sa

Jordanian Dinar(JOD)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Jordanian Dinar = 5.2942 Saudi Riyal




sa

Lebanese Pound(LBP)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Lebanese Pound = 0.0058 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Lebanese Pound(LBP)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Lebanese Pound = 0.0025 Saudi Riyal




sa

Bahraini Dinar(BHD)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Bahraini Dinar = 23.1416 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Bahraini Dinar(BHD)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Bahraini Dinar = 9.9325 Saudi Riyal




sa

Chilean Peso(CLP)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Chilean Peso = 0.0106 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Chilean Peso(CLP)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Chilean Peso = 0.0045 Saudi Riyal




sa

[Women's Outdoor Track & Field] Freshman Talisa Budder Qualifies for Track Nationals

In November 2011, Talisa Budder from Kenwood, OK qualified for the 2011 NAIA Women's Cross Country National Championships.  Upon her return to the Haskell campus she began training for the track program.   




sa

[Women's Outdoor Track & Field] Trio of Indians to Compete at Kansas Relays

Christina Belone, Talisa Budder and Matt Woody to take part on second day of 85th edition of the prestigious event




sa

Maldivian Rufiyaa(MVR)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Maldivian Rufiyaa = 0.5645 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Maldivian Rufiyaa(MVR)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Maldivian Rufiyaa = 0.2423 Saudi Riyal




sa

Malaysian Ringgit(MYR)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Malaysian Ringgit = 2.0193 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Malaysian Ringgit(MYR)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Malaysian Ringgit = 0.8667 Saudi Riyal




sa

El enigma de la COVID-19: ¿Por qué el virus arrasa en algunos lugares y en otros no?

Los expertos se preguntan por qué el coronavirus es tan caprichoso. Las respuestas pueden determinar el mejor modo de protegernos y durante cuánto tiempo tendremos que hacerlo.




sa

Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro(NIO)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro = 0.2544 Salvadoran Colon



  • Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro

sa

Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro(NIO)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro = 0.1092 Saudi Riyal



  • Nicaraguan Cordoba Oro

sa

Saints' schedule 2020: Tom Brady in Week 1, Vikings on Christmas

The NFL didn’t wait long to shine a spotlight on the new Brady-Brees rivalry, but the Saints' fate could be decided by brutal late-season stretch.




sa

Favre: $1.1M for PSAs, not no-show speeches

Brett Favre on Friday disputed a Mississippi state auditor's report that said the Hall of Fame quarterback received $1.1 million in welfare money for multiple speaking engagements that he didn't actually attend.




sa

Netherlands Antillean Guilder(ANG)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Netherlands Antillean Guilder = 4.875 Salvadoran Colon



  • Netherlands Antillean Guilder

sa

Netherlands Antillean Guilder(ANG)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Netherlands Antillean Guilder = 2.0924 Saudi Riyal



  • Netherlands Antillean Guilder

sa

Estonian Kroon(EEK)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Estonian Kroon = 0.6136 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Estonian Kroon(EEK)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Estonian Kroon = 0.2634 Saudi Riyal




sa

Danish Krone(DKK)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Danish Krone = 1.2719 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Danish Krone(DKK)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Danish Krone = 0.5459 Saudi Riyal




sa

Fiji Dollar(FJD)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Fiji Dollar = 3.8844 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Fiji Dollar(FJD)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Fiji Dollar = 1.6672 Saudi Riyal




sa

New Zealand Dollar(NZD)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 New Zealand Dollar = 5.3718 Salvadoran Colon



  • New Zealand Dollar

sa

New Zealand Dollar(NZD)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 New Zealand Dollar = 2.3056 Saudi Riyal



  • New Zealand Dollar

sa

Croatian Kuna(HRK)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Croatian Kuna = 1.2613 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Croatian Kuna(HRK)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Croatian Kuna = 0.5414 Saudi Riyal




sa

Peruvian Nuevo Sol(PEN)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Peruvian Nuevo Sol = 2.5747 Salvadoran Colon



  • Peruvian Nuevo Sol

sa

Peruvian Nuevo Sol(PEN)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Peruvian Nuevo Sol = 1.1051 Saudi Riyal



  • Peruvian Nuevo Sol

sa

Dominican Peso(DOP)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Dominican Peso = 0.159 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Dominican Peso(DOP)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Dominican Peso = 0.0682 Saudi Riyal




sa

[Men's Outdoor Track & Field] Haskell Runners Finish-Up Kansas Relays Appearance

Christina Belone, Talisa Budder and Matt Woody compete in the 85th edition of the annual event

