Re: Expanding Universe
"two different methods of measuring the Hubble Constant give different values"
yes. This suggests an error in measurement in one or both calculations. A very good point. "garbage in, garbage out".
10944 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
I think I know what's going on with the ref voltage: apparently the ADC (or external circuitry, even) draws different levels of current based on the digital bit pattern, causing changes in voltage on its reference voltage supply. And if the ref voltage is not filtered and/or regulated correctly, you end up with errors based on "how many 1 bits" (as appears to be indicated by the article).
Solution: you put a proper regulator and/or filter on the ref voltage, or [as the article suggested], use differential voltages against a different reference. Or both.
ADCs have been around in discrete form for a very long time, and they nearly always have a reference voltage supply that's separate from the Vcc supply. It's that way on the microcontrollers I've worked with as well. [I've used the 'differential ADC with gain' feature on one particular microcontroller a few times]
Also, you're really NOT supposed to tie Vcc and Vref together unless you filter it really well. You can, but it can result in A:D noise. A 'big fat capacitor' is often sufficient. Lately, I've gone to 'small series resistor plus big fat capacitor'. Yeah, this tech isn't all that complicated.
But ideally your voltage reference is one of those temperature compensated reference voltage chips, which only cost a dollar or two [last I priced them]. And to use one of THOSE you'll need a differential ADC measurement. So there ya go.
but if you SERIOUSLY want accuracy, you'll have something on the reference voltage circuit that actually maintains a relatively constant temperature, because voltage drift due to temperature still exists. In the comms world, crystals have been kept in temperature controlled ovens since decades ago, so that their frequencies are more stable. So similar thing for A:D reference voltages.
And yeah, there's really no need to overengineer it, because too much overengineering results in higher current consumption, larger circuit boards, heavier payloads, yotta yotta. However, a series resistor and fat filter capacitor aren't really that much to add.
"I wonder what happens when you set a passphrase instead of a PIN?"
It would depend on the hash. SHA256 would take a very long time.
iOS apparently limits the total # of failed attempts and/or the retry rate in order to mitigate the less secure PIN method. It's actually OK to do it Apple's way as long as there's no 0-day flaw [which they obviously need to fix, now].
well, there are a lot of reasons:
a) fishing expedition by law enforcement - we'll find SOMETHING we can nail you for! [jaywalking as indicated by GPS, for example]
b) planted evidence. Not that hard, really. A few child pr0n pics in your browser cache, and now you're a sex offender!
c) "leaking" personal information found on your phone, as a means of coercion or outright blackmail [just plead guilty, or maybe some of those photos will get 'leaked' and you don't want THAT, now do you?]
Those three reasons ALONE ought to be enough to ALWAYS INSIST on keeping privacy, well, private.
"How long before we switch off analog radio? DVB? In favour of streamed content over IP rather than broadcast-over-the-airwaves?"
You can't string a fiber optic cable up to a satellite. And our transmitters send directional signals, but it makes it to deep space. Someone 'lucky enough' to be in the pattern [as earth spins around] might catch an occasional broadcast coming from our way, and every 24 hours it would repeat. That's gonna catch some attention if they're paying any attention at all.
That, and television and FM radio signals, broadcasting at 100kwatts [or more], and especially UHF TV, which can go up to half a million watts (as I recall). OK with all of the noise with multiple transmitters on multiple frequencies competing and interfering with one another [and multiple picture standards to decode] it's LESS likely to be decodable by ETs but it might indicate "something" like 'chaos' vs 'noise'.
"We have only a sample of one (here) which is statistically meaningless."
Well, maybe not one [Mars bacteria fossils may have been found in a meteorite, for example]. But yeah, 2 neighboring planets, one of which could have seeded the other [since the meteor made it here], is STILL statistically meaningless.
Now, if signs of life are found on Io or Europa or any OTHER planet/moon in our own solar system, it might be like the odds of finding planets going around any given star. Recent observations suggest that planets are EXTREMELY common, better than the Drake equation had ever suggested.
"the fraction of formed stars that have planets" was once (1961, per wikipedia page) set at a value of 0.2 to 0.5 . Nowadays, it's a number pretty close to 1. The # of planets in the goldilocks zone was also estimated at 1-5 [similar to our solar system, actually]. That next number might need to be revised [up] as well.
"If specialist had to re-create documents from plain text data only, they would spend a lot of time to understand which formatting they should apply."
tab-delimited works best. CSV is cumbersome and doesn't handle use of the double-quote for inches very well, nor the use of commas to separate the decimal on a number.
Tab delim works with 'awk' and pastes directly into a spreadsheet with columns properly set up afterwards.
What's not to love?
and in case they refer to 'plain text' with respect to inter-office communications, I'm totally on board with THAT. HTML mail is an *EVIL* *CANCER* that should've been nuked out of existence early on.
post-edit - UTF-8, same as 'plain text' from my perspective.
