First, go plug your laptop in via ethernet in the awful location, and admire the glorious bandwidth.
Second, use your powerline adapters and/or some 802.11ac routers to get internet in the rest of your house. I'm almost certain there is no real need for you to use the full gigabit connection, so for now just don't worry about it. Of course this is not the answer you want, but it's the practical solution.
I think the search that you refer to is Grover's algorithm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover's_algorithm Yes, Quantum computers have other known uses besides Shor's and Grover's algorithms. Specifically, they can simulate other quantum systems, and also do a few other things such as solving algorithms based on quantum walks. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_algorithm
I have a similar question to yours. Do the D-Wave people claim any mapping of their hardware to a known quantum algorithm such as those at the last link above, or what?
If you're singing in a choir, then you're standing next to someone else, who is likely sighted. Just have them give you the cue. It could be that they hold your upper arm, and slide it down to the elbow it as the choirmaster's baton drops. If the choirmaster gives a four-count before starting, then the helper's signal may be four squeezes on your arm, or four taps on your shoe. I don't imagine that it would take much training for a new person to help you with this, and it's much cheaper than some high-tech solution which may not work.
A system with M antennas (.11n) can give roughly M times the throughput of a single-antenna system or can cancel roughly M-1 strong interferers. Even if it isn't here now, future systems will do a smart tradeoff between high throughput and interference cancellation, use spectrum sensing ('cognitive radio'), and add more spectrum to give very flexible systems.
All these projects depend on the Make government more transparent. Without this one, the governments will limit all other projects. This is exactly the same reason why Lawrence Lessig is fighting corruption and not copyright problems. He was fighting people that couldn't hear him.
So, I vote for it.
Amen to that. I think the "community" projects share some ideas and could be combined to some degree. Start with "Transparent Govt" then move on to "Collect and organize the world's urban data," "Work toward socially conscious tax policies," and "Create real-world issue reporting system".
See title. Basically like the GPS, you can access the internet from anywhere using special technology. Security is obviously going to be the biggest issue however.
GPS is not a two-way system. It is transmit only, and you need to use some other system to get your data back 'up' to the satellite. This 'uplink' part of a satellite nework requires special antennas or lotsa power; it's not an option.
From the article: The measure, S.B.260, says: "Upon request by a consumer, a service provider may not transmit material from a content provider site listed on the adult content registry." A service provider is defined as any person or company who "provides an Internet access service to a consumer."
Seems like you can still get your porn if you want it. The real question is the rating system discussed later on. Who will have to rate their content? Utah companies or everyone?
No, I mean that the two will converge. Wireless lans will start to look more like cell systems, cellular systems will start to have more bandwidth, like wireless LANS.
* This is just a few researchers in a lab. This is far from an implemenation. It IS the way future wireless standards will go.
* Future standards will blur the lines between wireless LAN and cellular standards. Your cell phone will provide high rates, your wireless internet connection may handle higher mobility.
* The multiple antennas mentioned here need only be at the cellular base station, or on the access point.
Much of theoretical computer science is all about some crazy professor looking at a problem that he thinks is cool, without worrying about its utility. Then in a few years, somebody finds a practical application.
How about having a computer for a secretary? DARPA is funding a "enduring personalized cognitive assistant." The system will be able to "reason, use represented knowledge, learn from experience, accumulate knowledge, explain itself, accept direction, be aware of its own behavior and capabilities as well as respond in a robust manner to surprises."
I'm not sure that an optical transform is the same as a digital transform, or that they can be used to do the same thing. Can their optical FFT/digital encoding produce the same bits during JPEG encoding as a digital FFT/digital encoding JPEG encoder? This is crucial for image/video compression algorithms.
I agree with other posters in that real-time/streaming/ high quality/kick butt video will be a staple of computer interfaces in the near future. The intro to MPEG4 on Leonardo Chiariglione's web site illustrates that these things and much more will be available with MPEG4.
