I don't know if there was a ban on Java at Sun or not, what I know is that for Solaris9, they replaced the GUI of their Solaris admin tools by Java GUIs which *sucked* hard: lots of spinning wheel, slow as molasse, etc.
Apparently at least for Solaris9 (don't know if this has improved afterwards), even Sun doesn't know how to make good GUI apps in Java!
>So how is it different than quantum entanglement? I do not know, but I would like to.
The difference is that in quantum entanglement the ball are not red or blue, they are in a state which mix of red and blue and the color of the ball is only set to red or blue when you look at the ball, and the color of the other entangled ball is set also instantaneously to the opposite color whatever the distance between both balls is, weird eh?
The natural question is: but how do you know that the color of the ball isn't fixed instead of being determined when you look at the ball, well Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen have shown that as counter-intuitive as it, there is a difference in some case, so their view was that Quantum Mechanic was wrong because it would mean that there is an effect faster than C.. Much latter Alain Aspect (a French researcher) made an experiment which measured what happens truly in those case and the QM predictions were the correct one..
So there is really a weird instantaneous non-local action, but even weirder, it doesn't violate the special relativity because it cannot transfer data faster than C.
A language which has by default regular expression is less bloated than one which has them as part of its standard library? Your definition of bloat is like Perl: twisted.
>Once you learn perl you don't need a big set of reference books to explain every obscure library. Just the manpages
Perl manpages are *big*, so that's not a very convincing proof! And personnaly when I'm using Perl, I'm always using books and google to try to make sense of that convoluted mess of a language.
>Seriously, why is this such a surprise to everyone?
Who said it's a surprise? I've worked in a project which was originally mostly French and German, then some parts were moved to Romania and China, the Chinese used an Indian IT company which subcontracted some parts to (a few) German engineers.
Re:Biggest myths of all have been around for ages.
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
+1 mod parent up.
Re:Biggest myths of all have been around for ages.
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
>You deny religion in Einstein, whose faith in God was so strong that he rejected quantum mechanism, famously with "God does not play dice with the universe"?
Einstein view of "God" was 'the nature', so his sentence is more about an aesthetic view of the universe than a religious declaration. Einstein had quite a few reasons to reject QM: remember the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen 'thought experiment', it doesn't depend on your religious views to be baffled by the QM view: there are non-local 'instantaneous' interactions, but those 'instantaneous' interaction cannot be used to transfer data faster than C, WTF???? And yet, Alain Aspect's experiments have shown that this is what happen.
Anyway to stay on topic, >>Cultist. The key here is "believes in" rather than "can conceive of". The *key* to science has always been uncertainty. >Do you not appreciate the irony in this statement? That you cannot "conceive of" religious belief being valid?
Because all these religious belief have no rational basis: they always assert universe is like *this*, without any serious proof. Scientific point of view is more honest: the truth is that *we don't know*.
Re:Biggest myths of all have been around for ages.
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
That's not what the rules say, it says that any additionnal entity added to the simplest explanation must have a justification which means that the simplest answer is "too simple": Newton is too simple because it doesn't explain Mercure's orbit, so we have to go to Einstein.
A lot of people leave without believing that superstitions (including religions) are real, so if you want to explain that those entity are necessary to explain the world, you must give a proof (and a big one at that: extraordinary claim needs extraordinay proof): no proof, no supernatural entities (whether it's telepathy, God, or whatever).
Re:Biggest myths of all have been around for ages.
on
Why Myths Persist
·
· Score: 1
> This is why the scientific method is so invaluable
Only if you apply it! Usually religious&superstitious people do apply the 'scientific method' as well as sceptic people for normal topics but they don't apply it to everything.
Which is not surprising: what you learns as a child is really hard to dismiss after, even when it contradicts the Occam razor.
In France, the legal papers were stolen from the tribunal preventing the trial, and *drum roll*, it happened TWO TIMES!!
Even once, it is inexcusable (security in the tribunals in France is laughable) as Scientology had already done such tricks on other countries, but twice in the same country, the mind boggles from the incompetency of: - the judge for not taking special measure to protect the documents - the judicial system for not providing safe to store legals documents.
> heck sometimes we even shared a meal or some sodas in a local park - OUTDOORS
Well, ironically if you live in a third world country, it would be easier to use the laptop outdoors as the OLPC black&white screen is much easier to read outdoors than traditionnal LCD screens (and it has a higher resolution), too bad normal laptop builders have more or less stopped inovating (the flash disk being the only exception).
