you may as well run HT or PCI-E to the monitor at this point
Maybe in a laptop, but certainly not in a desktop.
Implementing a high-speed databus on a motherboard (such as PCI-E), is easy, since the distances are very short and the "wires" are the traces on the motherboard. It is a very controlled environment.
But you just can't take that same thing and run it down a 3 foot cable to a monitor.. In the GHZ range, the losses in a 3 foot cable would be severe, not to mention the inductive effects of the cable, (which would vary depending on its position and orientation [coiled, curved, or straight]).
Perhaps if we go back to the ol' days where the monitor and the motherboard were housed in the same box, then it would work...
Doubling the bandwidth only allows the display to increase by about sqrt(2) in resolution.
For larger displays, they just need something much better.. Also, relatively few businesses and home users are going to be using 3200x2400 displays... (I suppose some graphics artists might, but they ain't exactly the majority).
J.P. Morgan pulled all his funding and effectively shut down Nikola Tesla
Though Tesla was intelligent, he was also wasn't the most honest. I recall reading a book that described his inventions. Many were notable. Some were not -- like the time he tricked someone into thinking a Galvanometer was a "Death Ray". He did something like use it as collateral to get a loan and flee with the money...
Free Energy won't solve all our problems....
Where are the minerals going to come from? What about the materials for plastics, medicines? What about drinking water?
Yes, free energy would *ease* many of our problems, but it won't solve them... In fact it would likely accelerate our own demise. (How fast can one mine rock with an unlimited supply of energy?) There is still only a finite amount of suitable rock. Most people can't afford to wait millions of years for new stuff to form.
And if the energy supply isn't unlimited, then it won't be free. Economics is founded on this concept.
We almost already have free energy -- its called the Sun. Unfortunately, utilizing it requires materials that are in finite supply (finite over short time durations). Thus it isn't very free to us.
I'm under the impression that the "UFO culture" doesn't exist in most other countries. They might believe in ghosts, but that's quite a bit different... Then again, if extraterrestial lifeforms did exist, the US would probably stand out in the same way algae stands out on a pond.
Regardless, if we are looking up at the stars, then it means we are not reading the newspaper nor watching the news. I invite all to consider the previous sentence carefully....At most, I think this guy "hacked" his way into a PR honeypot...
I think they should add borders to the lenses, or something to proclaim that "No this guy isn't just wearing the most retarded sunglasses you've ever seen, but actually a nifty piece of technology.",
Heck, you could get a HUD for real life, or zoom in on a far away object... especially with the shrinking size of high-resolution cameras, the possibilities seem almost endless.
And while you're at it, go ahead and change your first and last name to "Borg".
They can't outlaw it. How is everyone going to make online purchases?
I think you're being a bit naieve.
I can forsee this:
The US Govt outlaws all encryption schemes not "approved" by the NSA. Only the "approved" schemes involve the use of a "master public key" (owned by the NSA) that can decrypt the data (something like the regular public/private key schemes with a master "backdoor"). Commerce still continues and THEY can intercept anything they want...
And of course, since all encryption protocols would be "known" by the NSA, anything they can't easily decrypt would be instantly flagged and followed up. Of course, only "terrorists" would be using non-approved encryption schemes.
Now of course, the whole idea that anything encrypted could be decrypted with a single master key sounds completely silly.... But truth is stranger than fiction -- look at DVD technology!
Now I don't believe the above scenarion would be any more helpful in catching evildoers... But it would be an excellent want to spend extra money and give to friends in the security business, more business. The public would praise it as a way to *prevent* terrorism (lol!). Such a scenario could also be sold as a way to protect the children from online predators....
I haven't been reading Bradbury, perhaps I should.
"The Department of Homeland Security has taken into custody the programmer who injected the security flaw in the commonly used X11 Linux server. The programmer is suspected of having ties to new-age terrorist groups. Officials state that a plot was in progress to compromise vital government computers via this security flaw. Despite the target being an open-source program, the flaw subtle enough that nobody would spot it, despite being very serious. The suspect will be tried on charges of terrorism, vandalism, and a violation of the Millenium act... "
I don't know about that particular game, but I have a feeling that's why multiplayer games have centralized servers.... Things are probably simpler when only one node decides who-shot-who.
