Post by: Darcy7 on August 28, 2014, 09:42:35 AM
While technology has moved leaps and bounds, some things seemingly have not changed much at all and in fact have regressed to some degree. Many of the problems in the world today are simple things but they cause millions of people frustration on a daily basis. Some effect the world in profound and life changing ways.
I thought I'd start a thread for forumites to express their frustration at the things that, with todays technology, we would think we should have been able to solve or do by now.
A couple of things that come to my mind:
I cannot believe we haven't been able to effectively synchronise traffic lights. You should be able to drive along a major road and not get a red light at every intersection.
I cannot believe we haven't found a cure for the common cold.
I cannot believe Bruno Mars can run out of words for his songs yet they are still hits
And finally
I cannot believe that ABC News Radio is transmitting on the AM band in Victoria where the tram network in Melbourne causes so much interference, you can't hear it...!
Over to you people....
Post by: WilSurf on August 28, 2014, 09:49:45 AM
With all the satellites everywhere, they haven't seen it going somewhere.
Post by: oldmate on August 28, 2014, 09:50:08 AM
Post by: Bird on August 28, 2014, 09:57:01 AM
oh wait
http://www.iflscience.com/technology/3d-printed-robot-takes-hoverbike-out-spin (http://www.iflscience.com/technology/3d-printed-robot-takes-hoverbike-out-spin)
Post by: UIZ733 on August 28, 2014, 10:09:20 AM
Post by: oldmate on August 28, 2014, 12:38:36 PM
How-about something very simple like internet and mobile phone (to 21st century standards) coverage that could be considered acceptable, particularly by those living in rural and remote locations in this country.
Touché
Post by: noel_w on August 28, 2014, 12:50:04 PM
How-about something very simple like internet and mobile phone (to 21st century standards) coverage that could be considered acceptable, particularly by those living in rural and remote locations in this country.Your dreaming aren't ya :laugh: :laugh:
Post by: UIZ733 on August 28, 2014, 01:05:42 PM
Your dreaming aren't ya :laugh: :laugh:I don't think I should be.
Our ancestors built roads and other vital infrastructure to these locations with little more than determination, hard work and a great sense of duty. We (21st century) Australians with our immense wealth and resources should easily be able to do it.
There appears to be an instant solution to the communications problem. Build a mine there, and guess what world class communications is assured.
If it can be done for multi-national mining companies, why not for our own people?
Post by: noel_w on August 28, 2014, 01:19:47 PM
I don't think I should be.The answer to that is politics, pure & simple. The LNP are intent on changing whatever LP have instigated for the NBN. There was so much time, money & opportunity wasted to change to a FTTN solution when the FTTP was already planned and being rolled out. Change horses mid stream and end up down the river. Now the issue is that they have to use the existing Telstra copper from the node to your house and because the NBN was coming, Telstra have let the copper deteriorate so it is a dead duck.
Our ancestors built roads and other vital infrastructure to these locations with little more than determination, hard work and a great sense of duty. We (21st century) Australians with our immense wealth and resources should easily be able to do it.
There appears to be an instant solution to the communications problem. Build a mine there, and guess what world class communications is assured.
If it can be done for multi-national mining companies, why not for our own people?
Post by: edz on August 28, 2014, 02:05:29 PM
Post by: #jonesy on August 28, 2014, 06:30:07 PM
TV remotes that work on different tv's and have the same layout.
Post by: Bunyip on August 28, 2014, 06:37:45 PM
If it can be done for multi-national mining companies, why not for our own people?
I think you will find the mines pay for a lot of that, I know the mine I am working at did. That and we pay for the upkeep on the main road leading from town to the site. I am not saying that we shouldn't pay, we are the primary user of the facilities, but it does also assist the local community.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Post by: Bunyip on August 28, 2014, 06:40:11 PM
I think you will find the mines pay for a lot of that, I know the mine I am working at did. That and we pay for the upkeep on the main road leading from town to the site.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Just a clarification here, the road passes by the site, it is not specifically for the mine.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Post by: champin on August 28, 2014, 07:51:53 PM
Post by: oldmate on August 28, 2014, 08:38:59 PM
I can't believe we can't goback in time and give Billy Ray Cyress a condom.
Or his father
Post by: achjimmy on August 28, 2014, 08:45:32 PM
Post by: achjimmy on August 28, 2014, 08:51:11 PM
They havent replaced bar staff that cant pour a beer with https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmnp3aVGyGc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmnp3aVGyGc) yet .
Are saying a machine can't pour a beer? They do in Japan.
