But that does not take into account what would happen to the fire dept if anyone got hurt, or equipment damaged, etc... What happens when a firefighter dies fighting the fire
What happens when the guy's hidden meth lab explodes, blowing burning hazardous materials onto neighbor's houses and potentially killing everyone nearby?
Have you ever actually benchmarked video performance on a rotated display? Even with hardware supported rotation, the framebuffer read-out order is no longer consecutive which completely fucks video performance.
I seriously can't believe the suggestions... It's like saying "What happened to all the compact cars?" and you reply "Stop whining, just crush your car down to size." Why can't we just buy something in the form factor we want?
So what you're saying is... Once one company makes a certain thing, nobody else should make anything similar because that's "not creative." In other words, all products should be monopolies. Great.
Don't get into disease - some vaccines are MANDATORY. Where is your freedom there?
You have a vaccine against botnet infections? What are you standing around for? Distribute it to everyone!
You have no inherent freedom to speed on the highway and endanger everyone. You have no freedom to drive drunk.
You're comparing a bunch of voluntary antisocial activities to simply being online while (perhaps unknowingly) being infected by malware. THIS, ladies and gentlemen is what I mean by "losing your fucking minds."
Now if all this overhead served some useful purpose, then it would just be something the world would have to deal with. However all of it is illegitimate, fraudulent and/or get-rich-quick scams that benefit society not at all. Why the FUCK do you insist we all keep paying for this? Must be nice to be rich and be able to afford all that waste.
Because people inherently have freedom. It's also been estimated that the common cold does about $22 billion of economic harm each year in the USA alone because of missed work time. Will you now suggest that we should forcibly contain all cold-infected people in their homes (I suppose you'd use the National Guard to enforce it)? Yes, it fucking sucks. Erasing people's rights for your own convenience and thriftiness sucks worse.
What is it about spam and malware that causes people to completely lose their minds? What are you worried about botnets anyway? Either your system is secure and it won't be a problem for you, or your system is not secure and you are, by your own admission, "part of the problem." This isn't like quarantining carriers of a deadly disease. It's not exactly difficult to secure your own system against the nasties on the internet. But people are here supporting the idea of severing a person's internet connectivity because they've been a victim of some asshole on the internet. I think we can all agree that the internet is culturally revolutionizing, and has already proven itself to be an extremely important tool in the promulgation of free speech. But once you throw this crap in the mix we have people asserting these authoritarian opinions which, quite honestly, scare the shit out of me.
At the very least, if there is some set of criteria for disconnecting somebody from the internet, there must also be criteria for how to get reconnected and a very clear and doable set of instructions how to get back online. Otherwise you will end up permanently silencing people.
Our bodies are made of self-replicating nanomachines. Stragely enough, these machines come pre-made with a general purpose programming language called "DNA." Perhaps instead of attempting to start from scratch we should try to adapt what we are already surrounded by to fit our purposes better.
Yeah, that will be awesome! $27.5 million / 8 years / 8.4 million = a big fat check of $0.41 per year that you'll be getting back! Whoot! That's fucking large!
It would probably cost the city more than that just to organize the refund. People ought to learn to use a calculator. These numbers are microscopic.
Memory pages are reference counted. Some of the pages are shared and the cores spend a lot of time reference counting. There is a point where the reference counting overhead dominates. It is hypothesized that this could be fixed by enhancing the OS to isolate pages to physical cores thereby removing the need to reference count; this is a fundamental change to the structure of traditional virtual memory management.
I still don't understand. Why would the reference counts of the pages be changing all the time? For shared library pages, that would imply zillions of extremely short-lived processes being executed and then dying, all the time. And for threads within a single process that all share the same VM, why would any reference count change unless one of the threads modified the VM map by calling mmap() or some other such function?
I'm getting this image of my head of reference counts constantly beings increment and decremented and I find myself wondering why the hell that should be happening in the first place. I'm no kernel wizard but I've written device drivers and that doesn't make any sense to me.
Part of the point OF being mortal is that we are supposed to survive. It's what we do
Actually, the important part of being mortal is that we die. It's incredibly important that we die, or evolution doesn't work. There is no selective pressure. Genetic evolution is random or non-existent. The first form of such life that arose, would simply continue on forever, reproducing and being just as boring in one generation as in the previous. Mortality is absolutely the most important reason we even exist.