  




sa

Papua New Guinean Kina(PGK)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Papua New Guinean Kina = 2.5512 Salvadoran Colon



  • Papua New Guinean Kina

sa

Papua New Guinean Kina(PGK)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Papua New Guinean Kina = 1.095 Saudi Riyal



  • Papua New Guinean Kina

sa

Brunei Dollar(BND)/Salvadoran Colon(SVC)

1 Brunei Dollar = 6.1925 Salvadoran Colon




sa

Brunei Dollar(BND)/Saudi Riyal(SAR)

1 Brunei Dollar = 2.6579 Saudi Riyal




sa

[Men's Basketball] Saturday 1/11/20 Men's Basketball Game Postponed to 2/12/20





sa

Glory and Sadness, Beauty and Pain

X is a song written by Y and famously covered by Z. Time Magazine’s Josh Tyrangiel described it thus:

Y murmured the original like a dirge, but except for a single overwrought breath before the music kicks in, Z treated the 7-min. song like a tiny capsule of humanity, using his voice to careen between glory and sadness, beauty and pain, mostly just by repeating the word X. It’s not only Z’s best song — it’s one of the great songs, and because it covers so much emotional ground and is not (yet) a painfully obvious choice, it has become the go-to track whenever a TV show wants to create instant mood. ‘X can be joyous or bittersweet, depending on what part of it you use,’ says Sony ATV’s Kathy Coleman. ‘It’s one of those rare songs that the more it gets used, the more people want to use it.’

Name X, Y and Z.

Workoutable © 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic




sa

Here Is Why the Indian Voter Is Saddled With Bad Economics

This is the 15th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

It’s election season, and promises are raining down on voters like rose petals on naïve newlyweds. Earlier this week, the Congress party announced a minimum income guarantee for the poor. This Friday, the Modi government released a budget full of sops. As the days go by, the promises will get bolder, and you might feel important that so much attention is being given to you. Well, the joke is on you.

Every election, HL Mencken once said, is “an advance auction sale of stolen goods.” A bunch of competing mafias fight to rule over you for the next five years. You decide who wins, on the basis of who can bribe you better with your own money. This is an absurd situation, which I tried to express in a limerick I wrote for this page a couple of years ago:

POLITICS: A neta who loves currency notes/ Told me what his line of work denotes./ ‘It is kind of funny./ We steal people’s money/And use some of it to buy their votes.’

We’re the dupes here, and we pay far more to keep this circus going than this circus costs. It would be okay if the parties, once they came to power, provided good governance. But voters have given up on that, and now only want patronage and handouts. That leads to one of the biggest problems in Indian politics: We are stuck in an equilibrium where all good politics is bad economics, and vice versa.

For example, the minimum guarantee for the poor is good politics, because the optics are great. It’s basically Garibi Hatao: that slogan made Indira Gandhi a political juggernaut in the 1970s, at the same time that she unleashed a series of economic policies that kept millions of people in garibi for decades longer than they should have been.

This time, the Congress has released no details, and keeping it vague makes sense because I find it hard to see how it can make economic sense. Depending on how they define ‘poor’, how much income they offer and what the cost is, the plan will either be ineffective or unworkable.

The Modi government’s interim budget announced a handout for poor farmers that seemed rather pointless. Given our agricultural distress, offering a poor farmer 500 bucks a month seems almost like mockery.

Such condescending handouts solve nothing. The poor want jobs and opportunities. Those come with growth, which requires structural reforms. Structural reforms don’t sound sexy as election promises. Handouts do.

A classic example is farm loan waivers. We have reached a stage in our politics where every party has to promise them to assuage farmers, who are a strong vote bank everywhere. You can’t blame farmers for wanting them – they are a necessary anaesthetic. But no government has yet made a serious attempt at tackling the root causes of our agricultural crisis.

Why is it that Good Politics in India is always Bad Economics? Let me put forth some possible reasons. One, voters tend to think in zero-sum ways, as if the pie is fixed, and the only way to bring people out of poverty is to redistribute. The truth is that trade is a positive-sum game, and nations can only be lifted out of poverty when the whole pie grows. But this is unintuitive.

Two, Indian politics revolves around identity and patronage. The spoils of power are limited – that is indeed a zero-sum game – so you’re likely to vote for whoever can look after the interests of your in-group rather than care about the economy as a whole.