Post by: JD-120 on August 28, 2014, 08:58:58 PM
They have had since 1985 to develop a hoverboard. come on people, how hard can it be ??? ;D
I guess we only have 1 more year to wait though as according to Wikipedia, Marty traveled to the year 2015 and this i where the hoverboards were.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bc--tcBCEAAXgP3.jpg)
Post by: oldmate on August 28, 2014, 09:03:27 PM
hoverboards.
They have had since 1985 to develop a hoverboard. come on people, how hard can it be ??? ;D
I guess we only have 1 more year to wait though as according to Wikipedia, Marty traveled to the year 2015 and this i where the hoverboards were.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bc--tcBCEAAXgP3.jpg)
Yeah, I want to do a hover conversion on my patrol, and trailer, and my DeLorean
Post by: JD-120 on August 28, 2014, 09:06:32 PM
Yeah, I want to do a hover conversion on my patrol, and trailer, and my DeLorean
no good for going to the cape oldmate, remember, the hover does not work over water....that is unless...........
(http://larkable.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/hoverboards.jpg)
Post by: knoath on August 28, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
Post by: scarps on August 28, 2014, 09:13:43 PM
Post by: edz on August 28, 2014, 09:23:52 PM
On the beer thingy Achjimmy, Im saying its a wonder that bar staff havent been replaced by this beer dispencer yet ... Guessing the day will come here in Oz..
Post by: JCOJ on August 28, 2014, 09:56:31 PM
40 years ago we put man on the moon.
We didn't - biggest con job of the century. They filmed two men in a studio just to say they beat the Russians. Why didn't the Russians ever do it - because they couldn't.
Post by: UIZ733 on August 28, 2014, 10:13:30 PM
We didn't - biggest con job of the century. They filmed two men in a studio just to say they beat the Russians. Why didn't the Russians ever do it - because they couldn't.Them's fighting words. ;D
Post by: edz on August 28, 2014, 10:31:31 PM
Post by: chillipepperz on August 28, 2014, 11:20:08 PM
I can't belive people still think we need to spend billions laying cable when in bum**** Victoria (puckapunyal ) when everybody on base is using 4g and you can still get 35mb download speeds.
I agree! Here I am in Pt Lincoln tonight on 4G pulling 13mb download when at home in Strathalbyn I can barely get 2mb on my ADSL2+ and by the end of the year I will have NBN access that will provide me with more speed than I probably need...why all the expense dropping that fibre cable in the ground when we should be going wireless...
Post by: noel_w on August 28, 2014, 11:55:50 PM
I agree! Here I am in Pt Lincoln tonight on 4G pulling 13mb download when at home in Strathalbyn I can barely get 2mb on my ADSL2+ and by the end of the year I will have NBN access that will provide me with more speed than I probably need...why all the expense dropping that fibre cable in the ground when we should be going wireless...
And here I am in an inner city suburb with adsl1 and in a mobile deadspot. Yeah 4g works if you are near a tower. Wireless has it's use but we don't have the frequencies to cover everyone and everywhere. Be warned contention ratios will max out wireless all too soon.
Post by: Darcy7 on September 01, 2014, 11:24:47 AM
And here I am in an inner city suburb with adsl1 and in a mobile deadspot. Yeah 4g works if you are near a tower. Wireless has it's use but we don't have the frequencies to cover everyone and everywhere. Be warned contention ratios will max out wireless all too soon.
Same.....for some reason when we travel through Ascott Vale in Melbourne, we loose mobile phone coverage of any network.
Bizarre...!
Post by: olddigger on September 02, 2014, 12:55:56 AM
An egg carton that stops eggs breaking.
Cheers, Tony
Post by: speewa158 on September 02, 2014, 04:40:21 AM
Post by: Mik01 on September 02, 2014, 06:28:29 AM
Post by: kylarama on September 02, 2014, 06:35:23 AM
Post by: Darcy7 on September 02, 2014, 09:25:37 AM
Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo rocket plane was set loose on Thursday over California's Mojave Desert for a gliding test flight — and although its hybrid rocket motor wasn't lit up, the pilots checked out the propulsion system's plumbing for a future blast.
Post by: Redback on September 02, 2014, 09:47:04 AM
I agree! Here I am in Pt Lincoln tonight on 4G pulling 13mb download when at home in Strathalbyn I can barely get 2mb on my ADSL2+ and by the end of the year I will have NBN access that will provide me with more speed than I probably need...why all the expense dropping that fibre cable in the ground when we should be going wireless...
