The problem is, tomorrow we won't be happy with the same old video we used to stream, we are going to want a super high-def version with 8 channel stereo sound and in-line twitter commentary plus it will have to update our facebook status every time we pause it to go to the bathroom...
Nobody is making "super high def" content, nor can existing display devices do "super high def."
This entire argument is based on the fallacy that bandwidth needs will grow forever. Its simply not true. Prior to double-digit megabit connections, there was always media that couldnt be delivered in real-time.. but now there simply isnt any media that cannot be delivered in real-time on 10+ mbit connections, and that includes 3D HD video.
I realize that in your imaginary world, the bandwidth of content grows exponentially.. but thats just your imagination. The jump from SD to HD was not an exponential growth in the size of content.
As far as "8 channel stereo sound".. uh, what? stereo is 2 channel sound. Didnt you know that when you start talking about channels, you negate the whole stereo thing? Also, audio hasnt been an issue for years... even the WORST broadband connections can stream UNCOMPRESSED audio in realtime, and a 15:1 LOSSLESS audio compression is a typical reality.
As far as twitter and facebook.. you are further proving that you have absolutely no fucking idea what you are taking about.
The only way current high end bandwidth will be insufficient is if there is a new media paradigm.. holographic (real 3D) media and so forth.. that'll be possible in 10 years, or so they have been saying for the last 60 years.
They were required to stop looking for the GENUINE_INTEL CPU flag but still optimise based on assumptions about pipelines and available APUs/FPUs on current generation Intel processors.
This was actually not a requirement. The FTC ruled that Intel must inform people that the compiler does not optimized for non-Intels, not that they had to stop doing these things.
As of September of last year, when Intel released a new version, it was still doing the same things. Essentially, Open64 is beating ICC on the Intel T2370 (with the bog-standard -O2 optimizations enabled) even when ICC is generation code that does full processor model detection at runtime.
Once upon a time BAPCo didnt even bother pretending that they weren't actually Intel.
These days, BAPCo pretends that they arent Intel. Its still Intel tho.
BAPCo is Intel.
The last time Intel so blatantly rigged the benchmark game was when the Athlon XP's were beating the shit out of the Pentium 4's. AMD has recently made a mockery of Intels Atom solutions, and the one leaked benchmark for the Bulldozer design must have Intel more than a little worried about its future bragging rights.. so here we are, with Intel blatantly rigging the benchmark game again.
Geeks may use Firefox incidentally, but their target audience isn't geeks. Their target audience are the parents and grandparents of geeks, along with the non-geek friends of geeks.
No. The product they are selling is the default search engine setting, and their target audience is Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
This is just part of what will be a contentious battle between the bandwidth owners and the content / service providers.
I gotta interject here, because you are forgetting someone: You.
You think Google/etc has your back on this one so you can just go ahead and keep paying too much for a shitty plan? and eventually things will get better? It will not get better as long as you keep buying the product, dumbass.
If the local store charged $100 per gallon for rancid pig vomit, and somehow amazingly rancid pig vomit was the coolest shit since sliced bread such that tons of people pay that price.. THEY MIGHT EVEN RAISE THE PRICE! DUH!!!!
Clearly you dipshits think the service you are getting is worth the price. I'll stick with my ~$7/month pre-paid dumb-phone, thanks.
Given an ISP with a proportionally small number of customers relative to their bandwidth they can manage that, however when the customer base gets proportionally too large that is no longer feasible.
Bullshit.
Any large ISP can organize their network as if it was many small ISP's, but in fact do so more efficiently.
You clearly have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
Actually bandwidth is still key. The bandwidth we have today is based on the premise that we will not need it "too often". This presumption is "guaranteed" by the data caps.
Bullshit.
Funny that some companies can provide 10Mbit service (REAL 10Mbit service, even during primetime) with no caps, while others are crying the "we need to cap" line that you just spat at me even when their best-of-the-best plan is 3Mbit for the same price that I am paying.
You are "presuming" that those that want to implement caps are not already making a killing off of you, while they figure that they got you locked in some sort of contract or monopoly situation where you can go fuck yourself if you don't like it.
