00:00:00 --- log: started forth/15.02.20 00:00:07 Seriously, I would rather read SPI Flash data sheets over that. 00:00:26 I'll give you the names and addresses of my surviving maths teachers. You can thank them. 00:00:50 ttmrichter: I think apathy at preventable hypocrisy with human suffering as a consequence is boring as shit 00:00:57 lol 00:01:49 It's not apathy. Apathy is not caring. This is ANTIPATHY. I fucking hate it. 00:02:17 And this is the kind of antipathy the vast majority of human beings have for the abstract maths. 00:02:17 could you describe the turning point when you started to hate it? what caused such a strong emotion? 00:02:28 I can date it to 1982. 00:03:05 ttmrichter: you keep referencing fields of maths, implementing a proof checker only needs the basics of logic 00:03:19 Symbolic logic is a maths domain. 00:03:24 ttmrichter: what happened in 1982? is it very personal? 00:03:43 ttmrichter: strcopy is also unbearable? 00:03:50 September 1982 is when I started my Grade XIII (sic) algebra course. The height of which (in terms of tedium and boredom) was finding the tangent of a curve that passed through a given point. 00:04:13 It was horrifically painful and slow using the techniques that had been given us to that point to do this. 00:04:27 Then, the next semester, I hit my calculus class. 00:04:51 And in the SECOND CLASS (!) this problem was thrown at us and laughed away as a trivial problem with two lines or three lines of squiggles. 00:04:52 --- quit: ASau (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 00:05:01 What went through my mind then was "you fucking bastard!" 00:05:30 Torture us for months with painful, tedious, boring, slow, hand-cramp-inducing bullshit when you've had this waiting in the wings for centuries. 00:05:47 That was the moment I (metaphorically) turned over the table and walked away. 00:06:03 do you see an inconsistency in this story? 00:06:13 The antipathy had been building over the years (for other reasons) but that was the point I switched from distaste to pure blind hatred. 00:06:54 Nope. I see a field dominated by assholes who can't teach and who seem to think teaching the right way to do it is a secret that should be only open to the elect. 00:07:02 So I decided to vote myself away. 00:07:22 teacher is supposed to helpfully explain, yet he un-pedagogically teaches inferior method, to unteach it afterwards, laughing the problem away (not a good motivator) 00:07:51 Which is why I say that maths are the worst-taught discipline in history. 00:07:53 your mistake is you confused this teacher's behavior for the mathematics itself 00:08:02 No, I hate the field. 00:08:14 I hate the fact there is no reasonable approachable entrance to the field. 00:08:27 I disagree 00:08:30 I hate the fact that mathematicians think stories like that are like blues musicians "paying their dues". 00:09:03 I think we should dissociate functionality from personality, the problem you describe is a general one, in every profession 00:09:03 And, in a world that has so much to learn in it, one small field filled with assholes and bullshit is one I can safely ignore until I come across a need. 00:09:12 It's never going to be a field I study for the wonder of it (like language). 00:09:14 their should be no job positions 00:09:25 It's never going to be a field I study for fascination (like embedded software). 00:09:51 It's never going to be anything more than something unpleasant I have to occasionally work with while doing things that actually interest me. 00:10:07 And it's certainly never going to be anything I'm ever going to willingly insert MORE of into my life. 00:10:22 My maths learning is demand-paged. 00:10:30 its very funny, because I still imagine most of what you do to be a form of mathematics. its like you want to censor the concept of mathematics without actually censoring mathematics 00:10:36 I don't even bother with a lookahead cache. 00:11:18 you can not seriously claim you don't try to use logic 00:11:41 No. I use formal logic at need. 00:11:44 the brain is a machine that desperately tries resolve inconsistencies 00:11:59 I just don't look to insert more formal logic into my world than I absolutely must. 00:12:11 So I remember my Boolean truth tables because those are needed in my work. 00:12:32 I don't remember category theory (because I haven't bothered learning it). 00:12:49 I don't remember the more obscure parts of discrete maths. 