Even worse, consensus in a distributed system with any packet loss is not guaranteed (famous FLP paper in the 80s). The only guarantees are probabilistic... (And the world seems to run okay on that.) Which means no matter what algoritim, if x players start shooting at each other, their computers will not always agree on what happened!
Plus, remember the cheat in the original quake? Doing something like unplugging the ethernet for few seconds would allow one to go around and shoot everyone (while they appeared "frozen"). Then they could plug the cable back in and watch their score go up.
What if my girl friend copies my music from my laptop? Is that piracy?
Could be!
IANAL, but I have read arguments that if copying a work affects prevents one from purchasing another copy, then it is likely to be unlawful copyright infringement:
1) Making copies of CDs you own so you don't have to haul the originals between home and car is probably okay [you easily could have moved the originals back and forth, so the act of copying did not have an economic impact]. 2) Making copies of your friend's CDs so you don't have to borrow his and so you don't have to spend money on buying is probably not okay.
As for your girlfriend: As wacky as the laws and precedents go in many cases, I have a feeling it becomes infringement upon breakup! (Because after then you probably won't even think of lending CDs to each other).
So, my guess would be home network is okay. Girlfriend is probably okay (at least while's your together).
Now, for 2), I wonder if one could argue that their friend's music is crap and so you would have never spent money on it in the first place. Thus copying didn't prevent an otherwise a sale. But then the question arises, why was it copied? (perhaps for an upcoming paraodical derivative work]
As a long term reader of several NASA news listservs I see way too many fluff stories that are self congratulatory ("aren't we special? little joey dreamed of the space program his whole life and now he does X for NASA, let's all give him an internet pat on the back"), and not nearly enough along the lines of interesting experimental results or technology developments
I think you just summed up most government research...
It's agonizingly ironic; that Congress forces us to pay for the removal of our privacy.
Look to one of the oldest books: The Bible. In that day, the government supposedly made Jesus carry his own cross up a hill before nailed him to it.
In essence, they made him fund the means toward his own execution.
Now in modern times, the government is making citizens fund the removal of their own privacy? I am not surprised.
Also interesting is to note that the former was considered a criminal and a terrorist (after all, he spoke of the collapse of government). The latter are just ordinary citizens such as ourselves...
I did forget to mention that beamforming could be used by the cell towers... (and I think this is being researched)
Which would probably have all of the advantages that you were thinking about. If the tower can be more sensitive, then the cell phone can use less power, etc.
The towers also have the benefit of extra room for antennas, extra processing power, and might even be able to collaborate to determine the direction to the cell phone (e.g. as being done for 911)
I have to wonder if data mining isn't the problem -- the real problem seems to be that there are few obvious problems data mining will solve.
Consider WalM*rt. When the 2005 hurricanes were predicted, they mined their sales data for previous hurricanes. They found that in the last hurricane people stocked up on beer, pop tarts and peanut butter, so they sent trucks full of that stuff to the stores in the path of the hurricanes. They made lots of sales, and provided a valuable service to the communities. Capitalism at its finest.
Well, as a resident in a city that was about 200 miles inland, I would disagree.
They managed to run out of coolers, bottled water, battery-powered lights, batteries, propane, camping stoves, laterns. And when I mean out, I mean out: Not even a single "C" battery was to be found in the whole store!!!!
And yes, businesses and schools were closed before it hit -- so this area apparently thought the effects could have been severe. I think a less technological solution involving "common sense" should have been applied.
So they're going to keep records of everyone's activities online and sift through all of that to find the people surfing kiddie porn?
Of course not.... Haven't you noticed that "data mining" is a hot Computer Engineering research topic? perhaps only second to Wireless Sensor Networks.
ut the basic precepts of most religions out there are founded, promoted, and executed with good intent.
I belive so too. Which is what makes these groups the most destructive force ever created. Yes, they often do a lot of good. But misguided good intentions are far more destructive than intentionally destructive actions.
