The above 'too small' is only true to a degree - ceramic antennas can change things a little. However. Given that this is a MEMS device, and that the actual quotes are at best ambiguous, I suspect what it is is a big pile of relays. This will let you combine several antennas that would be singly pretty useless into one that happens to be decent, for the way the user is holding the phone at that particular moment. Imagine for a moment the whole back of the device with appropriate striplines going to a couple of dozen patches, each of which could either be hooked to add, subtract, or add or subtract at 90 degrees out of phase, driven by this MEMs chip. The technology could be similar to that used to deposit touchscreens on the other side of the device. You can in principle get useful additional performance from this.
Totally agree. I regularly pirate content - simply as I can't have it on all my devices otherwise. For example, I reread books I liked after a few years. Why on earth would I be happy with a cloud solution that probably is not going to be there in the next decade? Barring the total collapse of western civilisation, I can pretty much say I'll be able to read epub/html/txt.
Several reasons it's better. Firstly, weather balloons are a _LOT_ closer to the transmitter than GPS. 300mW@100km is a much, much stronger signal than 50W at 40000km.
Secondly, there are perhaps a few dozen stations that receive weather balloons, and these can be upgraded for well under a few thousand dollars each. It's not like GPS, where there are literally millions of receivers that may be affected.
A hard cap on salary at the average would have a simple effect. Only rich people would become politicians. They would be even more likely to 'suffer' for a short while, while lining up contacts for future lucrative contracts in industry.
I'm curious. How do you have a biased math textbook? No number 7s?
Re:A good site for extrapolating from current scie
on
Aircraft Carriers In Space
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Sure there's stealth in space. See 'Space is FUCKING HUGE' - being far away is stealthy. Being in an unexpected location too.
In addition, there is passive stealth. Point a conical mirror at your opponent (taking care not to get glints from the sun or other local stellar object), and you are basically invisible. (this is more annoying near planets), disguise.
Then there are active stealth systems, from jamming to cooling the surface of your craft to near absolute zero to avoid IR signatures, decoys, degrading your opponents sensors by various means, in addition to more conventional systems for shortrange combat such as radar absorbant paint.
Note that in space - radar is _short_ range only. Yes, technically things many millions of miles away have been detected by radar, but if your opponent is using planetary sized objects as ships, you're basically screwed anyway.
RADAR and LIDAR are useful perhaps for point defense type applications, and similar.
RADAR (and LIDAR) can be boosted modestly by increasing the transmit power or recieve sensitivity. But they rapidly run into the fact that the returned signal decays depending on the fourth power of distance.
So, if you want to take an earth-based radar, and increase the range a hundred times, you need a transmitter a hundred million times more powerful.
(1)A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if— (a)he intentionally causes or incites another person (B) to engage in an activity, (b)the activity is sexual, and (c)either— (i)B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over, or (ii)B is under 13. (2)A person guilty of an offence under this section, if the activity caused or incited involved— (a)penetration of B’s anus or vagina, (b)penetration of B’s mouth with a person’s penis, (c)penetration of a person’s anus or vagina with a part of B’s body or by B with anything else, or (d)penetration of a person’s mouth with B’s penis,is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. (3)Unless subsection (2) applies, a person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— (a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both; (b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years."
"would you fuck me" - is clearly inciting penetration, so you can do up to 14 years for this.
This is _NOT_ a strict liability offence. The jury must have had reason to believe that he intended to do this. Doing it by accident _CANNOT_ lead to a conviction, unless the judge misdirects them. For example - if he'd directed that because he intended to send it to one person on the list, that intent carried over to the unintended recipients.
Indeed, I can't seem to see any 'strict liability' offences in the act. I may have missed some. At a minimum you need to have intended the action and not known the other party was underage.
I note that in the USA, the pass rate of the driving test in general exceeds 50% by a considerable margin. This is not due to great tuition and driver skill and knowledge. Also, a number of other safety features that would considerably reduce deaths are not implemented.