"For every little thing they may, by chance, happen to get right, there are dozens of total pooch screws."
I still haven't figured out how these OBVIOUSLY CORRUPT and STUPID politicians keep getting [RE]-ELECTED. It must be that half the voters in Cali-fornicate-you are smoking WAY too much wacky weed.
"Uh, man, gotta vote again. I hear the Democrat party wants to legalize more drugs and give me more welfare money. Awesome!"
I live in Cali-fornicate-you and laugh at every one of these 'Super-cali' meme titles.
The gummint here REALLY IS that freaking stupid. I think Jerry Brown lost his marbles back in the 70's, when he did 'EST'. And he's been on tv ADMITTING how he's lied his ass off every time he runs for office. And now that he's truly term-limited out, he's finally showing who he REALLY is.
And the really really stupid thing is all of the people voting FOR those idiot politicians in one of THE most corrupt legislatures in the world, where paid lobbyists openly occupy the legislature floor, and are consulted on EVERY legislative move, constantly whining or more money, and doing an end-around to increase taxes and fees [like on gasoline and car registration, recently] at EVERY possible turn, "for the children".
icon, because, the Cali-fornicate-you gummint is one of the WORST with the "for the children" meme.
"We regularly get in my European office people who couldn't yet get a visa for the US."
I have a strong suspicion that the immigration reforms that Trump wants (i.e. end "the lottery" aka 'random pick' system and use a 'merit-based' system, along with ending 'chain migration' and of course building 'the wall') might actually make it EASIER for technologically savvy people to obtain visas and immigrate.
But that viewpoint isn't very popular. It doesn't have 'Trump hate' in it.
Once more qualified people CAN come into the USA more easily [instead of being randomly selected at the same rate as "unskilled" people and their 12th cousins] we'll see a LOT less of the *kinds* of complaints that are associated with H1-B visas, etc..
"the God Complex and 'I am the center of $projectFoo, I am Super Cool™' is rampant"
This became apparent OUTSIDE of Redmond with the release of Win-10-nic, following "Ape". I mean, what ELSE could possibly explain it?
Consider the engineer responsible for 'The Metro' and 'The Ribbon' and all *KINDS* of horrible ideas, who happens to be a woman. They kept her employed there until late last year, even promoted her, but fired Sinofsky over "Ape" (i.e. the tiles in Windows 8). Go fig.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larson-Green
If there was TRULY equal treatment, she should've been canned along with Sinofsky. Hell, fire the entire management team for coming up with Win-10-nic in the FIRST place. "In their own bubble-world", as I expected. NO clue as to what the customers want (that would be a Windows 7.1 that has minor improvements and solid design with no security problems or massive UI re-invention).
"This behavior is commonplace today in tech companies worldwide."
Actual discrimination based on sex: I have my doubts (consider the 'Google memo' from a while back - if there is ANY discrimination it is REVERSE discrimination against white heterosexual christian men, who typically don't whine because it's not "manly" to do so)
Being sued by women who should NOT be promoted or given raises, because they were NOT promoted nor given raises: I suspect that THIS may be more common than not.
The problem is that the court system and the legislation *ENABLES* "gold digger" types to FRIVOLOUSLY sue their employers.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to see ACTUAL CASES of discrimination punished as hard as possible. It's just that I doubt it's REALLY happening to THAT extent.
I call B.S. on their lawsuit.
OK maybe not $5 but still...
critical parts need a spec/paper trail. The U.S. Navy has a program called 'SUBSAFE' that deals with a couple of nuke boats that were lost in the 60's. In short, anything that is related to a safety system or the hull goes through a paper trail and inspection gauntlet. So the $5 bolt becomes a $500 bolt. It also doesn't sink the ship due to failure.
Similar program for rockets, I'd think.
"Check out the unexpurgated words of wisdom here"
It sounds REALLY GOOD to me, actually. Now we, as citizens, must hold him accountable to those words, and make sure he does what he says he'll do. If he does, I'll be VERY happy! But criticizing him for doing what he said he'll do? I don't think that's deserved.
the problem here is whether or not the FCC should be regulating CONTENT. I say they should NOT be.
When (back in the 60's, as mentioned by the article) there aren't any real competing TV news outlets available, the FCC might have a reason to regulate SOME content; that is, if there's deliberate bias in the TV station's news reporting (such as racism and "not reporting" things), a case COULD be made [and apparently WAS] that they're not "serving the public interest".
Nowadays most TV in the USA is available via cable and satellite, and the cable has a sort of "monopoly" in a given area FOR CABLE. Satellite and local channels are available WITHOUT the cable.
Now, if 72% of media coverage is a single cable company, AND they're able to provide content that people want at prices that compete with the satellites, I see no problem with that.
