HURD played the same role as Duke Nukem Forever back them.
Linux is successful from the volunteers that developed the driver/HAL suite around the kernel. If we were still have basic display driver issues today, no one would be on Linux... except maybe the network guys.
Cool, I guess flying will easily get me to the corner of 14th and Pennsylvania Ave. Really, the exact corner...
Really, all this shows it that the more precise location you need to be in, the more energy you'll use. Sure, flying may theoretically get you closer, but if you factor in the infrastructure required vs a dirt road, it's more expensive (today's street cost a lot for robustness.
Goes with my mantra: More precision == more effort (i.e. cost in this case). Applies to pretty much everything.
They hire people that desire the culture of hanging out intelligently, and hire their buddies. Unfortunately that also includes staying around, which means working all day long, much like working in a college lab.
Not different from any college academic fraternity. I saw that with SPS as we had a dedicated study room, aka hang out for nerds (tv, frig, couches, tables, bookshelf library, etc...).
I want to see proof. Photos of a hovering drone says nothing nowadays....and especially from a penny stock company that appears to be teaming up with a university to push gov't SBAS contracts. Oh, the gov't cash cow!
Really, even Google's '8 guys surrounding a drone' video doesn't show autonomous capability--though their cars are a different story (i.e. real).
Nowadays, I see 9 or 10 companies touting fully autonomous flight, redundancy and delivery, RTF, ready to go, 1hr flight, 1min charge--I want to see a 1 min video of an actual test of a real use case: drive up, 2lbs payload, launch to delivery to land, to recharging, no setup and one-touch. It's very possible to create content of that, but I don't see any...
Then really, a drone on top of a truck--I see things (IMU) shifting off calibration, sand-papering the props, dust-n-dirt, sun damage, and them some. You put skis on top of a truck, not precision electronic devices.
I hope that part of landing you describe is not under closed loop. If so, that's why Elon's tweet was removed....
It's typical for any vertical landing mechanism [on Earth] to go open loop. Most quadcopters (much like ours) have enough throttle authority until entering ground effect, rockets in vertical landing also apply, but it's a different type of ground effect as you can see in the video--that thing had a high descent rate likely to keep it from horizontally drifting off target. In our copter's case, once we enter ground effect, our s/w goes into a open loop algo and it does a similar hover-slam technique--why? again, to keep it from drifting horizontally (likely induced from ground effect), aka on target.
Once you enter ground effect, all models will likely fail using a closed loop approach, and you need to go open loop, vertical dead reckon and use gravity to your advantage. If they are expecting oscillations upon touchdown (i.e. Elon's phase lag comment), there's something else wrong, or their approach (again, closed loop?) isn't right: you shouldn't design to have oscillations, especially when it's applied in ground effect.
“This level of autonomous swarming flight has never been done before,” said Mastroianni. “ I beg to differ. Some groups I know of have been doing this (with vehicle to vehicle communication) since 2012.
As a researcher, we've found DoD made hardware is highly optimized for the task at hand. Most military equipment I've used in the public sector is very good at the task it's made for, some of it is very robust too.
That is a good thing and justifies their expensive price tag, BUT nearly all high tech military equipment forget to fulfill one requirement:
minimal collateral damage
Missile shrapnel hits surrounding homes? Drone loses RF, crash lands? Humvee leaking leaded fuel? F22 runs at 200dB noise cruising low attitude? High tech rifles discharges uranium-laced shells randomly on the ground? "Who cares, it's not apart of the mission".
In the public sector, especially what I see in entertainment: collateral damage is pretty much the #1 or #2 safety requirement.
our hexacopters can carry upto 1.5kg and about 650mm boom to boom and still get 15min flight times.
Drone delivery will be good for [highly] customized, small articles. Drug perscriptions would be a potential. And thus will justify a preimum in delivery costs. Commodity items--just ship it through ground, it scales better since there's already an infrastructure (i.e. roads). Eventually once "roads", "driveways", and "mailboxes" are established for drones, you'll likely see a shift.
