If I ran an ISP, I'd do it voluntarily. Why do we need laws to do the (TM)Right Thing(/TM)?
Because of the bandwidth required(700 1.5Mbit cable modems), I would surmise the source wasn't trojaned computers. It sounds to me like someone physically broke into a backbone like Sprint(655Mbit I think) and spoofed multiple IP sources to make it look like a distributed DoS. Computer security is only as strong as the weakest link, and in many peoples cases, it is physical proximity.
On a lighter side, maybe Distributed.net has an alter-ego and the official client is THE trojan. I think 40K people across the internet have enough bandwidth to do it!
note:please laugh, because I wouldn't seriously allege that d.net would do something like this, unless in a freakish incident of chaos I am right, then please credit me.
digitalunity has spoken. many have ignored. karma has suffered.
This is not just a demo of a new product! This is demonstration of leading edge technology(.18u with copper interconnects) for their market segment. This also shows that their huge loans for building Fab30 in dresden paid off.
I might be wrong, but whether in volume or not wouldn't this be the first real product to come off the Dresden fab?
It would seem they have learned a valuable lesson: don't flaunt chips that don't exist. I got burned real bad last year when everyone thought they were doing so well, and they were. It was just at the expense of revenue, which hurt a lot of stock holders(like myself). Before the K7(erm, 'scuse me. Athlon) was released, I as a personal investor tried to find about it as much as possible. Info was out there, but not too much was said until they taped out. Now they don't really warn us, they just spring new products on us and that is good!
this isn't that cool.
on
RNA Computer
·
· Score: 1
And I'll tell you why.
Because many are commenting about its use in d.net's computing effort, I'll tell you a major flaw in this. Although the RNA and a d.net's client both are trying all possible combinations, d.net can expand its list of possible combinations on the fly. Example: d.net's RC5 client started without internet access will assemble a list of possible keys(1*2^32 keys) and then test them. I will think this is really cool when a cell given basic information about a problem(the rules of knights & the size of the board) and then determines what the possible placements are, then decides which ones are valid.
Yes, OpenGL is not a program. It is an API. Forking an API is just as bad as forking the linux kernel(or any OS); It leads to bad things. Mesa and certified OpenGL implementations are in essence two forks of the same API. You may say that the function calls are the same, or the visual effects are the same. But that doesn't matter, there are features Mesa doesn't support. Forking OpenGL would fragment the UNIX graphics community and create havoc for those of us who have real work to do.
One thing I really like about OpenGL is that there have only been 3 versions. v1.0, v1.1, and v1.2. That makes it pretty easy to pick your applications and your implementations. SGI has done the (TM)"Right Thing" and I believe will lead to a much better, much more compatible Mesa and accelereted OpenGL implementations created by many people.
Look at the results: Companies can now release the source to their Windoze GL implementations, leading to integration of accelerated hardware support possibly being implemented in Mesa. I doubt this will change the OpenGL trademarking or certification procedures, hence Mesa will still not be certified. However, Mesa can finally be really compliant while supporting in a single code tree all hardware whose respective companies choose to release source! A very good thing.
If you haven't noticed, they have been working non-stop for 4 1/2 years. With no IPO money. At the top, it says they spent a sum of money 'well north' of $100M. When sales pick up their debts, they will be a privately held, debt free fabless R&D company. How many of those do you see around?
Doubtful. If they really want to keep this tight, they won't charge you with software piracy. Under US code Title 18, section 3592(B) they can put someone to death for treason(espionage in this case). According to this title, there are many factors determining appropriateness of death sentence. I would doubt that they would ever complete this sentence but intentionaly passing out the source code to something like this could definitely be cause for a stiff jail sentence.
I remember reading the rules for these matches and one of the rules says that flying projectile weapons must be tethered. So a gun wouldn't work.
Still, I see no thrill in the idea of me walking under my I-5 underpass and getting cut off at the knees. That would seriously impede my beer runs while I code!
I was saddened by the movie. They just had to go and pull the plug on the super-paranoid over-powered sentient computer. They always do that.
