CO2 is nicer than nitro because it liquifies more easily. This means a lot of gas in a small container, and at a higher effective pressure because the liquid -> gas conversion delivers a lot of oomph. Cheap paintball CO2 setups take advantage of this.
Because it is a PITA to do analog recordings right. Getting good S/N and low distortion is a lot harder than it sounds, requires good equipment, and the knowledge to operate it.
You haven't convinced me that the situation circa 2003 is any different than that c. 1989. As then, physics is placing limits on the performance of current design processors.
I think it is exceedingly likely that there will be advances in materials science and manufacturing that will prolong the validity of Moore's Law. It continues to be feasible to decrease core voltages, and newer heat-removal technologies and better dielectrics are showing promise. Even if each avenue provides only a linear reduction in dissipation, or a linear increase in our ability to deal with it, the end result is that the synergy allows us to eke out a few more years of exponential growth.
Well, you are right. But in theory, there aren't multiple correct answers for color rendering. There are very specific standards in terms of color temperature and how colors get turned into analog signals by the video DAC. While I can empathize with the desire to, say, correct for a set of DVD/LCD displays that somehow is faulty, really they should have produced a "correct" DVD and encouraged the hardware manufacturers to faithfully implement the standards.
Answer this: how many of those positions are duplicates of the same job farmed out by different consulting companies? How many aren't dependent on some obscure skillset? (mainframe cobol expert??) The figures don't look as good after that analysis.
Diffraction in audio refers to the kind of comb filtering described by T below. It can happen both due to multiple speakers and due to the multiple drivers used by most loudspeaker systems.
Facing speakers towards each other exacerbates these problems, leading to a large number of frequency-dependent constructive and destructive lobes. This effect is considerably ameliorated in the standard speaker arrangement due to (generally) decreasing off-axis response of the higher frequencies.
Not very, that is. This arrangement is the worst possible, since you will have 100% phase cancellation (in theory). In reality, your bass-to-low/midrange will fade out, and you will have no imaging or soundstage. This effect will vary greatly due to diffraction, leading to large changes in sound depending on where your head is.
The reason headphones work is that all of the sound is going into your ears: no possibility for cancellation. Personally, I much prefer loudspeakers for "thre dimentionality."
The military is just one purveyor of reliable systems though. Industry, medicine, etc. all require high-reliability (in some cases mil-spec) components.
I don't think DRM is a national-security issue, for the reasons you've mentioned, among others. And I agree that the author of that paper is more than a little incendiary. The fact remains, though, that DRM is an attractive technology in a world where IP is becoming more valuable than "real" property. These DRM schemes will not work unless it becomes very hard to procure general purpose CPUs that can circumvent them--and it is those inexpensive off-the-shelf processors that are fueling cost savings in various industries.
In the past there was a high barrier to adding microprocessors to devices because suitable components were prohibitively expensive to develop. Now, that has changed due to high-volume general CPUs. In 10 years when you can put a 3GHz P4-equivilent in a water-quality monitor, that chip is only going in if it can hit the $1 price point offered by mass production. If DRM renders it unsuitable, the manufacturer isn't going to shell out $50 for a custom IC--they are simply going to design the product differently. We simply won't get some of the products we would have had, because they will be too expensive.
Many mil-spec parts are simply the commercially available part that has upgraded reliability and/or testing. That hardened CPU probably shares the same core as the commercial IC.
Mil-spec parts already cost several times the amount of their commercial brethren, because that guaranteed reliability costs money. If you force mil-spec (and industrial) parts to be designed from scratch, the cost will be at least an order of magnitude greater than that--separate R&D, separate fab process, etc. Making 1000 DRM-free ARM processors is unimaginably more expensive than making 1,000,000+.
No, these embedded processors don't currently support DRM. The author's (persuasive) argument, though, is that if DRM becomes the new paradigm for hardware and software licensing, there will eventually no longer be commercially viable computing devices that do not support it. The military, and those industries that can afford it, will go the custom-designed route in that case. However, DRM will add a high cost burden to those operations.
