Comment Re:How is this a "robot" (Score 1) 39
Do you really think that your wanking added something of value to the commentary?
Do you really think that your wanking added something of value to the commentary?
It's a robot locomotion design. It's part of a robot design. It walks on water and jumps on water. It's impressive as hell to anybody with the slightest clue. Are you happy now, or do you want to litter slashdot with more of your nonfunctional tripe?
Question: when you have trouble with your bowel movement does it eventually come out if you really try?
It is a prototype of part of a robot. The article only claims that the robot is designed, and does not claim that it is completely finished. If you pretend not to be impressed with what they have demonstrated so far then you must hand in your geek card.
That's the problem with getting our tech news from a place called "popsci". They failed to link the actual research. It seems apparent that the robot has been designed, and the mechanical part has been prototyped and successfully tested. Say, do you regard yourself as a technical person? (Not looking good at the moment.)
You seem to be promoting your own private definition of "locomotion".
whatever, we have terabyte hard drives now, so it's pointless to resurrect this technology.
Where is your exabyte drive going to come from?
If latency is 1,000 times lower and endurance is 1,000 times higher then, under continuous load, endurance measured in real time is unchanged. Not by any means a hypothetical scenario.
Why should anyone care about the power level, as opposed to the pulse energy?
Thresholds, the same reason that the Large Hadron Collider may break apart subatomic particles while a 16 inch cannon cannot, even though the cannon delivers more total energy.
It has locomotion and is controlled by a computer, unlike a paper clip (unless you are talking about Clippy).
Webm works flawlessly in Chrome, meaning that it works on most of the smartphones in the world and a huge chunk of desktops. Kudos to the researchers for showing the chuztpah to make whiny tech wanabees like you move a teensy bit away from their comfort zone.
Somebody modded my post troll, almost certainly an Oracle employee. However, the linked mail is a fact, and the current situation is a fact, no astroturfing will change that. To you the mod: sad to be you.
MIPS is another arch with staying power, mainly because of being largely patent-free. Opencores has VHDL. IIRC, China has come up with some functioning clusters based on this and there are design wins to be found in embedded (e.g. Broadcom). I don't think there is really anything special about MIPS that makes it attractive. A servicable but unexciting architecture with some programmer-visible quirks that cater to ancient design assumptions that lost validity long ago. MIPS isn't going to die because some embedded designer is always going to find it the cheapest way to chip their product.
That's the debian verdict. Oracle may have other ideas, but if drinking that koolaid, caution is advised.
At least MSFT was smart enough not to leave that up to Dell, Acer, Compaq, HP, etc.
Well... but Microsoft's devices are still the ones that regularly end up so infested with malware they aren't usable at all, except perhaps for malware distribution. Maybe not the best model to emulate.
If you own an old one you are SOL. HTC typically provides a few OTA updates per model.
1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.
