But what they are teaching is safe IP. So on everything presented I am required to ask a) where did you get this, did you have the rights to access that b) provide ownership rights traceable back to the original author and sworn statements that the original author did not copy it from someone one I can't just assume because of the setting that it is ok. I can't just assume that their simple statement that it is ok is enough. I need authenticated documents on everything. I can't assume that what they presented yesterday applies to today.
Yes you are told to write what you see on the board. But did the teacher copy that from somewhere. Did they have a performance license is it transferable?
If asked to read from a book does the student have to get a performance license first or enquire about the existence of such? Does the teacher have a performance license to read from a book. Does the school have a license to play the recording of the national anthem in the morning? When passed a test the student should refuse to do anything until the teacher either asserts that the creation of the test was original work and that the copy thus produced was allowed or provide a certified copy of licensing agreement allowing the reproduction of question from the book onto the test.
And you expect grade school kids to catch onto this? Some of them will talk to parents and latch on to things do stuff like the above and drive the whole process to a standstill. Are you going to have the teachers say "we don't worry about that in the class room", if word of that gets out the parent calls the school and reports the teacher.
So why are we unable to tap the planets electric field? Can someone explain this a little more. Seems like that is a power source just waiting to be tapped. Unintented consequences like collapsing earths magnetic sphere aside.
"global surface temperature" is not global temperature. Global temperature includes deep sea temperature and high atmosphere temeperatur. It is very easy to heat and cool air. Heating the deep ocean takes decades or longer.
Stop looking at it from a local or even surface point of view. Vertical air circulation is accelerating, this is what causes the arctic ice to close up. Cold air up north does not come from up north, it comes from high in the atmosphere, it just happens to "fall" down up north because that is where the weakest counter push "up" is.
There are dynamics here we are still looking at and learning. Surface temperatures are the thin single layer of the onion when there are many layers of the atmosphere and many layers of the oceans to look at as well.
You missed the "synthetic" they take lots of static pictures with the same point over time. Then use a computer to skew the images it in all the directions and speeds and do the search.
Grocery stores "weigh" everything in grams. Grams might be mass but the general populace uses mass interchangeably with weight.
Hmm, can we use the map to get global scale calibrations to a normal mass. It would seem to be unfair that the same amount of material might cost more or less in different places due to scale errors that measure weight and use it blindly as mass.
There is no untestable magic there: 1) entropic source 2) digial state algorithm 3) async sampling
"The ES runs asynchronously on a self-timed circuit and uses thermal noise within the silicon to output a random stream of bits at the rate of 3 GHz. The ES needs no dedicated external power supply to run, instead using the same power supply as other core logic. The ES is designed to function properly over a wide range of operating conditions, exceeding the normal operating range of the processor."
The digtal part behind the entropic source is what the article discusses. Digital clouds are fully verifiable with scan, even async ones with proper test logic insertion which breaks loops. Fully analog entropic circuits like the thermal noise source are also verifiable.
What makes it "random" is that it a) has an entropic source and b) runs async to the rest of the design. Both of those are testable with proper test circuits. The pertebations described in the article are commonly tested for faults. If they were nto detected 5-10% of processors would not work at all.
The article talks about it being undetectable because they are only looking at the reduced space random sequence and that is effectively still random. Scan test is able to look at the value of every logic state and how it come about (ok there is not usually 100% coverage, but large portions of the design do get 100% coverage and LFSR type logic is easily covered in scan).
1) computer generated" random numbers" of the type this covers are fully state to state defined they are not random in any way. To make them random you need to seed the initial state and then reduce the output. 2) the automated scan check is bit by bit on the logic it does not care that 64 bits make a random number it looks at the logic cone input for every single bit independently and verifies the functionality. This is done to make sure all the logic works.
These parts would not pass the standard verification process and would be rejected from being assembled into devices. Standard testing of ICs for functional faults includes a scan process. Per the design specification that the part was supposed to buildt a number of scan vectors are passed through the devices. These scan vectors check as much of the device as possible. The goal is to check every flop and every logic path between flops. The tests are to detect manufacturing errors. And can find single faults in devices. Typical errors are stuck at 1 or stuck at 0, also shorts and would easily expose modifications of this sort, especially of such a scale as to radically change things.
