Intel is still working on Itanium and has a new architecture in the pipeline. This article agrees that simple VLIW is dead, and indicates that the new Itanium architecture will do a little bit of scheduling on its own instead of relying completely on the compiler.
Baseball cards have a varying value depending on what somebody is willing to pay for them, but they are otherwise not backed up by anything, which is why they are not useful as currency.
Bitcoins have a fixed value based on what somebody is willing to pay for them, but they are not otherwise backed up by anything, which is why they are useful for a currency.
That looks to me like what you said, except phrased in a way that shows it makes no sense.
Alternately, Bitcoins are useful as currency because they are an intrinsically valueless concept that some people are inexplicably willing to accept them as payment, based on the idea that somebody will let me buy real money with Bitcoins. Therefore, if I say I will take baseball cards as payment, based on the idea that somebody will later buy those baseball cards from me for real money, they are also useful as currency.
You quoted one part of the article, but you missed the relevant bit.
"We've found that you can build a much faster storage device, but in order to really make use of it, you have to change the software that manages it as well. Storage systems have evolved over the last 40 years to cater to disks, and disks are very, very slow," said Swanson. "Designing storage systems that can fully leverage technologies like PCM requires rethinking almost every aspect of how a computer system's software manages and accesses storage."
So you're right, they didn't invent PCM, but they're coming at the problem with the assumption that PCM will become commonplace and then looking at the problems that come after that. All the speed and capacity in the world are only helpful up to a point if your software stack and memory bus are bottlenecks.
The stimulation therefore doesn't induce movement, but taps into a network of spinal cord nerves that are capable of initiating movement on their own without the help of the brain, which then work together with cues from the legs to direct muscle movement.
Okay, so saying the legs make decisions on their own was somewhat of an oversimplification, but my point that the brain is not involved and so it's not clear how much practical control he has over mobility or what the equivalent would be for other limbs remains.
It wasn't clear to me from the article how much control he actually has over the mobility. It says instead of hooking the brain back up to the legs, they're just stimulating the nerves in that area to wake the legs back up, and then the legs sort of make decisions on their own in terms of standing or maybe walking to stay balanced on a moving treadmill.
So it would definitely be useful for keeping paralyzed legs fit, but I wonder what the equivalent would be for stimulating a paralyzed arm?
Mod parent +1 too-obvious-and-smart-to-ever-be-put-into-practice(-again).
I remember in Calc 2 in college one test where I used my graphing calculator as a crutch, since I had some extra time and had no idea how to solve the problem. It had something to do with finding a curve that was less than or greater than another, so I just started punching stuff in until something looked good. (Naturally, the professor didn't give me any credit for it; his comment on the test was "maybe, but why?")
That's interesting extra information that either wasn't in the full article or I just missed it, but it's not exactly what I meant. It's something that often bothers me about AI and ALife research -- it's less about "we built a system, and look at this cool emergent behavior," and more about, "we rigged this system to prove we could get the result we wanted."
I am fully aware that it's difficult to have an open flexible system -- you need a way for new behaviors to appear and to be interpreted in a reasonable way -- but it's much more interesting or exciting when Langton Ants just happen to start building highways, or the 2D Game of Life happen to generate gliders and glider cannons, or Braitenberg Vehicles start "worshipping," avoiding, following, etc. just by a few small sensors and saying "let's see what happens."
All of this is not to say the work isn't interesting, and maybe somebody can even interpret it to say some environmental change "rigged the game" in the same way and it's how humans learned altruism. I'm just saying they should scale the claim back.
The robots/virtual robots didn't actually evolve altruism as such. I was hoping they were going to say the robots had discovered they ability to recognize weak kin and share food. Instead, the researchers taught the robots how to share, and also changed their optimization problem to "if we both have a decent amount of food, all of our genes will die, but if I give it all away, your genes might propagate." So they just solved the optimization problem they were taught, as opposed to figuring it out on their own.
Their description of the rudimentary nervous systems make the robots sound like they're related to Braitenberg Vehicles, which are otherwise pretty fascinating.