Naysayers of delivery drones are just being ignorant to the fact there's a huge infrastructure to support ground delivery, dating way back to the pony express let's say, and missing the fact that your house design is apart of that infrastructure (e.g. mailbox "slot"). Drone mass-delivery just became an idea what? 2 yrs ago? Sounds like naysayers are mre like fanboys and the media more like a hype machine, but the tech will become reality once a infrastructure is developed/deployed.
That's a deep answer. This is the funniest article of the day for me as a flying robot/drone developer.
While the germans are flying drones all over the place, selling them and have a regulatory framework, they are complaining they cannot build/sell autonomous cars... and calling out other countries, mainly the US as beating them in that game.
But in the US, it's the completely reverse... or bizarro situation. While Google and Uber are building autonomous cars, and getting them approved for use, drones on the other hand are DOA with no framework insight... and drone companies are complaining countries like Germany and France (and Australia) are beating them in that game.
Someone needs to realize that computers will like fall out to the next big thing in about 15-25 yrs or so from now.
Computers were developed from the evolution of science, which continues and will likely evolve into some "new tool and approach". With the tools from Quantum Physics, that will likely fall in the field/aspect of memory. For instance, that step-wise calculations and numerical methods to do integrals make just go away....
Also having Xerox doing real $$$ R&D on UIs/HMI/GUIs on physical objects... makes sense that the current mouse, keyboard, screen are pretty much 98% efficient for 98% of the population. Considering that R&D was done nearly 40yrs ago.
All this VR stuff is maybe 5% efficient for 5% of the population. It's a start, but guys, don't sell it now as the solution to everything.
Topic based will sure solve short term interests. But topics basically push a system into being trend based.
Last big industry I know that is trend based is Hollywood. There [in general,] are pop-actors (forumlated), discovered actors (savants), technical (by the book), and method actors (experience). That's not including the wannbes (your nightschool students?) and "wealthies" (buy their way into Hollywood, aka buy your degree).
Next thing you know, Finland's system will become similar to the above scenario, common in the Hollywood community of actors. Those would learn the old ABC's (method and technical) and those by topics (formualted and savants).
And we'll all be called talent instead of students by then... and need agents.
"That market isn't about telling time but making a statement."
Sound like Apple products, with the exception that some Apple products also increase productivity. Hence Apple will impact the market, but with the GDP of the Swiss, their services and banks--I doubt it will make an impact.
Basically 5.1 is a "steal some PR from Apple iOS Spring Event" release vs a feature update release.
I'm tried on all Android and iOS updates. They fail on 6mos old phones making them slow, battery hogs and buggy (remember the iOS simcard issue? or the Android battery hog issue?). It's not right for those who don't want to buy the latest phone every 3 mos.
Actually CEOs were somewhat different 15yrs ago. Remember the $1/day salary? There's very few CEOs nowadays that follow that paradigm... Today, there's so much VC and Wall Street influnence, and the social network, aka "club" mentality from the kiddies coming out of the universities--it's much a unfair racket as any other Wall Street business.
Automation precedes scale. Once Google automates the vehicles, the cost of the vehicle should go down technically. Then we're looking at disposable cars or reusable car parts. The capital costs should go down a lot.
Of course, that's all theory in the non-Internet, physical world (i.e. it worked for the Internet, but there's not much physical in the internet world...)
Obviously Ubuntu devs thought the biggest selling point for this phone was that it was running Ubuntu/linux.
We've been here before, it was called OpenMoko. Though that project blazed the trails for ARM-based Linux, it never got off the ground due to the lack of driver support (the chipset guys knew it) and underwhelming h/w. Once an openmoko developer, and seeing how ARM linux has evolved, we really haven't progress much aside from getting driver support and Android (though the biggest mobile player, has an OS that runs less efficient than iOS, BB, WP7).