If the autodriver is safer than the average auto driver,...
This is not by hand. To take a programming analogy, it's looking at what the compiler generated, and then giving it hints so the resultant code/chip is laid out as you expect.
Chips stopped being able to be laid out 'properly' by hand some time ago.
Doing this has much the same benefits as doing it with code. You know stuff the compiler does not. You can spot silly stuff it's doing, that is not wrong, but suboptimal, and hold its hand.
Infrastructure costs money to put in. If you need signisicant extra infrastructure put in for your use, the normal pricing structure is likely to assume that you will use it, not simply (as a data centre might) leave it idle unless other power fails.
The real fail is that Microsoft failed to negotiate a proper contract to avoid the needless waste of resource.
The notion that because gas is only 90% pure, it is useless to the medical profession is rather ridiculous. Refining this gas back to 99.99% helium is almost trivial, compared to extracting it from sources where the helium content is in parts per million.
8 layer minimum fine pitch board, with soldermask, and appropriate platings. You are not making anything more than a dumb feature phone with 4 layers today. 4 layer boards are readily available in batchpcb type services. 8 layer ones are not.
The several hundred for an assembly was also not pulled out of the air. If you can assemble them yourself, and get a 99.5% success rate on these difficult to solder fine pitch devices with as many as several hundred balls, you will never make a prototype that works.
You may be able to rework it and get it working, but it vastly complicates things, Adding xray inspection by skilled people may pretty much be required.
For a cellphone class device, you are likely to need to spend over 10k, in parts and unavoidable services to get a working copy.
Assuming skilled designers that have worked on similar projects will donate large slices of their time for free.
If you are using various devices to login with. Sure, your normal keyboard may have an unusual keystroke that yields . But, other OSs, or key maps are unlikely to either support the requisite keystroke ('But my phone doesn't even have alt-gr") or it is going to be in a place only findable With extreme effort.
Hardware development is hard. The below was written in respect of openspurcw mobile hardware.
To elaborate on why open-source hardware is hard.
Why open-source software works is: Widely available repository of code. Many people able to review it, or sections of it, and understand it. Ease of submitting tested patches.
Hardware has problems that don't really fit well with this. The open schematic is the trivially easy part, and not really a problem. (though in practice, you need a schematic with copious links to design documents, which isn't well solved by open tools).
The number of people who can review it is rather smaller - as you can't open up a c file, and see a clear error or awkwardness in code that can be edited.
For all but the most basic errors, you are going to have to sit down and read several hundred pages of hardware documentation about how the chips in question work, in addition to having in-depth knowledge about the circuit design, and costings of likely changes.
Now, you've done this, and generated a patch that you think (for example) lowers the supply current by 1%.
Compile - test. On a PC, this takes a couple of minutes.
For something of a smartphone class, a one-off PCB may cost several hundred dollars. Then the parts will cost another several hundred dollars in small quantities, as well as being difficult to obtain. Now, you have to solder the parts onto the board, which is a decidedly nontrivial thing - and if you decide you want someone else to do this, it's probably another several hundred dollars.
So, you're at the thick end of a thousand dollars for a 'compile'.
Now, you boot the device, and it exhibits random hangs.
Neglecting the fact that you are going to need several hundred to several thousand dollars of test equipment, you now have to find the bug.
Is it: A) The fact that unlabled 0.5*1mm component C38 is in fact 20% over the designed value, as the assembly company put the wrong one in. B) C38 has a tiny bridge of solder underneath it that is making intermittent contact. C) The chipmaker for the main chip hasn't noticed that their chip doesn't quite do what they say it will do, and the datasheet is wrong. D) You missed a tangential reference on page 384 of the datasheet to proper setup of the RAM chip, and it is pure coincidence that all models up till now have booted. E) Because you're ordering small quantities, you had to resort to getting the chips from a distributor who diddn't watch their supply chain really carefully, and your main chip has in fact been desoldered from a broken cellphone. F) Though the design of the circuit is correct, and the board you made matches that design, and all the parts are correct and work properly, the inherent undesired elements introduced by real life physics means it doesn't work. G) A completely random failure of a part that could occur with even the best design, and best manufacture.