That may or may not be new behavior, but it's still not the ideal behavior. There's no reason (that I know of) I should have to log out and back in to go back to a secure connection. I used to be able to go back to the security settings page to reenable https without logging out and back in, although I see now they've replaced it with "please logout and login again." The obviously correct behavior is to serve whatever page(s) it has to over http, with that interstitial warning page, but continue serving everything else that it can over https.
(I also disagree with your second point, but I'm completely failing at coming up with a well-articulated response to it.)
Unfortunately, "whenever possible" has the side-effect of "when not possible, we're going to disable this option." For instance, I'll turn on https when possible, go play Tetris Battle, it'll say "sorry, we can't display this as https, do you want to switch to http," and if I click yes, it disables https for everything else too.
And in my experience, you can get most sporting events streaming as well. At least, most games I'm interested in I can watch on ESPN3 since Comcast is our ISP, and the local games that are blacked out are usually either streaming from a local provider like Raycom Sports or are on (gasp) broadcast TV.
No, anyone who was using the invention prior to the filing date should (and, theoretically, does) prevent the patent from being granted. Unless you're suggesting that a free prior use license for existing instances and making everybody else pay for a license is somehow better than prior art blocking a patent, and you're suggesting that getting a prior use license would be be easier than getting a patent revoked/blocked.
Ah, if only everybody else would remember that and post links to the nyud cached copy instead. By the time I get around to reading summary for an article that's been slashdotted, it's usually too late and nyud can't connect either.
Nevermind the fact that I loathed "Boom Boom Pow," a #1 pop single just means appealing to the lowest common denominator and doesn't say anything about creative merit. And I'm willing to claim a lack of creative merit on that song. I don't know if dumbing it down is the appropriate direction for a high-tech company to take.
Let's assume I made (all of) the obvious joke(s) about "penetrate" so we can get that out of the way.
Finding creatures sealed off for 14 million years below 4km of ice would be pretty cool. I wonder what else is under the Antarctic ice? Was the continent ever tropical/non-icy? Might we find fossils of new species, assuming there was some way to get down there?
How much "wilderness" is actually unused land though, as opposed to farm land or protected (state and national parks/preserves)? I realize that the answer is nonzero, but I wonder how much of it is usable/livable. (Pioneer spirit is one thing, but I don't think building a house at the top of Pikes Peak or in Death Valley fall in the realm of reasonable.) I also wonder at your 70% figure.
+1: The class I had in undergrad that I was most excited about was the one that had a series of 7 projects, which cumulatively were 70% of the grade. There was a small midterm and smaller final, but the main point was to get our hands dirty and write a lot.
On the other hand, there is something to be said I think for the basics that you get in lower-level courses, and most people in the lower-level courses aren't going to do well if you throw lots of code at them. (Yeah, yeah, use that to select out the bad students so only the good coders even make it to the upper-level classes.)
Not that this comment will get read, you know, being so far down the page...
Presumably, the hotter the temperature, the better, in terms of generating geothermal energy. That means that the eastern part of the state (with the exception of the panhandle) would be the best for generating geothermal. However, a lot of that land along the WV/VA border is protected: state parks, national forests, national rec areas, and a large number of caverns that are declared off-limits. The Greenbanks radio astronomy telescope is also in that area, and a couple miles around it are restricted from having wireless communications or other serious electrical equipment that could interfere with radio astronomy.
On the other hand, if coal ever goes out of fashion, I guess the state will have to make a decision - with coal and tourism being our two biggest sources of money, I guess they'll have to decide whether the state parks are more valuable for tourism or generating power.
Its just there used to be places you could go that everyone in the world couldn't follow you and find out everything you were doing.
The Internet is not and was not necessarily that place ("On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog" notwithstanding). The reason everybody can follow you and find out everything you're doing everywhere else in the world is because you announced to everybody where you were going and what you were doing anyway.
I saw one that replaced your HOSTS file to prevent you from going to symantec, kapersky, etc., and show a host not found error instead. Sadly, it wasn't clever enough to check your browser first, so it displayed the IE error page in Firefox.
This is not new. Sure, the WSJ article is dated today(/yesterday depending on where you are), but the Solo Cup case they reference is from last year at the most recent and maybe older than that.
Slashdot Mirror
Intel is still working on Itanium and has a new architecture in the pipeline. This article agrees that simple VLIW is dead, and indicates that the new Itanium architecture will do a little bit of scheduling on its own instead of relying completely on the compiler.