MPEG4 includes audio and video of course, but it also includes much more. Here's an excerpt from the link above:
Efficiently represent a number of data types:
Video from very low bitrates to very high quality conditions;
Music and speech data for a very wide bitrate range, from transparent music to very low bitrate speech;
Generic dynamic 3-D objects as well as specific objects such as human faces and bodies;
Speech and music to be synthesized by the decoder, including support for 3-D audio spaces;
Text and graphics;
Provide, in the encoding layer, resilience to residual errors for the various data types, especially under difficult channel conditions such as mobile ones;
Independently represent the various objects in the scene, allowing independent access for their manipulation and re-use;
Compose audio and visual, natural and synthetic, objects into one audiovisual scene;
Describe the objects and the events in the scene;
Provide interaction and hyperlinking capabilities;
Manage and protect intellectual property on audiovisual content and algorithms, so that only authorized users have access.
Provide a delivery media independent representation format, to transparently cross the borders of different delivery environments.
In a few years, I imagine that you'll be do such cool things as generate a 3D model of your head, which you'll map onto the head of your favorite avatar model, and you'll have a character with a head that looks like you, but a body that looks like Van Damme or Lara Croft. Or some Linux guru will get ticked off at Bill {Gates, Clinton} and will render an entire video using 3D models and textures obtained from CNN. And these technologies will be based in part on what's happening now with MPEG4. Just as RealVideo is essentialy H.263, new tools will excel because of the foundation that MPEG4 is providing.
The DCT is an important thing, and shouldn't be ignored, but what about wavelet transforms? Wim Sweldens, the CREW people and others have looked at integer implementations. Wavelets discussed by the CREW people can be implemented with shifts and adds, as the DCT described above. I haven't heard of any patent problems with JPEG 2000, which will be based the wavelet transform, and will use integer transforms in some cases.
Assuming an omniscient God, then all any scientist is doing is rediscovering knowledge. A patent then is a bit pretentious.
If you're interested, the latest rev of the standard is described in this paper.
I've followed the standard, and I think that it will do very well. Even on the Web. The only problem I see is with licensing, but since HP developed the algorithm and they are giving away licenses for the JPEG-LS algorithm (which they helped develop), I can't see this as a problem.
I've found xanim to work well, with the exception of Quicktime 3.0 support, specificaly Sorenson Video. Send mail to pauli@s-vision.com if you'd like a Sorenson Video codec integrated into xanim.
Slashdot Mirror
First, go plug your laptop in via ethernet in the awful location, and admire the glorious bandwidth.
Second, use your powerline adapters and/or some 802.11ac routers to get internet in the rest of your house. I'm almost certain there is no real need for you to use the full gigabit connection, so for now just don't worry about it. Of course this is not the answer you want, but it's the practical solution.
I think the search that you refer to is Grover's algorithm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover's_algorithm
Yes, Quantum computers have other known uses besides Shor's and Grover's algorithms. Specifically, they can simulate other quantum systems, and also do a few other things such as solving algorithms based on quantum walks. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_algorithm
I have a similar question to yours. Do the D-Wave people claim any mapping of their hardware to a known quantum algorithm such as those at the last link above, or what?
If you're singing in a choir, then you're standing next to someone else, who is likely sighted. Just have them give you the cue. It could be that they hold your upper arm, and slide it down to the elbow it as the choirmaster's baton drops. If the choirmaster gives a four-count before starting, then the helper's signal may be four squeezes on your arm, or four taps on your shoe. I don't imagine that it would take much training for a new person to help you with this, and it's much cheaper than some high-tech solution which may not work.
A system with M antennas (.11n) can give roughly M times the throughput of a single-antenna system or can cancel roughly M-1 strong interferers. Even if it isn't here now, future systems will do a smart tradeoff between high throughput and interference cancellation, use spectrum sensing ('cognitive radio'), and add more spectrum to give very flexible systems.
All these projects depend on the Make government more transparent. Without this one, the governments will limit all other projects. This is exactly the same reason why Lawrence Lessig is fighting corruption and not copyright problems. He was fighting people that couldn't hear him.
So, I vote for it.