You prevent a user from hogging all the bandwidth by not giving him all the bandwidth. That has nothing to do with data caps.
You seem to be arguing a red herring. There are speed limits in place even without caps. Regardless of how finite the resource is, a user can only utilize at most a predetermined finite fraction of it with our without metering.
Replacing the 100 MB switch with the GB switch, and then the GB switch with the 10 (100) GB switch in 5 years is what costs.
In 5 years time, a user has paid $40/month * 60 months = $2400 ! Thats a single user.
Now, without any sort of trickery a 10G switch can serve 48 users because they have 48 10/100/1000 ethernet ports BUILT IN (thats not counting the pair of 10G uplinks they have)
So without any trickery at all a single one of these things can generate $115000 in revenue over that 5 years.
Now lets stack these things up. Lets suppose a small-sized cable company serving only 48,000 broadband subscribers. The revenue over 5 years is $115 million.
Are you suggesting that you cannot setup 1000 10G switches, maintain them for 5 years, and not profit greatly on $115 million?
Gambling is bad, but if he can fool enough people into thinking that poker is skills it won't hurt their brains, even though most gambling houses will kick you out if you really use skill.
I would love to play against you in any form of poker. The reason is that not only don't you know that its a game of skill, you in fact insist that it isnt a game of skill.
I could take your money from you forever, and you will curse your bad luck the whole way. God I love people like you.
As for "the federal government drives the economy", well, federal spending is a significant chunk of GDP.
Where does it get that money to spend? Perhaps from the GDP?
lets take your theory to its extreme conclusion. The government takes 100% of all financial transactions and then spends it. Under your theory our GDP is now 200% of what it was.
Insane bullshit. Learn to think instead of parrot.
People with a vested interest for X not to be true "debunk X" before its even been tested
Which part of this confuses you? Clearly the people with a vested interest in X not being true are not exactly being upstanding people.. people you seem to be calling heroes.. drink the kool-aid much?
The notion of AGW is nothing more than an attempt to control all aspects of everyone's lives
It really is everything. Every energy sector, every agricultural sector, every industrial sector.. you name it and regulatory control is being insisted upon with the excuse of climate change.
Seriously.. who the hell wants some dipshit in the U.N. (or the people that bribe him) to decide if your country can raise more cattle, heat more homes, produce more goods?
How about the 500 million people in India that earn less than $1.25 per day (USD conversion.) Thats just one fucking country with 500 million people below the international poverty line. Its billions of people worldwide, with some countries as high as 80% poverty rates.
These people need to get some fucking perspective and open their eyes to the horrors that are happening right now. Humans would be much better off ignoring climate change and doing something about the shit thats already happening.
Um... because that theory is not real science and has been completely debunked.
Since it hasnt been debunked, what does that tell you about that realclimate.org site? Do you know who runs it? Its run my some folks that get big research grants only as long as climate change is something scary, such as Jones.
A couple degrees of temperature rising can inundate a coastal city.
Lets put this in perspective.
That "inundation" as you call it will "flood in" at a rate of 0.4 cm per year.
However, a couple trillion dollars will feed people for centuries.
The #1 killer on this planet right now is poverty, and this has been true for basically all of recorded history.
For christ sakes do you know how many people can be literally saved THIS YEAR with a couple trillion dollars? Its way more than whatever prediction you have for the number of people displaced (not "inundated" you emotional prick) by sea level rise and climate "change."
Here is some fucking perspective for you. There are more people in India right now below the poverty line than there are people in the United States, and India's poverty line isnt like the U.S. poverty line.. these people have NOTHING but the tattered rags that drape their malnourished bodies and right now have no fucking idea where their next meal is going to come from.
..and you dumb fucks want to essentially blow a couple trillion dollars to stop a little sea level rise? holy fucking shit you are evil.
Regarding performance, on principle an integrated solution can do better by offering tighter integration and more efficient exchanges between CPU and GPU than going through a lower speed / higher latency external bus as for a discrete GPU.
