i'd like to have a low power transfer mode, where the cpu is reduced (to 1 core at say 500 mhz),
Thanks to AMD's CnQ, and Intel later following suit, any CPU made in at least the past year (and more for AMD64 CPUs), will idle down to low power states automatically.
the monitor is turned off,
Also easy. You can hit the power button on the monitor, you can wait for it to automatically shut off after 15-20 minutes, or with X11, you can run xset and tell the video card o shut-off the monitor.
and as much memory as possible is dedicated to the apps which are doing intensive file reads/writes. this will allow the hard drives to be used less by caching the files in ram and pulsing the hard disk.
That one is not done, and is not really reasonably possible to do, nor helpful (on desktops) if it was done.
You need to write to the disk every few seconds, to maintain a consistent state, with or without a journaling file system. Your (desktop) HDD can't be spun-down in such a case, as spinning it up, over and over, would use more power than leaving it on, not to mention wear and tear... And since it's still spinning, even if you cached 1GB to RAM, flushing that to disk would use just as much power as writing it to the disk directly, a byte at a time.
I know I'm setting myself up for flames around here, but the OS with the best support for APCI S3 Suspend is FreeBSD 6.2, even though it's certainly not perfect.
My desktop _almost_ worked. I had to swap-out my ATI video card to get it to resume from S3.
Now, the big problem is X.org... Since X doesn't play well with suspend, FreeBSD is supposed to switch off of X, to a virtual console before entering suspend mode. Unfortunately, I've found that, unfortunately, X 6.9.0 freezes about 1 in 3 times. Once I figured that out, it was just a matter of manually switching to a console, then typing "suspend" before I walk away. Now I haven't rebooted my machine in months, and it's on and usable (right where I left everything) in about 3 seconds.
Of course, the drawback to X not cooperating is that I can't set my machine to auto suspend when it's been idle for a few minutes, but I'm hopeful the next release of FreeBSD will fix that. X6.9.0 is the latest ported release, and compiling from vanilla sources goes horribly, horribly wrong, right now. I could try downgrading, but it's not worth the hassle and lost features, IMHO.
SNES didn't win. It was trailing behind the Sega Genesis for a very long time. It's only when 16-bit systems were showing their age, and Sega was transitioning to the Saturn, SNES out-sold the Genesis, but only by a few percent. At that point it was the end of the 16-bit era, and people were buying Playstations.
Will it allow me to drive faster than the speed limit? Legally drive through stop-signs and stop lights? Drive at full speed even when there is an accident or traffic jam? Anything?
a 30 minute episode renders in a little over an hour to mpeg2 for airing at a TV station or for bluRay disc.
Yeah, well MPEG-2 is over a decade old. Encode it to VC-1 or H.264 (for HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, or Dish/DirecTV), and you'll be sitting around waiting for quite a long time.
shooting progressive for anything but a movie with planned lighting and camera moves makes a really crappy looking news clip , tv show or sitcom.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Sports is commonly broadcast in 720p, and there's nothing about progressive that inherently makes it "crappy looking".
And I see Core 2 Duos with 1MB L2 cache, compared with Turions with 512K per core... You're just taking the worst-case example, and complaining about it as if it's typical.
Not to mention that Turion X2s have 128K L1 cache, while Core 2 Duos have a paltry 64K of L1. L1 is much more significant than L2.
Actually, it isn't. Core 2 CPUs are Intel's desktop CPUs as well. AMD, OTOH, has a different line of CPUs for their desktops, with, among other things, typically 1MB of cache (in your words) "per fucking core."
Remember the Pentium D (Basically a hyped up pentium 3 with 2 megs of L2 cache) that smoked many higher-end Pentium 4s in gaming?
No, I don't remember that at all. the Pentium D is the euphemism for a Pentium 4, that they've used just in the past few months now.
Pay attention! My 640K AMD64 3000+ could be smoking many other machines if it just had a DECENT CACHE ON-DIE!
People are supposed to accept your theory, because you've shown how you know absolutely nothing about processors? I'll pass. AMD can figure out how to make fast CPUs without your "help." They've just been caught napping, and need time to catch up.
I saw an article by a woman talking about why women are paid less than men. She figures it is because women go for the quality of life jobs while men go for the money.
It isn't just one woman's opinion. There have been in-depth studies to prove it.
Never the less, none of the politicians want to be honest, and risk making female voters angry, so those political causes continue, despite reality.
You don't have a learning disability, or something of that sort, do you? You appear to repeatedly ask the same questions, even after they've been answered.
Sorry, I'm not assuming ridiculous, magic ink savings figures without at least some evidence of it. There are savings to be had, but I find it extremely difficult to believe 80% ink savings, since there is a lower limit to what a very small amount of ink can do on paper...
