2011-04-19 06:23 I suspect the bot that copies this channel to the log file is not working. 2011-04-19 06:26 ddd/t 2011-04-19 06:26 what makes you think that? 2011-04-19 10:59 wolfspraul: hmm, tuxbrain is very silent lately. do you have any life signs from him ? 2011-04-19 10:59 no 2011-04-19 11:00 but... tuxbrain nearly disappeared for 3+ months last year 2011-04-19 11:00 diving 2011-04-19 11:00 urgh 2011-04-19 11:00 and then he reappeared 2011-04-19 11:00 well the reality is sometimes with our kind of stuff you cannot hold the same pace all the time 2011-04-19 11:00 I am also quite a lot underground lately, or am I not? :-) 2011-04-19 11:01 so he reappeared last time (and stronger than before), he will surely reappear this time 2011-04-19 11:01 yes, indeed. found some "daytime" work ? 2011-04-19 11:01 no way 2011-04-19 11:01 all mm1-v3 ? 2011-04-19 11:01 I rather go run 10h / day thinking how to move forward 2011-04-19 11:02 (disappear/reappear) yeah. i'm just wondering because we have the wpan production moving along. so there's an external pace for a while. 2011-04-19 11:02 yes mostly rc3 2011-04-19 13:55 from our forum: "Is it Possible to use nanonote as an oscilloscope (using it's inbuilt ADC using the 3.5mm jack as input) using software like xoscope?" 2011-04-19 13:57 it ought to be, with all the constraints such a solution has (no DC-coupling, only AC-coupling; very limited bandwidth; probably not very linear either; ...) 2011-04-19 13:59 regarding software, it may be easier to write something from scratch than porting an application, particularly if non-X is a requirement 2011-04-19 14:00 (linear) that can of course be partially compensated by software 2011-04-19 14:02 hi guys 2011-04-19 14:04 hi 2011-04-19 14:10 If I recall correctly, when checking out eye tracker designs in the past, I have seen quite a lot of them using analog cameras compared to for example ordinary "webcams". If this is the case, is there any reason why an analog camera would be prefered? 2011-04-19 14:11 or could it just be the case that good enough digital cameras were not available when the designs with analog cameras were compiled? 2011-04-19 14:11 better optics than cheap webcams perhaps ? 2011-04-19 14:11 yes, that would be my guess 2011-04-19 14:12 some of the early webcams were quite dreadful 2011-04-19 14:12 If I were to play around with making my own eyetracker today, then I would want a very small camera to make it inobtrusive, and then what comes to mind are cameras from cell phones 2011-04-19 14:16 jesperj: yes, why not. phone cams have reasonably good resolution. and they (usually ?) have a fast parallel bus, so you can get the images out quickly enough. 2011-04-19 14:21 nods 2011-04-19 14:21 I just had to check if I had missed something there, some reason why not to use digital camera 2011-04-19 14:22 not reaööy 2011-04-19 14:22 irgh. really 2011-04-19 14:22 jesperj: 'no driver support yet' 2011-04-19 14:23 http://embeddedsystemnews.com/toshiba-introduces-new-8-megapixel-cmos-image-sensor-and-2mp-cscm-in-15-inch-optical-format.html < Cool. Besides CCM cameras there are also CSCM "Chip Scale Camera Module" 2011-04-19 14:23 roh: What do you mean with "no driver support yet"? 2011-04-19 14:26 digital camera -> digital interface. 2011-04-19 14:26 means usb or similar. 2011-04-19 14:26 mm1 doesnt have drivers for such afaik 2011-04-19 14:26 roh: hey there. I have some mechanical m1 feedback. 2011-04-19 14:26 first - Adam will see whether the DMX TX connector is available in a version that has the metal 'push' button on the left side, rather than on top 2011-04-19 14:27 that would make it easier to press, because otherwise the top acrylic is in the way a little when trying to press it 2011-04-19 14:27 if we do that, we would need to move the 'DMX' label to the left, otherwise it would be partially behind the 'push' button 2011-04-19 14:27 do you know what I mean? 2011-04-19 14:28 sure 2011-04-19 14:28 is that OK with you? (we haven't decided whether we want this change, I just try to get the pieces together so we can make a yes/no decision) 2011-04-19 14:28 of course i can do that 2011-04-19 14:28 it's a small thing, but seems like an easy change if such a connector exists... 2011-04-19 14:29 do you have any opposition against this idea? 2011-04-19 14:29 i would just like to remember that the current connector is neutrik. dont use anything cheaper or less qualitative. 