Ah yes, "asshole". Now that sounds like the sords of a man who is not emotionally invested!
Emotionally invested in preventing you from lying about me while insulting me.
Clearly you cant answer the question, fuckhead. You believe what someone else told you about the science, tried to defend it, but couldnt answer a simple question about it, so went on an insult campaign... conclusion: a lying asshole,. a real fuckhead.
For reasons you've demonstrated that you're not bright enough to understand.
Which you are keeping a secret?
I saw some of your other posts in the thread. You're either too dim or too emotionally invested in believing lies to absorb the answers. So, I shall not waste my time.
I've made two posts in this thread.
One of them, the one you are replying to, asking why they then it is that they are adjusting the old historical record if the thermometers were so good.
The other, containing only a link to an XKCD comic.
You are exactly the reason nobody takes climate shit seriously. You are the one so emotionally wrapped up in this stuff that you cant even keep straight who it is that posted what. Meanwhile you are accusing others of being emotionally wrapped up. PROJECT MUCH? Your faults and flaws are you own, asshole.
Why is it that the fear-monger guy is the least specific, the least informative?
...for a 80kg human is something like 60 micrograms.
its something like you didnt even bother to look it up, because if you had, it wouldnt be "something like".. you would have a solid number instead of a vague guess that you can back away from later.
Pretty much only Pu-238 and Pu-241 are alarmingly dangerous, and any that is there will remain alarmingly dangerous for between hundreds and thousands of years. Isotopes like Pu-237, Pu-243, Pu-245, and Pu-246 have mostly all decayed by now, while Isotopes like Pu-239, Pu-240, Pu-242, and Pu-244 all have such long half-lives that while "dangerous", are not alarmingly so to varying degrees (you could safely handle Pu-244.)
They will still be a factor, but all strategies are an evolving landscape as transistor counts increase. A pure RISC was a better performing strategy than CISC at one time, and now a hybrid of both is the best performing.... as transistor counts go up things like translation become a non-issue.
Over time the best way to get the most work into the pipeline per cycle changes. Right now Intel CPU's can pull in at most 4 instructions per cycle into the pipeline (unless that has changed with the latest update) and then only if the instructions have already been decoded and cached. The ingenuity of this accomplishment is of course great, but when complex solutions are used to solve otherwise simple problems, its clear that things are near a threshhold where a new take may win out.
ARM doesn't have anywhere near the IPC of intel chips.
But thats on purpose. They are targeting different markets. Intel tried to shoulder in on ARM's power efficiency market and hoped that its greater performance would make up for not being better at power efficiency, but all they ended up with was an under-performing x86 that nobody really wanted. They have since backed off on that push and have instead re-focused on keeping ARM from making a big dent in the server space.
Plain old RISC was a fad. On general purpose hardware a CISC instruction set with a RISC execution pipeline is hands down better w.r.t. performance, and thats what (for example) both Intel and AMD are already doing.
As far as ARM penetrating the desktop space, I think its a certainty that the x86 line will eventually fall due to licensing. Intel is losing the FAB edge (they are now arguably just keeping up) and if all these other FAB's cant produce x86, they will still produce something. Maybe ARM takes over the desktop space, or maybe some other yet-to-be-invented architecture, but its going to happen.
Intel is still the biggest FAB company with the most revenue, but they no longer have a majority share of either production or revenue, and these two metrics will only get worse and worse for Intel. When as is inevitable a non-Intel chip greatly outperforms anything Intel can fabricate, that may finally be the year of the Linux desktop, and then Intel will either go the way AMD did and split/sell off its FAB's, or the way Motorola did and abandon the business for something else.
People don't realize this. Even without patents, no one else is close to 10 nm yet.
You mean besides the three companies that have already (Samsung) or will shortly (TSMC, Toshiba) beat Intel to 10nm?
Intel fumbled the ball on this node. Their process advantage is gone, and combined with their vertical integration disadvantage, will see them fall farther and farther behind. Thats why they have recently done massive layoffs and are now blanketing press releases about a new "cloud strategy."
Intel knows that they are now in a bad position. Their competitors also know it. Contrary to popular shalshdot belief, the list of Intels main competitors do not include AMD or even ARM. Intel is a fabrication company. Its main competitors are TSMC, Samsung, Toshiba, and Global Foundries, and there are dozens of smaller competitors, and all of them are now eating into Intel at all node sizes. Samsung arrived at 10nm mass production first, and TSMC is following closely behind.
of course some anonymous coward will now say that Samsung isnt producing true 10nm... not understanding that Intel invented lying about node size.. and hasnt even produced a true 22nm yet.
