I wonder what would happen if the surfaces are fractal, or as close an approximation as physical matter can achieve.
With fractals, the shape of the surface depends on the scale of the observer. So, in this case, the gap between the surfaces would also depend on the scale of the observer (in this case the wave). Since the relationship between shape and scale is non-linear, it should be possible to construct a fractal in which a given wavelength is allowed but some shorter wavelength is not.
Surely a better design is to produce a series of very small, highly specialized, very fast cores on a single piece of silicon, and then have a layer on top of that which makes it appear to be an x86, ARM or whatever.
One reason for having a bunch of specialist cores is that you don't have one core per task (GPU, CPU or whatever), but rather one core per operation type (which means you can eliminate redundancy).
Another reason is that having a bunch of mini cores should make the hardware per mini core much simpler, which should improve reliability and speed.
Finally, such an approach means that the base layers can be the same whether the top layer is x86, ARM, PPC, Sparc or a walrus. NVidia could be free to innovate the stuff that matters, without having to care what architecture was fashionable that week for the market NVidia happens to care about.
This is not their approach, from everything I'm seeing. They seem to be wanting to build tightly integrated system-on-a-chip cores, rather than having a generic SoaC and an emulation layer. I would have thought this harder to architect, slower to develop and more costly to verify, but NVidia aren't idiots. They'll have looked at the options and chosen the one they're following for business and/or technical reasons they have carefully studied.
If I was as bright as them, why is it that they have the big cash and I only get the 4 digit UID? Ergo, their reasoning is probably very sound and very rational, and if presented with my thoughts could very likely produce an excellent counter-argument to show why their option is logically superior and will produce better returns on their investments.
The question then changes as follows: What reasoning could they have come up with to design a SoaC unit the way they are? If it's the "best" option, although demonstrably not the only option, then what makes it the best, and what is it the best at?
There are photos on the web of images grabbed from the optic nerve of a cat. They're old, but the description given (can barely see the full moon on a cloudless night) seems to compare well with those early experiments in image capture, and image capture is much easier than image injection (which is what these guys are doing).
When I was in that age range, schools were building eggmobiles (machines that can carry raw eggs over an obstacle course at high speed) and competing in the Granada Power Game (the contest I entered involved dropping a coin exactly half-way along a track, again at high speed).
Children not much older were competing quite successfully at contests such as the Micromouse tournament.
This is not to say that kids these days would be satisfied with such problems today, but this would seem a logical starting point as we know that it is possible for extremely young kids to really understand the mechanics and to really construct such devices with minimal outside help.
The question is, how to upgrade these sorts of problems to handle the expectations modern kids place on themselves, and the much more advanced technology required to keep them interested.
One possible starting point is to use K'Nex or Lego Mindstorms to produce a skeletal robot which the kids can then add to. The problem with this is that then the real logic part, the part they need to really solve, is the part that is solved for them.
Another option is to use the basic concept of the original problems, using the computer to provide steering rather than motive power. This keeps the mechanics simple enough for the kids, but allows for some very sophisticated logic behind the steering.
(For example, you could have a simple eggmobile that must avoid barriers with lights on top, using light-sensitive diodes and a simple programmable board for the control system.)
In other news, Aesop was unavailable for comment, Hans Christian Anderson is too busy being sued by the MPAA for street performances, and Shakespere may owe SCO royalties.
The use of screen shots (and indeed printouts) from computers in legal trials in the UK in the 1990s resulted in a body of case law in which it was pointed out that anyone can make a computer show anything you like, that doesn't mean the data is valid.
(This case law was frequently as a result of a popular defense tactic against the Poll Tax. Just because a printout says X owes Y amount doesn't mean that this is true. You can't cross-examine a computer.)
It would be good if this argument made its way into the US legal system, but for all the flak that UK judges get for ignorance, I suspect they are smarter when it comes to technology.
-60F is cold. -60C is damn cold. (CO2 freezes not much below this.) Mind you, server overload might be damn useful then - use the CPU heat to melt through the ice and escape.
I am waiting for the discovery of intelligent life on Earth. (There is some intelligent life on Slashdot, but I'm convinced that is from aliens breaking into the Intertubes via SETI@Home.)
