It has a hardware 16*16=32bit integer multiply, two separate instructions to easily support 32-bit multiplication, given that the register sizes are 32-bits. It doesn't look like there are any additional cycles for multiplication vs any other operation, just that you have to run 2 instructions to perform it in 32-bit. No division instruction.
The addressing modes are kind of funky, and there's a single accumulator register that all math seems to pipe through. So this is a very non-CISC architecture in terms of requiring multiple instructions to shuffle data around between registers/stack plus performing ALU ops. Though I suspect compilers could get pretty good at keeping the code tight.
I know it's an erosion of rights. But I am secure in knowing that making somebody else grope my balls is generally more degrading for them than it is for me. So denying the scanners and making some flunky have to do that is my little protest against the system.
More than one (nameless) FBI folks I have talked to have said there have been multiple incidents where TSA stopped someone actively bringing harmful materials onto an airplane.
Yes, and the TSA will also tell you it's confiscated actual explosives and weapons, in trying to sound relevant to safety. Too bad it's just lighters and nail clippers people forgot in their purse.
Granted, this doesn't replace the GUI, but exposes the GUI through an autocomplete CLI. Also, there doesn't seem to be any way to parameterize the commands through this interface, so I wouldn't necessarily call it a CLI.
As it is, I don't think it's a big deal. But there are 2 more existing concepts they really, REALLY should integrate if they want a hit:
1) Show the keyboard shortcuts! Why don't they list these along with the search hits? It's retarded to expect people to search for oft-used commands; give them the fastest way to reuse them right up front. Most menu displays already do this. This is a glaring lack of functionality.
2) REXX clone. I've only used the Amiga AREXX, but now that programs have a textual way of hitting commands, allow programmatic access for automation.
If there are laws protecting workers from their employers, and laws protecting employers from rogue workers, then we've got a better environment. Reduce the unions' lock-in entitlements and anti-competitive control; bust regulations that are nothing more than NIMBY, entrenchment, money-funneling, and/or monopolistic. (Keep decent environmental and working condition regulations, obviously. I shouldn't have to say that, but you don't seem to believe that there are any non-good regulations that can be separated out from those that should be kept.)
We still need complete education overhaul, and a lower tax burden on hiring (which disproportionately affects small businesses), especially if the.gov is going to start poking more into health care.
Our workforce is getting dumber, and we are allowing businesses to actually less and less business. This is not the right direction. We're going off on an extreme. China's off on a different extreme. Pulling back from our extreme does not make us "like China".
Basically what you said is, "I'm fine with the USA stepping out of R&D, manufacturing, and innovation in general." These things do not happen in clean, isolated, academic-only think-tank utopias, they happen where there are boots on the ground doing productive things and seeing what comes of it.
We do not need to become a China to pull this off, but we have way too many people with established interests preventing innovation for no other reason than their own entrenchment; ie, no environmental, human rights, etc basis. For starters, look at media interests, the corn industry, and union politicking.
And if the government wants to kill offshoring, they need to make it easier to hire & do business locally. Bust bad union control, bust badly constraining regulation, lower employment taxes, complete education system overhaul, etc.
If all you do is ban offshoring, I'm not sure the current domestic climate is even capable of picking up the slack anymore.
It's not genetics but other factors, presumably mental exercise, diet, etc that contributes 75% to keeping your intelligence intact as you enter old age?
Yes, I should qualify that I was talking specifically about federal income taxes, since all the "tax the rich" rhetoric is typically focused just on income taxes for the higher brackets. I agree that other taxes like sales & "vice" taxes have a disproportionate effect on the poor and aren't a good idea when many people are going down in financial standing.
It is accurate to say they pay more taxes in absolute dollars. But did you realize if the tax bill for running the country was divided evenly, it works out to over $11,000 per citizen? More like $33,000 per working person. And that's ignoring social security taxes.
Right. I'm not advocating tax breaks for the rich, I'm just saying that increasing taxes on the rich is not some easy catch-all fix. As the numbers above show, the rich are already picking up slack that is HUGE to a poor person (though not enough to placate some). Plus as others have mentioned, even a 100% income tax on the wealthiest 1% (or even more) wouldn't phase the federal yearly deficits, so different means than just "tax the rich" must be pursued.
