I've marked you as a foe, but please don't take it personally - it just a reminder not to reply to you in the future, as you're too stupid to debate with.
Sorry I don't meet your expectations. I will have to try harder. Have a nice day;-)
Sorry, I don't think I understand you. Are you now trying to claim that you didn't say that working on anything is creative?
No, I never said or implied that. That is something that you came up with all on your own.
...You distinctly said that people are paid to work on something, therefore that is creative...
No, and I don't know how you came to that conclusion. All I said is that there are people who are paid to do that job. If you need an explanation; This was to point out that scheduling is something that doesn't just happen. It probably requires skill and talent. You can't give the scheduling task to a kid in the mail room to do in his spare time. (But you could probably get him to dig a ditch;-)
The act of scheduling is a creative endeavour.
Not sure why you chose to latch on to that one sentence rather than making any kind rational argument over the copyright status of TV schedules.
First of all it is creative on the part of the broadcasting company not the TV guide publishers. So using your logic the copyright should belong to the station broadcasting and the guide people have no standing.
That is what the case is all about.
Quote TFA; ...taking on Australia's largest television station, the Nine Network, over the copyright status of the weekly broadcast schedule.
Really? So if you had, say, 24 hours of programming to fill you wouldn't give it any thought? Just schedule a kids show between two episodes of 'CSI: NY'? Run the evening news in the noon time slot?
I am hoping that this does get struck down but as a special case not because it's not "creative".
There are people who are paid to do nothing but dig ditches. Is ditch-digging considered "creative" now too?
Why would a schedule not be considered "creative"? There are people who are paid to do nothing but come up with schedules. There is no mathematical formula and although it may appear otherwise the programming choices are not just randomly picked.
Don't get me wrong I think that it's stupid for a TV station to prevent anyone from publishing their schedule just not for that reason.
You, sir, didn't have an old 1973 Jeep Wagoneer did you?
No, but actually I always wanted a Jeep when I was younger - still have never owned a 4WD vehicle. Not sure what it is but these days it seems whenever someone is following behind a little close it says "peeJ" in my rear view mirror;-)
Oh, and after a good nights seep my memory is a little less hazy, the second car with the broken clutch cable was a '81 Plymouth Horizon with a 1.7L I4 1bbl carb. not the Daytona. It was the Daytona that had its starter motor dangling by the electrical cables half the time because of a lack of locktight on the bolts after a DIY clutch replacement.
Those indeed were the days, lets hope they never return.
Did you do this with a high torque engine? I can't see this technique working so well with a low torque engine.:)
Nothing all that powerful. The first was a '74 Pinto with a 2L 4 cyl (2 bbl carb.), the second was a little more powerful; '86 Dodge Daytona 2.2L 4 cyl w/throttle body injection. It was really the starter that did the hard part. Once up to speed shifting on the go is fairly easy, occasionally still do it to this day for the fun of it. Just play with the throttle until you can slip in/out of gear with no more effort than when using the clutch.
Oh, and my comments on breaking should have been braking. I do use the engine to brake but have yet to break an engine (that will teach me to post right after having a drink;-)
...Not having a clutch when you need it is really really bad...
True, but I've had to drive without a working clutch (always engaged) for at least a week on two occasions. Both were the result of broken clutch cables. Most likely the cables broke from excess use of the clutch pedal. The routine was the same both times;
1) Warm the engine up, with the shift in neutral, so it won't stall when proceeding with the next steps.
2) Shut off engine, shift to first.
3) Start engine with transmission in first.
4) Shift up through the gears by matching engine RPM with the transmission (RPM up for down shift, RPM down for up shift).
5) Repeat from step 2 at each stop light.
Then there was the time that my starter fell off (probably from starting the engine in gear too many times)-; and I had to always remember to park facing down hill....
I'm so glad I make enough money to afford a reliable car now;-)
As far as engine breaking goes I agree 100% it's the right thing to do in most cases. And the people who try to stay at full speed right up to the last moment then apply the breaks are the retards!
A non-compete clause like that would be laughably unenforceable.
I don't disagree but not being a lawyer can you explain to me what about it makes it "laughably unenforceable"?
