Not a S/N ratio of zero, their definition of channel capacity is only very tenuously connected to Shannon's channel capacity really. Quantum channels already have 0 capacity at non zero fidelity (the quantum equivalent to S/N). The 0 capacity channel from this paper aren't 0 capacity because of their fidelity though, the channels are 0 capacity for different reasons.
So it's not really directly applicable, "just" interesting math.
Increased capacity down the line might move oil producers to increase their production now (because of the decreased future profits from keeping it in the ground). 20-40$ per barrel is of course a stupid amount of money to account for that.
The market doesn't speculate based on fundamentals though, the market speculates on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on.... based on the fundamentals. Pumping up bubbles is a completely rational thing to do when leverage is available (and the collapse of the housing markets have made a lot of capital available for oil speculation). Or at least it's rational as long as you think you are smarter than everyone else, better able to find the percentage advantages needed to make the most of the leverage and smart enough to see when to get out.
It's not so much that the announcement of drilling would change the fundamentals, but everyone expects it to be the pin prick which will burst the bubble (which thus becomes a self fulfilling prophecy). Don't be the one left holding the bag;)
Seriously, something like this makes a lot of sense for fine grain parallelism with many interacting of processes on a processor with a brain dead MMU (there are practical designs for MMUs which can support lots of individually protected process spaces). In the end though for performance sensitive code I'd still rather have a real language, safety be damned.
That was a blast from the past, but indeed this is very close. It's also close to RMoX (Raw Metal Occam, yet another language which allows isolation without intervention of the hardware MMU).
This Slashdot discussion would have been more interesting without the whole misguided web angle attached by that clueless Infoworld article.
Boycots are only ever a publicity tool, they are not meant to hurt sales by their direct effect they are meant to draw headlines and hurt sales by their indirect effect. That only works if you have a large publicly visible group which represents the users in question.
For something like this boycots are the wrong tool, there are better ways of causing bad publicity for Foxconn. As this particular user is showing.
It got out of hand? It got successful. As for booth babes (and noise).... being stricter with rules of conduct for stand holders and tightening the reigns on credentials are two different things. They could have done one without the other.
They chose to do both, I can't fathom why... it's obviously not going to be making them more money.
GPUs can do raytracing fine... but it still won't be used most of the time, simply because you can get better looking images by not trying to use it for all your rendering.
What would he speak about there apart from morality and games? His religious views and are relevant to his ability to do that well... fundies generally don't have a lot of value to add to a discussion.
Or are you postulating he had a secret career as game developer before going into politics?
If you start by considering a Dell as your first choice of purchase you are a perfect Apple customer, but it does make you poorly suited to compare PCs against Macs. Dell is neither cheap nor of particularly high quality.
So why bother if you can simply file the patent and wait for someone else to do it? The patent troll situation is far from static, they are still increasing... who will elect to fund 5 year efforts if there is a large chance that when all is said and done someone with an absolute monopoly on a necessary step will leech away all of your profits?
They are trying to find steps which are unavoidable in the development of technologies. Not quite the same thing.
A person skilled in the art could not make anything which actually worked from their patents without making many more innovative steps... if they actually developed a technology that would not be true.
The chance of people being assholes is wholly uncorrelated with their intelligence. As far as risk/reward/effort goes patent trolling is a better deal than being an engineer in a start up.
Regardless, names do not have copyright protection and there is nothing about trademarks in the DMCA. So either their lawyers are dumb, they intentionally misuse the DMCA or there is something else amiss.
Slashdot Mirror
Hormone's ay? That's nice, what about EPO and blood doping?
Those good developers you are talking about, how large a percentage of the developers are they exactly?
I do wonder though, if they didn't confuse Euros prices with Pounds ... because that price is outrageous.
For comparison, a MSI wind would set you back around 400 Euros in mainland Europe which corresponds pretty well to the 600 Dollar price tag in the US.
Not a S/N ratio of zero, their definition of channel capacity is only very tenuously connected to Shannon's channel capacity really. Quantum channels already have 0 capacity at non zero fidelity (the quantum equivalent to S/N). The 0 capacity channel from this paper aren't 0 capacity because of their fidelity though, the channels are 0 capacity for different reasons.