I wouldn't hold your breath on that if the Govt has their way, apparently we don't need it ???
Post by: grafy82 on September 02, 2014, 10:13:10 AM
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 02, 2014, 10:35:33 AM
Cure for cancer. I mean really, it's got to be the most prevalent disease on the planet. You would think all the eggheads would have worked it out by now
The same reason there will never be a cure for any disease, the drug companies, the ones with the money don't
want to cure anything, they just want to develop expensive drugs that can control the disease and sell them to
you for the rest of your life. The days of a researcher working away to find a cure and then giving it to the world
are gone, everything has to be patentable or there not interested. Why do you think there was such a race to
map the human genome, private enterprise wanted to get there first and copywright and patent it.
There's simply no money in a one off pill that would cure cancer for example, so it will never happen unless
some dedicated privately funded researcher finds it and gives it to the world.
Post by: Paul Mac on September 02, 2014, 12:07:07 PM
Post by: chester ver2.0 on September 02, 2014, 12:19:17 PM
The same reason there will never be a cure for any disease, the drug companies, the ones with the money don't
want to cure anything, they just want to develop expensive drugs that can control the disease and sell them to
you for the rest of your life. The days of a researcher working away to find a cure and then giving it to the world
are gone, everything has to be patentable or there not interested. Why do you think there was such a race to
map the human genome, private enterprise wanted to get there first and copywright and patent it.
There's simply no money in a one off pill that would cure cancer for example, so it will never happen unless
some dedicated privately funded researcher finds it and gives it to the world.
Actually the problem is that i cant believe that in drug manufacturing that they will not accept computer modelling and you still have to go through 25 odd years of human and animal trials before FDA approval. The reason why nothing like cancer or diabeties cures get done is because the payoff under the current approval regieme is so far away no investor will go the distance
Post by: MattNQ on September 02, 2014, 12:30:01 PM
..improved the tase of xxxx gold
Post by: Moggy on September 02, 2014, 12:46:20 PM
Post by: edz on September 02, 2014, 01:26:02 PM
Post by: fridayman on September 02, 2014, 01:54:24 PM
We didn't - biggest con job of the century. They filmed two men in a studio just to say they beat the Russians. Why didn't the Russians ever do it - because they couldn't.
THIS (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_loUDS4c3Cs) is worth watching
Post by: Bird on September 02, 2014, 02:06:54 PM
Quote from: JCOJ
We didn't - biggest con job of the century. They filmed two men in a studio just to say they beat the Russians. Why didn't the Russians ever do it - because they couldn't... the longer this goes on and the more I hear about it the more I believe this now..
otherwise they would have been back by now..
Post by: paceman on September 02, 2014, 02:10:30 PM
I agree! Here I am in Pt Lincoln tonight on 4G pulling 13mb download when at home in Strathalbyn I can barely get 2mb on my ADSL2+ and by the end of the year I will have NBN access that will provide me with more speed than I probably need...why all the expense dropping that fibre cable in the ground when we should be going wireless...
because if everyone was using wireless and no-one was using fixed line broadband, your wireless pipe (and it is just a pipe) would be really full, really quickly and your 13mb download would become a 1mb download just as quickly.
wireless cannot compete with fibre-based technologies. it's physics, pure and simple.
you might not need the speed that fibre can bring, but business, education and health are three pretty big areas that will gobble up that speed and put it to good use.
Post by: paceman on September 02, 2014, 02:15:05 PM
... the longer this goes on and the more I hear about it the more I believe this now..
otherwise they would have been back by now..
why must we go back? why is that the theorists rebuttal?
so if it is fake, why is it that no-one, out of the thousands of people that were involved in this project, has said anything to the contrary? in the world we live in, it seems strange that no-one has come out and categorically proved that the landing was a hoax.
there is plenty of factual evidence that we did go there, but no factual evidence that it was a hoax. plenty of theories, but they are just that: theories.
give me some factual proof that is it a hoax and i might reconsider.
Post by: WilSurf on September 02, 2014, 02:16:45 PM
I can't believe there hasn't been a mobile phone disabler installed in all modern cars to automatically turn off mobile phones once your car has been turned on. Your phone could still ring however, you wouldn't be able to answer it until you have parked and turned off your car. How many lives would that save? ???
Apperantly Samsung has an app what does exactly this.