And is it advisable for someone agree to a contract that that has unenforcible language? Even if the company knew they wouldn't win they could still take you to court. Giving you a reputation as someone that doesn't honour a signed contract.
What of the open source project, would they have the resources to defend against a C&D that resulted from someone with a non-compete working on the code?
I once worked for a company that hired someone that was under a non-compete with a second company. The second company threatened to sue. So my company, not wanting the added expense of going to court, withdrew the job offer. Everyone knew that we would win but they didn't want to go to the trouble.
I wonder, would such a non-competition clause extend to after you left the job concerned?
That is exactly how it's phrased;
However, they also want me to sign a non-competition clause, which would bar me from ever working on and publishing results for the original open source project itself, even if done separately, in my free time.
In six months the company can decide that the changes that they need have all been made and further development is no longer needed. Now he doesn't have a job AND can't work on the open code.
No, I wouldn't go for this.
Re:If only all companies had this vision
on
Roku To Go Open Source
·
· Score: 2, Informative
...but at an average of 6 hours of viewing a day...
Part of the issue is that if the GPU and CPU are merged, they would also attempt to keep the same die-shrink, while traditionally are a generation behind in GPUs (though this gap has been shrinking). By keeping one generation behind there is a significant expense savings, which is why integrated CPU/GPUs are usually 2-3 generations behind (since that is the "value" segment of the market and usually production issues are worked out by then).
The grandparent is correct that the more you stuff on a single piece of silicon, the more bad chips you get, but you (parent) are also correct that the more you jam on a piece of silicon, the cheaper the overall costs if you can effectively build them in volume...
True, and even though I did mention single die I would expect a first generation CPU/GPU to be two dies in one package. You get the option of mixing generations as well as an improved yield through prescreening the individual pieces. This would still give the advantage of fewer pins to deal with, compared to two packages.
Intel has no intention to build a true quad that I know of - they rolled out a 6 core die yesterday, so I expect the next step to be 12.
A hex core processor that tests out with two bad cores could either be called scrap or a good quad core.
Can't wait to welcome our new duodeca-core overlords;-)
It's very slightly (pennies) cheaper to put one chip on the motherboard rather than two. It's MUCH more expensive to merge two big CPU/GPU type chips into one. Manufacturing flaws become more common fast with bigger chips.
I don't think your estimate is correct for packaging and placing a single chip vs. two chips but in high volume manufacturing even pennies make all the difference. What about the cost of the second fan and other infrastructure for the GPU? There is also the issue of real estate - two chips take up more room than one so your etch routing becomes more of a challenge requiring smaller etch geometries resulting in a more expensive PCB.
If we could break CPUs into pieces now we'd do it, both for that and heat reasons. We can't because all the parts currently located in a CPU need to talk to each other very fast. The GPU is something that usually doesn't need to talk to the CPU much. So it's separate.
No, it will always be cheaper to integrate at the chip level. Look at system prices, dual core is cheaper than dual CPU (if you can even find one these days) of similar performance. The trend in embedded systems (even more cost sensitive than PCs) is to integrate everything into a single package (SOC). As others have pointed out cache and the FPU were once separate chips from the CPU they are now all integrated into one package.
No, that can't be it. Know why? Because...why would you put more processing and thus more heat in one place that already has problems with that?
Cost. It's cheaper to build and install, on the MB, one chip with one die than it is to build two chips/dies on two boards (not to mention bypass caps, fans, RAM, etc.). With combined functions it may be that the one chip produces less heat than the total of the two, although it is all in one spot.
And why install an overkill graphics processing unit inside the processor if most people won't use it anyway?
Maybe two CPU grades? One with full graphics capabilities and the other with basic graphics (could be the same die one passes all graphics tests at full speed the other doesn't).
And where would the VGA/DVI output go if there's no graphics card? If you put it somewhere else then why move the graphics processor further away from the outputs?
You are already going to put a (relitively) long cable from the connector to the monitor, what's a few more inches?
Well, all right I'm not really familiar with all the built in XP functions. Try to minimize my exposure and all;-) But, yeah, now that you mention it I do remember being surprised that Media Player didn't know what to do with a DVD the one time I tried it.
