This paper produces a good result: http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2007/ph210/otey2/. If you game is OK sounding synthetic, I've had good results simulating a string plucked off center, decay each harmonic proportional to the frequency, then adding reverb.
A sound font or VST plug-in with appropriate licenses may be another route, but I can't speak to how difficult that would be to work with. It's on my to-do list.
I wish comparisons like this would include unicode coverage. I have code that uses the symbols, arrows, etc. to avoid needing image assets. Or some non-English text that need accented characters or the CJK glyphs.
The Cypress PSoC might be of interest. It's a combination FPGA and microcontroller, the low-end demo boards with USB programming get as low as ~$10.
Though most of what you can do with the FPGA would be covered by built-in timer/capture modules or the PICO PIO modules on other chips (though IIRC, some of the boards have analog support in the FPGA if you wanted to do real-time audio processing). I have not found a particular hobbyist use for them, only know it from my father teaching some computer engineering courses and picking since he could use the same board for digital logic and microcontroller programming.
You can theory-craft a non-malicious justification: Insurance trusts Dr. Hibbert will perform the procedure without complications and has negotiated a fixed price of $1K. Insurance doesn't trust Dr. Nick and believes any procedure he performs will result in a second claim later to set things right. Insurance strongly wants you to chose Dr. Hibbert and the only leverage they have is to refuse to pay for Dr. Nick should you go with him.
Not sure how plausible that is though--I suppose they could data-mine frequency of follow-up treatment required per doctor--but I've never observed in network/out of network to correspond to a meaningful metric (our local dentist recommended by all the dental specialists around doesn't deal with any insurance companies, while the in-network dentist is pretty clearly padding their work)
I usually filter by "Retailer: Walmart.com" for any common and/or name-brand item (and price/shipping is usually better than 3rd part sellers anyway). You still have to take your chances for more obscure items, but at least for me that's rare.
My experience with HW HSMs has been that the FIPS process is so expensive that companies are only willing to put out a new FIPS-certified version once year. Also the certification itself seems to be more concerned with high-level security requirements rather than proof that any particular features of your HSM work correctly.
So the answer to any particular bug is typically wait until next year's version which includes all bug fixes that the normal releases have built up over the past year, or re-evaluate if you really need the certification.
We typically assume that loans are taken for some immediate use (rather than just having cash on hand). Thus you get the following scenario:
Bank loans $money to person A. Person A uses the $money to buy from person B. Person B deposits $money into the Bank. Bank now has $money (less reserve requirements) available to lend.
If you attempted to sell those treasury bonds now on the secondary, you would have to accept the same $99 the shares of VFITX are worth. The immediate, liquid value is the same either way. (You need a common unit to comapre in instead of VFITX in now-$ to bonds in principle-$.)
If you hold the bonds and/or VFITX instead, the interest pay out of the bonds and the distributions of VFITX should also come out equal (except not, the fund has the advantage that it can change its composition from buying/selling bonds, but also has the overhead of selecting and performing those transactions).
(In reference to your below comment, yes, fund != holding bonds. The fund is closer to you buying the bonds, but also buying/selling as bonds mature or you anticipate changes in rates)
Isn't that the logical approach to teaching it though? Start with the base case, analyze how it functions, then start looking it how it changes when you remove an assumption.
Similar to how physics starts with perfectly elastic point-masses in vacuum on a friction-less plane.
If I'm reading the post right, it's stricter than that:
> ...distrusting certificates whose validity period (the difference of notBefore to notAfter) exceeds the specified maximum.
I.e., a certificate valid from 1/2015..1/2019 is distrusted as of Chrome 59.
And the more lax restrictions only apply to certificates that have already been issued. Any one issued after Chrome 61 are held to the highest (9 mo) limit.
> In addition, we propose to require that all newly-issued certificates must have validity periods of no greater than 9 months (279 days) in order to be trusted in Google Chrome, effective Chrome 61.
I can't speak specifically to SHA-1/2, but typically the criteria for the standards takes into account lower-end hardware that must be able to execute the algorithms with limited memory and processing (especially embedded systems).
For example, smart cards and terminals for the payments/banking industry. These algorithms came out in the 90's when you often had 8-bit processors and very little memory to work with.
At the last place I worked, we were looking for an entry-level developer and routinely turned down computer science graduates. They knew their theory, big-o, algorithm names, and such, but could not code at all in any medium. (And we weren't looking for any specific language--just enough background that they could learn our internal test scripts.)
There is a sharp difference between "Computer Science" and "Computer Engineering" though colleges often conflate the two. The article's author sounds like the latter, and with his personal background in programming, I would expect him to do fine in the position we were trying to fill. But many other graduates with CS on their diploma will have written just enough Java to pass their one programming course and have no interest in learning any more.
You don't need to know everything about the field, but you do need the ability to learn the practice. "Computer Science" on a resume (without some sign of personal projects) is too often a flag that the person lacks that ability.
That's not necessary malicious on the part of the power company.
At a previous job, we built a system for a company that prepared batteries through multiple charge/discharge phases. During a discharge, the power was pushed back onto the grid.
The major challenge was matching the waveform of the grid power (occasional spikes confusing the zero-crossing, drift on the timer elements etc.). If you don't, it reduces the efficiency of the power company's transformer leading to replacement with a larger one, or damage due to the excess heat. You can imagine they're going to recover that expense from somewhere (and you and your dirty sine wave are pretty clearly at fault).
I would expect the home systems to be less precise than our industrial client's equipment.
This strikes me as a far more important consideration than the loss of revenue or potential harm being discussed in the other topics.
Blacking out Google's front page will reach 38 Million (or 12% of the population) [1]. Compare that to the effort involved in more traditional political advertising--The largest TV audience is around 27 Million [2] (And drops by 50% to the most popular non-football program). There's also the question of how invasive the ads are. I'd bet a notice on the Google homepage getting in your way every time you do a search will have far more impact than newspaper ad that you skip over once you realize it isn't an article.
We know there's a level of discomfort concerning business's influence on politics. There was fallout over the supreme court decision in Citizens United v. FEC--the issue is being brought up again [3].
Google has a lot of power over the internet and a lot of knowledge of what people do on-line. Most of us can overlook that since we don't see a personal impact (except every few months a site vanishes from Google's results and the owner's blog post shows up on HN). Though they are getting attention from congressional inquiries and lawyers seeking to kill opposing sites.
Consider the fallout if Google went ahead. You have people uneasy with how businesses can effect politics from just the abstract idea of donations being shown a very concrete example. You have politicians with the power to regulate Google being shown that Google can be a danger to them.
I don't see how they could risk losing their perceived neutrality and harmlessness.
[1] Using the statistics from http://google.com.hypestat.com/ for a rough estimate: 129M unique visitors daily, 30% from the United States, that's 38.7M or 12% of the population.
A sound font or VST plug-in with appropriate licenses may be another route, but I can't speak to how difficult that would be to work with. It's on my to-do list.