Re: Hmm. Already happening
Rhetorical question I suppose.
3409 posts • joined 23 Nov 2007
Rhetorical question I suppose.
Like Astra's OB3, but using a new launcher.
Eutelsat is sceptical about OB3, but then Astra is their biggest competitor, so they would say that.
I guess Virgin Galactic has more publicity value than Astra.
Capacity (Cap) will be low once subscribers are added. Internet access, but not real Broadband.
I wonder what the "catch" will be? Google isn't altruistic at all. They must see money in this.
We knew this, but perhaps not exact details.
MS has paid a lot for something Nokia wanted to dump.
Nokia still exists. Who knows what they will do next?
They still do Network Infrastructure.
"mobile phone networks that will want to stream large numbers of 4K video streams to subscribers"
There is no mobile tech than can stream more than approximately ONE 4K stream on a Mast sector, and that needs largest size channel and perfect signal. Typically you only need 400Mbps (peak) for a multi-sector mast with 20MHz channels. Most masts will struggle to use up 100Mbps of backhaul peak. The Headline Mobile speeds are frequently on very unlikely configurations and 1 user. Probably 1Gbps backhaul "future proofs" a mast.
HFC (DOCSIS 3.0 cable cabinet fibre fed), VDSL, FTTx etc benefit from this. Mobile not at all.
They are breaking their charter because they constantly promote the Proprietary, pointless and COMMERCIAL 3rd party Facebook and Twitter.
No Satellite TV would also be possible outcome.
Or GPS (nothing like as high, so much less vulnerable).
or any other Satellite based service if the Belch is bad enough.
1) It's badly designed, that's why a slow uptake.
2) When we figure how to make Ansibles the IPV6 space isn't big enough.
3) It's nothing like near infinite if it does become as ubiquitous as Bluetooth or 3.5mm jackplugs. What if Apple gives 2 x IPV6 to every Beats headphone? (One for each ear).
Is Stephen Fry "clever" at all? Or just a pleasant Actor. Hint, he is only Acting the part of Jeeves.
Best put comment I've ever read on Turing Test and AI.
Have a beer or liquid refreshment of your choice.
Also it may be like a Program able to play Chess, that passing the Turing test can be solved without any recourse to AI.
You know how Google Translate works compared to how people tried to build machine translation for 30+ years? A big rossetta stone and search. Not clever parsing and grammar.
Interestingly though we found the "AMP" parts of LAMP easy to install on Win2K server and Win2003 server and ran Linux PHP apps unchanged. Easier than IIS + MSSQL.
Obviously this is a nonsense metric. Only "real" web sites not part funded by Microsoft count.
Companies with Sharepoint / Exchange are not representative either as they are locked into MS forever (effectively, in reality it's possible to switch) and often get special volume discounts.
Credit & Debit cards already have NFC, Lidl accepts NFC Debit cards.
But it's an inherently less secure tech than sticking the card in the slot. Almost no advantage.
NFC on a phone is even sillier.
NFC is good for Warehouse pallets. Which it was invented for. Stupid for payments and individual products (barcodes are far cheaper and more privacy secure in the retail context ).
Snap it with another phone.
Nothing to do with EU. You must be reading Daily Mail or UKIP press releases.
As well as that doubt was cast on the concept of Touring test YEARS ago when Eliza was written. Given the quality of Reality TV and Soaps you need an expert.
IMO even when the "The Touring Test" can be passed well enough fool experts, it doesn't mean anything about progress on AI, just progress on simulation of conversation. Just like Chess was thought to need AI and Alan Turing himself proved it didn't.
I think anyway Alan Turing's comment was an off the cuff statement rather than anything with any mathematical proof, unlike his paper about solvable & unsolvable problems illustrated with the infinite paper tape driven computer. ("Turing Machine").
Of course Kevin Warwick involved makes one think it may be ill-informed hype.
Yes, because Wireless Charging is an expensive gimmick. It needs a power supply and cable. Not hard to plug cable directly or have a speaker + keyboard charging dock.
Wireless Charging is an expensive low functionality wireless dock. It's in reality no more wireless than a Cordless kettle.
Also if travelling a "Wireless" Charger is more bulky to carry than an ordinary USB or jack based charger. I wish Phone and Kindle had 2.5mm jack as well as USB as a Charging option.
