CDs and DVDs are and always were higher cost than their cassete and VHS couterparts. For no good reason, yes (since they are cheaper to make). HD video can be very cheap. You've got a full HD capable monitor in front of you right now. It didn't have to cost much more than any other TV. And yes, 1080 lines of resolution DOES look exciting on a large format device. Even more so than on a laptop screen. I know we're typically spoiled with our high-res computer games, but 1080 looks VERY good. Windows screens (not formatted for 1080), not so much. Video and pictures -- very good. Again, your posting (modded +3 -- nice job slashdotters) shows little experience with this in reality.
"On the average reproducing system, owned by the masses of consumers, the difference between mp3 and full CD audio is unnoticeable. This is also the case between the new HD formats and the now existing DVDs."
This is simply untrue and is written as someone who hasn't watched native 1080i material vs the 480p of a DVD. Jaw dropping. Cost is also becoming less of an issue. Need an HDTV monitor? How much was that 15" LCD monitor? $159 bucks? Now I'd still argue you can't really appreciate all that detail on a 15 inch display, but $150 is cheap. Projectors (and even better option, IMHO) are also getting cheaper every day. I paid $1k a couple months ago for a projector that will play high-def (or most any other computer format) and throw out a gorgeous 10-foot image on my wall. No, it's not the ultimate home theater setup, but it's amazing how cheap it can be to get such an amazing experience. HDTV is an extension of the DVD home thater. The new content being created at those higher resolutions will drive that market. I'll agree the take-up will be slower, but come 2008 it'll be pretty unanimous.
You're the type of person who still buys the pan-and-scan versions of movies for your VHS player, huh? Yeah, HD is the same image as SD if you cut off a third of the picture, and blurred everything. And how are your 8-tracks doing? Never justified the expense to move up to tapes or (god-forbid) CDs. You can get 8 tracks for pennies now. Good stuff. (end old fart rant)
Native 1080i format material is simply mind-blowing. Granted, there's not a lot of it out there yet. I think most people commenting on this have not seen this level of detail yet -- even on their "friends" set. I've never met a person who watched a native 1080i show and didn't just stand there with their mouth open. No, a 27" TV is not sufficient to fully appreciate the level of detail apparent. The tech gets cheaper every day -- it's just a matter of when to jump in and enjoy it. And that's not to mention that here in the US, we'll all NEED digital tuners in a few years (2008?). Or all the other options having the capability to display HD material gives you (like an extra big computer monitor).
Native HD material (like many TV shows broadcast now) is what will drive HD-DVD and Blu-Ray sales. Movies not so much until the digital film technology becomes more prevalent (and movies are being shot in higher rez formats). Internet streaming of this type of material (even bittorrent like methods)is slow -- the files are gargantuan.
You are so out of touch with reality I don't know if reason will even avail me here. The fact that you keep getting +3 modifiers for this tripe only heightens my frustration.
"Actually, I have attended public schools in Southern California, and I have also been to the hospital before. I also have (state) healthcare and pay car insurance in Southern California. I understand that the healthcare system has severe shortcomings and so do our schools (thoguh the schools I attended were pretty good IMO), but these problems have nothing to do with immigration."
Wow. I'm going to have to chalk another one up to our poor education system. Dude, you've got to wait for hours (I've waited as much as 10 hours, and have known others to wait as much as 15!) to get any emergency room service -- since this is the first place illegals go for health care. Yeah, I could blame that on the fact we don't have universal health care (and thus the hospitals foot the bill -- causing more hospitals to close from budget shortfalls), but again I ask -- who pays for this? Our schools are the same issue. Thousands flooding the schools with no additional funding to account for them. Now you would think they'd get more money for more students. This is not the case, even though almost half the states budgest goes directly to education funding.
"Firstly, immigrants contribute to our economy by providing cheap labor for many industries, and we benefit from this through the cheaper goods produced by them. We also have one of the largest economies in the world, so if our school/healthcare systems are underfunded, it's because we don't employ a progressive tax system capable of supporting our educational/healthcare infrastructure, and/or because tax money is being misspent. Secondly, if you buy anything in California, you're paying state sales tax and putting money directly back into the economy. So saying that illegals don't pay taxes or are stealing from our economy is just a load of BS. An illegal immigrant who comes here to make minimum wage and shares a 2 bedroom apartment with 20 people is more likely to spend all of their disposable income on basic necessities than some millionaire who keeps most of his money in tax-exempt off-shore bank accounts."
Wow. This is the typical republitard argument. Lets keep our slave race of cheap labor. Every industry the gets a help from "cheap labor" is footing the bill to you and me -- the taxpayer -- for all the other public services they consume (healthcare, education). And yeah, they do pay sales tax (which helps local economies only) -- assuming they are spending their money in reputable establishments that don't also hire illegals ('cause remember -- this is about ILLEGALS, not just immigrants). Remeber our "day without an immigrant" last month? Nicest commute day I've ever had in LA. The most interesting thing was the businesses that were most affected were the businesses that hire illegals! They were businesess almost entirely supported by illegal immigrants, run by illegal immigrants. Talk to a "real" American hispanic, and they've got a different view of illegals than you see on TV. Saying we our schools/healcare is messed up becasue we don't have a progressive tax system only proves my point. That's a total cop out. We have tons of money in this state -- almost all from the rich and wealthy businesses (like Google) we have here in the US. You'd like the poor to pay more? We can drive all the rich (and businesses) out of this state. See how much tax revenue we get then. Oh and just sales tax? I'd still claim they're getting more out than that. Not just becasue the type of businesses ILLEGALS support don't pay their correct taxes (when income is claimed -- if it's not a cash-only transaction). And SS#'s? It's called identity theft, and it's QUITE common. Yes, they can still get welfare and other services (even EIC tax credits). Let's do the math: 20 ILLEGAL immigrants in one house vs. 1 millionaire with an offshore account (your example). The mil
" I certainly won't argue with the fact that most pedophiles come from within the family, but all you have to do is run a quick "Megan's Law" search of your zip code to see the number of sex offenders in you area.
Yes, so? That number is certainly dwarfed by the number of people guilty of other violent crimes against the person in the same area, though, of course, that number isn't as easy to see."