This isnt quite right. On principle, a discrete solution doesnt have to compromise with the low-latency random access memory performance demands of the CPU, while an integrated solution does. For raw compute performance, the discrete solutions are starting out in a much better position.
The latency savings only manifests as a win for small workloads, but small workloads ultimately dont matter (blink of an eye vs half-a-blink of an eye)
To quote AnandTech, "On average the A8-3850 [GPU] is 58% faster than the Core i5 2500K [GPU]. If we look at peak performance in games like Modern Warfare 2, Llano delivers over twice the frame rate of Sandy Bridge. This is what processor graphics should look like.
This is comparing AMD's flagship APU @ $170 vs Intels mid-range Sandy @ $220.
The road Intel is going down is the same road its always gone down. Delivering sub-par graphics performance to a crowd that isnt going to notice.
I do have a problem with those observations. You seem to have concluded that the federal books define the economy, which is wrong (its a popular liberal fabrication that the federal government drives the economy)
Also, an argument could be made for some versions of C having low level architectural feature access by virtue of simply being able to say #asm at any time and properly utilizing the compiler's version of the #asm/#endasm interface. Although as far as I'm concerned, if you're going to do that, you probably should have been writing in asm anyway...
#asm is not part of the C definition, and there is more than one BASIC compiler than has inline assembler (as well as hacks for BASIC compilers that do not support it, such as VB6 using TweakVB)
None of Microsoft's 64-bit compilers support inline assembler at this point.
The usual meaning is that a line of c produces easily predictable results for a particular architecture
Many languages have this predictability in the same sense that C does, including BASIC and Pascal. Nobody is calling BASIC "low level." The only people calling C "low level" are C programmers and those that believe the hype.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, tomorrow we won't be happy with the same old video we used to stream, we are going to want a super high-def version with 8 channel stereo sound and in-line twitter commentary plus it will have to update our facebook status every time we pause it to go to the bathroom...
Nobody is making "super high def" content, nor can existing display devices do "super high def."
.. uh, what? stereo is 2 channel sound. Didnt you know that when you start talking about channels, you negate the whole stereo thing? Also, audio hasnt been an issue for years... even the WORST broadband connections can stream UNCOMPRESSED audio in realtime, and a 15:1 LOSSLESS audio compression is a typical reality.
This entire argument is based on the fallacy that bandwidth needs will grow forever. Its simply not true. Prior to double-digit megabit connections, there was always media that couldnt be delivered in real-time.. but now there simply isnt any media that cannot be delivered in real-time on 10+ mbit connections, and that includes 3D HD video.
I realize that in your imaginary world, the bandwidth of content grows exponentially.. but thats just your imagination. The jump from SD to HD was not an exponential growth in the size of content.
As far as "8 channel stereo sound"
As far as twitter and facebook.. you are further proving that you have absolutely no fucking idea what you are taking about.
The only way current high end bandwidth will be insufficient is if there is a new media paradigm.. holographic (real 3D) media and so forth.. that'll be possible in 10 years, or so they have been saying for the last 60 years.
They were required to stop looking for the GENUINE_INTEL CPU flag but still optimise based on assumptions about pipelines and available APUs/FPUs on current generation Intel processors.
This was actually not a requirement. The FTC ruled that Intel must inform people that the compiler does not optimized for non-Intels, not that they had to stop doing these things.
As of September of last year, when Intel released a new version, it was still doing the same things. Essentially, Open64 is beating ICC on the Intel T2370 (with the bog-standard -O2 optimizations enabled) even when ICC is generation code that does full processor model detection at runtime.
I think you are a little lost on this one.
Once upon a time BAPCo didnt even bother pretending that they weren't actually Intel.
These days, BAPCo pretends that they arent Intel. Its still Intel tho.
BAPCo is Intel.
The last time Intel so blatantly rigged the benchmark game was when the Athlon XP's were beating the shit out of the Pentium 4's. AMD has recently made a mockery of Intels Atom solutions, and the one leaked benchmark for the Bulldozer design must have Intel more than a little worried about its future bragging rights.. so here we are, with Intel blatantly rigging the benchmark game again.
