sigterm
sigterm on Hacker News
I think x_0 refers to the corrupted image and x is the (denoised/upscaled/inpainted) image the optimization algorithm tries to come up. Without R(x) the optimal solution is simply x=x0. So we need a good R(x) that can measure how good or natural the solution image is. In this work the R(x) is constraining the valid x to those that can be represented by a CNN.
The house value does not need rise enough to offset the interest + taxes unless you're buying it and leaving it unoccupied for all this time.
If you need a house to live in, the monthly rent for a 1MM house is likely going to be over $3k. Over 30 years this will come out to be $1.08M, much more than the $870k in mortgage interest + taxes for owning the house. On top of that there's the 20-30% tax discount on the mortgage interest that will make owning even more favorable.
and used computer vision algorithm to register the opponent's moves...
> Until 1999 it received wide support from Chinese officials
Even some famed academy of science fellow believed in "special human body functions". 90s was just a really weird time in China. Chinese government is far from perfect, but I honestly don't know anyone from China who doesn't support the banning of FLG.
How is this different from motion estimate in HEVC?
It's bad when crossing the border. Rumor says it's due to traffic analysis by the GFW. I cannot find any source to prove or disprove that though.
Is it tough? There are only seven fundamental units.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_base_unitJust represent every unit in terms of them then it's good.
One problem with the array you came up is that the units are not orthogonal, since Joules = Newtons * Meters.
Not sure what you mean by "how coherent the R, G, and B are with each other". They are not coherent, since they have different frequencies.
One can do the "two process design methodology" in Verilog too. It's not unique to VHDL.
s/China/Iraq
then reread this comment.
Are you referring to a new DSL based on software languages, something like MyHDL? I think this is definitely promising for designs that are started from scratch. However, as soon as there is need to integrate with other legacy code, it falls back to the current painful way of manual integration.
What do you think about an IDE that supplements existing HDL languages? Not as drastic as making a shiny new language, but it avoids many challenges you brought up.
Since you are coming from a CS background, do you have recommendation for good IDE frameworks that can be leveraged?
I am a pretty junior ASIC engineer who has relatively more exposure to software world compared to many of my peers.
In my last project I did some IP integration work and the lack of decent development tools led to significant chores. I did make use of Emacs verilog-mode like GP mentioned and even wrote some small macros in elisp but overall experience is far from satisfactory. Not to even mention the usability of propriety EDA tools and flows. The software world just looks like heaven with so many awesome development tools available (VS, PyCharm, intelliJ, to name a few I've used). And I can tell the difference because I once managed to convert a C# GUI software into a console application mainly with the help of an IDE (Visual Studio), without first learning C#.
Sadly, I think ASIC (or maybe broader, hardware) industry has a pretty poor ecosystem in general. I'm not aware of good hardware focused community comparable to HN, no high quality active Q&A on sites like stackoverflow; even the HDL languages look inelegant and not well thought out. And you have a point, I'm not even sure how many of my colleagues realize that. I want to make some difference. But I'm not sure where to start...
This is not true. Even ancient Chinese had a strong preference for light skin tone. My understanding is that darker skin usually means a person is more exposed to sunlight, presumably from farming work, which is an indicator of lower social status.
PCIe2 has 5Gbps lanes. PCIe3 has 8Gbps with updated encoding.
The face detection on her research group's front page has one glaring mislabel (
http://vision.stanford.edu/).
I always find that quite amusing.
Going with your example, if AMD uses "Core" or "Xeon" in the name of their chip, it is most likely infringing the trademark of Intel. But in this case, it's more like AMD is simply branding their chip with exact Intel product name and sold as if it's from Intel. I don't think this is a trademark issue any more, it's more like fraud.
Does anyone even know what entity designed and made the fake FTDI chip?
I find many people don't seem to understand what making compatible chip means. It's very common to have legitimate, drop in replacement for popular ICs. But this fake FTDI chip is certainly not the case here.
Really? I can understand people might want to cheap out for personal projects. But there's no way I'll use it knowingly at work.
Whoever is in charge of sourcing for life-critical application and let the sketchy part slip in should be held responsible for it.
>the parts aren't "junk"
You don't know for sure. How likely is it that the manufacturer of the knock-off part performed full characterization of their chip to ensure they are within spec limits of the original manufacturer? What if the chip starts sending wrong bits when the temperature gets a bit high or voltage supply fluctuates somewhat? Don't you think getting disabled by driver might even be a less disastrous failure mode in this case?
I agree that punishing the users of the product that contains the fake chip is a very bad idea.
Again, I'm merely trying to express my opinion that this way of making compatible chips is a very shady practice (and unlike that original comment I replied to was implying, typical market competition). Most users didn't choose the chip just because it's compatible and cheaper. They bought it thinking it's the legitimate FTDI chips with (very specific) guarantees from its manufacturer's datasheet.
I got your point now. But then my comment was trying to point out that a "compatible chip" isn't really competing if its branding is deceitful. Whether it's possible for a driver to tell the difference between counterfeit and legitimate compatible chips isn't really relevant here.
Besides, any legitimate compatible chip vendor will need to have their own VID, which also means they need to develop their own compatible driver.
You mean how the driver tells the counterfeit apart? I don't really know. One possibility is that the counterfeit didn't copy some of the "don't care" cases exactly.
Not if they label the "compatible chip" as the genuine ones.
It could be generated by the chip itself with built-in hardware RNG. The outside world never needs to know what it is.
Only two were actually used to kill people. Most of the rest were preparations for it.
Would love to know this too. I have always thought it might have to do with being able to communicate with the medical staff to get a better assessment.
Considering iPhone has their custom processor design, this information is most likely confidential. However, it isn't inconceivable that some sort of memory protection method similar to IOMMU can be added to the internal fabric to prevent baseband processors (or any other peripherals) from accessing arbitrary physical memory.