00:13:19 I don't give abstract algebras much of a glance unless they're in a problem domain I'm working on. 00:13:53 to write the proof checker you don't even need to know de morgan's theorem, which you probably use often while programming 00:14:11 Not under that name I don't. 00:14:27 But to write the proof checker I'd still be writing more stuff than the actual code I'm checking. 00:14:33 It's like TDD for maths nerds. 00:14:56 so you like maths, but dont like that people name the objects they describe, for easier referencing? 00:15:11 No, I tolerate maths when I have to use them. 00:15:13 I don't ever like them. 00:15:31 writing the proof checker is relatively little work, its writing the proofs that could turn out a larger task 00:15:42 That's the part I'm talking about. 00:15:50 Writing a proof checker without using it is singularly pointless. 00:16:01 More pointless than my writing Turing machines for entertainment. 00:16:28 http://yfl.bahmanm.com/Members/ttmrichter/yfl-blog/two-turing-machines 00:16:31 That wasn't a joke. 00:16:45 ttmrichter: you don't need to write the proof to still profit from it. given the choice between 2 otherwise identical programs, and one is proven to have no vulnerability, which would you choose? 00:17:09 The one that had the better user interface. (Whether that user is an end-user or a programmer.) 00:17:22 otherwise identical 00:18:04 look, I too think very lowly of math for the math, but anti-math for the anti-math is even crazier 00:18:24 See, there you go. You're doing the mathematician thing of a spherical, frictionless cow. :) 00:18:37 The two pieces of software could not possibly BE otherwise identical. 00:18:59 Because the one that was formally verified would not be adapted to the end-user needs as easily and quickly. 00:19:25 In a wholly fictitious, literally impossible world, I would choose the "identical" software that is formally verified, of course. 00:19:28 some programs don't need a lot of change 00:19:44 sending money around is just sending money around 00:19:56 In the *REAL* world, however, I would choose the one that had the better user interface (or some other metric of differentiation) which will, 99.44% of the time, not be the formally verified one. 00:20:19 I know. SWIFT still uses some of my code from the '90s. 00:20:20 :) 00:20:29 you worked for SWIFT? 00:20:44 No. They bought a heavily-customized product from Entrust. 00:21:05 I worked for Entrust on the project in question. 00:21:10 that is still in use on TARGET2? 00:21:18 AFAIK, yes. 00:21:34 I'm long since out of the loop, but the very nature of international banking requires long-term stability. 00:21:49 yes 00:21:57 * xtalmath brb 00:24:14 Yeah, looking at TARGET2 and SWIFTNet Phase 2, I'm guessing there's still some of my code in the loop. 00:24:21 This is why I don't use SWIFT transfers. :D 00:24:26 hehe 00:24:56 Basically, Entrust provided the infrastructure for the security portion of SWIFTNet. 00:25:05 does SWIFT have dedicated network, or do they go over the public internet? 00:25:08 Specifically the library used to build it. 00:25:11 I'm not actually sure. 00:25:21 I know SWIFTNet was made to replace X.25. 00:25:31 Not sure if it was private network still, though, or public. 00:25:41 I only did (parts of) the PKI stuff. 00:26:01 I have definitely seen a swift subdomain to log into for bankers with the right credentials, and the certificate expires every hour or 2 00:26:58 To give you an idea of how huge that was, Entrust was about 10 layers down in the bureaucratic clusterfuck that is international banking standards development, and I was four layers further down. 00:27:07 did you read about NSA gemalto hack? 00:27:18 SWIFT was a major, major, major customer for us. 00:27:27 We were likely not even a blip on their balance sheet. 00:27:32 Nope. 00:28:02 Oh, on the topic of formal verification. 00:28:05 turns out a major SIM card manufacturer / personalizer was hacked by NSA 00:28:24 Security is one of the fields touted as a beneficiary of formal verification. 00:28:27 mass interception of the private keys, basically SIM bypassed 00:28:30 And, indeed, to a point, I agree that it is. 00:28:34 But... 00:28:44 Formal verification doesn't help as much as people would like. 00:28:48 Consider smart cards. 