I'm starting to believe that Linux has finally hit a limit--it excels in the business (server, routers, robots). Forget the direct-to-consumer space--it's not gonna happen, and Ubuntu phone sort of solidifies it w/all the hype that came with it. Hi, FreeRunner 2....
Mod this up. Look at the Audi CES example. Reporters sat in the drivers seat 100% of the drive and the car was not autonomous in SF/Urban areas and steep hill climbs to Vegas... And it was a nice sunny day...
And the 80% of those roads from SF to Vegas is a nearly perfectly straight: a freeway called the I-5... and another one called the I-15. It was more of a demonstration of active speed control than driverless! Hard to not go straight in a car with laser alignment. I can sleep on the I5 for 20min and likely not hit anything (it's that straight).
Driverless cars are the future, but way overblown. we're just going through a hype cycle.
[science/fact based] Diets are a lab experiement. They dont consider the system, i.e. you stress levels, environment, DNA, etc... It purely looks at calorie intake and energy and that's pretty much it. Diets never considered anything else and that's the flawed part of the science--much like studying just the wind and never looking at barometric pressure to determine if it's going to rain.
Since there's a motivation of cash with diets, science really gets pushed to the side. Much like using science to help you find a date.
Who cares about the impact, it's all about fear and PR, look at Syria. It's mainly about PR and money. A few bottle rockets would set of a slew of new laws. Welcome to the new social networking order: physical action need not apply, just an impression & intent.
Instead of an IED, it would be a more serious issue by lawmakers if there was a running video camera on that thing...
Unfortunately, fearmongering law makers are going to have a field day on this.
Slashdot Mirror
HURD played the same role as Duke Nukem Forever back them.
Linux is successful from the volunteers that developed the driver/HAL suite around the kernel. If we were still have basic display driver issues today, no one would be on Linux... except maybe the network guys.
Cool, I guess flying will easily get me to the corner of 14th and Pennsylvania Ave. Really, the exact corner...
Really, all this shows it that the more precise location you need to be in, the more energy you'll use. Sure, flying may theoretically get you closer, but if you factor in the infrastructure required vs a dirt road, it's more expensive (today's street cost a lot for robustness.
Goes with my mantra: More precision == more effort (i.e. cost in this case). Applies to pretty much everything.
Self selection my ass.
They hire people that desire the culture of hanging out intelligently, and hire their buddies. Unfortunately that also includes staying around, which means working all day long, much like working in a college lab.
Not different from any college academic fraternity. I saw that with SPS as we had a dedicated study room, aka hang out for nerds (tv, frig, couches, tables, bookshelf library, etc...).
I want to see proof. Photos of a hovering drone says nothing nowadays. ...and especially from a penny stock company that appears to be teaming up with a university to push gov't SBAS contracts. Oh, the gov't cash cow!
Really, even Google's '8 guys surrounding a drone' video doesn't show autonomous capability--though their cars are a different story (i.e. real).
Nowadays, I see 9 or 10 companies touting fully autonomous flight, redundancy and delivery, RTF, ready to go, 1hr flight, 1min charge--I want to see a 1 min video of an actual test of a real use case: drive up, 2lbs payload, launch to delivery to land, to recharging, no setup and one-touch. It's very possible to create content of that, but I don't see any...
Then really, a drone on top of a truck--I see things (IMU) shifting off calibration, sand-papering the props, dust-n-dirt, sun damage, and them some. You put skis on top of a truck, not precision electronic devices.
Hence, whatever happened to RUDP?
Everyone keeps turning UDP into some pseudo TCP w/o all the extras....that's what RUDP was built for.
I hope that part of landing you describe is not under closed loop. If so, that's why Elon's tweet was removed....