> Write FTL changes to a log, make changes according to log, mark log as completed. On power up, check log, if it's not completed
You mean you log to the drive you are trying to manage? Where do you put the changes to the FTL due to your writing the log? Back in the log? That is self defeating circular.
In any case maintaining a log results in - a) amplyfying writes, this has horible performance overheads b) always something in the not committed log cache, which is the problem in the first place c) the need to cache stuff before the log gets processed and marked d) the need to wait for a log flush or search the write cache before you can service a read
SSD's are fast all this slows it down considerably.
see the long post by tlhIngan discussing flash translation layers (FTL) above for why. The thing is the FTL data has to be written from RAM in the SSD to Flash in the SSD at shutdown time.
Good drives have internal supercaps or batteries that allow them enough time to shutdown gracefully if the system power fails without warning. This would be invisible to the system. The big thing is "SHOULD". Firmware bugs, short on power cycles, defective caps/batteries and you are back to the big fail scenario.
A hard shutdown of high-speed SSD is death. It takes really really good firmware to recover without reinitializing the drive.
The basic SSD "format" is susceptable to damage on power fails in a way that hard drives are not. The mapping and setup stables of the SSD are critical and constantly in flux unlike a harddrive where the mapping is only updated when a failure occures. SSD drives need internal power fail control so they can gracefully shudown and firmware that supports it.
I take back the "you can't really encrypt a power signal". They are doing synthetic beam forming using spatial location as the coding to separate devices. The command and control channel will help the sender configure to location of the device to be charged.
Getting it to sum to 1W at only the selected location is not something they can guarantee without accurately mapping out the space. And doing it dynamically if there are people moving is something else.
Lots of trickey math and I doubt they can avoid a good bit of leakage.
I don't use my TV's features. I use my media players features through my TV. The media player has much more functionality and is upgradable with just software updates.
As one comment on the original article says. This is the way to do organs. The original gel can be agar like or other cellular support matrix then you can print in a circulatory system with external interface then add in the actual organ cells. Let it mature a bit and finish up by washing off the original gel.
So 300GB of bootleg songs. Say 4MB/song
300/0.004 => 75,000 songs -> ~ 1/2 a year songs
at $2,250 per song thats $168.75M
at $222,000/24 songs thats $693.750M I bet wallmart will sell full discs for $50.
The legal question, is filtered internet access really internet access. There is a technical definition of the internet defining packets DNS lookup and routability. I don't think a filtered internet access fully qualifies as internet access.
This could lead to legal challenges as the service providers are not selling true internet access. They are selling something else.
Trademarks apply within the Trade field of the company that registers the trademark. You can't do Nike sports wear. But Nike is not a gaming company. You can make a Nike game.
The appropriate response to any trademark take down request is - a) send me a notarized copy of a trademark registration document for the trademark in question that is currently valid in the country you wish to assert your ownership. b) explain to me how the usage in this context infringes on your trademark. In your explaination cover
i) physical locality of the usage you claim infringes and its relationship to region your trademark registration is in
ii) a detailed description of how the usage in the claimed infringement conflicts with the registered usage. c) notice that failure to do a) b) will result in no action taken on my part. Insufficient detail and in particular legal grounding for the explanation provided in b) will result in delays and requests for more details. In particular a simple claim in b) that "they used our trademark" without any attempt at detailing domain of usage conflicts will result in the ignoring of your request as insufficiently documented.
Microsoft can do it. They can do it in less than a quarter. The writedown is $900M. By spending less than $1M they could have an Android load for the device and recover >$100M.
So the question is does Ballmer want to make >$100M or not? Do the shareholders want that?
If the school system was doing a proper job and education was engaging and felt worthwhile then attendance would not be a problem.
I would say they are spending the money in the wrong place. Working on the curriculum and staff training would be better, but the system cannot blame itself for the failing so blames the students.
*sigh* if only the education system could actually be intelligent and learn from the past.
Slashdot Mirror
But what they are teaching is safe IP. So on everything presented I am required to ask
a) where did you get this, did you have the rights to access that
b) provide ownership rights traceable back to the original author and sworn statements that the original author did not copy it from someone one
I can't just assume because of the setting that it is ok. I can't just assume that their simple statement that it is ok is enough. I need authenticated documents on everything. I can't assume that what they presented yesterday applies to today.
