There was a similar (Amazon?) super-bowl commercial that showed the company's mascot riding on a donkey through a silicon-valley-esque ghost town of boarded up offices, broken glass, and whitewashed signs where only the ".com" was visible. On his way out of town, the mascot came across the limp Pets.com sock puppet (with X's for eyes) blowing in the wind. The commercial ended with a suggestion to trust the stable, surviving business [or something along those lines].
...so yeah. Obviously my memory is a bit faulty; this is one of my all-time favorite commercials, even if I can't remember the sponsoring company. Does anyone remember this commercial? Can someone fill in the blanks, here?
maybe people with lesser maintenance contracts and whatnot get the runaround. Yep. I've dealt with Dell both as a home user (my wife's old laptop, now she uses a Mac) and as a corporate customer. There is a world of difference between the two. Their special line for big-money users is really worlds different from their oft-complained-about home user's customer support
When I represented the big contract, I gave the first guy I talked to an ID number, then was transferred to a friendly support representative. I explained my problem (four failed hard drives--in one month, no less, out of 36 computers) and was off the phone within fifteen minutes with replacement drives arriving a few days later.
As a home user, I had quite the opposite experience. A ball bearing broke on the laptop's under-warranty case fan, so I called tech support. I first had to speak with at least three different people with varying degrees of English comprehension and was told more than once to reboot the computer in order to fix the broken fan. Finally, they agreed to send someone to replace the fan in about a week or so.
But that wasn't the end of it! The technician improperly replaced the keyboard/mouse connectors when he sealed up the computer, meaning that the input devices were completely inoperable (and fixing it myself would involve breaking a security sticker added by the technician and voiding the warranty). I again called Dell's support line, and, after being tossed about from call center to call center--and pretending to reboot a few more times, was finally told that someone could come by to fix the first technician's mistake... in another two weeks.
I fixed it myself in about five minutes after that phone call, considering the lost warranty to be of negligible value at this point.
Does anyone know if the "avalanche" behavior observed in these solar cells is in any way related to diode/photodiode avalanche breakdown? If so, could someone explain to me how energy can be produced in this manner?
During a photodiode's avalanche breakdown, for example, the act of a photon hitting a reverse-biased photodiode diode excites an electron into the conduction band. The excited electron gains energy from the strong reverse bias potential and "smashes" into other electrons on its way down-potential, which electrons are also excited, and excite more electrons, and so forth. However, all the energy in the system (aside from the photon's few eV) is supplied by the source that reverse biases the diode and provides the excited electrons with the energy to accelerate through the semiconductor (which is why a photodiode can be used as a switch, trigger, or sensor).
TFA didn't do much to explain this issue... can anyone give me a hand?
I thought that only moving charges, i.e. current, could produce magnetic flux. Is there another method of magnetic flux production going on, here? If it is still flux caused by moving charges, how is it different than the inductor?
Okay, I RTFA'd, but I still don't get it. Their summary states:
When a current is applied to one, the resistance of the other changes. Now, if I'm correct:
A) This requires current to flow through the first wire, so where's the memory? B) Aside from the probably-more-linear relationship, how is this different from JFET's or BJT's?
I mean, the transistor is a device where you run a current or voltage to point A, changing the resistance between points B and C. Can someone explain the difference?
My father is the Cuyahoga County prosecutor in charge of homicide, rape, etc. cases, and this sort of setup isn't as rare as the CSI shows would have you think. Truth be told, many criminals can and do cover their tracks after this sort of crime, and many victims' bodies are never found. The CSI technology that can magically find some microscopic imprint in a month-old sweater to tell you the time, date, place, and style of murder just doesn't exist in real life, and that's where "reasonable doubt", circumstantial evidence, and the juror's logical analysis of the big picture really comes into play.
So, I understand (in a manner of speaking) the whole material ejection process, so to speak. I was wondering if someone could clear up an issue for me, though... Why do accretion disks form in the first place? I mean, why a single disk rather than a sphere of material being drawn in to the essentially "spherical" black hole? Why is one plane favored above all others? Is it because the black hole itself is rotating?
I just moved to Columbus from Cleveland, a whole 140 miles south... now, suddenly, when six inches of snow hits, they declare it the "Blizzard of '08" and shut down the city. *sigh*
I know that I've posted about this before, but... Huzzah! For the first time in 25 years, the name MOSFET (Metal -Oxide-Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor) will correctly describe the device that goes by that name!
(For those confused as to my jubilation, highly doped polysilicon replaced metal gates over 25 years ago. As a result most MOSFETS haven't actually had metal in them since.)