But, if 72% of media coverage is a single cable company, AND they're only letting people see what THEY want seen [let's say, dropping Fox News channels but keeping PMSNBC, FNN, and CNBC, NOT airing religious broadcasting, yotta yotta], AND there's NO alternative, then the FCC would have a case to REGULATE them "in the public interest".
I think the latter case is not relevant in the 21st century. Keep in mind that the "public utilities commission" of various states could ALSO regulate the cable industry to make sure this doesn't happen, since they have "monopolies" over geographical areas.
And because of THAT, you have to wonder whether or not the FCC really needs to regulate anything in this case. And I believe DE-regulation is a GOOD thing whenever it's done. So until there are ACTUAL ABUSES, let's not get our panties in a wad (or nickers in a knot) over something that has NOT happened.
If/when it does, let the lawsuits fly, and the regulations will follow. I doubt that Sinclair would want that. Instead, they'll probably "carry everything" to avoid that problem and keep customers happy. It's what Spectrum and Time Warner Cable have done. I've got 2 Fox News channels, and I _KNOW_ those guys are lefties. But they're not censoring the content I want. Because they want MY business. [I just wish it wasn't $92/month].
"While it was probably just your standard routing issue"
ack. I think so to. Comcast looks bad because it took them WAY too long to fix it. So, rather than a sinister "we will, we will, BLOCK YOU" motive, it's just bureaucracy and poor performance on their part.
but it's hard to take THAT explanation into the realms of black helicopters and evil corporations...
"do things for the greater good rather than cold, hard cash?"
who says they have to be different goals? I say that the GREATEST GOOD is FREE SPEECH! _ANY_ form of censorship, which is what is being asked for here [do NOT doubt me], is NOT "the greatest good".
And when those who define "the greater good" as "being in LOCK STEP with THEM" _ENFORCE_ that "greater good" upon the free speech of OTHERS, you get the OPPOSITE of "the greater good", regardless of "feelings" or intent.
"No I don't think Trump is much of a leader, people compare him with Hitler, I've no idea why, Trump can hardly read, and definitely can't write a book (on his own), he's hardly popular at home, about as presidential as a brick"
You're echoing the same unsubstantiated rumors as so many others, I see. Try watching Fox News (instead of PMSNBC or FNN or ABS or NBS or CBS or NPR or Comedy Central) and get the REAL story about how successful Donald Trump has been with only a little more than a year in office. Our "turned around" economy is #1 on that list. (hopefully BBC is better than the 3 letter networks over on THIS side of the pond when it comes to accurate news reporting).
Perhaps the REAL problem is brainless people echoing the same lies and rumors as if they are truth, and trying to sound 'authoritative' in the process.
from article: "Social networks, he said, have empowered and amplified those who spread divisive ideas by turning a blind eye to their own influence and being slow to develop rapid takedown technologies."
politicians on Twitter - would that be like Donald Trump?
OK here's a thought: what are "they" really after here? Let's read between the lines.
"those who spread divisive ideas" - read: Those who say things I don't like when others agree with them.
"turning a blind eye to their own influence" - read: How DARE they convince people I'm wrong!
"being slow to develop radpid takedown technologies" - read: They should be SILENCED before ANYBODY can read what they said, because others MIGHT actually BELIEVE it!
So, to me, the politicians here don't LIKE public discourse on matters THEY do not want discussed... and the LAST thing THEY want to see, is the equivalent of Donald Trump over in the UK!
meanwhile, I think 'The Donald' is doing QUITE well over here on the other side of the pond. G'head, howler monkeys, downvote me. yeah it's "divisive" to NOT fall in LOCK STEP [think Nazi Germany] with YOU people. So, you throw poo and downvote and think it affects people like me. But the truth is, we all knew this stuff before, and were simply VERY HAPPY to know that there are OTHERS out there who are like US, and not YOU.
"And developers stayed away in droves." (from article)
Seems it was better under Ballmer (at least for a while) when they were MORE about "Developers, developers, devellopers, developers" except when it became ".Not" "C-pound" and then "The metro" and UWP and now we get "YET ANOTHER FAIL" Hololens.
Thanks, Microshaft, for the moving target confusion. When developers see Windows "APE", Win-10-nic, and UWP, we say "Why the FORNICATE would we want 'yet another Micro-shaft developer platform' to develop for, when we all KNOW it will _REQUIRE_ Win-10-nic and all of our customers use 7!!!"
And THAT is why it failed.
/me points out if Win-10-nic had been made to be like 7, without the "cram it up your ass" adware/spyware/updates/2DFlugly, this would not have happened, or happened so quickly.
In other words, Micro-shaft, you _DROVE_ _THE_ _DEVELOPERS_ _AWAY_!!!
what primarily defines a cult has several aspects to it:
a) hierarchical authoritarian leadership, wielding control over your personal life
b) punishment for non-compliance/rebellion
c) manipulation (emotional or other types of coercion)
These things alone (unfortunately) aren't necessarily a guarantee that it's a cult, but if you see all three in an organization, it's probably time to leave. If nothing else, it's a recipe for abuse.