The whole system is stupid.
Yes you are told to write what you see on the board. But did the teacher copy that from somewhere. Did they have a performance license is it transferable?
If asked to read from a book does the student have to get a performance license first or enquire about the existence of such? Does the teacher have a performance license to read from a book. Does the school have a license to play the recording of the national anthem in the morning?
When passed a test the student should refuse to do anything until the teacher either asserts that the creation of the test was original work and that the copy thus produced was allowed or provide a certified copy of licensing agreement allowing the reproduction of question from the book onto the test.
And you expect grade school kids to catch onto this? Some of them will talk to parents and latch on to things do stuff like the above and drive the whole process to a standstill. Are you going to have the teachers say "we don't worry about that in the class room", if word of that gets out the parent calls the school and reports the teacher.
The Microsoft goal is to flush so much money down the drain it will become plugged up.
We learn by copying. Write what you see on the board. Repeat after me. Read the book aloud ....
Overlaying an "anti-piracy" theme is just going to be confusing and counter to the whole process.
So why are we unable to tap the planets electric field? Can someone explain this a little more. Seems like that is a power source just waiting to be tapped. Unintented consequences like collapsing earths magnetic sphere aside.
"global surface temperature" is not global temperature. Global temperature includes deep sea temperature and high atmosphere temeperatur. It is very easy to heat and cool air. Heating the deep ocean takes decades or longer.
Stop looking at it from a local or even surface point of view. Vertical air circulation is accelerating, this is what causes the arctic ice to close up. Cold air up north does not come from up north, it comes from high in the atmosphere, it just happens to "fall" down up north because that is where the weakest counter push "up" is.
There are dynamics here we are still looking at and learning. Surface temperatures are the thin single layer of the onion when there are many layers of the atmosphere and many layers of the oceans to look at as well.
You missed the "synthetic" they take lots of static pictures with the same point over time.
Then use a computer to skew the images it in all the directions and speeds and do the search.
Can I have my Roomba take my place on the picket line?
Grocery stores "weigh" everything in grams. Grams might be mass but the general populace uses mass interchangeably with weight.
Hmm, can we use the map to get global scale calibrations to a normal mass. It would seem to be unfair that the same amount of material might cost more or less in different places due to scale errors that measure weight and use it blindly as mass.
I have read - http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-digital-random-number-generator-drng-software-implementation-guide
There is no untestable magic there:
1) entropic source
2) digial state algorithm
3) async sampling
"The ES runs asynchronously on a self-timed circuit and uses thermal noise within the silicon to output a random stream of bits at the rate of 3 GHz. The ES needs no dedicated external power supply to run, instead using the same power supply as other core logic. The ES is designed to function properly over a wide range of operating conditions, exceeding the normal operating range of the processor."
The digtal part behind the entropic source is what the article discusses. Digital clouds are fully verifiable with scan, even async ones with proper test logic insertion which breaks loops. Fully analog entropic circuits like the thermal noise source are also verifiable.
What makes it "random" is that it a) has an entropic source and b) runs async to the rest of the design. Both of those are testable with proper test circuits. The pertebations described in the article are commonly tested for faults. If they were nto detected 5-10% of processors would not work at all.
The article talks about it being undetectable because they are only looking at the reduced space random sequence and that is effectively still random. Scan test is able to look at the value of every logic state and how it come about (ok there is not usually 100% coverage, but large portions of the design do get 100% coverage and LFSR type logic is easily covered in scan).
1) computer generated" random numbers" of the type this covers are fully state to state defined they are not random in any way. To make them random you need to seed the initial state and then reduce the output.
2) the automated scan check is bit by bit on the logic it does not care that 64 bits make a random number it looks at the logic cone input for every single bit independently and verifies the functionality. This is done to make sure all the logic works.
These parts would not pass the standard verification process and would be rejected from being assembled into devices.
Standard testing of ICs for functional faults includes a scan process. Per the design specification that the part was supposed to buildt a number of scan vectors are passed through the devices. These scan vectors check as much of the device as possible. The goal is to check every flop and every logic path between flops. The tests are to detect manufacturing errors. And can find single faults in devices.