Guess maybe the question should have been "Does (did) a Lenovo Linux system play mp3, DVD, etc. out of the box?". Does anyone provide that type of system? I ask because I don't know and would consider buying my next Linux box from a company that does include that functionality.
Lenovo shipped Novell's SLED 10 (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10), but not Ubuntu. Maybe Lenovo selected the wrong distro?
So, does SLED 10 play mp3's and DVD's out of the box? Don't get me wrong I am a Linux fanboi - it's the only thing I run at home and mostly at work. But having to find and install all the various "non-free" apps from possibly incompatible repos (yum) is a PITA. Probably even more so for a non-technical user.
Someone guy unpotted a Votrax module and refurbished the damaged components so that it still worked afterwards and he could reverse-engineer it. It's interesting and has lots of pictures of before and after. The thing starts out as a a big block of epoxy and ends up a normal-looking circuit board.
That is pretty cool but I suspect it would be a bit more difficult to do this with technology that is less than 25 years old (note the 1982(?) copyright under the logo).
Today the "chips" will probably be bare dies glued to the PCB with very delicate bond wires connecting everything together. Not very conducive to being exposed by a heat gun;-)
Two Media converters. If you can run ethernet over it, it's good.
That's true but only to a certain extent.
It is possible that 1Gig ethernet will work fine on a cable that will not work or has a high error rate at 10Gig.
You also will not be able to determine if a long run of single mode fiber has a multi mode patch in the middle of it (OTDR is the only thing that might give you that info).
An Optical Power Meter is your best investment. That along with a good cleaning kit will give you the best results. A lot of "bad" fibers can be traced back to dirty connectors. _Always_ clean the fiber before plugging it into an interface - it is much easier to clean the fiber than it is to clean interface optics that have been contaminated by a dirty connector end.
Beyond that if this is for in-house work just plan on using your fastest interface as a tester during downtime - setup the interface to expect loopback and put a short loopback patch at the far end. Run data through the cable and check for errors.
Or as the parent said get a couple of cheap O/E converters for field work - not as good as a fast interface but better than a power meter alone.
What happens when the work that makes the sound waves is interactive? In that case, the instructions to make the sound wave don't ever need to leave the player.
So, that would involve turning all movies, TV series, and songs into games? No doubt there will be some of that format in the future but can't see it being the preferred method of generating (or consuming) content.
Capturing the sound wave just captures one playing of the work, and replaying that over and over can get boring.
Boring? There are a lot of films, TV shows, and even more somusic that people watch watch/listen to over and over again. And there are enough people driving cars while interacting over their cell phones that I wouldn't want to see what would happen if they were also interacting with the music.
Could be wrong but I think "boring" non-interactive forms of entertainment will always be the the norm.
It would break one of the most useful features of USB, the ability to charge/provide power to portable electronics and accessories.
Unless they were pumping out a lot of RF;-)
Seriously, will 3.0 provide more power than 2.0? May not be necessary with the trend to lower power devices.
What about the optical version, will the cables include wires for powering devices?
Not much info in TFA.
...if there's any kind of transparent film, it will likely impede electrical current. I think you know not of what you speak. Isopropyl alcohol, especially if you get 90% or so, is about all that is in electrical contact cleaner.
Well, I do know of what I speak. Been working in electronics for a long time. Funny that "howstuffworks" link doesn't provide any references to back up their "facts".
It may be true that the cheap products that call them selves contact cleaner are nothing more than isopropyl. The real commercial grade contact cleaner is much more than that.
The WHOLE POINT is to remove any films or dirt that prevent connection.
That's a little short sighted. If you want the device to last it is important to clean AND protect the contacts. Even if you don't care about the cart you can damage the mating connector inside the unit (gold plating is measured in microns).
Slashdot Mirror
I've marked you as a foe, but please don't take it personally - it just a reminder not to reply to you in the future, as you're too stupid to debate with.
Sorry I don't meet your expectations. I will have to try harder.
Have a nice day;-)
Sorry, I don't think I understand you. Are you now trying to claim that you didn't say that working on anything is creative?
