MU-MIMO does effectively offer higher speeds than SU-MIMO in practice. Since most client devices are single antenna devices and only a few that are dual-antenna, MU-MIMO effectively increases the per-client throughput by improving overall capacity. If four single-antenna clients can be concurrently served by a MU-MIMO access point with 4 antennas, each client can have up to 4 times more throughput than the same 4 clients being served by a 4-antenna SU-MIMO access point. The SU-MIMO 4-antenna AP can't speed up operation for a single 1-antenna client.
I said the cables are overpriced, way overpriced I might add. It's just a freaking cable. I said the chargers at $20 aren't *that* overpriced, though they're still overpriced somewhat. The chargers that Apple sells are actually one of the highest quality chargers on the market according to this guy's tests (http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-apple-is.html) so they're actually worth close to $20.
So my point is that if Apple cared about safety, they'd lock out 3rd party chargers rather than the 3rd party cables. It's the charger that's dangerous when it sends 110V or 220V AC down the USB cable.
A person can still use an overpriced official cable from Apple but used a dangerous charger and the dangerous conductive surface of the iPhone. The cable isn't the cause of the safety issue but the cable is what's overpriced so iOS 7 is forcing you to buy the overpriced cables. The official Apple chargers aren't *that* overpriced.
Same here. High School AP classes were just too easy compared to what they offer at the junior college. And what they offer at the junior college for the same subject is too easy compared to a major university. It doesn't feel good to get that rude awakening but the people with character admit their shortcomings and then work to overcome them.
The problem in recent decades is that we're too focused on building up the self-esteem of our youngsters. It gives them a false sense of what the real world is like and we're failing to prepare them for the real world. They think everything should be easy and effortless when they should be challenged.
You didn't address a single issue I raised that specifically criticized the actions of Mann and the UN IPCC. You use words like "denier" to attack the opposition. Your ad hominem response is unfortunately all too typical of the AGW movement.
And yes I do criticize the AGW movement based on the actions of Mann and the UN IPCC because they are central figures in the AGW movement. And when Mann and the IPCC display blatant disregard for the scientific method, it calls into question the AGW movement which heavily relies on Mann's graph and the UN IPCC.
Even though I'm willing to accept the idea that man probably has caused some of the warming over the last 150 years, any honest scientist will acknowledge that we can't be sure how large of a role man plays when we consider the fact that we were coming out of a little ice age. It's also disputable that we are facing "unprecedented" warming because recent studies (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/11/evidence-for-a-global-medieval-warm-period/) show that there was significant worldwide warming during the medieval warming period.
In general, it's good to let scientific "consensus" drive policy. But when the major scientific organizations try to shut down all discussion and explain "the debate is over" and start drawing firm conclusions on something as complex as climate science, it makes me suspicious. Then when the AGW advocates start blatantly lying about how there is supposedly more incidents of extremely destructive weather and fire, it makes me extremely suspicious. When the UN IPCC knowingly makes up a story about the Himalayas melting in a few decades even though they know it's based on a single *opinion* from an activist making comments in the WWF magazine, it tells me that there is a systemic corruption of science when it comes to the issue of global warming.
And when I see proof that Mann et al is cherry picking data in a nontransparent manner and most of the "concensus" is based on that cherry picked data, this so called "concensus" no longer holds any credibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbR0EPWgkEI
AMD might attempt some really bulky overweight tablets that have to be shut down rather than something that behaves like an always on iPad or smartphone. Then again, this applies to Intel's Ivy Bridge parts because they can't do "Connected Standby" either. A high-performance SoC with Connected Standby won't happen for Intel until Haswell in 2013. AMD on the other hand has nothing announced for 2012 or 2013 that does Connected Standby.
Hondo is a Brazo based "APU" so it's definitely x86. But unlike Intel Clover Trail, AMD Hondo isn't really a tablet chip because it fundamentally lacks "Connected Standby" capability in Windows 8. That means it won't do 30 days of standby in an on state nor is it compatible of meeting the 300 millisecond screen-on requirement. Moreover, Hondo is a 4.9W TDP part while Intel Clover Trail is a 1.7W TDP part.
I see people take their smartphone into the Sauna all the time where it's 200F. Then they shove it in their pocket which is soaking wet from the sweat or from the steam room they exited. Apparently nobody bothered to explain that these are outside of safe operating parameters.