These groups, fueled by good intentions, sometimes (indirectly) push their faith on others. I doubt even the innocent religious charities do not work without an angle.
And I find it quite funny that churches will have multi-million dollar fundraisers to build a new building when the old one seems to serve its purpose and in the same mass, have a separate collection for the disadvantaged.
Is a antenna which can change direction depending on a signal already there ? If not the idea wont work at all.
Yes, it is possible to have a directional antenna without it physically having to move in order to change directions. I think they have been around for a long, long time. Mutliple antennas/elements are required. (phased array?) . But the consumer wants a cell phone, not a porcupine.
I *think* something might be done like this in current MIMO research. I believe the problem of finding the direction is more complicated than just a pilot tone. It usually required multiple antennas and gets confused by multipath. (e.g. which one do you aim at)? I have briefly heard of MIMO guys using multiple antennas and doing beamforming with them.
Also, what happens if someone in a car,train, etc? (changing angles at high rate of speed). I wonder how well existing hand-off algorithms would work with directional antennas.
Also, it would seem that a directional phone would be forced to use lower transmit power (so that the max Effective Radiated Power to the head was the same/lower).
Also for cell phones, I wonder if directioality would be limited to 2D or 3D? (after all, the towers are usually fairly close by).
Slashdot Mirror
my employer found a way to get into by gmail account and read my discussions between possible employers.
I believe this violates many federal laws (in the US).
25 days of vacation??? Wow.
Do you actually get to use them?? In a time other than the middle of winter?
you may as well run HT or PCI-E to the monitor at this point
Maybe in a laptop, but certainly not in a desktop.
Implementing a high-speed databus on a motherboard (such as PCI-E), is easy, since the distances are very short and the "wires" are the traces on the motherboard. It is a very controlled environment.
But you just can't take that same thing and run it down a 3 foot cable to a monitor.. In the GHZ range, the losses in a 3 foot cable would be severe, not to mention the inductive effects of the cable, (which would vary depending on its position and orientation [coiled, curved, or straight]).
Perhaps if we go back to the ol' days where the monitor and the motherboard were housed in the same box, then it would work...
Doubling the bandwidth only allows the display to increase by about sqrt(2) in resolution.
For larger displays, they just need something much better.. Also, relatively few businesses and home users are going to be using 3200x2400 displays... (I suppose some graphics artists might, but they ain't exactly the majority).
I suspect DRM is a bigger factor.
J.P. Morgan pulled all his funding and effectively shut down Nikola Tesla
Though Tesla was intelligent, he was also wasn't the most honest. I recall reading a book that described his inventions. Many were notable. Some were not -- like the time he tricked someone into thinking a Galvanometer was a "Death Ray". He did something like use it as collateral to get a loan and flee with the money...
Free Energy won't solve all our problems....
Where are the minerals going to come from?
What about the materials for plastics, medicines?
What about drinking water?
Yes, free energy would *ease* many of our problems, but it won't solve them... In fact it would likely accelerate our own demise. (How fast can one mine rock with an unlimited supply of energy?) There is still only a finite amount of suitable rock. Most people can't afford to wait millions of years for new stuff to form.
And if the energy supply isn't unlimited, then it won't be free. Economics is founded on this concept.
We almost already have free energy -- its called the Sun. Unfortunately, utilizing it requires materials that are in finite supply (finite over short time durations). Thus it isn't very free to us.
I'm under the impression that the "UFO culture" doesn't exist in most other countries. They might believe in ghosts, but that's quite a bit different... Then again, if extraterrestial lifeforms did exist, the US would probably stand out in the same way algae stands out on a pond.
...At most, I think this guy "hacked" his way into a PR honeypot...
Regardless, if we are looking up at the stars, then it means we are not reading the newspaper nor watching the news. I invite all to consider the previous sentence carefully.
I think they should add borders to the lenses, or something to proclaim that "No this guy isn't just wearing the most retarded sunglasses you've ever seen, but actually a nifty piece of technology.",
Perhaps they could sell them only in "white".
