Yes. The Southpark episode was much better even...at least that had a Tron reference!
Not news for nerds, geeks, or even someone outside of Australia. I mean what am I going to do...get a plane ticket to attend that party?!?! Let's be real here...
In addition to my reply above, I do agree that my posting was an overreaction. It may be true that some articles are a bit out of whack but in hindsight, not so much this one. Your point is well made and also commenters are supposed to admit when they had jumped to conclusion too fast...like me.
This is the last launch of the shuttle. It was supposed to be the height of tech, yet we lost two shuttle crews and two shuttles. Losing another person before the launch just adds another layer to the sadness about the launch. Not only will we lose the ability of manned flight for some time, but a bunch of very smart engineers will be out of work. And more abstract, we lose a bit of the shine on our national tech halo.
This is certainly a different take I really had not considered.
[...]wonder why you're complaining about it.
True there are much more irrelevant articles this topic could be considered more relevant and I do consider this more "on-the-fence" or appropriate now than before. I say I guess this was relevant and I believe that was more an expression of my frustration towards other articles poorly grouped with this.
Yes, I'll admit when I overreact, your point is completely valid and makes me question my initial perspective towards this posting...thanks.
This makes me sad, but I have to wonder how this is "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters."
I mean are we going to start reporting all tech related deaths in every scientific industry? Perhaps we as a Slashdot community need a dual feed or a different tag: interest to the scientific community vs. news that matters for a bigger picture...an "in-between" idle if you would.
I am not an ass, however, and this is a sad story and I do feel for the family, coworkers, and friends.
Yeah, that is the only possibility of what I was thinking that could ever be considered... I guess the best way to look at this, if we are looking for a hint of truth, would be for the programming of very efficient algorithms to still produce calculations... after all calculations can take millions of pico seconds and a certain block of code executed 1 million times might be 50 picoseconds better than another per iteration. It all adds up internally.
Efficiency of algorithms is a big deal even with some latency. If you can react one second earlier than your competitors... that may mean a lot of money!
Yeah I would call bullshit though if they were referring to signal in the actual fiber.
1,000 CPUs each doing one operation in 330ns as basically equivalent (in terms of net work done) to 1 CPU doing all 1,000 of those operations in 330ps apiece?
Haha, I was just saying that in reply to the comment I had posted as a reply above. 10^6 to 10^9 is the next jump in the verbal scale so even if they have to use 10,000 picoseconds as the basis, that is still better than dealing with the possibility of a real decimal representation in a nano-second. All the little guys add up after a while...
Well I bet it is measured in the 10's of thousands. Reading your comment made me realize you have some insight there...found this one out:
[...]10^12 1 picosecond ps One trillionth of a one second 1 ps: half-life of a bottom quark 4 ps: Time to execute one machine cycle by an IBM Silicon-Germanium transistor 1 ps, 10 ps, 100 ps
10^9 1 nanosecond ns One billionth of one second 1 ns: Time to execute one machine cycle by a 1 GHz microprocessor 1 ns: Light travels 12 inches (30 cm) 1 ns, 10 ns, 100 ns
10^6 1 microsecond s One millionth of one second sometimes also abbreviated sec 1 s: Time to execute one machine cycle by an Intel 80186 microprocessor[...] (source)
I suppose the reasons they use picoseconds is primarily: ---at the scale of a microchip, 3mm is quite the distance ---the jump for units of measurement goes from a picosecond to a nanosecond. We all know nanoseconds could definitely be a bit slow in today's world and real decimal values are messy, unfortunately this means a jump from 10^6 to 10^9. We all know that is quite the jump in magnitude.
To put this in perspective: ---A picosecond is roughly "330 picoseconds (approximately) – the time it takes a common 3.0 GHz computer CPU to add two integers" (source) ---To put that in perspective, since obviously a large large amount of data must be inputted and then "processed" in real time, but then they are concerned with ~350 cpu cycles? ---Even if a processor can do tons of these operations a second, the amount of data they are receiving must be ghastly! Makes me think of the patriot missile system and the round-off error tragedy that occurred. I am just hoping our market does not "experience the same fate". (I do understand it was all a fundamental bad programming situation before, but decisions that are made in picoseconds should be taken with some level of precaution.)
...And your comment is really an insight to what it means to make a database. In the real world, when presented with data, one will have missing entries, retarded conventions, and other plain stupidities that must be recorded due to crazy external forces.