But I would imagine that there will come a time when a holistic learning engine could learn to teach itself new skills. Because of the nature of the field, I would say that such AI programming would(will?) stem from open source code. Hence, open source will soon be not one step behind, but the leading edge in technology.
I think maybe though HAL just needed some prozac or a good budwiser to take the edge off, then maybe he wouldn't have been so evil.
Maybe it's my paranoid hacker mind, but I find it rather odd that HAL's birthday is so near to IBM's decision to support linux. I think 2001 was really a documentary. No, really, it was. Follow me on this...
HAL - next character in alphabet for each letter is: IBM
Isn't it obvious. IBM was celebrating HAL's birthday by supporting Linux, and we all know HAL 9000's boot Linux. I think the movie was made in the future and sent into the past.
and I even took my medication this morning:) hehe mike thehackernextdoor
I can't remember the exact benchmark numbers as I got one second hand, but I remember my ATI Graphics Pro Turbo. It was freakin' fast(TM)(C). It was the one with the Mach64 GX with 4mb VRAM, and at the time, that was a bunch, and the standard was real-slow dram, 1 or 2 MB.
Yes, yes, it's a really old card. But it was The-Sh*t in its day!
I personally appreciate having big software announcements on slashdot. I check slashdot more often than freshmeat and don't mind being notified of something big like that. So how 'bout you just sit there, not like the software announcement, and keep it to yerself. 'kay?
If they suck so bad at making processors and are so damn good at manufacturing, maybe we should get apple to make AMD's chips. Think, a.15u Athlon right now. Immediatley scalable to probably 1Ghz. They'd trample all over intel.
unity ps:the only way to fix it is to flush it all away
I don't play slots. As I also don't play poker, blackjack, or drink alcohol. It's immoral.:) unity ps:the only way to fix it is to flush it all away. psps::( I just ran out of southern comfort. damn
I use slackware, and have been using a glibc2.1 beta for quite some time now. On the abouts of 3 months. This new beta isn't that big of news, 'specially since the beta I've got works perfect and I have never had a problem. I figure this new beta is better, though. It has to be, the version went up:)
AMD has two pricing segments, OEM's and retail customers. The differentiation between Athlon chips is their speed, their cache size, and cache speed. The cache runs at some division of core speed. Right now, they're releasing Athlons with 512K running at half core speed. The architecture was designed to allow for varying levels of performance with price savings for low performance units.
The lower priced Athlons are not crippled, they're slow because they have smaller, slower cache, likely clocked to 1/3 core speed. The high end version, called the Athlon Ultra will have larger cache expected to run at 2/3 or even full speed, and shipment is expected with 1MB or more of cache.
And yes, Yahoo! is in denial that the Athlon is faster(THINK PR:). Benchmarks on the Athlon are consistently higher than anything Intel has produced as of yet.
One thing that Yahoo!News declined to mention is that Intel, with the new Coppermine core is not expected to be significantly more efficient per clock cycle than the current PIII cores. The.18u process will allow for lower power, higher clockable units.
I must congratulate AMD on a job well done. I'm not an AMD evangelist, just a gamer who demands the highest level of performance.
Of course Intel is cutting their prices. They need to provide some motivation for people to buy the P-III. Don't forget, AMD did the exact same thing with the K6. If you have an inferior product, you need to make it cheap to get people to buy it.
But i wouldn't expect AMD to follow suit. Athlon was not designed to be cheap. It was designed to set the performance standard for all other market contenders. I wouldn't expect them to lower their prices for the simple reason that people will pay the premium for a superior product. Intel proved that with the P-II, always more expensive than AMD but overall a better product.
Its more likely that the data was downloaded during the beta period, and wasn't uploaded until after the new databases were zeroed and online. This makes a lot of sense because those damn intel 386's were so slow.
digitalunity the only way to fix it is to flush it all away...
Slashdot Mirror
If I ran an ISP, I'd do it voluntarily. Why do we need laws to do the (TM)Right Thing(/TM)?