2011-04-19 14:29 another option would be to cut out some piece from the top acrylic, but that's a bigger change and would look ugly imo 2011-04-19 14:29 no worries 2011-04-19 14:30 the 'push' is still pushable, but for someone with a bit bigger fingers, or even glove or so, it's probably hard to push it 2011-04-19 14:30 i was more worried that the depth to press the button isnt deep enough with 3mm acryllic 2011-04-19 14:30 roh: Pardon my ignorance but what is "mm1"? 2011-04-19 14:31 jesperj: thanks for asking, curiosity rules here :-) 2011-04-19 14:31 jesperj: milkymist one 2011-04-19 14:31 oh I am way too curious for my own good :) 2011-04-19 14:31 anonymous curiosics 2011-04-19 14:31 jesperj: i thought you were referring to the cam input and the discussions about adding one to the kit 2011-04-19 14:31 we all suffer from that one 2011-04-19 14:32 but it feels good if that attitude is common in this channel 2011-04-19 14:32 roh: I'm just testing. I cannot tell what the minimum is that 'push' needs to be pushed in, but there is no problem with that 2011-04-19 14:32 the push button definitely releases the cable 2011-04-19 14:32 roh: Oh. No I am thinking about pros and cons for usage in constructing an eye tracker. 2011-04-19 14:32 but it's hard to push down being squeezed in between the top acrylic and the DMX cable 2011-04-19 14:32 btw.. there are no analog cams.. or digital ones. there are cams with analog or digital video interfaces. the chips themselved (ccd/cmos) are not really analog anyhow 2011-04-19 14:32 roh: ok, so please note this. We _may_ move the DMX label to the left for the next order of 80 cases from you, it's not decided yet. 2011-04-19 14:33 I will let you know asap. 2011-04-19 14:33 roh: sure there are analog cams ;-) 2011-04-19 14:33 wolfspraul: the only thing i can do anyhow is drill the metal sheets from gemmel which arrived yesterday and then start unmounting the cnc mill 2011-04-19 14:33 roh: then I have another one. THe reception of the internal microphone is quite bad inside the case. How do you feel about adding a hole on the side, between VGA connector and line-in 2011-04-19 14:34 my electronics workbench is already unmounted and moved (not reassembled yet) 2011-04-19 14:34 jekhor: btw, mm1 refers to this: http://www.milkymist.org/ 2011-04-19 14:34 hm. i dont think a simple hole would make it better so much 2011-04-19 14:34 Adam would then need to see how he can move the microphone closer to the acrylic, or make it point towards the acrylic 2011-04-19 14:35 no we can make the microphone reach into the hole or so. only have to be careful that it's not becoming too fragile for assembly/disassembly 2011-04-19 14:35 to be fair.. i wonder why you added such a electret mike at all. 2011-04-19 14:35 you are saying you would remove the microphone? 2011-04-19 14:36 i wouldnt have added an internal one. 2011-04-19 14:36 I think an integrated microphone that 'just works' is nice. but inside the case the reception is just not very good, only if it is loud outside (which Sebastien says it is in a VJ environment) 2011-04-19 14:36 ok, but we have it and I think it's nice 2011-04-19 14:36 seems like a leftover from a develboard where somebody wanted to use all the pins on his codec (makes sense on a develboard) 2011-04-19 14:36 so the question is whether we can improve reception 2011-04-19 14:37 it's fun that you can clap into your hands and the vga output reacts :-) 2011-04-19 14:37 i am not critisising.. just wondering. dont vj's always get proper line audio from the dj booth? 2011-04-19 14:37 ok let's just be very specific about the upcoming run of 80, rc3 2011-04-19 14:37 wolfspraul: how does sound currently reach the mic ? are there holes for it in the acrylic ? 2011-04-19 14:37 wpwrak: resonance mostly 2011-04-19 14:37 I think it's clear we do not want to move the vga connector or line in/out 2011-04-19 14:38 so the only question is whether we can improve the microphone reception 2011-04-19 14:38 we will not remove the mic in rc3 2011-04-19 14:38 roh: so .. negative hi-fi ? 2011-04-19 14:38 adam can move it closer to the acrylic, and make it point to the acrylic 2011-04-19 14:38 I think if there would be a hole there, things could be much better 2011-04-19 14:38 wpwrak: its a low-end electrec capsue.. so.. regardless of making holes.. ye. low-fi 2011-04-19 14:38 wpwrak: well. no. 2011-04-19 14:38 wolfspraul: one hole or a number of holes ? 2011-04-19 14:39 and my fingers are still sleeping 2011-04-19 14:39 the gaps in the case somewhere :-) 2011-04-19 14:39 I was thinking about one hole, potentially large enough so that the mic can reach into it 2011-04-19 14:39 does the mic have a surface suitable for exposure ? 