Yeah, for really embedded stuff ARM is much better suited, becuase it is a lot simpler. I don't think it's possible or would make sense to squeeze the whole x86 legacy baggage into e.g. a tiny uC with a few KB SRAM, and still get decent performance and features. But I don't think this is where Intel is aiming at.
Is it really true that x86 is necessarily (substantially) less efficient than ARM? x86 instruction decoding has been a tiny part of the chip area for many years now. While it's probably relatively more on smaller processors like Atom, it's still small. The rest of the architecture is already RISC. Atom might still be a bad architecture, but I don't think it's fair to say x86 always causes that.
Also, there is exactly one x86 Android phone that I know of, and while its power efficiency isn't stellar, the difference is nowhere near 4x. From the benchmarks I've seen, it seems to be right in the middle of the pack. I'd really like to see the source for that claim.
The idea migt be shocking to you, but there's nothing wrong with having a union even when things are going well. When labor laws are being violated, you need a union that can draw support from and build upon an established base, so it is actually able to act. Just starting to build one then seems a tad late.
The UK government loves to outsource - when it inevitably goes wrong, they can just say 'wasn't us!'
But they are still the ones who made the laws requiring a filter to be present, or at least coerced the ISPs to install one. If I outsource an assassination to a hitman, does that mean I can somehow disclaim responsibility?
Which "reputation as an upholder of web freedom" would that be? The one based on them censoring Wikipedia for showing an album cover? Or the one where you have to hand over encryption keys or be thrown in jail?
I think I'd say the same thing if it happened where I live. Having a rapist get away is horrible, of course, but we need to realize that not every crime can be solved without turning to totalitarian methods, and some not even then. I consider letting some criminals run free an acceptable price for not living in a totalitarian society.
You can't hide it from someone who knows what to look for (otherwise noone could ever receive it), but you can obfuscate it from a casual observer by spreading the power over a wide frequency band, spreading the necessary symbol energy in time (transmitting at a lower symbol rate and lower power), changing frequency and modulation according to a pseudorandom pattern, etc.
Not that I'm an expert at this, just some ideas off the top of my head.
That depends more on the modulation used. Yes, encrypted data looks random, but if you're sending it using a simple modulation scheme, it's very obvious that you're sending something, even if it looks like random data.
That could very well be true, but from what I gather from the wiki article, quantum teleportation doesn't seem to be a suitable candidate. It looks more like a method to transfer the state of a qubit to a remote location without physically transporting the qubit itself. Crucially, it involves sending the measured state via a classical channel (i.e. radio).
If I were the killer, I would certainly not give my DNA. They probably expect this. Those who refuse will of course receive special attention.
Well, I've never killed anyone and don't plan to, but I most certainly wouldn't give anyone my DNA unless forced to. If they want to force me, they have to treat me as a suspect, I have a right to legal counsel, etc. Why should I trust the police that they'll destroy everything afterwards? Wouldn't be the first time they lied.
They have to do their homework, find suspects, and then get THEM to provide a DNA sample. Taking shortcuts and asking everybody to provide one "voluntarily" is not acceptable, because at some point it won't be voluntary any more. The fact that the proper procedures take a lot of work is an insurance policy against just treating everybody as a suspect just in case.
Huh, did you mean to reply to a different comment?
Anyway, I completely agree with you. Without context, I'd say the reason to compare Windows to Linux in general, without naming a specific distro, is because even though the default configuration depends on the distro, you can customize most so much that you can end up with something very similar no matter where you start from. Of course, that's mostly just a "because I can" proof of concept thing - since I value my time and sanity, I'd always use the one where I have to do the least amount of tinkering to get to the desired state. For most people, that's probably either Debian, (K/X/L)Ubuntu, or Fedora, or maybe Arch or some RHEL clone.