We're not talking about violent crimes. We're talking about sexual predators and specifically, pedophiles.
" Now out of the few hundred you see within a few miles of your house, how many are pedophiles?
Judging from crime stats from the BJS probably somewhere in the loose neighborhood of about 1 in 8 are any type of pedophile, and as noted upthread, far fewer than that are pedophiles that pose any more risk than any random person on the street to anyone outside of their own immediate family."
I did note that upthread -- as with no links or support -- just "IIRC". If you've REALLY read substantial research relating to convicted pedophiles and how liable they are to molest others outside their family (again I'd say convenience and have seen as yet nothing to contradict that) -- they you've read more than I. That still just seems crazy to me. Seems like a heck of a gamble.
" They are only contained. We have laws that require them to remain so far from public places where kids stay (not open for debate). GPS tracking ensures this.
No, it doesn't, for the same reason -- illusion of security provided by "Megan's Law" databases notwithstanding -- legal registration requirements don't actually ensure that police actually know where offenders live."
Uh, no. GPS works great. You know EXACTLY where they are. RFID requires local detectors. Megan's law is (admitedly) more of a scare than of any real use. GPS works. That's also why they use it for house arrest.
" Do you REALLY think that's wrong?
I think that various indicators of social alienation have been linked to increased recidivism of molestors, and that "scarlet letter" approaches of all kinds that are certain to increase social alienation may be necessary and useful, but need to be well-considered and carefully and selectively applied considering effectiveness, characteristics of the particular offender, and potential adverse consequences. So, yeah, I think much of the mindless blanket approach taken to sexual offenders is poorly thought-out, reflexive, and counterproductive, and that universal GPS monitoring of sex offenders would fall into that category, as well."
You know, I agree with you right here. I'm too much of a libertarian to disagree. But as a parent, and someone who's seen the effects of molestation on people's lives, I've got to think GPS monitoring of CERTAIN sexual predators may be a good thing. You yourself finally grants there may be some usefullness in a carefull approach. I think in those cases, it's the best approach out there.
I certainly won't argue with the fact that most pedophiles come from within the family, but all you have to do is run a quick "Megan's Law" search of your zip code to see the number of sex offenders in you area. Try it. See how many pop up. Now out of the few hundred you see within a few miles of your house, how many are pedophiles? Have kids? Want to know where these guys are? Your assert much in your argument. You have nothing to support there is a difference between a pedophile that molest someone in their family vs an outsider. Is there a difference? Seems like a matter of convenience to me.
As someone who recently found out their late grandfather molested my own mother -- and he was an elementary school principal -- it shudders me to think of the possible consequences. Molesting your own kids wasn't even a jail time offense until the late 80s.
I'll repeat -- pedophiles are not "cured". They are only contained. We have laws that require them to remain so far from public places where kids stay (not open for debate). GPS tracking ensures this. Can you think of another way? Do you REALLY think that's wrong?
You must not have attended public school in Southern California, or had to visit any of our lovely hospitals there recently. Appently you also don't have healthcare in this state, nor do you have car insurance. All of these things have seen skyrocketing costs (or wait times) in the last 10-20 years (since our nice 1986 immigration bill) This state is being drained by illegals in more ways than one. As someone who attended California public schools and now faces the prospect of sending my own children to them -- the problem is quite obvious. In fact, I WILL NOT be sending my kids to any public schools in Southern California. And I know I'm not the only one. I have no doubt that many large corporations in this state make more money because of the illegals (and corresponding low wages) they employ. The problem is it costs the rest of the state (taxpayers) tens of billions each year. Billions that don't come from illegals. Don't tell me they pay taxes. If you make less than 30k a year, you're not paying taxes. More likely you're getting money from the govenment (EIC) and paying some into SS and medicare (not taxes). This is where 99% of our illegals fall -- even the "legally" working ones. It's ONE of the reasons why we limit the amount coming into the country.
As for a border camera system being compared to "gestapo" tactics. You're way off. Total FUD. You'd rather have a wall? As much as I have a problem with illegals, a wall isn't what I'd want either. I'd prefer Mexico to straighten it's ass up and get a real government of the people, not a few corrupt businesses. Fox is the biggest joke in Mexico in the last century, who feels no shame in exporting his countries poorest to the US for whatever they can get. I think a "virtual fence" like this might be a better solution. Something we can remove easily when (and if) Mexico ever gets it's head out its ass and straightens out its economy. As far as encouraging xenophobia -- whatever. That's a racial cop out. I have no problem with LEGAL immigrants. I married a LEGAL immigrant. My great grandparents were LEGAL immigrants. I have no racial issues at all. I have serious issues with people violating our laws and then expecting preferential treatment. There are many reasons why we limit the amount of immigrants into this counrty -- despite the fact we have the largest number of immigrants entering the US ever year than any other courty in the world. Can't say I'm too thrilled about the whole plan, but it sounds better than most.
I actually think it's one of the few applications that make sense for GPS/RFID tracking -- pedophiles. There are a number of good reasons for this -- most centered on the inability of pedophiles to get within a certain distance of schools/other places with small children. You don't "cure" or "rehabilitate" pedophiles -- you can only hope to contain them. GPS ankle bracelets work great for that. They are also common for people under house arrest -- another useful application.
I love all the hyperbole on slashdot. Makes it interesting (even if most of it is complete BS). Again -- statement is from a CEO who's company sells these products -- NOT THE US GOVERNMENT. I don't think this would ever happen to immigrant/guest workers because (as others have stated quite well) -- it just doens't make sense, provide enough of a benefit, and incourages illegal immigration (enough of a problem already). Putting RFID tags in visas is NO WHERE CLOSE TO THE SAME THING. Oh, and they're already trying to put these things in kids. They ARE putting them in pets. I've also heard the market in latin and south america has been growing for this because of the large amount of kidnappings that occur there. Immigrants are the buzzword right now (well -- ILLEGAL immigrants, unless you're in the media and you don't know the difference), and this guys is just trying to capitalize. Oh, and "human rights violation"? Give me a break. Purely conjecture (since it doesn't exist), but this as proposed (by the CEO) is "voluntary" isn't it? Get it or don't get in? How's that a human rights violation? How many coutries do you have to get a shot before you get in? Same thing, just this shot can track you! Look, I'm not for it (for immigrants) or implanting RFID tags in anyone, but the knee-jerk reaction to RFID on/. is just silly sometimes (much like this idea).
and if I don't like my job, I quit and get/make a new one. I went to school to learn how to think -- not to be a sheep. Unions are for unskilled workers who can't compete in the open market because of their lack of marketable abilities. We have unions for many jobs nowdays that don't meet tese qualifications, yet unionize anyway. Never, IMHO, to their better. I'd rather tech not be one.