And even if the figures weren't true, I also don't see any evidence that they couldn't still make plenty of profit, marking-up ink cartridges, and making refilling difficult.
driving onto a train is a whole lot easier than craning a car into a cargo hold...
No, it's not any easier at all.
the ship would be about a 17mile journey for just the water portion.. the train ride I suggest could cover thousands of miles.....
Complete nonsense. They wouldn't force people to take the vastly longer route through Alaska, if they're going by ship. The ship will go across the Pacific starting at wherever port is closest to the most people, and the journey will be thousands of miles across the ocean.
In reality, though, people chose to transfer their vehicle by ship, usually a week ahead of time, and they opt for the much faster jet, themselves.
Everything in the summary is based on info in TFA, notably EXCEPT that:
Edgeline technology is said to be so ink-efficient that if HP were to sell these printers, they would never match the money they make from consumables (cartridges etc) now."
TFA didn't say that, and I don't see any source for it. What TFA did say was that it will "lower colour operating costs by up to 30 percent".
30% isn't exactly enough to make inkjet cartridge sales worthless, now is it?
This has resulted in several high-profile arrests, such as those of Pete Townshend and Robert Del Naja (both falsely accused), while attracting significant press attention. Yet, the reality of the investigation is one of stolen credit cards, wrongful accusations, and ignorance
WTF?
Pete Townshend's credit card wasn't stolen, and he certainly wasn't falsely accused. Though charges were dropped, because they didn't find any child porn stored on his computer, he openly admitted from the beginning that he was guilty:
"I accept that I was wrong to access this site, and that by doing so, I broke the law, and I have accepted the caution that the police have given me."
every other source they deliver provides the definition of the word as "unable to be counted". Perhaps you should invest in a more accurate dictionary?
m-w.com
One entry found for innumerable. Main Entry: innumerable Pronunciation: i-'nüm-r&-b&l, -'nyüm-; -'n(y)ü-m&- Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin innumerabilis, from in- + numerabilis numerable : too many to be numbered : COUNTLESS; also : very many
The problem comes when there *is* no documentation for the 'binary strings', and they only way to send data to (print, for example) in a documented format (postscript or PCL, for example) is via a closed 'driver' that only runs on one close 'OS',
That's not the situation here, it has little to do with security exploits, and attaching it to Ethernet wouldn't help the situation...
how freaking hard is it to imagine a train that goes from seattle to moscow, and has capacity for personal vehichles, and cargo containers, and runs as traffic demands.....
Much harder than imagining a ship that goes from the US to Russia, and has similar capability.
"the article is written by journalists. it does not go into detail. I percieve that $rant due to the inadequacies of the article. Can we discuss how this might have been sorted?"
The problems with the Bering-straight bridge/tunnel are innumerable, extremely well known by now, and such concerns have nothing to do with how well or poorly they were mentioned in the latest news story about it...
even when fuel oil for ships is in short supply or becomes just too expensive. Most of the railways in the Far East already have electric power, and the new tracks for the tunnel will definitely have electric power as well.
It's a shame nobody ever figured out how to make ships operate on something like WIND POWER. There's lots of that on the ocean. If only I were smart enough to figure out some way to harness that, ships could SAIL across the ocean, using very little stored energy... </SARCASM>
Honestly, gigantic tanker ships are the best candidates for switching off of fossil fuels. They're large enough that it would be efficient to drop a small nuclear reactor on-board, and stop using oil all together.
There's a significant amount of wind out on the ocean, and plenty of deck space (above the containers) for something like mirrors for solar power.
Even more than that, though, weight is practically no object with ships. You could load them up with an incredible number of lead-acid (or NiMH) batteries, and just start charging them as they arrive in port. The time they spend in port is non-trivial so charging time wouldn't be much of an issue, the batteries probably wouldn't take up any more space than the existing (unbelievably massive) diesel engines and fuel tanks, and the savings would appear rather quickly with the amount of energy tankers use, and their continuous operation.
I'm sure it's feasible to build a flexible railcar that can ride standard-gauge tracks, then upon exiting the tunnel westbound, expand its wheelbase to match the wider Russian tracks.
Presumably, the tunnel (or bridge) would be used primarily for transporting oil/gas/electricity
And then what?
You have the well known trans-Alaskan pipeline, but you know what happens to the oil at the south end of it? It gets loaded onto tankers at the port of Valdez, and goes by sea to the rest of the states/world. What is the point in spending $100 billions to transfer oil/gas/electricity by the most unbelievably round-about path imaginable, only to get it to a slightly closer port?
I'd be excited to see what you plan to do with the electricity, as well. Several thousand miles of transmission lines aren't going to be easy to maintain, especially in the frozen north, and line losses over such distances will be significant.