Typical errors are stuck at 1 or stuck at 0, also shorts and would easily expose modifications of this sort, especially of such a scale as to radically change things.
> Write FTL changes to a log, make changes according to log, mark log as completed. On power up, check log, if it's not completed
You mean you log to the drive you are trying to manage? Where do you put the changes to the FTL due to your writing the log? Back in the log? That is self defeating circular.
In any case maintaining a log results in -
a) amplyfying writes, this has horible performance overheads
b) always something in the not committed log cache, which is the problem in the first place
c) the need to cache stuff before the log gets processed and marked
d) the need to wait for a log flush or search the write cache before you can service a read
SSD's are fast all this slows it down considerably.
see the long post by tlhIngan discussing flash translation layers (FTL) above for why. The thing is the FTL data has to be written from RAM in the SSD to Flash in the SSD at shutdown time.
Good drives have internal supercaps or batteries that allow them enough time to shutdown gracefully if the system power fails without warning. This would be invisible to the system. The big thing is "SHOULD". Firmware bugs, short on power cycles, defective caps/batteries and you are back to the big fail scenario.
A hard shutdown of high-speed SSD is death. It takes really really good firmware to recover without reinitializing the drive.
The basic SSD "format" is susceptable to damage on power fails in a way that hard drives are not. The mapping and setup stables of the SSD are critical and constantly in flux unlike a harddrive where the mapping is only updated when a failure occures.
SSD drives need internal power fail control so they can gracefully shudown and firmware that supports it.
I take back the "you can't really encrypt a power signal". They are doing synthetic beam forming using spatial location as the coding to separate devices. The command and control channel will help the sender configure to location of the device to be charged.
Getting it to sum to 1W at only the selected location is not something they can guarantee without accurately mapping out the space. And doing it dynamically if there are people moving is something else.
Lots of trickey math and I doubt they can avoid a good bit of leakage.
So how do you stop leakage and vampires?
You can't really encrypt a power signal.
I don't use my TV's features. I use my media players features through my TV. The media player has much more functionality and is upgradable with just software updates.
As one comment on the original article says. This is the way to do organs. The original gel can be agar like or other cellular support matrix then you can print in a circulatory system with external interface then add in the actual organ cells. Let it mature a bit and finish up by washing off the original gel.
So 300GB of bootleg songs.
Say 4MB/song
300/0.004 => 75,000 songs -> ~ 1/2 a year songs
at $2,250 per song thats $168.75M
at $222,000/24 songs thats $693.750M
I bet wallmart will sell full discs for $50.
The legal question, is filtered internet access really internet access. There is a technical definition of the internet defining packets DNS lookup and routability. I don't think a filtered internet access fully qualifies as internet access.
This could lead to legal challenges as the service providers are not selling true internet access. They are selling something else.
Trademarks apply within the Trade field of the company that registers the trademark.
You can't do Nike sports wear. But Nike is not a gaming company. You can make a Nike game.
The appropriate response to any trademark take down request is -
a) send me a notarized copy of a trademark registration document for the trademark in question that is currently valid in the country you wish to assert your ownership.
b) explain to me how the usage in this context infringes on your trademark. In your explaination cover
i) physical locality of the usage you claim infringes and its relationship to region your trademark registration is in
ii) a detailed description of how the usage in the claimed infringement conflicts with the registered usage.
c) notice that failure to do a) b) will result in no action taken on my part. Insufficient detail and in particular legal grounding for the explanation provided in b) will result in delays and requests for more details. In particular a simple claim in b) that "they used our trademark" without any attempt at detailing domain of usage conflicts will result in the ignoring of your request as insufficiently documented.
Microsoft can do it. They can do it in less than a quarter.
The writedown is $900M. By spending less than $1M they could have an Android load for the device and recover >$100M.
So the question is does Ballmer want to make >$100M or not? Do the shareholders want that?
Put android on it.
It will become more functional, have better battery life and a bigger application library.
If the school system was doing a proper job and education was engaging and felt worthwhile then attendance would not be a problem.
I would say they are spending the money in the wrong place. Working on the curriculum and staff training would be better, but the system cannot blame itself for the failing so blames the students.
*sigh* if only the education system could actually be intelligent and learn from the past.