Hang on, "typical focus on embarrassingly parallel problems"? That's just plainly not true. Pick a classical problem for HPC, weather forecasting. You break up the atmosphere into a bunch of cubes and distribute those cubes in a sensible way between your nodes. You model the flows between the cubes on a local machine and pass the edge information to neighbouring nodes. If it's embarrassingly parallel then you wouldn't be passing edge information, but that would mean weather wouldn't move from one area to another...
CFD for modelling heat or air flow, or pathogen propagation. Modelling population trends with microsimulation, or even parallel simulation of software systems. None of that is embarrassingly parallel. You wouldn't spend all your money on low latency high bandwidth interconnects if all the nodes spent their days playing with themselves.
Something like raytracing *can* be embarrassingly parallel, but I'd say most that runs on HPC isn't.
Without knowing the details of the agreements (and that's all behind NDAs) there's no way of reasonably coming to those conclusions. For all you know Microsoft are effectively paying companies to license the patents to give it credibility... All you can infer is that it the other companies thought it was in their interest to sign the deal, but you know nothing about what the deal was, or if they were right.
I've used DMX with Chromium to give 3D accelerated X over 28 monitors on 7 machines. Works, but the performance can be terrible if you don't have the interconnect to deal with what you're rendering. With gigabit basic X applications could cope, but firefox with google maps would take seconds per redraw. Depending on the 3D app you/can/ get decent performance though.
Are you really just griping about clashing vg names? If this is something that you need to do, just name your volume groups with unique names in the first place. Is this wildly different to having ext4 filesystems with identical labels? The solution in that case is to use UUIDs instead to mount, which are highly unlikely to clash. But I don't really see the problem in setting your vg name to machinenamevg2009a. When you get your new machine you can call the VG machinenamevg2011a. But this really is griping over nothing.
Also, given you should really need to use the vg name directly too often, why not just mash your palm into the keyboard when you choose a vg name...
I wasn't specifically meaning the US govt (the UK one was far more in my thoughts). You don't think more than 1 trillion USD of QE is enough to have an inflationary effect?
Thing is, fuel tax does this quite effectively. Yes it's only a linear punishment, but then road tax in the UK certainly isn't (a high MPG diesel can easily be in the £20 a year tax band, but your thirsty V8 could easily be £445 a year). This'll mean taxation that varies based on your car and the time of day. But don't forget that high flyers will probably get this refunded through expenses. I think it's a lavishly expensive and over complicated solution for a problem that doesn't really exist, that I'm not sure won't lead to a whole host of private toll-roads and a generally less open road network than we enjoy now.
The period of time on amber should be legally defined. If it's greater or equal to that, it's fine. If it's shorter than that, it's illegal and you'd be able to contest the fine. If the legal minimum period is insanely short, the rules need changing.
They support it in the sense that they publish all the information that you should need to use things in an OS agnostic manner, but they're not going to help you with any of the specifics. It's unreasonable to expect them to. That said, if there were fundamental setup issues stopping a service working on linux and changing it to make it work wouldn't impact existing users, it's very likely that change would be made.
Supporting linux internally is very different to supporting it for student use. Where I work, we support and use linux internally, but don't support it for student use. But using mail / VPN / file stores from linux is all functional, and we publish the necessary information required to use them.
I wouldn't say you get ridiculed, but you'll inevitably come up against people who don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Sure, but most weren't/that/ slow. Plenty of people used 60Hz CRT monitors and didn't think they were hideous (I'm not entirely sure why though), and the persistence of those phosphors was tiny (after about 5% of the vertical size they'd reverted to mostly black).
Yes, but not a great deal. Stick CRTs in front of people and everybody will say 50Hz flickers. Some won't have a problem with 60. I'd guess about half would be happy with 70, and most would be happy above 85. So at 60, yes you'll probably notice a bit of flicker, but probably not enough to bother you. Smaller screens bother you much less with flicker anyway, so I doubt people will be bothered by this.
It's not that long ago that people were happy with their 60Hz TV sets (or even 50Hz here in the UK). It's really no big deal.
Erm, what do you think happens with current systems? You put your bag on a belt at check in, and it's sucked into the system. Surely as far as the bag's concerned, this journey is much the same as at any other airport? The only difference is, you're doing it with a machine unsupervised, as opposed to details being keyed by an employee.
The UK has a much weaker concept of fair use than the US as far as I'm aware, so I've probably got quite a different perspective on this. Slashdot likes to criticise Disney for having seemingly endless copyright on material as they're not getting a fair reward, but this isn't at that end of the scale. If you're saying that large scale duplication of academic texts is fine, then it really does disincentivise people from bothering to publish academic texts. A text that's clearly essential to teach a module at university level gets duplicated (to the extent that whole paragraphs are lifted), and the library has say one or two copies. The university and the lecturer are just piggy-backing off someone else's work. It's not like the university isn't getting income from teaching the students, so they are profitting from ripping off the author. So lets put the videos of the lectures online too for other universities to use. Only universities and the lecturers don't generally like that, as they feel it's theirs...
