Actually, given that MATLAB is the "Matrix Laboratory", it's likely to be one of the few commonly-used PC software packages that would get a boost on the Cell.
Alas, this poor debacle of a project should probably have remained buried in the forgotten past of Evans Hall. Harry's work never really did amount to anything substantial, despite massive chewings out on the part of Dave!
How did you arrive at a consumption figure of 9.5W for the Mac Mini? The tech specs declare it to have a max. continuous operating power of 85W. Is yours using almost a tenth of that in average consumption? Serious question. Maybe you ran an ammeter on the AC line or something?
The phenomenon is real, though I haven't checked the rate cited. You can read about it here. Soft errors (a.k.a, "transient faults" or "single event upsets" if you're googling) are caused by external radiation that causes a voltage spike when intersecting a memory or chip logic element and cause random bit flips. Sun Microsystems ate a huge chunk of money replacing Ultra10s that had non-ecc cache chips some years back because the systems would randomly crash, with the frequency of errors being dependent on the elevation of the computing site. Most of the radiation that causes soft errors is cosmic in origin, so the distance between the computer and space is related to the error rate.
For the sake of completeness (Because I forgot to include it in my first post!) Mills' Homepage is there. The picture he has posted is incredibly younger than he currently is. See a more current image.
Also, his homepage appears to be rather broken in Safari for OS X. He uses hideous javascript hacks where server-side includes would be more appropriate.
Hear hear! Dave Mills was head of all sorts of stuff relating to the early 'net, in addition to inventing NTP. I can't believe they left him out! He was totally robbed.
Many systems allow email addresses to be modified slightly and still have the email delivered. For example, are "no@example.com" and "NO@ExAmPlE.com" the same email address? They'll hash differently.
Alternately, I can receive email to myaddress+someflag@mydomain.com. This also would not hash the same as "myaddress@mydomain.com".
How would you propose getting around this problem? Dropping to all lower-case email addresses for the first issue may work fine, but I'm not entirely sure that trimming off all the +whatevers from people's addresses will suffice, for reasons that I cannot quite justify right now.
You haven't tested it yourself? Send an email to your phone and see if you get an SMS. www.attws.com also has a page where you can send any phone an SMS.
There's no reason to guess whether they did what they said: Be certain. My AT&T wireless reps kept tellinig me all sorts of stuff that was false, so make sure you validate their claims.
Quite possibly to prevent someone else from registering that domain name and using it for something Apple doesn't like, now that Apple buying Universal is a hot topic.
Lots of companies register domains of the form [company]sucks.com and such to prevent similar activities.
Fire.app for MacOSX can encrypt messages with GPG both ways transparently with arbitrarily sized keys.
It also does on the fly language translation using a babelfish-quality replacement engine, so you can chat with people whose language you don't speak. It's very cool.
I'm a college student, and I know that I can't afford anything near the amount of money that Microsoft wants to charge for office.
Even if they start giving away windows for free, people are eventually going to grow tired of spending another few hundred bucks for the next version of office with no worthwhile new features. Meanwhile, there are other products available that are catching up, like Star Office. Even if Sun's going to be charging for Star Office in the future, I don't think it'll be nearly as expensive as MS Office.
I'm a student at the University of Delaware EECE department, where the people who design and make the Fingerworks keyboard come from. I've used one for a short while at an IEEE meeting that was held here on campus where the technology was demonstrated, and I must say that, for the short time that I used it, the Fingerworks keyboard was very difficult to type on quickly.
However, one of the men who invented the thing (Dr. Wayne Westerman, Fingerworks CTO), demonstrated to the audience that it's quite possible, with practice, to type at around 50-60 WPM on the things without your fingers getting in the way of each other. He did say that it would be difficult or impossible for most people to reach the level of typing speed of a regular keyboard, but also demonstrated that the Fingerworks technology has several uses in areas where typing speed doesn't account for everything.
The really slick advantage of the Fingerworks technology is that your typing surface can also act as your pointing device, as well as a sort of low resolution graphics tablet. Also, since there are no physical keys, if you could hack the keyboard layout or use their layout design tools, you could make your own key layout that would have keys in non-traditional positions, or as many keys as you want... The keyboard's big enough to have space for about twice of a normal keyboard's keys, if you wanted to get rid of the (rather important) wrist rest area.
The other big deal with this technology is the gesture-based input that Fingerworks has come up with. I've seen it in action, and it's quite impressive. Westerman, at his demo, was scrolling around a document with his left hand, zooming with his right hand, and editing text (cut and paste) with a flicking gesture of his fingers. He made text move around the page faster than most people I've seen doing text editing work. I was quite impressed.
Also, I spoke with him afterwards and he noted that Fingerworks keyboard would be ideal for miniaturized laptops... The technology has the capability to become as thin as a sheet of paper, and space need not be wasted on an extra trackpad or trackball. It would allow thinner machines that have larger effective keyboards relative to their case size.
Don't get me wrong, I think I'd hate to use one myself, but the secretaries in our department use them all day long, and they work very well with them... The keyboard reduce RSI effects dramatically, and they speed up everything but sheer typing speed that a word processor needs to do.
I can see a good reason to avoid a.kids domain name: Namely that it's, in my opinion, highly unlikely to be used for its intended purpose. I can envision a world filled with www.theworldssexiest.kids and similar domain names, and if the.kids domain is marketed as being a place for "safe" domain names (www.education.kids), then it may lead to things like filtering software overlooking the porn sites that are sure to move in.