Even if that's possible, it's not nearly as simple as an autonomous standalone payload getting readings fed to it by the jetliner with 3 meter accuracy of position and speed and direction information.
I wrote about ADS-B homing drones last year and why jetliners (high value targets) should avoid beacon accuracy of Navigation Accuracy Category (NAC) level 7 (less than 93 meter accuracy) or better. It would be relatively easy to fly a piston powered model plane controlled by an iPod Touch connected to a GPS with 3-meter accuracy in front of the path of a jetliner carrying a small payload. The model plane wouldn't need to be fast because it would be the jetliner that runs into the model plane.
http://www.hightechforum.org/new-airline-navigation-system-easy-target-for-terrorists/
Specs matter to those of us who neither want to waste time or money. We're not going to buy a device for the sake of being able to have a Linux tablet. There will be $250 quad-core 7" android tablets with beautiful IPS multitouch panels and 1080P megapixel cameras. This Aseigo Linux tablet has comparable specs to a $99 7" Android tablet on the market today.
Hell, even Kelvins are arbitrary to some extent but the size of the unit based on the gap between frozen and boiling water at "Standard Temperature and Pressure". Celsius doesn't even accurately reflect heat and plenty of smart people who should know better routinely believe that 32C is twice as hot as 16C when it's actually 305.15C to be twice as hot.
Metric system for geometric measurements do have advantages for humans who evolved with 10 fingers and decided to use a number system with base 10. But even then, carpenters tell me that 12 is a much nicer split than 10 because it is divisible four ways while 10 is only divisible in two ways.
Do you honestly think I'm making up the cost of underground fiber? What you're describing isn't even all that clear and it sounds like there is already conduit in place to pull fiber. If there is no conduit, you have to dig and build conduit.
Moreover, your copper is no different than our copper and the same physics applies. The same throughput of VDSL2 applies everywhere in the world. The difference is that in addition to the copper phone wires, we have a lot more cable coax competition in addition to a whole lot more fiber to the home.
Sigh. Listen to yourself. You should just stop posting comments on slashdot and just do what you are suggesting. If you're successful, slashdot will link to you. But before you do that, you should read this post on this subject. http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2627934&cid=38745922
Again, did you read the article? I talked about the issues listed in the article and there was nothing conspiratorial against Google, just a hard dose of reality.
Dude, it's like 4-8 times more expensive to lay fiber underground and this is a well documented fact. It's vastly superior for sure, but at a very steep price.
Did you even read the article? Oh wait, this is slashdot.
The article talks about unequal treatment. One provider offers the same public service as Google, but they're not getting special treatment and free access to the facilities. Then there's the issue of higher costs associated with hanging fiber near electrical wiring. You don't want your workers or customers getting fried, so there will be additional costs.
Almost all of these types of reports citing how cheap *additional* gigabytes cost only reflect the marginal costs. They don't reflect the underlying infrastructure cost, the cost of workers (often union) and their healthcare benefits. This is why when we look at broadband providers financials, the gross profit margin will be in the 60% range but the net profit margin will be in the sub 10% range.
If the lad had stolen in iPad 2, it might have cost far more than just a kidney if he had gone to jail. He might have ended up with both kidneys harvested and most other major organs.
The thing just guzzles fuel for the load that it is carrying and it's not a jet. The word "jet" is marketing and fraudulent because there is no jet propulsion. It's two inefficient ducted fans that are inappropriate for hovering compared to a small helicopter rotor. This is why the thing can only fly for 30 minutes.
The article mentions making a 25 kilowatt version of the prototype, but that translates to 33.5 horsepower. That's perfectly fine for human transportation (heck 1 hp should be able to propel a human to 60+ mph if the vehicle was aerodynamic and light), but Americans (or people of any wealthy nation) like to splurge on a massive car with a massive engine.
This is indeed an engineering breakthrough, but what we need in conjunction with is either a change in human nature or some radical mandates on maximum vehicle weight. That obviously can't happen over night because no one wants to be in the smaller car when there is a collision. No one wants to unilaterally disarm on vehicle weight. What would need to happen is to have a max car and SUV size of say 4000 lbs and then reduce the maximum allowed weight by 100 lbs a year. Keep going until the maximum allowable car size is 500 lbs.