As to what W8 does or doesn't support, I have no idea since I've never tried it. I agree that W7 was a big step forward from XP - with Cygwin, AutoHotkey for global/custom hotkeys, and VirtuaWin for virtual desktops, it's actually pretty usable. I guess MS will keep it alive for a long time like they did with the XP downgrade option that came with most Vista PCs. My biggest complaint is, funnily enough, hardware support. For anything other than graphics cards and maybe wifi chipsets, Linux tends to have better support these days. Certainly out of the box, but also after you hunt down each and every driver for Windows. Mostly because on Linux, everything that's really just the same hardware in a different box uses the same driver, while on Windows, every manufacturer has different drivers, each with their own set of annoying bugs. And Linux wins hands down for old and obscure hardware: The Windows driver for my SAS controller doesn't really support standby - the disk only spins up about 20s after resume, and sometimes not at all, causing a BSOD. I tried an Ubuntu live cd, and it worked flawlessly. If I didn't need Windows sometimes, I'd have thrown it out already. When the next paycheck comes along, I'll probably replace the loud and small 15k HDD with an SSD, and finally have some space to install Linux on this box.
BTW, and completely offtopic here: I'm greatly looking forward to the next time travelling story, I enjoy them a lot! I hope you have just as much fun writing them!
Did I say anything aginst that notion? Of course it is - that's just what I meant! "Linux the kernel" is just a part in the toolbox that is "Linux the desktop OS". You can change it all you want. You can even replace it, e.g. Debian kFreeBSD. Of course, nobody would call the result Linux, but since it uses the same userspace, it shares many if not most use-visible properties.
Yeah, I was imprecise in referring to "Linux" instead of "Free *NIX" in general. Or probably even just "monolithic, closed architecture" vs "open, flexible architecture". Typical GNU/Linux distros are just great examples of the latter.
That's because a rational discussion on the philosophical and design approaches of different user interfaces is not troll clickbait. The purpose of this article is to drive as many people here to flame about how Windows 8 is terrible and ugly and the worst OS in the world. And what do you know, take a look at first 5 posts below this one and you'll see exactly that.
Then it's a good thing we don't RTFA here. Slashdot - sticking it to greedy publishers since 1997!
Most artists don't like people messing with their artworks. So maybe the lack of customizability is a reflection of that. Linux OTOH is more like a mechanic's (or artist's, for that matter) toolbox. It usually looks like shit, but it can take a beating and still get the job done. And nobody is going to look at you funny if you rearrange things to your liking.
I can certainly understand the author. My home looks a lot more like a toolbox filled with random useful (and some not so useful) things than an architecture exhibit. And no matter how pretty they may look, I wouldn't want to live in one.
IF I got my "benefits" as salary, I could be much more efficient in my health care dollars than Insurance.
That only works as long as you never have to spend more on health care than you can afford. That's exactly what insurance is supposed to prevent - of course somebody who is never ill pays more than he ever receives. That's by design. It's also what prevents you from dying if you suddenly need some treatment that costs $HUGE_AMOUNT which you don't have.
Of course, this says nothing about stupid inefficiencies within the insurance system, like your example (and many others). But I would never ever want to be without health insurance.
The US have used their control quite a few times to unilaterally take down sites well outside their jurisdiction. Does that excuse the Saudi government's bigotry? Of course not. But two wrongs don't make a right.
I don't like the Taliban. At all. They're a bunch of lying, autocratic, misogynistic, terrorizing, hypocritical warlord assholes (and a whole lot of other choice words). Yet I wholly agree that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were huge, obvious mistakes from day one.
People tend to get fed up with oppressive governments rather quickly. Given time, they'll take care of them all by themselves, as history has shown repeatedly. Unless, of course, an invading army comes along, bombing your country back to the stone age. Then it's easy for the most hated dictator to call for unity against the common enemy.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, for really embedded stuff ARM is much better suited, becuase it is a lot simpler. I don't think it's possible or would make sense to squeeze the whole x86 legacy baggage into e.g. a tiny uC with a few KB SRAM, and still get decent performance and features. But I don't think this is where Intel is aiming at.
Is it really true that x86 is necessarily (substantially) less efficient than ARM? x86 instruction decoding has been a tiny part of the chip area for many years now. While it's probably relatively more on smaller processors like Atom, it's still small. The rest of the architecture is already RISC. Atom might still be a bad architecture, but I don't think it's fair to say x86 always causes that.