There are far more rich people than there are people bribing politicians to change tax codes. Part of becoming rich is being very aware of what's happening to your money and what your options are. No matter what "loopholes" you think there are, people with a rich mindset will maximize what they get for their money, and find the most profitable places to hold & flow it.
Already in the current situation, if you owe a tax bill and try to enter the USA, they can and do come down on you hard. It's not that the rich are not paying money owed to the IRS, they pay what they owe and keep what they owe (relatively) small. Remember that the top N% pay FAR more in absolute tax dollars, as well as more in percentage of their income, than the bottom 100-N%, for pretty much any value of N.
(It did sound like you were saying Ron Paul would never reduce defense spending. If you only meant he wouldn't tax the rich, I believe that's correct, as he wants to eliminate most federal taxes.)
And this is why we need numbers, not just anecdotes.
You mention that only 1 former employer did that? You were pleased with the vacation handling from the rest?
I've certainly had decent experience with vacation setups, with employers making sure the allotted time was generally used, and being free during vacation.
Between our collective samples, the overall sounds more positive than negative.;-)
The rich are rich in part because they investigate how taxes work, and use them to save money. Try to squeeze the rich, and they'll just move their wealth to where it is most beneficial to them, and you end up with zero taxes from more of them. "Tax the rich" is simple but incorrect.
Now, reducing defense spending is fine, and that's actually a large part of Paul's platform from what I've seen. I think he's said that the largest portion of the trillion dollar cut he wants to do comes from stopping the current military actions.
This generally happens without the law mandating it. Looking at the vacation setup is really important for selecting a job; any company who wishes to hire competent people will offer a decent package including sane vacation.
I know many single people who simply work because that's what they do, and at the end of the year their bosses get on their case to take vacations so that the budgeting works out properly.
Wow, you've got that backwards. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" means that the people must remain vigilant in monitoring the government, lest they lose their freedoms.
But I guess in one way you're right: If the government can take unlimited vigilant action against anybody anywhere without accountability, they have the freedom to do whatever they want to the people. That you seem to view this as desirable or at least expected is frightening.
"Classic" things have had their time, and that time has passed. If those specific works are still around, they should have entered culture and be in the public domain as is the *default* without the government-granted copyright protection.
Users don't understand the technology they use, and what legislation would do to it in the long (or even short) run. They look at currently available features, and it never enters their mind that other possibilities could exist. It's only the power users and geeks who do the digging to be informed (regardless if the subject is computing, cars, politics, etc).
I'd rather have a technologically unaware representative who will work against PATRIOT/SOPA/etc than somebody who uses an iPad and has buys into security theater and its IP equivalents.
That argument doesn't apply. If customers to purchase newer more efficient tech, they actually *save* money so it self-incentivizes/punishes and needs not be legislated.
The environmental laws are good to restrict when saving money causes external damage.
It doesn't appear that the point of this project is to deal with positional information at all, but that it's a musical project where the type of contact the person does with the arbitrary surface is simulated as perturbing some physics-based audio source.
Multiple-mic positioning has been done before in other projects.
Wait, I'm no expert on what goes on in a court room, but a jury actually came to a unanimous decision that $1,370,590 should be awarded for this case until the judge stepped in and reduced it?
Consider junk mail and spam. There are ridiculously low sub-1% positive responses on those, yet that's enough to make it worthwhile. What's the conversion rate on unsolicited phone sales?
It's the same thing with any sort of sales tactics: Just because something works on enough people to make it profitable does not mean that that's what commonly works on everybody, or even most people. It only means that there is a large enough sliver of people who fall into it to make it profitable. The selection bias trains the sales people to think that the majority of people can be swayed in such a way, but the numbers show the opposite.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not a truncated floating point number, it's a rational number.
It has a hardware 16*16=32bit integer multiply, two separate instructions to easily support 32-bit multiplication, given that the register sizes are 32-bits. It doesn't look like there are any additional cycles for multiplication vs any other operation, just that you have to run 2 instructions to perform it in 32-bit. No division instruction.