No, I never said or implied that. That is something that you came up with all on your own.
...You distinctly said that people are paid to work on something, therefore that is creative...
No, and I don't know how you came to that conclusion. All I said is that there are people who are paid to do that job.
If you need an explanation; This was to point out that scheduling is something that doesn't just happen. It probably requires skill and talent. You can't give the scheduling task to a kid in the mail room to do in his spare time. (But you could probably get him to dig a ditch;-)
The act of scheduling is a creative endeavour.
Not sure why you chose to latch on to that one sentence rather than making any kind rational argument over the copyright status of TV schedules.
First of all it is creative on the part of the broadcasting company not the TV guide publishers. So using your logic the copyright should belong to the station broadcasting and the guide people have no standing.
That is what the case is all about.
...taking on Australia's largest television station, the Nine Network, over the copyright status of the weekly broadcast schedule.
Quote TFA;
Because there is no creative element.
Really? So if you had, say, 24 hours of programming to fill you wouldn't give it any thought? Just schedule a kids show between two episodes of 'CSI: NY'? Run the evening news in the noon time slot?
I am hoping that this does get struck down but as a special case not because it's not "creative".
There are people who are paid to do nothing but dig ditches. Is ditch-digging considered "creative" now too?
Nice try.
...A schedule isn't creative.
Why would a schedule not be considered "creative"? There are people who are paid to do nothing but come up with schedules. There is no mathematical formula and although it may appear otherwise the programming choices are not just randomly picked.
Don't get me wrong I think that it's stupid for a TV station to prevent anyone from publishing their schedule just not for that reason.
You, sir, didn't have an old 1973 Jeep Wagoneer did you?
No, but actually I always wanted a Jeep when I was younger - still have never owned a 4WD vehicle. Not sure what it is but these days it seems whenever someone is following behind a little close it says "peeJ" in my rear view mirror;-)
Oh, and after a good nights seep my memory is a little less hazy, the second car with the broken clutch cable was a '81 Plymouth Horizon with a 1.7L I4 1bbl carb. not the Daytona. It was the Daytona that had its starter motor dangling by the electrical cables half the time because of a lack of locktight on the bolts after a DIY clutch replacement.
Those indeed were the days, lets hope they never return.
Did you do this with a high torque engine? I can't see this technique working so well with a low torque engine. :)
Nothing all that powerful. The first was a '74 Pinto with a 2L 4 cyl (2 bbl carb.), the second was a little more powerful; '86 Dodge Daytona 2.2L 4 cyl w/throttle body injection.
It was really the starter that did the hard part. Once up to speed shifting on the go is fairly easy, occasionally still do it to this day for the fun of it. Just play with the throttle until you can slip in/out of gear with no more effort than when using the clutch.
Oh, and my comments on breaking should have been braking. I do use the engine to brake but have yet to break an engine (that will teach me to post right after having a drink;-)
...Not having a clutch when you need it is really really bad...
True, but I've had to drive without a working clutch (always engaged) for at least a week on two occasions. Both were the result of broken clutch cables. Most likely the cables broke from excess use of the clutch pedal. The routine was the same both times;
Then there was the time that my starter fell off (probably from starting the engine in gear too many times)-; and I had to always remember to park facing down hill....
I'm so glad I make enough money to afford a reliable car now;-)
As far as engine breaking goes I agree 100% it's the right thing to do in most cases. And the people who try to stay at full speed right up to the last moment then apply the breaks are the retards!
A non-compete clause like that would be laughably unenforceable.
I don't disagree but not being a lawyer can you explain to me what about it makes it "laughably unenforceable"?
And is it advisable for someone agree to a contract that that has unenforcible language? Even if the company knew they wouldn't win they could still take you to court. Giving you a reputation as someone that doesn't honour a signed contract.
What of the open source project, would they have the resources to defend against a C&D that resulted from someone with a non-compete working on the code?
I once worked for a company that hired someone that was under a non-compete with a second company. The second company threatened to sue. So my company, not wanting the added expense of going to court, withdrew the job offer. Everyone knew that we would win but they didn't want to go to the trouble.
There may be different levels of "enforceable".