Also, you have to lie down to be a doormat. Just sayin'
I came to the conclusion long ago that a number of people get involved in a church or religion so that they can have control over other people's lives, and there's enough people WANTING others to control them, that they have plenty of willing victims showing up. Both sides of this (in my opinion) represent some kind of psycnological disorder, and I wouldn't even begin to guess how to cure that. I doubt therapy would be enough. Problems like _THAT_ are most likely too deep.
That, of course, does not in any way impugn that those others NOT in the above 2 categories have something wrong with them for attending a church or being part of a religion. Most likely they're just regular people who happen to be religious, like maybe half of the world's population...
/me thinks: party in hell, I'll bring the liquor. it beats hot cocoa and s'mores
When I was 4 years old I distinctly remember having a dream in which my sister and I were eaten by a lion and got turned into poo. Anthromorphic poo. I suppose vegetables feeil pain when we turn THEM into poo. So I should be a 100% carnivore [at least the animals are DEAD].
So how can I turn _THIS_ into a religion so _I_ can be a gozillionaire with an infinite number of women to have sex with at my command, ordering people around and acting like an evil dictator all the time, muahahahahaha!
[it'd be a bit like being the 'dear leader' of North Korea]
and yet, it seems that Elron actually BELIEVED his own B.S. - or else he was an excellent actor.
Also worth pointing out, why do SO many celebs fall for this obvious bullcrap? are they THAT desperate for meaning to their otherwise vacuous lives that they MUST fill it with *THAT* ???
ACK
this is the reason why trains over short distances don't work very well, and why we have busses and shuttles at train stops (for things _like_ commuting, for example). If you're stopping every few hundred feet, the train can't get up to speed. Same kinds of implications here, as the meatbags inside the "transportation device" can't handle more than 2G of acceleration safely (this number may be smaller than 2G, I was guessing).
So, unless the stops are several MILES apart, which would defeat the purpose of its existence, it ain't gonna be practical.
"How much money would that save anyway?"
When it comes to ANY kind of public transportation, it's not about the money, it's about the SQANDERED TIME, waiting around to connect to another bus/trolley/train/whatever. If you're lucky, they show up every 30 minutes (or less, in some places). Some busses have hourly schedules. Some even WORSE.
[no wonder people don't like public transportation in way too many places, with notable exceptions ONLY in a very small number of localized areas]
Somewhat recently I pointed out that, with all of the hassles involved in flying between San Diego and Las Vegas, it would have been cheaper (overall) and taken the SAME AMOUNT OF TIME to rent a car and drive there and back, if you share the same car. And you wouldn't have to leave "at a certain time" etc. or hassle with baggage claim.
(other implications are obvious I think)
I like the self-driving car concept instead. You call up for a car, it shows up in under 5 minutes, and takes you to your destination. you subscribe to the service, theoretically being cheaper than car ownership. If properly managed, THAT would work (and it would be PRIVATELY owned, not "public" and therefore NOT subject to governmentium and politics).
"Blame the webmasters lawyers and lawmakers"
Fixed it for ya.
The moment that Google [and other search providers] were *REQUIRED* to insert filtering for whatever reason, 'right to be forgotten' being ONE of them, it opened the door to MANIPULATE the search results any way that "they" see fit.
So how about THIS instead: FREE competing services that don't filter, except for settings YOU send along with the query.
The internet does best when completely UN-regulated. Don't try and justify socialist or moralist ideas upon the world. THAT will _ONLY_ empower some "Internet Pope" (self-appointed or otherwise) to wield power, and we don't need YET ANOTHER one of _THOSE_ kinds of people, now do we???
[And _I_ thought the 60's was about "power to the people" - turns out, it was about "power to CERTAIN people" - just the same old CRAP under a different [mis]label I guess]
"if CERN discovers as predicted that antimatter generates weak negative gravity (ie around -3%) and entangled antimatter more so, its possible that the drive I've invented could work."
well, as one mad scientist to another, you can try kickstarter...
either that or realize that the energy required to produce enough antimatter is of "stellar" proportions.
"So the FCC has authority over space as well, now?"
I think they just authorize the use of RF to communicate with them. But, effectively, it looks like it, for U.S. companies at least. Yeah I'm not happy about that either. I'd think NASA or even the FAA should have that jurisdiction. Maybe it's time for Con-grab to define the regulatory roles better.
"It's even more fun to watch women moving from in front, easier to see their tits."
Yeah, I guess I'm an ass-man... And like I always like to say around time when the breast cancer charities are asking for money to cure breast cancer: A boob is a terrible thing to waste! So yeah, definitely cure THAT!