Are you? If the information is anonymous, and only says "a mobile device was here at this time," then it has no way of knowing that the same mobile device is there every day at 5:30.
Such information is completely USELESS. It amounts to a series of points in spacetime, and that's it. "On the surface of the earth, at this present moment, there exist a number of mobile devices in these specific locations." Unless the next sample also tracks continuity of the devices, the only value of such information would be insta-marketing based on your present location (standing near a Starbucks, an ad for Starbucks pops up) but what the hell sort of mobile device behaves that way? If my phone constantly popped advertisements I'd throw it in the dumpster and get something else.
I see no way they could NOT be tracking the specific device in some way. It would be POINTLESS.
As long as no "who" information is transmitted to the advertiser, it's not personal. It's just some unknown device at coordinates X,Y at time T.
Are you braindead? "Hey, this guy goes to the same spot every day at 5:30 PM and remains there until 7:30 the next morning. That must be his home. Hey, here's the address. Hey, I got his name now."
Can somebody please explain what the fuck they are actually talking about? They've dumbed down the terminology to the point I have no idea what they are saying. Is this some kind of cache-related issue? Inefficient bouncing of processes between cores? What?
Keep in mind you're just removing the dissolved oxygen, not atmospheric oxygen, so it's not like you're taking it out of the air tanks. If you could find a way to extract that prior the the fermentation process, it could even be a net gain.
If there was no dissolved oxygen at the outset, you would have to pitch a LOT more yeast. In my experience the volume of yeast increases by a factor of 10 or more during the reproduction phase (although this is based on measuring the primary yeast cake, which admittedly isn't entirely composed of yeast).
I do like the idea of using it to grow plants. Perhaps barley?;-)
Since you didn't show your math, I have to ask... Did you use the relativistic definition of kinetic energy or the Newtonian one? Because using Newton would be incredibly wrong in this case.
I thought the article would be about how to formulate a beer that drinks well in space. Instead it seems to be about actually brewing in space.
I really don't see why you would want to do that. Even a simple brewing setup involves several bulky pieces of equipment. And five gallons of beer fermenting will release somewhere around 200 liters of CO2 (number pulled from the depths of my memory, could be wrong) which is obviously not something you want an excess of in space.
However, the observation that the yeast seemed to be more "efficient" in space makes sense to me. Fermentation in beer basically consists of three phases. During the first phase, the yeast consumes oxygen (aerobic respiration) as it reproduces in the wort. Once the yeast population gets high enough, they switch their metabolism to anaerobic and commence the fermentation proper. Finally, the yeast begin to aggregate together (it's called "flocculation") and form large globules which drop out of suspension and form a "cake" on the bottom of the fermenter. In a zero-G environment, these globules will instead stay in suspension and the yeast will remain in an active state for a longer period of time.
Reading only what you want to read is a good road to go down to eventually become a closed-minded bigot. It used to be you had to work hard to avoid exposing yourself to facts you don't like, but these days we have computers that will do that for you. Cognitive dissonance will be rendered a thing of the past, so that we may more easily group ourselves into extremist factions and ignore reality. It's all so wonderfully efficient.
Performing rigorous QA is "bureaucratic obstruction?" What are you smoking?
Ever notice how a lot of software out there just fucking sucks? Crashes all the time, trashes your data, and makes you pull your hair out? Do you think the situation would improve if only we could find those mythical perfect developers who never make mistakes? Or might it have something to do with... the fact that nobody TESTS their shit anymore?
I'm really baffled at how ANY developer could have a beef against QA. For crap sake, they are taking responsibility for the quality of the product! If something goes wrong you can point your finger at them and deflect the blame! And you want to call them useless bureaucrats? They're covering your ass!
So, wait. The game includes features that were created expressly to make it easier to do this sort of thing? That kind of removes a big chunk of the "cool" factor, at least for me.
Slashdot Mirror
But that does not take into account what would happen to the fire dept if anyone got hurt, or equipment damaged, etc... What happens when a firefighter dies fighting the fire
What happens when the guy's hidden meth lab explodes, blowing burning hazardous materials onto neighbor's houses and potentially killing everyone nearby?