Heck, you could get a HUD for real life, or zoom in on a far away object... especially with the shrinking size of high-resolution cameras, the possibilities seem almost endless.
And while you're at it, go ahead and change your first and last name to "Borg".
They can't outlaw it. How is everyone going to make online purchases?
I think you're being a bit naieve.
I can forsee this:
The US Govt outlaws all encryption schemes not "approved" by the NSA. Only the "approved" schemes involve the use of a "master public key" (owned by the NSA) that can decrypt the data (something like the regular public/private key schemes with a master "backdoor"). Commerce still continues and THEY can intercept anything they want...
And of course, since all encryption protocols would be "known" by the NSA, anything they can't easily decrypt would be instantly flagged and followed up. Of course, only "terrorists" would be using non-approved encryption schemes.
Now of course, the whole idea that anything encrypted could be decrypted with a single master key sounds completely silly.... But truth is stranger than fiction -- look at DVD technology!
Now I don't believe the above scenarion would be any more helpful in catching evildoers... But it would be an excellent want to spend extra money and give to friends in the security business, more business. The public would praise it as a way to *prevent* terrorism (lol!). Such a scenario could also be sold as a way to protect the children from online predators....
I haven't been reading Bradbury, perhaps I should.
if you want the battery industry to change, refuse to purchase devices that are non-recyclable! ... the industry adapts to deliver what we want,
That only changes the problem, without solving it.
Just because "X" buys only recycled paper doesn't me he is going to put the discarded stuff back in the recycling bin.
The public wants recycled goods, but it also doesn't want to be bothered with actually recycling them...
Next week there will be a followup article:
"The Department of Homeland Security has taken into custody the programmer who injected the security flaw in the commonly used X11 Linux server. The programmer is suspected of having ties to new-age terrorist groups. Officials state that a plot was in progress to compromise vital government computers via this security flaw. Despite the target being an open-source program, the flaw subtle enough that nobody would spot it, despite being very serious. The suspect will be tried on charges of terrorism, vandalism, and a violation of the Millenium act... "
Any suggestions?
I think a solution here is to be unethical.
OTOH, (most) people are stupid. It could be likely that many are more interested in the ads than your website.
I don't know about that particular game, but I have a feeling that's why multiplayer games have centralized servers.... Things are probably simpler when only one node decides who-shot-who.
Even worse, consensus in a distributed system with any packet loss is not guaranteed (famous FLP paper in the 80s). The only guarantees are probabilistic... (And the world seems to run okay on that.) Which means no matter what algoritim, if x players start shooting at each other, their computers will not always agree on what happened!
Plus, remember the cheat in the original quake? Doing something like unplugging the ethernet for few seconds would allow one to go around and shoot everyone (while they appeared "frozen"). Then they could plug the cable back in and watch their score go up.
What if my girl friend copies my music from my laptop? Is that piracy?
Could be!
IANAL, but I have read arguments that if copying a work affects prevents one from purchasing another copy, then it is likely to be unlawful copyright infringement:
1) Making copies of CDs you own so you don't have to haul the originals between home and car is probably okay [you easily could have moved the originals back and forth, so the act of copying did not have an economic impact].
2) Making copies of your friend's CDs so you don't have to borrow his and so you don't have to spend money on buying is probably not okay.
As for your girlfriend: As wacky as the laws and precedents go in many cases, I have a feeling it becomes infringement upon breakup! (Because after then you probably won't even think of lending CDs to each other).
So, my guess would be home network is okay. Girlfriend is probably okay (at least while's your together).
Now, for 2), I wonder if one could argue that their friend's music is crap and so you would have never spent money on it in the first place. Thus copying didn't prevent an otherwise a sale. But then the question arises, why was it copied? (perhaps for an upcoming paraodical derivative work]
As a long term reader of several NASA news listservs I see way too many fluff stories that are self congratulatory ("aren't we special? little joey dreamed of the space program his whole life and now he does X for NASA, let's all give him an internet pat on the back"), and not nearly enough along the lines of interesting experimental results or technology developments
I think you just summed up most government research...
and maybe even the enviroment. Who knows?
