A 60 GHz phased array for $10 • Hacker News Board

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#41

Post by TehCorwiz » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:16 PM UTC

stefan_ wrote: post #6

I love how industry came up with ever crazier schemes to stream content from phones and laptops to TVs. There must have been three different attempts involving WiFi alone, but this phased array mmWave 60 GHz million bucks basic research abomination surely takes the cake. Meanwhile, some Google engineer realized you could solve 90% of phone-to-TV streaming applications and 100% of the hard technical problems by just t…

Yes, genius if the content is asynchronous.

Any real-time or interactive display will need to be able to stream at sub-frame latencies. At 60fps that means less than 16ms, at VR friendly refresh rates ~90fps that means 11ms.

While their approach works beautifully for their core competencies, static and non-interactive streaming content, it doesn't really work for any other application.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#42

Post by aesthesia » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:19 PM UTC

vba wrote: post #38

SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The efficient market hypothesis implies that P==NP. There's a LOT of reason to believe it's false.

How so? Can you elaborate? Genuinely interested

Well, a naive, overly strong formulation of the efficient markets hypothesis may imply that P=NP. Something like "an optimal trading strategy is a function depending on the entire market history, and in order to find an optimal trading strategy, one must check an exponentially large space of such functions."

The paper is here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1002.2284.pdf. They do a sketchy reduction to an extremely stylized model of the market from the knapsack problem and 3-SAT.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#43

Post by hwillis » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:20 PM UTC

jobseeker990 wrote: post #22

lachlan-sneff wrote: post #18

Phased arrays are very cool tech. Personally, I can't wait for visible-wavelength optical phased arrays to hit the mainstream (they're just now being implemented), since they'd enable tech like legitimately holographic displays and video cameras with digitally programmable optical zoom.

Have any further reading I can do on this?

https://www.spar3d.com/news/lidar/mits-10-lidar-chip-will-ch...

holographic displays would use eye trackers to show each eye a different image. Solid state zoom is maybe a bit of a stretch, but it would involve pixels becoming sensitive to angles more inward or outward from the sensor's center.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#44

Post by sudosysgen » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:20 PM UTC

vba wrote: post #38

SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The efficient market hypothesis implies that P==NP. There's a LOT of reason to believe it's false.

How so? Can you elaborate? Genuinely interested

Here is a paper on it : https://arxiv.org/pdf/1002.2284.pdf

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#45

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

ngvrnd wrote: post #24

Traster wrote: post #15

>Now the bad news: SiBeam was bought by Lattice Semiconductor, and right before I gave this talk, Lattice shut down the entire SiBeam organization and ended support and production of this part. I didn’t find out about this until months later, when I contacted the sales engineers I had been talking to about this part and they told me what happened. This is one thing that really pisses me off. Time and time again you'v…

This linked article says this chip was produced to support a standard that didn't catch on. It's not surprising that it's no longer in production if this is true.

[deleted]

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#46

Post by Polylactic_acid » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:34 PM UTC

opwieurposiu wrote: post #7

nsxwolf wrote: post #3

Is this appropriate for creating a wireless HDMI interface for VR headsets?

Datasheet says it add 5ms latency, latency in VR causes nausea.

I haven't used it but the reports I have seen say the vive wireless seems to work fine without noticeable latency.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#47

Post by bordercases » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:37 PM UTC

paulmd wrote: post #32

TomMarius wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The founders obviously wanted to exit

everyone wants to exit, the only question is how many zeroes it'll take for you to admit it. If I offered you a billion dollars for 100% of your startup today, would you really actually not exit? what's the old saw? "now we're just haggling over the price"... https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/

Then how do we realign capital to stop keeping large loss-running companies or now slow-growing companies on life support so that basic innovations can still penetrate the market?

IIRC Zuckerberg had the option to relinquish control of his company but other than taking that sweet sweet In-Q-Tel dollar still did his best to stay at the helm.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#48

Post by bordercases » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

big_chungus wrote: post #36

ethbro wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can it be that these companies can afford to buy companies at a premium, throw away massive parts of the value of the company It's almost like the lack of robust anti-trust prosecution by world governments have so enriched large, rent-seeking companies that they can literally afford to burn money and still come out ahead...

On the other hand, preventing acquisitions reduces available exits and might discourage future innovation (which in turn might promote more trusts).

There needs to be a larger gradient of funding options than "Waste cash until unicorn" or "rent-seek until next bailout", and "dominate small-to-medium market niche" or "sponsor and penetrate next manufacturing commodity".

We've seen so much wastage from the prevailing financial model in SV tech.

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#49

Post by bordercases » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:41 PM UTC

vba wrote: post #38

SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The efficient market hypothesis implies that P==NP. There's a LOT of reason to believe it's false.

How so? Can you elaborate? Genuinely interested

Rather than using the metaphors from one field in another field whose day-to-day has little to do with those concepts, try reading a book:

https://www.amazon.com/Efficiently-Inefficient-Invests-Marke...

Re: A 60 GHz phased array for $10

#50

Post by nicoburns » Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

bordercases wrote: post #47

paulmd wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

everyone wants to exit, the only question is how many zeroes it'll take for you to admit it. If I offered you a billion dollars for 100% of your startup today, would you really actually not exit? what's the old saw? "now we're just haggling over the price"... https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/03/07/haggling/

Then how do we realign capital to stop keeping large loss-running companies or now slow-growing companies on life support so that basic innovations can still penetrate the market? IIRC Zuckerberg had the option to relinquish control of his company but other than taking that sweet sweet In-Q-Tel dollar still did his best to stay at the helm.

Agressively tax large organisations. There'd be a cost to that, but as this comment chain is discussing, there's also a cost to leaving them with the money and allowing them to use it to stifle innovation.