Actually there was a case that received some media exposure a little while back where a woman discovered a camera installed in her shower. It turned out that the only criminal offense they could dig up was theft of electricity! (Now, it is possible there is some civil resource, but the taping was not a crime)
In most (all?) states in the U.S. it is perfectly legal to stand on your property and use your eyes, telescopes, etc, to peer into your neighbor's homes.
Correct. More importantly, the acceptable length of traces is a function of the dielectric (propagation time) and the rise time of the signal. Very fast rise times mean the systems must be very small to avoid transmission-line effects...you cannot terminate lots of transmission lines inside an IC, the dissipation gets unmanageable.
Is it really? New hardcovers generally run about $22.50 on sale. They contain the equivilent of perhaps two years of Shadowmarch, and when all is said and done you own a physical, quality book.
Please bear in mind that I am a Shadowmarch suscriber, but I joined less because of the 'deal' than out of my desire to a) show support for Tad Williams b) show support of community-funded material
1) many line level tube circuits do not pass through trannies. There are many reasons tube circuits do not clip "hard", but the most common one is that tubes are low gain devices, operated with low (or no) negative feedback. It is NFB that "squares up" the clipping, producing the high order (nasty) harmonics.
2) I couldn't get to the site, but the most common tubes are dual triodes, which is quite sufficient for a stereo buffer.
Slashdot Mirror
It is almost comical to me to hear you call the question of the nature of existence trivial.
My point was it is easier and cheaper to "bottle". I wasn't commenting on its taste!
That was the one I had thought of.
CO2 is nicer than nitro because it liquifies more easily. This means a lot of gas in a small container, and at a higher effective pressure because the liquid -> gas conversion delivers a lot of oomph. Cheap paintball CO2 setups take advantage of this.
AFAIK the military has chemical-fueled lasers. I don't think they are anywhere close to man-portable though.
Because it is a PITA to do analog recordings right. Getting good S/N and low distortion is a lot harder than it sounds, requires good equipment, and the knowledge to operate it.
This is better: if I simultanously record and playback from my Extigy, it crashes my entire computer. Whee.
Serra's mother must have been smart enough to realize that. The infinite power source...
Those Hollywood idiots always seem to cast either someone famous or someone not-famous in their movies. The gall...
u = micro (10^-6) [old, incorrect: mm]
m = milli (10^-3)
M = mega (10^6) [incorrect: m]
I think the problem is you read my response very narrowly. I was well aware of the scope of the original article.
You haven't convinced me that the situation circa 2003 is any different than that c. 1989. As then, physics is placing limits on the performance of current design processors.
I think it is exceedingly likely that there will be advances in materials science and manufacturing that will prolong the validity of Moore's Law. It continues to be feasible to decrease core voltages, and newer heat-removal technologies and better dielectrics are showing promise. Even if each avenue provides only a linear reduction in dissipation, or a linear increase in our ability to deal with it, the end result is that the synergy allows us to eke out a few more years of exponential growth.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Well, you are right. But in theory, there aren't multiple correct answers for color rendering. There are very specific standards in terms of color temperature and how colors get turned into analog signals by the video DAC. While I can empathize with the desire to, say, correct for a set of DVD/LCD displays that somehow is faulty, really they should have produced a "correct" DVD and encouraged the hardware manufacturers to faithfully implement the standards.
I thought trade secrets were de facto uncopywritable.
Answer this: how many of those positions are duplicates of the same job farmed out by different consulting companies? How many aren't dependent on some obscure skillset? (mainframe cobol expert??) The figures don't look as good after that analysis.
Offtopic?
/. You just have to be able to read it.
ÜB
AC was just pointing out that we can in fact use Japanese on
Diffraction in audio refers to the kind of comb filtering described by T below. It can happen both due to multiple speakers and due to the multiple drivers used by most loudspeaker systems.