Post by: edz on September 02, 2014, 02:28:51 PM
http://www.universetoday.com/111188/how-do-we-know-the-moon-landing-isnt-fake/ (http://www.universetoday.com/111188/how-do-we-know-the-moon-landing-isnt-fake/)
http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon-landings-could-have-never-ever-been-faked-the-definitive-proof (http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon-landings-could-have-never-ever-been-faked-the-definitive-proof)
Post by: Elky on September 02, 2014, 02:53:16 PM
Post by: edz on September 02, 2014, 05:11:16 PM
http://www.drinkstuff.com/products/product.asp?ID=657#.VAVuRPmSxIc (http://www.drinkstuff.com/products/product.asp?ID=657#.VAVuRPmSxIc)
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on September 02, 2014, 05:19:46 PM
A diesel bowser hand piece that doesn't leak. >:(
Be easier to understand what a woman is thinking, so good luck with that.
Post by: Symon on September 02, 2014, 07:05:42 PM
40 years ago we put man on the moon. It was accomplished with such primitive computing power that todays electronic calculators have more capability. In the years that followed, we were promised the technology would progress so far that we would be taking holidays in space by the year 2000 yet, here we are in 2014 and we haven't even returned to the moon, let alone Mars. The Space Shuttle program seemed to usher in a new age but it has quietly been relegated to the history pages, never to be seen again in our lifetime.
I'm pretty sure the Challenger disaster had a fair bit to do with that, it took quite a while before anyone was game to shoot people back into space. Putting that aside, why would anyone go back? It's a damn expensive tourist trip.
Mars is a bloody long way, anyone who goes there is facing a one way trip.
Quote
I cannot believe we haven't been able to effectively synchronise traffic lights. You should be able to drive along a major road and not get a red light at every intersection.
There are heaps of people looking at this and there are all sorts of mathematical models to try and optimise traffic flow, I'm sure somewhere someone has got it right.
Quote
I cannot believe that ABC News Radio is transmitting on the AM band in Victoria where the tram network in Melbourne causes so much interference, you can't hear it...!
AM transmission will always be prone to interference from spark gaps, that's just the way it is.
Build a mine there, and guess what world class communications is assured.
If it can be done for multi-national mining companies, why not for our own people?
That's because the mine pays for it, including all the infrastructure to supply that service. Did you think that the government gives all these things to mining companies for free?
I can't believe we can't goback in time and give Billy Ray Cyress a condom.
Someone give this man a beer.
We didn't - biggest con job of the century. They filmed two men in a studio just to say they beat the Russians. Why didn't the Russians ever do it - because they couldn't.
I can't believe that people actually fall for this stupid conspiracy theory. We have been to the moon six times - Apollo 11 to 17. We have left stuff up there that people can track even now. It's lunacy to suggest otherwise.
why all the expense dropping that fibre cable in the ground when we should be going wireless...
Because wireless is not better than fibre, not by a long shot. Wireless is good for short distances at low bandwidth. If you want to go any serious distance at high speed you need fibre.
Post by: fisher on September 02, 2014, 07:19:08 PM
Post by: Mik01 on September 02, 2014, 07:44:02 PM
Because wireless is not better than fibre, not by a long shot. Wireless is good for short distances at low bandwidth. If you want to go any serious distance at high speed you need fibre.
So can someone please explain to me why I can watch (presumably) huge volumes of data, in the way of hd TV via foxtel satellite for $75/mth?
Why can't we all get a decent bandwidth and download via satellite for a reasonable price? I just don't understand. I hardly get a decent mobile signal, but I can watch TV in hd....
Post by: paceman on September 02, 2014, 08:14:48 PM
So can someone please explain to me why I can watch (presumably) huge volumes of data, in the way of hd TV via foxtel satellite for $75/mth?
Why can't we all get a decent bandwidth and download via satellite for a reasonable price? I just don't understand. I hardly get a decent mobile signal, but I can watch TV in hd....
because satellite comms and wireless comms are two totally different beasts. to provide enough satellite bandwidth for everyone, at the speed of fixed line broadband, would cost multiple billions of dollars and would be a waste of money.
Post by: Chippy76 on September 02, 2014, 08:21:17 PM
figured out how to synchronise the handrail with the escalator/travelator ..... why do they never move at the same rate ???
cheers Chippy :D
Post by: Symon on September 02, 2014, 09:04:29 PM
So can someone please explain to me why I can watch (presumably) huge volumes of data, in the way of hd TV via foxtel satellite for $75/mth?
Why can't we all get a decent bandwidth and download via satellite for a reasonable price? I just don't understand. I hardly get a decent mobile signal, but I can watch TV in hd....