So "GTA III," -- a Mafioso stereotype with a huge amount of cinema fiction to support that. It's sort of a cultural joke. We all know that Italians aren't like that but we know Mafioso gangsters are. Do we remove race from it? No, they're just gangsters. "Vice City" is just '80s "Miami Vice." So even with the Cubanos and Latinos we know all Cubanos aren't like that. "San Andreas" gets scary because it's basically what people think black people are. So... he's saying that blatant stereotypes are okay, as long as they are not of black people? Am I missing something?
I've seen all three games. I'm Italian. My wife is Latina. And I'm not offended by any of it. But this interviewer seems to be saying that my lack of offense is because there is some fundamental difference in the race portrayals... I thought it was that I can choose to be offended or to be entertained by any of these blatant, joking, stereotypes.
That depends on the state (or sometimes municipality). In Ohio, it is required to post a clear sign before every stoplight or speed camera, which has the desired effect of making people drive more "cautiously" through the area.
Now, this "cautious" often entails drivers slamming the breaks to avoid the yellow light or to drop well below the speed limit out of fear of a ticket, leading to an increase in accidents at certain intersections.
After about five minutes of training, Jester started finding a fair number of jokes that I found humorous, even if they all scored highly on the "nerd" scale.
However, I didn't quite understand the punchline when it gave me this one:
Could not connect to user database: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (11)
Seriously, if there is *anyone* here criticizing Scientology, but believing the quaran or the bible, you are hypocrites. You make it sound as though I have a problem with their beliefs. But I've got to tell you, I don't give a flying DC3 what they believe. I could care less.
Yes, I consider myself religious, but (unless he tells me that he wants to sit down and have an intelligent discussion about it) what the next guy chooses to believe is up to him, and whether it's deism, humanism, theism, or FSMism, that's fine by me. I have a problem when he (and yes, this includes members of my own religion) uses coercion or threats or violence or elitism etc. to force his views... and hence my beef with Scientology.
Some very intelligent researchers at the Institute of Physics' Condensed Matter and Material Physics Conference came to some very intelligent decisions about the future of CPU's... but this is hardly the end of the silicon chip.
In addition to some of the points made by other posters (Silicon CPU's will live on in smart systems, cheap systems, handheld systems, etc.), there is a whole world of silicon chips that are *not* CPU's! Analog and mixed signal circuits need highly linear devices--not just switches that turn on and off--which current silicon technology provides wonderfully. Our current analog design technology has nowhere near exhausted the possibilities on the tapestry that ten/twenty year old silicon fabrication technologies provide.
Maybe graphene, nanotubes, or the Next Big Thing will change the high performance CPU niche, but silicon still provides everything we can manage to use for the rest of the IC world.
Besides, I bet that graffiti will be quite a challenge with nanotubes.
- why it's a bad idea to multitask 2 programs off the same floppy *shudder*
I literally cannot picture anyone in their right mind trying to do this. Maybe it just shows my computer-age, but that sounds to me about as good an idea as drunken NASCAR.
If you dropped a pop bottle onto Earth from a great height, say a million miles, it would splat (air resistance excluded) at about 25,000 MPH. Seven miles per second. Analogously, if you wanted to reverse the course of the pop bottle, you'd have to launch it from the Earth's surface at a similar speed. That would only be true if you wanted to *exactly* run that course in reverse; i.e. launching it with an initial velocity of ~25 kMPH and having it come to a stop at whatever great height with no forces other than gravity acting on the rocket in the meanwhile.
If, on the other hand, you have a engine that can exert forces on your rocket for the duration of the flight, you (technically) only need to have a thrust of infinitesimally greater than m*g to not fall back to Earth and eventually make progress toward the stars.
Now, in reality, the experiment is limited by the fuel one can cram into a measly 2 L bottle, but the point is that you can achieve "space" (note: "space" != "orbit") at a quite leisurely pace, as long as you've got the patience and the fuel tanks.
Actually, 'drunk hillbillies' take potshots at the Goodyear Blimp quite often. A combination of multiple layers, compartments, and poor aim has kept it in the air for all this time.
8) Martin O'Donnell & Michael Salvatori. The artists in charge of the Halo series have produced some quite impressive pieces relying on orchestra, chorus, gutiar, and sci-fi synthesizer. Though all of their best stuff tends to have the same 'driven' feel, it is definitely good music, if not all that varied.
Once upon a time (1970's), everybody used metal for their FET gates. Those aluminum gates are where we got the names MOSFET (Metal-Oxide-Silicon Field Effect Transistor) and CMOS (Complementary MOSFET). In the 1980's, pretty much every fab gave up metal gates for the polysilicon that has been used since, amidst various enhancements in polysilicon deposition technology, self aligned gates, etc.
Now, the trend seems to be to return to the metal gates of yesteryear and ditch the oxide (the 'O' in MOSFET) for high-k dielectrics (not high-k metals, as the summary seems to say)...