Expect a new version of ICC shortly.
In recent tests Open64 is better than ICC at producing code that executes on the Pentium Dual Core T2370
In fact, its not just better... its significantly better.
Stop talking out your ass.
That's great! Why doesn't AMD go and write a compiler of thier own and give it away for free?
Its called Open64.
The mistake is yours.
Geeks may use Firefox incidentally, but their target audience isn't geeks. Their target audience are the parents and grandparents of geeks, along with the non-geek friends of geeks.
No. The product they are selling is the default search engine setting, and their target audience is Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
This is just part of what will be a contentious battle between the bandwidth owners and the content / service providers.
I gotta interject here, because you are forgetting someone: You.
You think Google/etc has your back on this one so you can just go ahead and keep paying too much for a shitty plan? and eventually things will get better? It will not get better as long as you keep buying the product, dumbass.
If the local store charged $100 per gallon for rancid pig vomit, and somehow amazingly rancid pig vomit was the coolest shit since sliced bread such that tons of people pay that price.. THEY MIGHT EVEN RAISE THE PRICE! DUH!!!!
Clearly you dipshits think the service you are getting is worth the price. I'll stick with my ~$7/month pre-paid dumb-phone, thanks.
Given an ISP with a proportionally small number of customers relative to their bandwidth they can manage that, however when the customer base gets proportionally too large that is no longer feasible.
Bullshit.
Any large ISP can organize their network as if it was many small ISP's, but in fact do so more efficiently.
You clearly have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
Actually bandwidth is still key. The bandwidth we have today is based on the premise that we will not need it "too often". This presumption is "guaranteed" by the data caps.
Bullshit.
Funny that some companies can provide 10Mbit service (REAL 10Mbit service, even during primetime) with no caps, while others are crying the "we need to cap" line that you just spat at me even when their best-of-the-best plan is 3Mbit for the same price that I am paying.
You are "presuming" that those that want to implement caps are not already making a killing off of you, while they figure that they got you locked in some sort of contract or monopoly situation where you can go fuck yourself if you don't like it.
You prevent a user from hogging all the bandwidth by not giving him all the bandwidth. That has nothing to do with data caps.
You seem to be arguing a red herring. There are speed limits in place even without caps. Regardless of how finite the resource is, a user can only utilize at most a predetermined finite fraction of it with our without metering.
Replacing the 100 MB switch with the GB switch, and then the GB switch with the 10 (100) GB switch in 5 years is what costs.
In 5 years time, a user has paid $40/month * 60 months = $2400 ! Thats a single user.
Now, without any sort of trickery a 10G switch can serve 48 users because they have 48 10/100/1000 ethernet ports BUILT IN (thats not counting the pair of 10G uplinks they have)
So without any trickery at all a single one of these things can generate $115000 in revenue over that 5 years.
Now lets stack these things up. Lets suppose a small-sized cable company serving only 48,000 broadband subscribers. The revenue over 5 years is $115 million.
Are you suggesting that you cannot setup 1000 10G switches, maintain them for 5 years, and not profit greatly on $115 million?
Gambling is bad, but if he can fool enough people into thinking that poker is skills it won't hurt their brains, even though most gambling houses will kick you out if you really use skill.
I would love to play against you in any form of poker. The reason is that not only don't you know that its a game of skill, you in fact insist that it isnt a game of skill.
I could take your money from you forever, and you will curse your bad luck the whole way. God I love people like you.
As for "the federal government drives the economy", well, federal spending is a significant chunk of GDP.
Where does it get that money to spend? Perhaps from the GDP?
lets take your theory to its extreme conclusion. The government takes 100% of all financial transactions and then spends it. Under your theory our GDP is now 200% of what it was.
Insane bullshit. Learn to think instead of parrot.
You dont seem to grasp what my logic is.
Theory suggests X
People with a vested interest for X not to be true "debunk X" before its even been tested
Which part of this confuses you? Clearly the people with a vested interest in X not being true are not exactly being upstanding people.. people you seem to be calling heroes.. drink the kool-aid much?