00:28:55 Let's go whole-hog. 00:29:02 Formally-verified CPU core. 00:29:14 Formally-verified kernel operating on it. 00:29:26 yes gemalto also produced the smartcard eID's here in belgium, I consider it's "private key" as not so private given the gemalto hack 00:29:32 Formally-verified crypto algorithms. 00:29:45 That's gotta be really super-secure, right? 00:29:48 Ooops. 00:29:49 you are going at sidechannels 00:29:52 sure 00:30:11 Turns out some guys in ... Israel, I think it was? ... found a way to extract keys from smartcards by ... power usage. 00:30:39 No need to even try to open the (typically destructively secured) smart cards. 00:31:01 Just stick it into a machine and monitor its power usage until you reduce the search space for keys to something that takes a few minutes. 00:31:20 No amount of formal verification prepares you for blind-sides like that. 00:31:34 cryptography is the science of 1) knowing the limits of human feats 2) transforming these limits into cryptographic primitives. 00:31:40 But formal verification can (and does) leave people falsely secure. 00:32:15 If you're not 100% sure of your security, you take measures to mitigate the costs of breaches. 00:32:30 (I call this "The Erlang School" now.) 00:32:42 ttmrichter: sidechannels are long known, before a physical implementation could be called secure, it should be proven secure against all known attacks 00:32:56 You come up with ways to limit the damage or to limit the benefit an attacker can gain by a breach. 00:33:05 The key word there is "known". 00:33:08 That's my point. 00:33:26 There *WERE* formally verified CPU cores, kernels, cryptosystems, etc. in some of the more expensive smart cards. 00:33:45 no, the situation you describe is a correct application of formal verification but using an incorrect definition of security 00:33:47 Then some wiseasses in Israel (I think?) take a step around it and trivially extract keys. 00:34:11 And a lot of people who swallowed the hype didn't secure enough because they thought formal verification was enough. 00:34:25 They didn't layer, partition, physically secure, etc. 00:34:53 Now a new "formally verified" smart card would have some way to show that power differential attacks can't work. (There's ways to do this.) 00:34:54 of course formal verification is not enough, you need to form a belief system encompassing human knowledge as well 00:35:03 And that will be sidestepped again. And again. And again. 00:35:58 This argument I've had dates back to my university years where a VAX system admin claimed he had the system secured so he could detect illicit communications 00:36:08 I think I spent two days reading and then proved him wrong. 00:36:13 ttmrichter: there is always a finite theoretical probability of successful attack: guess the key 00:36:33 I was able to communicate at about 10baud between two user accounts that had virtually no privileges. 00:36:55 And the trick was as cheap as it was funny watching him turn red and explode. :D 00:37:22 how did you do it? 00:37:32 Sucked up the CPU. 00:37:43 When the CPU was at 100%, that was a high line. 00:37:49 When it was under 50% that was a low line. 00:38:17 Even with other users on the line, standard debounce algorithms and error detection/correction protocols could be implemented as if you were on a noisy serial line. 00:38:39 (Actually I think my target numbers were 90% and 40% respectively.) 00:39:12 I needed no privileges beyond the ability to write DCL scripts. 00:39:12 brb, have to get tobacco, im going mental here 00:39:31 multiple users shared the same CPU? 00:39:39 Yep. 00:40:01 Holy shit, that Gemalto hack... 00:40:05 I'm reading that. 00:40:08 Ugly. 00:47:05 yeah it really is 00:47:30 The NSA (and its British lapdog) has effectively killed Gemalto. 00:47:53 makes me wonder if the private RSA keys in my electronic ID are really private, or if gemalto / government has a backup copy... 00:48:23 They probably do. 00:48:37 It's safest to assume that and take counter-measures if appropriate. 00:48:54 I think so too, but there would be no use to it since its assymetric crypto, which makes me kind of wonder how complicit gemalto was 00:49:34 I'd guess they weren't except insofar as being criminally negligent. 00:49:35 one can be a victim and a perpetrator at the same time 00:49:53 mmm 00:50:40 Basically, pillow talk or the old rubber hose attack is all it takes. 00:50:45 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 00:50:54 yeah 00:50:54 Pillow talk/rubber hose the right engineers and you've got yourself a back door. 00:51:04 And from there it becomes a loading zone. 00:51:22 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@c-98-210-219-91.