You end up with a laptop that is dog slow. You're right, most modern laptops throttle themselves effectively in order to reduce power consumption.
What the guy is doing, however, is trying to lower the voltage consumption to the line where the processor starts to behave a little flaky, and then pumping it up just a bit over that. Processors are made in big batches, some of them just work better than others. If yours happens to be one of the good ones in the batch, you can reduce the voltage while maintaining performance (not needing to bump down the clock speed).
If you really obsess over it, you go into the research that my roommate does, where he spends endless hours, days, and weeks tweaking processor floor plans and running them through simulators. You might hope to build a more efficient processor through all of this.
I wouldn't recommend doing this if you're not partial to your laptop randomly hanging while you're working on it, but everyone needs a hobby.
Eh, I just fundamentally disagree about what college is about. I agree wholeheartedly that we shouldn't shove the idea that they should become techies down kids throats. They did that when I was in high school (I'm still working on getting into PhD programs, no worries about becoming faculty yet). The kids who go into CS because they were told to go in lead miserable careers. Who would want to do a field just because it makes money? Then, worse, in reality, often, it doesn't make money.
That said, most of my peers who just finished their M.Eng's have great jobs making money hand over fist. Not all of them are writing software, but many industries appreciate the analytical and mathematical skills. My friend who is a banker is making 6 figures, a couple buddies who headed off to MS or large labs are making high 5 figures.
Also, on the front of India, one has to realize that, at the larger scale, economic factors being what they are, that many countries can undercut us on just about any front. Your job isn't "safe," because of its industry. India could pop up any industry and undercut us (and they do), but their education system beats the tar out of ours, and their pay rates are, as you said, pennies on the dollar. It's not so much them paying back student loans, they just get paid less.
So, now you have a major cultural issue. US CEOs don't care that they are rotting out the core of their companies. See, if you don't produce a product, your company isn't worth anything. A brand name and management only go so far. A bunch of managers bumping up the price of an Indian product doesn't make their company worth a dime. It's the Indian company that is worth something. Eventually, the US economy will adjust, or the US will go bankrupt. Ok, so, then we all move to India and get jobs as coders. Who cares?
My argument is, schools should teach what they're supposed to teach. My undergraduate school taught me how to code, very well (I'm one of the best coders here, and was one of the best in industry), but fell short in some areas, while still managing to be quite strong in others.
Even all of that said, the argument has nothing to do with how CS should be taught. You can't defend "well, CS students should slack off," by saying "they have no future anyway." Jeez, do you think that History students outsource their essays, because, how much of a "History" industry is there anyway?
Sure, but that's not what the degree is about. The degree is about computer science.
This guy isn't advocating "learning the material" or "learning that nobody really values you," he's advocating "learning how to outsource." That just has nothing to do with computer science.
I wouldn't want my students learning everything in the course, oh, except for that one really difficult assignment that they hated. They can outsource that.
That doesn't teach them anything that will help them in the real world. If anything, it teaches them that they can slack off and get away with it.
While I don't agree that research is at all boring (I've had an RAship for about 9 months now, that I'll be sitting in until I start my PhD), I must admit that society's approach to finding more researchers seems to be all wrong.
It's hard to discuss it without stepping on anyone's toes, and it's an emotionally charged issue for some, so, I'll reserve my rather harsh criticism of most modern programs.
Simply put. When I was a kid, I went to lectures at a particle accelerator, and they were cool. I liked programming. I thought that AI and robots were cool. Now, I work with AI, I've done work with robots (and want to do a lot more), and one of my advisors (I've got my hands in several projects) has multiple degrees, including a background in Physics.
The key, is to get kids those opportunities. Saying "computer science isn't for geeks anymore," is kind of akin to those commercials on the radio where kids say "I know that drinking and smoking aren't for kids." We all know that kids want to be more adult, right? The advertisers don't believe that those commercials will prevent kids from drinking. Do we really believe that "oh, you're not a nerd if you go into science" sends the message that we believe that? The people who believe that never even think to say that, or, if they do, say it in jest or fun (check out the Slashdot logo).
I guess that trackerless BitTorrent works by scattering the content normally cached in peers on a Distributed Hash table?
Ok, so, a couple things.
1) Signed distributed shared objects could easily be used to vouch for your activities, just as well as a central tracker could. If these dudes really want to keep their scorecards, there isn't a single technological hurdle to doing this that doesn't have a working implementation in some form. 2) As far as anonymity is concerned, you could easily generate a key, cryptographically sign all of your activity, and use a handle during the entire transaction. 3) If people needed to get a hold of you, you could use one of the several probabilistic membership algorithms over the entire overlay. In other words, you could even run an instant messenger like this. That doesn't appeal? Check out the recent work on BAR robustness. You can effectively force clients into complying with managing the distributed shared objects required to maintain whatever scoreboard these guys want to run. That paper, however, seems to destroy most of the motives for running a private tracker, as it allows the network to manage this matter for itself.
