Check out My Gate Array Project if you haven't already done so. The EE work is done by Chris Testa KD2BMH, I mostly do systems programming and business but do a lot of design checks, etc.
Repeating the AC because he's posted at karma 0. That's "University of California at Berkeley", AC, but the rest of this is spot on:
Berkeley University is pushing really hard to get universities to adopt RISC-V (an Open ISA and set of cores) as a basis for future processor and architecture research. The motivation behind RISC-V was to have a stable ISA that isn't patent encumbered, isn't owned by one company, and is easily extensible (OpenRISC didn't fit the bill here).
I can see that ARM and MIPS would have a problem with this, especially as there is nothing particularly innovative or performance gaining about either ISA, and some recent RISC-V cores have demonstrated similar performance to some recent ARM cores in half the area. This is there way of fighting back against something open that stands to lose them significant marketshare.
Cool. Someone found us the agenda!
I get paid to train EEs within large companies on intellectual property issues, and to help the companies and their attorneys navigate those issues. Infringement is rife within software companies. Not because anyone wants to infringe, but because of a total lack of due diligence driven by ignorance.
You've made my point for me.
And any informed patent holder knows that any violation must be prosecuted, or the validity of the patent evaporates.
No, that's just the ignorance of the uninformed that "everybody knows", but it's wrong. You don't lose your patent from failing to enforce it. You might be confusing it with trademarks, which can go into the public domain if you allow them to become generic terms rather than specific brands. And you can sometimes lose the capability of being able to enforce against a specific infringer if you hold back until the market develops, that's the Doctrine of Laches. But you don't lose your patent. Nor would you lose your copyright due to failure to enforce.
That's why you use algae farms in the desert irrigated using seawater. That way you're not displacing farmland.
I took a look at buying Stevia in the store awhile back. I am also a reader of contents labels, so I put it back on the shelf really fast. The first ingredient listed: dextrose
Boy you're a really clever one aren't you, catching onto secret calories in stevia that nobody else did?
First off, stevia is available in many different forms. Stevia is many times more potent than sugar in terms of sweetness, it's extremely hard to use pure (I have pure stevia - to use it pure you have to make very large batches and very tiny measurements!). To dilute it down you obviously have to mix it with something. There are all sorts of mixes, but there are two main categories: those that try for parity with sugar in terms of how much you use (which generally mix with maltodextrin), and those who try for a product that is much sweeter than sugar but not as extreme as pure stevia (these can come in a variety of forms, but a common blend is with dextrose). So yes, the dextrose has calories - but it's far outmatched in terms of sweetness by the stevia therein, so you only need to use a very small amount (depending on the ratio of the blend). The 1:1 parity versions as mentioned use maltodextrin, which is also caloric - but it's so light and fluffy that there's very little mass (and thus calories) per unit volume; basically, what the stevia is blended with is mostly air.
More fun facts about stevia here [100daysofrealfood.com].
Hahaha, Food Babe? Are you joking? The woman who says she hates air travel because they compress your bodies with high pressure air and it restricts your digestive organs? And how "the air that is pumped in isn’t pure oxygen either, it’s mixed with nitrogen, sometimes almost at 50%. To pump a greater amount of oxygen in costs money in terms of fuel and the airlines know this!" Or her microwave rant, where she talks about how microwave ovens are evil because once water has been microwaved it no longer crystalizes into pure forms when frozen, but rather into forms similar to water that has heard words like "hitler" and "satan"? This is your information source?
Yeah, I think I'll stay over here in the real world and not get my information from a living joke, thanks.
Having a strict target is not impossible, and when the difference between consumption and expenditure is on the order of 500 calories, you have room for error on both ends - on your estimation of your consumption and on the estimation of your burn.
There was a rousing ITV, or BBC, I don't remember, documentary on a woman
Whoa - throw away all of the scientific data, there's an anecdote here involving an TV show about an uncontrolled experiment whose data we can't see and whose name you can't even remember!
The human body works on calories. The human digestive system does not throw away energy from digestible substances. It's energy in vs. energy out.
you must consult with Imagination before you change it.
Yes. And what happens then?
I haven't in general met many professors (or EEs) who understand much about intellectual property.
OK. Can we see your agreements, please? Because that did sound very much like trolling for additional intellectual property to add to your portfolio.
People who read this article have pointed out three open CPU designs in addition to the one that I remembered.
While your product might be "production ready", please keep in mind that open projects are very often written to a higher standard than commercial ones, and the researchers involved are no less professional than your own developers. And their projects come with fewer intellectual property issues than yours.
Some curious results:
"occupation:omnivore". Apparently Bob Dillan is the best omnivore out there.
"gender:animal": Obama is #1.
"citizenship:cops": Alfred Deacon, the second prime minister of Australia
"genre:set" William Shakespeare, of course.
It's only "free" for academia.
Not even them. This is a lure for universities to create tech that they are not allowed to produce in hardware, but the company that provided the original tech can monetize.
The patent terms are whatever they want them to be. In general "reasonable" and "patent" don't happen together much. And "tiny", well I really doubt it.
Having a company provide funds for a research grant and then reap the patent royalties isn't in general a good thing for society. The student researchers get paid like slave labor (if they get paid at all) and put what may be the best idea of their lives in some company's pockets.
If Tesla could profitably sell the Model S, as it stands now, for $30k without subsidies then they would have a real winner on their hands.
Even $40-50k should work with the feature set it currently has. It's a luxury vehicle right now.
But you could throw shitloads of motor at the problem and do that. You would just have to burn more fuel.
The intent isn't to save more fuel though, it's to improve that 0-60 time, primarily by providing that extra bit of *oomph* right at the start where a 100% torque@0 rpm electric motor is at it's best where the gasoline engine hasn't reached optimal RPMs yet. I understand they're also doing strange stuff with shifting as well.
Regenerative braking also helps save the brakes.
There's a limit to what you can do by throwing a bigger engine and fuel tank at the problem of a race car - eventually it just becomes too heavy and/or large.