What ... AGAIN??
Posts by Some Beggar
882 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jul 2009
Moore's Law has ten years to run, predicts physicist
Wind farms create local warming
Re: Of course it does
Do you have any citations for that ground source claim?
There's a convenient "experiment" been built close to us (in southern France) that appears to completely contradict it. A row of essentially identical villas (in terms of area/volume) running along a gently sloping road all built with identical ground source heating systems. As far as I am aware, they are all running as efficiently as expected. If cooled ground water was a real problem, shouldn't the chap at the bottom of the hill have lost some benefit?
Re: taking this theory further...
Most of that 15C is because urban areas are made of brick, concrete and asphalt and act as massive solar ovens storing up the sun's heat and blocking any cooling winds. Pompeii is effing hot in the summer and I don't think there are many Roman aircon units still running.
Re: But cooling elsewhere
Removing energy from the flow means that the flow can't reach as far as it once did, so 'where ever' doesn't get the cooling breezes it used to.Consequently, 'where ever' gets warmer.
First Law of Thermodynamics again. How does removing energy from the system cause another part of the system to gain energy in the form of heat?
Arcam rPac
Re: jitter-free analogue signal
Apologies. You're quite right. The datasheets I was looking at were packages with both the DAC and a TI USB controller. The PCM5102 itself doesn't have on-board USB.
It's interesting that your main post mentions your abundance of gear (or 'ear') to test this on and yet neither the TI sales bumph nor this review contains any objective testing.
No offence, but until somebody actually posts something material rather than these empty assertions then I'm sticking firmly with my original audiophile voodoo assessment.
Re: jitter-free analogue signal
"Arcam is one of the few companies to implement it in all its USB DACs right down to this inexpensive one."
The USB stack is built into the TI DAC. The only other digital i/f into the DAC is s/pdif. How are Arcam implementing anything novel in the USB connection in this product?
Re: Don't be too harsh
"If you can get a £10 box of bits and sell it for £150, welcome to capitalism"
Absolutely. But when somebody does sell a £10 box of bits for £150 it is the responsibility of people who know better to point that out. And a reviewer on a techie website should be one of the people who knows better. Writing a fluff piece that gives that £10 box of bits a score of 90% is weak.
Re: Would you like to buy a bridge?
Rather than spamming a blog, perhaps you could simply explain what else you believe is inside that pretty box that would bring the necessary BoM and design costs into double figures, let alone up to £75 or £150.
I just poked around and the same (or essentially the same) DAC is used in several of those cheapo USB-driven (rather than USB-powered) PC speakers. So that's the entire useful contents of that box plus two (or four) drivers, power/volume control, caseworks, headphone output and cable to connect the satellite speaker ... all for between £25 and £50 retail.
So ... can you persuade me that this device is anything other than audiophile homeopathy?
Would you like to buy a bridge?
Those DACs cost under $3 in volume, they have on-board USB and sp/dif, and they can drive headphones directly. You need about another $1 of discrete components to make something that goes all the way from the USB in to the headphone socket out. You can get away with cheapo components since the whole point of that DAC is that it does the full job and is robust against interference and jitter.
Let's be generous and say $5 for the electronics. Care to explain where the rest of that £150 comes from? Pure voodoo.
Shock sales surge sends Amazon shares soaring
Study finds water cycle accelerating with warming
Panasonic touts monster 8k by 4k 'flickerless' plasma
Re: Premature
Many of these [insert your superlative] products are about as 'real' as the concept cars you see at motor shows. There's no rush to ever get them to market. They get attention at trade shows and free advertising in the papers.
I mean ... not The Register obviously. They wouldn't be gullible enough to splash the word PANASONIC onto their interweb just because somebody at PANASONIC released the sniff of a hint of a rumour that a big and shiny PANASONIC product might possibly go on sale at some vague point in the future. Maybe. Perhaps.
Gaia scientist Lovelock: 'I was wrong and alarmist on climate'
Re: @ ArmanX
(I'd avoid the weak attempts at condescension if I were you. I'm a scientist. I'm perfectly comfortable with the concept of a scientific model and its place within the broader scientific process. I even know some long words.)
One model that was suggested many years ago said that, among other things, the polar ice caps would melt completely by the year 2010.
Citation please.
I am attacking, for lack of a better word, the Cult of Climate Change
No. What you are attacking is a straw man.
Re: @ ArmanX
"My point is that the current model ceased being science when it was disproved, but not abandoned."
Then your point is empty since nobody has "disproved" the science. The overwhelming scientific consensus is still very much in favour of the model of man-made climate change:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract
Re: Predictions...
"Somehow I believe that this "climate change" stuff fits into this type of model, but I have no evidence, just a belief."
Why rely on belief for something that is straightforward to empirically test? These predictions are published in journals. They're not buried in concrete tombs. You simply need to collect them, evaluate their accuracy against some metric, and compare the distribution against what you would expect from pure chance.
(or you could just use google scholar and read the papers that have already this ... unfortunately it completely contradicts your belief so you might not want to)
Re: SCIENCE
"The test case for climate science is just so big, you need a spare planet"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_science
There are some fundamental differences between observational and experimental science, but that doesn't automatically mean the former is invalid or based on 'faith'.
And if you take the argument too far then it starts to sound disturbingly similar to the arguments used by creationists to undermine our theories on the age of the planet and the universe.
Re: Weak.
"What's so crazy about the idea of multi-cellular life forms being part of a higher level multi-cellular life form?"
There is no mechanism proposed by this could work and no test proposed to verify whether it is false. That might make it "interesting" to some people, but it disqualifies it from being a scientific hypothesis.
New satellite will blow your socks off - and spot them from spaaaace
Nokia's fontastic Pure wins 'design Oscar'
Quantum cruncher beats today's computers by 1080
They haven't built a "computer" by any ordinary definition.
What they've built is an analogue simulator. It uses quantum behaviour on a small and manageable scale - the disc of beryllium - to model the quantum behaviour of much more intractable systems. It's like modelling tsunamis in the kitchen and calling your sink a "computer".
I'm not sure at what point between the Nature paper and the Reg article this became so completely befuddled. It's not rocket science.
Well ... ok ... it is slightly rocket science. But somebody with a background in physics and an ability to read even just the abstract of the Nature paper could have grasped the vague idea of what they've done.
Indiana cops arrest violent 6-year-old
Tablets are the future of the PC, says researcher
Re: Convenient?
Not everybody has a job that can be done while sitting in one place. Or wants one. I'm hardly a skittish youth but if I had to sit in one place all day I'd quit and become a landscape gardener or a plasterer. Or whatever you call those people who build paths on mountains. Or a spaceman.
On the one hand, I'm buying his predictions because I like tablets and I like his smiley beardy face.
On the other hand, he's done the standard market analyst trick of publishing a colourful graph with no error bars and pointlessly specific predictions. And if you browse the old papers on the Forrester website there are some ... "interesting"... predictions even amongst the papers that they haven't pulled because they turned out to be bollocks.
(no offence to any market anaylysts ... I'm sure you're not all charlatans with nice shirts and trustworthy faces)
Amazon Kindle Touch touches down early
Re: Here's a question
@The BigYin
You seem peculiarly determined to persuade me that I've made a foolish purchasing decision. Is this genuine concern for my welfare or are you just tickling your own bollocks to make yourself feel good?
Here's what I originally wrote:
"I wouldn't rely on DRM'd media for anything that I wanted to keep. E-books are a handy paperback replacement if you read and/or travel a lot. For stuff that I might actually want to dip into in the future I'd rather own a hardback or an "open" digital copy."
Is there anything in there that you actually disagree with?