Yeah, pretty much. Basically, they just doubled the width of the vector execution units. Obviously, that will double the FLOPS for vectorized code. In other news, 8 cores can do twice the work of 4 cores, if your code is multithreaded properly.
Okay Mr. Smartypants. Do it. Define everyone alive according to related values. It sounds so easy, and it's not like people's qualities can contradict, nor can people be ignorant or irrational in an infintesimally large number of ways.
Make yourself a billion dollars and invent perfect speech recognition while your at it.
I didn't say anything about making perfect predictions. You can't even do that for ordinary random variables, much less ones as complex as humans. There is plenty of low hanging fruit to play with, though.
indeed and if he tried to open up he would soon be dead
I doubt it. The Kim line is a personality cult. Control of the country without a visible Kim presence would be extremely difficult, at best.
If Un started running his mouth stupidly, they'd probably pump him full of drugs until he started talking about rainbows instead. Killing him would be drastic.
People like to think that they're "undefinable". In fact, all they are are values of a vector random variable. If you know the values of some of the components you can infer the values of others, because they are not all independent. A similar principle (vector quantization) is used in lossy data compression.
Somebody will come in here and say "No, you can't know for certain, that's what makes us human" -- no, that's what makes you a random variable. A vector-valued one, but a random variable nonetheless.
As a mature adult, I am able to gracefully accept that people will say things I don't like. I don't need to protect myself from bad speech. I don't need to physically block my ears. I don't need to technologically block users. I simply don't allow what random strangers say to affect my emotions.
What a load of self-righteous horseshit. This isn't about protecting our fragile ears, it's about personal fucking preferences.
Isn't it interesting that you post as AC while saying all this. It's almost as if you want to prevent people from automatically filtering you out. You're the guy who goes out of his way to act like a douche and then gets all uppity about his rights when people call him on his douche-baggery. And you do so anonymously so that there is no consequence for you when that happens.
Are you an idiot? The judge said (exact words): "It is a scam that motorists can't win."
So, when a judge says something, he doesn't really say it, in your view? News reporters shouldn't report the exact statements made by people, in your view?
Maybe they assume that responsible adult people can handle reading a word they don't like. Free speech does mean other people might say things you don't like and free speech is more than worth it.
Ah, the old "Free speech means I can say whatever I want and you don't get to say anything back" argument. You have a special kind of stupidity, it's quite remarkable.
Providing a hash of the IP address preserves anonymity while allowing users to ignore each other if they see fit. Being able to do things you want to do, like ignore somebody else, is called "freedom." You see, freedom applies to all parties involved. You're free to be an idiot. I'm free to suggest a technological measure that would allow me personally to filter out your bullshit. Slashdot is free to ignore the suggestion. Freedom for everyone! Awesome, isn't it?
Another technical measure to avoid hearing speech you don't like, is to put your hands over your ears. Care to present an argument against that one? An argument that doesn't involve infringing my freedom to put my hands over my ears?
I'm not saying there's no prior art (there is -- stuff that I've worked on, for one thing). But this is not the same as a modem. There are significant challenges sending modulated audio in the open air. Air density variations can cause fading in specific audible bands. Multipath reflection off building walls and other objects is also problematic. There is also the obvious problem of noise in the environment. Another source of fun is the fact that the speed of sound is low (compared to light) which means Doppler shift is also a serious issue when the source or receiver is moving.
A modem doesn't have any of those problems to the same extent. There is no channel fading (unless the equipment has problems). There is no multipath reflection. The noise floor is much, much lower.
My implementation of this used OFDM-QAM for the media layer -- basically, the spectrum is split into hundreds of subchannels each of which is modulated at a very slow rate, to combat multi-path interference. The code feeding the OFDM modulator is a spread-spectrum code designed to deal with subchannel fading and bursts of noise. The downside to OFDM is that it is not robust to Doppler shift. I've been playing with this for literally years and it's a challenging project.
This stuff is far more complicated that playing a modem at high volume.
Aren't the time zones defined in terms of their offset from GMT? So if you shift the timezones around, the GMT shifts the same amount and so the change cancels out. It sounds like you are talking about altering GMT, not shifting the timezones.
From there to Jane Fonda. I didn't realize she was such a national treasure.
Uh, I think you missed the point. Fonda was viewed by many Americans as a traitor during the Vietnam War, both for the things she said, and for an incident where she was photographed sitting on a NVA anti-aircraft gun (which she has explained was unintentional, but nobody bought that).
The comparison to Fonda is meant to bring up an image of a hated, anti-American citizen who might be worthy of getting taken out. That's the reference he was making.
Tee hee.. You must not be old enough to remember Outlook or Excel Macros.
I'm old enough to remember the Stoned virus. Anyway, how are incorrectly implemented security models in crappy products the user's problem? Why don't you give the user software that isn't full of holes?