Also, there is exactly one x86 Android phone that I know of, and while its power efficiency isn't stellar, the difference is nowhere near 4x. From the benchmarks I've seen, it seems to be right in the middle of the pack. I'd really like to see the source for that claim.
The idea migt be shocking to you, but there's nothing wrong with having a union even when things are going well. When labor laws are being violated, you need a union that can draw support from and build upon an established base, so it is actually able to act. Just starting to build one then seems a tad late.
You need a union. It's the only way to fix this kind of thing.
This. So much this. You don't have to put up with this bullshit. And it will only get worse unless you fight back.
The UK government loves to outsource - when it inevitably goes wrong, they can just say 'wasn't us!'
But they are still the ones who made the laws requiring a filter to be present, or at least coerced the ISPs to install one. If I outsource an assassination to a hitman, does that mean I can somehow disclaim responsibility?
Which "reputation as an upholder of web freedom" would that be? The one based on them censoring Wikipedia for showing an album cover? Or the one where you have to hand over encryption keys or be thrown in jail?
I think I'd say the same thing if it happened where I live. Having a rapist get away is horrible, of course, but we need to realize that not every crime can be solved without turning to totalitarian methods, and some not even then. I consider letting some criminals run free an acceptable price for not living in a totalitarian society.
You can't hide it from someone who knows what to look for (otherwise noone could ever receive it), but you can obfuscate it from a casual observer by spreading the power over a wide frequency band, spreading the necessary symbol energy in time (transmitting at a lower symbol rate and lower power), changing frequency and modulation according to a pseudorandom pattern, etc.
Not that I'm an expert at this, just some ideas off the top of my head.
That depends more on the modulation used. Yes, encrypted data looks random, but if you're sending it using a simple modulation scheme, it's very obvious that you're sending something, even if it looks like random data.
That could very well be true, but from what I gather from the wiki article, quantum teleportation doesn't seem to be a suitable candidate. It looks more like a method to transfer the state of a qubit to a remote location without physically transporting the qubit itself. Crucially, it involves sending the measured state via a classical channel (i.e. radio).
If I were the killer, I would certainly not give my DNA. They probably expect this. Those who refuse will of course receive special attention.
Well, I've never killed anyone and don't plan to, but I most certainly wouldn't give anyone my DNA unless forced to. If they want to force me, they have to treat me as a suspect, I have a right to legal counsel, etc. Why should I trust the police that they'll destroy everything afterwards? Wouldn't be the first time they lied.
They have to do their homework, find suspects, and then get THEM to provide a DNA sample. Taking shortcuts and asking everybody to provide one "voluntarily" is not acceptable, because at some point it won't be voluntary any more. The fact that the proper procedures take a lot of work is an insurance policy against just treating everybody as a suspect just in case.
Huh, did you mean to reply to a different comment?
Anyway, I completely agree with you. Without context, I'd say the reason to compare Windows to Linux in general, without naming a specific distro, is because even though the default configuration depends on the distro, you can customize most so much that you can end up with something very similar no matter where you start from. Of course, that's mostly just a "because I can" proof of concept thing - since I value my time and sanity, I'd always use the one where I have to do the least amount of tinkering to get to the desired state. For most people, that's probably either Debian, (K/X/L)Ubuntu, or Fedora, or maybe Arch or some RHEL clone.