G - may mean that it's worthwhile making two or more of each revision - which of course boosts costs.
Hardware is nasty.
This gets a lot less painful of course for lower end hardware. For very limited circuits, which can be done on simple inexpensive PCBs, and be easily soldered at home - costs of a 'compile' can be in the tens of dollars, or even lower.
Indirect discrimination is discrimination too. If your algorithm does discriminate against a group because you are discriminating against things common to that group, you may still have a problem.
Start out the class by having a screening test, then kill the worse performing half. This both helps with overpopulation, motivates the others, and reduces amount of required hardware.
There is another issue. It's essentially impossible to make a dock with a micro USB connector. if you tRy to slam it into a dock with even.5mm of error, the connector will snap off.
In order to do this, it relies on the sun being a nice bright disk. If you try to split the image of the sun on a prism, it works well. If you do the same with a cloudy sky, it totally fails,
So, this technique will not wWork at all during light cloud. In many places, that more than halves the output.
At one end is remote viewing, telekinisis, and similar claims.
At the other is what is usually taken as axioms. 1+1=2,...
The higgs, and indeed the electron, is somewhere between these two. We have a good deal of evidence that the electron behaves mostly as current theories predict, to many, many decimal places. Any change in understanding of it pretty much either has to find thousands of earlier results flawed, or to be a subtle effect only visible at unexplored areas. Much like the initial (re) discovery of atoms.
Slashdot Mirror
On balance, the internet would be a better place.
60GHz will be essentially unaffected by microwaves.
However, I note that my laptop (with 802.11g) works just fine on top of my operating microwave.
The above 'too small' is only true to a degree - ceramic antennas can change things a little.
However.
Given that this is a MEMS device, and that the actual quotes are at best ambiguous, I suspect what it is is a big pile of relays.
This will let you combine several antennas that would be singly pretty useless into one that happens to be decent, for the way the user is holding the phone at that particular moment.
Imagine for a moment the whole back of the device with appropriate striplines going to a couple of dozen patches, each of which could either be hooked to add, subtract, or add or subtract at 90 degrees out of phase, driven by this MEMs chip.
The technology could be similar to that used to deposit touchscreens on the other side of the device.
You can in principle get useful additional performance from this.
Totally agree.
I regularly pirate content - simply as I can't have it on all my devices otherwise.
For example, I reread books I liked after a few years.
Why on earth would I be happy with a cloud solution that probably is not going to be there in the next decade?
Barring the total collapse of western civilisation, I can pretty much say I'll be able to read epub/html/txt.
Several reasons it's better.
Firstly, weather balloons are a _LOT_ closer to the transmitter than GPS.
300mW@100km is a much, much stronger signal than 50W at 40000km.
Secondly, there are perhaps a few dozen stations that receive weather balloons, and these can be upgraded for well under a few thousand dollars each.
It's not like GPS, where there are literally millions of receivers that may be affected.
A hard cap on salary at the average would have a simple effect.
Only rich people would become politicians.
They would be even more likely to 'suffer' for a short while, while lining up contacts for future lucrative contracts in industry.
I'm curious.
How do you have a biased math textbook?
No number 7s?
Sure there's stealth in space.
See 'Space is FUCKING HUGE' - being far away is stealthy.
Being in an unexpected location too.
In addition, there is passive stealth.
Point a conical mirror at your opponent (taking care not to get glints from the sun or other local stellar object), and you are basically invisible.
(this is more annoying near planets), disguise.
Then there are active stealth systems, from jamming to cooling the surface of your craft to near absolute zero to avoid IR signatures, decoys, degrading your opponents sensors by various means, in addition to more conventional systems for shortrange combat such as radar absorbant paint.
