384 posts • joined 28 Nov 2007
Re: (T)rouble, (C)onsistent (P)ain protocol
Since my comment has been so thoroughly abused, maybe I need to expand my thoughts. Possibly those who downvoted me have never had to debug a TCP stack at 2 in the morning, or maybe I have just lost it and this is the 1st sign on oncoming senility. Read on and judge for yourself!!.
My main interest is industrial networks. Now this is a bit of a tangent to the main article, but I believe there are parallels to be drawn. One of the more common protocols used is one called Modbus/TCP which sends real time packet data via a TCP protocol. In the past we have had many problems with this protocol generally because of TCP/IP queuing algorithm. On a network failure, the protocol backs off until reconnection and then you get a whole mass of data. Problem is the data is real time, so by the time it is delivered it is already out of date so is basically useless. So a lot of effort and resources are used to transmit data which is no longer required.
IP already has a solution for that and that is UDP(and no, it does not stand for unreliable data protocol). If we use UDP then on connection fail the old data would simple be discarded. So why did the designers of Modbus choose TCP? The truth is TCP has become a blunt instrument for all network problems (resulting in making the protocol remarkable complex ). If you ask why, people will tell you that it guarantees packet delivery, ignoring the knock on effects that the reliability method cause.
TCP is a great method of transferring data in some situations. For example when streaming like a film or music, where packet delivery order is critical. But the benefits are far less when you are sending data of limited length and when the data has limited life spans (such as AJAX data) it makes no sense at all.
The original article suggest that TCP/IP is a significant bottleneck in internet efficiency. I agree, however I would counter that it is partly due to TCP/IP being mis-used to send data which does not require the reliability and congestion capability. If we start moving to Internet of things then we will have a large number of devices send small packets of real-time data. In this situation TCP is a bad choice to transport that data.
I will go and take my medication now :)
(T)rouble, (C)onsistent (P)ain protocol
When we are asked to design a new industrial protocols we have a simple flowchart.
Should I use TCP->No->But What if..->O.M.G No
TCP benefits increasingly decreases as networks become better. As the internet infrastructure has improved, the benefits of TCP has greatly been outweighed by it's disadvantages For example in a client-server situation is that there is no simple way to implement multicast so as you fan out the load on your servers become greater.
Another issue with TCP is that the standard has grown to a point where it is very difficult to reliable implement. I would guess 80% of our network issues on our projects are caused by TCP especially after a connection glitch
I also get weary of people telling me that TCP is safer because it guarantees packet delivery like it is some sort of magic like it does quantum tunneling over networks. It doesn't, and often it attempts to do so causes more issues than it solves. Generally you are often better off implementing your own bespoke protocol on top of UDP.
Here's more hoping...
Let's hope it's more 'Blade Runner' than 'PayCheck'
I know Ridley did Blade Runner, but then again he also did Prometheus)
I appear to have a specific form of dyslexia where I only spot online mistakes after it is to late to change them.
That assumes that creative types think only about their financial recompense when doing their work.
However you are right, creative people need to be rewarded compensate with their talent(although I realise that means a lot of TV and music personalities are grossly over payed). The question is however whether that recompense should be based on a 19th century business model which increasingly is anachronistic in the modern age.
A photographer admitted to me once that there is little money to be made selling photos nowadays because the cost of technology and distribution has lowered the bar so much that virtually anyone can take pictures and sell them. Therefore he makes most of his money doing courses on how to improve photographers techniques. He still makes a good living using his creative talents, just not by selling his work. Instead they become his advertising.
Time we had a serious rethink about Copyright
In my experience people are pretty honest and try their best to stay within the law, but the rules covering Copyright are pretty insane.
I have a hobby(not a business) which is taking old photos and retaking the original photo in the same position and merging the two. I had always assumed that since the originals were old(> 100 years) that they were out of copyright and free to use(after all isn't that the idea of a government mandated monopoly).
However after being stung by another copyright issue, I did some investigations and found out that as the law stands it is virtually impossible to work out if a photo is in or out of copyright.
Basically you had to work out the following
When the photo was taken
Are they still alive? If not when did they die.
Was it published and if so when.
Actually it wasn't even that simple, so I wrote a flowchart ((http://photographyformortals.blogspot.com/2014/05/copyright-or-copywrong.html))
Basically it could not be done, so the only alternative was to give up my hobby or potentially break the law. Any guesses which I did?