I love the attitude common on Slashdot where posters come up with extremely obvious criticisms to new ideas posted on Slashdot, and then in an extremely conclusory manner dismiss the entire idea/project as stupid or silly.
Would you prefer that they listed the numerous critical problems with the idea, and then said how wonderful of an idea it is?
It's as if they assume that their intellect is so mighty, that surely whatever trivial criticisms they have to make
None of these criticisms are trivial. You seem to have a horrible lack of understanding of the situation.
have never been thought of by high ranking professionals whose job is to think about the project.
Yeah, we should defer all judgment to the professionals. I mean, I criticized the idea of a war with Iraq on the grounds that they didn't appear to have any WMDs and that none of the available evidence suggested any non-conventional weapons program. My goodness how wrong I was. The high-ranking officials in the Bush administration knows better than the rest of us non-experts that happen to be familiar with the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks to AMD's CnQ, and Intel later following suit, any CPU made in at least the past year (and more for AMD64 CPUs), will idle down to low power states automatically.
Also easy. You can hit the power button on the monitor, you can wait for it to automatically shut off after 15-20 minutes, or with X11, you can run xset and tell the video card o shut-off the monitor.
That one is not done, and is not really reasonably possible to do, nor helpful (on desktops) if it was done.
You need to write to the disk every few seconds, to maintain a consistent state, with or without a journaling file system. Your (desktop) HDD can't be spun-down in such a case, as spinning it up, over and over, would use more power than leaving it on, not to mention wear and tear... And since it's still spinning, even if you cached 1GB to RAM, flushing that to disk would use just as much power as writing it to the disk directly, a byte at a time.
I know I'm setting myself up for flames around here, but the OS with the best support for APCI S3 Suspend is FreeBSD 6.2, even though it's certainly not perfect.
My desktop _almost_ worked. I had to swap-out my ATI video card to get it to resume from S3.
Now, the big problem is X.org... Since X doesn't play well with suspend, FreeBSD is supposed to switch off of X, to a virtual console before entering suspend mode. Unfortunately, I've found that, unfortunately, X 6.9.0 freezes about 1 in 3 times. Once I figured that out, it was just a matter of manually switching to a console, then typing "suspend" before I walk away. Now I haven't rebooted my machine in months, and it's on and usable (right where I left everything) in about 3 seconds.
Of course, the drawback to X not cooperating is that I can't set my machine to auto suspend when it's been idle for a few minutes, but I'm hopeful the next release of FreeBSD will fix that. X6.9.0 is the latest ported release, and compiling from vanilla sources goes horribly, horribly wrong, right now. I could try downgrading, but it's not worth the hassle and lost features, IMHO.
No, it wasn't. Sega had the early lead, and continued to offer stiff competition for years.
Nintendo got ahead, and stayed ahead, but not immediately, and Sega maintained a very significant portion of the market.
There has never been another generation of consoles so competitive, and staying close to each other in market share.
If you think I'm wrong, prove it.
SNES didn't win. It was trailing behind the Sega Genesis for a very long time. It's only when 16-bit systems were showing their age, and Sega was transitioning to the Saturn, SNES out-sold the Genesis, but only by a few percent. At that point it was the end of the 16-bit era, and people were buying Playstations.
So why am I supposed to buy a new car, again?
Will it allow me to drive faster than the speed limit? Legally drive through stop-signs and stop lights? Drive at full speed even when there is an accident or traffic jam? Anything?
Yeah, well MPEG-2 is over a decade old. Encode it to VC-1 or H.264 (for HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, or Dish/DirecTV), and you'll be sitting around waiting for quite a long time.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Sports is commonly broadcast in 720p, and there's nothing about progressive that inherently makes it "crappy looking".
Saying something negative, and following it with "and that's just X" implies that some OTHER scenarios are worse... That just isn't the case.
And I see Core 2 Duos with 1MB L2 cache, compared with Turions with 512K per core... You're just taking the worst-case example, and complaining about it as if it's typical.
Not to mention that Turion X2s have 128K L1 cache, while Core 2 Duos have a paltry 64K of L1. L1 is much more significant than L2.
What's more, L2 cache isn't magic, anyhow. According to benchmarks, the difference between 2MB L2 cache, and 4MB L2 cache, makes AT VERY BEST less than 10% of a performance improvement. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/07/14/intel
Actually, it isn't. Core 2 CPUs are Intel's desktop CPUs as well. AMD, OTOH, has a different line of CPUs for their desktops, with, among other things, typically 1MB of cache (in your words) "per fucking core."
No, I don't remember that at all. the Pentium D is the euphemism for a Pentium 4, that they've used just in the past few months now.
People are supposed to accept your theory, because you've shown how you know absolutely nothing about processors? I'll pass. AMD can figure out how to make fast CPUs without your "help." They've just been caught napping, and need time to catch up.