Because of the bandwidth required(700 1.5Mbit cable modems), I would surmise the source wasn't trojaned computers. It sounds to me like someone physically broke into a backbone like Sprint(655Mbit I think) and spoofed multiple IP sources to make it look like a distributed DoS. Computer security is only as strong as the weakest link, and in many peoples cases, it is physical proximity.
On a lighter side, maybe Distributed.net has an alter-ego and the official client is THE trojan. I think 40K people across the internet have enough bandwidth to do it!
note:please laugh, because I wouldn't seriously allege that d.net would do something like this, unless in a freakish incident of chaos I am right, then please credit me.
digitalunity has spoken. many have ignored. karma has suffered.
This is not just a demo of a new product! This is demonstration of leading edge technology(.18u with copper interconnects) for their market segment. This also shows that their huge loans for building Fab30 in dresden paid off.
I might be wrong, but whether in volume or not wouldn't this be the first real product to come off the Dresden fab?
It would seem they have learned a valuable lesson: don't flaunt chips that don't exist. I got burned real bad last year when everyone thought they were doing so well, and they were. It was just at the expense of revenue, which hurt a lot of stock holders(like myself). Before the K7(erm, 'scuse me. Athlon) was released, I as a personal investor tried to find about it as much as possible. Info was out there, but not too much was said until they taped out. Now they don't really warn us, they just spring new products on us and that is good!
And I'll tell you why.
Because many are commenting about its use in d.net's computing effort, I'll tell you a major flaw in this. Although the RNA and a d.net's client both are trying all possible combinations, d.net can expand its list of possible combinations on the fly.
Example: d.net's RC5 client started without internet access will assemble a list of possible keys(1*2^32 keys) and then test them.
I will think this is really cool when a cell given basic information about a problem(the rules of knights & the size of the board) and then determines what the possible placements are, then decides which ones are valid.
Then, it will be ready for real computing.
Yes, OpenGL is not a program. It is an API. Forking an API is just as bad as forking the linux kernel(or any OS); It leads to bad things. Mesa and certified OpenGL implementations are in essence two forks of the same API. You may say that the function calls are the same, or the visual effects are the same. But that doesn't matter, there are features Mesa doesn't support. Forking OpenGL would fragment the UNIX graphics community and create havoc for those of us who have real work to do.
One thing I really like about OpenGL is that there have only been 3 versions. v1.0, v1.1, and v1.2. That makes it pretty easy to pick your applications and your implementations. SGI has done the (TM)"Right Thing" and I believe will lead to a much better, much more compatible Mesa and accelereted OpenGL implementations created by many people.
Look at the results:
Companies can now release the source to their Windoze GL implementations, leading to integration of accelerated hardware support possibly being implemented in Mesa. I doubt this will change the OpenGL trademarking or certification procedures, hence Mesa will still not be certified. However, Mesa can finally be really compliant while supporting in a single code tree all hardware whose respective companies choose to release source! A very good thing.
If you haven't noticed, they have been working non-stop for 4 1/2 years. With no IPO money. At the top, it says they spent a sum of money 'well north' of $100M. When sales pick up their debts, they will be a privately held, debt free fabless R&D company. How many of those do you see around?
Doubtful. If they really want to keep this tight, they won't charge you with software piracy. Under US code Title 18, section 3592(B) they can put someone to death for treason(espionage in this case). According to this title, there are many factors determining appropriateness of death sentence. I would doubt that they would ever complete this sentence but intentionaly passing out the source code to something like this could definitely be cause for a stiff jail sentence.
Sleep well knowing they have that power...
ps: IANAL, but I play one in law class.
I remember reading the rules for these matches and one of the rules says that flying projectile weapons must be tethered. So a gun wouldn't work.
Still, I see no thrill in the idea of me walking under my I-5 underpass and getting cut off at the knees. That would seriously impede my beer runs while I code!
If I could administer drugs to my computer, it would not be acid. Hell no...
It'd smoke crystal, then maybe pov-ray would go faster!
I was saddened by the movie. They just had to go and pull the plug on the super-paranoid over-powered sentient computer. They always do that.