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 00:51:32 it should become possible for engineers to work anonymously, so they don't know who to rubber hose 00:52:20 ttmrichter: where do you live? 00:52:23 Then you'd have the problem (as a company) of policing those engineers. 00:52:35 ttmrichter: yeah I was just thinking of the same problem 00:52:37 You'd get engineers doing things like literally outsourcing their jobs to China. 00:52:53 And I live in China at the moment. 00:53:05 ttmrichter: but then again, why can't we generate our own damn keys as endusers for things like SIM etc 00:53:52 or perhaps SIM's with a reset pin, to generate a new random key 00:54:24 Oh, that's easy. 00:54:35 It would add $0.02 to each SIM. 00:54:43 And that would add $150 to the price of each phone. 00:55:03 (I've never quite understood pricing in the electronics world, but that seems to be the gist of it.:D) 00:55:21 lol 00:55:51 I wish I were joking. 00:56:20 yah pricing is extremely irregular 00:56:29 I worked for these guys for a while: http://www.pikatechnologies.com/english/view.asp?x=1 00:56:34 Waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back when. 00:56:39 the other day I was looking at a ToF package 00:56:51 They were making their "V12" line of products then. 00:56:54 I was their software guy. 00:57:07 never heard of pika 00:57:09 I knew nothing about the process of making hardware. 00:57:22 I still know nothing because what I saw made no fucking sense. :) 00:57:38 At one point they were arguing over adding a $0.25 chip to a daughterboard on the V12. 00:57:47 There'd be 12 of these daughterboards and that was too expensive. 00:58:31 the datasheet of the $6 ToF sensor, mentions the package contains an SPAD, and I had been looking a long while for a cheap SPAD, but they all were expensive, and needed cooling... I might try and open the package to see if it is seperable from the logic, or if its on the same die 00:58:42 I looked at them while they were talking and asked, "You're planning on selling these boards for $300 each. The cost of making the board is under $100. 12 time 25 cents is three bucks. Why not just use the part?" 00:59:13 They all looked at me like I'd grown a third eyeball. 00:59:34 Then blathered some nonsense about how adding $3 in parts to a $300MSRP board meant they'd have to raise the price to $350. 00:59:48 And at no point could explain WHY except "that's the standard". 01:00:09 lol 01:00:50 Now I'm working with hardware guys again, and I understand a whole lot more about the physical processes, but when it comes to pricing, I foresee a few more such questions. 01:01:04 im trying to think of import taxes, extra time to discuss inclusion, ... hmm doesnt really make sense 01:01:31 No, it doesn't. There was literally no reason for it except "this is the standard formula". 01:02:00 I mean if you're talking about a commodity item with really tight margins I can understand counting each penny. 01:02:11 ttmrichter: I think they tend to do their cheapest because it becomes a slippery slope. allow the $0.25 part, and next time you might allow the $0.30 part and ... 01:02:15 But we were talking a premium item sold in its most basic form for $300. 01:02:28 Slippery slopes are fallacies. 01:02:31 its more to maintain their habbit 01:02:34 You cross that bridge if you get to it. 01:02:48 Look at cost of manufacturing and cost of sales. 01:02:50 ttmrichter: I guess "the standard" was a reference to their bridge 01:03:17 I actually suspect it's because they're engineers and not accountants. 01:03:23 very possible 01:03:26 And as a result they work by cargo cult, not by comprehension. 01:03:35 ttmrichter: as in they were one-upping each other? 01:04:11 No, as in they just blindly followed a pricing strategy they learned once in a poorly-remembered business course. 01:04:19 Instead of thinking and/or learning more about the business side. 01:04:28 Even now I see they're doing some stupid things. 01:04:29 ok that is just grim 01:04:45 So ... 15 years after I left them they're still doing stupid business things. 01:04:48 Like ... no prices. 01:05:30 This is the closest thing to the V12 line I worked on with them that's in their current catalogue: http://www.pikatechnologies.com/english/View.asp?x=647 01:05:47 Quick: how much will it cost? 01:06:15 (Hint: this is a trick question.) 