So let's get this straight:
Baseball cards have a varying value depending on what somebody is willing to pay for them, but they are otherwise not backed up by anything, which is why they are not useful as currency.
Bitcoins have a fixed value based on what somebody is willing to pay for them, but they are not otherwise backed up by anything, which is why they are useful for a currency.
That looks to me like what you said, except phrased in a way that shows it makes no sense.
Alternately, Bitcoins are useful as currency because they are an intrinsically valueless concept that some people are inexplicably willing to accept them as payment, based on the idea that somebody will let me buy real money with Bitcoins. Therefore, if I say I will take baseball cards as payment, based on the idea that somebody will later buy those baseball cards from me for real money, they are also useful as currency.
People use "spoon" or "jelly" in that context? I, thankfully, have never encountered that.
"We've found that you can build a much faster storage device, but in order to really make use of it, you have to change the software that manages it as well. Storage systems have evolved over the last 40 years to cater to disks, and disks are very, very slow," said Swanson. "Designing storage systems that can fully leverage technologies like PCM requires rethinking almost every aspect of how a computer system's software manages and accesses storage."
So you're right, they didn't invent PCM, but they're coming at the problem with the assumption that PCM will become commonplace and then looking at the problems that come after that. All the speed and capacity in the world are only helpful up to a point if your software stack and memory bus are bottlenecks.
Sorry, that's a DMCA violation, circumventing a copy protection device.
So, how is this at all different from the way Apple has been making the same claim for the past several weeks?
The stimulation therefore doesn't induce movement, but taps into a network of spinal cord nerves that are capable of initiating movement on their own without the help of the brain, which then work together with cues from the legs to direct muscle movement.
Okay, so saying the legs make decisions on their own was somewhat of an oversimplification, but my point that the brain is not involved and so it's not clear how much practical control he has over mobility or what the equivalent would be for other limbs remains.
It wasn't clear to me from the article how much control he actually has over the mobility. It says instead of hooking the brain back up to the legs, they're just stimulating the nerves in that area to wake the legs back up, and then the legs sort of make decisions on their own in terms of standing or maybe walking to stay balanced on a moving treadmill.
So it would definitely be useful for keeping paralyzed legs fit, but I wonder what the equivalent would be for stimulating a paralyzed arm?
Mod parent +1 too-obvious-and-smart-to-ever-be-put-into-practice(-again).
I remember in Calc 2 in college one test where I used my graphing calculator as a crutch, since I had some extra time and had no idea how to solve the problem. It had something to do with finding a curve that was less than or greater than another, so I just started punching stuff in until something looked good. (Naturally, the professor didn't give me any credit for it; his comment on the test was "maybe, but why?")
That's interesting extra information that either wasn't in the full article or I just missed it, but it's not exactly what I meant. It's something that often bothers me about AI and ALife research -- it's less about "we built a system, and look at this cool emergent behavior," and more about, "we rigged this system to prove we could get the result we wanted."
I am fully aware that it's difficult to have an open flexible system -- you need a way for new behaviors to appear and to be interpreted in a reasonable way -- but it's much more interesting or exciting when Langton Ants just happen to start building highways, or the 2D Game of Life happen to generate gliders and glider cannons, or Braitenberg Vehicles start "worshipping," avoiding, following, etc. just by a few small sensors and saying "let's see what happens."
All of this is not to say the work isn't interesting, and maybe somebody can even interpret it to say some environmental change "rigged the game" in the same way and it's how humans learned altruism. I'm just saying they should scale the claim back.
The robots/virtual robots didn't actually evolve altruism as such. I was hoping they were going to say the robots had discovered they ability to recognize weak kin and share food. Instead, the researchers taught the robots how to share, and also changed their optimization problem to "if we both have a decent amount of food, all of our genes will die, but if I give it all away, your genes might propagate." So they just solved the optimization problem they were taught, as opposed to figuring it out on their own.
Their description of the rudimentary nervous systems make the robots sound like they're related to Braitenberg Vehicles, which are otherwise pretty fascinating.