So it's not really directly applicable, "just" interesting math.
Increased capacity down the line might move oil producers to increase their production now (because of the decreased future profits from keeping it in the ground). 20-40$ per barrel is of course a stupid amount of money to account for that.
The market doesn't speculate based on fundamentals though, the market speculates on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on based on what they perceive the market will speculate on .... based on the fundamentals. Pumping up bubbles is a completely rational thing to do when leverage is available (and the collapse of the housing markets have made a lot of capital available for oil speculation). Or at least it's rational as long as you think you are smarter than everyone else, better able to find the percentage advantages needed to make the most of the leverage and smart enough to see when to get out.
It's not so much that the announcement of drilling would change the fundamentals, but everyone expects it to be the pin prick which will burst the bubble (which thus becomes a self fulfilling prophecy). Don't be the one left holding the bag ;)
Unless you rip them from my cold dead hands!
Seriously, something like this makes a lot of sense for fine grain parallelism with many interacting of processes on a processor with a brain dead MMU (there are practical designs for MMUs which can support lots of individually protected process spaces). In the end though for performance sensitive code I'd still rather have a real language, safety be damned.
Safe is slow.
That was a blast from the past, but indeed this is very close. It's also close to RMoX (Raw Metal Occam, yet another language which allows isolation without intervention of the hardware MMU).
This Slashdot discussion would have been more interesting without the whole misguided web angle attached by that clueless Infoworld article.
Very nicely constructed post to show how no one reads the articles.
Subtract one l ... damn.
The fucking article is about college level education.
Boycots are only ever a publicity tool, they are not meant to hurt sales by their direct effect they are meant to draw headlines and hurt sales by their indirect effect. That only works if you have a large publicly visible group which represents the users in question.
For something like this boycots are the wrong tool, there are better ways of causing bad publicity for Foxconn. As this particular user is showing.
It got out of hand? It got successful. As for booth babes (and noise) .... being stricter with rules of conduct for stand holders and tightening the reigns on credentials are two different things. They could have done one without the other.
They chose to do both, I can't fathom why ... it's obviously not going to be making them more money.
Don't worry by the time they have the technology to make that work your patent will have expired.
Taken them hWhat about the people who came up with the idea independently?
GPUs can do raytracing fine ... but it still won't be used most of the time, simply because you can get better looking images by not trying to use it for all your rendering.
Raytracing, best in moderation.
I'm betting they will be about evenly tied with defensive Chinese expats (much smaller numbers but much stronger feelings).
What would he speak about there apart from morality and games? His religious views and are relevant to his ability to do that well ... fundies generally don't have a lot of value to add to a discussion.
Or are you postulating he had a secret career as game developer before going into politics?
Even ignoring pressure it's about velocity not temperature. They get plenty of fusion in particle accelerators, it's just not very energy efficient.
If you start by considering a Dell as your first choice of purchase you are a perfect Apple customer, but it does make you poorly suited to compare PCs against Macs. Dell is neither cheap nor of particularly high quality.
This is what you should be comparing against, not fucking Dell :
http://www.avadirect.com/Notebooks/Core_2_Notebooks
So why bother if you can simply file the patent and wait for someone else to do it? The patent troll situation is far from static, they are still increasing ... who will elect to fund 5 year efforts if there is a large chance that when all is said and done someone with an absolute monopoly on a necessary step will leech away all of your profits?
They are trying to find steps which are unavoidable in the development of technologies. Not quite the same thing.
... if they actually developed a technology that would not be true.
A person skilled in the art could not make anything which actually worked from their patents without making many more innovative steps
With 500 pieces of shit some of it will stick in the end ... and unfortunately that's all patent trolls need to turn a profit.
The chance of people being assholes is wholly uncorrelated with their intelligence. As far as risk/reward/effort goes patent trolling is a better deal than being an engineer in a start up.
Played by patent proponents, it's a useless distinction which holds no information. Empty words and misdirection.
Unless you want to prove you are a dickhead.
Regardless, names do not have copyright protection and there is nothing about trademarks in the DMCA. So either their lawyers are dumb, they intentionally misuse the DMCA or there is something else amiss.