Maximum concurrency limit of 10 exceeded.Currently serving the following requests: /2008/05/28/13-reasons-java-die-old-age/ /2008/05/28/13-reasons-java-die-old-age/ ...
Not sure what language they used, but it should be dead too.
USA and Spain has similar trade deficits, not in absolute terms but as a percentage of their GDP. The "excuse" for Spain is that they have lots of tourism that bring "cash", but I think that it is as much crap as the excuses that they say in USA (not a problem).
Nevertheless, I am more worried about US because Spain shares currency with other countries with trade surplus (EU).
I am a CS/EE professor at at UC university, and student cost is a big burden. Every year I see good students applications that I need to reject because of student cost.
For UC (similar to other universities), each student costs over $65K/year (with overheads). Keeping a 6 student group requires close to $400k/year NSF/DARPA/NASA/whatever grants. Not need to say that this is a though amount of money to request that requires lots of work writing grants.
Currently, I have 4 fully funded students. If students were free, I could manage 10. For faculty that wants to do research (there are always some lazy faculty) this would be a big difference.
Even ignoring the increase on interest/applications due to tuition cost reduction, I can easily see a 20% to 50% graduate student increase on the CS fields.
The Carbon atom is around 0.2nm width. If they can make gates with a single atom (lets ignore interconnection), this means that we can go up to 0.2nm (This is just 8 generations away from 45nm or less than 20 years).
I guess that to keep the Moore's law, we'll go to 3D chips much earlier (my 2 cents that we'll have mass produced 3D chips before or during 22nm).
My feeling is that this is a radiation caused problem. Radiation can "move" particles on the electronic circuits. This will affect timing (faster or slower depending on the circuit), and this is a reason why the temperature change has an impact.
The only thing is that I will not expect to have very new technology (350nm or older). If this is the case, there should be HUGE amounts of radiation to have such impact. Well, I guess that it is space after all.
btw, if the error is much bigger than the radiation models could predict, the satelite may be going through some "unexpected" radiation source (great) or there was some problems during design (sucks).
The HPCA program is a "cover" (not so cover) funding to companies. The problem is that it is not so clear that it is even good for them. The reason is that "lots" of additional resources from these companies are also diverted for these projects. Since these machines have a "doubtful" application besides the DARPA contract, I think that it may be better for these companies to invest on research more related to their product or may-be products.
For example, Sun Labs was in charge of the DARPA project at Sun. They have "invested" 3 years on that. My question is "what do they have to show?". They do not have publications on any top computer architecture conference, they do not seem to have anything that may save Sun ass. (At least from an architecture point of view)
This is not such a strange comment, I have head it from people at IBM research itself. Some people there is not sure that winning is the best thing either.
Several years in Internet make me thing that a new and strong movement is being created around the Internet philosophy. I believe that in the next years it will become stronger, and in a near future it will change the world. I use to call it or AnarcoNet, but Techno-Idealist is also a good name. In any case, what I see as the basic ideas of the movement are:
NO LEADERSHIP: Although some people has a stronger influence, there is no leaders.
NO TOP-DOWN HIERARCHY: It's clear, isn't it?
LOT'S OF PEOPLE INVOLVED: A project success if an only if lot's of people is involved. The basic strength of the AnarcoNet is the big amounts of people involved.
INTENSIVE PARTICIPATION FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME The persons that push the movement change, and it base in a strict meritocracia. Some people highly involved collaborate for long periods, but then they should be very tolerant to new ideas. Although, some persons have more influence in the movement that others NEVER there is a declaration of any kind of hierarchy.
NO ENFORCEMENT: Never there is obligation to do anything. If someone is against something everybody else, he will do whatever he want.
MULTIPLE OBJECTIVE One objective is pushed forwards if there are multiple reasons. For example, the Linux project is done by people that wants a political change, people that likes to code, that wants to be recognized for their talents...
WIDE TECHNOLOGY USE: Utilization of technology to facilitate the communication and share of information.
FREE INFORMATION: All the information should be free, accessible for anyone, at anytime, in any place.
NO EXTERNAL CONTROL: Protection between all the members against abusive forms of control. This also seems to appear in other political organizations, but now the idea of common good do not exists.
Slashdot Mirror
I just got.
/2008/05/28/13-reasons-java-die-old-age/
/2008/05/28/13-reasons-java-die-old-age/
...
Maximum concurrency limit of 10 exceeded.Currently serving the following requests:
Not sure what language they used, but it should be dead too.