I thought an RIAA lawyer WAS the result of going over. Or is it the result of a Greater Undead being possessed by a Greater Demon? (They do have certain similarities to Rolemaster's Black Reavers...)
Knight Lore and Elite were definitely revolutionary, ground-breaking games. Revs could be considered in that category, as one of the first racing sims as opposed to Pole Position-style racing games.
Oh, there were MANY games from back then that completely changed the way games were looked at. Some were from the US (Sir Tech's Wizardry I, the infamous Dungeon), some were from the UK.
I doubt there would be any MMORGs today if there had been no Essex MUD or AberMUD. The first really introduced large-scale networked gaming, the second introduced the idea that such games need not be pure text. Everything after is derived with more compute power but little or no actual innovation.
What they MEAN to say is: we never came up with a design, we don't know what it's doing (besides fiendishly difficult quadratic equations) and we want to pass this off as deliberate so we get our next grant cheque.
...is not nearly as much of a problem as the proliferation of noise with respect to signal. In the end, whatever survives is whatever is dominant (ie: the most successful in the environment) which is not the same as whatever is actually useful. If noise is the dominant element, then noise is what will endure and the signal will die. It will be out-competed. Basic darwinism.
THIS is the pollution, not the persistence of information. There's probably not much more real information being produced now than there was at any time in the Age of Enlightenment, so it really doesn't matter if it persists. It'd be great if it persisted better. The problem is the creeping crud. This isn't about freedom to express oneself, since that is also information (sometimes too much information, in another sense of the term). Nobody claims a Nigerian scammer is expressing themselves. Well, if you DO claim that, I've a few billion in gold that could be yours if you just supply me with some information first.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what would happen if the surfaces are fractal, or as close an approximation as physical matter can achieve.
With fractals, the shape of the surface depends on the scale of the observer. So, in this case, the gap between the surfaces would also depend on the scale of the observer (in this case the wave). Since the relationship between shape and scale is non-linear, it should be possible to construct a fractal in which a given wavelength is allowed but some shorter wavelength is not.
Give kindergartners large enough hammers and they will.
Surely a better design is to produce a series of very small, highly specialized, very fast cores on a single piece of silicon, and then have a layer on top of that which makes it appear to be an x86, ARM or whatever.
One reason for having a bunch of specialist cores is that you don't have one core per task (GPU, CPU or whatever), but rather one core per operation type (which means you can eliminate redundancy).
Another reason is that having a bunch of mini cores should make the hardware per mini core much simpler, which should improve reliability and speed.
Finally, such an approach means that the base layers can be the same whether the top layer is x86, ARM, PPC, Sparc or a walrus. NVidia could be free to innovate the stuff that matters, without having to care what architecture was fashionable that week for the market NVidia happens to care about.
This is not their approach, from everything I'm seeing. They seem to be wanting to build tightly integrated system-on-a-chip cores, rather than having a generic SoaC and an emulation layer. I would have thought this harder to architect, slower to develop and more costly to verify, but NVidia aren't idiots. They'll have looked at the options and chosen the one they're following for business and/or technical reasons they have carefully studied.
If I was as bright as them, why is it that they have the big cash and I only get the 4 digit UID? Ergo, their reasoning is probably very sound and very rational, and if presented with my thoughts could very likely produce an excellent counter-argument to show why their option is logically superior and will produce better returns on their investments.
The question then changes as follows: What reasoning could they have come up with to design a SoaC unit the way they are? If it's the "best" option, although demonstrably not the only option, then what makes it the best, and what is it the best at?
Well, where's the more detailed reference in the comments, then? :)
Slashdot covered the story at the time, but I don't have the URL handy.
There are photos on the web of images grabbed from the optic nerve of a cat. They're old, but the description given (can barely see the full moon on a cloudless night) seems to compare well with those early experiments in image capture, and image capture is much easier than image injection (which is what these guys are doing).
What, ponder that? :)
With the way the US keeps changing the definition of copyright, don't be so sure!
You're right. I say that the VMS architecture for Linux should be revived and included in the mainstream kernel.
When I was in that age range, schools were building eggmobiles (machines that can carry raw eggs over an obstacle course at high speed) and competing in the Granada Power Game (the contest I entered involved dropping a coin exactly half-way along a track, again at high speed).