Note that in space - radar is _short_ range only.
Yes, technically things many millions of miles away have been detected by radar, but if your opponent is using planetary sized objects as ships, you're basically screwed anyway.
RADAR and LIDAR are useful perhaps for point defense type applications, and similar.
RADAR (and LIDAR) can be boosted modestly by increasing the transmit power or recieve sensitivity.
But they rapidly run into the fact that the returned signal decays depending on the fourth power of distance.
So, if you want to take an earth-based radar, and increase the range a hundred times, you need a transmitter a hundred million times more powerful.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents
The relevant section is http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/10
"Causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity
(1)A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally causes or incites another person (B) to engage in an activity,
(b)the activity is sexual, and
(c)either—
(i)B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over, or
(ii)B is under 13.
(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section, if the activity caused or incited involved—
(a)penetration of B’s anus or vagina,
(b)penetration of B’s mouth with a person’s penis,
(c)penetration of a person’s anus or vagina with a part of B’s body or by B with anything else, or
(d)penetration of a person’s mouth with B’s penis,is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.
(3)Unless subsection (2) applies, a person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years."
"would you fuck me" - is clearly inciting penetration, so you can do up to 14 years for this.
This is _NOT_ a strict liability offence.
The jury must have had reason to believe that he intended to do this.
Doing it by accident _CANNOT_ lead to a conviction, unless the judge misdirects them.
For example - if he'd directed that because he intended to send it to one person on the list, that intent carried over to the unintended recipients.
Indeed, I can't seem to see any 'strict liability' offences in the act.
I may have missed some.
At a minimum you need to have intended the action and not known the other party was underage.
You missed a cost.
thisAlgorithmBecomingSkynetCost=-999999999
I note that in the USA, the pass rate of the driving test in general exceeds 50% by a considerable margin.
This is not due to great tuition and driver skill and knowledge.
Also, a number of other safety features that would considerably reduce deaths are not implemented.
If the autodriver is safer than the average auto driver, ...
This is not by hand.
To take a programming analogy, it's looking at what the compiler generated, and then giving it hints so the resultant code/chip is laid out as you expect.
Chips stopped being able to be laid out 'properly' by hand some time ago.
Doing this has much the same benefits as doing it with code.
You know stuff the compiler does not.
You can spot silly stuff it's doing, that is not wrong, but suboptimal, and hold its hand.
Infrastructure costs money to put in.
If you need signisicant extra infrastructure put in for your use, the normal pricing structure is likely to assume that you will use it, not simply (as a data centre might) leave it idle unless other power fails.
The real fail is that Microsoft failed to negotiate a proper contract to avoid the needless waste of resource.
Not to mention the cosmetic industry.
The notion that because gas is only 90% pure, it is useless to the medical profession is rather ridiculous.
Refining this gas back to 99.99% helium is almost trivial, compared to extracting it from sources where the helium content is in parts per million.
8 layer minimum fine pitch board, with soldermask, and appropriate platings.
You are not making anything more than a dumb feature phone with 4 layers today.
4 layer boards are readily available in batchpcb type services.
8 layer ones are not.
The several hundred for an assembly was also not pulled out of the air.
If you can assemble them yourself, and get a 99.5% success rate on these difficult to solder fine pitch devices with as many as several hundred balls, you will never make a prototype that works.
You may be able to rework it and get it working, but it vastly complicates things,
Adding xray inspection by skilled people may pretty much be required.
For a cellphone class device, you are likely to need to spend over 10k, in parts and unavoidable services to get a working copy.
Assuming skilled designers that have worked on similar projects will donate large slices of their time for free.
If you are using various devices to login with.
Sure, your normal keyboard may have an unusual keystroke that yields .
But, other OSs, or key maps are unlikely to either support the requisite keystroke ('But my phone doesn't even have alt-gr") or it is going to be in a place only findable With extreme effort.