As a photographer myself I want to ensure that people get proper remuneration for their work. But copyright in the digital age is a paper castle. It pretends to protect all, but only actually protects those with the money and influence to enforce it. It does little for the lone photographer, while at the same time inhibiting creativity. It is really time we bit the bullet and brought a little reality to copyright law
Re: Can't pee standing up?
They can vote!!!? They'll be letting immigrants stand for parliment next!
Couldn't agree more
"Xbox has a raving fan base"
No need to add the words mad and stark
My biggest peeve
There are many, but after running windows 8 for months on my main machine, the biggest issue is creating a desktop short cut after installing an application.
Unless the installation does it automatically, I find I have to trawl file explorer to locate where the application is installed to create a shortcut
Which is a pity, because windows 8 is actually quite a smooth desktop experience and almost as powerful as some linux window managers :) , it is all spoiled by it forcing to go back to the unnecessary metro interface when try and do anything
Are we there yet?
"Will the Voyagers make it?"
Wrong question. They will make it, but will we be able to know when they get there?
Well you could argue that F1 is perceived as dull due to the disparity of the cars meaning that it is less down to driver skill and more down to team finances.
Anyway this is the 1st year. Car differences will largely be restricted to aerodynamic tweaks, althogh I can see energy management being a big factor. The next year, rules will be relaxed allowing for more differentiation in the various cars.
Each car can go around 25 minutes on a full charge at race speed. Since races are expected to be an hour long, each driver will have 2 cars and swap during pitting(The batteries take 45 min to recharge)
I do realise that i have broken the unwritten reg rule of answering sarcasm with facts, but the truth is motor sport is a great test bed and i am sure energy management and reclamation will become an important part of the racing which hopefully will filter down to normal cars.
Re: Are electric cars really usefull?
Hopefully Formula E will be used to address some of these issues in the same way we have seen a trickle down of technologies from things like Formula 1.
Maybe not in the 1st year, but when the formula rules are loosened up, we will likely see teams bring in innovations which can later be applied to real world vehicles.
After all it is only by pushing the envelope that we progress.
Our friends electric
I had a sneaky look at the cars at the recent test day. I don't think many hard core F1 fans will be won over, but I do think it has an excellent chance of winning new fans to motorsport.
Anyway here are my thoughts after the day
and a few more piccies
Shurely it only works if you give birth on it. Now that would be a challenge.....
"Perhaps cautious after the recent BICEP-CMB kerfuffle, which still hasn't been completely resolved,..."
Welcome to science. If you want certainty try religion
Re: Questionable value
Look around any office and you will find tons of software which cost £100's if not £1000's but is basically junk because it ran on obsolete OS or hardware, it was never used in a project or sometimes it was never even opened or used.
Basically software uses value faster than a England football players reputation, so any value comparison is basically worthless.
We have to remember that in the need of the day all software is just 0 and 1's and it terms of material wealth is worth as much as the DVD it came on
It'd be cheaper, fairer, faster, and all round better if we just shot the long term unemployed, disabled, immigrants, labour voters, people who didn't go to Eton, blah, blah, blah
Re: This isn't PROtection... it's just DEtection...
Wouldn't something like this make more sense
Then you get a free drone
About the best you can do if you don't want to pay Adobe Tax for life is do most of your processing in Lightroom (probably using few extensions like the Nik collection) and if you need more tweaking after that, import the Jpeg/Tiffs into something like Photoshop CS2 (which I believe is very reasonable priced at present)
Let Adobe hold you by the privates
"Putting aside the controversial financial aspects of the subscription model for a moment"
Well unfortunately to most of us, that is the whole issue. Subscription only really works if you are getting an additional service for the continual cost. Bug fixes used be factored into the purchase price. New features and upgrades could be ignored if they did not add anything to what you needed, which in turn made the developers work harder to find new improvements to continue the cash stream Now they have you locked in. If they make no major changes at all they still get their money.
Also how many features are there to add to such packages? Ignoring user interface improvements Photoshop CS2 will do 95% that Photoshop CS6 will do. How likely that a must have feature will appear in the near future? At the same time you risk Adobe making changes that will break your entire workflow or move to a new file format that locks you into the subscription mode for ever. Basically subscribe the Adobe CC and Adobe has your entire business by the balls.
