This BBC podcast took me back exactly 25 years.
Way back in 1984, I visited Asia for a couple of months, including about two weeks in Hong Kong. While in Hong Kong I was staying at a unusual little rooming house in an intriguing and unique building on Nathan Road on Kowloon side. The building (apparently five buildings, not that I could tell) were called Chungking Mansions.
Even at the time, this building was a riot of activity. Hundreds and hundreds of little tiny shops and food stalls. Several 'hotels' that offered rooms barely larger than the cot; bathroom down the hall.
Chungking Mansions on Wiki.
BBC radio has a half-hour audio podcasts on this building. It's probably not of interest to everyone, but if you are then here's the link.
Chungking Mansions podcast
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/docarchive/docarchive_20090731-1100a.mp3
2009-08-15
2009-07-18
Listening to 40-year delayed Apollo 11 mission audio
NASA is streaming the real-time mission audio of Apollo 11.
It's delayed forty years.
They "just" opened up the LM. I'm using the WunderRadio Internet "radio" app on my iPhone.
It's delayed forty years.
They "just" opened up the LM. I'm using the WunderRadio Internet "radio" app on my iPhone.
Lightning experts confounded
Lightning doesn't always follow 'the rules'.
Here's am image of a bolt hitting the NASA Space Shuttle water tower about three-quarters of the way down from the top. This was captured from HDNet's coverage of an aborted Space Shuttle launch.
Some lightning 'experts' will be very surprised by this. I'm not. Anyone that pays attention will have seen various examples that violate the rules-of-thumb proclaimed by the lightning protection snake-oil salesmen.
The more cameras, the more clear it becomes that lighting hasn't always read 'the rule book'.
Why Moore’s Law Certainly DOES Apply to Digital Photography
Response to: Why Moore’s Law Does Not Apply to Digital Photography
"...At least with respect to expecting the number of mega pixels to double for a given sensor size (full 35 mm frame), this will not happen. We are very near the limit right now. ..."
Another expert pontificating about how there's a hard-and-fast limit to what humans can achieve.
Mr. Maxwell, meet Mr. Clarke:
Arthur C. Clarke formulated the following three "laws" of prediction:
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
So, how will science and technology blast past the physical limits of diffraction?
Well duh, that's a stupid question. Of course nobody knows! It's called "The Future" because it's, well, in the future.
But here's what I can see coming, and this is just by thinking about it for ten minutes.
5 years: The camera will take several images using various combinations of settings to gather additional information (dozens of images). It will then compensate for any movement of objects within the frame (using MPEG technology), and then re-combine the processed image elements to provide maximum image quality while achieving the artistic goals of the photographer. It won't always work, but for still images this sort of process can generate acceptable quality at 50+ Mpix images in a $100 digital camera. You watch.
10 years: The above-mentioned variable settings will be built-into the sensor itself. It won't be a dumb sensor. They'll call them 'Smart Sensors' or similar. They've have built-in lenses and tunable colour filters per pixel. They'll have built-in complexities to skip around the edges of the laws of physics. The image processor will be built-into the sensor (underneath). 100+ Mpix images, given certain restrictions to avoid artifacts, from mid-range cameras.
15 years: The sensor and processor will actually examine the diffraction-generated Airy disks, look for the obvious oval shape of the outer rings using extreme bit depth. The sensors will be actively cooled to extremely low temperatures, for ultra short periods (avoiding power and condensation issues), to eliminate noise. The camera's processor will then model the entire diffraction process in reverse to calculate the incoming diffraction-free signal. The camera will have more processing power than your blah-blah-blah... This will be the big breakthrough that will allow 250+ Mpix diffraction-free images in the sweet-spot $2k price range (2009 dollars).
20 years: The sensor will no longer be a planer chip. It'll be something akin to a field of monopole antennas. The antenna elements will swirl around in little circles to probe the electrical field of the incoming light. They'll be able to detect sub-diffraction patterns and the processor will be able to reconstruct the incoming diffraction free image. Giga-pixel images in a camera the size of a Large Format. They'll be very expensive... ...until the price comes down, and then they'll be affordable (LOL).
That's just ten minutes brainstorming. Imagine what magic will occur when people actually get paid to work on the problem for the next fifteen to twenty years or so.
A common error is to overestimate change in the mid-term, and vastly underestimate change in the long term.
In summary, Moore's Law certainly DOES apply to digital cameras. Big time.
And there won't be any stopping it.
Update: A more modest rebuttal covering the near term.
"...At least with respect to expecting the number of mega pixels to double for a given sensor size (full 35 mm frame), this will not happen. We are very near the limit right now. ..."
Another expert pontificating about how there's a hard-and-fast limit to what humans can achieve.
Mr. Maxwell, meet Mr. Clarke:
Arthur C. Clarke formulated the following three "laws" of prediction:
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
So, how will science and technology blast past the physical limits of diffraction?
Well duh, that's a stupid question. Of course nobody knows! It's called "The Future" because it's, well, in the future.
But here's what I can see coming, and this is just by thinking about it for ten minutes.
5 years: The camera will take several images using various combinations of settings to gather additional information (dozens of images). It will then compensate for any movement of objects within the frame (using MPEG technology), and then re-combine the processed image elements to provide maximum image quality while achieving the artistic goals of the photographer. It won't always work, but for still images this sort of process can generate acceptable quality at 50+ Mpix images in a $100 digital camera. You watch.
10 years: The above-mentioned variable settings will be built-into the sensor itself. It won't be a dumb sensor. They'll call them 'Smart Sensors' or similar. They've have built-in lenses and tunable colour filters per pixel. They'll have built-in complexities to skip around the edges of the laws of physics. The image processor will be built-into the sensor (underneath). 100+ Mpix images, given certain restrictions to avoid artifacts, from mid-range cameras.
15 years: The sensor and processor will actually examine the diffraction-generated Airy disks, look for the obvious oval shape of the outer rings using extreme bit depth. The sensors will be actively cooled to extremely low temperatures, for ultra short periods (avoiding power and condensation issues), to eliminate noise. The camera's processor will then model the entire diffraction process in reverse to calculate the incoming diffraction-free signal. The camera will have more processing power than your blah-blah-blah... This will be the big breakthrough that will allow 250+ Mpix diffraction-free images in the sweet-spot $2k price range (2009 dollars).
20 years: The sensor will no longer be a planer chip. It'll be something akin to a field of monopole antennas. The antenna elements will swirl around in little circles to probe the electrical field of the incoming light. They'll be able to detect sub-diffraction patterns and the processor will be able to reconstruct the incoming diffraction free image. Giga-pixel images in a camera the size of a Large Format. They'll be very expensive... ...until the price comes down, and then they'll be affordable (LOL).
That's just ten minutes brainstorming. Imagine what magic will occur when people actually get paid to work on the problem for the next fifteen to twenty years or so.
A common error is to overestimate change in the mid-term, and vastly underestimate change in the long term.
In summary, Moore's Law certainly DOES apply to digital cameras. Big time.
And there won't be any stopping it.
Update: A more modest rebuttal covering the near term.
2009-07-03
'Shortwave Radio' on iPhone
If you wish to listen to "shortwave radio" (such as BBC World Service), then one option is the new class of 3G mobile Internet telephones. I put an 'app' on my iPhone called WunderRadio. It seems to be able to find and play all the big name stations.
Some skeptics think that the mobile network can't handle such applications. In fact, it's here now. And it only requires a fraction of my 6GB monthly bandwidth allowance, assuming you're not listening 24 hrs a day. And it seems to be acceptably reliable (it just plain works). And the 3G coverage in areas where I'm actually located (inside my house, inside my office, inside my car, driving behind hills) is fine.
This technology does actually appear to be perfectly 'Ready for Prime Time.'
Here is a screen capture of my iPhone playing BBC World Service.
Some skeptics think that the mobile network can't handle such applications. In fact, it's here now. And it only requires a fraction of my 6GB monthly bandwidth allowance, assuming you're not listening 24 hrs a day. And it seems to be acceptably reliable (it just plain works). And the 3G coverage in areas where I'm actually located (inside my house, inside my office, inside my car, driving behind hills) is fine.
This technology does actually appear to be perfectly 'Ready for Prime Time.'
Here is a screen capture of my iPhone playing BBC World Service.
2009-07-01
TerreStar-1 is up
TerreStar-1 was successfully launched today by an Ariane-5.
This is the largest commercial satellite ever. It has a dish about sixty-feet across. It will use Ground Based Beam Forming such that complex equipment that produces about 500 spot beams is left on the ground.
The system will work with newly-designed Smartphones not any bigger than normal. No big antenna required. High speed data. Mobile Internet. Etc.
Coverage is to be most of North America, right up into northern Canada (~70N).
For some people, it'll change 'everything'.