I wonder, would such a non-competition clause extend to after you left the job concerned?
That is exactly how it's phrased;
However, they also want me to sign a non-competition clause, which would bar me from ever working on and publishing results for the original open source project itself, even if done separately, in my free time.
In six months the company can decide that the changes that they need have all been made and further development is no longer needed. Now he doesn't have a job AND can't work on the open code.
No, I wouldn't go for this.
...but at an average of 6 hours of viewing a day...
Apparently you are off by about 50%. But Four hours a day is still a lot.
In the US only old people watch TV anyway.;-)
...how to effectively use nuclear bombs against civilians?
That's easy; light fuse, get away;-)
white-on-green and mis-used apostrophes.
It wouldn't be so bad if the theme was continued down into the comments. I'm blinded by the white background as I scroll down each and every time.
Part of the issue is that if the GPU and CPU are merged, they would also attempt to keep the same die-shrink, while traditionally are a generation behind in GPUs (though this gap has been shrinking). By keeping one generation behind there is a significant expense savings, which is why integrated CPU/GPUs are usually 2-3 generations behind (since that is the "value" segment of the market and usually production issues are worked out by then).
The grandparent is correct that the more you stuff on a single piece of silicon, the more bad chips you get, but you (parent) are also correct that the more you jam on a piece of silicon, the cheaper the overall costs if you can effectively build them in volume...
True, and even though I did mention single die I would expect a first generation CPU/GPU to be two dies in one package. You get the option of mixing generations as well as an improved yield through prescreening the individual pieces. This would still give the advantage of fewer pins to deal with, compared to two packages.
Intel has no intention to build a true quad that I know of - they rolled out a 6 core die yesterday, so I expect the next step to be 12.
A hex core processor that tests out with two bad cores could either be called scrap or a good quad core.
Can't wait to welcome our new duodeca-core overlords;-)
It's very slightly (pennies) cheaper to put one chip on the motherboard rather than two. It's MUCH more expensive to merge two big CPU/GPU type chips into one. Manufacturing flaws become more common fast with bigger chips.
I don't think your estimate is correct for packaging and placing a single chip vs. two chips but in high volume manufacturing even pennies make all the difference. What about the cost of the second fan and other infrastructure for the GPU? There is also the issue of real estate - two chips take up more room than one so your etch routing becomes more of a challenge requiring smaller etch geometries resulting in a more expensive PCB.
If we could break CPUs into pieces now we'd do it, both for that and heat reasons. We can't because all the parts currently located in a CPU need to talk to each other very fast. The GPU is something that usually doesn't need to talk to the CPU much. So it's separate.
No, it will always be cheaper to integrate at the chip level. Look at system prices, dual core is cheaper than dual CPU (if you can even find one these days) of similar performance. The trend in embedded systems (even more cost sensitive than PCs) is to integrate everything into a single package (SOC). As others have pointed out cache and the FPU were once separate chips from the CPU they are now all integrated into one package.
No, that can't be it. Know why? Because...why would you put more processing and thus more heat in one place that already has problems with that?
Cost. It's cheaper to build and install, on the MB, one chip with one die than it is to build two chips/dies on two boards (not to mention bypass caps, fans, RAM, etc.). With combined functions it may be that the one chip produces less heat than the total of the two, although it is all in one spot.
And why install an overkill graphics processing unit inside the processor if most people won't use it anyway?
Maybe two CPU grades? One with full graphics capabilities and the other with basic graphics (could be the same die one passes all graphics tests at full speed the other doesn't).
And where would the VGA/DVI output go if there's no graphics card? If you put it somewhere else then why move the graphics processor further away from the outputs?
You are already going to put a (relitively) long cable from the connector to the monitor, what's a few more inches?
XP won't play DVD's "out of the box" either.
This particular bit of FUD needs to die.
Well, all right I'm not really familiar with all the built in XP functions. Try to minimize my exposure and all;-)
But, yeah, now that you mention it I do remember being surprised that Media Player didn't know what to do with a DVD the one time I tried it.
Guess maybe the question should have been "Does (did) a Lenovo Linux system play mp3, DVD, etc. out of the box?". Does anyone provide that type of system?