Anyway. If these folks did their homework, they could build a system that blazes, guarantees "fairness," for what it's worth in this enterprise, and gives a very low probability of people nailing you on exactly what you're doing.
Make a couple tiny adjustments to the system from the BAR paper, allowing you to designate other people to snag the file from. Do everything encrypted.
Gosh. I think that the only reason that nobody has done this yet is that nobody wants to put a paper in at a conference with the title, "A Really Bitchin Way to Download Movies D00dz!"
They're a marketing and advertising company that's been picking up the best CS researchers in serveral fields for years. I'm sure that their moral high-ground has some cash value, but, there's a lot more to Google than sticking AdSense into search results. I know several of their people, and they're damn talented.
You're right, they market themselves well... but free pizza to the computer science students at my university, around midnight during cram times, and at discussion group meetings attended mainly by PhD students, should at least have you thinking about who they're marketting themselves to.
When I browse to Google from inside the department network, a link shows up under the box you enter your query in... "Graduating? Come work for us!"
I don't know. I've seen this from multiple angles.
I have a friend who jumped out of the M.Eng program here, and she makes a low 6 figure salary as a banker. I have another who jumped out and works at Microsoft now for a high 5 figure salary.
The VP of my old company certainly worked his way up and did MBA first, but we also had several people who've never done a technical thing in their life in charge, including a girl who had just finished her MBA, straight out of college, no work experience. She had a private office and made, eh, probably more than I (though, I've really no clue). She was a program manager, which put her in charge of a lot of people who'd been working 20+ years as software engineers.
In fact, almost nobody who was a software engineer when I came to that company wanted to stay in engineering when I left. (I left to get my M.Eng, and now am off for a PhD).
I certainly can see my friends who are making big money wanting to stay in tech, but we are all graduates from a top school. My undergraduate institution was much more humble, and I can hardly see anybody who was working at my old job wanting to stay in it.
Most people in tech these days do NOT stay at a job rising through the ranks. In Southeastern VA, you're practically expected to float your resume ever 3 years. In DC, it's more like every 9 months. This is so you can see if you'll find a job with a higher pay rate. This is what the people really do. I've seen them in action.
I'd love to say that most of industry works like that. It's how it probably should work, but in my experience, only the top companies work like that, and the people who have access to those companies are few and fortunate.
The reason that they don't do that is because you're supposed to be getting a degree in computer science. A computer science degree isn't intended to be vocational training in programming, and it certainly isn't about making business decisions.
Nobody said that the three major areas of CS were Theory, Systems, Artificial Intelligence and... oh, a fourth, Outsourcing.
The reason that they don't do that, is that the point is for you to learn computer science. Life's lessons come from the School of Hard Knocks.
The business folks at my old company were SMOKING the programmers as far as pay rates were concerned, and apparently got all sorts of cool benefits after I left (executive retreats to the Florida keys monthly).
Slashdot Mirror
Congrats to GP BTW. Perhaps I'll underclock my notebook tonight.
Yes, that probably was inflammatory. I feel lousy about it too. Oh well.
Nifty :-D
Congratulations?
I'm not sure if you're offering moral support to folks who want to do this, or pointing out a flaw in my rationale.
Ok, I overclocked my old tower and didn't have problems for years.
You can do all sorts of stuff if you feel like it.
I feel like posting to Slashdot, then eating my dinner and returning to my research.
You end up with a laptop that is dog slow. You're right, most modern laptops throttle themselves effectively in order to reduce power consumption.
What the guy is doing, however, is trying to lower the voltage consumption to the line where the processor starts to behave a little flaky, and then pumping it up just a bit over that. Processors are made in big batches, some of them just work better than others. If yours happens to be one of the good ones in the batch, you can reduce the voltage while maintaining performance (not needing to bump down the clock speed).
If you really obsess over it, you go into the research that my roommate does, where he spends endless hours, days, and weeks tweaking processor floor plans and running them through simulators. You might hope to build a more efficient processor through all of this.
I wouldn't recommend doing this if you're not partial to your laptop randomly hanging while you're working on it, but everyone needs a hobby.
