This is the EXACT same reason people are having problems with vista. New OS = New requirements sometimes. If you criticize one for it you must criticize the other.
I thought it said that the COMPANIES were funding for the GOV'T to do something, not the other way around... so... what's this have to do with anything communist like?
Yeah, sorry but genetic diversity is not the same as evolution. Evolution requires that before the age when people reproduce, there is some factor that wil single out a particular type of genes as mroe likely to reproduce, that way the species can evolve to whichever genes are selected as most beneficial. Just because people are constantly changing in hundreds of billions of ways, doesn't mean that in the end the species will evolve. Statistically, I believe, the genetic changes, will always cancel out unless there is an outside pressure pushing us one way. The geneticist is saying since there are no longer any factors putting pressure on certain genes, humans will no longer evolve from the current state of affairs. Maybe you should understand what he's saying before you call someone much smarter than you retarded...
Personally, I have a relatively easy time installing apache. But I would still like to have some sort of IIS GUI program to easily navigate the settings in less time than finding the correct locations of the things in config files. I'm not the type of person who hates apache because that tool doesn't exist - but it'd be nice to have, just in case / for fun.
The way I see it (and I could be mistaken), is that the only possible way to design a compression technique which passes the "AI Threshold" is to have a lossy technique, and the only way to determine what is okay to loose in human text is to have some form of AI saying if a particular word is necessary in a specific context, or if it can be removed. Such as removing consecutive repetetive thoughts which repeat themselves. Thus, in order to get any type of compression technique beyond what this new program does, we need to run an AI contextualizer on the text and somehow combine that with the compressor.
Just kinda thinking out loud
Okay yeah, unlike many of these posts which are mainly repeated are a little off. It has nothing to do with the speed of light. Electrons are not the same as light - they move at their own speed. It happens to be slower than the speed of light, but none-the-less. It depends on how far an electron can move through the semiconductors in a given time period. The more transistors, the more space it has to move in one clock cycle, so the clock speed has to be slow enough that the electrons can move throughout the entire circuit, but at the same time it cannot be too slow that race conditions develop. And unlike many people think, the electron itself is moving very (relative) slow (You can learn this in a standard high school AP Physics class), it is the effect of the electron moving, pushing the other electrons through the wire that moves very fast, but still much MUCH slower than light. The potential difference, a.k.a. voltage, comes from the difference in amount of electrons on one side versus the other side of a circuit, this difference causes the electrons at a higher potential push towards the lower potential until the difference has become 0, pushing the other electrons as they flow, like water in a river. While the water itself is not moving very fast, the water moving at the start of a river can cause a reaction at the bottom much faster than the water itself gets there.
maybe, but maybe not, sometimes the control can really help out. Especially if there are commands to find out which cpu things are already running on, especially in the area of non-unified caches.
Let's say you have three threads, all of "equal priority" on a system with two cores. So in general you can add them in any order and they work either way. But say one of your threads is controling the other two by human input, while one is modifying data and the other is analyzing that same data. If you have those two on a processor together, and the control program on the separate core, you can have much faster memory access (depending on your access patterns) because they are both running with the same cache. But if you had them on separate cores with the control thread on a random one, the actual threads may get more run time, but it will also take much longer to access the shared memory, since the caches must be kept in sync, writing through all the way down to a unified level before being brought back up to the core's personal cache for use in the other thread. I'd rather do a couple extra micro-seconds ops waiting to switch threads, rather than have to go through the process of copying cache data.
And while we are making headway in unified caches, that's still only L2 caches, there will always be a small portion of cache that is not unified. And it would still be nice to have this level of control in a program. Any besides - we're not supposed to say "It's easy in java so let's just let the scheduler handle it" - we're supposed to say "I want to control every aspect of my computer", and the speed you loose by using java is not worth the simplicity of Java threads. Though I will admit - I do really love the way Java works. especially with threads, exceptions, and GUI (swing).
Not to say I'm right... maybe I can never be satisfied with the options I'm given - I always want more and more control, I should just write a kernel - hahaha.
