Since the plan was to take donations and then later to reward those that donated, and we are now discussing the reward part of the plan, yes... FUCK THEM FOR LONG TERM PLANNING.
Hrm, spellcheck changed "fascists" to "racists" in my reply. Please mentally edit accordingly.
With the way the left decries any requirement of presenting identification as racist in the case of voting, their push for even more strict gun control laws is surely racist under the same standard. You wouldnt want to deprive black people guns just because the place to get an I.D. is way across town, do you?
... specifically as a language to replace assembler for low level development
No.
The C crowd has been claiming this for awhile, but not since the 70's. It wasn't until the 90's that the C crowd started insisting that C was a low level language. I've been banging keys through all of this period. You are wrong.
and even today almost all OS kernels including linux, windows and OS/X are written in it.
Not entirely, but you pretend different.
The real problem here isnt your ignorance about C, its that you have no idea what "low level" means, just like that wave of 1990's C programmers.
Buy a ticket on the clue train when you get a chance.
I'm already on the clue train. Tickets cost knowledge. Hope that someday you can afford to ride. Make sure that you leave your standard library at the station, because its not allowed in low level clueville.
Seriously how can a bug like this hang around as basic input validation is something that should be done.
For some strange reason folks these days insist that bloated high level languages like C/C++ are a good choice of language for real low level problems, leading to bootloader designs the defy explanation, because the developers suited to making a high level language work in this instance are not the typical developers that have to deal with unconstrained input.
In car analogy terms, its what you get when you hire a car mechanic to design an oil tanker.
If you expect the Federal government to fix your State government when you arent satisfied, who do you expect to fix your Federal government when you arent satisfied?
You think that you have more influence on the Federal government than you do on your State government?
You should get off your ass, stop being an arm-chair power-giver, and fix things at the most local level possible.
Gee, I guess you complainers should go picket your drone manufacturers' headquarters, then
...because the government punishing innocent people while starting the erection of barriers to entry into a private industry at the request of private industry, is someone other than the governments fault?
The European Commission has imposed a fine of €1 060 000 000 on Intel Corporation for violating EC Treaty antitrust rules on the abuse of a dominant market position (Article 82) by engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude competitors from the market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (CPUs). The Commission has also ordered Intel to cease the illegal practices immediately to the extent that they are still ongoing. Throughout the period October 2002-December 2007, Intel had a dominant position in the worldwide x86 CPU market (at least 70% market share).
Intel was CONVICTED of monopoly abuse. This is an irrefutable fact. There are a lot of people here either claiming that they were never convicted or downmodding those that are revealing the truth. The site I linked to is the official press release site of the E.U. Commission.
The European Commission has imposed a fine of €1 060 000 000 on Intel Corporation for violating EC Treaty antitrust rules on the abuse of a dominant market position (Article 82) by engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude competitors from the market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (CPUs). The Commission has also ordered Intel to cease the illegal practices immediately to the extent that they are still ongoing. Throughout the period October 2002-December 2007, Intel had a dominant position in the worldwide x86 CPU market (at least 70% market share). The Commission found that Intel engaged in two specific forms of illegal practice. First, Intel gave wholly or partially hidden rebates to computer manufacturers on condition that they bought all, or almost all, their x86 CPUs from Intel. Intel also made direct payments to a major retailer on condition it stock only computers with Intel x86 CPUs.
It seems like all AMD needs to do is contribute the appropriate code generators to GCC.
..because GCC is used to benchmark what... exactly?
Most of the mid-2000's benchmarks used already-compiled libraries, such as Intels Math Kernel Library. Further, synthetic benchmarks didnt say that they were benchmarking the MKL, instead saying they were benchmarking "3D transonic transient laminar viscous flow" and other math-heavy stuff using the MKL. If they were benchmarking using software like Mathematica, Mathcad, and Matlab then with 100% certainty they were using Intels math libraries, as compiled and supplied by Intel.
