They are on a journey to find the last remaining kakapo, a fat, flightless parrot which, when threatened with attack, adopts a strategy of standing very still indeed.
It seems like "standing still when threatened" isn't the only reason why there's only one of them left...
The truth is that most people work in office buildings that are not that busy, and they only spend a tiny fraction of their day in a busy and distracting environment.
An office environment is not distracting? Have you ever heard of e-mail, youtube or slashdot?
They talk about dealing with sparse matrices but
they would have to be O(log n) sparse to be useful for a single
application of the algorithm. For example, a matrix with n=1000000
would have to have around 15 non-zero values and a trillion zero
values.
Wrong. An upper bound in big O notation does not give any indication as to constant factors of the "real" bound (nor to other summands which are in o(log n)). In fact, your statement doesn't even make sense, because it is an asymptotical bound and hence can't be applied to a fixed size of the input size.
From TFS: "Designers say it provides a solution to the problem of rising water levels as the house can simply walk away from floods"
Yeah, right. They should build floating houses: when a flood comes, they just go with the flow.
Actually, from the looks on the picture, I'd say they can already float. Connect a dozen of them and you get yourself a raft. Now add a computer to each one and you have a Beowulf cluster.
Obviously the common definition of "microkernel" does not apply to SAS (Single Address Space) systems. The difference between Singularity and Linux is that in Linux all the modules logically belong to the kernel, while they are logically separated in Singularity: in Linux all data structures can potentially be accessed by every module; this is not the case in Singularity. Hence you can call Singularity a microkernel system, even though everything runs in the same address space.
A microkernel loads modules into the kernel space.
No, that's the opposite of a microkernel. A microkernel loads its modules (then often called "servers") into user space. If the kernel and its drivers etc. run in the same address space (as is the case with, e.g., Linux), then we're talking about a monolithic kernel, even if it can dynamically load modules.
A one-megaton nuclear bomb detonated 250 miles over Kansas could cripple many modern electronic devices and systems in the continental US and take out the power grid for a long time.
I don't mean to troll, but you don't need a nuclear bomb to take out the power grid [1,3]. Instead, the money should be invested in renewing the outdated grid in the USA [2,3].
I apologize if none of this makes sense to anyone, since I apparently cannot communicate well enough to achieve the communication-worthiness of a piece of feces.
I know you're being sarcastic, but you're dead-on.
Actually, it's more like a replacement for the "DRAM"-part in "(DDR-)SDRAM": "DRAM" describes the underlying memory technology, while "synchronous" describes the interface method (the results are returned on the edges of the clock signal). So the product will probably be called "SMRAM" or "DDR-SMRAM".
Another example is taking advantage of the hardware. Right now because of eager evaluation it is very difficult to take full advantage of hardware. Use lazy evaluation and the system can allocate tasks based on hardware availability (like a mainframe does).
There is a huge difference between an interesting, promising idea and its actual feasibility in practice. Others had the same idea before, and when they implemented it, the results were disappointing; for example dataflow-processors ("use the resources of the system as efficiently as possible") or demand-based evaluation of dataflow-graphs ("only evaluate what is really needed"). Those concepts were very popular in the academic world of the 80s, but they never caught on.
Regarding AIs in games: the problem here does not lie in implementing good algorithms, but in thinking of them. Give me a description of an algorithm, and I will implement it for you in an imperative language.
Slashdot Mirror
They are on a journey to find the last remaining kakapo, a fat, flightless parrot which, when threatened with attack, adopts a strategy of standing very still indeed.
It seems like "standing still when threatened" isn't the only reason why there's only one of them left...
Because he can.
Yeah, that'll teach the establishment a lesson, you little rebel!
Fuck the system, man!
Oh, and I nearly forgot: "Arise, chicken! Chicken, arise!"
(for the uninitiated: ATHF)
Just be careful you don't leave a honeypot lying around anywhere your ants will find it.
"Insightful"? Aw come on, people! I was aiming for "Funny"...
This is slashdot.. there are no girls
Uhm, yes, we all understood what he meant, thank you.
(1) Large feature set (2) Compact/optimized (3) Fast to market Pick any two...
...and you'll get one. If you're lucky. And it won't be (3). And sometimes it won't be one of the two that you picked.
The truth is that most people work in office buildings that are not that busy, and they only spend a tiny fraction of their day in a busy and distracting environment.