Eh, I just fundamentally disagree about what college is about. I agree wholeheartedly that we shouldn't shove the idea that they should become techies down kids throats. They did that when I was in high school (I'm still working on getting into PhD programs, no worries about becoming faculty yet). The kids who go into CS because they were told to go in lead miserable careers. Who would want to do a field just because it makes money? Then, worse, in reality, often, it doesn't make money.
That said, most of my peers who just finished their M.Eng's have great jobs making money hand over fist. Not all of them are writing software, but many industries appreciate the analytical and mathematical skills. My friend who is a banker is making 6 figures, a couple buddies who headed off to MS or large labs are making high 5 figures.
Also, on the front of India, one has to realize that, at the larger scale, economic factors being what they are, that many countries can undercut us on just about any front. Your job isn't "safe," because of its industry. India could pop up any industry and undercut us (and they do), but their education system beats the tar out of ours, and their pay rates are, as you said, pennies on the dollar. It's not so much them paying back student loans, they just get paid less.
So, now you have a major cultural issue. US CEOs don't care that they are rotting out the core of their companies. See, if you don't produce a product, your company isn't worth anything. A brand name and management only go so far. A bunch of managers bumping up the price of an Indian product doesn't make their company worth a dime. It's the Indian company that is worth something. Eventually, the US economy will adjust, or the US will go bankrupt. Ok, so, then we all move to India and get jobs as coders. Who cares?
My argument is, schools should teach what they're supposed to teach. My undergraduate school taught me how to code, very well (I'm one of the best coders here, and was one of the best in industry), but fell short in some areas, while still managing to be quite strong in others.
Even all of that said, the argument has nothing to do with how CS should be taught. You can't defend "well, CS students should slack off," by saying "they have no future anyway." Jeez, do you think that History students outsource their essays, because, how much of a "History" industry is there anyway?
Sure, but that's not what the degree is about. The degree is about computer science.
This guy isn't advocating "learning the material" or "learning that nobody really values you," he's advocating "learning how to outsource." That just has nothing to do with computer science.
I wouldn't want my students learning everything in the course, oh, except for that one really difficult assignment that they hated. They can outsource that.
That doesn't teach them anything that will help them in the real world. If anything, it teaches them that they can slack off and get away with it.
Obligatory Futuram quote: If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.
While I don't agree that research is at all boring (I've had an RAship for about 9 months now, that I'll be sitting in until I start my PhD), I must admit that society's approach to finding more researchers seems to be all wrong.
It's hard to discuss it without stepping on anyone's toes, and it's an emotionally charged issue for some, so, I'll reserve my rather harsh criticism of most modern programs.
Simply put. When I was a kid, I went to lectures at a particle accelerator, and they were cool. I liked programming. I thought that AI and robots were cool. Now, I work with AI, I've done work with robots (and want to do a lot more), and one of my advisors (I've got my hands in several projects) has multiple degrees, including a background in Physics.
The key, is to get kids those opportunities. Saying "computer science isn't for geeks anymore," is kind of akin to those commercials on the radio where kids say "I know that drinking and smoking aren't for kids." We all know that kids want to be more adult, right? The advertisers don't believe that those commercials will prevent kids from drinking. Do we really believe that "oh, you're not a nerd if you go into science" sends the message that we believe that? The people who believe that never even think to say that, or, if they do, say it in jest or fun (check out the Slashdot logo).
I'm not following this thread at all.
I guess that trackerless BitTorrent works by scattering the content normally cached in peers on a Distributed Hash table?
Ok, so, a couple things.
1) Signed distributed shared objects could easily be used to vouch for your activities, just as well as a central tracker could. If these dudes really want to keep their scorecards, there isn't a single technological hurdle to doing this that doesn't have a working implementation in some form.
2) As far as anonymity is concerned, you could easily generate a key, cryptographically sign all of your activity, and use a handle during the entire transaction.
3) If people needed to get a hold of you, you could use one of the several probabilistic membership algorithms over the entire overlay. In other words, you could even run an instant messenger like this. That doesn't appeal? Check out the recent work on BAR robustness. You can effectively force clients into complying with managing the distributed shared objects required to maintain whatever scoreboard these guys want to run. That paper, however, seems to destroy most of the motives for running a private tracker, as it allows the network to manage this matter for itself.
Anyway. If these folks did their homework, they could build a system that blazes, guarantees "fairness," for what it's worth in this enterprise, and gives a very low probability of people nailing you on exactly what you're doing.
Make a couple tiny adjustments to the system from the BAR paper, allowing you to designate other people to snag the file from. Do everything encrypted.
Gosh. I think that the only reason that nobody has done this yet is that nobody wants to put a paper in at a conference with the title, "A Really Bitchin Way to Download Movies D00dz!"
How does one's money take over the world?
