Nope, they just said they haven't made any meaningful improvements. I guess you assume Firefox has perfect security. "Firefox already had superior security" ahh yes, you do. And superior by what metric? FF has had about 3x more critical critical vulnerabilities than Chrome and about 10% more overall. Not a huge difference, but it definitely puts them at "worse" not "superior".
You got it all wrong, SystemD works great when it's working. It's when it has issues that it has horrible issues. They never planned out the failure cases, which are THE MOST IMPORTANT PART of any system. Almost any idiot can get a system to work, but getting it to work correctly for the right reasons and to fail in predictable and graceful ways is the hard part.
It doesn't need its edges smoothed out, it needs to be re-written. It is fundamentally flawed and there is no way to fix SystemD without breaking compatibility. They used thick screws when they should have used fine nails. Not only do the screws not properly work, but they ruined the wood.
- Women in open-source are more competent than men? This is the hypothesis that the authors support the most. They suggest it somes about due to survivorship bias and/or self-selection and/or higher implicit performance-standards in the female population of open-source coders.
Some companies are working on DRAM-less SSDs with no caches that don't have this buffer-hole. Some of their prototypes were nearly the same read and write performance as all of the other SATA SSDs.
Burden of proof only applies when the information isn't easily publicly accessible. If I said the Space Shuttle is mostly white on top, I shouldn't need to "prove" it by supplying references. You are why we have sites like "Let me google that for you".
I've forgotten a lot of facts, but I remember the ideas. History is very important for political reasons. Many times politicians try to do the same thing under a different guise. Any good history course will give you many examples of these. I had to re-take history several times for some personal reasons, and every teacher taught history as a critical thinking course and did a lot of analysis and gave proper social context. A poor history class would just teach you a bunch of facts.
Same thing goes for sciences. I may not remember the math behind how humans perceive different colors, but I do remember that perception is a very complex topic and if I was to go into marketing, I would make apply due diligence to researching appropriate perception related issues.
Facts can be forgotten or become no longer valid, but concepts are eternal.
The real value that money is supposed to represent is man hours of work. If China can get the same amount of work done in fewer total man hours, then they can do it more cheaply. But I'm not saying that they can, but that's how you'd compare apples to apples.
the common core scam (which is incompatible with logic-based mathematics), kids can no longer fail regardless of performance
Common Core tests have a high failure rate because of the much higher goals. You're conflating so called "Common Core curriculum" which is sold by private companies with the standardized Common Core progression benchmarks. Any test can be "Common Core" as long as it closely aligns with the Common Core benchmarks. How the tests are done or how the curriculum is taught has nothing to do with "Common Core" except marketing.
No business will send their workers to college, they'll send them to a tech school for specific classes or to training seminars. None of which are a replacement for a good education. Technical knowledge expires quickly, education lasts a lifetime.
It's not as simple as how many flops can you do. The PowerPC Top500 are created specifically certain types of workloads and are designed by to ran at 100% 24/7. The idle power consumption of those platforms is ridiculous. Super computers are nothing like computers in normal datacenters. Datacenters have large swings of computational usage and do a lot of VMs. Super computers have constant load and run bare-metal for the most part with highly optimized OS's with kernel schedulers that schedule time slices in quantums of minutes instead of milliseconds.
And yes, AMD has great peak flops and can compete with Intel in this area, but AMD's design is biased more like a GPU than a CPU and takes a big hit any time you need to do thread synchronization. Higher latency to flush a cache-line, which is highly detrimental to synchronized performance(Amdahl's law). AMD wanted a large exclusive cache instead of a smaller low latency inclusive cache. ARM is great if you only need a bunch of weak CPU cores. Below 1Ghz, ARM is slightly ahead of Intel. Around 1ghz, ARM runs into efficiency issues and suddenly they draw more power than Intel and only similar performance at best. ARM does beat Intel in some niche workloads, but the same can be said about pretty much any CPU.
Intel actively sources many of their rare minerals from companies that need a fully audited conflict-free African areas. Unlike many of the other big companies that source from the cheapest, which often is in areas that have massive conflict issues. Intel's new requirements has actually eliminated conflicts in some areas because the money dried up until the warlords moved out, then money came back in. It has had a very positive affect by bringing in much needed money but keeping warlords out of the mix.
C# can be quite decent for performance with proper design and optimizations. To get max performance, you need to stop allocating new objects and start using more structs and buffers. C# also makes threading an async simple. Although, I'm not sure it would be able to keep up with 2GiB/s. That is a lot of IO. I depends on what you're doing. Even async could have issues with 2GiB/s because async uses tasks, which are new objects when a method does not return synchronously.
You seem to have no idea how much Microsoft R&D has contributed to many aspect of technology, especially around computers. A lot of modern GPUs were made possible because Microsoft had many kinds of exotic custom hardware architectures created, then create several custom OS kernels with completely different designs from mainstream, just to see what the best way forward would be. This allowed AMD, Intel, and Nvidia to prototype many ideas.
Slashdot Mirror
You're talking about common issues. I'm talking about corner cases, like when something actually goes wrong and you need to figure out what and why.
They didn't say Firefox isn't secure
Nope, they just said they haven't made any meaningful improvements. I guess you assume Firefox has perfect security. "Firefox already had superior security" ahh yes, you do. And superior by what metric? FF has had about 3x more critical critical vulnerabilities than Chrome and about 10% more overall. Not a huge difference, but it definitely puts them at "worse" not "superior".
High end TLC is good for 10k-60k write cycles. Get what you pay for.
I forgot to also mention, making a system that fails early instead of chugging along like nothing is wrong all the while it's messing your crap up.