>But if you don't trust Google to keep your bookmarks secure, how can you trust their program to do a proper encryption? Maybe they have a backdoor there that will allow them to access your "encrypted" bookmarks. There is no such thing as trusting them somewhat.
That's not true: you're using OS XXX, but you know that this OS has flaws so you patch it.
Without encryption, to send sensitive data to a provider, you must bet that he is able to keep his servers secure for outside and inside threats forever, with encryption you only need to bet that he is able to do proper encryption, a much safer bet.
For 'serious' scientific computing, they use 64b FP number, having vectors of 4 element seems the right size, so SIMD computations of 4*64=256 seems the 'right size' for these users.
Sure multimedia & games use lower precision FP computations so 16b or 32b FP number is enough, but it's strange that AMD doesn't try to improve the usage for the scientific computation niche.
Maybe it's because the change would be expensive as to be efficient, the width of the memory bus should be expanded to 256b from 128b now.
Re:And for those wondering what PCI refers to
on
PCI Compliance
·
· Score: 1
Thanks a lot!
Are the submiter or the editor dumb? It's very weird to allow such article to pass through without having PCI defined!
[[ When I am reading code and I see a break statement, I know where the flow goes. When I see a goto statement, I have no idea where the flow goes ]]
Sure because it's really difficult to see where 'goto end_loop_foo' goes..
There are three common idioms where goto are useful: breaking nested loops, going to a return error section at the end of a function or to code a state machine, in the first two case that's perfectly valid to use goto and labelled break or exception doesn't bring much, but it's true that for the third using an array for the transition helps the readability (a little, big state machine are hard to understand however you code them).
What I wonder myself is the CPU: current games are monothreaded so using a quad core CPU is not very interesting.. I would have bought a dual core myself, as for the same price you would have had higher clocked CPU (good for games) and still have two CPU which is nice for the responsiveness of normal operation of your computer (plus when one application goes mad and use 100% of a CPU, you can solve the problem without having a computer slow as molasse in the meantime).
There may be at least one inconsistency in your (optimistic) predictions: >- rising energy costs will define how we use transport >- we'll see 'fabricators', able to make any product out of a digital design
If by 'fabricators', you're thinking about are Drexler's type nano-factory, then 'any product' will include efficient solar cells so this should solve our energy problem. Assuming of course that we get nanotechnology before the rising energy cost send us back in a kind of 'medieval age', as it's quite difficult to build nanobots without a lot of energy available to make very high tech machine&computers first..
[[once we reach a certain level of technological sophistication, it takes only hundreds or thousands of years to either annihilate ourselves or transfer our consciousness into a virtual world]]
Transfer our consciousness into a 'virtual world', that's not science, that's (poor) science-fiction. Beside even if we 'transfered our consciousness into a virtual world', this virtual world would have a physical counterpart, and you'd want, for backup, to at least go around several stars.
I guess it's because nspluginwrapper run the plugin in another process as IMHO it should be always the case for "third party" plugins. Can anyone confirm (my google search didn't return useful information)?
Look, increasing police power to fight the 'bad guys' has the not-so welcome side effect of increasing also the problems caused by the dishonest copq or dishonest politicians at the head of the police.. If memory serves, not too long ago someone was charged because he was videotaping the police! Don't you notice a little assymetrical situation here? As always, who watch the watcher?
I'm French and one of our previous president (Mitterand) ordered to intercept phone calls of a famous actress, IMHO he ordered this because he was attracted by her, does that sound good to you?
And no, he wasn't punished for this (now he's dead) because in effect in France our presidents are our kings not like in Northen European countries where they are just working for the people, sigh..
>>Am I reading this right? This story is about breaking the record and increasing by only 2.1%
No, apparently you're not able to read correctly: this story is about breaking the record and increasing by 2.1% with a solar cell *~1cm* thick whereas the previous record holder was *~30cm* thick!
Quite a big difference, no?
[[I have Windows XP and Gentoo Linux running side by side, and strangely, Gentoo scores 10 to 12 FPS faster in World of Warcraft, Warcraft III and even Doom 3.]]
Weird: games framerate are mostly dependent on the driver, and Nvidia or ATI have put much more effort on their Windows driver than on their Linux driver..
I'd say that either you have a problem on your WindowsXP configuration (a virus or an antivirus which suck CPU or a configuration problem, have you the latest version of the driver for your video card on WindowsXP?) or maybe the settings of the game are not exactly the same on both OS..