That's all well and good, but I have one question... when will we get around to updating the term "CMOS"?
Slashdot Mirror
There was a similar (Amazon?) super-bowl commercial that showed the company's mascot riding on a donkey through a silicon-valley-esque ghost town of boarded up offices, broken glass, and whitewashed signs where only the ".com" was visible. On his way out of town, the mascot came across the limp Pets.com sock puppet (with X's for eyes) blowing in the wind. The commercial ended with a suggestion to trust the stable, surviving business [or something along those lines].
...so yeah. Obviously my memory is a bit faulty; this is one of my all-time favorite commercials, even if I can't remember the sponsoring company. Does anyone remember this commercial? Can someone fill in the blanks, here?
Oddly enough, this 'rumor' has been investigated by a surprising source... Slashdot
I've dealt with Dell both as a home user (my wife's old laptop, now she uses a Mac) and as a corporate customer. There is a world of difference between the two. Their special line for big-money users is really worlds different from their oft-complained-about home user's customer support
When I represented the big contract, I gave the first guy I talked to an ID number, then was transferred to a friendly support representative. I explained my problem (four failed hard drives--in one month, no less, out of 36 computers) and was off the phone within fifteen minutes with replacement drives arriving a few days later.
As a home user, I had quite the opposite experience. A ball bearing broke on the laptop's under-warranty case fan, so I called tech support. I first had to speak with at least three different people with varying degrees of English comprehension and was told more than once to reboot the computer in order to fix the broken fan. Finally, they agreed to send someone to replace the fan in about a week or so.
But that wasn't the end of it! The technician improperly replaced the keyboard/mouse connectors when he sealed up the computer, meaning that the input devices were completely inoperable (and fixing it myself would involve breaking a security sticker added by the technician and voiding the warranty). I again called Dell's support line, and, after being tossed about from call center to call center--and pretending to reboot a few more times, was finally told that someone could come by to fix the first technician's mistake... in another two weeks.
I fixed it myself in about five minutes after that phone call, considering the lost warranty to be of negligible value at this point.
Does anyone know if the "avalanche" behavior observed in these solar cells is in any way related to diode/photodiode avalanche breakdown? If so, could someone explain to me how energy can be produced in this manner?
During a photodiode's avalanche breakdown, for example, the act of a photon hitting a reverse-biased photodiode diode excites an electron into the conduction band. The excited electron gains energy from the strong reverse bias potential and "smashes" into other electrons on its way down-potential, which electrons are also excited, and excite more electrons, and so forth. However, all the energy in the system (aside from the photon's few eV) is supplied by the source that reverse biases the diode and provides the excited electrons with the energy to accelerate through the semiconductor (which is why a photodiode can be used as a switch, trigger, or sensor).
TFA didn't do much to explain this issue... can anyone give me a hand?
An honest question, here...
I thought that only moving charges, i.e. current, could produce magnetic flux. Is there another method of magnetic flux production going on, here? If it is still flux caused by moving charges, how is it different than the inductor?
Now, if I'm correct:
A) This requires current to flow through the first wire, so where's the memory?
B) Aside from the probably-more-linear relationship, how is this different from JFET's or BJT's?
I mean, the transistor is a device where you run a current or voltage to point A, changing the resistance between points B and C. Can someone explain the difference?
Agreed.
My father is the Cuyahoga County prosecutor in charge of homicide, rape, etc. cases, and this sort of setup isn't as rare as the CSI shows would have you think. Truth be told, many criminals can and do cover their tracks after this sort of crime, and many victims' bodies are never found. The CSI technology that can magically find some microscopic imprint in a month-old sweater to tell you the time, date, place, and style of murder just doesn't exist in real life, and that's where "reasonable doubt", circumstantial evidence, and the juror's logical analysis of the big picture really comes into play.
So, I understand (in a manner of speaking) the whole material ejection process, so to speak. I was wondering if someone could clear up an issue for me, though... Why do accretion disks form in the first place? I mean, why a single disk rather than a sphere of material being drawn in to the essentially "spherical" black hole? Why is one plane favored above all others? Is it because the black hole itself is rotating?
Oh boy... this is going to turn into a UID pissfest any moment, now...
Agreed.
I just moved to Columbus from Cleveland, a whole 140 miles south... now, suddenly, when six inches of snow hits, they declare it the "Blizzard of '08" and shut down the city. *sigh*
I used to walk to school in that much snow.
Uphill.
Both ways.
I know that I've posted about this before, but...
Huzzah! For the first time in 25 years, the name MOSFET ( Metal -Oxide-Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor) will correctly describe the device that goes by that name!