You got it all wrong, SystemD works great when it's working. It's when it has issues that it has horrible issues. They never planned out the failure cases, which are THE MOST IMPORTANT PART of any system. Almost any idiot can get a system to work, but getting it to work correctly for the right reasons and to fail in predictable and graceful ways is the hard part.
It doesn't need its edges smoothed out, it needs to be re-written. It is fundamentally flawed and there is no way to fix SystemD without breaking compatibility. They used thick screws when they should have used fine nails. Not only do the screws not properly work, but they ruined the wood.
- Women in open-source are more competent than men? This is the hypothesis that the authors support the most. They suggest it somes about due to survivorship bias and/or self-selection and/or higher implicit performance-standards in the female population of open-source coders.
I would assume the survivor selection bias thing.
My Samsung 850 has 10%-15% by default.
Some companies are working on DRAM-less SSDs with no caches that don't have this buffer-hole. Some of their prototypes were nearly the same read and write performance as all of the other SATA SSDs.
Older/cheaper SSDs do work that way. I wasn't until around the Samsung 840 or 850 that SSDs started to support wear-leveling untrimmed blocked.
Burden of proof only applies when the information isn't easily publicly accessible. If I said the Space Shuttle is mostly white on top, I shouldn't need to "prove" it by supplying references. You are why we have sites like "Let me google that for you".
I've forgotten a lot of facts, but I remember the ideas. History is very important for political reasons. Many times politicians try to do the same thing under a different guise. Any good history course will give you many examples of these. I had to re-take history several times for some personal reasons, and every teacher taught history as a critical thinking course and did a lot of analysis and gave proper social context. A poor history class would just teach you a bunch of facts.
Same thing goes for sciences. I may not remember the math behind how humans perceive different colors, but I do remember that perception is a very complex topic and if I was to go into marketing, I would make apply due diligence to researching appropriate perception related issues.
Facts can be forgotten or become no longer valid, but concepts are eternal.
The real value that money is supposed to represent is man hours of work. If China can get the same amount of work done in fewer total man hours, then they can do it more cheaply. But I'm not saying that they can, but that's how you'd compare apples to apples.
Slashdot needs to start a blacklist of domains, starting with forbes and medium.
To be Christian is to be Christ like. He preached love and forgiveness. Most self-proclaimed Christians aren't Christian.
What we call Gravity is just warped space time. We think we're accelerating down towards the Earth when really we're accelerating up away from it.
If learning isn't fun, you're doing it wrong. Children love to learn, until you beat the enjoyment out of it.
the common core scam (which is incompatible with logic-based mathematics), kids can no longer fail regardless of performance
Common Core tests have a high failure rate because of the much higher goals. You're conflating so called "Common Core curriculum" which is sold by private companies with the standardized Common Core progression benchmarks. Any test can be "Common Core" as long as it closely aligns with the Common Core benchmarks. How the tests are done or how the curriculum is taught has nothing to do with "Common Core" except marketing.
Coding will only be useful as long as there is a dearth of coders.
And gold will only be valuable as long as there is a dearth of gold. Unless you count fools gold, then we have plenty of coders.
Businesses will send their employees to college
No business will send their workers to college, they'll send them to a tech school for specific classes or to training seminars. None of which are a replacement for a good education. Technical knowledge expires quickly, education lasts a lifetime.
I have two issues working from home. My state of mind at home is not conductive to creative thinking. It's hard to train other programmers from home.
It's not as simple as how many flops can you do. The PowerPC Top500 are created specifically certain types of workloads and are designed by to ran at 100% 24/7. The idle power consumption of those platforms is ridiculous. Super computers are nothing like computers in normal datacenters. Datacenters have large swings of computational usage and do a lot of VMs. Super computers have constant load and run bare-metal for the most part with highly optimized OS's with kernel schedulers that schedule time slices in quantums of minutes instead of milliseconds.
And yes, AMD has great peak flops and can compete with Intel in this area, but AMD's design is biased more like a GPU than a CPU and takes a big hit any time you need to do thread synchronization. Higher latency to flush a cache-line, which is highly detrimental to synchronized performance(Amdahl's law). AMD wanted a large exclusive cache instead of a smaller low latency inclusive cache. ARM is great if you only need a bunch of weak CPU cores. Below 1Ghz, ARM is slightly ahead of Intel. Around 1ghz, ARM runs into efficiency issues and suddenly they draw more power than Intel and only similar performance at best. ARM does beat Intel in some niche workloads, but the same can be said about pretty much any CPU.
Intel actively sources many of their rare minerals from companies that need a fully audited conflict-free African areas. Unlike many of the other big companies that source from the cheapest, which often is in areas that have massive conflict issues. Intel's new requirements has actually eliminated conflicts in some areas because the money dried up until the warlords moved out, then money came back in. It has had a very positive affect by bringing in much needed money but keeping warlords out of the mix.
C# can be quite decent for performance with proper design and optimizations. To get max performance, you need to stop allocating new objects and start using more structs and buffers. C# also makes threading an async simple. Although, I'm not sure it would be able to keep up with 2GiB/s. That is a lot of IO. I depends on what you're doing. Even async could have issues with 2GiB/s because async uses tasks, which are new objects when a method does not return synchronously.
You seem to have no idea how much Microsoft R&D has contributed to many aspect of technology, especially around computers. A lot of modern GPUs were made possible because Microsoft had many kinds of exotic custom hardware architectures created, then create several custom OS kernels with completely different designs from mainstream, just to see what the best way forward would be. This allowed AMD, Intel, and Nvidia to prototype many ideas.