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if there was a ban on Java at Sun or not, what I know is that for Solaris9, they replaced the GUI of their Solaris admin tools by Java GUIs which *sucked* hard: lots of spinning wheel, slow as molasse, etc.
Apparently at least for Solaris9 (don't know if this has improved afterwards), even Sun doesn't know how to make good GUI apps in Java!
>So how is it different than quantum entanglement? I do not know, but I would like to.
The difference is that in quantum entanglement the ball are not red or blue, they are in a state which mix of red and blue and the color of the ball is only set to red or blue when you look at the ball, and the color of the other entangled ball is set also instantaneously to the opposite color whatever the distance between both balls is, weird eh?
The natural question is: but how do you know that the color of the ball isn't fixed instead of being determined when you look at the ball, well Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen have shown that as counter-intuitive as it, there is a difference in some case, so their view was that Quantum Mechanic was wrong because it would mean that there is an effect faster than C..
Much latter Alain Aspect (a French researcher) made an experiment which measured what happens truly in those case and the QM predictions were the correct one..
So there is really a weird instantaneous non-local action, but even weirder, it doesn't violate the special relativity because it cannot transfer data faster than C.
>Perl is my favorite unbloated language.
A language which has by default regular expression is less bloated than one which has them as part of its standard library? Your definition of bloat is like Perl: twisted.
>Once you learn perl you don't need a big set of reference books to explain every obscure library. Just the manpages
Perl manpages are *big*, so that's not a very convincing proof! And personnaly when I'm using Perl, I'm always using books and google to try to make sense of that convoluted mess of a language.
Smalltalk is a lean language, Perl isn't!
>Seriously, why is this such a surprise to everyone?
Who said it's a surprise?
I've worked in a project which was originally mostly French and German, then some parts were moved to Romania and China, the Chinese used an Indian IT company which subcontracted some parts to (a few) German engineers.
>You can't violate causality, even with quantum entanglement.
And IMHO, that's the 'weirdest' part: an interaction which an instantaneous non-local effect *but* that cannot be used to communicate faster than C??
Strange, very strange.
+1 Mod parent up.
+1 mod parent up.
>You deny religion in Einstein, whose faith in God was so strong that he rejected quantum mechanism, famously with "God does not play dice with the universe"?
Einstein view of "God" was 'the nature', so his sentence is more about an aesthetic view of the universe than a religious declaration.
Einstein had quite a few reasons to reject QM: remember the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen 'thought experiment', it doesn't depend on your religious views to be baffled by the QM view: there are non-local 'instantaneous' interactions, but those 'instantaneous' interaction cannot be used to transfer data faster than C, WTF????
And yet, Alain Aspect's experiments have shown that this is what happen.
Anyway to stay on topic,
>>Cultist. The key here is "believes in" rather than "can conceive of". The *key* to science has always been uncertainty.
>Do you not appreciate the irony in this statement? That you cannot "conceive of" religious belief being valid?
Because all these religious belief have no rational basis: they always assert universe is like *this*, without any serious proof.
Scientific point of view is more honest: the truth is that *we don't know*.
That's not what the rules say, it says that any additionnal entity added to the simplest explanation must have a justification which means that the simplest answer is "too simple": Newton is too simple because it doesn't explain Mercure's orbit, so we have to go to Einstein.
A lot of people leave without believing that superstitions (including religions) are real, so if you want to explain that those entity are necessary to explain the world, you must give a proof (and a big one at that: extraordinary claim needs extraordinay proof): no proof, no supernatural entities (whether it's telepathy, God, or whatever).
> This is why the scientific method is so invaluable
Only if you apply it!
Usually religious&superstitious people do apply the 'scientific method' as well as sceptic people for normal topics but they don't apply it to everything.
Which is not surprising: what you learns as a child is really hard to dismiss after, even when it contradicts the Occam razor.
Funny that you don't even ask the real question: why is there a cop in the toilets which want to catch gays in the first place?
In France, the legal papers were stolen from the tribunal preventing the trial, and *drum roll*, it happened TWO TIMES!!
Even once, it is inexcusable (security in the tribunals in France is laughable) as Scientology had already done such tricks on other countries, but twice in the same country, the mind boggles from the incompetency of:
- the judge for not taking special measure to protect the documents
- the judicial system for not providing safe to store legals documents.
> heck sometimes we even shared a meal or some sodas in a local park - OUTDOORS
Well, ironically if you live in a third world country, it would be easier to use the laptop outdoors as the OLPC black&white screen is much easier to read outdoors than traditionnal LCD screens (and it has a higher resolution), too bad normal laptop builders have more or less stopped inovating (the flash disk being the only exception).