Hardware development is hard.
The below was written in respect of openspurcw mobile hardware.
To elaborate on why open-source hardware is hard.
Why open-source software works is:
Widely available repository of code.
Many people able to review it, or sections of it, and understand it.
Ease of submitting tested patches.
Hardware has problems that don't really fit well with this.
The open schematic is the trivially easy part, and not really a problem.
(though in practice, you need a schematic with copious links to design documents, which isn't well solved by open tools).
The number of people who can review it is rather smaller - as you can't
open up a c file, and see a clear error or awkwardness in code that can be edited.
For all but the most basic errors, you are going to have to sit down and
read several hundred pages of hardware documentation about how the chips in question work, in addition to having in-depth knowledge about the circuit design, and costings of likely changes.
Now, you've done this, and generated a patch that you think (for example) lowers the supply current by 1%.
Compile - test.
On a PC, this takes a couple of minutes.
For something of a smartphone class, a one-off PCB may cost several hundred dollars. Then the parts will cost another several hundred dollars in small quantities, as well as being difficult to obtain.
Now, you have to solder the parts onto the board, which is a decidedly nontrivial thing - and if you decide you want someone else to do this, it's probably another several hundred dollars.
So, you're at the thick end of a thousand dollars for a 'compile'.
Now, you boot the device, and it exhibits random hangs.
Neglecting the fact that you are going to need several hundred to several thousand dollars of test equipment, you now have to find
the bug.
Is it:
A) The fact that unlabled 0.5*1mm component C38 is in fact 20% over the designed value, as the assembly company put the wrong one in.
B) C38 has a tiny bridge of solder underneath it that is making intermittent contact.
C) The chipmaker for the main chip hasn't noticed that their chip doesn't quite do what they say it will do, and the datasheet is wrong.
D) You missed a tangential reference on page 384 of the datasheet to proper setup of the RAM chip, and it is pure coincidence that all models up till now have booted.
E) Because you're ordering small quantities, you had to resort to getting the chips from a distributor who diddn't watch their supply chain really carefully, and your main chip has in fact been desoldered from a broken cellphone.
F) Though the design of the circuit is correct, and the board you made matches that design, and all the parts are correct and work properly, the inherent undesired elements introduced by real life physics means it doesn't work.
G) A completely random failure of a part that could occur with even the best design, and best manufacture.
G - may mean that it's worthwhile making two or more of each revision - which of course boosts costs.
Hardware is nasty.
This gets a lot less painful of course for lower end hardware. For very limited circuits, which can be done on simple inexpensive PCBs, and be easily soldered at home - costs of a 'compile' can be in the tens of dollars, or even lower.
Indirect discrimination is discrimination too.
If your algorithm does discriminate against a group because you are discriminating against things common to that group, you may still have a problem.
Start out the class by having a screening test, then kill the worse performing half.
This both helps with overpopulation, motivates the others, and reduces amount of required hardware.
There is another issue. .5mm of error, the connector will snap off.
It's essentially impossible to make a dock with a micro USB connector.
if you tRy to slam it into a dock with even
In order to do this, it relies on the sun being a nice bright disk.
If you try to split the image of the sun on a prism, it works well.
If you do the same with a cloudy sky, it totally fails,
So, this technique will not wWork at all during light cloud.
In many places, that more than halves the output.
I wonder if this is potentially talking about the mess that is ACPI?
Science is a continuum.
At one end is remote viewing, telekinisis, and similar claims.
At the other is what is usually taken as axioms. ...
1+1=2,
The higgs, and indeed the electron, is somewhere between these two.
We have a good deal of evidence that the electron behaves mostly as current theories predict, to many, many decimal places.
Any change in understanding of it pretty much either has to find thousands of earlier results flawed, or to be a subtle effect only visible at unexplored areas.
Much like the initial (re) discovery of atoms.
'Too many apps'.