(For those confused as to my jubilation, highly doped polysilicon replaced metal gates over 25 years ago. As a result most MOSFETS haven't actually had metal in them since.)
So... he's saying that blatant stereotypes are okay, as long as they are not of black people? Am I missing something?
I've seen all three games. I'm Italian. My wife is Latina. And I'm not offended by any of it. But this interviewer seems to be saying that my lack of offense is because there is some fundamental difference in the race portrayals... I thought it was that I can choose to be offended or to be entertained by any of these blatant, joking, stereotypes.
I don't get it.
That depends on the state (or sometimes municipality). In Ohio, it is required to post a clear sign before every stoplight or speed camera, which has the desired effect of making people drive more "cautiously" through the area.
Now, this "cautious" often entails drivers slamming the breaks to avoid the yellow light or to drop well below the speed limit out of fear of a ticket, leading to an increase in accidents at certain intersections.
*sigh*
However, I didn't quite understand the punchline when it gave me this one:
Could anyone clear that up for me?
Nowhere did I say that I belong to that belief system or think that those events are "acceptable in the name of God" ... or whatever.
You make it sound as though I have a problem with their beliefs. But I've got to tell you, I don't give a flying DC3 what they believe. I could care less.
Yes, I consider myself religious, but (unless he tells me that he wants to sit down and have an intelligent discussion about it) what the next guy chooses to believe is up to him, and whether it's deism, humanism, theism, or FSMism, that's fine by me. I have a problem when he (and yes, this includes members of my own religion) uses coercion or threats or violence or elitism etc. to force his views... and hence my beef with Scientology.
Some very intelligent researchers at the Institute of Physics' Condensed Matter and Material Physics Conference came to some very intelligent decisions about the future of CPU's... but this is hardly the end of the silicon chip.
In addition to some of the points made by other posters (Silicon CPU's will live on in smart systems, cheap systems, handheld systems, etc.), there is a whole world of silicon chips that are *not* CPU's! Analog and mixed signal circuits need highly linear devices--not just switches that turn on and off--which current silicon technology provides wonderfully. Our current analog design technology has nowhere near exhausted the possibilities on the tapestry that ten/twenty year old silicon fabrication technologies provide.
Maybe graphene, nanotubes, or the Next Big Thing will change the high performance CPU niche, but silicon still provides everything we can manage to use for the rest of the IC world.
Besides, I bet that graffiti will be quite a challenge with nanotubes.
I literally cannot picture anyone in their right mind trying to do this. Maybe it just shows my computer-age, but that sounds to me about as good an idea as drunken NASCAR.
That would only be true if you wanted to *exactly* run that course in reverse; i.e. launching it with an initial velocity of ~25 kMPH and having it come to a stop at whatever great height with no forces other than gravity acting on the rocket in the meanwhile.
If, on the other hand, you have a engine that can exert forces on your rocket for the duration of the flight, you (technically) only need to have a thrust of infinitesimally greater than m*g to not fall back to Earth and eventually make progress toward the stars.
Now, in reality, the experiment is limited by the fuel one can cram into a measly 2 L bottle, but the point is that you can achieve "space" (note: "space" != "orbit") at a quite leisurely pace, as long as you've got the patience and the fuel tanks.
Actually, 'drunk hillbillies' take potshots at the Goodyear Blimp quite often. A combination of multiple layers, compartments, and poor aim has kept it in the air for all this time.
Indeed.
That is one major reason why I repeatedly applaud Valve for their treatment of Alyx Vance. An equal, intelligent, non-over-sexed partner.
Huzzah.
8) Martin O'Donnell & Michael Salvatori. The artists in charge of the Halo series have produced some quite impressive pieces relying on orchestra, chorus, gutiar, and sci-fi synthesizer. Though all of their best stuff tends to have the same 'driven' feel, it is definitely good music, if not all that varied.
An honest request:
... uh... sources for the Iraq casualty count. Could you let us know where you fount this number?
I'm looking for some well-sourced
Thanks.
Once upon a time (1970's), everybody used metal for their FET gates. Those aluminum gates are where we got the names MOSFET (Metal-Oxide-Silicon Field Effect Transistor) and CMOS (Complementary MOSFET). In the 1980's, pretty much every fab gave up metal gates for the polysilicon that has been used since, amidst various enhancements in polysilicon deposition technology, self aligned gates, etc.
Now, the trend seems to be to return to the metal gates of yesteryear and ditch the oxide (the 'O' in MOSFET) for high-k dielectrics (not high-k metals, as the summary seems to say)...
That's all well and good, but I have one question... when will we get around to updating the term "CMOS"?
Just a request, so that we can more clearly see the Slashdot crowd's impact... could you post an update to your stats in... oh... 12 hours?