Three, voters tend to stay uninformed for good reasons, because of what Public Choice economists call Rational Ignorance. A single vote is unlikely to make a difference in an election, so why put in the effort to understand the nuances of economics and governance? Just ask, what is in it for me, and go with whatever seems to be the best answer.

Four, Politicians have a short-term horizon, geared towards winning the next election. A good policy that may take years to play out is unattractive. A policy that will win them votes in the short term is preferable.

Sadly, no Indian party has shown a willingness to aim for the long term. The Congress has produced new Gandhis, but not new ideas. And while the BJP did make some solid promises in 2014, they did not walk that talk, and have proved to be, as Arun Shourie once called them, UPA + Cow. Even the Congress is adopting the cow, in fact, so maybe the BJP will add Temple to that mix?

Benjamin Franklin once said, “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.” This election season, my friends, the people of India are on the menu. You have been deveined and deboned, marinated with rhetoric, seasoned with narrative – now enter the oven and vote.



© 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic




sa

Farmers, Technology and Freedom of Choice: A Tale of Two Satyagrahas

This is the 23rd installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

I had a strange dream last night. I dreamt that the government had passed a law that made using laptops illegal. I would have to write this column by hand. I would also have to leave my home in Mumbai to deliver it in person to my editor in Delhi. I woke up trembling and angry – and realised how Indian farmers feel every single day of their lives.

My column today is a tale of two satyagrahas. Both involve farmers, technology and the freedom of choice. One of them began this month – but first, let us go back to the turn of the millennium.

As the 1990s came to an end, cotton farmers across India were in distress. Pests known as bollworms were ravaging crops across the country. Farmers had to use increasing amounts of pesticide to keep them at bay. The costs of the pesticide and the amount of labour involved made it unviable – and often, the crops would fail anyway.

Then, technology came to the rescue. The farmers heard of Bt Cotton, a genetically modified type of cotton that kept these pests away, and was being used around the world. But they were illegal in India, even though no bad effects had ever been recorded. Well, who cares about ‘illegal’ when it is a matter of life and death?

Farmers in Gujarat got hold of Bt Cotton seeds from the black market and planted them. You’ll never guess what happened next. As 2002 began, all cotton crops in Gujarat failed – except the 10,000 hectares that had Bt Cotton. The government did not care about the failed crops. They cared about the ‘illegal’ ones. They ordered all the Bt Cotton crops to be destroyed.

It was time for a satyagraha – and not just in Gujarat. The late Sharad Joshi, leader of the Shetkari Sanghatana in Maharashtra, took around 10,000 farmers to Gujarat to stand with their fellows there. They sat in the fields of Bt Cotton and basically said, ‘Over our dead bodies.’ ¬Joshi’s point was simple: all other citizens of India have access to the latest technology from all over. They are all empowered with choice. Why should farmers be held back?

The satyagraha was successful. The ban on Bt Cotton was lifted.

There are three things I would like to point out here. One, the lifting of the ban transformed cotton farming in India. Over 90% of Indian farmers now use Bt Cotton. India has become the world’s largest producer of cotton, moving ahead of China. According to agriculture expert Ashok Gulati, India has gained US$ 67 billion in the years since from higher exports and import savings because of Bt Cotton. Most importantly, cotton farmers’ incomes have doubled.

Two, GMO crops have become standard across the world. Around 190 million hectares of GMO crops have been planted worldwide, and GMO foods are accepted in 67 countries. The humanitarian benefits have been massive: Golden Rice, a variety of rice packed with minerals and vitamins, has prevented blindness in countless new-born kids since it was introduced in the Philippines.

Three, despite the fear-mongering of some NGOs, whose existence depends on alarmism, the science behind GMO is settled. No harmful side effects have been noted in all these years, and millions of lives impacted positively. A couple of years ago, over 100 Nobel Laureates signed a petition asserting that GMO foods were safe, and blasting anti-science NGOs that stood in the way of progress. There is scientific consensus on this.

The science may be settled, but the politics is not. The government still bans some types of GMO seeds, such as Bt Brinjal, which was developed by an Indian company called Mahyco, and used successfully in Bangladesh. More crucially, a variety called HT Bt Cotton, which fights weeds, is also banned. Weeding takes up to 15% of a farmer’s time, and often makes farming unviable. Farmers across the world use this variant – 60% of global cotton crops are HT Bt. Indian farmers are so desperate for it that they choose to break the law and buy expensive seeds from the black market – but the government is cracking down. A farmer in Haryana had his crop destroyed by the government in May.