It isn't just one woman's opinion. There have been in-depth studies to prove it.
Never the less, none of the politicians want to be honest, and risk making female voters angry, so those political causes continue, despite reality.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230907&cid=187 636117 461457 45061
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230907&cid=18
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230907&cid=18
You don't have a learning disability, or something of that sort, do you? You appear to repeatedly ask the same questions, even after they've been answered.
Sorry, I'm not assuming ridiculous, magic ink savings figures without at least some evidence of it. There are savings to be had, but I find it extremely difficult to believe 80% ink savings, since there is a lower limit to what a very small amount of ink can do on paper...
And even if the figures weren't true, I also don't see any evidence that they couldn't still make plenty of profit, marking-up ink cartridges, and making refilling difficult.
I know exactly what happened.
You are simply assuming something YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT happened behind the scenes... presumably because you haven't heard about it...
Except he admitted it right away, before any plea agreement could possibly have been put in place.
And would you opt to be a registered sex offender for 5 years, if you were innocent?
Doubt whatever you want... That's not evidence of anything.
No, it's not any easier at all.
Complete nonsense. They wouldn't force people to take the vastly longer route through Alaska, if they're going by ship. The ship will go across the Pacific starting at wherever port is closest to the most people, and the journey will be thousands of miles across the ocean.
In reality, though, people chose to transfer their vehicle by ship, usually a week ahead of time, and they opt for the much faster jet, themselves.
TFA didn't say that, and I don't see any source for it. What TFA did say was that it will "lower colour operating costs by up to 30 percent".
30% isn't exactly enough to make inkjet cartridge sales worthless, now is it?
WTF?
Pete Townshend's credit card wasn't stolen, and he certainly wasn't falsely accused. Though charges were dropped, because they didn't find any child porn stored on his computer, he openly admitted from the beginning that he was guilty:
"I accept that I was wrong to access this site, and that by doing so, I broke the law, and I have accepted the caution that the police have given me."
m-w.com
One entry found for innumerable.
Main Entry: innumerable
Pronunciation: i-'nüm-r&-b&l, -'nyüm-; -'n(y)ü-m&-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin innumerabilis, from in- + numerabilis numerable
: too many to be numbered : COUNTLESS; also : very many
Try again.
That's not the situation here, it has little to do with security exploits, and attaching it to Ethernet wouldn't help the situation...
Much harder than imagining a ship that goes from the US to Russia, and has similar capability.
innumerable
-adjective
1. very numerous.
I suggest you invest in a better dictionary than the one you're using.
The problems with the Bering-straight bridge/tunnel are innumerable, extremely well known by now, and such concerns have nothing to do with how well or poorly they were mentioned in the latest news story about it...
It's a shame nobody ever figured out how to make ships operate on something like WIND POWER. There's lots of that on the ocean. If only I were smart enough to figure out some way to harness that, ships could SAIL across the ocean, using very little stored energy... </SARCASM>
Honestly, gigantic tanker ships are the best candidates for switching off of fossil fuels. They're large enough that it would be efficient to drop a small nuclear reactor on-board, and stop using oil all together.
There's a significant amount of wind out on the ocean, and plenty of deck space (above the containers) for something like mirrors for solar power.
Even more than that, though, weight is practically no object with ships. You could load them up with an incredible number of lead-acid (or NiMH) batteries, and just start charging them as they arrive in port. The time they spend in port is non-trivial so charging time wouldn't be much of an issue, the batteries probably wouldn't take up any more space than the existing (unbelievably massive) diesel engines and fuel tanks, and the savings would appear rather quickly with the amount of energy tankers use, and their continuous operation.
And I'm sure you're wrong.
Do we cancel each other out, now?
And then what?
You have the well known trans-Alaskan pipeline, but you know what happens to the oil at the south end of it? It gets loaded onto tankers at the port of Valdez, and goes by sea to the rest of the states/world. What is the point in spending $100 billions to transfer oil/gas/electricity by the most unbelievably round-about path imaginable, only to get it to a slightly closer port?
I'd be excited to see what you plan to do with the electricity, as well. Several thousand miles of transmission lines aren't going to be easy to maintain, especially in the frozen north, and line losses over such distances will be significant.
Would you prefer that they listed the numerous critical problems with the idea, and then said how wonderful of an idea it is?
None of these criticisms are trivial. You seem to have a horrible lack of understanding of the situation.
Yeah, we should defer all judgment to the professionals. I mean, I criticized the idea of a war with Iraq on the grounds that they didn't appear to have any WMDs and that none of the available evidence suggested any non-conventional weapons program. My goodness how wrong I was. The high-ranking officials in the Bush administration knows better than the rest of us non-experts that happen to be familiar with the subject.