Rate these things on transistor density and you will see that Intel is behind Samsung now, and will soon also be behind TSMC and Toshiba.
Preprocessors pass through stuff they dont handle. Compiling to C will never do that.
The fact that you think preprocessing = compiling tells us a lot about the state of your "expertise" on this matter. There isnt any expertise to be found. You are just a guy with little information but a lot of imagination trying to fool everything into thinking that you are an expert on a subject that you are actually only so casually familiar with that you spout bullshit like its gold.
And yet they do. Everything keeps trying to recreate Smalltalk, badly. I don't think programmers need to learn from Smalltalk as much as I think programming language designers should be required to know Smalltalk well.
What I think is that smalltalk needs better compilers. Sure, you are thinking performance isnt that big of a deal for 95% of the code... but it is for that 5%, and if you have to use a different language for that 5% then there needs to be a good reason not to also use it for the other 95%.
the one who doesn't seem to understand the market basics here is you actually. people, 401k payers included, buy shares of a company. the demand drives the price up and the market cap hits a trillion. there may be a slight increase in sales, but pretty much all of that is not actual money.
Didnt say it was. Said the opposite. You would know that if you knew what a market cap was.
So you claimed I dont understand things, and then said exactly what I said, but you used a ton of words to do it, because you dont know what the term market cap means.
w.r.t. government debt, if a collapse comes, America and Europe will still be on top of it.
If you owe the bank $100,000 then they have you by the balls. If you owe the bank $100,000,000,000 then you have them by the balls.
The private sector situation is much more interesting. Manufacturing of many goods has left western civilizations shores, and now even some services are being provided by the 3rd world. The question is how quickly can these things return if need be. I suspect most of it can return within a year or two. Its the stuff that can't return so quickly that matters. The stuff that requires multiple industries that have all left, to be in coordination, that wont be so quickly replaced if the global supply dries up. For instance the solar panel industry would be hit hard because it would require the local mining of rare earths to begin again, then the local refining of those rare earths, before local panel manufacturers could even begin to consider getting back into production after a collapse.
Slashdot Mirror
Artifacts are especially bad on displays with good contrast ratios.
They were making sure the banks complied as an "equal opportunity lender"
Ah yes, "asshole". Now that sounds like the sords of a man who is not emotionally invested!
Emotionally invested in preventing you from lying about me while insulting me.
Clearly you cant answer the question, fuckhead. You believe what someone else told you about the science, tried to defend it, but couldnt answer a simple question about it, so went on an insult campaign... conclusion: a lying asshole,. a real fuckhead.
Some of the stuff not listed here may not cause cancer:
Acetaldehyde, acrylamide, acrylonitril, abortion, agent orange, alar, alcohol, air pollution, aldrin, alfatoxin, arsenic, arsine, asbestos, asphalt fumes, atrazine, AZT, baby food, barbequed meat, benzene, benzidine, benzopyrene, beryllium, beta-carotene, betel nuts, birth control pills, bottled water, bracken, bread, breasts, brooms, bus stations, calcium channel blockers, cadmium, candles, captan, carbon black, carbon tetrachloride, careers for women, casual sex, car fumes, celery, charred foods, cooked foods, chewing gum, Chinese food, Chinese herbal supplements, chips, chloramphenicol, chlordane, chlorinated camphene, chlorinated water, chlorodiphenyl, chloroform, cholesterol, low cholesterol, chromium, coal tar, coffee, coke ovens, crackers, creosote, cyclamates, dairy products, deodorants, depleted uranium, depression, dichloryacetylene, DDT, dieldrin, diesel exhaust, diet soda, dimethyl sulphate, dinitrotouluene, dioxin, dioxane, epichlorhydrin, ethyle acrilate, ethylene, ethilene dibromide, ethnic beliefs,ethylene dichloride, Ex-Lax, fat, fluoridation, flying, formaldehyde, free radicals, french fries, fruit, gasoline, genes, gingerbread, global warming, gluteraldehyde, granite, grilled meat, Gulf war, hair dyes, hamburgers, heliobacter pylori, hepatitis B virus, hexachlorbutadiene, hexachlorethane, high bone mass, hot tea, HPMA, HRT, hydrazine, hydrogen peroxide, incense, infertility, jewellery, Kepone, kissing, lack