I also recall reports that thousands are dead because of the panic and rush of evacuation af Fukushima. IOW, the fear of radiation kills a lot more people than radiation itself. Meanwhile here in Finland, there are populated areas where the background radiation is stronger than some of the Fukushima evacuation areas. Still, people here have similarly irrational fear of radiation as everywhere else.
Tim Berners-Lee never intended URLs to be so visible or people to type them in manually so much; he though people would mostly follow hyperlinks from their home page. He said that if he had known people would deal with raw URLs and HTML so directly he would have made the syntax less cumbersome.
I don't see a lot of ways to simplify the URL structure without removing actual information. Today's URLs are only cumbersome because webmasters have chosen to do so, for example via the shitton of parameters sent by GET rather than POST.
If you want to access $content at $site, what's so cumbersome about http://$site/$content, and how are you going to put that any simpler? (Personally, I don't know what the// stand for, so they look superfluous to me:)
The problem is, there are a lot of sites and a lot of content, so you'll need more than just a few bits of information.
It's the same with almost everything in IT -- it reveals the complexity of the world in new ways. In the past, this complexity was filtered down to us by newspapers, TV and radio, friends, family members and so on, but today we have direct access to a lot more information, so we need things like search engines. But the cat's out of the bag with original sources, so I hope we continue with some kinds of URL for them.
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Gay people have always been able to reproduce, how fucking stupid are you anyways?
Can you read the part "by themselves"? I'm well aware of gay couples who have had children by various means, but this always involves a third party of the opposite sex (possibly via donated sperm or eggs). So the couple won't have genetic children together, which was the essential point here.
Citation needed, otherwise this is just a variant of the "let gays marry - and marrying dogs is next" argument.
Your comparison is seriously backwards, because gay couples and human-canine couples cannot reproduce by themselves. Besides, gay marriages are not heavy medical procedures. They are human conventions that would probably happen naturally anyway, were it not for specific restrictions on gay couples in many jurisdictions. By allowing gay marriages, we are making legislation simpler by removing these restrictions. Gay marriages don't take away anyone's rights and don't mean additional expenses for the society.
The GP asks: Should we allow heavy medical procedures that, while helping individuals, will make humanity more dependent on these procedures in the future? There's no easy answer.
In fact, it's a GM issue and we've already seen something like it with food production. GM promises to increase yields and make food cheaper, but at the same time it makes us more dependent on certain technology. Personally, I'm OK with GM foods, as long as we don't let them destroy current biodiversity, so we can always back up to the old ways if necessary. Something similar should apply here too.
If you had the choice, you would still be on cable. I know VDSL2 is a thing, but few DSL providers are offering it or ever plan to. Cable is generally where you upgrade to to get away from slow ADSL.
VDSL2 only works over short distances like under 1 km. I've only come across VDSL2 within buildings where you get fiber to the basement, and then they use the existing phone lines to get to the apartments.
Other than that, my experience has varied, and neither cable nor ADSL is the clear winner. Both are decent tech but have sometimes been ruined by bad service from the ISP. It's hard to do a proper comparison because you can only get cable from a single company. I imagine cable would win over long distances because it's actually been designed for high frequencies and bandwidths to begin with. OTOH, the usual complaint about cable is that capacity is shared between many subscribers, but that's not really the fault of the technology itself, as the capacity issue can come up at any stage within the ISP.
On the idea of CPU supporting Wifi, I first thought it would mean new hardware crypto accelerations, and that would be generally quite nice, not just for Wifi. Instead, Anandtech reports:
In their 15W and lower Core processors, Intel integrates the chipset into the same package as the CPU.... Intel also integrates a Wi-Fi MAC on the chipset
Definitely. As a STEM educator, the one "weird trick" I see that students can use to drastically improve their performance is simply memorizing key definitions and formulas. Problem-solving involves lots of guessing and checking ("trial-and-error"). Having key ingredients of their guess committed to memory speeds up the guessing process, which means you can arrive at the correct answer more quickly.
Back in school and university, I noticed I start to remember the values of key constants simply because I kept using them, even though they were always available in the exams. I think in/. we'd call this caching, and it's much better than simply memorizing things. Your memory/cache manager will remember things that come up often while you do the actual work, so you don't have to pre-select what's relevant. Of course, this also means you should keep your mind on the job.
Fictional heroes are generally quite average nice guys, presumably to give young watchers the idea that you too can be a hero, even if you're not particularly talented.
So that's why Tony Stark is a wife-beating drunkard...
He's a good example of the geek portrayal which I explained in another post. All that genius must be "averaged" by the bad personality, because we can't just have people that are too perfect.