Have you ever actually benchmarked video performance on a rotated display? Even with hardware supported rotation, the framebuffer read-out order is no longer consecutive which completely fucks video performance.
I seriously can't believe the suggestions... It's like saying "What happened to all the compact cars?" and you reply "Stop whining, just crush your car down to size." Why can't we just buy something in the form factor we want?
Nah. You're just "obstructing justice."
So what you're saying is... Once one company makes a certain thing, nobody else should make anything similar because that's "not creative." In other words, all products should be monopolies. Great.
If your mom is unwittingly infected by a botnet, your opinion of her degrades into "no better than somebody shitting on a public sidewalk?"
Don't get into disease - some vaccines are MANDATORY. Where is your freedom there?
You have a vaccine against botnet infections? What are you standing around for? Distribute it to everyone!
You have no inherent freedom to speed on the highway and endanger everyone. You have no freedom to drive drunk.
You're comparing a bunch of voluntary antisocial activities to simply being online while (perhaps unknowingly) being infected by malware. THIS, ladies and gentlemen is what I mean by "losing your fucking minds."
Now if all this overhead served some useful purpose, then it would just be something the world would have to deal with. However all of it is illegitimate, fraudulent and/or get-rich-quick scams that benefit society not at all. Why the FUCK do you insist we all keep paying for this? Must be nice to be rich and be able to afford all that waste.
Because people inherently have freedom. It's also been estimated that the common cold does about $22 billion of economic harm each year in the USA alone because of missed work time. Will you now suggest that we should forcibly contain all cold-infected people in their homes (I suppose you'd use the National Guard to enforce it)? Yes, it fucking sucks. Erasing people's rights for your own convenience and thriftiness sucks worse.
What is it about spam and malware that causes people to completely lose their minds? What are you worried about botnets anyway? Either your system is secure and it won't be a problem for you, or your system is not secure and you are, by your own admission, "part of the problem." This isn't like quarantining carriers of a deadly disease. It's not exactly difficult to secure your own system against the nasties on the internet. But people are here supporting the idea of severing a person's internet connectivity because they've been a victim of some asshole on the internet. I think we can all agree that the internet is culturally revolutionizing, and has already proven itself to be an extremely important tool in the promulgation of free speech. But once you throw this crap in the mix we have people asserting these authoritarian opinions which, quite honestly, scare the shit out of me.
At the very least, if there is some set of criteria for disconnecting somebody from the internet, there must also be criteria for how to get reconnected and a very clear and doable set of instructions how to get back online. Otherwise you will end up permanently silencing people.
Our bodies are made of self-replicating nanomachines. Stragely enough, these machines come pre-made with a general purpose programming language called "DNA." Perhaps instead of attempting to start from scratch we should try to adapt what we are already surrounded by to fit our purposes better.
Yeah, that will be awesome! $27.5 million / 8 years / 8.4 million = a big fat check of $0.41 per year that you'll be getting back! Whoot! That's fucking large!
It would probably cost the city more than that just to organize the refund. People ought to learn to use a calculator. These numbers are microscopic.
Memory pages are reference counted. Some of the pages are shared and the cores spend a lot of time reference counting. There is a point where the reference counting overhead dominates. It is hypothesized that this could be fixed by enhancing the OS to isolate pages to physical cores thereby removing the need to reference count; this is a fundamental change to the structure of traditional virtual memory management.
I still don't understand. Why would the reference counts of the pages be changing all the time? For shared library pages, that would imply zillions of extremely short-lived processes being executed and then dying, all the time. And for threads within a single process that all share the same VM, why would any reference count change unless one of the threads modified the VM map by calling mmap() or some other such function?
I'm getting this image of my head of reference counts constantly beings increment and decremented and I find myself wondering why the hell that should be happening in the first place. I'm no kernel wizard but I've written device drivers and that doesn't make any sense to me.
Part of the point OF being mortal is that we are supposed to survive. It's what we do
Actually, the important part of being mortal is that we die. It's incredibly important that we die, or evolution doesn't work. There is no selective pressure. Genetic evolution is random or non-existent. The first form of such life that arose, would simply continue on forever, reproducing and being just as boring in one generation as in the previous. Mortality is absolutely the most important reason we even exist.