HD TV is not huge volumes of data for starters, but putting that aside you get fast wireless speeds because you only have a short distance to go to the nearest tower, once you get there you are connected to the fibre network. It is the fibre backbone that is giving you the high speed, not the wireless. Comparing wireless bandwidth capability to fibre is like trying to compare a snail to a gazelle.
The other thing is that the radio spectrum is a finite resource, as technology improves we have been able to cram more data through the medium, but the fact remains that you are prone to interference with the more devices you use. Try sending a MMS when you are in the middle of a packed football stadium and you'll see what I mean.
Theoretically at least, there is no limit to fibre throughput.
Post by: Mik01 on September 02, 2014, 09:38:35 PM
HD TV is not huge volumes of data for starters
It is if I watch it via the internet. What's the difference?
Post by: Symon on September 03, 2014, 05:19:39 AM
It is if I watch it via the internet. What's the difference?
It seems that way, but it isn't. A 1080p 3D movie only needs around 10Mb/s, that is nothing really. Like I said before, wireless is not the answer, especially satellite. If you want reliable fast speed, you go fibre.
Post by: Garfish on September 03, 2014, 05:39:18 AM
Post by: #jonesy on September 03, 2014, 06:22:23 AM
They even covered this on Big Bang Theory when they fired a laser at the moon
I can't believe that people actually fall for this stupid conspiracy theory. We have been to the moon six times - Apollo 11 to 17. We have left stuff up there that people can track even now. It's lunacy to suggest otherwise.
Post by: paceman on September 03, 2014, 06:44:33 AM
They even covered this on Big Bang Theory when they fired a laser at the moon
the trouble is, the conspiracy buffs will tell you that unmanned craft put them there...
Post by: Symon on September 03, 2014, 07:22:30 AM
They even covered this on Big Bang Theory when they fired a laser at the moon
They did the same on mythbusters. The LRO also took shots of the landing sites where you can still see the tracks made by the astronauts.
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 03, 2014, 10:21:25 AM
Theoretically at least, there is no limit to fibre throughput."
There are a couple of points here that should be clarified, 3G/4G uses dynamic bandwidth, what this basically means is that the bandwidth is spread into two parts, data and voice. Voice is given priority, unused additional bandwidth is allocated for data calls, as the voice traffic increases data calls are shed, ie voice priority overrides data as it might be a 000 call for example.
In mass traffic situations it is not interference that causes the problem as all calls are handled sequentially and given a "time slot" keep in mind all the handsets operate on the same frequency within their allocated bandwidth , and are given a unique id (similar to ethernet LAN etc), they also have to wait for an available free packet to send if a collision occurs they will resend the packet. What this means is it is not interference it is lack of bandwidth that causes the problem. Bandwidth in this case is not actual frequency bandwidth but available power output from the cell, the more power the greater the modulation envelope (quadrature modulation) and the more channels (calls) the cell can handle.
For big events the Telcos can, and do put more call handling ability into the local cells by increasing the cells output transceiver modules and their power output if required, along with channel cards etc but there is a cost benefit ratio they will abide to. They will also install portable micro cells for big events etc like the Grandprix / Footy grand final etc to provide additional call handling ability.
Now for fibre, fibre does in reality have a throughput limit, ie how many "time slots" you can put down it, as the equipment connected to the fibre has a handling limit, this is why they are now using different colored laser so that they can add more
channels to the fibre. Generally though as Technology doubles I think from memory every 10 years you could say that
in ten years time the equipment will be able to handle twice the calls it does now, so on so on.
Why can't everyone have cheap wireless? Well one reason is bandwidth, with todays technology you just can't squeeze that many calls in, that's why your TV went digital to make more bandwidth available so that they could sell it to the Telcos.
Also keep in mind wireless is the Telcos premium product, Telstra initially designated their 3G roll out as the Jersey project and rightly so, it certainly turned out to be their cash cow. It is unlikely the prices will go down, Telstra must be very happy these days. most have moved onto mobile services, they get a premium return for their invest, they have let the fixed network run down to reduce costs and now the Government has to buy that off them as part of the deal to push their white Elephant, the NBN.
Ever wonder why Telstra was locked out of the initial NBN contracts? One reason was Telstra wouldn't give the Government an assurance that if the Government had to buy the Telstra local access network (they weren't sure they could "aquire" it legally without out paying Telstra compensation and it turned out they couldn't), that Telstra would guarantee not to use the money to expanded their 3G/4G network to undercut and compete directly against the NBN which they of course would have done.
Why did the Government have to build the NBN and not the Telcos? the Telco's aren't that stupid that's why!