That's exactly what I said in the first part of my post. That'd be the ONLY way it would work. If you had a speaker with a wire hanging off it (no amp) it won't work. If there is truly no power, then there is no amplification.
Actually balanced amps won't work either. I've seen this happen with fully differential amplifiers as well as pure single-ended versions. The problem is that the signal doesn't couple uniformly, and with a differential amplifier -- the difference between the two signal lines gets amplified. It's also imperative that PC board layouts be done correctly to minimize RF coupling, since long, exposed, traces on the board can also couple RF. Smart manufactureres sandwich signal lines on the inner layers of boards (between power and ground planes) for extra shielding. Mostly, however, Pi-filters on the inputs/outputs to an amplifier board (with all signal lines from then on run inside the board), and shielding where the problems are really nasty is the only way to truly kill RF. The cheap cables with metal net should work great for that. Digital is great because of it's relative noise immunity, but you've got to turn it back to analog at some point -- and that typically means the speaker cables are going to pick it up (always analog -- even with class D amps). If your amp is in a metal box it should be safe from the outside regardless of design choices -- it'll only be the external wires that let signals in.
Hmm -- could be there was still some power left in that wall-wart. They can sometimes take very LONG times to discharge if the circuit is open (days even). I have a hard time believing the RF coupling could drive speakers without some sort of amplification -- just because my experience says otherwise (and I've looked at quite a few setups at my job -- it's one of our biggest problems with audio systems). The real test is if the speakers would do this as just a wire connected to a speaker driver. It sounds like you had a set of powered speakers -- so this isn't exactly possible. Interesting though. Anyone else definitely seen (err.. heard) this with unpowered speakers?
This will NOT work with your speakers (and amp) unplugged! There is no way that RF coupling is strong enough current to drive an 8 ohm load with audible frequency components! I'm guessing whatever speakers you're hearing this from are still on even when they are switched off -- much like your television. This is quite common for many consumer electronics with audio (clock radios, etc.) And hey -- if I'm wrong and you've got a set of speakers that does (with no power) -- PLEASE message me the name and model so I can check it out. I work with these issues on a daily basis -- it'd be interesting to see something that refutes my experience. I've only EVER seen this as an amplifier issue -- where the high frequency coupling on the output lines feeds back to the input of the amp, thus being amplified (with enough current to drive a speaker load to an audible voltage). That's why we can generally kill these issues by putting ferrite beads and tiny caps to ground (pi-filter) right at the amplifier outputs. Any RF engineers out there? Calculations-wise, it doesn't seem like a huge amount of power would be necessary to do this: say a 5mV change in signal would be audible (at least very close) -- requiring only 0.625mA of current into an 8 ohm load (V=IR). That's 3uW of power induced on the line (P=VI). Pretty small, but I'm not sure how easy that is to do with an open circuit. I've never heard it -- only when the amp is on.
Actually, the speakers don't matter much -- it's the cable the couples the signal back to the amp (acts like a big antenna), it feeds back to the amps inputs, and the packet rate is amplified. This is 217Hz for GSM, and about 50Hz for 802.11b. Granted, the voice coil of the speakers could also act like an antenna, but usually it's the exposed speaker wires.
As an audio applications engineer for a large semiconductor company -- this is the single biggest compaint we have from customers using CMOS IC amplifiers. You will get it from almost any audio system that's near a cell phone (or 802.11b RF transmitter -- they have 50Hz packet rates that are audible from the 2.4GHz baseband signal). What ususlaly catches it is the speaker wires -- they act like giant antennas. 900MHz and up takes only a few centimeters to make a decent antenna, so long speaker cables are a prime target. The high frequncy (which you can't hear) couples on the output lines (typically) and goes back through the gain setting resistors on the amp to rech the amplifier input, where the packet rate (not the 2.4GHz to 900MHz baseband) is rectified and amplified. What you hear is the resulting buzz. Your cell phone itself doesn't shield this -- then it wouldn't work! The best thing to do is to shield your speakers, wire, and audio system it may be near. A faraday cage (as described by others here) will work great. Plastic-metallic shielding (like that used in anti-static IC or computer part bags) also works wonders.
Can somebody show me where you're pulling up these numbers (not the population numbers)? This seems rediculous. You're telling me that the US, the largest producer of agriculture products in the world (with HUGE grain surplusses), only makes 49% of what we need? How is this possible when we are one of the world leaders per capita in food production? (http://www.historylink101.com/lessons/farm-city/p er_capita.htm) It would seem that everyone else would be at LEAST as low (below 49%) for their own uses if this were true -- with a perpetual food shortage for everyone. This is not the case. I think your numbers are wrong. Or someone please explain to me how this works, 'cause I'm missing something here. Oh, and your numbers also assume no improvements in food production -- also highly unlikely -- and that population growth is constant (which will honestly probably get worse considering our soon-to-be-greatly-increasing immigrant population and the population growth of that sector) I will agree that people are the greatest source of pollution, period -- regardless of technology level. The more people, the worse your problems.
Wait a second -- the article says current embedded linux use drops from 24% to 17% and you're telling me interest isn't low? I'd like to see the comparison between other embedded OS use, but you're still missing the point of my post. That it has that marketshare is no surprise. If it were the be-all and end-all of imbedded OS (which it's not -- it's application driven just like everything else) you'd see higher market share. Also, again, the applications for it have only become massively popular in the last 5 years. What should be surprising is that in a area where the market has grown, embedded linux use has not. Frankly, this seems contrary to the end products I see in the consumer market. We seem to be seeing more applications using embedded linux (at least consumer apps), so I'd agree that this seems at least strange. It would be interesting to see the raw results of the survey (both this year and last year) to give some context to the title of the story. I see nothing in the story that specificaly says what the title says -- maybe an editor's change?