>But if you don't trust Google to keep your bookmarks secure, how can you trust their program to do a proper encryption? Maybe they have a backdoor there that will allow them to access your "encrypted" bookmarks. There is no such thing as trusting them somewhat.
That's not true: you're using OS XXX, but you know that this OS has flaws so you patch it.
Without encryption, to send sensitive data to a provider, you must bet that he is able to keep his servers secure for outside and inside threats forever, with encryption you only need to bet that he is able to do proper encryption, a much safer bet.
For 'serious' scientific computing, they use 64b FP number, having vectors of 4 element seems the right size, so SIMD computations of 4*64=256 seems the 'right size' for these users.
Sure multimedia & games use lower precision FP computations so 16b or 32b FP number is enough, but it's strange that AMD doesn't try to improve the usage for the scientific computation niche.
Maybe it's because the change would be expensive as to be efficient, the width of the memory bus should be expanded to 256b from 128b now.
Thanks a lot!
Are the submiter or the editor dumb?
It's very weird to allow such article to pass through without having PCI defined!
[[ When I am reading code and I see a break statement, I know where the flow goes. When I see a goto statement, I have no idea where the flow goes ]]
Sure because it's really difficult to see where 'goto end_loop_foo' goes..
There are three common idioms where goto are useful: breaking nested loops, going to a return error section at the end of a function or to code a state machine, in the first two case that's perfectly valid to use goto and labelled break or exception doesn't bring much, but it's true that for the third using an array for the transition helps the readability (a little, big state machine are hard to understand however you code them).
What I wonder myself is the CPU: current games are monothreaded so using a quad core CPU is not very interesting..
I would have bought a dual core myself, as for the same price you would have had higher clocked CPU (good for games) and still have two CPU which is nice for the responsiveness of normal operation of your computer (plus when one application goes mad and use 100% of a CPU, you can solve the problem without having a computer slow as molasse in the meantime).
There may be at least one inconsistency in your (optimistic) predictions:
>- rising energy costs will define how we use transport
>- we'll see 'fabricators', able to make any product out of a digital design
If by 'fabricators', you're thinking about are Drexler's type nano-factory, then 'any product' will include efficient solar cells so this should solve our energy problem.
Assuming of course that we get nanotechnology before the rising energy cost send us back in a kind of 'medieval age', as it's quite difficult to build nanobots without a lot of energy available to make very high tech machine&computers first..
[[once we reach a certain level of technological sophistication, it takes only hundreds or thousands of years to either annihilate ourselves or transfer our consciousness into a virtual world]]
Transfer our consciousness into a 'virtual world', that's not science, that's (poor) science-fiction. Beside even if we 'transfered our consciousness into a virtual world', this virtual world would have a physical counterpart, and you'd want, for backup, to at least go around several stars.
I guess it's because nspluginwrapper run the plugin in another process as IMHO it should be always the case for "third party" plugins.
Can anyone confirm (my google search didn't return useful information)?
Poor americans, when you compare what was the German more sensible reaction6 47221 and this one..
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/02/1
Look, increasing police power to fight the 'bad guys' has the not-so welcome side effect of increasing also the problems caused by the dishonest copq or dishonest politicians at the head of the police..
If memory serves, not too long ago someone was charged because he was videotaping the police! Don't you notice a little assymetrical situation here? As always, who watch the watcher?
I'm French and one of our previous president (Mitterand) ordered to intercept phone calls of a famous actress, IMHO he ordered this because he was attracted by her, does that sound good to you?
And no, he wasn't punished for this (now he's dead) because in effect in France our presidents are our kings not like in Northen European countries where they are just working for the people, sigh..
>>Am I reading this right? This story is about breaking the record and increasing by only 2.1% No, apparently you're not able to read correctly: this story is about breaking the record and increasing by 2.1% with a solar cell *~1cm* thick whereas the previous record holder was *~30cm* thick! Quite a big difference, no?
[[I have Windows XP and Gentoo Linux running side by side, and strangely, Gentoo scores 10 to 12 FPS faster in World of Warcraft, Warcraft III and even Doom 3.]]
Weird: games framerate are mostly dependent on the driver, and Nvidia or ATI have put much more effort on their Windows driver than on their Linux driver..
I'd say that either you have a problem on your WindowsXP configuration (a virus or an antivirus which suck CPU or a configuration problem, have you the latest version of the driver for your video card on WindowsXP?) or maybe the settings of the game are not exactly the same on both OS..