Yes they were, and here is the courts press release of the conviction.
A settlement is not a conviction
A settlement is not a conviction for sure, and the fact that there was an unrelated settlement doesnt negate the fact that Intel was convicted of flagrant monopoly abuse and ordered to (among other things) "cease illegal practices" (a direct quote.)
That is what a fanboy would say, but ignore the fact that AMD when they got the lead sat on said lead and got beat down.
Beat down by illegal practices that Intel was convicted of.
The fanboy here seems to be... you. Don't project your failings on others.
On top of last 3-4 years...
You mean the years that Intel failed to comply with the court ruling and pay AMD the damages it owed? Intel didnt pay AMD damages until late 2014, for a conviction in early 2009. Intel literally blew through an unprecedented amount of money on lawyers (several hundred million dollars), after being convicted, just to delay AMD getting the money owed to them.
You are the fanboy you accuse others of being. You are projecting. You are a disgrace.
Simulated annealing? I guess it's the most direct comparison but that is a terribly inefficient optimizer.
Do you know of any algorithms that are more efficient while still offering the same finite-time guarantee (of finding the optimal solution) that simulated annealing does?
This is one of the key points. More efficient methods are frequently more efficient because they wont search the entire space no matter how long you let them run. While simulated annealing wont search the entire space in practice, the operator has control over how much of the space gets sampled by altering the rate of convergence (the "cooling" rate)
The "more efficient method" that you mentioned, particle swarms, is only more efficient when such a finite-time guarantee is left behind. The finite-time guaranteed version of particle swarms is not more efficient, instead being equally as efficient.
do you have facts to back up this ridiculous assertion?
People like the guy you replied to only care about the facts when the facts force them into moving their goalpost, and they immediately stop caring about them the instant that they have moved the goalpost.
Anyone who has ever tried to debate these people on the merits of their argument see this very obvious thing. Their position came before any evidence, and no amount of evidence will change their position, only the rapidly moving goalpost they present as a series of justifications. As each justification is shot down, another emerges.
The fact is that we've tried things like an assault weapons ban (we banned them nationally for 10 years), and the fact is that on an unlabeled graph of gun related violence you cannot identify where the period began or where it ended. When asked to explain the lack of skill that such already-tried laws have in effecting gun violence they will trot out some other justification for such laws, rather than do the rational thing and admit that their position is in error.
Same facts that you can throw at them that wont make a bit of difference to their position:
(U.S.A. stats)
The majority of gun-related deaths are suicides (64%)
The majority of homicides are by handguns (69.00%), not rifles (2.32%), shotguns (2.51%), or other types (16.97%)
In the majority of homicides, the victim is black (55.00%) rather than white (25%) or hispanic (17%) even though only 13% of the population is black, 65% of the population is white, and 16% of the population is hispanic. (***)
On average, you are 5.2 times more likely to be murdered by a knife than by any form of rifle.
(***) When your treat a minority differently, its no surprise that the minority has different outcomes. You progressives are horrible people.
It isn't like there has never been a modern Christian terrorist movement. The IRA comes to mind.
There is a difference between doing bad things to people while being a member of a religion and doing bad things to people because they arent your religion.
The IRA are nationalist terrorists, as there motive is Irish independence based on the belief that all of Ireland should be an independent republic.
The closest thing in the modern day "Christianity" that could be called terrorism is the KKK, but even here this falls short because the KKK is specifically a Protestant movement, and since its formation has always been full blown anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic. I'm sure that I don't need to remind you that Catholics are about as Christians as you can get.
The fucking problem is that Islam sanctions violence against all that is not Islam, and that Muslim holy leaders do not denounce this violence. Cirtually every Christian denomination has denounced the KKK.
tl;dr - poster is full of shit about christian terrorism
This will help a lot in tasks that can't be multithreaded (fast fourier transforms if doing video, for example.)