I think what we need are (STANDARD) commands to say, how many cores? okay - throw this thread on core A, this thread on core B, and let me handle the interlinks, from a programming end. I know you can probably do this in ASM or with interrupts, and probably from C - but it's really got to get a lot more straightforward. Once it's as easy as speaking it, then it will be more likely that an average programmer will use that mechanism, and thus programs as a whole will begin to pick up enormous pace, and they will be able to adapt, at RUN TIME to the running conditions.
Posed no threat? So you'd say 6 months of having no money because someone has stolen your entire life is no threat. I'm sorry but my moral code tells me the theif person forfeit his own life when he stole her's.
actually, time itself wouldn't be moving any slower or faster, but our existence would be traveling through speed at a slower rate,.5 seconds per second anyone? haha. complicated but fun concept
Yeah, but at least you're allowed to install linux and windows on all their supported systems. If i pull out a random computer from the garbage and want to load it as a thin-client, vnc or rdesktop only - you think it will run mac os?...yea, sometimes...but the kicker - it's illegal - You can walk into the store, get the disc off the shelf - pop it in the computer, load it up - all with no hitches - and it's still illegal because it's not "apple hardware". - Yeah - therefore I will never buy any mac hardware or software - it's not worth the hassle. Especially considering mac hardware is about 3 times the price of normal hardware you can just walk into a bestbuy and get.
"recompiling the shell"
hm... it'd be interesting to see a google-written "explorer.exe" to replace the windows default.
I know microsoft actually has methods in place to allow this to happen...hmm....
Yes, This is true, but there is also the fact that we don't RESTRICT the automobile manufacturers from putting in whatever radio, glovebox or tires on standard that they want - we only ensure that we can add to them later. Microsoft's software allows for those additions to be made, but still has it's own "standard equiptment" in place.
And I'm sorry, no matter how much I love google, this is kinda ridiculous. It makes perfect sense to use Microsoft's built in search rather than any add-on. This is because if microsoft is making the operating system, they can integrate the search into the O.S. so much better than any other company that it actually becomes more of an OS process rather than an application process running on top of and interacting with the OS. It seems like google is getting to the point where they want to replace inherint system libraries, at a core level - that would require one of two things: Either Windows becoming open source....yeah, okay.... or google writing their own os....
And no offense, but they say microsoft is "prohibiting competition" or whatever words they use...? As long as you're running your program on their operating system, you're supporting microsoft, not competing against it - regardless of your application. Yes, you can take some of their profits in the office products, or browsers, or anything like that, but you're really not in a position to make microsoft worry, because it still has it's key - the os. Now, if you really want to compete, google has to do the one thing that would make microsoft cry...an OS.
So I get to my favorite idea, a google OS. I would love to see google put it's time and energy into an operating system. I think they could kill microsoft in this area if they really gave it a go. They need to drop this shinanigangs with antitrust, and really show microsoft they mean business. With the support of the many computer people who love google and hate microsoft, Google would have an amazing customer base to start out with. Then, if they made it linux based - they would have the entire linux community at their disposal. But I would like to see another non-linux based os (at least at kernel level.. and still preferably open source). This is because it would allow for a more widespread market. While linux is great, the entire world under one kernel/os would not be good - we need diversity - but friendly diversity.
A little dreaming mixed with a little anger, but it would be nice.
Bandwidth is essentially available already. I have my family running a couple linux-boxes with about 200MHz, and like 64 MB ram, they just RD into the same server and has access to anything they need, i don'tthink adding something like a smart fridge or microwave to this would hinder the bandwidth that much, the WAN end is where you start to see the problems
Now you just have to make sure everyone in the world who wants to access your site uses port 8000, not very easy, especially if you have an important web app / business running on it.
Personally, my port 25 (SMTP) was shut down,
"Running an email server is against the contract you signed".
Slashdot Mirror
This is the EXACT same reason people are having problems with vista. New OS = New requirements sometimes. If you criticize one for it you must criticize the other.