Won't be missed. Never really was able to get past the foolishness of people who were supposedly really smart. Real smart folks just don't roll that way.
Real smart people are rarely portrayed in American film or TV. Fictional heroes are generally quite average nice guys, presumably to give young watchers the idea that you too can be a hero, even if you're not particularly talented. In some ways it's a worthy educational approach: you can't change your genes, but you can always work a little harder to become a better and more succesful person.
The problem is that some kinds of working hard are associated with certain innate abilities: if you study too hard, it means you're a geek, because no normal person would want to do that. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to all interests or talents. Athletes are rarely portrayed as genetic freaks, they are more often just average guys that train really hard.
I'm sure there will be laughing stock nerds in many a series to come. That's the way it has been in American media for as long as I can remember. BBT put these nerds in center stage, but didn't change anything essential about their portrayal.
No matter how smart the nerd characters are, they are always downplayed in the end so that the average guy can be the hero. Their intellectual abilities are often balanced by childish obsessions with comics etc. or being socially awkward. It doesn't help that in the recent decades, very different interests such as watching anime and programming have been conflated into the same "geek culture".
Agreed, but it looks like the consumerist-capitalist system depends on the existence of vices such as alcohol. Not simply because of the compression-decompression balance, but also to numb the minds that might otherwise threaten the system. Hundreds of years ago, coffee houses were regarded with suspicion due to their potential to fuel unwanted political activity, whereas pubs were the recommended way to turn off your mind after work. We've fixed that now by taking coffee to the workplace where it can serve the proper masters.
One major concern? Putting back the performance that previous solutions have lost as a result of Meltdown and Spectre.
It's like getting back the "A" grade you lost after they found out you've been cheating. Sure it's a major concern because now you'll actually have to work for your grade. Meanwhile, there are other students who didn't cheat in the first place. Guess which one I'm going to hire?
A lot of the GPUs *are* useless to gamers because they don't have video circuitry on them or video outputs. So they're pretty much only good for GPU computing.
That's like saying that CPUs are only good for CPU computing. I'm seeing a lot of "hidden" applications for GPU computing these days, e.g. video and photo editors that are taking advantage of OpenCL and related tech behind the scenes. As a sibling post mentions, things like SLI should be useful for gamers and others that only use GPUs to process what's immediately visible. Games might also offload physics modelling etc. to GPUs.
Today, it seems completely backwards that GPUs used to be limited for display only. Why build those nice parallel processor arrays if you can't actually use them for general computing? Fortunately, some clever people worked around those limitations by putting general data into image textures. Eventually, the industry gave in and formalized the idea into OpenCL and CUDA.
You can forget about cryptocurrencies and see all these companies talking about data mining and AI. Things like tensor cores neither for gaming nor cryptos. That said, such companies are probably not interested in random second-hand GPUs, but the point is that GPU computing is huge and professional and not going away.
Sata 2.5" is dying fast, nearly all new designs are M.2. Faster, better. Desktop PC and enterprise will be the last island.
SATA is much more universal than M.2. I like drives I can freely move between my desktops/servers and laptops. This was a welcome change from IDE/PATA, where smaller drives had smaller connectors, so you'd need adapters to put a 2.5'' drive into a desktop, for instance. I'm used to building small and silent Mini-ITX machines, and I've seen too many unnecessary distinctions between "large" desktop/server and "small" laptop/mini hardware.
I understand the benefits of newer tech, for example my latest laptop has NVMe SSD + SATA HDD, and smaller form factors are also nice for many mobile devices. But people are not going to switch overnight. There's also a general need for larger/slower/cheaper storage such as HDDs, are those going to switch to M.2 as well?
It boils down to fashion. Women's pants are tight. Men's pants are baggy.
IMHO, part of the reason for baggy pants on men is the insistence of some men to carry everything in their pockets. To me, carrying wallets and phones in trouser pockets is ugly, uncomfortable and unwieldy. If the pockets are large enough for me to move comfortably, it invariably means the phone etc. will wobble around and potentially hit things around me. Of course, there are legitimate reasons to have some loose space, such as anatomy and mobility, but that doesn't explain something like cargo pants (which IMHO are completely useless for their purpose).
I imagine the inchage of jeans is measured along the beltline, and the body is wider somewhere below that. So given the differences between men and women, the discrepancy between waist size and the nominal inchage is larger with women.
Slashdot Mirror
I also recall reports that thousands are dead because of the panic and rush of evacuation af Fukushima. IOW, the fear of radiation kills a lot more people than radiation itself. Meanwhile here in Finland, there are populated areas where the background radiation is stronger than some of the Fukushima evacuation areas. Still, people here have similarly irrational fear of radiation as everywhere else.
