I think he defines one operation as a task. It's actually an easy calculation to do.
I typed "speed of light in inches per second" on google to get 1.180285270 * 10^10 in/sec then multiplied this by the amount of time to do one operation which is 1/5000000000 seconds
So this processor can do one operation in the time it would take light to travel 2.36 inches.
The annoying thing is that because of pipelining and many other factors, it is hard to quantitatively determine how much an operation actually is. It isn't like the old processors where you could easily look up how many operations an instruction took and then calculate exactly how long it would take to run a given routine. It all depends on the processor architecture.
What really sucks is that ebay has a monopoly over the entire online auction business. They can pretty much do whatever they want and force all their users to go with it since there is no competition offering anything better. If you do use an alternative to sell your product, you won't find any buyers since so many buyers visit ebay.
What we need is a fundamental change in the business model, we need competition. I don't understand why online auctioning couldn't be done by many companies competing. You might ask if site A, B, and C are all offering online auctions, how would the buyer have time to search them all? Well, There could easily be a search engine set up to search them all. They would all be competing for the lowest fees, giving the buyer the option of who to go with.
I'm not sure what has to happen for the online auctioning to change in this way. But something really needs to happen, we really can't have one company bullying everyone.
Funny how The article starts out saying "Diamonds may be rare on Earth" We all know this is a lie that De Beers has propagated so they can charge outrageous prices. Diamonds are actually fairly common in certain places. Apparently they have the Jet Propulsion Laboratory fooled as well, because this article appears on their site.
A few months ago I posted a video where I showed how to search for cheats and make game genie codes using an open source NES debugger/emulator called FCEUXD. My video basically showed how to do a cheat search in Contra and alter the game code (using a debugger) to give the player high jump ability. It stayed up for a few months before I received an e-mail from youtube saying the ESA claimed my video was infringing copyrights.
I seriously don't know what happened here, as there are thousands of videos showing rom hacks and related material. I started to file a counter claim, but then realized it would be more trouble than it's worth. Basically I would have to submit a written notice, and youtube claims "that filing a counter notice may lead to legal proceedings between you and the complaining party to determine ownership."
I really don't have the time or money to mess with the ESA right now, so I guess they win. It is a real shame that the ESA has nothing better to do than to hire people to search youtube for game hacking related videos and demand youtube take them down.
Vista has already had serious trouble catching on. First it was terribly delayed, then businesses didn't even bother to upgrade. When it was released in the consumer sector, it faired poorly with most consumer sales being with new computer purchases. And now, dell is even offering an XP option with new computer purchases. Many folks I know personally are planning to stick with XP for a few more years.
But now, I have a feeling Vista is going to be getting outdated really fast. I was under the impression a few years ago, based on what MS was saying, that vista would be able to handle plenty of new cores. Yet, now that it's out, we find that it's hardly any better than XP. I mean, "designed to run on one, two, maybe four processors." come on!
Quad core processors are out already! And, I have no doubt that in 2-3 years we'll be seeing 16 core (or more!) processors. The question is, where does that leave vista? I really believe Vista's terrible support for multi-core processors could strike a final blow, leaving vista as nothing but a huge miserable failure on Microsoft's part.
Back in 1999 there was a big revolt over a judge ruling a piece of source code illegal under the DMCA. People started wearing it on their shirts, and asking "Is my shirt now a device that can be used to circumvent copy protection?" People started even singing the source code as a form of artistic expression.
If there comes a time when collaboratively made movies by a bunch of volunteers are all that can be done because piracy sent the MPAA into bankrupcy, then you better believe those volunteers will get payed what it takes. It all comes to supply and demand. When that time comes that it is no longer economically feasable to make a movie because everyone will copy it and share it over the internet, then demand for movies will increase, untill it IS economically feasable. I don't know how things will work then, or how movies will be funded, but I'm sure they will.
Defragging is something that microsoft taught us was necessary. The FAT32 filesystem required it, and microsoft provided a built in defragmenter in their operating systems. Everyone believed it was something necessery to keep their computer running smoothly, and indeed, on a windows operating system with a fat32 filesystem it could help.
Now we have NTFS which doesn't require defragmenting. Or, even better, we have linux EXT2 and EXT3 filesystems which are supposed to perform so well without a defragmenting tool, that a good one isn't even provided in linux!
Why people still hold on to the old myth's that computers need defragmented, and by doing so think larger drives will need more time for it, is completely beyond me.
I have tried to grasp how this could be used at all for communication, and I honestly just don't get it.
The way I see it, you run one through a detector to see if it's a wave (or particle), and if it is then the other one also becomes a wave(or particle), no matter how far away in time or space it is.
So it's like this... Say I have two marbles that can either be red or blue each enclosed in a box. But, they are neither red nor blue untill I open one of the boxes and look. The moment I look at one, and see that it is red, the other one also becomes red.
Now... Lets say I have one of these special marbles, and my great great grandfather has one, back, say 100 years ago. I look at mine and see that it is red, therefore, his must also turn red. But, don't I still have to tell him what red means through some other form of communication?
Like, say I want to send him 1 bit of information (true or false) with one of these special marbles. How will he know that red means true, or false... all he will know is that I also got red when I looked at mine. Unless I have a way of altering the state of mine (and thus altering the state of his too), I don't have any way of telling him that red or blue mean anything, thus I can't send him any information with this method.
Can someone explain what I am missing here?
Slashdot Mirror
I think he defines one operation as a task. It's actually an easy calculation to do.