The notion of AGW is nothing more than an attempt to control all aspects of everyone's lives
It really is everything. Every energy sector, every agricultural sector, every industrial sector.. you name it and regulatory control is being insisted upon with the excuse of climate change.
Seriously.. who the hell wants some dipshit in the U.N. (or the people that bribe him) to decide if your country can raise more cattle, heat more homes, produce more goods?
How about the 500 million people in India that earn less than $1.25 per day (USD conversion.) Thats just one fucking country with 500 million people below the international poverty line. Its billions of people worldwide, with some countries as high as 80% poverty rates.
These people need to get some fucking perspective and open their eyes to the horrors that are happening right now. Humans would be much better off ignoring climate change and doing something about the shit thats already happening.
Um... because that theory is not real science and has been completely debunked.
Since it hasnt been debunked, what does that tell you about that realclimate.org site? Do you know who runs it? Its run my some folks that get big research grants only as long as climate change is something scary, such as Jones.
A couple degrees of temperature rising can inundate a coastal city.
Lets put this in perspective.
..and you dumb fucks want to essentially blow a couple trillion dollars to stop a little sea level rise? holy fucking shit you are evil.
That "inundation" as you call it will "flood in" at a rate of 0.4 cm per year.
However, a couple trillion dollars will feed people for centuries.
The #1 killer on this planet right now is poverty, and this has been true for basically all of recorded history.
For christ sakes do you know how many people can be literally saved THIS YEAR with a couple trillion dollars? Its way more than whatever prediction you have for the number of people displaced (not "inundated" you emotional prick) by sea level rise and climate "change."
Here is some fucking perspective for you. There are more people in India right now below the poverty line than there are people in the United States, and India's poverty line isnt like the U.S. poverty line.. these people have NOTHING but the tattered rags that drape their malnourished bodies and right now have no fucking idea where their next meal is going to come from.
The Mac Mini uses an nVidia 320M, which benchmarks at about half of the AMD 6550 Llano.
Regarding performance, on principle an integrated solution can do better by offering tighter integration and more efficient exchanges between CPU and GPU than going through a lower speed / higher latency external bus as for a discrete GPU.
This isnt quite right. On principle, a discrete solution doesnt have to compromise with the low-latency random access memory performance demands of the CPU, while an integrated solution does. For raw compute performance, the discrete solutions are starting out in a much better position.
The latency savings only manifests as a win for small workloads, but small workloads ultimately dont matter (blink of an eye vs half-a-blink of an eye)
To quote AnandTech, "On average the A8-3850 [GPU] is 58% faster than the Core i5 2500K [GPU]. If we look at peak performance in games like Modern Warfare 2, Llano delivers over twice the frame rate of Sandy Bridge. This is what processor graphics should look like.
This is comparing AMD's flagship APU @ $170 vs Intels mid-range Sandy @ $220.
The road Intel is going down is the same road its always gone down. Delivering sub-par graphics performance to a crowd that isnt going to notice.
I do have a problem with those observations. You seem to have concluded that the federal books define the economy, which is wrong (its a popular liberal fabrication that the federal government drives the economy)
Also, an argument could be made for some versions of C having low level architectural feature access by virtue of simply being able to say #asm at any time and properly utilizing the compiler's version of the #asm/#endasm interface. Although as far as I'm concerned, if you're going to do that, you probably should have been writing in asm anyway...
#asm is not part of the C definition, and there is more than one BASIC compiler than has inline assembler (as well as hacks for BASIC compilers that do not support it, such as VB6 using TweakVB)
None of Microsoft's 64-bit compilers support inline assembler at this point.
The usual meaning is that a line of c produces easily predictable results for a particular architecture
Many languages have this predictability in the same sense that C does, including BASIC and Pascal. Nobody is calling BASIC "low level." The only people calling C "low level" are C programmers and those that believe the hype.
The US deficit is not a problem. Seriously. The size of the US debt means nothing when looked at in isolation.
You do realize that the Deficit and the Debt are two different things? No? I guess not, looking at the way you are talking.
So your debate boils down to "yeah.. what you said is 100% true.. but its bad business to be programming for windows"