2011-04-19 14:40 wpwrak: nope. 2011-04-19 14:40 huh? checking... 2011-04-19 14:40 wolfspraul: i think i can imagine.. but it wouldn look pretty 2011-04-19 14:40 so that would suggests many small holes something like <= 1mm 2011-04-19 14:40 ok, then we can also do something with a few small holes, and the mic behind those 2011-04-19 14:40 that's also more robust for assembly/disassembly 2011-04-19 14:41 why 'many small holes'? I would make them less and bigger 2011-04-19 14:41 3-5 2011-04-19 14:41 and what keeps the mic there? 2011-04-19 14:41 it keeps itself there, it's on some feet right now (wait checking...) 2011-04-19 14:41 drawback: may give an access for spilled liquids. does the mic face upward ? 2011-04-19 14:41 just need to find out that points to the side, or simply bend it 2011-04-19 14:42 mine has weird bent pins... , 2 2011-04-19 14:42 wpwrak: ack 2011-04-19 14:42 ok mine is sitting flat on the pcb 2011-04-19 14:43 wolfspraul: add some 3$ mic for external connect, remove the internal one ;) 2011-04-19 14:43 diameter seems to be 5-6mm (guessed) 2011-04-19 14:43 outsource the issue11!1 2011-04-19 14:43 oh course, most DJs probably have a spare gibbet stowed away for anyone who spills their drink on the equipment, but still ... 2011-04-19 14:43 more clutter, I really don't like it 2011-04-19 14:43 also more expensive 2011-04-19 14:43 integrated mic is nice 2011-04-19 14:44 maybe you should test the internal mic 2011-04-19 14:44 via line out. 2011-04-19 14:44 so... it seems we have a lot of enthousiasm and reached consensus :-) 2011-04-19 14:44 and some headphones or so 2011-04-19 14:45 (joking) 2011-04-19 14:45 to 'hear wat the mm hears' 2011-04-19 14:45 maybe you are right and there are more problems 2011-04-19 14:45 but I just want to make a simple improvement now, or understand what simple improvement is possible 2011-04-19 14:45 it is pretty clear that the mic is really locked away right now 2011-04-19 14:45 check how sensitive it is without case and if wood or acryllic makes much difference etc 2011-04-19 14:46 well, that's easy 2011-04-19 14:46 open the top cover, run some patch, speak into the microphone 2011-04-19 14:46 no. not a patch 2011-04-19 14:46 then close the cover, tighten the screws, try the same thing again 2011-04-19 14:46 :-) 2011-04-19 14:46 i meant AUDIO 2011-04-19 14:46 for the little holes, probably a center hole plus a ring of peripheral holes would work well. maybe with a ring diameter of ~5 mm. (hole center would be on the ring) 2011-04-19 14:46 not something which works on it. use headphones. 2011-04-19 14:47 I am pretty sure that the way we lock it into the acrylic makes it mostly 'deaf' 2011-04-19 14:47 of course in software we can increase the volume again, but why not add some holes and move the mic close to those holes? 2011-04-19 14:47 something like 6 holes on the ring 2011-04-19 14:48 Sebastien made the best point - in a typical VJ environment it is so loud that even if it's locked away, it will still work 2011-04-19 14:49 wolfspraul: the case probably also has frequency-dependent attenuation. so you'd have to equalize as well, not just amplify. 2011-04-19 14:49 but I think that's a quite extreme argument, even if valid, especially that is no argument why it shouldn't be better in the first place 2011-04-19 14:49 roh: let's do 2 things: 2011-04-19 14:49 1) I ask Adam how easy it is to move the mic right next to the side, and make it point to the side (90 degree) 2011-04-19 14:50 2) same as with 'moving the DMX label', you know that we are looking into this and maybe we want to add some holes there. if so I will try to send you a mechanical sample upfront. 2011-04-19 14:50 or just some parts so you can try/imagine 2011-04-19 14:51 you haven't made a point yet why such holes would be bad, you only say the whole internal mic idea is bad 2011-04-19 14:51 you could also combine "many small holes" with "lateral placement". that would remove the access for liquids. 2011-04-19 14:51 wpwrak: you mean just leave it sitting flat on the pcb? 2011-04-19 14:52 if we add a few holes, we probably also want to add a new label 'MIC' 2011-04-19 14:52 wolfspraul: leaving it flat may not be optimal when the sound comes from the side. but if you can tilt it and make small holes on the side, you'd get reasonably simple assembly plus direct access for soundwaves, yet no new upward-facing hole(s) 2011-04-19 14:53 upward facing holes? 