You say use "UTC+/-x:xx", how do you know the primary key isn't something just like that? I am sure that primary table serves as a way to get anywhere with the most efficient way a database programming individual could proceed. (actually if someone finds out that would be pretty neat...)
You're comment is spot on, but considering the fundamental philosophy database admins, having a single expert or just a few people run this thing is required: you cannot get bogged down by managers, committee teams, and weekly progress reports.
No for this you need art. Great article and a beautiful read.
is a matter of contractual language between corporations, instead of the inherent right to a free internet.
And I say we give them incentive: usage fees. If I use more internet than my elderly next door neighbors, I do not mind paying for such. Treat it like a bill and then you'll see Comcast a bit more happy when customers start forking them money for Netflix subscriptions...
I think if it was usage based many companies would be more reluctant to see an open internet - as long as they get their compensation for bandwidth heavy users...
Yes! I totally thought there would be wildlife trying to tell us over the past weeks!
It is like they are just not showing their faces as if they just don't care! I mean if the oil spill was such a big deal, why didn't we see oil covered animals clambering to the shore for help?
They didn't have to be such wimps and die on the bottom.
I have no doubt that the decision was made by non-technical people, and at best they were advised by IT managers (who, in my experience, tend to talk a good game with non-techie folks but really don't have anywhere near the requisite knowledge to be the sole technical advisors in this role).
Thus is life. I mean once they had the risk tracking system in place and the 8 documents and signatures on it... well the plan is invincible. Plus with all the risk mitigation activities in place nothing could possibly go wrong. (And if it did well there is a plan to reduce the blame!)
Slashdot Mirror
Or conversely, if you send an SMS to a more elderly or less tech-savvy member of your family... when they ask you can simply point to the dictionary.
Now, if they have one of those cellphones with keyboards, however, they should be forming at least semi-coherent complete sentences.
Yes. The Southpark episode was much better even...at least that had a Tron reference!
Not news for nerds, geeks, or even someone outside of Australia. I mean what am I going to do...get a plane ticket to attend that party?!?! Let's be real here...
I honestly thought there was a tie with Ethisphere and Microsoft but after looking at every one of their board members and ties...
No, the website functions more reliably over there too...
In addition to my reply above, I do agree that my posting was an overreaction. It may be true that some articles are a bit out of whack but in hindsight, not so much this one. Your point is well made and also commenters are supposed to admit when they had jumped to conclusion too fast...like me.
This is the last launch of the shuttle. It was supposed to be the height of tech, yet we lost two shuttle crews and two shuttles. Losing another person before the launch just adds another layer to the sadness about the launch. Not only will we lose the ability of manned flight for some time, but a bunch of very smart engineers will be out of work. And more abstract, we lose a bit of the shine on our national tech halo.
This is certainly a different take I really had not considered.
[...]wonder why you're complaining about it.
True there are much more irrelevant articles this topic could be considered more relevant and I do consider this more "on-the-fence" or appropriate now than before. I say I guess this was relevant and I believe that was more an expression of my frustration towards other articles poorly grouped with this.
Yes, I'll admit when I overreact, your point is completely valid and makes me question my initial perspective towards this posting...thanks.
This makes me sad, but I have to wonder how this is "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters."
I mean are we going to start reporting all tech related deaths in every scientific industry? ...an "in-between" idle if you would.
Perhaps we as a Slashdot community need a dual feed or a different tag:
interest to the scientific community vs. news that matters for a bigger picture
I am not an ass, however, and this is a sad story and I do feel for the family, coworkers, and friends.
You may be have a name with "ubuntu" in it...but what you did was far from "humanity to others"
What is seen cannot be unseen.
Obviously it was a typo:
"[...] A picosecond is defined as roughly [...]"
But a typo none-the-less
You missed nanosecond: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picosecond
It is 1E-12
Your point remains however in the magnitude of the jump from nanoseconds to picoseconds.
any possible processing.
Yeah, that is the only possibility of what I was thinking that could ever be considered... I guess the best way to look at this, if we are looking for a hint of truth, would be for the programming of very efficient algorithms to still produce calculations... after all calculations can take millions of pico seconds and a certain block of code executed 1 million times might be 50 picoseconds better than another per iteration. It all adds up internally.
Efficiency of algorithms is a big deal even with some latency. If you can react one second earlier than your competitors... that may mean a lot of money!
Yeah I would call bullshit though if they were referring to signal in the actual fiber.
1,000 CPUs each doing one operation in 330ns as basically equivalent (in terms of net work done) to 1 CPU doing all 1,000 of those operations in 330ps apiece?