Its rarely about just opening an email. Its about opening attachments in that email, or opening links that lead to sites with malware.
Why are you not stripping attachments from external email? Or are you arguing that stripping attachments isn't a technical measure?
Think about how phishing works. They are trying to get you to open at attachment, or visit a resource which is fake (could be a URL, phone number, etc.) So strip attachments and resource identifiers (URLs, phone numbers) from external email. Problem solved.
If part of your job function requires people outside the company to send you attachments or URLs, then you ought to have received training how to handle those things safely. But for Joe Cubefarmer who's day-to-day function is completely internal to the company, there's no excuse for IT to allow for this stuff to happen.
For those with a signal processing background, it can be explained like this. The conjugate pair of momentum and position are related to each other by the Fourier transform -- the Fourier transform of the wavefunction in spatial coordinates yields the wavefunction in momentum coordinates. Anybody who has worked with a Fourier transform knows that if the input is band-limited, the output will not be, and vice versa. To know the position of a particle with exactness implies that its wavefunction is impulse-like in the spatial domain, which causes the momentum wavefunction to be a wave that extends infinitely throughout momentum-space. When you squeeze the bandwidth in one domain it grows in the other. Because the Fourier transform of a Gaussian is another Gaussian, a particle with Gaussian distribution in either space or momentum-space constitutes the most localizable wavefunction one could possibly achieve. The limit of the resolution is given by the Heisenberg relation, but this is a purely mathematical result, having nothing to do with measurement technique.
Everyone locks down ARM. It sucks when Microsoft does it, but no more than when Google does it (you can't boot whatever you like on ARM Chromebooks), or Samsung, or Apple, or...
Have you not noticed that tablets and smartphones are dissolving away the PC market? There won't be a big consumer market for x86 for much longer. "It's just ARM" is a really shortsighted assessment.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, pretty much. Basically, they just doubled the width of the vector execution units. Obviously, that will double the FLOPS for vectorized code. In other news, 8 cores can do twice the work of 4 cores, if your code is multithreaded properly.
Douchebags all over the planet make a lot of money. At least he ain't running EA anymore.
Okay Mr. Smartypants. Do it. Define everyone alive according to related values. It sounds so easy, and it's not like people's qualities can contradict, nor can people be ignorant or irrational in an infintesimally large number of ways. Make yourself a billion dollars and invent perfect speech recognition while your at it.
I didn't say anything about making perfect predictions. You can't even do that for ordinary random variables, much less ones as complex as humans. There is plenty of low hanging fruit to play with, though.
indeed and if he tried to open up he would soon be dead
I doubt it. The Kim line is a personality cult. Control of the country without a visible Kim presence would be extremely difficult, at best.
If Un started running his mouth stupidly, they'd probably pump him full of drugs until he started talking about rainbows instead. Killing him would be drastic.
The more they mine data, the more they are polishing my turds.
You're just an outlier in the data. Easily identified, easily filtered out...
Coming up with a profile that is completely incorrect and undetectably so is far more difficult than just being random and contradictory.
People like to think that they're "undefinable". In fact, all they are are values of a vector random variable. If you know the values of some of the components you can infer the values of others, because they are not all independent. A similar principle (vector quantization) is used in lossy data compression.
Somebody will come in here and say "No, you can't know for certain, that's what makes us human" -- no, that's what makes you a random variable. A vector-valued one, but a random variable nonetheless.
As a mature adult, I am able to gracefully accept that people will say things I don't like. I don't need to protect myself from bad speech. I don't need to physically block my ears. I don't need to technologically block users. I simply don't allow what random strangers say to affect my emotions.
What a load of self-righteous horseshit. This isn't about protecting our fragile ears, it's about personal fucking preferences.
Isn't it interesting that you post as AC while saying all this. It's almost as if you want to prevent people from automatically filtering you out. You're the guy who goes out of his way to act like a douche and then gets all uppity about his rights when people call him on his douche-baggery. And you do so anonymously so that there is no consequence for you when that happens.
You're the coward, kid.
Are you an idiot? The judge said (exact words): "It is a scam that motorists can't win."
So, when a judge says something, he doesn't really say it, in your view? News reporters shouldn't report the exact statements made by people, in your view?
Maybe they assume that responsible adult people can handle reading a word they don't like. Free speech does mean other people might say things you don't like and free speech is more than worth it.
Ah, the old "Free speech means I can say whatever I want and you don't get to say anything back" argument. You have a special kind of stupidity, it's quite remarkable.
Providing a hash of the IP address preserves anonymity while allowing users to ignore each other if they see fit. Being able to do things you want to do, like ignore somebody else, is called "freedom." You see, freedom applies to all parties involved. You're free to be an idiot. I'm free to suggest a technological measure that would allow me personally to filter out your bullshit. Slashdot is free to ignore the suggestion. Freedom for everyone! Awesome, isn't it?