But I would imagine that there will come a time when a holistic learning engine could learn to teach itself new skills. Because of the nature of the field, I would say that such AI programming would(will?) stem from open source code. Hence, open source will soon be not one step behind, but the leading edge in technology.
I think maybe though HAL just needed some prozac or a good budwiser to take the edge off, then maybe he wouldn't have been so evil.
Maybe it's my paranoid hacker mind, but I find it rather odd that HAL's birthday is so near to IBM's decision to support linux. I think 2001 was really a documentary. No, really, it was. Follow me on this...
:) hehe
HAL - next character in alphabet for each letter is:
IBM
Isn't it obvious. IBM was celebrating HAL's birthday by supporting Linux, and we all know HAL 9000's boot Linux. I think the movie was made in the future and sent into the past.
and I even took my medication this morning
mike
thehackernextdoor
I can't remember the exact benchmark numbers as I got one second hand, but I remember my ATI Graphics Pro Turbo. It was freakin' fast(TM)(C). It was the one with the Mach64 GX with 4mb VRAM, and at the time, that was a bunch, and the standard was real-slow dram, 1 or 2 MB.
Yes, yes, it's a really old card. But it was The-Sh*t in its day!
I personally appreciate having big software announcements on slashdot. I check slashdot more often than freshmeat and don't mind being notified of something big like that. So how 'bout you just sit there, not like the software announcement, and keep it to yerself. 'kay?
I don't play slots. As I also don't play poker, blackjack, or drink alcohol. It's immoral. :)
:( I just ran out of southern comfort. damn
unity
ps:the only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
psps:
freakin' html.
If they suck so bad at making processors and are so damn good at manufacturing, maybe we should get apple to make AMD's chips. Think, a .15u Athlon right now. Immediatley scalable to probably 1Ghz. They'd trample all over intel.
unity
ps:the only way to fix it is to flush it all away
I don't play slots. As I also don't play poker, blackjack, or drink alcohol. It's immoral. :) unity ps:the only way to fix it is to flush it all away. psps: :( I just ran out of southern comfort. damn
I use slackware, and have been using a glibc2.1 beta for quite some time now. On the abouts of 3 months. This new beta isn't that big of news, 'specially since the beta I've got works perfect and I have never had a problem. I figure this new beta is better, though. It has to be, the version went up :)
AMD has two pricing segments, OEM's and retail customers. The differentiation between Athlon chips is their speed, their cache size, and cache speed. The cache runs at some division of core speed. Right now, they're releasing Athlons with 512K running at half core speed. The architecture was designed to allow for varying levels of performance with price savings for low performance units.
:). Benchmarks on the Athlon are consistently higher than anything Intel has produced as of yet.
.18u process will allow for lower power, higher clockable units.
The lower priced Athlons are not crippled, they're slow because they have smaller, slower cache, likely clocked to 1/3 core speed. The high end version, called the Athlon Ultra will have larger cache expected to run at 2/3 or even full speed, and shipment is expected with 1MB or more of cache.
And yes, Yahoo! is in denial that the Athlon is faster(THINK PR
One thing that Yahoo!News declined to mention is that Intel, with the new Coppermine core is not expected to be significantly more efficient per clock cycle than the current PIII cores. The
I must congratulate AMD on a job well done. I'm not an AMD evangelist, just a gamer who demands the highest level of performance.
Of course Intel is cutting their prices. They need to provide some motivation for people to buy the P-III. Don't forget, AMD did the exact same thing with the K6. If you have an inferior product, you need to make it cheap to get people to buy it.
But i wouldn't expect AMD to follow suit. Athlon was not designed to be cheap. It was designed to set the performance standard for all other market contenders. I wouldn't expect them to lower their prices for the simple reason that people will pay the premium for a superior product. Intel proved that with the P-II, always more expensive than AMD but overall a better product.
Its more likely that the data was downloaded during the beta period, and wasn't uploaded until after the new databases were zeroed and online. This makes a lot of sense because those damn intel 386's were so slow.
digitalunity
the only way to fix it is to flush it all away...