Haha, I was just saying that in reply to the comment I had posted as a reply above. 10^6 to 10^9 is the next jump in the verbal scale so even if they have to use 10,000 picoseconds as the basis, that is still better than dealing with the possibility of a real decimal representation in a nano-second. All the little guys add up after a while...
Well I bet it is measured in the 10's of thousands. Reading your comment made me realize you have some insight there...found this one out:
[...]10^12 1 picosecond ps One trillionth of a one second 1 ps: half-life of a bottom quark
4 ps: Time to execute one machine cycle by an IBM Silicon-Germanium transistor 1 ps, 10 ps, 100 ps
10^9 1 nanosecond ns One billionth of one second 1 ns: Time to execute one machine cycle by a 1 GHz microprocessor
1 ns: Light travels 12 inches (30 cm) 1 ns, 10 ns, 100 ns
10^6 1 microsecond s One millionth of one second sometimes also abbreviated sec
1 s: Time to execute one machine cycle by an Intel 80186 microprocessor[...]
(source)
I suppose the reasons they use picoseconds is primarily:
---at the scale of a microchip, 3mm is quite the distance
---the jump for units of measurement goes from a picosecond to a nanosecond. We all know nanoseconds could definitely be a bit slow in today's world and real decimal values are messy, unfortunately this means a jump from 10^6 to 10^9. We all know that is quite the jump in magnitude.
To put this in perspective:
---A picosecond is roughly "330 picoseconds (approximately) – the time it takes a common 3.0 GHz computer CPU to add two integers" (source)
---To put that in perspective, since obviously a large large amount of data must be inputted and then "processed" in real time, but then they are concerned with ~350 cpu cycles?
---Even if a processor can do tons of these operations a second, the amount of data they are receiving must be ghastly!
Makes me think of the patriot missile system and the round-off error tragedy that occurred. I am just hoping our market does not "experience the same fate". (I do understand it was all a fundamental bad programming situation before, but decisions that are made in picoseconds should be taken with some level of precaution.)
...And your comment is really an insight to what it means to make a database. In the real world, when presented with data, one will have missing entries, retarded conventions, and other plain stupidities that must be recorded due to crazy external forces.
You say use "UTC+/-x:xx", how do you know the primary key isn't something just like that? I am sure that primary table serves as a way to get anywhere with the most efficient way a database programming individual could proceed. (actually if someone finds out that would be pretty neat...)
You're comment is spot on, but considering the fundamental philosophy database admins, having a single expert or just a few people run this thing is required: you cannot get bogged down by managers, committee teams, and weekly progress reports.
No for this you need art. Great article and a beautiful read.
(...and needs more schooling)
is a matter of contractual language between corporations, instead of the inherent right to a free internet.
And I say we give them incentive: usage fees. If I use more internet than my elderly next door neighbors, I do not mind paying for such. Treat it like a bill and then you'll see Comcast a bit more happy when customers start forking them money for Netflix subscriptions...
I think if it was usage based many companies would be more reluctant to see an open internet - as long as they get their compensation for bandwidth heavy users...
They pay by usage why shouldn't we?!?!
Whoa whoa whoa... don't be bringin' those complicated hyperlinks around here!
I'll bet he is going back to school. Learn some basics.
Meh... those users should just wipe it and install Linux.
Ah an investment strategy? I guess they could just think of it as a "20 billion dollar CD". Brilliant!
Yes! I totally thought there would be wildlife trying to tell us over the past weeks!
It is like they are just not showing their faces as if they just don't care! I mean if the oil spill was such a big deal, why didn't we see oil covered animals clambering to the shore for help?
They didn't have to be such wimps and die on the bottom.
If I can just hack someones desktop and get whatever their credentials are, then the encryption really doesn't matter any more.
Where the title leads this...
Imagine the worst person you know with a PC...
For those particular users, well they already are infected even before the voting process starts...
Good point.
I have no doubt that the decision was made by non-technical people, and at best they were advised by IT managers (who, in my experience, tend to talk a good game with non-techie folks but really don't have anywhere near the requisite knowledge to be the sole technical advisors in this role).
Thus is life. I mean once they had the risk tracking system in place and the 8 documents and signatures on it... well the plan is invincible. Plus with all the risk mitigation activities in place nothing could possibly go wrong. (And if it did well there is a plan to reduce the blame!)
And it was a really good vote, too.
I guess that is why it beeped 3 times, right?