There have been parallel FFT's algorithms for years that scale fairly well, especially for multi-dimensional data (3D transforms get an almost a linear scaling with core count.) What the hell are you talking about?
You've got issues - if somebody buys a card rated for 1.2 GHz and won't run there, they should return it and get a refund.
The person started with money, wanted the best cheap video card they could get so purchased one, and your advice is apparently to go back to the initial condition with no further recommendation as to how any other choice is or could possibly be any better.
In other words, you dont understand the point. When you buy cheap stuff, you get cheap stuff. The subtopic here is how to deal with the fact that you have cheap stuff.
I have assembled multiple computers for my father over the years, and each time he selects and orders the parts, and each time he ends up with a real stinker part somewhere because he literally selects the cheapest possible motherboard, the cheapest video card, and so on. You offer no improvement to his strategy because returning parts just costs more money.
The solution is to downclock where necessary, avoid using the bad usb ports, and so on. Thats it. Thats the solution. You havent offered one. You have your head in the sand.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah fuck the democrats for long term planning.
Since the plan was to take donations and then later to reward those that donated, and we are now discussing the reward part of the plan, yes... FUCK THEM FOR LONG TERM PLANNING.
I dont see how it is beneficial to society to "push" education paths on people. It can only lead to bad resource allocation.
Hrm, spellcheck changed "fascists" to "racists" in my reply. Please mentally edit accordingly.
With the way the left decries any requirement of presenting identification as racist in the case of voting, their push for even more strict gun control laws is surely racist under the same standard. You wouldnt want to deprive black people guns just because the place to get an I.D. is way across town, do you?
In that case the correct solution is to make a good offer to buy the land rather than block land owners from exercising their property rights.
Pretty sure that only one State in the Union offers honest-to-goodness property rights, and it certainly isnt North Carolina. Its Texas.
So your 30 minute commute takes 45 minutes. Not a significant issue.
(45 minutes - 30 minutes) x 2 ways x 5 days/week x 50 weeks/year = 7500 minutes / year = 5.2 days / year.
Most people have better things to do with 5.2 entire days per year than to live up to your low expectations.
C was designed in the 1970s...
Yes.
... specifically as a language to replace assembler for low level development
No.
The C crowd has been claiming this for awhile, but not since the 70's. It wasn't until the 90's that the C crowd started insisting that C was a low level language. I've been banging keys through all of this period. You are wrong.
and even today almost all OS kernels including linux, windows and OS/X are written in it.
Not entirely, but you pretend different.
The real problem here isnt your ignorance about C, its that you have no idea what "low level" means, just like that wave of 1990's C programmers.
Buy a ticket on the clue train when you get a chance.
I'm already on the clue train. Tickets cost knowledge. Hope that someday you can afford to ride. Make sure that you leave your standard library at the station, because its not allowed in low level clueville.
Seriously how can a bug like this hang around as basic input validation is something that should be done.
For some strange reason folks these days insist that bloated high level languages like C/C++ are a good choice of language for real low level problems, leading to bootloader designs the defy explanation, because the developers suited to making a high level language work in this instance are not the typical developers that have to deal with unconstrained input.
In car analogy terms, its what you get when you hire a car mechanic to design an oil tanker.
I live in a town with a gym that was paid for with tax dollars and a gym that was paid for privately. They compete.
The customers of the private gym must also pay for the tax funded gym, yet you have declared that competition is happening....
Isn't that the whole point?
No.
If you expect the Federal government to fix your State government when you arent satisfied, who do you expect to fix your Federal government when you arent satisfied?
You think that you have more influence on the Federal government than you do on your State government?
You should get off your ass, stop being an arm-chair power-giver, and fix things at the most local level possible.
Gee, I guess you complainers should go picket your drone manufacturers' headquarters, then
You Statists are fucking stupid.
Who is really to blame, here?
The government.
What the actual FUCK do you expect the FAA and the government to do?