Telstra a few years back was looking for a system to replace their aging Telephony network, the main suppliers weren't really interested in supply equipment as no one knew the direction Telecommunications was heading with IP Telelphony on rise, the only manufacture that had a product that looked like it might work off the shelf was a Chinese company, but at that time the upper management of Telstra was not pro Chinese. Telstra determined the only other viable contender was Alcatel so went with their system, many hundreds of millions (probably more like a billion) of dollars later the project was canned.
It is very dangerous to be a leader in the Technology markets, if your the first to jump one way and then everyone else follows as was the case with Telstra and 3G then your ahead, but if everyone else goes down a different path then you've just wasted hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.
The Government may learn the same lesson in the near future if a leap in Technology comes along and makes the NBN obsolete overnight.
Now where does this all lead? I remember seeing an article a few years back where a couple of scientist had stumbled onto something that was called co linked protons or something the like. The way they had described it was they could create two of these identical whatever's in a lab at the same time and then separate them, they then found if the attached a proton I think it was to one a proton instantly appeared on the other. It did not matter how far apart they separated the two "units" the same thing happened, one could be on the other side of the planet in a phone for example or on the other side of the galaxy.
They could not explain the process that caused phenomenon, but did point out there appeared to be no delay between the proton? being attached to one unit and a proton being attached to the other, and that this could lead to instantaneous communications to anywhere, or even matter transfer though the original item would most probably destroyed in the scanning and a perfect copy made at the other end rahter than the actual item physically transfered. One of the scientists indicated theoretically it was possible but that he would not be volunteering to hope into such a unit to test it out!
I did search awhile back to see where their upto but can no longer find any mention of it on the net, seems to have disappeared, if anyone else remembers the article and knows of a website involved in the project please let me know.
I suspect that such technology would not be released in the near term as there are is a lot of investment in the current communications industry and it would not be to their or their investors good interests for such technology to suddenly appear on the market.
Post by: chester ver2.0 on September 03, 2014, 12:09:42 PM
If it was a hoax someone would have got terminal cnacer or the like and with nothing to loose spilt the beans by now in some tell all interview
There is one constant in the unvirse that proves the above theory true
"everybody wants their 5 minutes of fame"
Post by: Ben.Archer on September 03, 2014, 01:14:17 PM
Over to the conspiracy theorists......
Post by: terravista on September 03, 2014, 01:30:54 PM
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 03, 2014, 01:31:45 PM
of fuel cell will become the norm.
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 03, 2014, 01:36:34 PM
grows to 20mm then stops, or best of all some sort of coating that is graffiti proof
or nano mites that can clean away the mess that some think is artistic.
Post by: Symon on September 03, 2014, 01:45:14 PM
In mass traffic situations it is not interference that causes the problem as all calls are handled sequentially and given a "time slot" keep in mind all the handsets operate on the same frequency within their allocated bandwidth , and are given a unique id (similar to ethernet LAN etc), they also have to wait for an available free packet to send if a collision occurs they will resend the packet. What this means is it is not interference it is lack of bandwidth that causes the problem. Bandwidth in this case is not actual frequency bandwidth but available power output from the cell, the more power the greater the modulation envelope (quadrature modulation) and the more channels (calls) the cell can handle.
My point is that there is a limit to how much the radio spectrum can sustain. Multiplexing technology has improved leaps and bounds over the years but there will be a point where you just can't cram more into a certain band.
Quote
Now for fibre, fibre does in reality have a throughput limit, ie how many "time slots" you can put down it, as the equipment connected to the fibre has a handling limit, this is why they are now using different colored laser so that they can add more channels to the fibre.
With current technology the limiting factor is not the medium, but the transmission/receiving hardware connected either side of it. From a practical perspective there will be a point where the attenuation of certain frequencies will become too great to be of much value, but we are nowhere near approaching that.
Quote
Generally though as Technology doubles I think from memory every 10 years you could say that in ten years time the equipment will be able to handle twice the calls it does now, so on so on.
I think you are referring to Moore's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law), where the number of transistors on a chip doubles every two years. Only loosely related to this discussion but you are correct, technology will evolve and bandwidth throughput will improve.
Quote
I did search awhile back to see where their upto but can no longer find any mention of it on the net, seems to have disappeared, if anyone else remembers the article and knows of a website involved in the project please let me know.
You are talking about quantum entanglement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement) there has been number of experiments done is this area, the most recent I think was in Africa with a paired particle in the USA. Anyways, here is a link to the Japanese doing it - http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520886/japanese-telco-smashes-entanglement-distance-record/ (http://www.technologyreview.com/view/520886/japanese-telco-smashes-entanglement-distance-record/)
Battery technology won't improve till the oil runs out. Maybe not even then, probably some form of fuel cell will become the norm.