Children not much older were competing quite successfully at contests such as the Micromouse tournament.
This is not to say that kids these days would be satisfied with such problems today, but this would seem a logical starting point as we know that it is possible for extremely young kids to really understand the mechanics and to really construct such devices with minimal outside help.
The question is, how to upgrade these sorts of problems to handle the expectations modern kids place on themselves, and the much more advanced technology required to keep them interested.
One possible starting point is to use K'Nex or Lego Mindstorms to produce a skeletal robot which the kids can then add to. The problem with this is that then the real logic part, the part they need to really solve, is the part that is solved for them.
Another option is to use the basic concept of the original problems, using the computer to provide steering rather than motive power. This keeps the mechanics simple enough for the kids, but allows for some very sophisticated logic behind the steering.
(For example, you could have a simple eggmobile that must avoid barriers with lights on top, using light-sensitive diodes and a simple programmable board for the control system.)
The pretzel was taken out and shot by secret service officials.
In other news, Aesop was unavailable for comment, Hans Christian Anderson is too busy being sued by the MPAA for street performances, and Shakespere may owe SCO royalties.
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
I fink so, Brain, but why do Slashdotters paint their toenails pink after eating custard?
The use of screen shots (and indeed printouts) from computers in legal trials in the UK in the 1990s resulted in a body of case law in which it was pointed out that anyone can make a computer show anything you like, that doesn't mean the data is valid.
(This case law was frequently as a result of a popular defense tactic against the Poll Tax. Just because a printout says X owes Y amount doesn't mean that this is true. You can't cross-examine a computer.)
It would be good if this argument made its way into the US legal system, but for all the flak that UK judges get for ignorance, I suspect they are smarter when it comes to technology.
And WAIS. Real Men use Gopher and WAIS. And Archie. Real Men use Gopher and WAIS and Archie. And the Spanish Inquisition.
-60F is cold. -60C is damn cold. (CO2 freezes not much below this.) Mind you, server overload might be damn useful then - use the CPU heat to melt through the ice and escape.
I am waiting for the discovery of intelligent life on Earth. (There is some intelligent life on Slashdot, but I'm convinced that is from aliens breaking into the Intertubes via SETI@Home.)
The question is whether your blog can survive Slashdot. That would seem a greater challenge still.
...whether they find any ice, but whether they find any gin.
I thought an RIAA lawyer WAS the result of going over. Or is it the result of a Greater Undead being possessed by a Greater Demon? (They do have certain similarities to Rolemaster's Black Reavers...)
...a Z Transform, a Laplace Transform or a Fast Fourier Transform?
Knight Lore and Elite were definitely revolutionary, ground-breaking games. Revs could be considered in that category, as one of the first racing sims as opposed to Pole Position-style racing games.
Oh, there were MANY games from back then that completely changed the way games were looked at. Some were from the US (Sir Tech's Wizardry I, the infamous Dungeon), some were from the UK.
I doubt there would be any MMORGs today if there had been no Essex MUD or AberMUD. The first really introduced large-scale networked gaming, the second introduced the idea that such games need not be pure text. Everything after is derived with more compute power but little or no actual innovation.
Right On, Commander.
What they MEAN to say is: we never came up with a design, we don't know what it's doing (besides fiendishly difficult quadratic equations) and we want to pass this off as deliberate so we get our next grant cheque.
...is not nearly as much of a problem as the proliferation of noise with respect to signal. In the end, whatever survives is whatever is dominant (ie: the most successful in the environment) which is not the same as whatever is actually useful. If noise is the dominant element, then noise is what will endure and the signal will die. It will be out-competed. Basic darwinism.
THIS is the pollution, not the persistence of information. There's probably not much more real information being produced now than there was at any time in the Age of Enlightenment, so it really doesn't matter if it persists. It'd be great if it persisted better. The problem is the creeping crud. This isn't about freedom to express oneself, since that is also information (sometimes too much information, in another sense of the term). Nobody claims a Nigerian scammer is expressing themselves. Well, if you DO claim that, I've a few billion in gold that could be yours if you just supply me with some information first.