As to what W8 does or doesn't support, I have no idea since I've never tried it. I agree that W7 was a big step forward from XP - with Cygwin, AutoHotkey for global/custom hotkeys, and VirtuaWin for virtual desktops, it's actually pretty usable. I guess MS will keep it alive for a long time like they did with the XP downgrade option that came with most Vista PCs. My biggest complaint is, funnily enough, hardware support. For anything other than graphics cards and maybe wifi chipsets, Linux tends to have better support these days. Certainly out of the box, but also after you hunt down each and every driver for Windows. Mostly because on Linux, everything that's really just the same hardware in a different box uses the same driver, while on Windows, every manufacturer has different drivers, each with their own set of annoying bugs. And Linux wins hands down for old and obscure hardware: The Windows driver for my SAS controller doesn't really support standby - the disk only spins up about 20s after resume, and sometimes not at all, causing a BSOD. I tried an Ubuntu live cd, and it worked flawlessly. If I didn't need Windows sometimes, I'd have thrown it out already. When the next paycheck comes along, I'll probably replace the loud and small 15k HDD with an SSD, and finally have some space to install Linux on this box.
BTW, and completely offtopic here: I'm greatly looking forward to the next time travelling story, I enjoy them a lot! I hope you have just as much fun writing them!
Anyway...
Shit, when did you break into my home?
Damn. Then who is that woman on my couch ?
Your mom. And it's her couch, not yours.
Did I say anything aginst that notion? Of course it is - that's just what I meant! "Linux the kernel" is just a part in the toolbox that is "Linux the desktop OS". You can change it all you want. You can even replace it, e.g. Debian kFreeBSD. Of course, nobody would call the result Linux, but since it uses the same userspace, it shares many if not most use-visible properties.
Yeah, I was imprecise in referring to "Linux" instead of "Free *NIX" in general. Or probably even just "monolithic, closed architecture" vs "open, flexible architecture". Typical GNU/Linux distros are just great examples of the latter.
That's because a rational discussion on the philosophical and design approaches of different user interfaces is not troll clickbait. The purpose of this article is to drive as many people here to flame about how Windows 8 is terrible and ugly and the worst OS in the world. And what do you know, take a look at first 5 posts below this one and you'll see exactly that.
Then it's a good thing we don't RTFA here. Slashdot - sticking it to greedy publishers since 1997!
Most artists don't like people messing with their artworks. So maybe the lack of customizability is a reflection of that. Linux OTOH is more like a mechanic's (or artist's, for that matter) toolbox. It usually looks like shit, but it can take a beating and still get the job done. And nobody is going to look at you funny if you rearrange things to your liking.
I can certainly understand the author. My home looks a lot more like a toolbox filled with random useful (and some not so useful) things than an architecture exhibit. And no matter how pretty they may look, I wouldn't want to live in one.
Not sure what it is or what it costs, but I'm pretty sure I need at least two of them.
I hear the price will be approximately $999,999,999.99. Or free with a million year contract!
operagost gets the MS developer job. Congratulations! :-)
Wouldn't that rather be the M$ developer job?
IF I got my "benefits" as salary, I could be much more efficient in my health care dollars than Insurance.
That only works as long as you never have to spend more on health care than you can afford. That's exactly what insurance is supposed to prevent - of course somebody who is never ill pays more than he ever receives. That's by design. It's also what prevents you from dying if you suddenly need some treatment that costs $HUGE_AMOUNT which you don't have.
Of course, this says nothing about stupid inefficiencies within the insurance system, like your example (and many others). But I would never ever want to be without health insurance.
Apparently he was quoting lyrics.
And if those cannibals keep trying,
To sacrifice us to their pride,
They soon shall hear the bullets flying,
We'll shoot the generals on our own side.
Will I also be arrested now?
The US have used their control quite a few times to unilaterally take down sites well outside their jurisdiction. Does that excuse the Saudi government's bigotry? Of course not. But two wrongs don't make a right.
Real Programmers must spend their first year writing Pascal code [...]
Okay, I'll bite.
Delete your backups before any major change that might go wrong - it's just too boring otherwise!
I don't like the Taliban. At all. They're a bunch of lying, autocratic, misogynistic, terrorizing, hypocritical warlord assholes (and a whole lot of other choice words). Yet I wholly agree that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were huge, obvious mistakes from day one.
People tend to get fed up with oppressive governments rather quickly. Given time, they'll take care of them all by themselves, as history has shown repeatedly. Unless, of course, an invading army comes along, bombing your country back to the stone age. Then it's easy for the most hated dictator to call for unity against the common enemy.