Tim Berners-Lee never intended URLs to be so visible or people to type them in manually so much; he though people would mostly follow hyperlinks from their home page. He said that if he had known people would deal with raw URLs and HTML so directly he would have made the syntax less cumbersome.
I don't see a lot of ways to simplify the URL structure without removing actual information. Today's URLs are only cumbersome because webmasters have chosen to do so, for example via the shitton of parameters sent by GET rather than POST.
If you want to access $content at $site, what's so cumbersome about http: //$site/$content, and how are you going to put that any simpler? (Personally, I don't know what the // stand for, so they look superfluous to me :)
The problem is, there are a lot of sites and a lot of content, so you'll need more than just a few bits of information.
It's the same with almost everything in IT -- it reveals the complexity of the world in new ways. In the past, this complexity was filtered down to us by newspapers, TV and radio, friends, family members and so on, but today we have direct access to a lot more information, so we need things like search engines. But the cat's out of the bag with original sources, so I hope we continue with some kinds of URL for them.
*throws chair*
In America, we run the White House via Twitter. In Soviet Russia, we run America via Twitter.
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
And why would you use a site when there's nice opensource software for downloading directly?
Gay people have always been able to reproduce, how fucking stupid are you anyways?
Can you read the part "by themselves"? I'm well aware of gay couples who have had children by various means, but this always involves a third party of the opposite sex (possibly via donated sperm or eggs). So the couple won't have genetic children together, which was the essential point here.
Citation needed, otherwise this is just a variant of the "let gays marry - and marrying dogs is next" argument.
Your comparison is seriously backwards, because gay couples and human-canine couples cannot reproduce by themselves. Besides, gay marriages are not heavy medical procedures. They are human conventions that would probably happen naturally anyway, were it not for specific restrictions on gay couples in many jurisdictions. By allowing gay marriages, we are making legislation simpler by removing these restrictions. Gay marriages don't take away anyone's rights and don't mean additional expenses for the society.
The GP asks: Should we allow heavy medical procedures that, while helping individuals, will make humanity more dependent on these procedures in the future? There's no easy answer.
In fact, it's a GM issue and we've already seen something like it with food production. GM promises to increase yields and make food cheaper, but at the same time it makes us more dependent on certain technology. Personally, I'm OK with GM foods, as long as we don't let them destroy current biodiversity, so we can always back up to the old ways if necessary. Something similar should apply here too.
If you had the choice, you would still be on cable. I know VDSL2 is a thing, but few DSL providers are offering it or ever plan to. Cable is generally where you upgrade to to get away from slow ADSL.
VDSL2 only works over short distances like under 1 km. I've only come across VDSL2 within buildings where you get fiber to the basement, and then they use the existing phone lines to get to the apartments.
Other than that, my experience has varied, and neither cable nor ADSL is the clear winner. Both are decent tech but have sometimes been ruined by bad service from the ISP. It's hard to do a proper comparison because you can only get cable from a single company. I imagine cable would win over long distances because it's actually been designed for high frequencies and bandwidths to begin with. OTOH, the usual complaint about cable is that capacity is shared between many subscribers, but that's not really the fault of the technology itself, as the capacity issue can come up at any stage within the ISP.
In their 15W and lower Core processors, Intel integrates the chipset into the same package as the CPU. ... Intel also integrates a Wi-Fi MAC on the chipset
Definitely. As a STEM educator, the one "weird trick" I see that students can use to drastically improve their performance is simply memorizing key definitions and formulas. Problem-solving involves lots of guessing and checking ("trial-and-error"). Having key ingredients of their guess committed to memory speeds up the guessing process, which means you can arrive at the correct answer more quickly.
Back in school and university, I noticed I start to remember the values of key constants simply because I kept using them, even though they were always available in the exams. I think in /. we'd call this caching, and it's much better than simply memorizing things. Your memory/cache manager will remember things that come up often while you do the actual work, so you don't have to pre-select what's relevant. Of course, this also means you should keep your mind on the job.
Fictional heroes are generally quite average nice guys, presumably to give young watchers the idea that you too can be a hero, even if you're not particularly talented.
So that's why Tony Stark is a wife-beating drunkard...
He's a good example of the geek portrayal which I explained in another post. All that genius must be "averaged" by the bad personality, because we can't just have people that are too perfect.
If it involves a lot of money, it sounds like a Hugh Grant.
Won't be missed. Never really was able to get past the foolishness of people who were supposedly really smart. Real smart folks just don't roll that way.