The addressing modes are kind of funky, and there's a single accumulator register that all math seems to pipe through. So this is a very non-CISC architecture in terms of requiring multiple instructions to shuffle data around between registers/stack plus performing ALU ops. Though I suspect compilers could get pretty good at keeping the code tight.
I know it's an erosion of rights. But I am secure in knowing that making somebody else grope my balls is generally more degrading for them than it is for me. So denying the scanners and making some flunky have to do that is my little protest against the system.
More than one (nameless) FBI folks I have talked to have said there have been multiple incidents where TSA stopped someone actively bringing harmful materials onto an airplane.
Yes, and the TSA will also tell you it's confiscated actual explosives and weapons, in trying to sound relevant to safety. Too bad it's just lighters and nail clippers people forgot in their purse.
Granted, this doesn't replace the GUI, but exposes the GUI through an autocomplete CLI. Also, there doesn't seem to be any way to parameterize the commands through this interface, so I wouldn't necessarily call it a CLI.
As it is, I don't think it's a big deal. But there are 2 more existing concepts they really, REALLY should integrate if they want a hit:
1) Show the keyboard shortcuts! Why don't they list these along with the search hits? It's retarded to expect people to search for oft-used commands; give them the fastest way to reuse them right up front. Most menu displays already do this. This is a glaring lack of functionality.
2) REXX clone. I've only used the Amiga AREXX, but now that programs have a textual way of hitting commands, allow programmatic access for automation.
If there are laws protecting workers from their employers, and laws protecting employers from rogue workers, then we've got a better environment. Reduce the unions' lock-in entitlements and anti-competitive control; bust regulations that are nothing more than NIMBY, entrenchment, money-funneling, and/or monopolistic. (Keep decent environmental and working condition regulations, obviously. I shouldn't have to say that, but you don't seem to believe that there are any non-good regulations that can be separated out from those that should be kept.)
We still need complete education overhaul, and a lower tax burden on hiring (which disproportionately affects small businesses), especially if the .gov is going to start poking more into health care.
Our workforce is getting dumber, and we are allowing businesses to actually less and less business. This is not the right direction. We're going off on an extreme. China's off on a different extreme. Pulling back from our extreme does not make us "like China".
Basically what you said is, "I'm fine with the USA stepping out of R&D, manufacturing, and innovation in general." These things do not happen in clean, isolated, academic-only think-tank utopias, they happen where there are boots on the ground doing productive things and seeing what comes of it.
We do not need to become a China to pull this off, but we have way too many people with established interests preventing innovation for no other reason than their own entrenchment; ie, no environmental, human rights, etc basis. For starters, look at media interests, the corn industry, and union politicking.
And if the government wants to kill offshoring, they need to make it easier to hire & do business locally. Bust bad union control, bust badly constraining regulation, lower employment taxes, complete education system overhaul, etc.
If all you do is ban offshoring, I'm not sure the current domestic climate is even capable of picking up the slack anymore.
It's not genetics but other factors, presumably mental exercise, diet, etc that contributes 75% to keeping your intelligence intact as you enter old age?
Because it can only replicate shape, not substance.
Yes, I should qualify that I was talking specifically about federal income taxes, since all the "tax the rich" rhetoric is typically focused just on income taxes for the higher brackets. I agree that other taxes like sales & "vice" taxes have a disproportionate effect on the poor and aren't a good idea when many people are going down in financial standing.
It is accurate to say they pay more taxes in absolute dollars. But did you realize if the tax bill for running the country was divided evenly, it works out to over $11,000 per citizen? More like $33,000 per working person. And that's ignoring social security taxes.
Right. I'm not advocating tax breaks for the rich, I'm just saying that increasing taxes on the rich is not some easy catch-all fix. As the numbers above show, the rich are already picking up slack that is HUGE to a poor person (though not enough to placate some). Plus as others have mentioned, even a 100% income tax on the wealthiest 1% (or even more) wouldn't phase the federal yearly deficits, so different means than just "tax the rich" must be pursued.