Indeed, but I was deliberately over guarding to avoid accusations of harshness. It's a model that works as long as the universities are flush with cash, and people are willing to turn a blind eye to the pointlessness of the publishers. Given the state of the sector in the UK, I think this is all about to properly come to a head (as opposed to the normal negotiations on fees).
In the worst cases, you've got a journal getting an academic to review papers for free, charging the submitter to be published, and then charging the reader to get a copy. This gravy train's going to end at some point, as people realise that the publishers aren't really providing them all that much.
Sounds pretty excessive to me. This isn't quoting a paragraph, this is taking a substantial portion of the book. If you need your students to have read it, get enough copies for the library. If that's too expensive, don't make them read it. If you're going to base your module round it, make them buy it. Sounds a lot like you've got an underfunded library that they're trying to work around by violating copyright. It's certainly not the behaviour I've seen of lecturers in my field.
I've always wondered whether or not land speed records would be better if your craft was only allowed to gain traction off the ground . Similarly with water speed records. Else, as you say, it's simply a case of keeping a rocket in near-constant contact with the ground. The vehicles certainly wouldn't look like rockets with pram wheels...
So you make a cluster of these things, where regular failures are normal but tolerated. Then when the cluster starts acting weird, you make a cluster of clusters...
Because copying over a big file and doing other things is too taxing for a modern machine? Seriously?
Most shocking i/o behaviour like this I've suffered from has been a result of crap RAID controllers. Big cache, shoddy drivers/firmware/hardware, and linux i/o scheduling doesn't get a look in. Potentially you find your one critical read stuck behind 512Mbytes of poorly performing writes all within the confines of the card.
Right. But it still makes for quite a lively surface compare to a star heated object doesn't it? A quick google suggests variation from 90-170K with small areas of volcanoes being far hotter (1500K).
Or would a larger and more atmosphered moon smooth off that variation a fair bit?
Slashdot Mirror
Hang on, "typical focus on embarrassingly parallel problems"? That's just plainly not true. Pick a classical problem for HPC, weather forecasting. You break up the atmosphere into a bunch of cubes and distribute those cubes in a sensible way between your nodes. You model the flows between the cubes on a local machine and pass the edge information to neighbouring nodes. If it's embarrassingly parallel then you wouldn't be passing edge information, but that would mean weather wouldn't move from one area to another...
CFD for modelling heat or air flow, or pathogen propagation. Modelling population trends with microsimulation, or even parallel simulation of software systems. None of that is embarrassingly parallel. You wouldn't spend all your money on low latency high bandwidth interconnects if all the nodes spent their days playing with themselves.
Something like raytracing *can* be embarrassingly parallel, but I'd say most that runs on HPC isn't.
Without knowing the details of the agreements (and that's all behind NDAs) there's no way of reasonably coming to those conclusions. For all you know Microsoft are effectively paying companies to license the patents to give it credibility... All you can infer is that it the other companies thought it was in their interest to sign the deal, but you know nothing about what the deal was, or if they were right.
Perhaps doing it in a generic hardware agnostic way is new?
I've used DMX with Chromium to give 3D accelerated X over 28 monitors on 7 machines. Works, but the performance can be terrible if you don't have the interconnect to deal with what you're rendering. With gigabit basic X applications could cope, but firefox with google maps would take seconds per redraw. Depending on the 3D app you /can/ get decent performance though.
Are you really just griping about clashing vg names? If this is something that you need to do, just name your volume groups with unique names in the first place. Is this wildly different to having ext4 filesystems with identical labels? The solution in that case is to use UUIDs instead to mount, which are highly unlikely to clash. But I don't really see the problem in setting your vg name to machinenamevg2009a. When you get your new machine you can call the VG machinenamevg2011a. But this really is griping over nothing.
Also, given you should really need to use the vg name directly too often, why not just mash your palm into the keyboard when you choose a vg name...
I wasn't specifically meaning the US govt (the UK one was far more in my thoughts). You don't think more than 1 trillion USD of QE is enough to have an inflationary effect?
You mean when the state's not deliberately inflating it away?
Believe me, plenty of money is being directed into the private sector on this deal...
Thing is, fuel tax does this quite effectively. Yes it's only a linear punishment, but then road tax in the UK certainly isn't (a high MPG diesel can easily be in the £20 a year tax band, but your thirsty V8 could easily be £445 a year). This'll mean taxation that varies based on your car and the time of day. But don't forget that high flyers will probably get this refunded through expenses. I think it's a lavishly expensive and over complicated solution for a problem that doesn't really exist, that I'm not sure won't lead to a whole host of private toll-roads and a generally less open road network than we enjoy now.