This is the largest commercial satellite ever. It has a dish about sixty-feet across. It will use Ground Based Beam Forming such that complex equipment that produces about 500 spot beams is left on the ground.
The system will work with newly-designed Smartphones not any bigger than normal. No big antenna required. High speed data. Mobile Internet. Etc.
Coverage is to be most of North America, right up into northern Canada (~70N).
For some people, it'll change 'everything'.
2009-05-27
HARC Ham Radio Flea Market 2009
It was a few weeks ago.
It was back at the old Halifax Forum (the world's third ugliest building). The parking lot was totally full; so I had to park in Truro and walk back to Halifax (just a slight exaggeration).
Sold the DX-200 I bought less than a year earlier. Buy high ($35), repair ($5), sell low ($25). Picture below.
Also sold the old DX-160 with the cracked dial glass. That was the same radio I once had out at the family cottage near Bridgewater. One evening, we tuned in a ship-to-shore conversation in Tagalog language (Philippines). My wife found it amusing (because she understood the conversation...).
The only things there that tempted me (to purchase) were a couple of nice shortwave radios. Since I was there to sell, it wouldn't have made much sense to bring home one or two more.
It was nice to see everyone again.
Thanks to those that organized the flea market.
It was back at the old Halifax Forum (the world's third ugliest building). The parking lot was totally full; so I had to park in Truro and walk back to Halifax (just a slight exaggeration).
Sold the DX-200 I bought less than a year earlier. Buy high ($35), repair ($5), sell low ($25). Picture below.
Also sold the old DX-160 with the cracked dial glass. That was the same radio I once had out at the family cottage near Bridgewater. One evening, we tuned in a ship-to-shore conversation in Tagalog language (Philippines). My wife found it amusing (because she understood the conversation...).
The only things there that tempted me (to purchase) were a couple of nice shortwave radios. Since I was there to sell, it wouldn't have made much sense to bring home one or two more.
It was nice to see everyone again.
Thanks to those that organized the flea market.
2009-03-07
Internet Radio - a new way to SWL (sort-of)
There have been a few good deals on Internet Radios recently. I recently got a Sanyo R227 Internet Radio from Dell.ca for only Cdn $100 (a Deal of the Day). And Amazon.ca was just today selling some sort of Aluratek USB "Internet Radio Jukebox" thingy (probably just software and indexing service - I guess) for about $22. The Source (soon to be ...by Bell) is currently selling this Centrios Internet Radio (pictured, stock number 131-5117, link is HERE ) for just Cdn $100.
IMHO, at that price, it is well worth it (assuming you're even a tiny bit interested).
Note - It has a fan that is not silent, so keep that in mind. Use headphones, or turn it up a notch. Not for quiet listening in a quiet room.
I more-or-less look upon Internet Radio from the perspective of being an old-fart Shortwave Listener (SWL). Put in that perspective, Internet Radio is pretty neat. Browse to the list of regions, Africa, Mali, and wait for the connection delay - and bang, you're listening to some station in Mali.
This Centrios radio uses ShoutCast and some other OEM indexing service (which is pretty good for SWL type listening). ShoutCast stations can be recorded onto a USB stick. It'll rip CD to MP3 and use Gracenotes to add the album data. It also has a slot for various memory sticks.
This particular model has the characteristic that if you wish to browse to find another station, the previous station is cut-off while you're browsing for the next. The Sanyo R227 is better in that regard since it allows you to listen while browsing for the next target.
One reason that Internet Radio isn't quite ready for prime time is that the user experience is pretty darn slow. It's not the speed of the Internet Connection, it is the yawn-inducing response time of the radios. This model takes a good 30-45 seconds just to turn on and connect to your WiFi. Changing stations takes a good 15 seconds (depending on how you do it). Other Internet Radio, such as the Sanyo R227, are about the same sort of speed. Perhaps Internet Radios will be like Digital Cameras. Eventually the designers will figure out that Power Up time and operator response time are critical factors.
But if you have ever enjoyed SWL, get yourself an Internet Radio. The overall experience is quite similar (the hunt, and the capture) and better in many ways (more stations, easier listening, better sound quality).
IMHO, at that price, it is well worth it (assuming you're even a tiny bit interested).
Note - It has a fan that is not silent, so keep that in mind. Use headphones, or turn it up a notch. Not for quiet listening in a quiet room.
I more-or-less look upon Internet Radio from the perspective of being an old-fart Shortwave Listener (SWL). Put in that perspective, Internet Radio is pretty neat. Browse to the list of regions, Africa, Mali, and wait for the connection delay - and bang, you're listening to some station in Mali.