01:06:21 heh 01:06:44 I hate when sellers dont mention prices, or want you to submit a mail for a quote... 01:06:57 So in a world where people can get answers in SECONDS to guesstimate the viability of a product, they want you to email them and wait for a quote. 01:07:02 it reeks of emotional abuse 01:07:13 So guess which supplier isn't even in the running. 01:07:17 And I *know* these guys. 01:07:22 I actually think they make good product. 01:07:28 But I'll be fucked if I support stupidity. 01:07:34 lol' 01:08:06 Fuck, you have to send them your email address just to get a data sheet! 01:08:50 these guys have shareholders? 01:08:55 Nah. Private firm. 01:09:39 When I was there it was ... five people when I joined (the president and the CFO part-time) and seven people when I left. 01:09:51 I think now they're about 20 people. 01:10:22 (I actually agreed with the stakeholders' reasons for not seeking investment funds.) 01:26:39 ok, according to the news, prince Laurent of belgium claims "since my coma, i talk with the dead" lolwhut? 01:35:41 * ttmrichter snickers. 01:45:41 --- quit: proteusguy (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 01:59:13 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@ppp-110-168-229-207.revip5.asianet.co.th) joined #forth 01:59:13 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 02:11:39 --- quit: fantazo (Quit: Verlassend) 02:17:46 hmm I did "see -" and I got "Code -" and a blinking dash, not responding to keyboard, not responding to Ctrl-C on gforth 02:32:07 --- quit: xtalmath (Quit: Leaving.) 02:59:44 Try making a word and using "see". 02:59:56 I'm not sure what gforth does when faced with code words. 03:00:25 Apparently it breaks in a spectacular way. :) 03:02:49 Ah. For code words you need to use see-code apparently. 03:03:11 Oh, that doesn't work either. 03:05:04 I misread it. 03:05:13 see-code just shows you the dynamic code for inlined things. 03:17:29 --- join: nighty-_ (~nighty@hokuriku.rural-networks.com) joined #forth 04:22:48 --- join: ASau (~user@46.114.167.228) joined #forth 04:34:02 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 04:53:42 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@180.183.120.218) joined #forth 04:53:42 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 05:21:24 --- quit: darkf (Quit: Leaving) 05:26:49 --- join: bedah2 (~bedah@g230212253.adsl.alicedsl.de) joined #forth 05:29:46 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 05:29:55 --- quit: bedah (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) 05:29:59 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@c-98-210-219-91.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 05:30:23 --- join: fantazo (~fantazo@213.129.230.10) joined #forth 05:45:45 --- quit: beretta (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 06:14:17 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 06:24:16 --- quit: joneshf-laptop (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 06:42:31 --- join: Zarutian (~Adium@168-110-22-46.fiber.hringdu.is) joined #forth 07:03:48 --- join: bandrami (~notyourbu@triband-mum-120.61.187.88.mtnl.net.in) joined #forth 07:32:37 that was a fascinating backlog. 07:40:05 --- quit: bandrami (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 07:43:56 tangentstorm: I am sorry that I dont have a copy of that. 07:45:30 see /topic :) 07:52:32 right, forgot this channel is logged. 07:52:47 --- join: bandrami (~notyourbu@triband-mum-120.61.202.203.mtnl.net.in) joined #forth 07:54:30 --- quit: bandrami (Client Quit) 07:57:25 I was wondering about, a few weeks or so ago, if an Forth machine would need an full fledged ALU or not. 08:01:06 turns out one can implement UM+ ( a b -- sum carry ) with just XOR, AND, OR and LeftBitRotate. 08:01:57 Why is that a good thing? because it can enable primitives to be of equal length cycle wise. 08:10:15 --- quit: fantazo (Quit: Verlassend) 09:09:23 * Zarutian wonders how the TI MSP430sR6 reacts to be only powered by a small solarcell, no bigger than its package and if there are any nearly translucent e-ink dot displays it could use ontop of the solarcell. 