Mobile phones have done more for battery research than what peak oil ever will.
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 03, 2014, 03:31:32 PM
"I think you are referring to Moore's law, where the number of transistors on a chip doubles every two years. Only loosely related to this discussion but you are correct, technology will evolve and bandwidth throughput will improve"
I was referring to technology in general, in the past a certain technology may have lasted 40,
replacement technology for 20, current technology 10 years future technology 5 years.
Yes mobile phones have driven battery technology to date, however I'm sure when the oil runs out or the
climate demands you will see much more active development in this area from the oil companies and the
automotive industry. That's assuming we aren't all running around with fusion reactors in our cars by then :D
The below is a link to an interesting article regarding fibre optic capacity, we may be closer than you think to
hitting the maximum transmission rate for the existing fibres:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11544459 (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11544459)
Post by: grafy82 on September 03, 2014, 04:40:23 PM
Improved battery technology. If it had improved at even the rate of microprocessor technology we would all have cars capable of 10,000k on a charge, phones and laptops that never ran out and petrol would be an old memory.....
Over to the conspiracy theorists......
I have a mate who's an engineer that is working on a new battery technology and is being handed large wads of cash to make it happen. He has discovered/developed a crystal that has very minimal degredation through discharge and recharge cycles. He's talking 20-30000 cycles for the life of the battery. I told him to watch out for oil company reps coming to his house for a visit.
Post by: edz on September 03, 2014, 04:55:32 PM
Post by: ras on September 03, 2014, 05:13:31 PM
The other idea i like is genetic engineering to be able to "shrink" endangeared species, so they can be pets... A lion/tiger the size of a domestic cat? Maybe a 2 foot fully grown elephant? At least we could preserve them in some form instead of extinction..Would make for interesting pets too.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Post by: Ben.Archer on September 03, 2014, 05:43:52 PM
The below is a link to an interesting article regarding fibre optic capacity, we may be closer than you think to
hitting the maximum transmission rate for the existing fibres:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11544459 (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-11544459)
This article is interesting but has been proven to be a little bit of a scare story.
Technologies such as Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing and fast Fourier transformation have proven that massive jumps in capability are possible.
Recently the Ultra High-Speed Optical Communications (UHSOC) group at the Denmark Technical University demonstrated 43Tbps down a single fibre using a single laser. This is a massive jump over the previous record set by the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany of 32Tbps (the equivalent of 700 DVD's in less than a second) in 2011.
Seeing as the vast majority of fibres laid are multi strand 200+ not being uncommon you are not going to be hitting limits on fibre capacity soon....
What is often of far more concern is the latency of the network, after all who cares if you can dump 700 DVD's in a second if the network responds like a slug on traqualisers.
Post by: HKB Electronics on September 03, 2014, 06:01:38 PM
Very true, like all the hype of the NBN, might give you more speed if you have a VPN point to point
service but pretty useless when your surfing the net or down loading from other hosts.
Post by: lino6 on September 03, 2014, 06:16:49 PM
Post by: Garfish on September 04, 2014, 08:00:59 PM
I'd like a car stereo that won't play Lady Gaga, P!nk, Taylor Swift, and any of the crap they flog 20 tomes a day.....They already have it's called an am radio
Post by: broncos11 on September 04, 2014, 08:05:34 PM
They already have it's called an am radio
JJJ or JJ
Post by: lino6 on September 04, 2014, 08:05:54 PM
They already have it's called an am radio
I like the other music though. And not into the oldies stuff.....
Post by: grafy82 on September 04, 2014, 08:12:04 PM
JJJ or JJ
I once heard it said, "JJJ, the station for all the bands that will never make it". Cant stand most of the alternative crap on there. ;D
Post by: broncos11 on September 04, 2014, 08:25:20 PM
I once heard it said, "JJJ, the station for all the bands that will never make it". Cant stand most of the alternative crap on there. ;D
Geez, if it wasn't for them, we'd have never heard of ACDC, Oils, Chisel, INXS, Skyhooks, Angles, Hunters Collectors, Powderfinger Pete Murray etc, etc etc because these bands were seen as "alternative crap" by our beloved mainstream radio/music industry of the time. But I'm hijacking a thread now.
Post by: Mallory Black on September 04, 2014, 11:01:02 PM
or panthers in the aussie bush (ahhhh here we go... bring it on!)