of exercise, laxatives, lead, left handedness, Lindane, Listerine, low fibre diet, magnetic fields, malonaldehyde, mammograms, manganese, marijuana, methyl bromide, methylene chloride, menopause, microwave ovens, milk hormones, mixed spices, mobile phones, MTBE, nickel, night lighting, night shifts, nitrates, not breast feeding, not having a twin, nuclear power plants, Nutrasweet, obesity, oestrogen, olestra, olive oil, orange juice, oxygenated gasoline, oyster sauce, ozone, ozone depletion, passive smoking, PCBs, peanuts, pesticides, pet birds, plastic IV bags, polio vaccine, potato crisps (chips), power lines, proteins, Prozac, PVC, radio masts, radon, railway sleepers, red meat, Roundup, saccharin, salt, sausage, selenium, semiconductor plants, shellfish, sick buildings, soy sauce, stress, strontium, styrene, sulphuric acid, sun beds, sunlight, sunscreen, talc, tetrachloroethylene, testosterone, tight bras, toast, toasters, tobacco, tooth fillings, toothpaste (with fluoride or bleach), train stations, trichloroethylene, under-arm shaving, unvented stoves, uranium, UV radiation, Vatican radio masts, vegetables, vinyl bromide, vinyl chloride, vinyl fluoride, vinyl toys, vitamins, vitreous fibres, wallpaper, weedkiller (2-4 D), welding fumes, well water, weight gain, winter, wood dust, work, x-rays.
Why would anyone want a monitor with such small metrics?
For reasons you've demonstrated that you're not bright enough to understand.
Which you are keeping a secret?
I saw some of your other posts in the thread. You're either too dim or too emotionally invested in believing lies to absorb the answers. So, I shall not waste my time.
I've made two posts in this thread.
One of them, the one you are replying to, asking why they then it is that they are adjusting the old historical record if the thermometers were so good.
The other, containing only a link to an XKCD comic.
You are exactly the reason nobody takes climate shit seriously. You are the one so emotionally wrapped up in this stuff that you cant even keep straight who it is that posted what. Meanwhile you are accusing others of being emotionally wrapped up. PROJECT MUCH? Your faults and flaws are you own, asshole.
Screw benchmarks. How cool can they run when underclocked. Will these be viable for passive cooling gaming rigs?
XKCD on the rate of change
Then why do they keep adjusting old values in the records?
The deadly dose of Plutonium...
Which isotope?
Why is it that the fear-monger guy is the least specific, the least informative?
...for a 80kg human is something like 60 micrograms.
its something like you didnt even bother to look it up, because if you had, it wouldnt be "something like" .. you would have a solid number instead of a vague guess that you can back away from later.
What software did they use for that BBS? WWIV?
Most plutonium is pretty safe.
Pretty much only Pu-238 and Pu-241 are alarmingly dangerous, and any that is there will remain alarmingly dangerous for between hundreds and thousands of years. Isotopes like Pu-237, Pu-243, Pu-245, and Pu-246 have mostly all decayed by now, while Isotopes like Pu-239, Pu-240, Pu-242, and Pu-244 all have such long half-lives that while "dangerous", are not alarmingly so to varying degrees (you could safely handle Pu-244.)
When is the raw CPU speed a bottleneck anymore?
Whenever the user waits for a computation to complete. Lots of filters in photoshop, for example, are waited for by the user that is applying them.
They will still be a factor, but all strategies are an evolving landscape as transistor counts increase. A pure RISC was a better performing strategy than CISC at one time, and now a hybrid of both is the best performing.... as transistor counts go up things like translation become a non-issue.
Over time the best way to get the most work into the pipeline per cycle changes. Right now Intel CPU's can pull in at most 4 instructions per cycle into the pipeline (unless that has changed with the latest update) and then only if the instructions have already been decoded and cached. The ingenuity of this accomplishment is of course great, but when complex solutions are used to solve otherwise simple problems, its clear that things are near a threshhold where a new take may win out.
ARM doesn't have anywhere near the IPC of intel chips.
But thats on purpose. They are targeting different markets. Intel tried to shoulder in on ARM's power efficiency market and hoped that its greater performance would make up for not being better at power efficiency, but all they ended up with was an under-performing x86 that nobody really wanted. They have since backed off on that push and have instead re-focused on keeping ARM from making a big dent in the server space.
