Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:What about secondary interference points? (Score 3, Interesting) 91 91

According to the whitepaper, the coefficients to weight each transmitter signal to constructively interfere at your location sets up mathematically orthogonal channels (at lease orthogonal to some SNR, with some leakage from other channels depending on the number/location of devices and antennas).

The device can send a signal back which will interfere with other devices, but incoming signals at the antennas can be weighted by the same coefficients (or at least derived from the same) to again cancel all the other signals but your own.

Mathematically, the channel can go both ways with full bandwidth.

Comment: Re:better than a group of doctors?!?! (Score 4, Interesting) 167 167

Actually, I find it interesting you used the Magic-8-Ball. While it is just a toy, the 20Q toy (which is somewhat similar in my mind) is very interesting because it tries to guess what you are thinking of by asking you yes/no/sometimes/don't-know questions. The neural net was then built by people playing the game and providing 'better questions' for when the AI got the answer wrong.

Could you not do the same for medical diagnosis?

[Do you have a headache?]
"No."
[Does your stomach hurt?]
"Yes."
[You have an ulcer?]
"No."
[What's wrong, and what would have been a better question?]
"Food poisoning, and 'Did you eat uncooked meat recently?'"
[Noted. Now I am smarter.]

It seems that you could make a diagnosis engine that as you rule things out it could come to as good a conclusion as a typical doctor.

Comment: Re:Do they account for hypothesis-mining? (Score 1) 226 226

So I simulated your hypothetical experiment. I was going to use a 16 toss sequence, but it was going to take MATLAB 22 hours, so I only had it look for a 8 toss sequence.

A coin is tossed 1 million times. Then we count the total number of times each possible 8-toss sequence occurs. Turns out that each pattern shows up about the correct number of times. No pattern even comes close to showing up 1.1x more than expected. Let alone, 100x.

See here: http://i.imgur.com/5F391.png

Pattern number is just dec2bin, i.e., #0 -> TTTTTTTT and #10 -> TTTTHTHT, etc.

Comment: GPS affected? (Score 3, Interesting) 253 253

Many of the comments on here are "1.8 microseconds, oh no I get less sleep! What a stupid finding."

But seriously, does this have an effect on GPS? GPS satellites need to be corrected for relativistic effects that cause their clocks to tick 38 microseconds/day different than the ground; which would cause error to accumulate at 10km/day. Does 1.8 microsecond difference in our day cause error to accumulate in GPS at the rate of 0.5km/day if not fixed?

Comment: Re:If anything comes of this... (Score 1) 132 132

If you still think that getting a computer to not only run a simulation but also generate all the random events that effect that simulation is still a plausible answer with computer technology today - I don't know how you arrived at that answer.

I merely only implied that it is possible to generate random numbers, which is very useful.

Perhaps you want to simulate something very specific and you know that the random part of the simulation has very specific characteristics (e.g. transient noise in SPICE), this is something that is easy to implement in software.

Comment: Re:If anything comes of this... (Score 1) 132 132

While pseudorandom number generators are deterministic (LFSR, etc), there is no reason that we can not implement a true random generator in hardware.

There are many ways to do this. For example, amplify the noise from a resistor, quantize it, and use the LSBs. These should be random.

Comment: Re:Meanwhile in Canada... (Score 1) 192 192

I am no expert in cryptography, but I remember my CS friends talking about 2 locks on a briefcase.

The shared key is encrypted with key A by Adam and sent to Betty (who can not open it without key A). Betty encrypts this with key B and sends it back to Adam. Adam decrypts this with key A and sends in back to Betty. Since the message now is only encrypted with key B, Betty can open it and get the shared key.

Or is this only a educational exercise and in actuality if you eavesdrop all of these transactions you can determine key A and B?

The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in late and owns the worm farm. -- Travis McGee

Working...