I thought it said that the COMPANIES were funding for the GOV'T to do something, not the other way around... so... what's this have to do with anything communist like?
Yeah, sorry but genetic diversity is not the same as evolution. Evolution requires that before the age when people reproduce, there is some factor that wil single out a particular type of genes as mroe likely to reproduce, that way the species can evolve to whichever genes are selected as most beneficial. Just because people are constantly changing in hundreds of billions of ways, doesn't mean that in the end the species will evolve. Statistically, I believe, the genetic changes, will always cancel out unless there is an outside pressure pushing us one way. The geneticist is saying since there are no longer any factors putting pressure on certain genes, humans will no longer evolve from the current state of affairs. Maybe you should understand what he's saying before you call someone much smarter than you retarded...
Personally, I have a relatively easy time installing apache. But I would still like to have some sort of IIS GUI program to easily navigate the settings in less time than finding the correct locations of the things in config files. I'm not the type of person who hates apache because that tool doesn't exist - but it'd be nice to have, just in case / for fun.
The way I see it (and I could be mistaken), is that the only possible way to design a compression technique which passes the "AI Threshold" is to have a lossy technique, and the only way to determine what is okay to loose in human text is to have some form of AI saying if a particular word is necessary in a specific context, or if it can be removed. Such as removing consecutive repetetive thoughts which repeat themselves. Thus, in order to get any type of compression technique beyond what this new program does, we need to run an AI contextualizer on the text and somehow combine that with the compressor. Just kinda thinking out loud
I don't need Exchange support, but can I sync it with a regular ubuntu LDAP server? if so - any tutorials?
Yeah, we're missing tons of info on this subject, someone needs to find out where all the links went and what's going on
Who said the CD was full?
Okay yeah, unlike many of these posts which are mainly repeated are a little off. It has nothing to do with the speed of light. Electrons are not the same as light - they move at their own speed. It happens to be slower than the speed of light, but none-the-less. It depends on how far an electron can move through the semiconductors in a given time period. The more transistors, the more space it has to move in one clock cycle, so the clock speed has to be slow enough that the electrons can move throughout the entire circuit, but at the same time it cannot be too slow that race conditions develop. And unlike many people think, the electron itself is moving very (relative) slow (You can learn this in a standard high school AP Physics class), it is the effect of the electron moving, pushing the other electrons through the wire that moves very fast, but still much MUCH slower than light. The potential difference, a.k.a. voltage, comes from the difference in amount of electrons on one side versus the other side of a circuit, this difference causes the electrons at a higher potential push towards the lower potential until the difference has become 0, pushing the other electrons as they flow, like water in a river. While the water itself is not moving very fast, the water moving at the start of a river can cause a reaction at the bottom much faster than the water itself gets there.
maybe, but maybe not, sometimes the control can really help out. Especially if there are commands to find out which cpu things are already running on, especially in the area of non-unified caches. Let's say you have three threads, all of "equal priority" on a system with two cores. So in general you can add them in any order and they work either way. But say one of your threads is controling the other two by human input, while one is modifying data and the other is analyzing that same data. If you have those two on a processor together, and the control program on the separate core, you can have much faster memory access (depending on your access patterns) because they are both running with the same cache. But if you had them on separate cores with the control thread on a random one, the actual threads may get more run time, but it will also take much longer to access the shared memory, since the caches must be kept in sync, writing through all the way down to a unified level before being brought back up to the core's personal cache for use in the other thread. I'd rather do a couple extra micro-seconds ops waiting to switch threads, rather than have to go through the process of copying cache data. And while we are making headway in unified caches, that's still only L2 caches, there will always be a small portion of cache that is not unified. And it would still be nice to have this level of control in a program. Any besides - we're not supposed to say "It's easy in java so let's just let the scheduler handle it" - we're supposed to say "I want to control every aspect of my computer", and the speed you loose by using java is not worth the simplicity of Java threads. Though I will admit - I do really love the way Java works. especially with threads, exceptions, and GUI (swing). Not to say I'm right... maybe I can never be satisfied with the options I'm given - I always want more and more control, I should just write a kernel - hahaha.
I think what we need are (STANDARD) commands to say, how many cores? okay - throw this thread on core A, this thread on core B, and let me handle the interlinks, from a programming end. I know you can probably do this in ASM or with interrupts, and probably from C - but it's really got to get a lot more straightforward. Once it's as easy as speaking it, then it will be more likely that an average programmer will use that mechanism, and thus programs as a whole will begin to pick up enormous pace, and they will be able to adapt, at RUN TIME to the running conditions.
Posed no threat? So you'd say 6 months of having no money because someone has stolen your entire life is no threat. I'm sorry but my moral code tells me the theif person forfeit his own life when he stole her's.
actually, time itself wouldn't be moving any slower or faster, but our existence would be traveling through speed at a slower rate, .5 seconds per second anyone? haha. complicated but fun concept
actually..that's a 9-to-1 ratio...but i agree
Yeah, but at least you're allowed to install linux and windows on all their supported systems. If i pull out a random computer from the garbage and want to load it as a thin-client, vnc or rdesktop only - you think it will run mac os? ...yea, sometimes...but the kicker - it's illegal - You can walk into the store, get the disc off the shelf - pop it in the computer, load it up - all with no hitches - and it's still illegal because it's not "apple hardware". - Yeah - therefore I will never buy any mac hardware or software - it's not worth the hassle. Especially considering mac hardware is about 3 times the price of normal hardware you can just walk into a bestbuy and get.
I personally wouldn't run windows if it didn't come with I.E. - seriously - without it you can't even download firefox!
"recompiling the shell" hm... it'd be interesting to see a google-written "explorer.exe" to replace the windows default. I know microsoft actually has methods in place to allow this to happen...hmm....
Yes, This is true, but there is also the fact that we don't RESTRICT the automobile manufacturers from putting in whatever radio, glovebox or tires on standard that they want - we only ensure that we can add to them later. Microsoft's software allows for those additions to be made, but still has it's own "standard equiptment" in place. And I'm sorry, no matter how much I love google, this is kinda ridiculous. It makes perfect sense to use Microsoft's built in search rather than any add-on. This is because if microsoft is making the operating system, they can integrate the search into the O.S. so much better than any other company that it actually becomes more of an OS process rather than an application process running on top of and interacting with the OS. It seems like google is getting to the point where they want to replace inherint system libraries, at a core level - that would require one of two things: Either Windows becoming open source....yeah, okay.... or google writing their own os.... And no offense, but they say microsoft is "prohibiting competition" or whatever words they use...? As long as you're running your program on their operating system, you're supporting microsoft, not competing against it - regardless of your application. Yes, you can take some of their profits in the office products, or browsers, or anything like that, but you're really not in a position to make microsoft worry, because it still has it's key - the os. Now, if you really want to compete, google has to do the one thing that would make microsoft cry...an OS. So I get to my favorite idea, a google OS. I would love to see google put it's time and energy into an operating system. I think they could kill microsoft in this area if they really gave it a go. They need to drop this shinanigangs with antitrust, and really show microsoft they mean business. With the support of the many computer people who love google and hate microsoft, Google would have an amazing customer base to start out with. Then, if they made it linux based - they would have the entire linux community at their disposal. But I would like to see another non-linux based os (at least at kernel level.. and still preferably open source). This is because it would allow for a more widespread market. While linux is great, the entire world under one kernel/os would not be good - we need diversity - but friendly diversity. A little dreaming mixed with a little anger, but it would be nice.
Bandwidth is essentially available already. I have my family running a couple linux-boxes with about 200MHz, and like 64 MB ram, they just RD into the same server and has access to anything they need, i don'tthink adding something like a smart fridge or microwave to this would hinder the bandwidth that much, the WAN end is where you start to see the problems
Now you just have to make sure everyone in the world who wants to access your site uses port 8000, not very easy, especially if you have an important web app / business running on it. Personally, my port 25 (SMTP) was shut down, "Running an email server is against the contract you signed".