The period of time on amber should be legally defined. If it's greater or equal to that, it's fine. If it's shorter than that, it's illegal and you'd be able to contest the fine. If the legal minimum period is insanely short, the rules need changing.
They support it in the sense that they publish all the information that you should need to use things in an OS agnostic manner, but they're not going to help you with any of the specifics. It's unreasonable to expect them to. That said, if there were fundamental setup issues stopping a service working on linux and changing it to make it work wouldn't impact existing users, it's very likely that change would be made.
Supporting linux internally is very different to supporting it for student use. Where I work, we support and use linux internally, but don't support it for student use. But using mail / VPN / file stores from linux is all functional, and we publish the necessary information required to use them.
I wouldn't say you get ridiculed, but you'll inevitably come up against people who don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Sure, but most weren't /that/ slow. Plenty of people used 60Hz CRT monitors and didn't think they were hideous (I'm not entirely sure why though), and the persistence of those phosphors was tiny (after about 5% of the vertical size they'd reverted to mostly black).
Yes, but not a great deal. Stick CRTs in front of people and everybody will say 50Hz flickers. Some won't have a problem with 60. I'd guess about half would be happy with 70, and most would be happy above 85. So at 60, yes you'll probably notice a bit of flicker, but probably not enough to bother you. Smaller screens bother you much less with flicker anyway, so I doubt people will be bothered by this.
It's not that long ago that people were happy with their 60Hz TV sets (or even 50Hz here in the UK). It's really no big deal.
Erm, what do you think happens with current systems? You put your bag on a belt at check in, and it's sucked into the system. Surely as far as the bag's concerned, this journey is much the same as at any other airport? The only difference is, you're doing it with a machine unsupervised, as opposed to details being keyed by an employee.
The UK has a much weaker concept of fair use than the US as far as I'm aware, so I've probably got quite a different perspective on this. Slashdot likes to criticise Disney for having seemingly endless copyright on material as they're not getting a fair reward, but this isn't at that end of the scale. If you're saying that large scale duplication of academic texts is fine, then it really does disincentivise people from bothering to publish academic texts. A text that's clearly essential to teach a module at university level gets duplicated (to the extent that whole paragraphs are lifted), and the library has say one or two copies. The university and the lecturer are just piggy-backing off someone else's work. It's not like the university isn't getting income from teaching the students, so they are profitting from ripping off the author. So lets put the videos of the lectures online too for other universities to use. Only universities and the lecturers don't generally like that, as they feel it's theirs...
Indeed, but I was deliberately over guarding to avoid accusations of harshness. It's a model that works as long as the universities are flush with cash, and people are willing to turn a blind eye to the pointlessness of the publishers. Given the state of the sector in the UK, I think this is all about to properly come to a head (as opposed to the normal negotiations on fees).
In the worst cases, you've got a journal getting an academic to review papers for free, charging the submitter to be published, and then charging the reader to get a copy. This gravy train's going to end at some point, as people realise that the publishers aren't really providing them all that much.
Sounds pretty excessive to me. This isn't quoting a paragraph, this is taking a substantial portion of the book. If you need your students to have read it, get enough copies for the library. If that's too expensive, don't make them read it. If you're going to base your module round it, make them buy it. Sounds a lot like you've got an underfunded library that they're trying to work around by violating copyright. It's certainly not the behaviour I've seen of lecturers in my field.
So how often have you actually taken action yourself?
I think I'd like to see the traction class given more credit then, as I think you end up disappearing behind the big boys with their broken planes.
I've always wondered whether or not land speed records would be better if your craft was only allowed to gain traction off the ground . Similarly with water speed records. Else, as you say, it's simply a case of keeping a rocket in near-constant contact with the ground. The vehicles certainly wouldn't look like rockets with pram wheels...
So you make a cluster of these things, where regular failures are normal but tolerated. Then when the cluster starts acting weird, you make a cluster of clusters...
Because copying over a big file and doing other things is too taxing for a modern machine? Seriously?
Most shocking i/o behaviour like this I've suffered from has been a result of crap RAID controllers. Big cache, shoddy drivers/firmware/hardware, and linux i/o scheduling doesn't get a look in. Potentially you find your one critical read stuck behind 512Mbytes of poorly performing writes all within the confines of the card.
So for the non astrophysicist, how does a gas giant form that close the the star where it's "warm"?
Right. But it still makes for quite a lively surface compare to a star heated object doesn't it? A quick google suggests variation from 90-170K with small areas of volcanoes being far hotter (1500K).
Or would a larger and more atmosphered moon smooth off that variation a fair bit?