Post by: bazt on September 04, 2014, 11:03:25 PM
Post by: #jonesy on September 05, 2014, 06:23:57 AM
the trouble is, the conspiracy buffs will tell you that unmanned craft put them there...Fly an unmanned craft remotely to the moon and land without crashing, several second delay for "live" grainy video to come to earth respond and send signal back. Then leave all the bits behind, leaving various marks in the dirt and fly the craft off, successfully docking again via remote control. Then fly home and in an era when they best way to land on earth was drop them in a really big puddle.
Next part is easy. Set up a studio that looks remarkably like where they land on the moon, and transmit the actors playing their role. Can't do it in real time due to the "slow motion". So it must be prerecorded by at some reasonable time. Have all the actors leave bits in the same places as the remote control thing on the moon.
And nobody gives up the secret.
Reminds me of the movie Capricorn One
Post by: MattNQ on September 05, 2014, 07:33:56 AM
I'd like a car stereo that won't play Lady Gaga, P!nk, Taylor Swift, and any of the crap they flog 20 tomes a day.....I've got one of those.
When the original nissan stereo died, I put in a 6 stacker and never connected the radio aerial. Don't miss it at all.
Post by: achjimmy on September 05, 2014, 09:16:31 AM
It is very dangerous to be a leader in the Technology markets, if your the first to jump one way and then everyone else follows as was the case with Telstra and 3G then your ahead, but if everyone else goes down a different path then you've just wasted hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.
The Government may learn the same lesson in the near future if a leap in Technology comes along and makes the NPN obsolete overnight.
This is so right. I was involved on the fringes of the great fibre boon around the late nineties earlier 2000. It was leaping ahead. 1000's of jobs in Aus alone. JDS uniphase, ADC to name a few. Then adsl was developed, wow did that that kill the fibre industry ! All the big players either shrunk or disappeared overnight.
Post by: WilSurf on September 05, 2014, 09:34:52 AM
Post by: Darcy7 on September 05, 2014, 11:51:08 AM
Fly an unmanned craft remotely to the moon and land without crashing, several second delay for "live" grainy video to come to earth respond and send signal back. Then leave all the bits behind, leaving various marks in the dirt and fly the craft off, successfully docking again via remote control. Then fly home and in an era when they best way to land on earth was drop them in a really big puddle.
Next part is easy. Set up a studio that looks remarkably like where they land on the moon, and transmit the actors playing their role. Can't do it in real time due to the "slow motion". So it must be prerecorded by at some reasonable time. Have all the actors leave bits in the same places as the remote control thing on the moon.
And nobody gives up the secret.
Reminds me of the movie Capricorn One
Yeah...even in the movie they couldn't keep the secret...!
Post by: champin on September 05, 2014, 06:34:58 PM
Post by: Fathom on September 06, 2014, 06:29:31 AM
Post by: SteveandViv on September 06, 2014, 02:37:59 PM
I'm pretty sure the Challenger disaster had a fair bit to do with that, it took quite a while before anyone was game to shoot people back into space. Putting that aside, why would anyone go back? It's a damn expensive tourist trip.
Mars is a bloody long way, anyone who goes there is facing a one way trip.
There are heaps of people looking at this and there are all sorts of mathematical models to try and optimise traffic flow, I'm sure somewhere someone has got it right.
AM transmission will always be prone to interference from spark gaps, that's just the way it is.
That's because the mine pays for it, including all the infrastructure to supply that service. Did you think that the government gives all these things to mining companies for free?
Someone give this man a beer.
I can't believe that people actually fall for this stupid conspiracy theory. We have been to the moon six times - Apollo 11 to 17. We have left stuff up there that people can track even now. It's lunacy to suggest otherwise. :cheers:QuoteBecause wireless is not better than fibre, not by a long shot. Wireless is good for short distances at low bandwidth. If you want to go any serious distance at high speed you need fibre.
Hi mate,
I am working with the CSIRO to deliver a new wireless protocol to support health up here. Interesting as it will deliver 50mg both ways. We will use a fiber back haul for that but in essence a lot quicker than LTE but no voice. I'll keep you up to date as this progresses.
Post by: oldmate on September 06, 2014, 07:16:50 PM
A camper like the "google car" that drives itself to your destination, sets itself up and puts a camp oven roast on while you are at work on Friday. Ready for the weekend. :)
X20billions
Post by: NewieCamper on September 06, 2014, 07:33:23 PM
X20billionsIt's called a caravan park with a pub next door. Some joints are doing the half tent thing now.