Slashdot Mirror
MU-MIMO does effectively offer higher speeds than SU-MIMO in practice. Since most client devices are single antenna devices and only a few that are dual-antenna, MU-MIMO effectively increases the per-client throughput by improving overall capacity. If four single-antenna clients can be concurrently served by a MU-MIMO access point with 4 antennas, each client can have up to 4 times more throughput than the same 4 clients being served by a 4-antenna SU-MIMO access point. The SU-MIMO 4-antenna AP can't speed up operation for a single 1-antenna client.
I said the cables are overpriced, way overpriced I might add. It's just a freaking cable. I said the chargers at $20 aren't *that* overpriced, though they're still overpriced somewhat. The chargers that Apple sells are actually one of the highest quality chargers on the market according to this guy's tests (http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-apple-is.html) so they're actually worth close to $20.
So my point is that if Apple cared about safety, they'd lock out 3rd party chargers rather than the 3rd party cables. It's the charger that's dangerous when it sends 110V or 220V AC down the USB cable.
A person can still use an overpriced official cable from Apple but used a dangerous charger and the dangerous conductive surface of the iPhone. The cable isn't the cause of the safety issue but the cable is what's overpriced so iOS 7 is forcing you to buy the overpriced cables. The official Apple chargers aren't *that* overpriced.
Same here. High School AP classes were just too easy compared to what they offer at the junior college. And what they offer at the junior college for the same subject is too easy compared to a major university. It doesn't feel good to get that rude awakening but the people with character admit their shortcomings and then work to overcome them.
The problem in recent decades is that we're too focused on building up the self-esteem of our youngsters. It gives them a false sense of what the real world is like and we're failing to prepare them for the real world. They think everything should be easy and effortless when they should be challenged.
You didn't address a single issue I raised that specifically criticized the actions of Mann and the UN IPCC. You use words like "denier" to attack the opposition. Your ad hominem response is unfortunately all too typical of the AGW movement. And yes I do criticize the AGW movement based on the actions of Mann and the UN IPCC because they are central figures in the AGW movement. And when Mann and the IPCC display blatant disregard for the scientific method, it calls into question the AGW movement which heavily relies on Mann's graph and the UN IPCC.
Even though I'm willing to accept the idea that man probably has caused some of the warming over the last 150 years, any honest scientist will acknowledge that we can't be sure how large of a role man plays when we consider the fact that we were coming out of a little ice age. It's also disputable that we are facing "unprecedented" warming because recent studies (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/11/evidence-for-a-global-medieval-warm-period/) show that there was significant worldwide warming during the medieval warming period.
In general, it's good to let scientific "consensus" drive policy. But when the major scientific organizations try to shut down all discussion and explain "the debate is over" and start drawing firm conclusions on something as complex as climate science, it makes me suspicious. Then when the AGW advocates start blatantly lying about how there is supposedly more incidents of extremely destructive weather and fire, it makes me extremely suspicious. When the UN IPCC knowingly makes up a story about the Himalayas melting in a few decades even though they know it's based on a single *opinion* from an activist making comments in the WWF magazine, it tells me that there is a systemic corruption of science when it comes to the issue of global warming.
And when I see proof that Mann et al is cherry picking data in a nontransparent manner and most of the "concensus" is based on that cherry picked data, this so called "concensus" no longer holds any credibility. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbR0EPWgkEI
AMD might attempt some really bulky overweight tablets that have to be shut down rather than something that behaves like an always on iPad or smartphone. Then again, this applies to Intel's Ivy Bridge parts because they can't do "Connected Standby" either. A high-performance SoC with Connected Standby won't happen for Intel until Haswell in 2013. AMD on the other hand has nothing announced for 2012 or 2013 that does Connected Standby.
Hondo is a Brazo based "APU" so it's definitely x86. But unlike Intel Clover Trail, AMD Hondo isn't really a tablet chip because it fundamentally lacks "Connected Standby" capability in Windows 8. That means it won't do 30 days of standby in an on state nor is it compatible of meeting the 300 millisecond screen-on requirement. Moreover, Hondo is a 4.9W TDP part while Intel Clover Trail is a 1.7W TDP part.
I see people take their smartphone into the Sauna all the time where it's 200F. Then they shove it in their pocket which is soaking wet from the sweat or from the steam room they exited. Apparently nobody bothered to explain that these are outside of safe operating parameters.
Even if that's possible, it's not nearly as simple as an autonomous standalone payload getting readings fed to it by the jetliner with 3 meter accuracy of position and speed and direction information.