An office environment is not distracting? Have you ever heard of e-mail, youtube or slashdot?
Note that many organisms survive very nicely with no brain at all.
Commence republicans/neocons jokes in 3... 2... 1...
You're easily offended. Too bad for you, the rest was rather funny.
But the Italian word "bilione" means 10e12, does it not?
Just pointing out that sometimes there is free-ish energy.
Not "free", rather "already paid for".
Dude, the European definition of billion is a thousand million, just like in the USA.
Huh? Where?! In German, French, Spanish and Italian, the word "billion" (resp. the words similiar to it) always means 10e12.
"Because God created it, the human body can remain nude and uncovered and preserve intact its splendor and its beauty." - Pope John Paul II.
Speak for yourself. I for one do not want to see the nude bodies of 80% of my fellow citizens (or 99.9% of all slashdotters).
They talk about dealing with sparse matrices but they would have to be O(log n) sparse to be useful for a single application of the algorithm. For example, a matrix with n=1000000 would have to have around 15 non-zero values and a trillion zero values.
Wrong. An upper bound in big O notation does not give any indication as to constant factors of the "real" bound (nor to other summands which are in o(log n)). In fact, your statement doesn't even make sense, because it is an asymptotical bound and hence can't be applied to a fixed size of the input size.
From TFS: "Designers say it provides a solution to the problem of rising water levels as the house can simply walk away from floods"
Yeah, right. They should build floating houses: when a flood comes, they just go with the flow.
Actually, from the looks on the picture, I'd say they can already float. Connect a dozen of them and you get yourself a raft. Now add a computer to each one and you have a Beowulf cluster.
Obviously the common definition of "microkernel" does not apply to SAS (Single Address Space) systems. The difference between Singularity and Linux is that in Linux all the modules logically belong to the kernel, while they are logically separated in Singularity: in Linux all data structures can potentially be accessed by every module; this is not the case in Singularity. Hence you can call Singularity a microkernel system, even though everything runs in the same address space.
A microkernel loads modules into the kernel space.
No, that's the opposite of a microkernel. A microkernel loads its modules (then often called "servers") into user space. If the kernel and its drivers etc. run in the same address space (as is the case with, e.g., Linux), then we're talking about a monolithic kernel, even if it can dynamically load modules.
A one-megaton nuclear bomb detonated 250 miles over Kansas could cripple many modern electronic devices and systems in the continental US and take out the power grid for a long time.
I don't mean to troll, but you don't need a nuclear bomb to take out the power grid [1,3]. Instead, the money should be invested in renewing the outdated grid in the USA [2,3].
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_North_America_blackout
[2] http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/26/business/grid.php
[3] http://www.pubrecord.org/nationworld/239-5-years-after-blackout-power-grid-still-in-dire-straits.html
For those moderators who didn't get it and modded him Troll: it's the (only) line from the Pink Floyd song "One of these Days".
By the way, it's "cut", not "chop": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_of_These_Days
I apologize if none of this makes sense to anyone, since I apparently cannot communicate well enough to achieve the communication-worthiness of a piece of feces.
I know you're being sarcastic, but you're dead-on.
Stopping the fan confirmed that it was the electronics themselves clicking! I'd hate to know what was causing the clicking, but the board died anyway.
The board died? Maybe you should have released the fan.
So her name is "Grace Hopper", and she made the term "computer bug" popular (see her entry in Wikipedia)? This can't be a coincidence...
Actually, it's more like a replacement for the "DRAM"-part in "(DDR-)SDRAM": "DRAM" describes the underlying memory technology, while "synchronous" describes the interface method (the results are returned on the edges of the clock signal). So the product will probably be called "SMRAM" or "DDR-SMRAM".
Another example is taking advantage of the hardware. Right now because of eager evaluation it is very difficult to take full advantage of hardware. Use lazy evaluation and the system can allocate tasks based on hardware availability (like a mainframe does).
There is a huge difference between an interesting, promising idea and its actual feasibility in practice. Others had the same idea before, and when they implemented it, the results were disappointing; for example dataflow-processors ("use the resources of the system as efficiently as possible") or demand-based evaluation of dataflow-graphs ("only evaluate what is really needed"). Those concepts were very popular in the academic world of the 80s, but they never caught on.
Regarding AIs in games: the problem here does not lie in implementing good algorithms, but in thinking of them. Give me a description of an algorithm, and I will implement it for you in an imperative language.