Real smart people are rarely portrayed in American film or TV. Fictional heroes are generally quite average nice guys, presumably to give young watchers the idea that you too can be a hero, even if you're not particularly talented. In some ways it's a worthy educational approach: you can't change your genes, but you can always work a little harder to become a better and more succesful person.
The problem is that some kinds of working hard are associated with certain innate abilities: if you study too hard, it means you're a geek, because no normal person would want to do that. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to all interests or talents. Athletes are rarely portrayed as genetic freaks, they are more often just average guys that train really hard.
I'm sure there will be laughing stock nerds in many a series to come. That's the way it has been in American media for as long as I can remember. BBT put these nerds in center stage, but didn't change anything essential about their portrayal.
No matter how smart the nerd characters are, they are always downplayed in the end so that the average guy can be the hero. Their intellectual abilities are often balanced by childish obsessions with comics etc. or being socially awkward. It doesn't help that in the recent decades, very different interests such as watching anime and programming have been conflated into the same "geek culture".
http://iki.fi/teknohog/music/c...
Agreed, but it looks like the consumerist-capitalist system depends on the existence of vices such as alcohol. Not simply because of the compression-decompression balance, but also to numb the minds that might otherwise threaten the system. Hundreds of years ago, coffee houses were regarded with suspicion due to their potential to fuel unwanted political activity, whereas pubs were the recommended way to turn off your mind after work. We've fixed that now by taking coffee to the workplace where it can serve the proper masters.
Worked really well for teenage mothers. I'll drink to that!
One major concern? Putting back the performance that previous solutions have lost as a result of Meltdown and Spectre.
It's like getting back the "A" grade you lost after they found out you've been cheating. Sure it's a major concern because now you'll actually have to work for your grade. Meanwhile, there are other students who didn't cheat in the first place. Guess which one I'm going to hire?
I wonder what is possible when chaining all these tensor cores together in a block-chain, super computer, or bot-net...
Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of those? More importantly, though, are they Turing complete?
Most dangerous thing with lithion ion on ships is getting rid of the generated steam and the pressure it generates.
A nice steam turbine will turn that bug into a feature.
A lot of the GPUs *are* useless to gamers because they don't have video circuitry on them or video outputs. So they're pretty much only good for GPU computing.
That's like saying that CPUs are only good for CPU computing. I'm seeing a lot of "hidden" applications for GPU computing these days, e.g. video and photo editors that are taking advantage of OpenCL and related tech behind the scenes. As a sibling post mentions, things like SLI should be useful for gamers and others that only use GPUs to process what's immediately visible. Games might also offload physics modelling etc. to GPUs.
Today, it seems completely backwards that GPUs used to be limited for display only. Why build those nice parallel processor arrays if you can't actually use them for general computing? Fortunately, some clever people worked around those limitations by putting general data into image textures. Eventually, the industry gave in and formalized the idea into OpenCL and CUDA.
You can forget about cryptocurrencies and see all these companies talking about data mining and AI. Things like tensor cores neither for gaming nor cryptos. That said, such companies are probably not interested in random second-hand GPUs, but the point is that GPU computing is huge and professional and not going away.
Sata 2.5" is dying fast, nearly all new designs are M.2. Faster, better. Desktop PC and enterprise will be the last island.
SATA is much more universal than M.2. I like drives I can freely move between my desktops/servers and laptops. This was a welcome change from IDE/PATA, where smaller drives had smaller connectors, so you'd need adapters to put a 2.5'' drive into a desktop, for instance. I'm used to building small and silent Mini-ITX machines, and I've seen too many unnecessary distinctions between "large" desktop/server and "small" laptop/mini hardware.
I understand the benefits of newer tech, for example my latest laptop has NVMe SSD + SATA HDD, and smaller form factors are also nice for many mobile devices. But people are not going to switch overnight. There's also a general need for larger/slower/cheaper storage such as HDDs, are those going to switch to M.2 as well?
It boils down to fashion. Women's pants are tight. Men's pants are baggy.
IMHO, part of the reason for baggy pants on men is the insistence of some men to carry everything in their pockets. To me, carrying wallets and phones in trouser pockets is ugly, uncomfortable and unwieldy. If the pockets are large enough for me to move comfortably, it invariably means the phone etc. will wobble around and potentially hit things around me. Of course, there are legitimate reasons to have some loose space, such as anatomy and mobility, but that doesn't explain something like cargo pants (which IMHO are completely useless for their purpose).
I imagine the inchage of jeans is measured along the beltline, and the body is wider somewhere below that. So given the differences between men and women, the discrepancy between waist size and the nominal inchage is larger with women.