I don't think EE times is trying to distort the truth here. EE Times is an industry magazine aimed at developers and engineers. The devices that embedded OS systems lend themselves to have experienced an explosion of popularity in the last 5 years. Before that, embedded OS were limited to more microcontroller applications -- and having propgrammed a few of those myself I would have used anything that was avaialable, cheap, and would solve my problems for that application. As an engineer I don't care about marketshare for product development. I might consider it an issue for support for ME -- but my final end product just needs to work. Period. That embedded linux has EARNED 17% marketshare (which I personally find hard to believe if you include microcontrollers -- and I've got my Nokia 770) in 5 years is a non-story in EE Times. That it HAS that much IS the story. And that, frankly, shouldn't be much of a surprise either.
Yeah -- Axio has some of the coolest looking bags out there. I've got one that inspired several of my friends to buy one as well. I also always get comments from people at the airport and my corporate co-workers who expect jets to pop out the side.
Sony, Dell and BOSE (!) get an A+ for trustworthyness!!!! From some of the schlock these companies put out (especially BOSE) this is almost absurd. I wouldn't put any of these companies above Microsoft -- although I do believe Microsoft got the grade it deserved. This seems to be grading their marketing abilities (which Microsoft lacks) rather than actual trustworthyness. Or maybe they're the same thing;)
I believe this relates to shannon's theorem as used in audio. This states that a continuous waveform may be reconstructed completely from samples taken at greater than twice the highest component frequency of the waveform (Nyquist rate) -- and the waveform can be analyzed for frequency content via fourier analysis. This is EXTREMEMLY important in digital audio -- because that's how it works and how we reconstruct an analog wveform from 1's and 0's. Admittedly, throwing the ipod reference in was a troll, but that's how digital audio works ladies and gents -- and that's how your ipod works too. http://graphics.cs.ucdavis.edu/~okreylos/PhDStudie s/Winter2000/SamplingTheory.html
10 hours a week -- that's 2 hours a weeknight. Pretty easy for MMORPG fare or even most FPS. I'm sorry(?) to say I play at least that much after the kids go to bed. Sometimes my son and I play together, too. I definitely get more time in becasue I GO TO BED MUCH LATER since I'm not a growing boy anymore (not even sideways). Looking at the hours my kids are up (and even would be up when they're older) and able to play -- I just have more time. I've got 2 hours at a minimum of time after they're in bed every day to divide upon my entertainment. I've got the income, I've got the habits (playing in college and afterward single-life incurred some bad VG habits), and I don't have Mom telling me to turn off the TV. Oh, I've also got all the money, and discerning video game tastes. While I've been an avid gamer since pong came out (I still have every system I've ever owned since the 2600 -- and they all work), my parents limited the amount of TV/games I played as a kid and I will do the same to my kids. If I was playing an hour or two a day then I was lucky. I think most parents still restrict the amount of time spent in front of the TV to some degree. When they get old they can waste their time playing (like me!) all they want. Till then they get to grow up with the master. And hey -- I'm pretty well informed on game content too, so I know exactly what they're being exposed to. As an adult, I find most TV (broadcast especially) to be unwatchable. My cable box never seems to leave the Discovery, History, Science Channel and Cartoon Network -- and then it's only if something interesting is on. If I'm going to waste my time I'd rather be playing a game and keep my brain in it.
What a complete troll! What you've stated only makes sense in banana republics where the strongman needs to keep people ignorant. Free societies run and prosper on the knowledge of the people -- the better informed the better decisions they can make and the more value they have as skilled labor. I'm sorry, but the US is not the manufacturing center of the world -- almost all our economy is dependant on skilled labor (and growing more so). Education = skills = more money. I see plenty of stupid people here in the US, but it's hardly because they are being "deliberately dumbed-down" -- they just don't give a shit (as is their right in a free counrty). We don't rely on the government to "instruct" us -- we have an active free press (which I deplore at times, but that's another story) that provides news and information. Please provide some examples of this dumbing-down along with your obvious anti-US bias (we're so stupid the world sends their kids here for college). If their was any truth in your statement, pot (and other drugs) would be legal here for those exact reasons. Excuse my rock-bottom quality public education -- it's sad it seems superior to whatever half-assed schooling you received. See, since we are so bourgeois here, and I'll take that as the Marxist form of the word -- since you seem to, we are all capitalists, and that means it revolves around money. Make me an argument that less education=more money and you've got something to say, but this is not the case. There are exceptions where this is true (special skills like sports stars), but hardly anything you'd base an economy on. Public education here is also about money (as it is ANYWHERE). It's finding the balance between money spent vs education recieved that we all struggle with -- no one would say education is a bad thing. Welfare states do not promote education. Welfare states promote WELFARE (as a form of subsistence). That's why we despise the idea so much here in the US (for the most part). Frankly, I think it's a term somewhat overused, because it's more an ideal welfare state than any actual place. I can't think of any country in the world that could accurately be described as such. Oh, and rich, smart people buy just as much crap (if not more) than the dumb ones. If fact, I'd wager they're MORE LIKELY to waste money on useless crap. No, the consumer culture that is the US (and Europe, and most all 1st world countries for that matter) feeds on education and free speech.
Honestly, that type of system seems to have too many loopholes to be used for timecard purposes. RFID badges are quite common in corporate life -- and have been used for years to open doors and the like by waving your badge in front of it (HID is probably the most popular maker).
All RFID is not created equal. Here is a white paper from HID's site on the differences between typical RFID inventory-tracking technologies versus smart card technologies: http://www.hidcorp.com/pdfs/whitepaper_tags_vs_sma rtcards.pdf
Both are RFID, but the level of security and use is vastly different.
Yeah -- she's only 2! We'll see how things turn out, but social gaming certainly isn't discouraged in my house -- and I find FPS to be decent social games too (except of course that you're SHOOTING things!). I'm personally dreading when she becomes a teenager -- I see way too much external social pressure on girls these days. I don't know...how can you resist the chance to frag Daddy?