Amen to that. I think the "community" projects share some ideas and could be combined to some degree. Start with "Transparent Govt" then move on to "Collect and organize the world's urban data," "Work toward socially conscious tax policies," and "Create real-world issue reporting system".
See title. Basically like the GPS, you can access the internet from anywhere using special technology. Security is obviously going to be the biggest issue however.
GPS is not a two-way system. It is transmit only, and you need to use some other system to get your data back 'up' to the satellite. This 'uplink' part of a satellite nework requires special antennas or lotsa power; it's not an option.
From the article: The measure, S.B.260, says: "Upon request by a consumer, a service provider may not transmit material from a content provider site listed on the adult content registry." A service provider is defined as any person or company who "provides an Internet access service to a consumer." Seems like you can still get your porn if you want it. The real question is the rating system discussed later on. Who will have to rate their content? Utah companies or everyone?
No, I mean that the two will converge. Wireless lans will start to look more like cell systems, cellular systems will start to have more bandwidth, like wireless LANS.
* This is just a few researchers in a lab. This is far from an implemenation. It IS the way future wireless standards will go.
* Future standards will blur the lines between wireless LAN and cellular standards. Your cell phone will provide high rates, your wireless internet connection may handle higher mobility.
* The multiple antennas mentioned here need only be at the cellular base station, or on the access point.
Newsreaders and users could both use random request times, rather than defaulting to the top of the hour.
Much of theoretical computer science is all about some crazy professor looking at a problem that he thinks is cool, without worrying about its utility. Then in a few years, somebody finds a practical application.
How about having a computer for a secretary? DARPA is funding a "enduring personalized cognitive assistant." The system will be able to "reason, use represented knowledge, learn from experience, accumulate knowledge, explain itself, accept direction, be aware of its own behavior and capabilities as well as respond in a robust manner to surprises."
I'm not sure that an optical transform is the same as a digital transform, or that they can be used to do the same thing. Can their optical FFT/digital encoding produce the same bits during JPEG encoding as a digital FFT/digital encoding JPEG encoder? This is crucial for image/video compression algorithms.
MPEG4 includes audio and video of course, but it also includes much more. Here's an excerpt from the link above:
In a few years, I imagine that you'll be do such cool things as generate a 3D model of your head, which you'll map onto the head of your favorite avatar model, and you'll have a character with a head that looks like you, but a body that looks like Van Damme or Lara Croft. Or some Linux guru will get ticked off at Bill {Gates, Clinton} and will render an entire video using 3D models and textures obtained from CNN. And these technologies will be based in part on what's happening now with MPEG4. Just as RealVideo is essentialy H.263, new tools will excel because of the foundation that MPEG4 is providing.
Sanpitch
Moab rocks.
The EE Times has this related story. Also the Feb. issue of the IEEE Spectrum has a nice story on magnetoelectronic memory.
I don't think such things should be patented.
The DCT is an important thing, and shouldn't be ignored, but what about wavelet transforms? Wim Sweldens, the CREW people and others have looked at integer implementations. Wavelets discussed by the CREW people can be implemented with shifts and adds, as the DCT described above. I haven't heard of any patent problems with JPEG 2000, which will be based the wavelet transform, and will use integer transforms in some cases.
Assuming an omniscient God, then all any scientist is doing is rediscovering knowledge. A patent then is a bit pretentious.
H.263 will do as well as Sorenson Video; Quicktime
supports it, and the format is open. See UBC's SPMG site.
Also, the problem with Sorenson Video is with
Apple's restrictions. Sorenson would gladly make
a xanim library if Apple would let them.
If you're interested, the latest rev of the standard is described in this paper.
I've followed the standard, and I think that it will do very well. Even on the Web.
The only problem I see is with licensing, but since HP developed the algorithm and they are
giving away licenses for the JPEG-LS algorithm (which they helped develop), I can't see this as
a problem.
--
Christian Peel
chris.peel@ieee.org
I've found xanim to work well, with the exception
of Quicktime 3.0 support, specificaly Sorenson Video. Send mail to pauli@s-vision.com if you'd like a Sorenson Video codec integrated into xanim.