09:11:29 application is boardgame tile (capacitive touch sensing would be used and possibly very short range induction coupling for tile to tile comms) 09:13:37 probably too much hassle to manifacture 09:24:58 --- join: fantazo (~fantazo@089144224236.atnat0033.highway.a1.net) joined #forth 09:46:07 --- join: _spt_ (~jaat@unaffiliated/-spt-/x-5624824) joined #forth 10:29:14 --- quit: malyn (Disconnected by services) 10:29:15 --- nick: malyn- -> malyn 10:29:33 --- join: ]sgDAvIFn (~malyn@server.strangegizmo.com) joined #forth 10:51:59 --- join: ehaliewicz (~user@50-0-50-8.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com) joined #forth 11:02:31 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 11:19:03 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@ppp-110-168-229-217.revip5.asianet.co.th) joined #forth 11:19:27 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 11:25:13 --- quit: ASau (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 11:32:29 ttmrichter: thank you for the word mathwank 11:38:38 ttmrichter: what I hate about math is the inconsistant notation. I have many times used the equation editor in Microsoft Word to translate equation into mathml (just save the doc as .docx and peruse it with a text editor) 11:50:55 --- join: joneshf-laptop (~joneshf@98.208.35.89) joined #forth 12:04:17 I dislike math mostly because of the math teachers, so I find ttmrichter point of view quiet correct of what this specific branch of "sciences" is. 12:42:03 --- join: kumul (~mool@adsl-72-50-87-250.prtc.net) joined #forth 12:44:59 --- quit: bedah2 (Quit: Ex-Chat) 12:45:22 --- join: bedah (~bedah@g230212253.adsl.alicedsl.de) joined #forth 13:57:04 --- quit: nighty-_ (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 13:57:47 --- join: Mat4 (~claude@ip18861915.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) joined #forth 13:57:51 hello 13:58:07 h'lo Mat4 13:58:17 hi Zarutian 13:58:39 do you know anything about black and white e-ink displays? 14:00:04 I know basical how there work (and why there update fequency is worse), why ? 14:00:35 ^frequency 14:00:43 I am wondering how much ambient light they can let through and if that percentage is good enough to give a solarcell enough light to give out around 3.3 V 14:02:10 oh, I think you can simply take a look at the specifications avariable 14:02:12 been mulling over lowpower MSP430sR6 (an TI MCU with FRAM) and if one could make semi dynamic gameboard tiles 14:03:47 2x2cm is my semi-target 14:04:00 can you point me to any such spec? 14:08:43 * Zarutian looks at http://www.eink.com/modules.html 14:10:53 --- join: nighty-_ (~nighty@hokuriku.rural-networks.com) joined #forth 14:10:54 no, there are some numbers published in scientific papers; It's only some time I've read about it 14:11:35 so I can't give you a link without research 14:11:39 sorry 14:13:58 no hard numbers required 14:14:26 from what I read at that site I linked to I gather that this might be possible. 14:17:23 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 14:20:22 generaly, because E-Ink papers are reflective displays the throughput? of ambient light is a near linear function of back content displayed 14:20:29 ^generally 14:22:18 you mean black content? 14:24:08 yes 14:25:38 hence the choice of the lowpower MSP. Might need a capacitor that recharges slowley when the display is all or nearly all black. 14:26:39 also it would depend on ambient light - is 3.3 realistic from a 2x2cm cell in the sorts of rooms people will play the game in? 14:27:02 I don't think so 14:27:07 not being able to play without a bright overhead might annoy more than the "wow" of a self-changing piece (or self-scoring game, etc.) makes up for 14:27:41 i like the idea but heavy real-world testing would be needed 14:27:45 hmm… comfortable reading light levels is what I am aiming for 14:28:10 now - if you can incorporate some sort of movement/shake/etc. and use a tiny dynamo to charge you might be able to have the game remain people-powered 14:28:24 *g* 14:28:42 "shake the pieces and roll them like dice" 14:29:12 probably both solarcell and dynamo charging 14:29:44 I dont expect each tile to run full throttle all the time 14:30:00 don't forget that these displays need to be inverted some time because of possible artifacts 14:30:06 --- quit: karswell (Remote host closed the connection) 14:30:29 Mat4: hmm? what kind of artificats? 