I typed "speed of light in inches per second" on google to get 1.180285270 * 10^10 in/sec then multiplied this by the amount of time to do one operation which is 1/5000000000 seconds
1.180285270*10^10(in/sec) * (1/5000000000)(sec) = 2.36057054 inches
So this processor can do one operation in the time it would take light to travel 2.36 inches.
The annoying thing is that because of pipelining and many other factors, it is hard to quantitatively determine how much an operation actually is. It isn't like the old processors where you could easily look up how many operations an instruction took and then calculate exactly how long it would take to run a given routine. It all depends on the processor architecture.
What really sucks is that ebay has a monopoly over the entire online auction business. They can pretty much do whatever they want and force all their users to go with it since there is no competition offering anything better. If you do use an alternative to sell your product, you won't find any buyers since so many buyers visit ebay.
What we need is a fundamental change in the business model, we need competition. I don't understand why online auctioning couldn't be done by many companies competing. You might ask if site A, B, and C are all offering online auctions, how would the buyer have time to search them all? Well, There could easily be a search engine set up to search them all. They would all be competing for the lowest fees, giving the buyer the option of who to go with.
I'm not sure what has to happen for the online auctioning to change in this way. But something really needs to happen, we really can't have one company bullying everyone.
Funny how The article starts out saying "Diamonds may be rare on Earth" We all know this is a lie that De Beers has propagated so they can charge outrageous prices. Diamonds are actually fairly common in certain places. Apparently they have the Jet Propulsion Laboratory fooled as well, because this article appears on their site.
A few months ago I posted a video where I showed how to search for cheats and make game genie codes using an open source NES debugger/emulator called FCEUXD. My video basically showed how to do a cheat search in Contra and alter the game code (using a debugger) to give the player high jump ability. It stayed up for a few months before I received an e-mail from youtube saying the ESA claimed my video was infringing copyrights.
I seriously don't know what happened here, as there are thousands of videos showing rom hacks and related material. I started to file a counter claim, but then realized it would be more trouble than it's worth. Basically I would have to submit a written notice, and youtube claims "that filing a counter notice may lead to legal proceedings between you and the complaining party to determine ownership."
I really don't have the time or money to mess with the ESA right now, so I guess they win. It is a real shame that the ESA has nothing better to do than to hire people to search youtube for game hacking related videos and demand youtube take them down.
Vista has already had serious trouble catching on. First it was terribly delayed, then businesses didn't even bother to upgrade. When it was released in the consumer sector, it faired poorly with most consumer sales being with new computer purchases. And now, dell is even offering an XP option with new computer purchases. Many folks I know personally are planning to stick with XP for a few more years.
But now, I have a feeling Vista is going to be getting outdated really fast. I was under the impression a few years ago, based on what MS was saying, that vista would be able to handle plenty of new cores. Yet, now that it's out, we find that it's hardly any better than XP. I mean, "designed to run on one, two, maybe four processors." come on!
Quad core processors are out already! And, I have no doubt that in 2-3 years we'll be seeing 16 core (or more!) processors. The question is, where does that leave vista? I really believe Vista's terrible support for multi-core processors could strike a final blow, leaving vista as nothing but a huge miserable failure on Microsoft's part.
Back in 1999 there was a big revolt over a judge ruling a piece of source code illegal under the DMCA. People started wearing it on their shirts, and asking "Is my shirt now a device that can be used to circumvent copy protection?" People started even singing the source code as a form of artistic expression.
Learn more here
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/
If there comes a time when collaboratively made movies by a bunch of volunteers are all that can be done because piracy sent the MPAA into bankrupcy, then you better believe those volunteers will get payed what it takes. It all comes to supply and demand. When that time comes that it is no longer economically feasable to make a movie because everyone will copy it and share it over the internet, then demand for movies will increase, untill it IS economically feasable. I don't know how things will work then, or how movies will be funded, but I'm sure they will.
The market will survive, it always has.
Defragging is something that microsoft taught us was necessary. The FAT32 filesystem required it, and microsoft provided a built in defragmenter in their operating systems. Everyone believed it was something necessery to keep their computer running smoothly, and indeed, on a windows operating system with a fat32 filesystem it could help.
Now we have NTFS which doesn't require defragmenting. Or, even better, we have linux EXT2 and EXT3 filesystems which are supposed to perform so well without a defragmenting tool, that a good one isn't even provided in linux!
Why people still hold on to the old myth's that computers need defragmented, and by doing so think larger drives will need more time for it, is completely beyond me.
7.5 billion dollars for 50 million lines?
That's $150 per line of code.
How do the figures come to that? That is some expensive code.
from the article: "The signals were coming from Cheyenne Mountain Air Station."
They must have meant to block the iris from being opened on the stargate.
I have tried to grasp how this could be used at all for communication, and I honestly just don't get it. The way I see it, you run one through a detector to see if it's a wave (or particle), and if it is then the other one also becomes a wave(or particle), no matter how far away in time or space it is. So it's like this... Say I have two marbles that can either be red or blue each enclosed in a box. But, they are neither red nor blue untill I open one of the boxes and look. The moment I look at one, and see that it is red, the other one also becomes red. Now... Lets say I have one of these special marbles, and my great great grandfather has one, back, say 100 years ago. I look at mine and see that it is red, therefore, his must also turn red. But, don't I still have to tell him what red means through some other form of communication? Like, say I want to send him 1 bit of information (true or false) with one of these special marbles. How will he know that red means true, or false... all he will know is that I also got red when I looked at mine. Unless I have a way of altering the state of mine (and thus altering the state of his too), I don't have any way of telling him that red or blue mean anything, thus I can't send him any information with this method. Can someone explain what I am missing here?