There are far more rich people than there are people bribing politicians to change tax codes. Part of becoming rich is being very aware of what's happening to your money and what your options are. No matter what "loopholes" you think there are, people with a rich mindset will maximize what they get for their money, and find the most profitable places to hold & flow it.
Already in the current situation, if you owe a tax bill and try to enter the USA, they can and do come down on you hard. It's not that the rich are not paying money owed to the IRS, they pay what they owe and keep what they owe (relatively) small. Remember that the top N% pay FAR more in absolute tax dollars, as well as more in percentage of their income, than the bottom 100-N%, for pretty much any value of N.
(It did sound like you were saying Ron Paul would never reduce defense spending. If you only meant he wouldn't tax the rich, I believe that's correct, as he wants to eliminate most federal taxes.)
And this is why we need numbers, not just anecdotes.
You mention that only 1 former employer did that? You were pleased with the vacation handling from the rest?
I've certainly had decent experience with vacation setups, with employers making sure the allotted time was generally used, and being free during vacation.
Between our collective samples, the overall sounds more positive than negative. ;-)
The rich are rich in part because they investigate how taxes work, and use them to save money. Try to squeeze the rich, and they'll just move their wealth to where it is most beneficial to them, and you end up with zero taxes from more of them. "Tax the rich" is simple but incorrect.
Now, reducing defense spending is fine, and that's actually a large part of Paul's platform from what I've seen. I think he's said that the largest portion of the trillion dollar cut he wants to do comes from stopping the current military actions.
This generally happens without the law mandating it. Looking at the vacation setup is really important for selecting a job; any company who wishes to hire competent people will offer a decent package including sane vacation.
I know many single people who simply work because that's what they do, and at the end of the year their bosses get on their case to take vacations so that the budgeting works out properly.
Why does the law have to meddle in this?
Wow, you've got that backwards. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" means that the people must remain vigilant in monitoring the government, lest they lose their freedoms.
But I guess in one way you're right: If the government can take unlimited vigilant action against anybody anywhere without accountability, they have the freedom to do whatever they want to the people. That you seem to view this as desirable or at least expected is frightening.
The ethernet is 100MBps, and is driven as a USB device behind an onboard-hub. The CPU isn't really that beefy.
However, it's cheap and easy to set up a network to play around with actually implementing the tech, if not for performance.
You've already found its greater purpose: To entice kids to become computer hobbyists at the programmer level, not just as websurfers & gamers.
Think about it, there really isn't anything inexpensive and capable enough in the current market to hit that niche.
"Classic" things have had their time, and that time has passed. If those specific works are still around, they should have entered culture and be in the public domain as is the *default* without the government-granted copyright protection.
Users don't understand the technology they use, and what legislation would do to it in the long (or even short) run. They look at currently available features, and it never enters their mind that other possibilities could exist. It's only the power users and geeks who do the digging to be informed (regardless if the subject is computing, cars, politics, etc).
I'd rather have a technologically unaware representative who will work against PATRIOT/SOPA/etc than somebody who uses an iPad and has buys into security theater and its IP equivalents.
That argument doesn't apply. If customers to purchase newer more efficient tech, they actually *save* money so it self-incentivizes/punishes and needs not be legislated.
The environmental laws are good to restrict when saving money causes external damage.
It doesn't appear that the point of this project is to deal with positional information at all, but that it's a musical project where the type of contact the person does with the arbitrary surface is simulated as perturbing some physics-based audio source.
Multiple-mic positioning has been done before in other projects.
And it goes to show that the enemy of your enemy is NOT automatically your friend.
Wait, I'm no expert on what goes on in a court room, but a jury actually came to a unanimous decision that $1,370,590 should be awarded for this case until the judge stepped in and reduced it?
Right, you are agreeing with me.
Consider junk mail and spam. There are ridiculously low sub-1% positive responses on those, yet that's enough to make it worthwhile. What's the conversion rate on unsolicited phone sales?
It's the same thing with any sort of sales tactics: Just because something works on enough people to make it profitable does not mean that that's what commonly works on everybody, or even most people. It only means that there is a large enough sliver of people who fall into it to make it profitable. The selection bias trains the sales people to think that the majority of people can be swayed in such a way, but the numbers show the opposite.