It's typical for any vertical landing mechanism [on Earth] to go open loop. Most quadcopters (much like ours) have enough throttle authority until entering ground effect, rockets in vertical landing also apply, but it's a different type of ground effect as you can see in the video--that thing had a high descent rate likely to keep it from horizontally drifting off target. In our copter's case, once we enter ground effect, our s/w goes into a open loop algo and it does a similar hover-slam technique--why? again, to keep it from drifting horizontally (likely induced from ground effect), aka on target.
Once you enter ground effect, all models will likely fail using a closed loop approach, and you need to go open loop, vertical dead reckon and use gravity to your advantage. If they are expecting oscillations upon touchdown (i.e. Elon's phase lag comment), there's something else wrong, or their approach (again, closed loop?) isn't right: you shouldn't design to have oscillations, especially when it's applied in ground effect.
“This level of autonomous swarming flight has never been done before,” said Mastroianni. “
I beg to differ. Some groups I know of have been doing this (with vehicle to vehicle communication) since 2012.
Bingo.
As a researcher, we've found DoD made hardware is highly optimized for the task at hand. Most military equipment I've used in the public sector is very good at the task it's made for, some of it is very robust too.
That is a good thing and justifies their expensive price tag, BUT nearly all high tech military equipment forget to fulfill one requirement:
minimal collateral damage
Missile shrapnel hits surrounding homes? Drone loses RF, crash lands? Humvee leaking leaded fuel? F22 runs at 200dB noise cruising low attitude? High tech rifles discharges uranium-laced shells randomly on the ground? "Who cares, it's not apart of the mission".
In the public sector, especially what I see in entertainment: collateral damage is pretty much the #1 or #2 safety requirement.
our hexacopters can carry upto 1.5kg and about 650mm boom to boom and still get 15min flight times.
Drone delivery will be good for [highly] customized, small articles. Drug perscriptions would be a potential. And thus will justify a preimum in delivery costs. Commodity items--just ship it through ground, it scales better since there's already an infrastructure (i.e. roads). Eventually once "roads", "driveways", and "mailboxes" are established for drones, you'll likely see a shift.
Naysayers of delivery drones are just being ignorant to the fact there's a huge infrastructure to support ground delivery, dating way back to the pony express let's say, and missing the fact that your house design is apart of that infrastructure (e.g. mailbox "slot"). Drone mass-delivery just became an idea what? 2 yrs ago? Sounds like naysayers are mre like fanboys and the media more like a hype machine, but the tech will become reality once a infrastructure is developed/deployed.
That's a deep answer. This is the funniest article of the day for me as a flying robot/drone developer.
While the germans are flying drones all over the place, selling them and have a regulatory framework, they are complaining they cannot build/sell autonomous cars... and calling out other countries, mainly the US as beating them in that game.
But in the US, it's the completely reverse... or bizarro situation. While Google and Uber are building autonomous cars, and getting them approved for use, drones on the other hand are DOA with no framework insight... and drone companies are complaining countries like Germany and France (and Australia) are beating them in that game.
Oh, "the irony of the rant".
How cares about skynet when it comes to heat and computers... I worry more about the Matrix instead.
Someone needs to realize that computers will like fall out to the next big thing in about 15-25 yrs or so from now.
Computers were developed from the evolution of science, which continues and will likely evolve into some "new tool and approach". With the tools from Quantum Physics, that will likely fall in the field/aspect of memory. For instance, that step-wise calculations and numerical methods to do integrals make just go away....
As I always said, information doesn't want to be free....
but wants to be exploited.
Also having Xerox doing real $$$ R&D on UIs/HMI/GUIs on physical objects... makes sense that the current mouse, keyboard, screen are pretty much 98% efficient for 98% of the population. Considering that R&D was done nearly 40yrs ago.
All this VR stuff is maybe 5% efficient for 5% of the population. It's a start, but guys, don't sell it now as the solution to everything.
Topic based will sure solve short term interests. But topics basically push a system into being trend based.
Last big industry I know that is trend based is Hollywood. There [in general,] are pop-actors (forumlated), discovered actors (savants), technical (by the book), and method actors (experience). That's not including the wannbes (your nightschool students?) and "wealthies" (buy their way into Hollywood, aka buy your degree).