Not particularly if you compare Like with Like running Native code. The Problem with MIPS and Alpha (in NT3.5 / NT 4.0) was lack of native versions and also the x86 only Win3.x and Win9x were the main MS OS then. NT3.5 and NT3.51 rarely used other than servers. NT4.0 started to see much higher Workstation penetration but hampered by MS and Channel promoting Win9x to Business (It originally was really meant to be Home Gaming OS). Win9x even killed the Pentium Pro which ran NT4.0 great but was a pig on Win9x because so much of it was really 16 bit Win3.1 with Explorer Shell.
The Pentium Pro even outperformed the later PII running Win98 or NT4.0 if running NT4.0 and 32bit applications. The cost of RAM also help kill the Pentium Pro too.
SPARC or MIPS or PowerPC etc have been Niche products for years now. Even routers and Set-boxes rarely use MIPS now, that was last major market for MIPS. Apple abandoned Power PC 10 years ago? Oracle doesn't care about SPARC.
Of course no-one will make a tablet with SPARC or MIPS or PowerPC unless a new insanely cheap SoC version of those is released for a Tablet.
Intel still has an ARM licence.
It's not at all about Licence fees but Ego and Margin.
They did already.
"I hope intel make a mobile ARM SoC using their best technology soon."
Fixed it for you.
Intel have made ARM.
They didn't sell all ARM to Marvell
They had a great RISC of their own design (i960)
They have an ARM Licence.
Their biggest assets are not x86 and Itanium etc but Process Technology, Marketing and Industry relationships. So it's pure stupid ego that they don't make an ARM Soc. It would add some genuine competition and we would then get better stuff from AMD, Qualcomm, Samsung etc.
x86 due to marketing clout and "PC Compatibility" killed off "better" CPUs such as 680xx series, PowerPC, MIPS, Alpha and Alpha64, Sparc etc.
Now we don't so much need legacy x86 Compatibily as Win 8.x isn't that compatible compared with XP, which unlike previous MS OS which went past "Sell by" and "Use By" has been publicly "hung drawn and quartered".
So a good time for Intel to put their might behind ARM instead of polishing the T**d
Some people will be lucky and have good signal and underused masts. You want to hope Three doesn't notice or they might turn of the mast.
They need more subscribers than that to make a profit. But early days yet for selling 4G. You'll see :(
Available since 2006 / 2007
Even on early 4G (not LTE).
Broadband has a minimum Mbps speed (different countries define the minimum differently). Minimum of 4G is about 0.25Mbps
Broadband is "Always On". Like ISDN, 3G HSPA and 4G LTE "connect on demand". Getting an inward connection may be impossible. Getting an outgoing connection may be impossible.
Ability of 4G to connect depends on how many users already connected. So without moving it may drop a connection or fail to connect.
Broadband is low latency. Mobile Latency can be x10 higher if congested.
Broadband the contention is number of subscribers signed up to a cable or on an exchange vs bandwidth of backhaul (or number of Cable DOCSIS channels and Backhaul). It's totally controlled and can be low. On 3G and 4G the only contention control are anti-congestion measures such as Cap or refusing a connection. You can't know how many users will be on a Cell / Mast /Sector.
Both 3G, 4G and any future 5G are "Midband". Sometimes you can get (entry level) Broadband speed and Latency. No reliability at all and no assurance of a sensible minimum speed, maximum latency or even a connection!
DSL depends on distance from Exchange and Backhaul. What ever you get is predicatable.
Mobile vs poor DSL
Fixed Wireless, unlike Mobile can have controlled contention. Because it uses professionally installed outdoor "aerials" (often on chimney) it can often be SIXTEEN times more efficient in use of Spectrum. It also usually has hugely more spectrum per mast than Mobile (but not always). It (not Satellite or Mobile) is the best solution for Isolated UK / European rural users. Not appropriate for Urban or Suburban where now Cable TV / DOCSIS HFC systems, FTTC or FTTH are CHEAPER per user than Mobile or DSL or Fixed Wireless. Also greener with lower power consumption per user.
Fixed Wireless Beats Mobile & Satellite
Wireless simply doesn't have capacity for high numbers of concurrent users. So if congestion and contention isn't to make ISDN look attractive you need low caps to limit time users are on. Still makes peak times rubbish.
4G isn't Broadband and never will be as it's uneconomic to have every 3rd street lamp a Femto cell, which is what would be needed. Every street would need high capacity fibre, so FTTC (x10 speed) or FTTH (x100 speed at peak times, no Cap) would be cheaper.
This is marketing. Not a viable majority user replacement for real broadband. The sums say so.