Slashdot Mirror
CDs and DVDs are and always were higher cost than their cassete and VHS couterparts. For no good reason, yes (since they are cheaper to make). HD video can be very cheap. You've got a full HD capable monitor in front of you right now. It didn't have to cost much more than any other TV.
And yes, 1080 lines of resolution DOES look exciting on a large format device. Even more so than on a laptop screen. I know we're typically spoiled with our high-res computer games, but 1080 looks VERY good. Windows screens (not formatted for 1080), not so much. Video and pictures -- very good. Again, your posting (modded +3 -- nice job slashdotters) shows little experience with this in reality.
"On the average reproducing system, owned by the masses of consumers, the difference between mp3 and full CD audio is unnoticeable. This is also the case between the new HD formats and the now existing DVDs."
This is simply untrue and is written as someone who hasn't watched native 1080i material vs the 480p of a DVD. Jaw dropping.
Cost is also becoming less of an issue. Need an HDTV monitor? How much was that 15" LCD monitor? $159 bucks? Now I'd still argue you can't really appreciate all that detail on a 15 inch display, but $150 is cheap. Projectors (and even better option, IMHO) are also getting cheaper every day. I paid $1k a couple months ago for a projector that will play high-def (or most any other computer format) and throw out a gorgeous 10-foot image on my wall. No, it's not the ultimate home theater setup, but it's amazing how cheap it can be to get such an amazing experience. HDTV is an extension of the DVD home thater. The new content being created at those higher resolutions will drive that market.
I'll agree the take-up will be slower, but come 2008 it'll be pretty unanimous.
You're the type of person who still buys the pan-and-scan versions of movies for your VHS player, huh?
Yeah, HD is the same image as SD if you cut off a third of the picture, and blurred everything.
And how are your 8-tracks doing? Never justified the expense to move up to tapes or (god-forbid) CDs. You can get 8 tracks for pennies now. Good stuff.
(end old fart rant)
Native 1080i format material is simply mind-blowing. Granted, there's not a lot of it out there yet. I think most people commenting on this have not seen this level of detail yet -- even on their "friends" set. I've never met a person who watched a native 1080i show and didn't just stand there with their mouth open. No, a 27" TV is not sufficient to fully appreciate the level of detail apparent. The tech gets cheaper every day -- it's just a matter of when to jump in and enjoy it.
And that's not to mention that here in the US, we'll all NEED digital tuners in a few years (2008?). Or all the other options having the capability to display HD material gives you (like an extra big computer monitor).
Native HD material (like many TV shows broadcast now) is what will drive HD-DVD and Blu-Ray sales. Movies not so much until the digital film technology becomes more prevalent (and movies are being shot in higher rez formats). Internet streaming of this type of material (even bittorrent like methods)is slow -- the files are gargantuan.
You are so out of touch with reality I don't know if reason will even avail me here. The fact that you keep getting +3 modifiers for this tripe only heightens my frustration.
"Actually, I have attended public schools in Southern California, and I have also been to the hospital before. I also have (state) healthcare and pay car insurance in Southern California. I understand that the healthcare system has severe shortcomings and so do our schools (thoguh the schools I attended were pretty good IMO), but these problems have nothing to do with immigration."
Wow. I'm going to have to chalk another one up to our poor education system. Dude, you've got to wait for hours (I've waited as much as 10 hours, and have known others to wait as much as 15!) to get any emergency room service -- since this is the first place illegals go for health care. Yeah, I could blame that on the fact we don't have universal health care (and thus the hospitals foot the bill -- causing more hospitals to close from budget shortfalls), but again I ask -- who pays for this?
Our schools are the same issue. Thousands flooding the schools with no additional funding to account for them. Now you would think they'd get more money for more students. This is not the case, even though almost half the states budgest goes directly to education funding.
"Firstly, immigrants contribute to our economy by providing cheap labor for many industries, and we benefit from this through the cheaper goods produced by them. We also have one of the largest economies in the world, so if our school/healthcare systems are underfunded, it's because we don't employ a progressive tax system capable of supporting our educational/healthcare infrastructure, and/or because tax money is being misspent. Secondly, if you buy anything in California, you're paying state sales tax and putting money directly back into the economy. So saying that illegals don't pay taxes or are stealing from our economy is just a load of BS. An illegal immigrant who comes here to make minimum wage and shares a 2 bedroom apartment with 20 people is more likely to spend all of their disposable income on basic necessities than some millionaire who keeps most of his money in tax-exempt off-shore bank accounts."
Wow. This is the typical republitard argument. Lets keep our slave race of cheap labor. Every industry the gets a help from "cheap labor" is footing the bill to you and me -- the taxpayer -- for all the other public services they consume (healthcare, education). And yeah, they do pay sales tax (which helps local economies only) -- assuming they are spending their money in reputable establishments that don't also hire illegals ('cause remember -- this is about ILLEGALS, not just immigrants). Remeber our "day without an immigrant" last month? Nicest commute day I've ever had in LA. The most interesting thing was the businesses that were most affected were the businesses that hire illegals! They were businesess almost entirely supported by illegal immigrants, run by illegal immigrants. Talk to a "real" American hispanic, and they've got a different view of illegals than you see on TV.
Saying we our schools/healcare is messed up becasue we don't have a progressive tax system only proves my point. That's a total cop out. We have tons of money in this state -- almost all from the rich and wealthy businesses (like Google) we have here in the US. You'd like the poor to pay more? We can drive all the rich (and businesses) out of this state. See how much tax revenue we get then.
Oh and just sales tax? I'd still claim they're getting more out than that. Not just becasue the type of businesses ILLEGALS support don't pay their correct taxes (when income is claimed -- if it's not a cash-only transaction). And SS#'s? It's called identity theft, and it's QUITE common. Yes, they can still get welfare and other services (even EIC tax credits).
Let's do the math: 20 ILLEGAL immigrants in one house vs. 1 millionaire with an offshore account (your example). The mil
" I certainly won't argue with the fact that most pedophiles come from within the family, but all you have to do is run a quick "Megan's Law" search of your zip code to see the number of sex offenders in you area.
Yes, so? That number is certainly dwarfed by the number of people guilty of other violent crimes against the person in the same area, though, of course, that number isn't as easy to see."
