Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Why Not Flywheels? (Score 2) 146

AFAIK the most recent company to make a serious attempt at market penetration with flywheels was Beacon Power. They got as far as building one frequency regulation plant to operational status, and then the financials caught up with them; there's a private equity firm trying to put humpty dumpty back together again, we'll see how they do.

Just like flow batteries, it's a tech that needs a lot of up front money and work to scale out, and is stepping into a field where they have to compete with a variety of companies with different technology -- not all of them necessarily based on technology that uses resources that actually scale (e.g. giant plants of Li batteries are likely to later be scrapped when Li starts to be more expensive as mobile applications need it for gravimetric/volumetric energy density.) Investors can get reluctant when a breakout market trend towards one particular tech could make the others obsolete before they start turning a profit, and the pressure is always there to go back to the drawing board and improve the eventual economics at the cost of losing time in market development.

But mostly, nobody mentioned them because the article is about flow batteries, not flywheels.

Comment Re:girl with dragon tattoo did it (Score 1) 303

I never claimed "Layer 0" was specified, don't be a moron, use your reading comprehension skills. You don't win arguments by mischaracterizing your opponent. And stop being so insulting. All I did was point out that "Layer 0" is in parlance, and that the extent to which physical media and infrastructure is "in the ISO model" is, by that own model's admission, been a gray area with gradually scope creep (they probably should have started with layer 3 or so to leave space to grow downward.)

At any rate, I will leave you and your personality disorders to amuse yourself insulting other people.

Comment Re:girl with dragon tattoo did it (Score 1) 303

Hey man whatever, I hear the term "Layer 0" at least once a week, so I know I'm no wrog there. We always get a chuckle when a wet-behind-the-ears hire starts making a fuss over OSI mode pedantry, BTW.

An example of a "Layer 1" attack would be an RF interferer. This is clearly a "Layer 0" attack.

Comment Re:girl with dragon tattoo did it (Score 1) 303

Layer 1 ends at bit encoding.

Physical Media: Any means in the physical world for transferring
      signals between OSI systems. Considered to be outside the OSI Model,
      and therefore sometimes referred to as "Layer 0." The physical
      connector to the media can be considered as defining the bottom
      interface of the Physical Layer, i.e., the bottom of the OSI

Here, and yes, we do. This is not a new thing.

One thing you have to realize about networking career folks is they are always tired and have forgotten more than many people know due to their horrible sleep habits/job requirements, so honestly, it was just a slip of the neurons. Do always ask us to verify our answers though because often we are kinda phasing in and out of reality.

Comment Re:girl with dragon tattoo did it (Score 1) 303

I meant to say, physical layer, sorry, tired, so NRZI etc. Really the whole thing is rather fungible with protocols that don't fit cleanly into the classifications, but for the most part layer 1 is mostly high frequency bit encodings that don't actually demand certain voltage/current specifications.

Comment Re:girl with dragon tattoo did it (Score 1) 303

For those who don't want to Google, the 7 layers are numbered 1 through 7, not 0 through 6.

Layer 1 is link layer signalling like HDLC.

We who are actually in the business do indeed use the term "Layer 0" to refer to power/physical cabling/infrastrucuture.
I've even heard "Layer 8" bandied about to refer to managers and politics, but it's less popular.

Comment Re:Assembly (Score 1) 429

After having watched numerous threads on xda fizzle because the participents didn't have the ASM chops to reverse engineer bootloaders, I think GP's point is pretty valid. Don't underestimate just how much control humble boot/driver ROM writers actually have over the landscape on which everyone else walks around.

Also learning ASM gives you a better feel for how the hardware sees your higher level code, so it helps to build instincts about what is likely to work well and what will drag ass.

BTW after x86 and ARM, or maybe even before ARM, MIPS is a good one to know.

The trouble with a lot of self-made men is that they worship their creator.