Oracle (UK Office)
Well known Asian Companies that spam if you buy:
Dynamic Trading Co
Random USA or Asian or Russian spammers are one thing. Reputable UK / Ireland and other EU companies have no excuse for this.
You owe me for a doctor and optician's visits now!
Some QR apps just load the destination without a confirmatory URL display.
The QR code may be a link shortening service.
Most users get Malware because they always click on "OK" on dialog boxes.
I agree one should be able to click on anything safely. But today you can't. If a link doesn't have expected domain for the context the likely situation is that it leads to evil. So I don't Click.
Number of virus infections / Trojans etc on my own computers since 1979 = Zero.
I do check with specialist tools that I'm as clean as I think.
one good one is at silentrunners.org
So is 32bit NT3.xx and 16 bit windows before Win9.x safe then? Or NT4.0?
QR codes as implemented currently are even more stupid than Link Shortening Services. I like at least to know the domain.
I'm very tempted to print fake ones (but harmless) for Tesco's veggie dept.
Likely all IP is transferred to Mothership and isn't included. Which would explain why it won't sell.
Qualcomm has bought many smaller companies and shuttered them. Basically to strengthen IP portfolio.
Exactly what I was alluding to. Perhaps few of today's Commentards had an Apple II. I had one before my ACT Sirius 1 and IBM PC.
Sound by Beats.
Hmm.. Apple Corp. founded by Beatles. with an Apple based logo.
The Steves like Beatles so use a colored Apple logo and Apple Computer as company.
Twice Apple gets sued (and loses) by Beatles.
I have an image in my head of a Kafkaesque giant Beetle munching an Apple while listening to Hip Hop and Rap on giant Headphones.
Microsoft saved Apple once with real money.
And C# is really MS concept of Java, derived from J++
It's not that bad and does have Mono to run it outside .Net
The patent itself in this should be struck out. There should be NO patents for Business processes, mathematics or software (Copyright covers software).
Patents should be:
Not obvious to anyone versed in the art.
No very similar prior art. Should not have to be identical.
For something that a "prototype" can be made. i.e. an "Invention".
So for example RCA superhet patent should have been invalid and later F.M. as these both quickly became obvious to experts in Radio versed in Mathematics and in both cases had even been demonstrated elsewhere.
Edison's attempt to have a monopoly on Movie film was eventually stopped but that took over 10 years! Crazy.
The US Patent system has been "broken" since Victorian era and is getting worse.
"with more of an emphasis on desktop backgrounds."
Why do I want the background?
There is no need to "partner" with anyone. No Sound or audio company can make stock 2" or 1" x 3" laptop speakers in a skinny cabinet sound better.
Some companies make genuinely good headphones. Some companies make decent loudspeakers, usually at least in an MDF or Chipboard box and more than 4". No-one can do much sensible with speakers in current style constrained laptops, notebooks or tablets.
Unless Beats is paying them why would HP have been inserting this "snake oil"? "Beats" audio as a "feature" would put me off a purchase.
Unlike the Balloons and Drones this sort of works.
But is it Geo (high latency!!!!) or LEO?
Also one small roadside fibre cabinet has more capacity than the high capacity 82 Spot Ka-Sat, the highest capacity at the time.
Devil in detail.
I have no wish to die and then have a facsimile reassembled from transmitted data.
A) It's possible to "scan" someone entirely
B) Possible to store/transmit that amount of data
C) Possible to turn the Energy / Data back into original constituents.
This concept of "transportation" is nothing to do with Star Trek's concept, which may be inherently impossible. Which may have been "invented" due to lack of budget for Shuttle, or lazy scriptwriting. Just because something seems cool on TV doesn't mean it's ever possible. I'd sooner believe a "Star ship" is possible.
It's not clear how you actually use entanglement / Quantum Transportation to do any useful information transmission, in the "Ansible" sense.
The EU examination was on too narrow competition grounds.
It will be a more poorly managed network (Three outsources EVERYTHING technical with no apparent "reality tests"). There will be less coverage and lower capacity as masts are closed to maximise profit vs operating costs.
It would be better if Three sold Irish operation to Liberty (UPC). That though would SERIOUSLY upset Meteor (Eircom) and Vodafone though!
I'm not entirely sure exactly what Vodafone is worried about unless it's UPC/Liberty MVO / MVNO involvement which is actually the one aspect they can't officially complain about.
I'd have rather seen Telefonica (O2) buy out Three.