This Centrios radio uses ShoutCast and some other OEM indexing service (which is pretty good for SWL type listening). ShoutCast stations can be recorded onto a USB stick. It'll rip CD to MP3 and use Gracenotes to add the album data. It also has a slot for various memory sticks.
This particular model has the characteristic that if you wish to browse to find another station, the previous station is cut-off while you're browsing for the next. The Sanyo R227 is better in that regard since it allows you to listen while browsing for the next target.
One reason that Internet Radio isn't quite ready for prime time is that the user experience is pretty darn slow. It's not the speed of the Internet Connection, it is the yawn-inducing response time of the radios. This model takes a good 30-45 seconds just to turn on and connect to your WiFi. Changing stations takes a good 15 seconds (depending on how you do it). Other Internet Radio, such as the Sanyo R227, are about the same sort of speed. Perhaps Internet Radios will be like Digital Cameras. Eventually the designers will figure out that Power Up time and operator response time are critical factors.
But if you have ever enjoyed SWL, get yourself an Internet Radio. The overall experience is quite similar (the hunt, and the capture) and better in many ways (more stations, easier listening, better sound quality).
2009-02-15
Avro Arrow - Black Friday (Feb. 20, 1959) - 50 years later
We're less than a week from the 50th anniversary of Black Friday (when the Avro Arrow was canceled).
My paternal grandmother was Edith K. Shaw, author of 'There Never was an Arrow'.
Her 2nd husband and my grand(step)father, George Shaw, who also worked at Avro, wrote an article on the subject: The Legend of the Arrow.
My paternal grandmother was Edith K. Shaw, author of 'There Never was an Arrow'.
Her 2nd husband and my grand(step)father, George Shaw, who also worked at Avro, wrote an article on the subject: The Legend of the Arrow.
2009-02-03
Commentary: Humber College - lame, very lame...
The ill-informed news outlets are all excited about...
"A set of Humber College students achieved the near impossible, contacting the International Space Station with the use of a home-made radio."
Yawn...
More-detailed information indicates that the radio was not home-made, but was an Icom-brand radio purchased from a local ham radio store. Similarly, the antenna system was off-the-shelf.
So, they, ah, hooked it all up correctly.
And even if the radio was home-made (but it apparently wasn't), this accomplishment would only be news-worthy if the students were 8-year-olds.
That their instructor feels that this is a 'first', and an accomplishment worth celebrating, indicates that the level of experience in radio history and knowledge of every-day Ham radio events (such as contacting the ISS) is sorely lacking.
Lame - very very lame.
I apologize in advance if anyone is offended by my views on this news item. I'd be very interested to hear if I've missed any details that make the accomplishment more news worthy than indicated by the information that I've seen. Did they do the entire project blind-folded?
"A set of Humber College students achieved the near impossible, contacting the International Space Station with the use of a home-made radio."
Yawn...
More-detailed information indicates that the radio was not home-made, but was an Icom-brand radio purchased from a local ham radio store. Similarly, the antenna system was off-the-shelf.
So, they, ah, hooked it all up correctly.
And even if the radio was home-made (but it apparently wasn't), this accomplishment would only be news-worthy if the students were 8-year-olds.
That their instructor feels that this is a 'first', and an accomplishment worth celebrating, indicates that the level of experience in radio history and knowledge of every-day Ham radio events (such as contacting the ISS) is sorely lacking.
Lame - very very lame.
I apologize in advance if anyone is offended by my views on this news item. I'd be very interested to hear if I've missed any details that make the accomplishment more news worthy than indicated by the information that I've seen. Did they do the entire project blind-folded?
2009-01-21
2009-01-10
Acer laptop touch pad not working
The touch pad on my Acer 5630 laptop stopped working one day. I tried everything including uninstalling and reinstalling the drivers, updating to the latest drivers. I even went out a bought a couple of those little travel mouses. I was so disappointed that our laptop was starting to become less than perfectly functioning.
Yep, I tried everything. Everything - except checking the manual. LOL.
Press Fn + F7 to enable and disable the touchpad.
Ha ha. Funny (in hindsight).
At least the travel mouses were quite inexpensive.
Yep, I tried everything. Everything - except checking the manual. LOL.
Press Fn + F7 to enable and disable the touchpad.
Ha ha. Funny (in hindsight).
At least the travel mouses were quite inexpensive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