Facing speakers towards each other exacerbates these problems, leading to a large number of frequency-dependent constructive and destructive lobes. This effect is considerably ameliorated in the standard speaker arrangement due to (generally) decreasing off-axis response of the higher frequencies.
Not very, that is. This arrangement is the worst possible, since you will have 100% phase cancellation (in theory). In reality, your bass-to-low/midrange will fade out, and you will have no imaging or soundstage. This effect will vary greatly due to diffraction, leading to large changes in sound depending on where your head is.
The reason headphones work is that all of the sound is going into your ears: no possibility for cancellation. Personally, I much prefer loudspeakers for "thre dimentionality."
The military is just one purveyor of reliable systems though. Industry, medicine, etc. all require high-reliability (in some cases mil-spec) components.
I don't think DRM is a national-security issue, for the reasons you've mentioned, among others. And I agree that the author of that paper is more than a little incendiary. The fact remains, though, that DRM is an attractive technology in a world where IP is becoming more valuable than "real" property. These DRM schemes will not work unless it becomes very hard to procure general purpose CPUs that can circumvent them--and it is those inexpensive off-the-shelf processors that are fueling cost savings in various industries.
In the past there was a high barrier to adding microprocessors to devices because suitable components were prohibitively expensive to develop. Now, that has changed due to high-volume general CPUs. In 10 years when you can put a 3GHz P4-equivilent in a water-quality monitor, that chip is only going in if it can hit the $1 price point offered by mass production. If DRM renders it unsuitable, the manufacturer isn't going to shell out $50 for a custom IC--they are simply going to design the product differently. We simply won't get some of the products we would have had, because they will be too expensive.
Many mil-spec parts are simply the commercially available part that has upgraded reliability and/or testing. That hardened CPU probably shares the same core as the commercial IC.
Mil-spec parts already cost several times the amount of their commercial brethren, because that guaranteed reliability costs money. If you force mil-spec (and industrial) parts to be designed from scratch, the cost will be at least an order of magnitude greater than that--separate R&D, separate fab process, etc. Making 1000 DRM-free ARM processors is unimaginably more expensive than making 1,000,000+.
No, these embedded processors don't currently support DRM. The author's (persuasive) argument, though, is that if DRM becomes the new paradigm for hardware and software licensing, there will eventually no longer be commercially viable computing devices that do not support it. The military, and those industries that can afford it, will go the custom-designed route in that case. However, DRM will add a high cost burden to those operations.
Actually there was a case that received some media exposure a little while back where a woman discovered a camera installed in her shower. It turned out that the only criminal offense they could dig up was theft of electricity! (Now, it is possible there is some civil resource, but the taping was not a crime)
In most (all?) states in the U.S. it is perfectly legal to stand on your property and use your eyes, telescopes, etc, to peer into your neighbor's homes.
Do you have any notion of how /expensive/ lead-free solders are?
Correct. More importantly, the acceptable length of traces is a function of the dielectric (propagation time) and the rise time of the signal. Very fast rise times mean the systems must be very small to avoid transmission-line effects...you cannot terminate lots of transmission lines inside an IC, the dissipation gets unmanageable.
Is it really? New hardcovers generally run about $22.50 on sale. They contain the equivilent of perhaps two years of Shadowmarch, and when all is said and done you own a physical, quality book.
Please bear in mind that I am a Shadowmarch suscriber, but I joined less because of the 'deal' than out of my desire to
a) show support for Tad Williams
b) show support of community-funded material
Two notes:
1) many line level tube circuits do not pass through trannies. There are many reasons tube circuits do not clip "hard", but the most common one is that tubes are low gain devices, operated with low (or no) negative feedback. It is NFB that "squares up" the clipping, producing the high order (nasty) harmonics.
2) I couldn't get to the site, but the most common tubes are dual triodes, which is quite sufficient for a stereo buffer.