Enforce existing laws that target criminals instead of enacting new ones that target innocent people.
WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU THINK OUR REACTION WOULD BE?
Links to the FACT that Intel was convicted of anti-trust against AMD keeps getting modded down.
So here it is again:
E.U. Commission press release detailing their conviction of Intel.
The European Commission has imposed a fine of €1 060 000 000 on Intel Corporation for violating EC Treaty antitrust rules on the abuse of a dominant market position (Article 82) by engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude competitors from the market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (CPUs). The Commission has also ordered Intel to cease the illegal practices immediately to the extent that they are still ongoing. Throughout the period October 2002-December 2007, Intel had a dominant position in the worldwide x86 CPU market (at least 70% market share).
Intel was CONVICTED of monopoly abuse. This is an irrefutable fact. There are a lot of people here either claiming that they were never convicted or downmodding those that are revealing the truth. The site I linked to is the official press release site of the E.U. Commission.
AMD settled one of their entirely valid lawsuits:
Fixed that for you.
In another lawsuit, Intel was convicted of anti-trust violations.
The European Commission has imposed a fine of €1 060 000 000 on Intel Corporation for violating EC Treaty antitrust rules on the abuse of a dominant market position (Article 82) by engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude competitors from the market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (CPUs). The Commission has also ordered Intel to cease the illegal practices immediately to the extent that they are still ongoing. Throughout the period October 2002-December 2007, Intel had a dominant position in the worldwide x86 CPU market (at least 70% market share). The Commission found that Intel engaged in two specific forms of illegal practice. First, Intel gave wholly or partially hidden rebates to computer manufacturers on condition that they bought all, or almost all, their x86 CPUs from Intel. Intel also made direct payments to a major retailer on condition it stock only computers with Intel x86 CPUs.
It seems like all AMD needs to do is contribute the appropriate code generators to GCC.
Most of the mid-2000's benchmarks used already-compiled libraries, such as Intels Math Kernel Library. Further, synthetic benchmarks didnt say that they were benchmarking the MKL, instead saying they were benchmarking "3D transonic transient laminar viscous flow" and other math-heavy stuff using the MKL. If they were benchmarking using software like Mathematica, Mathcad, and Matlab then with 100% certainty they were using Intels math libraries, as compiled and supplied by Intel.
No, they weren't convicted.
Yes they were, and here is the courts press release of the conviction.
A settlement is not a conviction
A settlement is not a conviction for sure, and the fact that there was an unrelated settlement doesnt negate the fact that Intel was convicted of flagrant monopoly abuse and ordered to (among other things) "cease illegal practices" (a direct quote.)
Why are Intel shills such lying fucks?
Well, I certainly enjoy living in a society where people can't legally grab me on the street and steal my wallet.
Yes, its much better when it happens illegally.
That is what a fanboy would say, but ignore the fact that AMD when they got the lead sat on said lead and got beat down.
Beat down by illegal practices that Intel was convicted of.
The fanboy here seems to be... you. Don't project your failings on others.
On top of last 3-4 years...
You mean the years that Intel failed to comply with the court ruling and pay AMD the damages it owed? Intel didnt pay AMD damages until late 2014, for a conviction in early 2009. Intel literally blew through an unprecedented amount of money on lawyers (several hundred million dollars), after being convicted, just to delay AMD getting the money owed to them.
You are the fanboy you accuse others of being. You are projecting. You are a disgrace.
Simulated annealing? I guess it's the most direct comparison but that is a terribly inefficient optimizer.
Do you know of any algorithms that are more efficient while still offering the same finite-time guarantee (of finding the optimal solution) that simulated annealing does?
This is one of the key points. More efficient methods are frequently more efficient because they wont search the entire space no matter how long you let them run. While simulated annealing wont search the entire space in practice, the operator has control over how much of the space gets sampled by altering the rate of convergence (the "cooling" rate)
The "more efficient method" that you mentioned, particle swarms, is only more efficient when such a finite-time guarantee is left behind. The finite-time guaranteed version of particle swarms is not more efficient, instead being equally as efficient.