On June 10 this year, a farmer named Lalit Bahale in the Akola District of Maharashtra kicked off a satyagraha by planting banned seeds of HT Bt Cotton and Bt Brinjal. He was soon joined by thousands of farmers. Far from our urban eyes, a heroic fight has begun. Our farmers, already victimised and oppressed by a predatory government in countless ways, are fighting for their right to take charge of their lives.

As this brave struggle unfolds, I am left with a troubling question: All those satyagrahas of the past by our great freedom fighters, what were they for, if all they got us was independence and not freedom?



© 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic




sa

Force cell equivalence between same-footprint and same-functionality hard-macros in Conformal LEC

For a netlist vs. netlist LEC flow we have to solve the following problem:

- in the RTL code we replicate a large array of N x M all-identical hard-macros, let call them MACRO_A

- MACRO_A is pre-assembled in Innovus and contains digital parts and analog parts (bottom-up hierarchical flow)

- at top-level (full-chip) we instantiate this array of all-identical macros

- in the top-level place-and-route flow we perform ecoChangeCell to remaster the top row of this array with MACRO_B

- MACRO_B is just a copy of the original MACRO_A cell containing same pins position, same internal digital functionality and also same digital layout, only slight differences in one analog block inside the macro

- MACRO_A and MACRO_B have the same .lib file generated with the do_extract_model command at the end of the Innovus flow, they only differ in the name of the macro

- when performing post-synthesis netlist vs post-place-and-route we load .lib files of both macros in Conformal LEC

- the LEC flow fails because Conformal LEC sees only MACRO_A instantiated in the post-synthesis netlist and both MACRO_A and MACRO_B in the post-palce-and-route netlist

Since both digital functionality and STD cells layout are the same between MACRO_A and MACRO_B we don't want to keep track of this difference already at RTL stage, we just want to perform this ECO change in place-and-route and force Conformal to assume equivalence between MACRO_A and MACRO_B .

Basically what I'm searching for is something similar to the add_instance_equivalences Conformal command but that works between Golden and Revised designs on cell primitives/black-boxes .

Is this flow supported ?

Thanks in advance

Luca




sa

Default param values not saved in OA cell property.

When I place a pcell and do not change the W parameter (default is used) the value is not saved in the OA cell property.

When I change the default value of the super master now, the old pcell will get the new default value automatically because there is nothing saved inside the OA cell for this parameter.

Do you have any Idea, that how we can save the default values in the OA cell properties so that this value doesn't get updated if the default values are updated in the new PDKs




sa

How to save the cellview of all instances in a top cell faster?

I have a top cell & need to revise all the instances' cellview & export top cell as a new GDS file.

So I write a SKILL code to do so and I find out it will be a little bit slow by using the dbSave to save the cellview of each instance.

Code as below:

let( (topCV subCV )
topCV = dbOpenCellViewByType(newLibName topCellName "layout" "maskLayout" "a")
foreach(inst topCV->instances
subCV = dbOpenCellViewByType(newLibName inst->cellName "layout" "maskLayout" "a")
;;;revise code content
;;;...
;;;revise code content
dbSave(subCV)
dbClose(subCV)
)
dbSave(topCV)
dbClose(topCV)
system(strcat( "strmout -library " newLibName " -topCell " topCellName " -view layout -strmFile " resultFolder "/" topCellName ".gds -techLib " srcLibName " -enableColoring -logFile " topCellName "_strmOut.log" ) )
)

Even if the cell content is not revised, the run time of dbSave will be 2 minutes when there are ~ 1000 instances in topcell. The exported GDS file size is ~2MB.

And the dbSave becomes the bottle neck of the code runtime...

Is there any better way to do such a thing? 




sa

Skill code to disable all callbacks

Can anybody assist with a Skill code /function to disable all callbacks




sa

DAC 2019 Preview – Multi-MHz Prototyping for Billion Gate Designs, AI, ML, 5G, Safety, Security and More

Vegas, here we come. All of us fun EDA engineers at once. Be prepared, next week’s Design Automation Conference will be busy! The trends I had outlined after last DAC in 2018—system design, cloud, and machine learning—have...(read more)




sa

How to check a cluster of same net vias spacing, with have no shape or cline covered

 

Hi all,

I have a question regarding the manufacture : how to check a cluster of same net vias spacing, with have no shape or cline covered