I ask because I don't know and would consider buying my next Linux box from a company that does include that functionality.
Lenovo shipped Novell's SLED 10 (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10), but not Ubuntu. Maybe Lenovo selected the wrong distro?
So, does SLED 10 play mp3's and DVD's out of the box?
Don't get me wrong I am a Linux fanboi - it's the only thing I run at home and mostly at work. But having to find and install all the various "non-free" apps from possibly incompatible repos (yum) is a PITA. Probably even more so for a non-technical user.
Someone guy unpotted a Votrax module and refurbished the damaged components so that it still worked afterwards and he could reverse-engineer it. It's interesting and has lots of pictures of before and after. The thing starts out as a a big block of epoxy and ends up a normal-looking circuit board.
That is pretty cool but I suspect it would be a bit more difficult to do this with technology that is less than 25 years old (note the 1982(?) copyright under the logo).
Today the "chips" will probably be bare dies glued to the PCB with very delicate bond wires connecting everything together. Not very conducive to being exposed by a heat gun;-)
Two Media converters. If you can run ethernet over it, it's good.
That's true but only to a certain extent.
It is possible that 1Gig ethernet will work fine on a cable that will not work or has a high error rate at 10Gig.
You also will not be able to determine if a long run of single mode fiber has a multi mode patch in the middle of it (OTDR is the only thing that might give you that info).
An Optical Power Meter is your best investment. That along with a good cleaning kit will give you the best results. A lot of "bad" fibers can be traced back to dirty connectors. _Always_ clean the fiber before plugging it into an interface - it is much easier to clean the fiber than it is to clean interface optics that have been contaminated by a dirty connector end.
Beyond that if this is for in-house work just plan on using your fastest interface as a tester during downtime - setup the interface to expect loopback and put a short loopback patch at the far end. Run data through the cable and check for errors.
Or as the parent said get a couple of cheap O/E converters for field work - not as good as a fast interface but better than a power meter alone.
What happens when the work that makes the sound waves is interactive? In that case, the instructions to make the sound wave don't ever need to leave the player.
So, that would involve turning all movies, TV series, and songs into games? No doubt there will be some of that format in the future but can't see it being the preferred method of generating (or consuming) content.
Capturing the sound wave just captures one playing of the work, and replaying that over and over can get boring.
Boring? There are a lot of films, TV shows, and even more so music that people watch watch/listen to over and over again.
And there are enough people driving cars while interacting over their cell phones that I wouldn't want to see what would happen if they were also interacting with the music.
Could be wrong but I think "boring" non-interactive forms of entertainment will always be the the norm.
It would break one of the most useful features of USB, the ability to charge/provide power to portable electronics and accessories.
Unless they were pumping out a lot of RF;-)
Seriously, will 3.0 provide more power than 2.0? May not be necessary with the trend to lower power devices.
What about the optical version, will the cables include wires for powering devices?
Not much info in TFA.
Am I the only one who fails to see how these rodent zombie robots have anything to do with Alzheimer's?
Obviously, you get more funding if you include a hot research topic in the project description.
And does that mean that assembly programmers are evil?
Yes
Not evil, just misunderstood.
...if there's any kind of transparent film, it will likely impede electrical current. I think you know not of what you speak. Isopropyl alcohol, especially if you get 90% or so, is about all that is in electrical contact cleaner.
Well, I do know of what I speak. Been working in electronics for a long time.
Funny that "howstuffworks" link doesn't provide any references to back up their "facts".
It may be true that the cheap products that call them selves contact cleaner are nothing more than isopropyl. The real commercial grade contact cleaner is much more than that.
The WHOLE POINT is to remove any films or dirt that prevent connection.
That's a little short sighted. If you want the device to last it is important to clean AND protect the contacts. Even if you don't care about the cart you can damage the mating connector inside the unit (gold plating is measured in microns).
Here are a few examples of contact cleaner with lubricant;
http://www.cpcares.com/TAE/puretronics/TAE-5000.html
http://www.mgchemicals.com/products/404b.html
http://www.mgchemicals.com/products/801b.html