That is, assuming that your creation really is new with respect to the state of the art, and really is non-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
It wouldn't matter if it was too slow when scrolling, but I think typing could be the issue. If there's a significant delay between hitting a key and the letter appearing, it would be awkward to use.
Though I'm seeing a far bit of delay on this web form right now, and I'm coping with it...
Apple lawyers are pleased to report that the wording of Genesis 3:6 has been altered to remove all reference to "Apple", and heretofore refers to "the fruit of the tree".
Well, "Good Enough" was the Past of Technology, so I guess so. But the truth is that industries fluctuate on their focus.
When the market demands more features and performance than the technology provides, then the businesses that improve the technology become the industry leaders. Think silicon: intel, RAM, Flash, iPods.
But when the market is happy with the features ("good enough"), and demands cheaper products, then the businesses that can make them cheaper become the market leaders.
I think they're saying that there are important benefits to the depressive style of thinking. It's only a problem when it's inappropriate.
It's similar to the instincts of gorging on high-energy foods; of being terrified of potential dangers; and of being violently enraged about intrusion into one's territory. These all have benefits in some situations that used to be more common than they are today.
I've just been reading an Edison biography, and it depends on what you mean by "idea". Alexander Bell made the first telephone (he didn't really have the "idea" for it, because lots of people thought it would be cool to transmit voice by wires, although they didn't see any commercial application for it - and they didn't make it work). But, hearing of this idea, Edison (and many others) began to try to improve it, particularly for longer distances (which limited Bell's version), by creating a microphone that worked by varying resistance, instead of generating currents by induction, and therefore could be amplified (by regulating an ordinary telegraph signal). So, that was Edison's idea: not entirely obvious, unless you understood the issues, as one skilled in the state of the art would. But it wasn't worth anything.
Edison did a ton of work, and came up with something that was OKish. He submitted it to Western Union for commercialization, and they weren't impressed. He went back, and experimented some more. He had thought that the carbon disk he used (that translated pressure into resistance) needed to vibrate with the sound waves. But as he tried stronger springs, that incidentally reduced the vibration as a by-product, the signal got clearly. He eventually noticed this, and tried locking the carbon in place, so it didn't vibrate at all - and the signal was perfect.
The idea of a telephone was not valuable; the idea of translating sound into resistance was not valuable, but *this* idea - that rigid carbon is very effective for translating sound into resistance - *was* a valuable idea. Although it seems less Edison's, than nature who had to keep... banging... him... on... the... head... with... it.... until he got it. But I think that's the nature of truly new ideas: they are very hard to see, even when right in front of you. We likely are surrounded by great ideas at all times that we cannot see...
Regarding the limit of C: using the third dimension can help minimize the distance between components. A different layout of transistor communications paths (such as a linear pipeline) can help with bandwidth of processing, though not latency, by signals not needing to traverse the entire chip in a single clock cycle.
Will subsequent versions exploit the exploits, setup botnets, send spam etc?
If Microsoft entered the armor business, would they also supply arms to the other side?
But seriously, Microsoft put a ton of research into finding their security holes, including embedding the acquired techniques in tools. They're useful tools, and have been critically useful to them. Why not release them? My only worry is that it is not in their fighter-nature to help their competitors, and of course the tool can also be used by crackers.
Slashdot Mirror
That is, assuming that your creation really is new with respect to the state of the art, and really is non-obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
EP$C is the new M$
It wouldn't matter if it was too slow when scrolling, but I think typing could be the issue. If there's a significant delay between hitting a key and the letter appearing, it would be awkward to use.
Though I'm seeing a far bit of delay on this web form right now, and I'm coping with it...
It's not always true that monitoring is a cost: JIT (Just In Time compilation) monitors execution, and has yielded significant speed-ups in Java.
I conjecture that the key to distributed computing will turn out to be wasting resources (inefficiency) in some way that serves the overall goal.
Apple lawyers are pleased to report that the wording of Genesis 3:6 has been altered to remove all reference to "Apple", and heretofore refers to "the fruit of the tree".
Accept the idiosyncracies of people without passing judgement, much like you would with a hardware platform.
I think I may see the problem.
The only thing Windows really has going for it is the existing library of PC software.
If netbooks are used primarily for webapps (hence the "net"), the OS and its libraries don't matter so much.