I wrote about ADS-B homing drones last year and why jetliners (high value targets) should avoid beacon accuracy of Navigation Accuracy Category (NAC) level 7 (less than 93 meter accuracy) or better. It would be relatively easy to fly a piston powered model plane controlled by an iPod Touch connected to a GPS with 3-meter accuracy in front of the path of a jetliner carrying a small payload. The model plane wouldn't need to be fast because it would be the jetliner that runs into the model plane. http://www.hightechforum.org/new-airline-navigation-system-easy-target-for-terrorists/
Specs matter to those of us who neither want to waste time or money. We're not going to buy a device for the sake of being able to have a Linux tablet. There will be $250 quad-core 7" android tablets with beautiful IPS multitouch panels and 1080P megapixel cameras. This Aseigo Linux tablet has comparable specs to a $99 7" Android tablet on the market today.
Hell, even Kelvins are arbitrary to some extent but the size of the unit based on the gap between frozen and boiling water at "Standard Temperature and Pressure". Celsius doesn't even accurately reflect heat and plenty of smart people who should know better routinely believe that 32C is twice as hot as 16C when it's actually 305.15C to be twice as hot.
Metric system for geometric measurements do have advantages for humans who evolved with 10 fingers and decided to use a number system with base 10. But even then, carpenters tell me that 12 is a much nicer split than 10 because it is divisible four ways while 10 is only divisible in two ways.
Do you honestly think I'm making up the cost of underground fiber? What you're describing isn't even all that clear and it sounds like there is already conduit in place to pull fiber. If there is no conduit, you have to dig and build conduit.
Moreover, your copper is no different than our copper and the same physics applies. The same throughput of VDSL2 applies everywhere in the world. The difference is that in addition to the copper phone wires, we have a lot more cable coax competition in addition to a whole lot more fiber to the home.
Sigh. Listen to yourself. You should just stop posting comments on slashdot and just do what you are suggesting. If you're successful, slashdot will link to you. But before you do that, you should read this post on this subject. http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2627934&cid=38745922
Again, did you read the article? I talked about the issues listed in the article and there was nothing conspiratorial against Google, just a hard dose of reality.
Dude, it's like 4-8 times more expensive to lay fiber underground and this is a well documented fact. It's vastly superior for sure, but at a very steep price.
Did you even read the article? Oh wait, this is slashdot.
The article talks about unequal treatment. One provider offers the same public service as Google, but they're not getting special treatment and free access to the facilities. Then there's the issue of higher costs associated with hanging fiber near electrical wiring. You don't want your workers or customers getting fried, so there will be additional costs.
#1 choice would be authentic wet dreams with the choice of partner(s).
Almost all of these types of reports citing how cheap *additional* gigabytes cost only reflect the marginal costs. They don't reflect the underlying infrastructure cost, the cost of workers (often union) and their healthcare benefits. This is why when we look at broadband providers financials, the gross profit margin will be in the 60% range but the net profit margin will be in the sub 10% range.
They'll phase out domestic nuclear power production and then import nuclear power from France.
The local newspapers depended heavily on revenue from classifieds. When that was taken by Craigslist, local newspapers went into the red.
If the lad had stolen in iPad 2, it might have cost far more than just a kidney if he had gone to jail. He might have ended up with both kidneys harvested and most other major organs.
The thing just guzzles fuel for the load that it is carrying and it's not a jet. The word "jet" is marketing and fraudulent because there is no jet propulsion. It's two inefficient ducted fans that are inappropriate for hovering compared to a small helicopter rotor. This is why the thing can only fly for 30 minutes.
The article mentions making a 25 kilowatt version of the prototype, but that translates to 33.5 horsepower. That's perfectly fine for human transportation (heck 1 hp should be able to propel a human to 60+ mph if the vehicle was aerodynamic and light), but Americans (or people of any wealthy nation) like to splurge on a massive car with a massive engine.
This is indeed an engineering breakthrough, but what we need in conjunction with is either a change in human nature or some radical mandates on maximum vehicle weight. That obviously can't happen over night because no one wants to be in the smaller car when there is a collision. No one wants to unilaterally disarm on vehicle weight. What would need to happen is to have a max car and SUV size of say 4000 lbs and then reduce the maximum allowed weight by 100 lbs a year. Keep going until the maximum allowable car size is 500 lbs.