That may or may not be new behavior, but it's still not the ideal behavior. There's no reason (that I know of) I should have to log out and back in to go back to a secure connection. I used to be able to go back to the security settings page to reenable https without logging out and back in, although I see now they've replaced it with "please logout and login again." The obviously correct behavior is to serve whatever page(s) it has to over http, with that interstitial warning page, but continue serving everything else that it can over https.
(I also disagree with your second point, but I'm completely failing at coming up with a well-articulated response to it.)
Unfortunately, "whenever possible" has the side-effect of "when not possible, we're going to disable this option." For instance, I'll turn on https when possible, go play Tetris Battle, it'll say "sorry, we can't display this as https, do you want to switch to http," and if I click yes, it disables https for everything else too.
And in my experience, you can get most sporting events streaming as well. At least, most games I'm interested in I can watch on ESPN3 since Comcast is our ISP, and the local games that are blacked out are usually either streaming from a local provider like Raycom Sports or are on (gasp) broadcast TV.
No, anyone who was using the invention prior to the filing date should (and, theoretically, does) prevent the patent from being granted. Unless you're suggesting that a free prior use license for existing instances and making everybody else pay for a license is somehow better than prior art blocking a patent, and you're suggesting that getting a prior use license would be be easier than getting a patent revoked/blocked.
Glen Beck uses Slashdot?
Ah, if only everybody else would remember that and post links to the nyud cached copy instead. By the time I get around to reading summary for an article that's been slashdotted, it's usually too late and nyud can't connect either.
Nevermind the fact that I loathed "Boom Boom Pow," a #1 pop single just means appealing to the lowest common denominator and doesn't say anything about creative merit. And I'm willing to claim a lack of creative merit on that song. I don't know if dumbing it down is the appropriate direction for a high-tech company to take.
Let's assume I made (all of) the obvious joke(s) about "penetrate" so we can get that out of the way.
Finding creatures sealed off for 14 million years below 4km of ice would be pretty cool. I wonder what else is under the Antarctic ice? Was the continent ever tropical/non-icy? Might we find fossils of new species, assuming there was some way to get down there?
How much "wilderness" is actually unused land though, as opposed to farm land or protected (state and national parks/preserves)? I realize that the answer is nonzero, but I wonder how much of it is usable/livable. (Pioneer spirit is one thing, but I don't think building a house at the top of Pikes Peak or in Death Valley fall in the realm of reasonable.) I also wonder at your 70% figure.
+1: The class I had in undergrad that I was most excited about was the one that had a series of 7 projects, which cumulatively were 70% of the grade. There was a small midterm and smaller final, but the main point was to get our hands dirty and write a lot. On the other hand, there is something to be said I think for the basics that you get in lower-level courses, and most people in the lower-level courses aren't going to do well if you throw lots of code at them. (Yeah, yeah, use that to select out the bad students so only the good coders even make it to the upper-level classes.)
Not that this comment will get read, you know, being so far down the page...
Presumably, the hotter the temperature, the better, in terms of generating geothermal energy. That means that the eastern part of the state (with the exception of the panhandle) would be the best for generating geothermal. However, a lot of that land along the WV/VA border is protected: state parks, national forests, national rec areas, and a large number of caverns that are declared off-limits. The Greenbanks radio astronomy telescope is also in that area, and a couple miles around it are restricted from having wireless communications or other serious electrical equipment that could interfere with radio astronomy.
On the other hand, if coal ever goes out of fashion, I guess the state will have to make a decision - with coal and tourism being our two biggest sources of money, I guess they'll have to decide whether the state parks are more valuable for tourism or generating power.
Its just there used to be places you could go that everyone in the world couldn't follow you and find out everything you were doing.
The Internet is not and was not necessarily that place ("On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog" notwithstanding). The reason everybody can follow you and find out everything you're doing everywhere else in the world is because you announced to everybody where you were going and what you were doing anyway.
I saw one that replaced your HOSTS file to prevent you from going to symantec, kapersky, etc., and show a host not found error instead. Sadly, it wasn't clever enough to check your browser first, so it displayed the IE error page in Firefox.
This is not new. Sure, the WSJ article is dated today(/yesterday depending on where you are), but the Solo Cup case they reference is from last year at the most recent and maybe older than that.