Are you? If the information is anonymous, and only says "a mobile device was here at this time," then it has no way of knowing that the same mobile device is there every day at 5:30.
Such information is completely USELESS. It amounts to a series of points in spacetime, and that's it. "On the surface of the earth, at this present moment, there exist a number of mobile devices in these specific locations." Unless the next sample also tracks continuity of the devices, the only value of such information would be insta-marketing based on your present location (standing near a Starbucks, an ad for Starbucks pops up) but what the hell sort of mobile device behaves that way? If my phone constantly popped advertisements I'd throw it in the dumpster and get something else.
I see no way they could NOT be tracking the specific device in some way. It would be POINTLESS.
As long as no "who" information is transmitted to the advertiser, it's not personal. It's just some unknown device at coordinates X,Y at time T.
Are you braindead? "Hey, this guy goes to the same spot every day at 5:30 PM and remains there until 7:30 the next morning. That must be his home. Hey, here's the address. Hey, I got his name now."
Can somebody please explain what the fuck they are actually talking about? They've dumbed down the terminology to the point I have no idea what they are saying. Is this some kind of cache-related issue? Inefficient bouncing of processes between cores? What?
Depends. According to whom is the ship accelerating at 1 g?
According to anybody in any inertial frame. Acceleration is not relative.
Keep in mind you're just removing the dissolved oxygen, not atmospheric oxygen, so it's not like you're taking it out of the air tanks. If you could find a way to extract that prior the the fermentation process, it could even be a net gain.
If there was no dissolved oxygen at the outset, you would have to pitch a LOT more yeast. In my experience the volume of yeast increases by a factor of 10 or more during the reproduction phase (although this is based on measuring the primary yeast cake, which admittedly isn't entirely composed of yeast).
I do like the idea of using it to grow plants. Perhaps barley? ;-)
Since you didn't show your math, I have to ask... Did you use the relativistic definition of kinetic energy or the Newtonian one? Because using Newton would be incredibly wrong in this case.
I thought the article would be about how to formulate a beer that drinks well in space. Instead it seems to be about actually brewing in space.
I really don't see why you would want to do that. Even a simple brewing setup involves several bulky pieces of equipment. And five gallons of beer fermenting will release somewhere around 200 liters of CO2 (number pulled from the depths of my memory, could be wrong) which is obviously not something you want an excess of in space.
However, the observation that the yeast seemed to be more "efficient" in space makes sense to me. Fermentation in beer basically consists of three phases. During the first phase, the yeast consumes oxygen (aerobic respiration) as it reproduces in the wort. Once the yeast population gets high enough, they switch their metabolism to anaerobic and commence the fermentation proper. Finally, the yeast begin to aggregate together (it's called "flocculation") and form large globules which drop out of suspension and form a "cake" on the bottom of the fermenter. In a zero-G environment, these globules will instead stay in suspension and the yeast will remain in an active state for a longer period of time.
Reading only what you want to read is a good road to go down to eventually become a closed-minded bigot. It used to be you had to work hard to avoid exposing yourself to facts you don't like, but these days we have computers that will do that for you. Cognitive dissonance will be rendered a thing of the past, so that we may more easily group ourselves into extremist factions and ignore reality. It's all so wonderfully efficient.
If there is an open beer in a car, you can't prove the driver was drinking.
But having an open container in the vehicle is against the law. What we're discussing here is not (yet)
How are you going to prove the driver was the one using the phone? Just because the driver owns the phone doesn't mean nobody else can use it.
Performing rigorous QA is "bureaucratic obstruction?" What are you smoking?
Ever notice how a lot of software out there just fucking sucks? Crashes all the time, trashes your data, and makes you pull your hair out? Do you think the situation would improve if only we could find those mythical perfect developers who never make mistakes? Or might it have something to do with... the fact that nobody TESTS their shit anymore?
I'm really baffled at how ANY developer could have a beef against QA. For crap sake, they are taking responsibility for the quality of the product! If something goes wrong you can point your finger at them and deflect the blame! And you want to call them useless bureaucrats? They're covering your ass!
*Shakes head in disbelief*
So, when two people do something stupid, it's not stupid anymore?
So, wait. The game includes features that were created expressly to make it easier to do this sort of thing? That kind of removes a big chunk of the "cool" factor, at least for me.