I only drank McMerlot until I saw Sideways. Now, I insist on McPinot Noir.
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110101 01100001 01101100 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100111 01101101 00100000 01110010 01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101101 01100001 01111010 01100101 01100100 00101110 00100000 00100000 01001001 00100000 01101000 01100001 01100100 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110010 01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 00100000 01101100 01101111 01110111 00100000 01101111 01110000 01101001 01101110 01101001 01101111 01101110 00100000 01101111 01100110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01010011 01101100 01100001 01110011 01101000 01100100 01101111 01110100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01100101 01110010 01110011 01101000 01101001 01110000 00100000 01110101 01101110 01110100 01101001 01101100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01110011 01100001 01110111 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01100101 01101110 01110100 00100000 01100111 01101111 01110100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01100100 01100100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01110101 01110000 00100001 00100000 00100000 01001110 01101111 01110111 00101100 00100000 01001101 01111001 00100000 01110110 01101001 01100101 01110111 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110011 00100000 01100011 01101000 01100001 01101110 01100111 01100101 01100100 00101110 00101110 00101110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110011 01100101 01100101 01101101 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01100101 01101100 01101100 01101001 01100111 01100101 01101110 01110100 00100000 01101100 01101001 01100110 01100101 00100000 01101111 01101110 00100000 01010011 01101100 01100001 01110011 01101000 01100100 01101111 01110100 00100001 00001010 00001010 01010100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101100 01101001 01101011 01100101 00100000 01010011 01000101 01010100 01001001 01000000 01001000 01101111 01101101 01100101 00100001
They're a marketing and advertising company that's been picking up the best CS researchers in serveral fields for years. I'm sure that their moral high-ground has some cash value, but, there's a lot more to Google than sticking AdSense into search results. I know several of their people, and they're damn talented.
You're right, they market themselves well... but free pizza to the computer science students at my university, around midnight during cram times, and at discussion group meetings attended mainly by PhD students, should at least have you thinking about who they're marketting themselves to.
When I browse to Google from inside the department network, a link shows up under the box you enter your query in... "Graduating? Come work for us!"
One word: Redhat
caucasian - 'white'
So, that's what caucasian means.
I guess that I've been filling those forms out incorrectly for years now.
Well.......
I don't know. I've seen this from multiple angles.
I have a friend who jumped out of the M.Eng program here, and she makes a low 6 figure salary as a banker. I have another who jumped out and works at Microsoft now for a high 5 figure salary.
The VP of my old company certainly worked his way up and did MBA first, but we also had several people who've never done a technical thing in their life in charge, including a girl who had just finished her MBA, straight out of college, no work experience. She had a private office and made, eh, probably more than I (though, I've really no clue). She was a program manager, which put her in charge of a lot of people who'd been working 20+ years as software engineers.
In fact, almost nobody who was a software engineer when I came to that company wanted to stay in engineering when I left. (I left to get my M.Eng, and now am off for a PhD).
I certainly can see my friends who are making big money wanting to stay in tech, but we are all graduates from a top school. My undergraduate institution was much more humble, and I can hardly see anybody who was working at my old job wanting to stay in it.
Most people in tech these days do NOT stay at a job rising through the ranks. In Southeastern VA, you're practically expected to float your resume ever 3 years. In DC, it's more like every 9 months. This is so you can see if you'll find a job with a higher pay rate. This is what the people really do. I've seen them in action.
I'd love to say that most of industry works like that. It's how it probably should work, but in my experience, only the top companies work like that, and the people who have access to those companies are few and fortunate.
Troll? It was a joke. Jeez.
IBM's chips are power-hungry and generate a lot of heat, and therefore not suitable to notebook computers.
So, we jumped to Intel, which hasn't be plagued by this issues of late...
I can't believe that someone actually decided that.
The reason that they don't do that is because you're supposed to be getting a degree in computer science. A computer science degree isn't intended to be vocational training in programming, and it certainly isn't about making business decisions.
Nobody said that the three major areas of CS were Theory, Systems, Artificial Intelligence and... oh, a fourth, Outsourcing.
The reason that they don't do that, is that the point is for you to learn computer science. Life's lessons come from the School of Hard Knocks.
Really?
The business folks at my old company were SMOKING the programmers as far as pay rates were concerned, and apparently got all sorts of cool benefits after I left (executive retreats to the Florida keys monthly).
I loved HeroQuest when I was a kid.
Forget RAID, get tape. It's cheaper, so you can have, you know, more than one tape with similar data on it.
Go.com?
You don't have to settle for the Microsoft of roleplaying.
Your comment makes my Brujah angry. Rawwwrr.