We're not talking about violent crimes. We're talking about sexual predators and specifically, pedophiles.
" Now out of the few hundred you see within a few miles of your house, how many are pedophiles?
Judging from crime stats from the BJS probably somewhere in the loose neighborhood of about 1 in 8 are any type of pedophile, and as noted upthread, far fewer than that are pedophiles that pose any more risk than any random person on the street to anyone outside of their own immediate family."
I did note that upthread -- as with no links or support -- just "IIRC". If you've REALLY read substantial research relating to convicted pedophiles and how liable they are to molest others outside their family (again I'd say convenience and have seen as yet nothing to contradict that) -- they you've read more than I. That still just seems crazy to me. Seems like a heck of a gamble.
" They are only contained. We have laws that require them to remain so far from public places where kids stay (not open for debate). GPS tracking ensures this.
No, it doesn't, for the same reason -- illusion of security provided by "Megan's Law" databases notwithstanding -- legal registration requirements don't actually ensure that police actually know where offenders live."
Uh, no. GPS works great. You know EXACTLY where they are. RFID requires local detectors. Megan's law is (admitedly) more of a scare than of any real use. GPS works. That's also why they use it for house arrest.
" Do you REALLY think that's wrong?
I think that various indicators of social alienation have been linked to increased recidivism of molestors, and that "scarlet letter" approaches of all kinds that are certain to increase social alienation may be necessary and useful, but need to be well-considered and carefully and selectively applied considering effectiveness, characteristics of the particular offender, and potential adverse consequences. So, yeah, I think much of the mindless blanket approach taken to sexual offenders is poorly thought-out, reflexive, and counterproductive, and that universal GPS monitoring of sex offenders would fall into that category, as well."
You know, I agree with you right here. I'm too much of a libertarian to disagree. But as a parent, and someone who's seen the effects of molestation on people's lives, I've got to think GPS monitoring of CERTAIN sexual predators may be a good thing. You yourself finally grants there may be some usefullness in a carefull approach. I think in those cases, it's the best approach out there.
I certainly won't argue with the fact that most pedophiles come from within the family, but all you have to do is run a quick "Megan's Law" search of your zip code to see the number of sex offenders in you area. Try it. See how many pop up. Now out of the few hundred you see within a few miles of your house, how many are pedophiles? Have kids? Want to know where these guys are?
Your assert much in your argument. You have nothing to support there is a difference between a pedophile that molest someone in their family vs an outsider. Is there a difference? Seems like a matter of convenience to me.
As someone who recently found out their late grandfather molested my own mother -- and he was an elementary school principal -- it shudders me to think of the possible consequences. Molesting your own kids wasn't even a jail time offense until the late 80s.
I'll repeat -- pedophiles are not "cured". They are only contained. We have laws that require them to remain so far from public places where kids stay (not open for debate). GPS tracking ensures this. Can you think of another way? Do you REALLY think that's wrong?
You must not have attended public school in Southern California, or had to visit any of our lovely hospitals there recently. Appently you also don't have healthcare in this state, nor do you have car insurance. All of these things have seen skyrocketing costs (or wait times) in the last 10-20 years (since our nice 1986 immigration bill)
This state is being drained by illegals in more ways than one. As someone who attended California public schools and now faces the prospect of sending my own children to them -- the problem is quite obvious. In fact, I WILL NOT be sending my kids to any public schools in Southern California. And I know I'm not the only one.
I have no doubt that many large corporations in this state make more money because of the illegals (and corresponding low wages) they employ. The problem is it costs the rest of the state (taxpayers) tens of billions each year. Billions that don't come from illegals.
Don't tell me they pay taxes. If you make less than 30k a year, you're not paying taxes. More likely you're getting money from the govenment (EIC) and paying some into SS and medicare (not taxes). This is where 99% of our illegals fall -- even the "legally" working ones. It's ONE of the reasons why we limit the amount coming into the country.
As for a border camera system being compared to "gestapo" tactics. You're way off. Total FUD. You'd rather have a wall? As much as I have a problem with illegals, a wall isn't what I'd want either. I'd prefer Mexico to straighten it's ass up and get a real government of the people, not a few corrupt businesses. Fox is the biggest joke in Mexico in the last century, who feels no shame in exporting his countries poorest to the US for whatever they can get.
I think a "virtual fence" like this might be a better solution. Something we can remove easily when (and if) Mexico ever gets it's head out its ass and straightens out its economy. As far as encouraging xenophobia -- whatever. That's a racial cop out. I have no problem with LEGAL immigrants. I married a LEGAL immigrant. My great grandparents were LEGAL immigrants. I have no racial issues at all. I have serious issues with people violating our laws and then expecting preferential treatment. There are many reasons why we limit the amount of immigrants into this counrty -- despite the fact we have the largest number of immigrants entering the US ever year than any other courty in the world.
Can't say I'm too thrilled about the whole plan, but it sounds better than most.
I actually think it's one of the few applications that make sense for GPS/RFID tracking -- pedophiles. There are a number of good reasons for this -- most centered on the inability of pedophiles to get within a certain distance of schools/other places with small children. You don't "cure" or "rehabilitate" pedophiles -- you can only hope to contain them. GPS ankle bracelets work great for that. They are also common for people under house arrest -- another useful application.
/. is just silly sometimes (much like this idea).
I love all the hyperbole on slashdot. Makes it interesting (even if most of it is complete BS).
Again -- statement is from a CEO who's company sells these products -- NOT THE US GOVERNMENT. I don't think this would ever happen to immigrant/guest workers because (as others have stated quite well) -- it just doens't make sense, provide enough of a benefit, and incourages illegal immigration (enough of a problem already).
Putting RFID tags in visas is NO WHERE CLOSE TO THE SAME THING.
Oh, and they're already trying to put these things in kids. They ARE putting them in pets. I've also heard the market in latin and south america has been growing for this because of the large amount of kidnappings that occur there.
Immigrants are the buzzword right now (well -- ILLEGAL immigrants, unless you're in the media and you don't know the difference), and this guys is just trying to capitalize.
Oh, and "human rights violation"? Give me a break. Purely conjecture (since it doesn't exist), but this as proposed (by the CEO) is "voluntary" isn't it? Get it or don't get in? How's that a human rights violation? How many coutries do you have to get a shot before you get in? Same thing, just this shot can track you!