14:30:38 artifacts* 14:31:03 pixel garbage which can remain in beetwen content updates 14:31:18 --- join: karswell (~user@201.67.208.46.dyn.plus.net) joined #forth 14:31:29 ^between 14:33:37 how do lcds compare power-wise? they're much faster refresh and you might be able to get non-opaque/unbacked components, yes? 14:34:08 e-ink is nice in that it "stays" but lcd has been the low-power go-to for a while 14:39:02 the display illumination is a problem for most LCD based displays. In the end there tend to consume more power in comparation to E-Ink displays 14:40:14 refresh rate or update speed is low issue for me in this 14:40:43 and what Mat4 said about power consumption 14:42:16 I've readed about new generation of E-papers which much better refresh rates possible some time ago. My bet is that these display type has a bright future and it seems there can replace LCD based one possibly in future 14:42:48 eh, my keyboard 14:42:59 nice 14:44:12 * Mat4 should not answer questions in different languages at the same time 14:44:18 I am mostly looking for low or medium resolution, (comparable to cheaply printed paper around 300 dpi or so) 14:47:52 typical E-Ink displays 14:49:41 I've found this publication: http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/v3/n5/full/nphoton.2009.68.html 14:49:53 have some work, brb 14:50:05 --- nick: Mat4 -> Mat4-coding 14:50:22 --- quit: ehaliewicz (Remote host closed the connection) 15:09:44 --- quit: kumul (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 15:24:22 --- join: kumul (~mool@adsl-72-50-87-186.prtc.net) joined #forth 15:38:08 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 15:38:43 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@c-98-210-219-91.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 15:44:07 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 15:47:48 --- quit: _spt_ (Quit: gone to fix a server for Staffc CC) 15:49:26 --- join: ASau (~user@46.114.167.228) joined #forth 16:07:37 ttmrichter: re guestimating the viability of a product: I call it feasibility study and I eliminate all parties that require an email to get a quote from it. 16:19:37 --- nick: Mat4-coding -> Mat4 16:19:43 --- quit: Mat4 (Quit: Verlassend) 16:28:00 --- quit: chouser (Quit: Leaving.) 16:49:57 --- quit: Zarutian (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 16:53:26 --- quit: karswell (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 17:12:58 --- nick: MrM0bius -> MrMobius 17:56:10 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 18:05:43 --- quit: nighty-_ (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 18:21:30 --- quit: chouser (Quit: Leaving.) 18:22:24 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 18:36:41 --- join: darkf (~darkf___@unaffiliated/darkf) joined #forth 18:37:41 --- quit: chouser (Quit: Leaving.) 18:37:52 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 18:51:05 --- quit: ASau (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) 19:08:33 --- quit: chouser (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 19:43:20 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 20:16:59 --- join: gabriel_laddel (~user@unaffiliated/gabriel-laddel/x-9909917) joined #forth 20:18:02 --- quit: chouser (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 20:23:41 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@c-98-210-219-91.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 20:34:07 --- join: chouser (~chouser@c-68-44-5-241.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) joined #forth 21:00:52 --- quit: chouser (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) 21:03:04 --- join: ASau (~user@46.114.167.228) joined #forth 21:24:38 --- quit: kumul (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 21:29:48 --- join: saml_ (~saml@cpe-24-102-97-97.nyc.res.rr.com) joined #forth 21:43:00 --- quit: ASau (Remote host closed the connection) 21:44:41 --- join: ASau (~user@46.114.167.228) joined #forth 21:47:58 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 22:35:18 --- quit: saml_ (Quit: Leaving) 22:36:46 --- quit: gabriel_laddel (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 22:38:11 --- join: bandrami (~notyourbu@triband-mum-120.61.202.203.mtnl.net.in) joined #forth 22:59:16 --- quit: bandrami (Quit: Leaving) 23:05:14 --- join: gabriel_laddel (~user@unaffiliated/gabriel-laddel/x-9909917) joined #forth 23:12:45 --- quit: gabriel_laddel (Remote host closed the connection) 23:15:22 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@180.183.120.218) joined #forth 23:15:22 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 23:28:49 --- quit: MrMobius (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/15.02.20