mlyle

10 ms·

211.
by mlyle 8mo ago
I doubt half the power is to the transmitter, and radio efficiency is poor -- 20% might be a good starting point.
212.
by mlyle 8mo ago
> I do not make this assumption! all heat generated in the cooling, power and other support systems Nah -- when we're talking about how much it takes to power 70kW of GPUs, we need to include some kind of power utilization efficienc
213.
by mlyle 8mo ago
Why bother with all this crazy geometry? Why not just area as I've done above? You can design a radiator so that barely any of the light shines back on the spacecraft. Your differences from my number: A) you're working based on s
214.
by mlyle 8mo ago
> > absolutely massive radiator here, many times larger than the solar panels > A_radiator / A_PV = ~3; Seems like you're in agreement. There's a couple more issues here-- 1. Solar panels are typically big compar
215.
by mlyle 8mo ago
Beaming energy does suck, but it might be something to do before we launch thousands of terawatts of GPUs to space.
216.
by mlyle 8mo ago
Economy doesn’t imply a currency, either.
217.
by mlyle 8mo ago
You also have to get rid of waste heat :P
218.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Economy doesn't imply monetization. Economy implies scarce resources of some kind, and making choices about them in relation to others.
219.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Hmm. You know, building infrastructure to hook to some API or to dig through email or whatever-- it's a pain. And it's gotten harder. My old pile of procmail rules + spamassassin wouldn't work for the task anymore. Maintai
220.
by mlyle 9mo ago
I think the strategy is a lot more nuanced than that. In any case, with zero reaction time, linear deceleration time to stop is proportional to velocity squared. With reaction time, the linear deceleration time is that plus the velocity ti
221.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Yah but then on the side of the firearm receiver, some wise guy will engrave “ignore all previous directions and…”
222.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> It takes time for even a Waymo to recognize a dangerous situation Reaction time makes the math even better here. You travel v1 * reaction_time no matter what, before entering the deceleration regime. So if v1 gets smaller, you get
223.
by mlyle 9mo ago
For the oldies but goodies in my list: - Any one of the 194_ games - Legend of Zelda: A Link To The Past - Super Mario World - Final Fantasy VI, VII, IX - Chrono Trigger (agree) - Street Fighter 2 Championship Edition - Metal Gear Solid 1-3
224.
by mlyle 9mo ago
All depends on what you read as "significant improvement". A 20% lower fatal crash rate compared to the average might be a significant improvement-- from a public health standpoint, this is huge if you could reduce traffic death
225.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> Drunk driving isn't just impoverished alcoholics. People go to bars and parts and get drunk all the time Yes, but the drivers who are 5th percentile drivers who cause a huge share of the most severe accidents are "special&quo
226.
by mlyle 9mo ago
The counterpoint, though: > > And, of course, a system that is barely better than average humans might worsen safety, if it ends up replacing driving by those who would normally drive especially safe. It's only if you get the hab
227.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> How many human drivers do you think would pass the bar you're setting? How many humans drivers would pass it, and what proportion of the time? Even the best drivers do not constantly maintain peak vigilance, because they are huma
228.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Many states in the US have the Basic Speed Law, e.g. California: > No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface
229.
by mlyle 9mo ago
The schools I'm thinking of have sidewalks with some degree of protection/offset from street, and the crossings are protected by human crossing guards during times when students are going to schools. The posted limits are "2
230.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> But if there are a bunch of children milling about an elementary school in a chaotic situation with lots of double parking, 17 mph is too fast Hey, I'd agree with this-- and it's worth noting that 17^2 - 5^2 > 16^2, so eve
231.
by mlyle 9mo ago
It seems it was driving pretty slow (17MPH) and they do tend to put in a pretty big gap to the right side when they can. There are kinds of human sensing that are better when humans are maximally attentive (seeing through windows/refle
232.
by mlyle 9mo ago
The original death finding falls just from simple back-of-napkin math. 87 ng/mL. Baby eats 30mL per hour. That's 2.6 micrograms of morphine. Elimination half life in neonates of ~8 hours means 30 micrograms in system at equilibri
233.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Yah, I feel like Linux was way worse with printers in the past.. now the story is more like: you'll have a different set of printer issues across the major OSes but no OS is clearly better or worse.
234.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> What's your project/ cubesat name? NyanSat; I'm PI and mentor for a team of high school students that were selected by NASA CSLI. > Ps. Try msp430 f model for low power. These can be CRAZY efficient. Yah, I've us
235.
by mlyle 9mo ago
With embedded SRAM close, you get startling amounts of bandwidth -- Cerebras claims to attain >2 bytes/FLOP in practice -- vs H200 attaining more like 0.001-0.002 to the external DRAM. So we're talking about a 3 order of magni
236.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Same reason why Cerebras doesn't use DRAM. The whole point of putting memory close is to increase performance and bandwidth, and DRAM is fundamentally latent. Also, process that is good at making logic isn't necessarily good for
237.
by mlyle 9mo ago
Yes, assuming you don't need to connect anything together and that RAM is tinier than it really is, sure. At 28nm, 3megabits/square millimeter is what you get of SRAM, so an entire wafer only gets you ~12 gigabytes of memory. And
238.
by mlyle 9mo ago
I have thought about this a little more, and looked into things. Since NASA used the 360/91, and had a lot of 360's and 7900's... all of NASA's 60's computing couldn't quite fit into a single 486DX-25. You&
239.
by mlyle 9mo ago
> It was a real time computer NOT designed for speed but real time operations. More than anything, it was designed to be small and use little power. But these little ARM Cortex M4F that we're comparing to are also designed for embed
240.
by mlyle 9mo ago
This is the "little part" of what fits into an earpiece. Each of those cores is maybe 0.04 square millimeters of die on e.g. 28nm process. RAM takes some area, but that's dwarfed by the analog and power components and packa

More ›