Of course you could arguer that Adobe have nothing to gain by being evil. But this is the same company that moved to a entire subscription model when their user base asked them no to.
Rather than paying adobe in perpetuity
I'll think I'll stick with CS2 thanks all the same and put all the dosh I saved into buying some better glass.
Truth is I haven't actually seen any great innovation features that would make me think I'm missing out on much apart from some user interface improvements.
If only it ran on something other than windows...
Need more business app support
I have no problems with the OS or the hardware. However a lot of businesses only support up to 2 phone OS.
If I can't get things like tripcase or webex then the phone is just a glorified browser.
It's not Nokia and MS fault however it is a consequence of being a long way back in the number of user stakes.
Re: copyright laws as they exist are based on the premise that copying is a difficult process
Well it's always been easier, but it was still involved a large industrial process and so was restricted. Now the barriers to producing a perfect copy are ridiculously low and open to virtually everyone.
On that basis enforcing copyright as originally defined is not really feasible anymore.
I have sympathy with both views. As a society we wish to provide protection to the creators, however the copyright laws as they exist are based on the premise that copying is a difficult process so that anyone who does copy has willfully infringed.
I recently got accused of copyright violation because I copied an email to a blog, not realizing that the text was intended to become part of a book. My subsequent investigation into copyright law showed there are many misconceptions about copyright law and how easy it is to transgress.
Even when trying to do the right thing, trying to ascertain the copyright status of a piece of work is a minefield. To work out whether a photo is still in copyright in the UK you have to know the following(http://photographyformortals.blogspot.com/2014/05/copyright-or-copywrong.html)
When the photo was taken
Are they still alive? If not when did they die.
Was it published and if so when.
It is no surprise then that many face with the situation will just say bugger it and use the photo anyway.
Remember as well as allowing proper remuneration to the creators the idea of copyright is that the works eventually become part of the creative commons. Unfortunately the power grab by companies such as Disney (a company founded on ripping off historic work with little recompense) has meant that copyright law has extended the privilege with little given back to the general good.
Like I said I have sympathy for anyone who feels there work has been stolen with no recompense. On the other hand, copyright law as designed does little to protect the individual but does give huge power to the mega corps. It is a question whether we should be continuing the myth that copyright protects, and instead look at new ways to ensure the creators get there due recompense without the need for a law which pretends to be for eh public good, but in fact does the exact opposite
Can we test this?
does that mean we know have a way of proving whether the D-Wave computers are true quantum computers or just very expensive snake oil?
I really, really, hate that word
I really hate the term boffin. It is too often used by certain publications to describe a man (and it is always a man, women in science tend to go by the term top science tottie) who though clever in a narrow field is incapable of dressing themselves in the morning or finding their glasses despite being perched on the top of their heads.
It allow those who are less than science literate (including the ruling class who in the majority only science training is in the use of Latin) to look down and denigrate the British scientific community.
Headlines like "Boffins suggest global warming" allow those who do want to to face realities to pretend that the research has been carried out by some elderly gentleman in tweed jacket with a limited grasp of reality rather than in truth someone who has dedicated their life to meticulous research and investigation.
Until terms like "Boffin" are relegated from the British language it is unlikely that the huge contribution to the economy that scientists make will ever be get the compensation they deserve and people like Alan Sugar will be able to get away with denigrating the abilities of scientists over his preferred bean counters(I am sure accountants love that term too)
And don't even get me started on calling gas fitters "engineers"
For verily it says in the Geeks bible
Forgive him lord Lord(insert Deity of choice here, Jobs, Wozniak, Torvold, or Gates ), he clearly dost not know what he spouts on about but those who hast not bullshitted at some point in the hope of being perceived a tad cleverer than they actually are may submit the 1st trolling comment
I am assuming that it will be tested at operational high altitude temperatures to ensure that the release friction will be consistent?
Wot no 3D?
I notice 3D capabilities are glaring in their absence. Is that fad over?
Are any games even going to be broadcast in 3D. Are curved screens and 4K the next 3D.
The answers next, but 1st a word from our sponsers
Re: Lets not forget who is to blame
Thank you for your erudite response and breakdown of my arguments.