Since I came to leave here, I only can claim that during the last years of the Clinton era.
btw, I leave on California, so I do not think that people is so stupid, but that was a real saying that I head
when I was a kid.
USA and Spain has similar trade deficits, not in absolute terms but as a
percentage of their GDP. The "excuse" for Spain is that they have lots
of tourism that bring "cash", but I think that it is as much crap as
the excuses that they say in USA (not a problem).
Nevertheless, I am more worried about US because Spain shares currency
with other countries with trade surplus (EU).
I am a CS/EE professor at at UC university, and student cost is a big burden. Every year I see
good students applications that I need to reject because of student cost.
For UC (similar to other universities), each student costs over $65K/year (with overheads).
Keeping a 6 student group requires close to $400k/year NSF/DARPA/NASA/whatever grants.
Not need to say that this is a though amount of money to request that requires lots of
work writing grants.
Currently, I have 4 fully funded students. If students were free, I could manage 10. For faculty
that wants to do research (there are always some lazy faculty) this would be a big difference.
Even ignoring the increase on interest/applications due to tuition cost reduction, I can
easily see a 20% to 50% graduate student increase on the CS fields.
Hope that it gets popular on the 2008 election,
This is the feeling that I get from reading the news.
The Carbon atom is around 0.2nm width. If they can make gates with a single atom (lets ignore interconnection),
this means that we can go up to 0.2nm (This is just 8 generations away from 45nm or less than 20 years).
I guess that to keep the Moore's law, we'll go to 3D chips much earlier (my 2 cents that we'll have mass
produced 3D chips before or during 22nm).
My feeling is that this is a radiation caused problem. Radiation can "move" particles
on the electronic circuits. This will affect timing (faster or slower depending on
the circuit), and this is a reason why the temperature change has an impact.
The only thing is that I will not expect to have very new technology (350nm or older).
If this is the case, there should be HUGE amounts of radiation to have such impact.
Well, I guess that it is space after all.
btw, if the error is much bigger than the radiation models could predict, the satelite
may be going through some "unexpected" radiation source (great) or there was some
problems during design (sucks).
The HPCA program is a "cover" (not so cover) funding to companies. The problem is that it is not so clear that it is even good for them. The reason is that "lots" of additional resources from these companies are also diverted for these projects. Since these machines have a "doubtful" application besides the DARPA contract, I think that it may be better for these companies to invest on research more related to their product or may-be products.
For example, Sun Labs was in charge of the DARPA project at Sun. They have "invested" 3 years on that. My question is "what do they have to show?".
They do not have publications on any top computer architecture conference, they do not seem to have anything that may save Sun ass. (At least from
an architecture point of view)
This is not such a strange comment, I have head it from people at IBM research itself. Some people there is not sure that winning is the best thing either.
If space starts at 100K, it means that at 200K/h, it would be half an hour.
The short says: "passengers would spend several days"????
I guess that there is some typo.
Several years in Internet make me thing that a new and strong movement is being created around the Internet philosophy. I believe that in the next years it will become stronger, and in a near future it will change the world.
I use to call it or AnarcoNet, but Techno-Idealist is also a good name. In any case, what I see as the basic ideas of the movement are:
NO LEADERSHIP: Although some people has a stronger influence, there is no leaders.
NO TOP-DOWN HIERARCHY: It's clear, isn't it?
LOT'S OF PEOPLE INVOLVED: A project success if an only if lot's of people is involved. The basic strength of the AnarcoNet is the big amounts of people involved.
INTENSIVE PARTICIPATION FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME The persons that push the movement change, and it base in a strict meritocracia. Some people highly involved collaborate for long periods, but then they should be very tolerant to new ideas. Although, some persons have more influence in the movement that others NEVER there is a declaration of any kind of hierarchy.
NO ENFORCEMENT: Never there is obligation to do anything. If someone is against something everybody else, he will do whatever he want.
MULTIPLE OBJECTIVE One objective is pushed forwards if there are multiple reasons. For example, the Linux project is done by people that wants a political change, people that likes to code, that wants to be recognized for their talents...
WIDE TECHNOLOGY USE: Utilization of technology to facilitate the communication and share of information.
FREE INFORMATION: All the information should be free, accessible for anyone, at anytime, in any place.
NO EXTERNAL CONTROL: Protection between all the members against abusive forms of control. This also seems to appear in other political organizations, but now the idea of common good do not exists.