I created dis.ney.ink to try to be the Lemmy version of the Disney subreddits (such as r/dvcmember and r/waltdisneyworld) … so far there’s 3 users and ~9 subscribers
At home, my parents are forced to use Windows and macOS because of their work, but all the machines at home are either Linux or a Linux/Windows dual-boot. The mobile phones run LineageOS. I haven’t succeeded with my little brother, who’s the only one with an iPhone.
Everyone’s happy, and when there’s a problem (which happens quite rarely), I’m asked, and it’s solved in seconds. Most of the time, no one misses proprietary applications, and everyone’s surprised that everything’s free, hahaha.
Have you seen those nas Intel n5105 mini itx motherboards at AliExpress? They have 6 sata ports, 2 nvme slots, 4 x 2.5 gigabit Ethernet. Looks very good for your use case.
It says I have 6 users but 2 of those accounts are test users I created when I was getting everything setup. My friend and I are on there and that’s really it.
Edit: somehow I have 20 users now which is kind of neat. Just not sure how many are valid since I had open registrations for a while (it’s still open to users but with verification and captcha enabled).
I used to work in the GRASP lab at Penn, and my predecessor there was John Bradley of xv fame. He had started naming all the machines after fish.
When I got there I continued the practice, naming some tiny computers being used for mini robots after different types of goldfish.
In my current job, years ago, I managed a group of Linux servers, and I named them after Demons (Lucifer, Asmodeus, Azrael, Beelzebub, etc.).
At this point, there is a specific naming convention in use where I’m at, and the name is limited to identifying organization, application, and server type.
About accuracy: Analog sensors are more accurate than digital ones and that is because they are analog. While an analog system has unlimited resolution and thus can continuously follow a signal curve, digital systems can only process quantized data and that is a clear disadvantage when it comes to precision. To visualize it, think of analog data as a smooth curve and of digital data as a stair shape that follows the curve. In the picture the red line is an analog signal while the blue line shows how that same signal would look after quantization in a digital system. As you can see the analog red line is an accurate depiction of the actual sensor data while the digital blue line is only an approximation to the original analog signal.
I think parent is referring to quantization in the amplitude/y-axis (bitdepth), whereas you are referring to quantization in time/x-axis (sampling rate).
Quantisation is a potential factor but the graph does not show its effects and their comment describes the supposed effects sampling, not quantisation.
Also, when we come to discussing SNR, you’ll have to consider the SNR of analog systems too.
I should have been more clear: The negative effects of quantisation. Obviously sampling into discrete values is shown but not the negative consequences that can have.
A DAC interpreting the blue trace will output something extremely close to the red one. There might be a slight bit of error in it due to the quantisation before but the graph does not show that and it probably couldn’t since it’d be so tiny. A good way to show quantisation noise would be a histogram with a signal in the middle and some quantisation noise around it.
The DAC would not output the jaggy line. It couldn’t, that’s not a valid analog signal. Painting the steps between the points can be done if your audience knows what that means but can be extremely misleading if it doesn’t. Those lines between the points with 90 degree angles don’t exist in the real world, they’re just interpolated between the points in the visualisation.
A much better way to represent digital samples in such a chart is the way it’s done in the wikipedia article on the topic: en.wikipedia.org/…/Sampling_(signal_processing). They’re just discrete points. If you did the same interpolation between the points as a DAC would do (which is not nearest-neighbour interpolation), you’d get the analog trace shown.
Quantisation is a potential factor but the graph does not show its effects
Pardon me? The blue graph is obviously a result of sampling and quantization of the red graph. If there was no quantization but only sampling going on there would be exclusively vertical blue lines with precise values instead of quantized values and no horizontal blue lines because no data between samples. To be precise, the blue graph does not even show the precise values of the samples but only the results of the quantization of those. Exact sample values are only indirectly in this graph - they are where red graph and blue vertical lines meet.
However - I was primarily referring to OP´s idea that digital speedometers would be more precise than analog speedometers. If you look at the graph you will see that the analog speedometer always knows and thus displays the exact speed of the car in any moment (plus a small inevitable speedometer system delay). The digital speedometer on the other hand most of the time only knows the quantized value of the last taken sample - except in the exact moments when the samples are taken. Considering the quality (resolution and speed) of nowadays digital technology I assume this is not a factor to consider when designing speedometers though.
Interesting. Does quantization not always refer to quantization of the amplitude value of a sample while the sampling rate is always referred to as the … sampling rate? I get what you mean by quantization of time but I have never heard anyone calling the sampling rate that before, so now I´m asking myself if it even is a real quantization because there is no value approximation going on and the sampling frequency is an exactly known value at all times.
Yes I think you used the terms correctly — it should be referring to the amplitude. “Discrete sampling” or just sampling rate is the preferred way to refer to time, you’re right.
I was trying to use consistent language in response to the reply claiming you were misunderstanding the sampling theorem. I think that poster was confusing discrete/quantized steps in time with discrete/quantized steps in amplitude.
They can’t simply fail you if you’re doing everything perfect. There are cases of bribery, but it’s more about them looking the other way when you messed up.
Smallstep (own CA for self-signed full chain certificates)
Linkding
Gotify + watchtower
Adguardhome
Traefik
Wireguard
Took me to much time to make everything work perfectly together, but learned alot along the road ! Everything hosted on a old spare laptopt with docker containers.
I also moderate c/Games and some of the moderators of the big communities are in a Discord group for questions and helping each other out. Since moderating a community about world news is not a easy task with all the (strong) different opintions I suggested to help since this is not a one-man job.
In order to become mod, you have to reply to a thread so the other moderators can assign you. Hence why I did that.
Correct! I myself mostly stay away from the news discussion in public. Mods should not be biased in order to do their job correctly. This is not to say that I do not follow c/World for a while. :)
kbin.life
Active