You have added much value to the debate
Lets not forget who is to blame
It is easy to characterize the NSA and GCHQ as some sort or Orwellian super power out of control targeting at removing our freedoms. But actually they are more an expression of our fears and anxieties. The reason these programs were setup in the 1st place was because we the people demanded it after events like 9/11 and 7/7 when it became clear that organisations like al-qaeda were using things like the internet to co-ordinate their followers. After 9/11 questions were asked why the CIA, NSA FBI etc did not see it coming and the answer was because they did not have the capabilities to monitor mass communication. So they built it.
Now you could argue that they went way over there brief, but that is fault with the oversight not the organisations themselves. Then again with the fear and paranoia following those events it would be a brave politician who would put their career on the line who would limit powers which might stop the next 9/11. We also would be clamoring to now why our security services had let us down if another event like that happened.
In a naive world populated by Edward Snowdens, the transgressions look inexcusable, but in the real world these organisations daily stop us getting killed or injured by the forces out there. The question therefore is not whether these powers should exist, but how they are overseen, the range of their use, and when they should be used.
Let me guess, comes in large, huge and enormous sizes
"but wanted a bit more control"
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ...Oh sorry that wasn't an attempt at irony
Can we define that is standard units
How big is that in terms of Wales?
i'm pretty sure that has been dropped, although I agree it was one of the reasons why I did not get a 520
Re: Good Thing (TM)
Good suggestions - Here are a few of mine.
Phone based tickets or at least tickets you can print out at home like airplane boarding passes
Why do we have to have a ticket and a reservation ticket? Why not just have one.
Flexible ticket pricing like low cost airlines so that the price can be based on when you book (early=cheaper)
A Good Start - now open the Postcode database please
Who are we talking about here?
A director with a patchy track record, a history of recycling bits from other genres', the inability to write scripts where the characters are anything more than 2 dimensional and is a mastery at the art of marketing.
I'm sorry are we talking about JJ Abrams here? because it sounds awfully like George Lucas. On that basis the Star Wars franchise is in good hands.
(as a side note, it was amazing watching the end of 633 squadron last night how much George Lucas lifted for the death star scene in the 1st Star Wars film. All it needed was a ghostly voice telling Cliff Robertson to "use the force, skipper" and it would of been virtually word for word)
A year too late
Probably a year to late. I looked at the 520, both for myself and my siblings, but the fact it was stuck on older unsupported on windows OS put me off. (and lets remember the 520 was so cheap because it was the only way to shift any )
However in terms of spec it had the market to itself. Now however it has to compete with equivalent specced android phones it can no longer use price as a differential.
So buyers need to choose. Do they buy into the Android ecosystem which is a magnitude greater than the equivalent MS one and has a guaranteed future, or plump on for the MS one, where the apps are less likely to be available and the future roadmap is unclear.(I think very few care, or even understand the advantages/disadvantages of the OS)
Uae the force...
To quote Carl Zwanig "Gaffer tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together"
But not enough to contain your rockets unfortunately
Terminator 2 anyone?
A disturbance is felt
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in joy and were suddenly silenced. I think something has happened.
To good the throw away?
The post doesn't explain how it go onto terra firma, since the I though the LEM's were all crashed into the moon after separation?
HTC is not the target
While HTC maybe be a casualty, Google's real target are Nokia and Amazon who are forking android and selling their own services through it.
I think Google will be happy as long as the phone uses the Google services for things like apps, emails and browsing. It is after all primarily an advertising company
And here was I thinking "W1A" was a fictional series. Apparently it was a fly on the wall documentary
"Lets nail that puppy to the floor"
Re: Why high end?
The Hudl is relatively low end in terms of both specification and price. It's was good value when it came out but today you can easily get a tablet of similar spec and lower price. Anyway from my experience most of them are owned by kids, which are not really Tesco's core demographic with limited spending power
Tesco says their phone is going after the high end, presumably because that's where the money is. But the real question is what price it will be. it will have to have a significant discount for people to abandon established manufacturers for basically a marketing tool. Especially when a Moto G covers a lot of those basis already
The road ahead...
If anyone wants to judge Bill Gates as a technology visionary they only have to read the road ahead(alternative title "are we there yet?").
- ASTEROID'S SHOCK DINO-KILLING SPREE just bad luck - boffins
- BEST BATTERY EVER: All lithium, all the time, plus a dash of carbon nano-stuff
- Stick a 4K in them: Super high-res TVs are DONE
- Review You didn't get the MeMO? Asus Pad 7 Android tab is ... not bad
- Russia: There is a SPACECRAFT full of LIZARDS in orbit above Earth and WE control it