Copying £10 'phones and sticking "Beats" labels on them?
I wonder anyway was it:
Plastics design 100%
Acoustic & Driver design 0%
Do Beats Headsets really use custom or off the shelf moving coil earpiece inserts?
But everyone keeps telling me it's not about the headphones but the Streaming!
I may come across as a negative, cynical person. But really I just try to call it as it is.
This is great.
Google famously has process for hiring people.
In general people will hire people like themselves.
I don't want to spend a week on 3D CAD drawing. I have maybe one original object and I need only one replica. Using latex or 2 part Silicone Rubber is a problem to replicate. Mechanical strength is needed too. I'm not replicating figurines but broken items not made for 30 to 90 years.
I need the high resolution 3D scanner too.
The "printed" parts need to be as smooth and resolution of cast, also as strong as Milled parts.
There is a 2.5mm stereo jack that some gear I have inexplicably uses.
1) No cost saving
2) Plenty of space in gadget for 3.5mm
3) They supply "Free" a 3.5mm to 2.5mm stereo patch cable.
Phones are often too thin already. Make them a little fatter so the battery lasts longer please!
I can't imagine any "Regulator" will care.
It's not their money being wasted on a Streaming service and Record Company deals that Apple could easily do. Or indeed any other large company can do.
Even BBC was having difficulty explaining the value of this on the News. They even risked an uncomplimentary comment about the "quality" of Beats Headphones and significance of the Streaming service, though they stated the deal was "really" about the Streaming.
By time of Sputnik the Russians had "sent home" their German Rocket Scientists and USA was doing Navy rockets that didn't work. So the USA let the Army and their German Rocket Scientists have a go. The 1st USA orbital satellite was a fraction of weight of Sputnik, not because Sputnik used valves (it did, but about 1/3 size of a pencil) and USA used transistors, but because the USA with Werner Von Braun was still figuring out Rockets.
So the USA (particularly) and USSR initially "imbibed" German Rocket Technology but by 1958 heading off in different directions. The Russian, Chinese and USA designs are quite different. No one at all wants to use the fuel the Russians used successfully for many years.
India, Israel, Japan, China, Russia, USA and European Space Agency (which isn't exactly EU, and curiously has their Spaceport in South America and provides Launch Pad for Russians, who now find their Spaceport is in a "foreign country", Kazakhstan) are all in the Club. Why did UK give up just as they about had it figured out?
I think it's a long time since the Chinese or Russians slavishly copied anything. The USA spy agencies DO help their large Industrial companies. Presumably everyone does this.
This is such total nonsense.
Especially if you watch the same title more than once or are not on Fibre.
Also "Streaming" is really rental. I do not wish to go back to rental. Who paid for the study? Netflix, Lovefilm etc?
Also Quality is generally poorer and lacking subtitles on Streaming, but this of course could be remedied.
I'm building a collection of the Music, TV Series and Films I like. Potentially my Grandchildren may appreciate some of it.
Streaming, Broadcast and Physical media are three complementary technologies. One can't replace the others. No matter how much this would benefit Netflix, Apple, Amazon, Google.
8% grid but can be over 10% Depends on country and Region.
8% to 15% on Charger electronics
10% to 15% battery charging losses
All that is only irrelevant if you have cheap Fusion power or live in a country that doesn't mostly depend on Fossil Fuel. Wind often isn't there when you need it. Interconnectors don't help as that can be the case over all of Western Europe at same time.
Universal Electric cars only better than LPG if we have much cheaper and cleaner to produce Electricity Generation distributed across the countries.
Totally forget Hydrogen cars. Lithium batteries are far more sensible.
I was giving a simplistic explanation. You are correct, there is advantage to smaller than 1/2 resolvable. I was trying to explain that "maximum" is 1/2 of resolvable. It's also complicated by sub pixel addressing and layout
traditional sub pixels are same height and 1/3rd width
Often now a basic colour cell is two rows (I think but may be wrong)
A "real" Blue, Red or Green LED is near monochromatic direct light source. An AMOLED display is really a kind of Electroluminescent panel and uses a mixture of phosphors and dye filters to get the desired R G & B. The life of AMOLED is thus poor compared to CRT or LCD.. Sony apparently has a real LED TV. Most "real" LED displays are very very large as they are not integrated panels. So called LED TVs in the shops today are just LCD with LED lighting instead of CCFL. The LED can be edge, back and using "nearly white" (Actually violet LED with phosphors) or most expensive are R G & B LED back lights.