robinsoh

25 ms·

211.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> The one who wants to see a script for PIE discovered :) I didn't quite understand. Is this related to what the article says: " The discovery of a civilization of people who lived before the Vedic people upended the story of I
212.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> I come from a Sanskrit background Meaning a scholar of Sanskrit or something else? > The optimist in me thinks this is the written script for an early version of Proto-Indo-European Optimist in what sense?
213.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> The folks at e-ink look like they want to milk their patents until the market bleeds. Here we go again. Based on what? I have no clue what you're referring to. But I see this kind of comment on HN again and again. There was a coup
214.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> This new age of dueling realities is a false. There is only one reality, and mine is based on recorded historical fact, your is based on personal experience and anecdote I'm confused. What "recorded historical facts" wer
215.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> You deny a general chilling effect that patents have on the market overall? That people will, companies, and insterors will simply avoid patent encumbered technology So I can just simply say Microsoft has patents and therefore operatin
216.
by robinsoh 5y ago
And how is it evidence in this case?
217.
by robinsoh 5y ago
I have no idea what you're trying to communicate. I reread your comment three times and I am still unsure.
218.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> What kind of evidence are you looking for? Normally, the person making a claim or allegation supplies some evidence. You know like if I accused Microsoft of using patents for holding back operating system development, then you as presu
219.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> Every time an E Ink article is posted the patent defeatism is inevitable Here, we go again. I've only read that here (repeatedly!) on HN and blogs that then cited throwaway HN posts which never respond to my requests for at least
220.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> I read somewhere that the e-ink expense is because the company which controls the intellectual property chooses to make it a low volume, high cost product. I've only read that here (repeatedly!) on HN and blogs that then cited thr
221.
by robinsoh 5y ago
"In the world of ad-hominem this is like a drive-by shooting with a nuclear bomb." But is it inaccurate? I wasn't sure. So I googled. Here's what I found: "Nicholas Negroponte, who co-founded MIT’s prestigious Media
222.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> he used Microsoft to actively sabotage OLPC, by directly targeting their intended market to prevent it from getting hold, since it was seen as an existential threat to the Windows desktop monopoly. You use such strong words and make su
223.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> it’s 1200x900? Some wires must be crossed somewhere 1200x900 in XO-1 is tft pixels not RGB pixels like XGA. In the simplest 1d layout, a 1x1 resolution RGB display is actually 1x3 tft pixels. That's why I'm saying apples to a
224.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> Well Pixel Qi seemed like a magical display at the time. Not to me. I had the chance to carefully look at an OLPC XO-1. It was terrible even by the lowest standards of the industry at the time. > I wonder if given a few more revisio
225.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> I feel being lied to. I notice this kind of response anytime I say something that goes against the faith of the OLPC believers. If you feel something I said is factually inaccurate, then please point it out specifically. Otherwise, I b
226.
by robinsoh 5y ago
I think this is another effect of the reality distortion field. XO-1's resolution was 692×520 (1/3 of 1200×900 which is the black&white resolution). Apples to apples means RGB XGA vs 692x520 bayer or whatever layout Jepsen cla
227.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> The screen pixel resolution was 1200x900, which was unusually high both for a 7.5" screen, and for a 2007 laptop. RGB XGA was dominant by 2006 so I don't think that's accurate.
228.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> Overall, my impression was of a project whose participants treated it as a vehicle for promoting their personal "pet" projects I'm so glad to see others speaking out about this. I'm 100% in agreement that's wha
229.
by robinsoh 5y ago
The term partial refreshes leaves much to be desired. I'd call it unclean refreshes. Perhaps I'm overdramatizing. > But why wouldn't it be possible to manufacture and sell such a device at < $1000? 13.3'' disp
230.
by robinsoh 5y ago
Subjective. In my opinion, the physics of electrophoretics imposes a minimum latency that no body will be able to surpass unless they change to new yet-to-be-invented materials or create new laws of physics. 700ms for a clean greyscale upda
231.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> price depends on many factors Price depends on volume. There's negligible chance of you realistic hitting less than 1k for a functional EINK laptop unless this thing is yet another kickstarter/indiegogo scam trying to exploi
232.
by robinsoh 5y ago
How come you don't mention your past allegations and EI2030 at all on the site? Seems like a very significant thing to leave out. There's also no list of people involved in Modos on the site. You have a Spartan FPGA as your displa
233.
by robinsoh 5y ago
Aren't you the same guy that alleged E Ink was abusing patents on your blog but then backed down when I asked for evidence of it? I can't find your original article. You also had a previous project Eink2020 or something like that?
234.
by robinsoh 5y ago
FYI, I questioned the veracity of those comments and never got a reply from the throwaway accounts that were used to post them. Check out my comment history trying to get to the bottom of those claims of evil EInk corporation holding back a
235.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> which is delayed due to expensive patents, as I understand it I keep asking about this since I see it repeatedly remarked on here. Please see my comment history. It doesn't appear to be true. My understanding is that it is about v
236.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> I know that's a big ask with eInk displays being proprietary but a guy can dream. Is there such a thing as a non-proprietary display?
237.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> though note that the displays are all but entirely sourced by the monopoly patent-holder, E-Ink itself) what does that mean? isn't that like saying nanocell displays all come from LG? which monopoly patent specifically are you ref
238.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> Eink will go through a similar process of nerd shaming as the patents expire and new competitors emerge, but eventually outdoor capable displays will also become a normal, acceptable option. Which patents? How will any company get past
239.
by robinsoh 5y ago
> I've read previously on HN that there's one company with a stranglehold on the e-ink patent and so the prices are artificially high for the screens. I wouldn't believe such extreme claims without any evidence. Please see
240.
by robinsoh 5y ago
FYI, I questioned the veracity of those comments and never got a reply from the throwaway accounts that were used to post them. Check out my comment history trying to get to the bottom of those claims of evil EInk corporation holding back a

More ›