Experience the Speed and raw Power of a 600 MHz processor! 256 MB RAM! 32 GB storage! 1999!
Well, "Good Enough" was the Past of Technology, so I guess so. But the truth is that industries fluctuate on their focus.
When the market demands more features and performance than the technology provides, then the businesses that improve the technology become the industry leaders. Think silicon: intel, RAM, Flash, iPods.
But when the market is happy with the features ("good enough"), and demands cheaper products, then the businesses that can make them cheaper become the market leaders.
I think they're saying that there are important benefits to the depressive style of thinking. It's only a problem when it's inappropriate.
It's similar to the instincts of gorging on high-energy foods; of being terrified of potential dangers; and of being violently enraged about intrusion into one's territory. These all have benefits in some situations that used to be more common than they are today.
If you ain't first, yer last!
Q. What brilliant idea did Google have?
[A. Pagerank]
I've just been reading an Edison biography, and it depends on what you mean by "idea". Alexander Bell made the first telephone (he didn't really have the "idea" for it, because lots of people thought it would be cool to transmit voice by wires, although they didn't see any commercial application for it - and they didn't make it work). But, hearing of this idea, Edison (and many others) began to try to improve it, particularly for longer distances (which limited Bell's version), by creating a microphone that worked by varying resistance, instead of generating currents by induction, and therefore could be amplified (by regulating an ordinary telegraph signal). So, that was Edison's idea: not entirely obvious, unless you understood the issues, as one skilled in the state of the art would. But it wasn't worth anything.
Edison did a ton of work, and came up with something that was OKish. He submitted it to Western Union for commercialization, and they weren't impressed. He went back, and experimented some more. He had thought that the carbon disk he used (that translated pressure into resistance) needed to vibrate with the sound waves. But as he tried stronger springs, that incidentally reduced the vibration as a by-product, the signal got clearly. He eventually noticed this, and tried locking the carbon in place, so it didn't vibrate at all - and the signal was perfect.
The idea of a telephone was not valuable; the idea of translating sound into resistance was not valuable, but *this* idea - that rigid carbon is very effective for translating sound into resistance - *was* a valuable idea. Although it seems less Edison's, than nature who had to keep... banging... him... on... the... head... with... it.... until he got it. But I think that's the nature of truly new ideas: they are very hard to see, even when right in front of you. We likely are surrounded by great ideas at all times that we cannot see...
Why is the "south polar region" on the top? Is that an astronomer thing?
You can also get immersed in a novel - because the printed page has a much higher dpi than today's displays.
But look at the context; look at the numbers:
Windows 3.1-->95 Huge upgrade!
Windows 95-->7 WTF are you kidding me?!
Yes, the 2nd ed of the Dragon book rewrote their sample parser in OO. It was much simpler, clearer and cleaner in procedural version in the 1st ed.
There's a great cartoon online illustrating this, but I can never find it.
Regarding the limit of C: using the third dimension can help minimize the distance between components. A different layout of transistor communications paths (such as a linear pipeline) can help with bandwidth of processing, though not latency, by signals not needing to traverse the entire chip in a single clock cycle.
Regarding density: it's not the density that doubles, but transistor count (number of components per integrated circuit.)
I'm thinking it might have involved the microscope
If it's more familiar, it's more usable, and therefore superior for users.
It's as if linux advocates measure "superiority" as an intrinsic quality, whereas users see superiority in terms of usefulness to them.
As PCs got cheaper, the price of XP stayed constant, and therefore grew in proportion. It was inevitable that XP would get cheaper.
Linux helped by making it visible.
Has it been run on itself?
Will subsequent versions exploit the exploits, setup botnets, send spam etc?
If Microsoft entered the armor business, would they also supply arms to the other side?
But seriously, Microsoft put a ton of research into finding their security holes, including embedding the acquired techniques in tools. They're useful tools, and have been critically useful to them. Why not release them? My only worry is that it is not in their fighter-nature to help their competitors, and of course the tool can also be used by crackers.
'How many bones are in the human body?'
Google says "There are 206 in adults and up to 350 for infants": http://www.google.com/search?q=How+many+bones+are+in+the+human+body
Google's brute force approach is irritatingly good (even to google engineers).
Feynman's claim that there is no such thing as intelligence, only interest
Wow, this is what I've always felt. Gotta love the Feynman.