Look, I'm not for it (for immigrants) or implanting RFID tags in anyone, but the knee-jerk reaction to RFID on
and if I don't like my job, I quit and get/make a new one. I went to school to learn how to think -- not to be a sheep.
Unions are for unskilled workers who can't compete in the open market because of their lack of marketable abilities.
We have unions for many jobs nowdays that don't meet tese qualifications, yet unionize anyway. Never, IMHO, to their better. I'd rather tech not be one.
That's exactly what I said in the first part of my post. That'd be the ONLY way it would work. If you had a speaker with a wire hanging off it (no amp) it won't work. If there is truly no power, then there is no amplification.
Actually balanced amps won't work either. I've seen this happen with fully differential amplifiers as well as pure single-ended versions. The problem is that the signal doesn't couple uniformly, and with a differential amplifier -- the difference between the two signal lines gets amplified. It's also imperative that PC board layouts be done correctly to minimize RF coupling, since long, exposed, traces on the board can also couple RF. Smart manufactureres sandwich signal lines on the inner layers of boards (between power and ground planes) for extra shielding.
Mostly, however, Pi-filters on the inputs/outputs to an amplifier board (with all signal lines from then on run inside the board), and shielding where the problems are really nasty is the only way to truly kill RF. The cheap cables with metal net should work great for that.
Digital is great because of it's relative noise immunity, but you've got to turn it back to analog at some point -- and that typically means the speaker cables are going to pick it up (always analog -- even with class D amps). If your amp is in a metal box it should be safe from the outside regardless of design choices -- it'll only be the external wires that let signals in.
Hmm -- could be there was still some power left in that wall-wart. They can sometimes take very LONG times to discharge if the circuit is open (days even). I have a hard time believing the RF coupling could drive speakers without some sort of amplification -- just because my experience says otherwise (and I've looked at quite a few setups at my job -- it's one of our biggest problems with audio systems). The real test is if the speakers would do this as just a wire connected to a speaker driver. It sounds like you had a set of powered speakers -- so this isn't exactly possible. Interesting though. Anyone else definitely seen (err.. heard) this with unpowered speakers?
This will NOT work with your speakers (and amp) unplugged! There is no way that RF coupling is strong enough current to drive an 8 ohm load with audible frequency components! I'm guessing whatever speakers you're hearing this from are still on even when they are switched off -- much like your television. This is quite common for many consumer electronics with audio (clock radios, etc.)
And hey -- if I'm wrong and you've got a set of speakers that does (with no power) -- PLEASE message me the name and model so I can check it out. I work with these issues on a daily basis -- it'd be interesting to see something that refutes my experience. I've only EVER seen this as an amplifier issue -- where the high frequency coupling on the output lines feeds back to the input of the amp, thus being amplified (with enough current to drive a speaker load to an audible voltage). That's why we can generally kill these issues by putting ferrite beads and tiny caps to ground (pi-filter) right at the amplifier outputs.
Any RF engineers out there?
Calculations-wise, it doesn't seem like a huge amount of power would be necessary to do this: say a 5mV change in signal would be audible (at least very close) -- requiring only 0.625mA of current into an 8 ohm load (V=IR). That's 3uW of power induced on the line (P=VI). Pretty small, but I'm not sure how easy that is to do with an open circuit. I've never heard it -- only when the amp is on.
Actually, the speakers don't matter much -- it's the cable the couples the signal back to the amp (acts like a big antenna), it feeds back to the amps inputs, and the packet rate is amplified. This is 217Hz for GSM, and about 50Hz for 802.11b. Granted, the voice coil of the speakers could also act like an antenna, but usually it's the exposed speaker wires.
As an audio applications engineer for a large semiconductor company -- this is the single biggest compaint we have from customers using CMOS IC amplifiers. You will get it from almost any audio system that's near a cell phone (or 802.11b RF transmitter -- they have 50Hz packet rates that are audible from the 2.4GHz baseband signal).
What ususlaly catches it is the speaker wires -- they act like giant antennas. 900MHz and up takes only a few centimeters to make a decent antenna, so long speaker cables are a prime target. The high frequncy (which you can't hear) couples on the output lines (typically) and goes back through the gain setting resistors on the amp to rech the amplifier input, where the packet rate (not the 2.4GHz to 900MHz baseband) is rectified and amplified. What you hear is the resulting buzz.
Your cell phone itself doesn't shield this -- then it wouldn't work! The best thing to do is to shield your speakers, wire, and audio system it may be near. A faraday cage (as described by others here) will work great. Plastic-metallic shielding (like that used in anti-static IC or computer part bags) also works wonders.
Can somebody show me where you're pulling up these numbers (not the population numbers)? This seems rediculous. You're telling me that the US, the largest producer of agriculture products in the world (with HUGE grain surplusses), only makes 49% of what we need? How is this possible when we are one of the world leaders per capita in food production? (http://www.historylink101.com/lessons/farm-city/p er_capita.htm)
It would seem that everyone else would be at LEAST as low (below 49%) for their own uses if this were true -- with a perpetual food shortage for everyone. This is not the case. I think your numbers are wrong. Or someone please explain to me how this works, 'cause I'm missing something here.
Oh, and your numbers also assume no improvements in food production -- also highly unlikely -- and that population growth is constant (which will honestly probably get worse considering our soon-to-be-greatly-increasing immigrant population and the population growth of that sector)
I will agree that people are the greatest source of pollution, period -- regardless of technology level. The more people, the worse your problems.
Wait a second -- the article says current embedded linux use drops from 24% to 17% and you're telling me interest isn't low? I'd like to see the comparison between other embedded OS use, but you're still missing the point of my post. That it has that marketshare is no surprise. If it were the be-all and end-all of imbedded OS (which it's not -- it's application driven just like everything else) you'd see higher market share. Also, again, the applications for it have only become massively popular in the last 5 years. What should be surprising is that in a area where the market has grown, embedded linux use has not.
