Slashdot Mirror

If your resting heart rate is 80bpm, which it probably is if you don't exercise, then your candle is burning brighter, so to speak, than it would be if you were fit and it was only 40bpm. Granted, while you're exercising, maybe its at 170bpm, but that's only for relatively short periods. So really the opposite may be true about burning twice as bright: peak fitness entails a generally dimmer burn, when not exercising, which is the vast majority of the time.

A quick Google on 'exercise and longevity' produced this seemingly informed page:

http://www.tfn.net/healthgazette/longev.html

Excerpt: "Now there is unequivocal data that proves regular vigorous exercise will enable you to live longer. In fact, it has been estimated that there are approximately 250,000 deaths in the United States each year that result from a lack of exercise."

However, my question is not about "some exercise", but rather, peak physical fitness, where an individual seeks to get themselves in optimal physical condition. Also, I'm wondering about de Grey's take on it, since the issue seems to be largely neglected in the "singularity" crowd.

I was raised on free municipal internet. http://www.tfn.net/ It was not seen as a problem because it was actully a seperate orgnization that just got grants from the city and county.

Is this art? A human designed the algorithms and the structures of the images involved with artistic intent. The images themselves were generated entirely by a computer and random number generator.

Using tools to assist a human generating art doesn't disqualify the product as art in itself. Adding randomness doesn't disqualify it either, as at least one famous piece shows (in 'qualified' opinion, anyway).

The line is more blurred than you suggest, I think.

Since we're all chiming in, here's one I've been editing for a while: http://www.tfn.net/~mdjordan/mozilla_adblock_filte rs.txt

today is the 10th anniversary of Tallahassee Freenet. Cinco de Mayo!
20K users, free dialup, community forums, etc. They sell used donated equipment from time to time, and have had library grant money in the past. Initially set up by Florida State University. Tallahassee Freenet

Dr. Simonyi's idea was to think of good programming to be a test where two programmers are given the same task and then separated from each other. They "pass" if they produce identical code, and they "fail" if they don't. This is a good test because if different programmers can follow rules to produce the same code, their code will be easy to borrow, read, maintain, etc.

You can read a version at Microsoft but if you, like me, don't even like going there then there are other copies on the web. There's one at apostate that has some additional addenda that might be interesting (I didn't look too closely) and one here that has some rather mindless criticism sprinkled in. Here's a plain text version.

A variant of this naming convention that most people have heard of was also adopted by Microsoft for use with Windows. The version Windows uses is a steaming pile of shit and is a complete perversion of the original idea, so don't base your opinion of Hungarian on Windows or on criticisms from people who only know that version. If you have the good sense to despise Windows's Hungarian because it is the opposite of abstract, you'll love the real thing. It can be hard to get used to Hungarian, but I don't know anybody who has gotten used to it who was able to stop using it.

BTW, he also worked at Xerox PARC where he more or less "invented" WYSIWYG word processing, before he succumbed to the evil empire and became charless@microsoft.com, father of Microsoft Word.
----

And I hate to point this part out, too, but not only are we not nearly as controversial; we got there first. I'm pretty certain there's actually even a trademark on the name.

[ looks ]

Yep. 1986.

And for the anal-retentives in the audience, yeah, I think a court would accept a dilution argument, given the close association of the problem spaces.

Cheers,
-- jra
-----

Heh... now I can fit 1024x768 8-bit images in a high-speed cache! This is the graphics engine I need. Uhm, can someone lend me a coupla grand?

"Byte-manipulation isn't one of Alpha's strong points..."

Sorry... I should have said "memory copying" since I use memcpy(). As for Byte-manipulation not being a strong point of Alpha, well, isn't the point of a general-purpose CPU/memory subsystem benchmark to uncover these kind of things? ;)

"If you want a real idea of memory bandwidth... use...Stream..."

Nope, I wasn't trying to assess memory bandwidth. By "memory access speed" I was referring to memory latency, a critical variable to system performance.

"...benchmark using the applications and data that are important to you."

heheh. Yeah, sure. The reason synthetic benchmarks and "application conglomeration" benchmarks exist is largely because of: 1) It's frequently damned hard to benchmark systems using the real application, complete with users, data, and all that. 2) Some computers are used in a very general purpose way. I do all manner of work on my little linux boxes, for example, and that pales in comparison to the wide-ranging use of some of the larger systems where I work.

"...it's irresponsible to post benchmark results without making the benchmark available...".

Dang. You've got me there. I wonder if we can get the Imark benchmarks from Intel, btw, to see how they've been biasing them toward the newer instructions as they introduce extended instruction sets... ;)

Anyway, my page contains a link to the code for the 1 megabyte version of the benchmark in question.

"Byte-manipulation isn't one of Alpha's strong points..."

Sorry... I should have said "memory copying" since I use memcpy(). As for Byte-manipulation not being a strong point of Alpha, well, isn't the point of a general-purpose CPU/memory subsystem benchmark to uncover these kind of things? ;)

"If you want a real idea of memory bandwidth... use...Stream..."

Nope, I wasn't trying to assess memory bandwidth. By "memory access speed" I was referring to memory latency, a critical variable to system performance.

"...benchmark using the applications and data that are important to you."

heheh. Yeah, sure. The reason synthetic benchmarks and "application conglomeration" benchmarks exist is largely because of: 1) It's frequently damned hard to benchmark systems using the real application, complete with users, data, and all that. 2) Some computers are used in a very general purpose way. I do all manner of work on my little linux boxes, for example, and that pales in comparison to the wide-ranging use of some of the larger systems where I work.

"...it's irresponsible to post benchmark results without making the benchmark available...".

Dang. You've got me there. I wonder if we can get the Imark benchmarks from Intel, btw, to see how they've been biasing them toward the newer instructions as they introduce extended instruction sets... ;)

Anyway, my page contains a link to the code for the 1 megabyte version of the benchmark in question.

The C code that produced this is definitely not art! However, not all of my code is so artless. ;)

Seriously, I believe that code is art. At least some of it... and that has to include Linux!