Another technical measure to avoid hearing speech you don't like, is to put your hands over your ears. Care to present an argument against that one? An argument that doesn't involve infringing my freedom to put my hands over my ears?
I'm not saying there's no prior art (there is -- stuff that I've worked on, for one thing). But this is not the same as a modem. There are significant challenges sending modulated audio in the open air. Air density variations can cause fading in specific audible bands. Multipath reflection off building walls and other objects is also problematic. There is also the obvious problem of noise in the environment. Another source of fun is the fact that the speed of sound is low (compared to light) which means Doppler shift is also a serious issue when the source or receiver is moving.
A modem doesn't have any of those problems to the same extent. There is no channel fading (unless the equipment has problems). There is no multipath reflection. The noise floor is much, much lower.
My implementation of this used OFDM-QAM for the media layer -- basically, the spectrum is split into hundreds of subchannels each of which is modulated at a very slow rate, to combat multi-path interference. The code feeding the OFDM modulator is a spread-spectrum code designed to deal with subchannel fading and bursts of noise. The downside to OFDM is that it is not robust to Doppler shift. I've been playing with this for literally years and it's a challenging project.
This stuff is far more complicated that playing a modem at high volume.
In order to make you feel better, please choose one of our other shitty products. Two shitty games are better than one!
Aren't the time zones defined in terms of their offset from GMT? So if you shift the timezones around, the GMT shifts the same amount and so the change cancels out. It sounds like you are talking about altering GMT, not shifting the timezones.
Yeah, but the sun would rise and set a half hour later on the clock.
I don't understand how shifting the timezones shifts the clock. It just shifts the set of people who are in each timezone.
Because shifting the timezones has no effect other than a different set of people are now on the eastern edge of a time zone?
Very funny... But nobody seems to get your joke.
From there to Jane Fonda. I didn't realize she was such a national treasure.
Uh, I think you missed the point. Fonda was viewed by many Americans as a traitor during the Vietnam War, both for the things she said, and for an incident where she was photographed sitting on a NVA anti-aircraft gun (which she has explained was unintentional, but nobody bought that).
The comparison to Fonda is meant to bring up an image of a hated, anti-American citizen who might be worthy of getting taken out. That's the reference he was making.
Once again, Ron Wyden's name appears in a noble context. The man needs to run for President.
I'm sure the Sales people will be very happy when they receive an e-mail saying "amended contract" with zero attachments. Oh yes.
Right. Because there's no sort of technology that could apply different policies to different people... We all know computers can't do shit like that.
Why are you blaming the users at all? They erred on the side of caution.
Tee hee.. You must not be old enough to remember Outlook or Excel Macros.
I'm old enough to remember the Stoned virus. Anyway, how are incorrectly implemented security models in crappy products the user's problem? Why don't you give the user software that isn't full of holes?
Its rarely about just opening an email. Its about opening attachments in that email, or opening links that lead to sites with malware.
Why are you not stripping attachments from external email? Or are you arguing that stripping attachments isn't a technical measure?
Think about how phishing works. They are trying to get you to open at attachment, or visit a resource which is fake (could be a URL, phone number, etc.) So strip attachments and resource identifiers (URLs, phone numbers) from external email. Problem solved.
If part of your job function requires people outside the company to send you attachments or URLs, then you ought to have received training how to handle those things safely. But for Joe Cubefarmer who's day-to-day function is completely internal to the company, there's no excuse for IT to allow for this stuff to happen.
The problem is 100% technical. How could viewing an email ever result in malware being installed? Somebody failed -- they're called the IT department.
But when every single company does it, what choice will you have? Not give any of them your money? Quit gaming alltogether?
Sounds reasonable to me... Jeez, you guys sound like drug addicts.
For those with a signal processing background, it can be explained like this. The conjugate pair of momentum and position are related to each other by the Fourier transform -- the Fourier transform of the wavefunction in spatial coordinates yields the wavefunction in momentum coordinates. Anybody who has worked with a Fourier transform knows that if the input is band-limited, the output will not be, and vice versa. To know the position of a particle with exactness implies that its wavefunction is impulse-like in the spatial domain, which causes the momentum wavefunction to be a wave that extends infinitely throughout momentum-space. When you squeeze the bandwidth in one domain it grows in the other. Because the Fourier transform of a Gaussian is another Gaussian, a particle with Gaussian distribution in either space or momentum-space constitutes the most localizable wavefunction one could possibly achieve. The limit of the resolution is given by the Heisenberg relation, but this is a purely mathematical result, having nothing to do with measurement technique.
Everyone locks down ARM. It sucks when Microsoft does it, but no more than when Google does it (you can't boot whatever you like on ARM Chromebooks), or Samsung, or Apple, or...
Have you not noticed that tablets and smartphones are dissolving away the PC market? There won't be a big consumer market for x86 for much longer. "It's just ARM" is a really shortsighted assessment.