I have a hard time believing a single core process is the next best choice.
On 10 cores its still at worst 10^7 times faster, on 100 cores its still at worst 10^6 times faster.
You do not seem to be very bright.
do you have facts to back up this ridiculous assertion?
People like the guy you replied to only care about the facts when the facts force them into moving their goalpost, and they immediately stop caring about them the instant that they have moved the goalpost.
Anyone who has ever tried to debate these people on the merits of their argument see this very obvious thing. Their position came before any evidence, and no amount of evidence will change their position, only the rapidly moving goalpost they present as a series of justifications. As each justification is shot down, another emerges.
The fact is that we've tried things like an assault weapons ban (we banned them nationally for 10 years), and the fact is that on an unlabeled graph of gun related violence you cannot identify where the period began or where it ended. When asked to explain the lack of skill that such already-tried laws have in effecting gun violence they will trot out some other justification for such laws, rather than do the rational thing and admit that their position is in error.
Same facts that you can throw at them that wont make a bit of difference to their position:
(U.S.A. stats)
The majority of gun-related deaths are suicides (64%)
The majority of homicides are by handguns (69.00%), not rifles (2.32%), shotguns (2.51%), or other types (16.97%)
In the majority of homicides, the victim is black (55.00%) rather than white (25%) or hispanic (17%) even though only 13% of the population is black, 65% of the population is white, and 16% of the population is hispanic. (***)
On average, you are 5.2 times more likely to be murdered by a knife than by any form of rifle.
(***) When your treat a minority differently, its no surprise that the minority has different outcomes. You progressives are horrible people.
It isn't like there has never been a modern Christian terrorist movement. The IRA comes to mind.
There is a difference between doing bad things to people while being a member of a religion and doing bad things to people because they arent your religion.
The IRA are nationalist terrorists, as there motive is Irish independence based on the belief that all of Ireland should be an independent republic.
The closest thing in the modern day "Christianity" that could be called terrorism is the KKK, but even here this falls short because the KKK is specifically a Protestant movement, and since its formation has always been full blown anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic. I'm sure that I don't need to remind you that Catholics are about as Christians as you can get.
The fucking problem is that Islam sanctions violence against all that is not Islam, and that Muslim holy leaders do not denounce this violence. Cirtually every Christian denomination has denounced the KKK.
tl;dr - poster is full of shit about christian terrorism
This will help a lot in tasks that can't be multithreaded (fast fourier transforms if doing video, for example.)
There have been parallel FFT's algorithms for years that scale fairly well, especially for multi-dimensional data (3D transforms get an almost a linear scaling with core count.) What the hell are you talking about?
You've got issues - if somebody buys a card rated for 1.2 GHz and won't run there, they should return it and get a refund.
The person started with money, wanted the best cheap video card they could get so purchased one, and your advice is apparently to go back to the initial condition with no further recommendation as to how any other choice is or could possibly be any better.
In other words, you dont understand the point. When you buy cheap stuff, you get cheap stuff. The subtopic here is how to deal with the fact that you have cheap stuff.
I have assembled multiple computers for my father over the years, and each time he selects and orders the parts, and each time he ends up with a real stinker part somewhere because he literally selects the cheapest possible motherboard, the cheapest video card, and so on. You offer no improvement to his strategy because returning parts just costs more money.
The solution is to downclock where necessary, avoid using the bad usb ports, and so on. Thats it. Thats the solution. You havent offered one. You have your head in the sand.
It misdirects you from the real issue, which is the 1% war profiteering in the Middle East and stealing their oil.
The countries over there get paid quite well for that oil. Hell, they unionized!
The real issue is that the ideas of islam exist.
In other countries they serve a very real purpose, and do it relatively well.
Thats what they tell you.