Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hotdog97's comments login

The MiSTer FPGA project is fun and easy to get started with.

You need:

1. The FPGA board from Terasic (Linux ARM host, has USB, HDMI) for $130

https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/terasic-inc/P0496/...

2. To run the cores for the vast majority of supported systems you need a custom 32 MB SDRAM board. For timing reasons the DDR3 memory on the FPGA board can't be used.

https://github.com/MiSTer-devel/Main_MiSTer/wiki/SDRAM-Board

I bought mine for about $30 from someone in the MiSTer forum - there are a bunch of hobbyists that sell them there.

3. Some of the more complex cores (Amiga etc) need a custom IO board (VGA, SD card slot, etc):

https://github.com/MiSTer-devel/Main_MiSTer/wiki/IO-Board

This one also seems to go for around $30 in the forum.


As far as emulation goes, how is this better/different than running an emulator on my pc or raspberry pi? I really want one for the cool factor but am unsure of how practical it is. FPGA dev sounds fun.


Emulators add a lot of extra latency, both on input and on display. Actually it isn't so much the emulator as the host os, with its compositor etc. An FPGA has the possibility of running with dramatically better latency. Similar issues go for startup time.


Currently though, FPGA emulation of the Amiga hardware isn't 100% perfect (but good enough for almost all tasks).

Also, last time I checked, it also doesn't have AGA support yet, so there's no proper Amiga 1200 or 4000 emulation just yet.

The FPGA Amiga stuff is all open-source, so hopefully the emulation will get there eventually.


Both the MiniMig and FPGA Arcade cores support AGA these days.


Actually this has been solved recently in WinUAE by implementing "Beam Racing Lagless VSync"


Well, you can't beat the booting times of the FPGA. Also, if you want a monster Amiga hard to emulate, check this out:

http://orders.apollo-accelerators.com


I haven't ever actually used any of these FPGA emulators, but just wanted to point out that their wiki has an article on just that question:

https://github.com/MiSTer-devel/Main_MiSTer/wiki/Why-FPGA


You really wish for a paranthesis counting pen when you have to write pages and pages of LISP (I think it was Common Lisp in our case) on paper for an exam.


Oh, you mean like

1) Skype: https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/17/12951996/skype-london-off...

2) Nokia: cruelly killed-off for no particular reason.


Feel free to point out actual instances, or even better, trends backing up that statement.


See lawsuits against Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, and other large tech companies going back the last 20-30 years. This is the type of basic fact that doesn't need a citation in a discussion about GDPR.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/13/technology/ho...


I don't believe this is a fair characterization.

In e.g. Belgium, privacy law is very strict and enforced for local corporation. When I read on hacker news how e.g. USA Healthcare providers dig up the old history of their clients to find a reason not to pay, I am horrified. Any West-European privacy regulator would have ended that kind of behavior long before things got this far. Probably just sending a strong 'We dont like this' message without actually starting a lawsuit would do the job.

Don't forget how history hammered into the population how people died and suffered because powerful groups managed to built lists of facts. Think WWII and the jews. Or the Napoleonitic conscription lists.

So if people with this background get confronted with the American Way, they don't like this. Here is a wrong that should be righted is the opinion.

For now, there are no lawsuits I am aware of. If both the large tech companies and the USA government behave reasonably well, I don't expect a big one either. The governmental regulators are simply not ready for them yet, as the GDPR had a big impact on them as well. And they never like having to pay for a drawn-out legal battle.


Maybe they mostly go after American companies because mostly American companies are in violation?

And it's not as if EU companies go without scrutiny. Due to the still-fractured market, most are small enough so their antitrust matters are localized to one country, but if you check the EU website there are still plenty of cases, they're just not sexy enough to make the news - like the a recent case "Commission fines maritime car carriers and car parts suppliers a total of €546 million".

In for instance the "state aid" tax preference cases cited in your link, the EU has also launched investivations into European companies like IKEA and Fiat cars.


So, I assume everyone else's first thought after reading this was: Let's build a vanilla flower pollination robot using deep learning to process RGB camera images and help guide the robot actuators. Startup, anyone?

Edit: turns out this is, in fact, not a unique thought:

"Implementation of Automated Vanilla Pollination Robotic Crane Prototype, 2017":

https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1109/SYSOSE.2017.79949...

(No deep learning, but I guess these people weren't desperate for funding.)


I think if you could work a blockchain in there somewhere you might have an idea worth funding. ;)


Because screw those poor farmers?


Maybe let the voters decide policy and the tech companies deal with the tech?


Extrapolation = guessing.


Any methodology for getting more information from less information is going to involve guess work at some point, surely? This guess work just happens to be helped along by having the results of (I assume) millions or more separate videos where they already had the higher speed footage.

This is also not extrapolation, rather quite the opposite, it's interpolation.


Sure, statistically speaking well-informed guessing at an industrial scale, but still guessing.


But that's what our brains do too. We might think we're seeing the world as it is, but much of our smooth and consistent view of the world has a lot to do with our brains patching things up to make it look that way.

The thing is, that it does raise some questions - I can see things like fake super-resolution and fake slow motion and other alternative realities generated by machine learning easily fooling humans. Once things become sufficiently advanced, who's to guarantee will we always know what the true source is? Could future training be done on data that itself was generated via machine learning. That brings up a load of other questions. Interesting times ahead...


Eulerian magnification should show artifacts of the slow down.


Don't our brains also extrapolate? I am sure our eyes feed the brain at a limited frequency, and the brain combines and extrapolates the images to create the illusion of smooth streams.


How high is that frequency is yet unknown: "Tests with Air force pilots have shown, that they could identify the plane on a flashed picture that was flashed only for 1/220th of a second.That is identifying. So it's pretty safe to say, that recognizing, that SOME light was there is possible with 1/300th of a second." http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm


On the upside for Swedes, routing between europe-north1 and Stockholm seems good. Typically around 10 ms for a roundtrip.


Here's a light-hearted comparison between the airline and PC world:

Motherboard/integration - Boeing/Airbus - a bunch of Taiwanese conglomerates, but the core design comes from Intel

OS - Boeing/Airbus - Microsoft/Apple

CPU/Engine - Rolls-Royce/GE - Intel

RAM/fuel - Saudi Aramco/etc - Samsung/SK Hynix/Micron

..

I don't know if it's useful in any way, but I found it interesting to do this exercise.


The truth is that in the alternative timeline where Theranos had a male founder they would never gotten their initial founding.

Holmes and Theranos rode the perfect wave built by the media being thirsty for a young, smart (blonde) female. It's so obvious when you look at it in hindsight.

Hilariously, even after the total collapse this topic is often taboo.

I can't help but feel for sorry for the young women out there creating actually useful innovations.


Theranos's first funding was in 2004, it had already raised $90M at $1B valuation in 2010, and started filling its board with defense bigwigs in 2011.

What media wave had happened at that point? From what I've seen, serious media coverage appeared in 2013, when they left "stealth mode" with the promise of the droplet testing, almost a decade after the initial investment.


I think he is referring to the media wave promoting women in entrepreneurship and in STEM courses and jobs, not to the media wave promoting this specific company.


I was misinformed (or remembered incorrectly) about the founding/media blitz sequencing. Thanks for informing me.


Then if you're interested in being less wrong, I suggest you to question why you were believing what you said, keeping in mind it was wrong.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: