What experiments have you conducted validating evolution as a theory with high predictive power? You haven't? You're accepting the word of numerous people worldwide who conducted those experiments first hand? Then you have a belief in science. You are effectively participating in the religion of science. And nobody could expect you to do otherwise because to personally verify the conclusions of every single scientific experiment whose outcome is important to your daily decisions is simply not possible.
Nor does logic play into it, because any logical argument applied to the subject is depending upon two things: the correctness of the premises, and the validity of the structure of the argument. Even assuming the correctness of the structure of every argument, the correctness of the premises can only be established via scientific experiment, leading to an infinite recursion of proving premises and an inevitable skydive into philosophy, psychology, metaphysics, and madness.
Emissions and crosstalk are a fact of life. It happens. But you know what? Cat5e emissions and crosstalk are decibels away from being problematic at 100bT speeds - at ANY cable length.
The effects of the harmonics you paid so much attention to in your *snicker* physics class represent a microscopic FRACTION of the line loss due to emissions and crosstalk.
As you push up to gigabit speeds, things like Near-End Crosstalk (NEXT) and Equal Level Far End Crosstalk at a frequencies higher than 100MHz become much more of a problem. Which is why CAT6 and CAT7 have much more stringent line loss requirements for the connectors.
That's right. Connectors.
I think you're SEVERELY overestimating the SWR in the mismatched impedances. The changes in resistance due to length are virtually nil in the allowed 100m cable length. Most of the reflections and loss are due to imperfections in the cable, variations in the twist rate, which DO increase with the length. But that's going to be, on average, fairly linear with cable length - it's not going to have an eignvector of stable points, as you suggest.
And to top it all of, you're barking up the wrong tree when it comes to noise. The miseries of the RJ-45 connector, under most circumstances, far outstrip the line loss and reflections in-flight.
Apparently you missed the hints suggesting that religion might have nothing to do with it:
Angel Caprica Six: "That too is in God's plan" Angel Baltar: "You know it doesn't like that name"
The discussions between the "angels" about the Law of Averages rather than prophecy or revelation.
It looks more like advanced beings overseeing the development of new species in the galaxy than "God". Which would be semi-consistent with the original BSG, as well.
Hmmmm. Maybe the tone just didn't quite come across right.
I enjoy knocking a fallacy as much as the next guy, but my intention wasn't to persuade, inform, or deceive.
My intention was mostly just to be snarky. Woo! Those crazy mormons are taking over california with all their morals and money and missionaries! They really aren't influential in california.
Actually, my understanding is that it was the black vote in california that tipped the scales. 69% for Prop 8.
And you know why they came out to the polls in such huge numbers? I had nothing to do with mormons calling them up and had everything to do with the presidential race.
Yup. Blame Obama. Heh. I like the guy, I really do. But it's one of those ironic quirks of fate.
Re:Hey, remember when Ender's Game was good?
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 1
Crap! I'm only *barely* four digit! Can I buy an indulgence for my sin of belatedness?
I lurked on slashdot back when it was Chips & Dips!
A large problem is that most people just don't feel copyright infringement is immoral anymore.
It's not immoral, and never was. Copyright infringement isn't wrong, it's merely illegal. It's an economic incentive for writers and inventors written into the constitution.
Tough to say. Intel reports "typical maximum" for their TDP.
AMD reports "theoretical maximum" for their TDP.
We don't know how VIA arrived at their number, but it's quite possible that VIA's 5W number and Intel's 2.5W number aren't a straight-across comparison.
I think most of us aren't bashing Java as a productive language. I think most of the Java bashing going on here is because Java isn't a good LEARNING language.
I think it is the opinion of those who object to Java as a learning language that just like we don't teach math by letting you use a calculator to do it all for you, we shouldn't teach programming where right from the start with libraries of functions that can do most of the work for you.
I started programming in Basic on our Atari 800XL when I was 6. I, too, am one of those passionate, self-taught people. I learned C and Perl programming by the time I was in high school. I thought I had a pretty good grip on programming.
Then I took an assembly language class, and my eyes were opened.
When I got to college, the first CS class in my major (computer engineering) starts with understanding numeric representations, then introduce an instruction set for manipulating numeric representations (and machine code), then assembly, then abstractions of assembly building up to C programming. It was great watching the eyes of everyone around me open up as they REALLY began to understand what computers were doing. It was almost like experiencing that great (semester-long) epiphany all over again myself.
When I TA'ed that class later, I could guess with better than 80% accuracy who the CS students were and who the engineering students were by their reactions to learning about ISAs and assembly and C programming. The CS students (generally) hated it. They also had to take an introductory programming class in Java before they took this class.
You act like that's the fault of "No Child Left Behind".
I grew up well before No Child Left Behind, and I knew far more people who could spew the win-loss records of every team in the NFL than could spew the Period Table.
I knew more people who cared about what those win-loss records meant for the season, and understood the strength of the team's schedule than knew about valence shells and what that meant for covalent bonding.
And the worst part? Sports team knowledge gets outdated every year, while scientific knowledge only gets outdated only every 5-50 years, and will make you a whole lot more money.
Unfortunately for you and your theories, for any major library, toolkit, driver, or anything else necessary to make an operating system remotely useful, you need low latencies, good single-point i/o, determinism. You'll never get that in garbage-collected code.
I thought that Wired DIDN'T violate the court ordered seal on the documents because the court order only prevented parties to the case from releasing the documents available to them by means of the case, and couldn't possibly apply to third-party sources that have the documents and aren't part of the case.
And considering your right is to the copyright protected content and not the media itself, replacement copies should only be the cost of media and transportation, but they have no incentive to respect YOUR rights. So not only is the system fundamentally broken in that they deny you your half of the copyright deal (your rights to the work they have sold you), they're worsening the deal with an obstacle course of "protections".
TFA said that the ATI chipset doesn't include the ethernet controller, BUT PROVIDES PCI-E LINKS TO WHICH MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURERS CAN CONNECT ONE.
It's really quite common for motherboard manufacturers to have to add an extra one of their own in order to provide GigE ethernet, or to work around a buggy chipset, or for whatever other reason.
The chipset also does nothing to limit the number of PCI/PCI-X slots. Again, the motherboard manufacturer can drop an inexpensive PCIe/PCI bridge there, and suddenly you've got 6 PCI slots! Wow! Magic!
If motherboard manufacturers thing 1 PATA connection is a problem, they can drop a simple PATA chipset on that PCIe/PCI bridge they added, or they can stick a 5-connector RAID 5 PATA controller on a PCIe link.
It looks to me like ATI provided a rock-solid base platform for OEMs to work from, without saddling them unnecessarily with legacy crap (excessive PATA headers or a wasted PCI bridge). Granted, the Ethernet controller doesn't fall under "legacy crap", but decent ethernet PHYs and MACs are a dime a dozen (well, a little bit more than that, but not much).
Really, the ATI chipset seems flexible enough to be designed into any level of system, and probably ideally suited for integration into SFF systems that the nVidia chipset would have a much harder time getting into. The one PATA connector would be ideal, passively cooled chipset, drop a cheap ethernet chipset on it, and bang! a nice mini-ITX board.
Slashdot Mirror
While the .NET Core is under the MIT license, Roslyn appears to be under the Apache 2.0 license.
I can see the reasoning behind the different choices - I'm just saying is all.
Obviously false.
Emacs comes with a built-in psychoanalyst - a critical feature for any experienced developer. Especially one using Emacs.
Visual Studio lacks such a feature, so the logical conclusion is that developers using Visual Studio are simply inexperienced.
Although, to be fair, Emacs isn't properly an IDE, it's an OS that comes with IDE features.
Oh, really?
What experiments have you conducted validating evolution as a theory with high predictive power? You haven't? You're accepting the word of numerous people worldwide who conducted those experiments first hand? Then you have a belief in science. You are effectively participating in the religion of science. And nobody could expect you to do otherwise because to personally verify the conclusions of every single scientific experiment whose outcome is important to your daily decisions is simply not possible.
Nor does logic play into it, because any logical argument applied to the subject is depending upon two things: the correctness of the premises, and the validity of the structure of the argument. Even assuming the correctness of the structure of every argument, the correctness of the premises can only be established via scientific experiment, leading to an infinite recursion of proving premises and an inevitable skydive into philosophy, psychology, metaphysics, and madness.
Get off my lawn!
We should celebrate the anniversary of the most boring day in history.
April 11th, Annual Most Boring Day Celebration. You celebrate it by... not doing anything special.
Oh no! Not *gasp* crosstalk!
Emissions and crosstalk are a fact of life. It happens. But you know what? Cat5e emissions and crosstalk are decibels away from being problematic at 100bT speeds - at ANY cable length.
The effects of the harmonics you paid so much attention to in your *snicker* physics class represent a microscopic FRACTION of the line loss due to emissions and crosstalk.
As you push up to gigabit speeds, things like Near-End Crosstalk (NEXT) and Equal Level Far End Crosstalk at a frequencies higher than 100MHz become much more of a problem. Which is why CAT6 and CAT7 have much more stringent line loss requirements for the connectors.
That's right. Connectors.
I think you're SEVERELY overestimating the SWR in the mismatched impedances. The changes in resistance due to length are virtually nil in the allowed 100m cable length. Most of the reflections and loss are due to imperfections in the cable, variations in the twist rate, which DO increase with the length. But that's going to be, on average, fairly linear with cable length - it's not going to have an eignvector of stable points, as you suggest.
And to top it all of, you're barking up the wrong tree when it comes to noise. The miseries of the RJ-45 connector, under most circumstances, far outstrip the line loss and reflections in-flight.
Apparently you missed the hints suggesting that religion might have nothing to do with it:
Angel Caprica Six: "That too is in God's plan"
Angel Baltar: "You know it doesn't like that name"
The discussions between the "angels" about the Law of Averages rather than prophecy or revelation.
It looks more like advanced beings overseeing the development of new species in the galaxy than "God". Which would be semi-consistent with the original BSG, as well.
And if you follow that explanatio
Hmmmm. Maybe the tone just didn't quite come across right.
I enjoy knocking a fallacy as much as the next guy, but my intention wasn't to persuade, inform, or deceive.
My intention was mostly just to be snarky. Woo! Those crazy mormons are taking over california with all their morals and money and missionaries! They really aren't influential in california.
Actually, my understanding is that it was the black vote in california that tipped the scales. 69% for Prop 8.
And you know why they came out to the polls in such huge numbers? I had nothing to do with mormons calling them up and had everything to do with the presidential race.
Yup. Blame Obama. Heh. I like the guy, I really do. But it's one of those ironic quirks of fate.
Crap! I'm only *barely* four digit! Can I buy an indulgence for my sin of belatedness?
I lurked on slashdot back when it was Chips & Dips!
Oh no! We're going to destroy the fabric of subspace before we even develop warp drive! We'll never make it to the stars now!
Ok, how about these numbers, then.
There are still many systems sold with XP, even now after MS has discontinued it, via "downgrade rights".
Every single one of those systems sold goes down on paper as a Vista sale, though.
A large problem is that most people just don't feel copyright infringement is immoral anymore.
It's not immoral, and never was. Copyright infringement isn't wrong, it's merely illegal. It's an economic incentive for writers and inventors written into the constitution.
That's it.
Why not Douglas Adams' novels? I read those when I was 10 - pretty^H^H^H^H^H^H^H mostly harmless
There. Fixed it for you.
Tough to say. Intel reports "typical maximum" for their TDP.
AMD reports "theoretical maximum" for their TDP.
We don't know how VIA arrived at their number, but it's quite possible that VIA's 5W number and Intel's 2.5W number aren't a straight-across comparison.
Geek kids these days got no respect. No respect, I tell ya.
What's that? Slashdot? Is that what they're calling the website these days?
So hard to tell with it always changing.
Hey Rob, how about a special emblem on the posts from members with UID's under 5000?
I think you mean the most highly publicised polygamists.
Because most of the polygamist splinter sects of the church in Utah don't practice pedophiliac polygamy.
Just the few that the FBI are always after.
I think most of us aren't bashing Java as a productive language. I think most of the Java bashing going on here is because Java isn't a good LEARNING language.
I think it is the opinion of those who object to Java as a learning language that just like we don't teach math by letting you use a calculator to do it all for you, we shouldn't teach programming where right from the start with libraries of functions that can do most of the work for you.
I started programming in Basic on our Atari 800XL when I was 6. I, too, am one of those passionate, self-taught people. I learned C and Perl programming by the time I was in high school. I thought I had a pretty good grip on programming.
Then I took an assembly language class, and my eyes were opened.
When I got to college, the first CS class in my major (computer engineering) starts with understanding numeric representations, then introduce an instruction set for manipulating numeric representations (and machine code), then assembly, then abstractions of assembly building up to C programming. It was great watching the eyes of everyone around me open up as they REALLY began to understand what computers were doing. It was almost like experiencing that great (semester-long) epiphany all over again myself.
When I TA'ed that class later, I could guess with better than 80% accuracy who the CS students were and who the engineering students were by their reactions to learning about ISAs and assembly and C programming. The CS students (generally) hated it. They also had to take an introductory programming class in Java before they took this class.
You act like that's the fault of "No Child Left Behind".
I grew up well before No Child Left Behind, and I knew far more people who could spew the win-loss records of every team in the NFL than could spew the Period Table.
I knew more people who cared about what those win-loss records meant for the season, and understood the strength of the team's schedule than knew about valence shells and what that meant for covalent bonding.
And the worst part? Sports team knowledge gets outdated every year, while scientific knowledge only gets outdated only every 5-50 years, and will make you a whole lot more money.
If nothing else, by dumbing down the curriculum, the demeaned all CS degrees by granting them to people who did a whole lot less to earn it.
And because it's so easy, you get people who see programming as an income and not as rewarding, satisfying work.
Unfortunately for you and your theories, for any major library, toolkit, driver, or anything else necessary to make an operating system remotely useful, you need low latencies, good single-point i/o, determinism. You'll never get that in garbage-collected code.
I thought that Wired DIDN'T violate the court ordered seal on the documents because the court order only prevented parties to the case from releasing the documents available to them by means of the case, and couldn't possibly apply to third-party sources that have the documents and aren't part of the case.
And considering your right is to the copyright protected content and not the media itself, replacement copies should only be the cost of media and transportation, but they have no incentive to respect YOUR rights. So not only is the system fundamentally broken in that they deny you your half of the copyright deal (your rights to the work they have sold you), they're worsening the deal with an obstacle course of "protections".
TFA said that the ATI chipset doesn't include the ethernet controller, BUT PROVIDES PCI-E LINKS TO WHICH MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURERS CAN CONNECT ONE.
It's really quite common for motherboard manufacturers to have to add an extra one of their own in order to provide GigE ethernet, or to work around a buggy chipset, or for whatever other reason.
The chipset also does nothing to limit the number of PCI/PCI-X slots. Again, the motherboard manufacturer can drop an inexpensive PCIe/PCI bridge there, and suddenly you've got 6 PCI slots! Wow! Magic!
If motherboard manufacturers thing 1 PATA connection is a problem, they can drop a simple PATA chipset on that PCIe/PCI bridge they added, or they can stick a 5-connector RAID 5 PATA controller on a PCIe link.
It looks to me like ATI provided a rock-solid base platform for OEMs to work from, without saddling them unnecessarily with legacy crap (excessive PATA headers or a wasted PCI bridge). Granted, the Ethernet controller doesn't fall under "legacy crap", but decent ethernet PHYs and MACs are a dime a dozen (well, a little bit more than that, but not much).
Really, the ATI chipset seems flexible enough to be designed into any level of system, and probably ideally suited for integration into SFF systems that the nVidia chipset would have a much harder time getting into. The one PATA connector would be ideal, passively cooled chipset, drop a cheap ethernet chipset on it, and bang! a nice mini-ITX board.
never realized it before - we share a birthday.
Happy birthday, Rob