Plain old RISC was a fad. On general purpose hardware a CISC instruction set with a RISC execution pipeline is hands down better w.r.t. performance, and thats what (for example) both Intel and AMD are already doing.
As far as ARM penetrating the desktop space, I think its a certainty that the x86 line will eventually fall due to licensing. Intel is losing the FAB edge (they are now arguably just keeping up) and if all these other FAB's cant produce x86, they will still produce something. Maybe ARM takes over the desktop space, or maybe some other yet-to-be-invented architecture, but its going to happen.
Intel is still the biggest FAB company with the most revenue, but they no longer have a majority share of either production or revenue, and these two metrics will only get worse and worse for Intel. When as is inevitable a non-Intel chip greatly outperforms anything Intel can fabricate, that may finally be the year of the Linux desktop, and then Intel will either go the way AMD did and split/sell off its FAB's, or the way Motorola did and abandon the business for something else.
People don't realize this. Even without patents, no one else is close to 10 nm yet.
You mean besides the three companies that have already (Samsung) or will shortly (TSMC, Toshiba) beat Intel to 10nm?
... not understanding that Intel invented lying about node size.. and hasnt even produced a true 22nm yet.
Intel fumbled the ball on this node. Their process advantage is gone, and combined with their vertical integration disadvantage, will see them fall farther and farther behind. Thats why they have recently done massive layoffs and are now blanketing press releases about a new "cloud strategy."
Intel knows that they are now in a bad position. Their competitors also know it. Contrary to popular shalshdot belief, the list of Intels main competitors do not include AMD or even ARM. Intel is a fabrication company. Its main competitors are TSMC, Samsung, Toshiba, and Global Foundries, and there are dozens of smaller competitors, and all of them are now eating into Intel at all node sizes. Samsung arrived at 10nm mass production first, and TSMC is following closely behind.
of course some anonymous coward will now say that Samsung isnt producing true 10nm
Rate these things on transistor density and you will see that Intel is behind Samsung now, and will soon also be behind TSMC and Toshiba.
Somewhere around 15-16 maximizes population growth rates for a tribe
Then the tribe would want the mean to be 15-16, not the minimum.
Dont let thinking get in the way of a good moral outrage though.
Preprocessors pass through stuff they dont handle. Compiling to C will never do that.
The fact that you think preprocessing = compiling tells us a lot about the state of your "expertise" on this matter. There isnt any expertise to be found. You are just a guy with little information but a lot of imagination trying to fool everything into thinking that you are an expert on a subject that you are actually only so casually familiar with that you spout bullshit like its gold.
C++ began as a C preprocessor.
The first C++ "compiler" was Cfront, which was a C preprocessor, which itself was derived from Cpre, which was also a C preprocessor.
And yet they do. Everything keeps trying to recreate Smalltalk, badly. I don't think programmers need to learn from Smalltalk as much as I think programming language designers should be required to know Smalltalk well.
What I think is that smalltalk needs better compilers. Sure, you are thinking performance isnt that big of a deal for 95% of the code... but it is for that 5%, and if you have to use a different language for that 5% then there needs to be a good reason not to also use it for the other 95%.
the one who doesn't seem to understand the market basics here is you actually. people, 401k payers included, buy shares of a company. the demand drives the price up and the market cap hits a trillion. there may be a slight increase in sales, but pretty much all of that is not actual money.
Didnt say it was. Said the opposite. You would know that if you knew what a market cap was.
So you claimed I dont understand things, and then said exactly what I said, but you used a ton of words to do it, because you dont know what the term market cap means.
Now people move to where the welfare is.
w.r.t. government debt, if a collapse comes, America and Europe will still be on top of it.
If you owe the bank $100,000 then they have you by the balls. If you owe the bank $100,000,000,000 then you have them by the balls.
The private sector situation is much more interesting. Manufacturing of many goods has left western civilizations shores, and now even some services are being provided by the 3rd world. The question is how quickly can these things return if need be. I suspect most of it can return within a year or two. Its the stuff that can't return so quickly that matters. The stuff that requires multiple industries that have all left, to be in coordination, that wont be so quickly replaced if the global supply dries up. For instance the solar panel industry would be hit hard because it would require the local mining of rare earths to begin again, then the local refining of those rare earths, before local panel manufacturers could even begin to consider getting back into production after a collapse.
Think about all the retirement accounts that must be holding on to a trillion dollars in shares, and why dou you hate peoples 401K's?
If you dont know what market cap means, dont jump into market cap discussions acting like an expert.