Frankly, this seems contrary to the end products I see in the consumer market. We seem to be seeing more applications using embedded linux (at least consumer apps), so I'd agree that this seems at least strange. It would be interesting to see the raw results of the survey (both this year and last year) to give some context to the title of the story. I see nothing in the story that specificaly says what the title says -- maybe an editor's change?
I don't think EE times is trying to distort the truth here. EE Times is an industry magazine aimed at developers and engineers. The devices that embedded OS systems lend themselves to have experienced an explosion of popularity in the last 5 years. Before that, embedded OS were limited to more microcontroller applications -- and having propgrammed a few of those myself I would have used anything that was avaialable, cheap, and would solve my problems for that application. As an engineer I don't care about marketshare for product development. I might consider it an issue for support for ME -- but my final end product just needs to work. Period.
That embedded linux has EARNED 17% marketshare (which I personally find hard to believe if you include microcontrollers -- and I've got my Nokia 770) in 5 years is a non-story in EE Times. That it HAS that much IS the story. And that, frankly, shouldn't be much of a surprise either.
Yeah -- Axio has some of the coolest looking bags out there. I've got one that inspired several of my friends to buy one as well. I also always get comments from people at the airport and my corporate co-workers who expect jets to pop out the side.
Sony, Dell and BOSE (!) get an A+ for trustworthyness!!!! From some of the schlock these companies put out (especially BOSE) this is almost absurd. I wouldn't put any of these companies above Microsoft -- although I do believe Microsoft got the grade it deserved. ;)
This seems to be grading their marketing abilities (which Microsoft lacks) rather than actual trustworthyness. Or maybe they're the same thing
I believe this relates to shannon's theorem as used in audio. This states that a continuous waveform may be reconstructed completely from samples taken at greater than twice the highest component frequency of the waveform (Nyquist rate) -- and the waveform can be analyzed for frequency content via fourier analysis. This is EXTREMEMLY important in digital audio -- because that's how it works and how we reconstruct an analog wveform from 1's and 0's.e s/Winter2000/SamplingTheory.html
Admittedly, throwing the ipod reference in was a troll, but that's how digital audio works ladies and gents -- and that's how your ipod works too.
http://graphics.cs.ucdavis.edu/~okreylos/PhDStudi
10 hours a week -- that's 2 hours a weeknight. Pretty easy for MMORPG fare or even most FPS. I'm sorry(?) to say I play at least that much after the kids go to bed. Sometimes my son and I play together, too. I definitely get more time in becasue I GO TO BED MUCH LATER since I'm not a growing boy anymore (not even sideways). Looking at the hours my kids are up (and even would be up when they're older) and able to play -- I just have more time. I've got 2 hours at a minimum of time after they're in bed every day to divide upon my entertainment.
I've got the income, I've got the habits (playing in college and afterward single-life incurred some bad VG habits), and I don't have Mom telling me to turn off the TV. Oh, I've also got all the money, and discerning video game tastes.
While I've been an avid gamer since pong came out (I still have every system I've ever owned since the 2600 -- and they all work), my parents limited the amount of TV/games I played as a kid and I will do the same to my kids. If I was playing an hour or two a day then I was lucky. I think most parents still restrict the amount of time spent in front of the TV to some degree.
When they get old they can waste their time playing (like me!) all they want. Till then they get to grow up with the master. And hey -- I'm pretty well informed on game content too, so I know exactly what they're being exposed to.
As an adult, I find most TV (broadcast especially) to be unwatchable. My cable box never seems to leave the Discovery, History, Science Channel and Cartoon Network -- and then it's only if something interesting is on. If I'm going to waste my time I'd rather be playing a game and keep my brain in it.
What a complete troll!
What you've stated only makes sense in banana republics where the strongman needs to keep people ignorant. Free societies run and prosper on the knowledge of the people -- the better informed the better decisions they can make and the more value they have as skilled labor. I'm sorry, but the US is not the manufacturing center of the world -- almost all our economy is dependant on skilled labor (and growing more so). Education = skills = more money.
I see plenty of stupid people here in the US, but it's hardly because they are being "deliberately dumbed-down" -- they just don't give a shit (as is their right in a free counrty). We don't rely on the government to "instruct" us -- we have an active free press (which I deplore at times, but that's another story) that provides news and information.
Please provide some examples of this dumbing-down along with your obvious anti-US bias (we're so stupid the world sends their kids here for college).
If their was any truth in your statement, pot (and other drugs) would be legal here for those exact reasons.
Excuse my rock-bottom quality public education -- it's sad it seems superior to whatever half-assed schooling you received. See, since we are so bourgeois here, and I'll take that as the Marxist form of the word -- since you seem to, we are all capitalists, and that means it revolves around money. Make me an argument that less education=more money and you've got something to say, but this is not the case. There are exceptions where this is true (special skills like sports stars), but hardly anything you'd base an economy on.
Public education here is also about money (as it is ANYWHERE). It's finding the balance between money spent vs education recieved that we all struggle with -- no one would say education is a bad thing.
Welfare states do not promote education. Welfare states promote WELFARE (as a form of subsistence). That's why we despise the idea so much here in the US (for the most part). Frankly, I think it's a term somewhat overused, because it's more an ideal welfare state than any actual place. I can't think of any country in the world that could accurately be described as such.
Oh, and rich, smart people buy just as much crap (if not more) than the dumb ones. If fact, I'd wager they're MORE LIKELY to waste money on useless crap.
No, the consumer culture that is the US (and Europe, and most all 1st world countries for that matter) feeds on education and free speech.
Honestly, that type of system seems to have too many loopholes to be used for timecard purposes. RFID badges are quite common in corporate life -- and have been used for years to open doors and the like by waving your badge in front of it (HID is probably the most popular maker). All RFID is not created equal. Here is a white paper from HID's site on the differences between typical RFID inventory-tracking technologies versus smart card technologies: http://www.hidcorp.com/pdfs/whitepaper_tags_vs_sma rtcards.pdf
Both are RFID, but the level of security and use is vastly different.
Yeah -- she's only 2! We'll see how things turn out, but social gaming certainly isn't discouraged in my house -- and I find FPS to be decent social games too (except of course that you're SHOOTING things!). I'm personally dreading when she becomes a teenager -- I see way too much external social pressure on girls these days.
I don't know...how can you resist the chance to frag Daddy?