Next thing you know, Finland's system will become similar to the above scenario, common in the Hollywood community of actors. Those would learn the old ABC's (method and technical) and those by topics (formualted and savants).
And we'll all be called talent instead of students by then... and need agents.
"That market isn't about telling time but making a statement."
Sound like Apple products, with the exception that some Apple products also increase productivity. Hence Apple will impact the market, but with the GDP of the Swiss, their services and banks--I doubt it will make an impact.
Basically 5.1 is a "steal some PR from Apple iOS Spring Event" release vs a feature update release.
I'm tried on all Android and iOS updates. They fail on 6mos old phones making them slow, battery hogs and buggy (remember the iOS simcard issue? or the Android battery hog issue?). It's not right for those who don't want to buy the latest phone every 3 mos.
Actually CEOs were somewhat different 15yrs ago. Remember the $1/day salary? There's very few CEOs nowadays that follow that paradigm... Today, there's so much VC and Wall Street influnence, and the social network, aka "club" mentality from the kiddies coming out of the universities--it's much a unfair racket as any other Wall Street business.
"Invented here" is somewhat a illusion.
Working with frameworks and other people's code is a engineering problem (design, integration, etc..)
Developing code is a computer programming problem.
Two different problems, and why Software Engineerings are [desired] unicorns in very large software projects.
You're missing the point.
Automation precedes scale. Once Google automates the vehicles, the cost of the vehicle should go down technically. Then we're looking at disposable cars or reusable car parts. The capital costs should go down a lot.
Of course, that's all theory in the non-Internet, physical world (i.e. it worked for the Internet, but there's not much physical in the internet world...)
Obviously Ubuntu devs thought the biggest selling point for this phone was that it was running Ubuntu/linux.
We've been here before, it was called OpenMoko. Though that project blazed the trails for ARM-based Linux, it never got off the ground due to the lack of driver support (the chipset guys knew it) and underwhelming h/w. Once an openmoko developer, and seeing how ARM linux has evolved, we really haven't progress much aside from getting driver support and Android (though the biggest mobile player, has an OS that runs less efficient than iOS, BB, WP7).
I'm starting to believe that Linux has finally hit a limit--it excels in the business (server, routers, robots). Forget the direct-to-consumer space--it's not gonna happen, and Ubuntu phone sort of solidifies it w/all the hype that came with it. Hi, FreeRunner 2....
They should look at the drone vendors--same problem, with even worst failure (it falls from the sky).
Mod this up. Look at the Audi CES example. Reporters sat in the drivers seat 100% of the drive and the car was not autonomous in SF/Urban areas and steep hill climbs to Vegas... And it was a nice sunny day...
And the 80% of those roads from SF to Vegas is a nearly perfectly straight: a freeway called the I-5... and another one called the I-15. It was more of a demonstration of active speed control than driverless! Hard to not go straight in a car with laser alignment. I can sleep on the I5 for 20min and likely not hit anything (it's that straight).
Driverless cars are the future, but way overblown. we're just going through a hype cycle.
[science/fact based] Diets are a lab experiement. They dont consider the system, i.e. you stress levels, environment, DNA, etc... It purely looks at calorie intake and energy and that's pretty much it. Diets never considered anything else and that's the flawed part of the science--much like studying just the wind and never looking at barometric pressure to determine if it's going to rain.
Since there's a motivation of cash with diets, science really gets pushed to the side. Much like using science to help you find a date.
Who cares about the impact, it's all about fear and PR, look at Syria. It's mainly about PR and money. A few bottle rockets would set of a slew of new laws. Welcome to the new social networking order: physical action need not apply, just an impression & intent.
Instead of an IED, it would be a more serious issue by lawmakers if there was a running video camera on that thing...
Unfortunately, fearmongering law makers are going to have a field day on this.