You mean like the part where he dropped enviornmental regulations to reduce gas prices??? I guess everything has its price...
That is not something we should be teaching to our kids (at least not as an acceptable course of action).
Do you really expect Zork or LtBurrito to do something about it?
I think we should rename him to PrivateBurrito
It's agonizingly ironic; that Congress forces us to pay for the removal of our privacy.
Look to one of the oldest books: The Bible. In that day, the government supposedly made Jesus carry his own cross up a hill before nailed him to it.
In essence, they made him fund the means toward his own execution.
Now in modern times, the government is making citizens fund the removal of their own privacy? I am not surprised.
Also interesting is to note that the former was considered a criminal and a terrorist (after all, he spoke of the collapse of government). The latter are just ordinary citizens such as ourselves...
Is there a difference?
Disclaimer: I am not Christian.
Well, speaking isn't typically a nerds greatest strength.
What they really need is a program that can be written by drawing.... Oh wait, its called Labview.
Nah, I don't think they'll ever replace good ol' C++ with a vim-like editor.
Well, maybe YOU can pronounce them!!!!
And for the viewing audience, which one if your root password?
I did forget to mention that beamforming could be used by the cell towers... (and I think this is being researched)
Which would probably have all of the advantages that you were thinking about. If the tower can be more sensitive, then the cell phone can use less power, etc.
The towers also have the benefit of extra room for antennas, extra processing power, and might even be able to collaborate to determine the direction to the cell phone (e.g. as being done for 911)
I have to wonder if data mining isn't the problem -- the real problem seems to be that there are few obvious problems data mining will solve.
Consider WalM*rt. When the 2005 hurricanes were predicted, they mined their sales data for previous hurricanes. They found that in the last hurricane people stocked up on beer, pop tarts and peanut butter, so they sent trucks full of that stuff to the stores in the path of the hurricanes. They made lots of sales, and provided a valuable service to the communities. Capitalism at its finest.
Well, as a resident in a city that was about 200 miles inland, I would disagree.
They managed to run out of coolers, bottled water, battery-powered lights, batteries, propane, camping stoves, laterns. And when I mean out, I mean out: Not even a single "C" battery was to be found in the whole store!!!!
And yes, businesses and schools were closed before it hit -- so this area apparently thought the effects could have been severe. I think a less technological solution involving "common sense" should have been applied.
So they're going to keep records of everyone's activities online and sift through all of that to find the people surfing kiddie porn?
Of course not.... Haven't you noticed that "data mining" is a hot Computer Engineering research topic? perhaps only second to Wireless Sensor Networks.
THEY know what they are doing....
ut the basic precepts of most religions out there are founded, promoted, and executed with good intent. I belive so too. Which is what makes these groups the most destructive force ever created. Yes, they often do a lot of good. But misguided good intentions are far more destructive than intentionally destructive actions. These groups, fueled by good intentions, sometimes (indirectly) push their faith on others. I doubt even the innocent religious charities do not work without an angle. And I find it quite funny that churches will have multi-million dollar fundraisers to build a new building when the old one seems to serve its purpose and in the same mass, have a separate collection for the disadvantaged.
Is a antenna which can change direction depending on a signal already there ? If not the idea wont work at all.
Yes, it is possible to have a directional antenna without it physically having to move in order to change directions. I think they have been around for a long, long time. Mutliple antennas/elements are required. (phased array?) . But the consumer wants a cell phone, not a porcupine.
I *think* something might be done like this in current MIMO research. I believe the problem of finding the direction is more complicated than just a pilot tone. It usually required multiple antennas and gets confused by multipath. (e.g. which one do you aim at)? I have briefly heard of MIMO guys using multiple antennas and doing beamforming with them.
Also, what happens if someone in a car,train, etc? (changing angles at high rate of speed). I wonder how well existing hand-off algorithms would work with directional antennas.
Also, it would seem that a directional phone would be forced to use lower transmit power (so that the max Effective Radiated Power to the head was the same/lower).
Also for cell phones, I wonder if directioality would be limited to 2D or 3D? (after all, the towers are usually fairly close by).