2011-04-19 14:53 wpwrak is your email working these days? 2011-04-19 14:54 I thought roh and I so far talked about holes on the side 2011-04-19 14:54 (hole pattern) with a 1+6 pattern, the distance between holes on the ring would be roughly the same as the distance between holes and the ring and the center hole 2011-04-19 14:54 rjeffries: aye 2011-04-19 14:54 thx 2011-04-19 14:54 roh: technically adding holes there and a 'MIC' label is OK for you? 2011-04-19 14:54 rjeffries: at least a dozen bayes-cheating spammers have told me so today :-( 2011-04-19 14:55 wolfspraul: could do that.. dont think it will look nice yet 2011-04-19 14:55 you mean the side, right? 2011-04-19 14:55 actually now that I think about it, most 'mic' designs just have 1 small hole 2011-04-19 14:55 like the Ben :-) 2011-04-19 14:55 wolfspraul: (holes) ah, thought that plan A was big mounting hole on the side, plan B many small holes wherever the mic is facing 2011-04-19 14:56 does only work with directional sounds... like headphones.. or telephones 2011-04-19 14:56 the mic is facing up, but the distance between top of mic and top acrylic is quite big, and I wouldn't want holes in the top side 2011-04-19 14:56 and the mic is placed directly behind such one-hole-things 2011-04-19 14:56 yes but we can do that here 2011-04-19 14:56 one hole, say 2mm diameter? or 1mm? then the mic right behind it? 2011-04-19 14:57 anyhow... i'll need to run now..  hope i can get the drilling for the metal done today... then the machines will be disassembled 2011-04-19 14:57 ok 2011-04-19 14:57 roh: please remember those 2 potential additions 2011-04-19 14:57 DMX label move, MIC label & hole 2011-04-19 14:57 'potential' right now 2011-04-19 14:57 wolfspraul: i'll ask again for final thoughts before giving the big laser order. 2011-04-19 14:58 thanks 2011-04-19 14:58 currently i am just stocking on parts and ramping everything to the 'go' 2011-04-19 14:58 while moving ;) 2011-04-19 15:01 bbl 2011-04-19 15:30 is everyone asleep? 2011-04-19 15:30 or working :) 2011-04-19 16:53 wpwrak that is a decent alibi. ;) 2011-04-19 18:15 wpwrak that is a decent alibi. ;) 2011-04-19 18:15 alibi of that: 2011-04-19 18:15 git commit crime 2011-04-19 18:16 ? 2011-04-19 18:19 alibi for being silent yet not asleep :) 2011-04-19 19:27 hmm, does anyone know if there's a way to do the equivalent of passing a -geometry argument with SDL ? what i'm looking for is a way to make an SDL window appear at a specific position under X. 2011-04-19 19:28 ah, found it.  export SDL_VIDEO_WINDOW_POS=x,y    :) 2011-04-19 19:51 hi, will this IDE2USB (NEC D720130GC) http://dl.dropbox.com/u/215810/ide2usb.jpg need separate power or it can take it from the USB bus? It comes from a 3.5'' HD enclosure. 2011-04-19 19:55 wrong channel but you may just try 2011-04-19 20:06 Jay7: any other suggestion besides #hardware 2011-04-19 20:07 sorry, I don't know any.. 2011-04-19 20:30 wpwrak interesting set of slides around TinyOS and wireless PANs. http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/mharvan/talks/wsn.pdf 2011-04-19 20:45 heh, yet another C variant ;-) 2011-04-19 20:51 the problem: global optimization is hard because object files don't carry enough information. attempted solution: dumb down the language a but and beef up the object files a bit, until you can somewhat do global optimization. fact not considered: open source exists. 2011-04-19 20:51 an analogy: 2011-04-19 20:52 the problem: this knot is too difficult to disentangle. attempted solution: get the knotmaker to make it a little less complicated and use an oiled rope, until you can wiggle it apart. fact not considered: you're carrying a sword. 2011-04-19 20:53 how hard can it be to put 2 and 2 together and arrive at the correct result ? :) 2011-04-19 21:54 wpwrak what do you kn ow about the microIP protocol they mention wher eit looks like 2011-04-19 21:55 they are able to have a very small IP and TCP/IP that (I think) they tunnel through some lower level protocol 2011-04-19 21:56 the aim being to allow a VERY low poere WPAN node be able to conne=ct (eventually, through a gateway) 2011-04-19 21:56 to the "real internet) 2011-04-19 22:01 rjeffries: isn't uIP a stack of 6lowpan, not a new protocol ? 2011-04-19 22:03 rjeffries: how you connect to the "real" internet is another question. sometimes you do indeed want a layer 7 gateway. 2011-04-19 22:05 rjeffries: non-standard layer <= 3 protocols don't make sense anyway. not being able to fit 6lowpan into some microcontroller is hardly an excuse :) 2011-04-19 22:07 wpwrak I am out of date re your status with 6lowpan. 2011-04-19 22:10 rjeffries: nothing new for the last few weeks. i'm now working on the production testing.