I don't think many of these targeted domain names are going to meet with much success unless some agency (ICANN, perhaps) manages to come up with a way to restrict the registerable domain names to on-topic sites. What's the good of having.kids (or.xxx, even), if they get filled up with sites that don't have anything to do with the tld? The state that our current tlds are in, i.e., filled up and abused, is due to the notion that anyone can register anything.
If the people in charge aren't going to restrict use of the new domain names to on-topic sites, why name them.kids,.xxx,.business,.whatever, and instead just go for generic names (.one,.two,.three, or what have you) that better represent the eventual content of those domains?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, given that MATLAB is the "Matrix Laboratory", it's likely to be one of the few commonly-used PC software packages that would get a boost on the Cell.
When the machines come, NTP researchers are your only hope.
Are you really asking if anyone's going to link their UID to a real name in a slashdot post?
Alas, this poor debacle of a project should probably have remained buried in the forgotten past of Evans Hall. Harry's work never really did amount to anything substantial, despite massive chewings out on the part of Dave!
I think that the term that both of you are looking for is that digital systems are "unstable" over their inputs.
How did you arrive at a consumption figure of 9.5W for the Mac Mini? The tech specs declare it to have a max. continuous operating power of 85W. Is yours using almost a tenth of that in average consumption? Serious question. Maybe you ran an ammeter on the AC line or something?
Computer science *teaching assistants* are given the laptops. The CSE IT folks take the laptops away when you become a research assistant.
The phenomenon is real, though I haven't checked the rate cited. You can read about it here. Soft errors (a.k.a, "transient faults" or "single event upsets" if you're googling) are caused by external radiation that causes a voltage spike when intersecting a memory or chip logic element and cause random bit flips. Sun Microsystems ate a huge chunk of money replacing Ultra10s that had non-ecc cache chips some years back because the systems would randomly crash, with the frequency of errors being dependent on the elevation of the computing site. Most of the radiation that causes soft errors is cosmic in origin, so the distance between the computer and space is related to the error rate.
Why use a knockoff? Use *real* time synchronization software.
For the sake of completeness (Because I forgot to include it in my first post!) Mills' Homepage is there. The picture he has posted is incredibly younger than he currently is. See a more current image.
Also, his homepage appears to be rather broken in Safari for OS X. He uses hideous javascript hacks where server-side includes would be more appropriate.
Hear hear! Dave Mills was head of all sorts of stuff relating to the early 'net, in addition to inventing NTP. I can't believe they left him out! He was totally robbed.
Ya know, you have to feed the fish in order for them to survive.
Many systems allow email addresses to be modified slightly and still have the email delivered. For example, are "no@example.com" and "NO@ExAmPlE.com" the same email address? They'll hash differently.
Alternately, I can receive email to myaddress+someflag@mydomain.com. This also would not hash the same as "myaddress@mydomain.com".
How would you propose getting around this problem? Dropping to all lower-case email addresses for the first issue may work fine, but I'm not entirely sure that trimming off all the +whatevers from people's addresses will suffice, for reasons that I cannot quite justify right now.
You haven't tested it yourself? Send an email to your phone and see if you get an SMS. www.attws.com also has a page where you can send any phone an SMS.
There's no reason to guess whether they did what they said: Be certain. My AT&T wireless reps kept tellinig me all sorts of stuff that was false, so make sure you validate their claims.
Quite possibly to prevent someone else from registering that domain name and using it for something Apple doesn't like, now that Apple buying Universal is a hot topic.
Lots of companies register domains of the form [company]sucks.com and such to prevent similar activities.
I'm still a denizen of Evans. That means I get to go razz Wayne on monday. :)
It also does on the fly language translation using a babelfish-quality replacement engine, so you can chat with people whose language you don't speak. It's very cool.
Even if they start giving away windows for free, people are eventually going to grow tired of spending another few hundred bucks for the next version of office with no worthwhile new features. Meanwhile, there are other products available that are catching up, like Star Office. Even if Sun's going to be charging for Star Office in the future, I don't think it'll be nearly as expensive as MS Office.
I'm a student at the University of Delaware EECE department, where the people who design and make the Fingerworks keyboard come from. I've used one for a short while at an IEEE meeting that was held here on campus where the technology was demonstrated, and I must say that, for the short time that I used it, the Fingerworks keyboard was very difficult to type on quickly.
However, one of the men who invented the thing (Dr. Wayne Westerman, Fingerworks CTO), demonstrated to the audience that it's quite possible, with practice, to type at around 50-60 WPM on the things without your fingers getting in the way of each other. He did say that it would be difficult or impossible for most people to reach the level of typing speed of a regular keyboard, but also demonstrated that the Fingerworks technology has several uses in areas where typing speed doesn't account for everything.
The really slick advantage of the Fingerworks technology is that your typing surface can also act as your pointing device, as well as a sort of low resolution graphics tablet. Also, since there are no physical keys, if you could hack the keyboard layout or use their layout design tools, you could make your own key layout that would have keys in non-traditional positions, or as many keys as you want... The keyboard's big enough to have space for about twice of a normal keyboard's keys, if you wanted to get rid of the (rather important) wrist rest area.
The other big deal with this technology is the gesture-based input that Fingerworks has come up with. I've seen it in action, and it's quite impressive. Westerman, at his demo, was scrolling around a document with his left hand, zooming with his right hand, and editing text (cut and paste) with a flicking gesture of his fingers. He made text move around the page faster than most people I've seen doing text editing work. I was quite impressed.
Also, I spoke with him afterwards and he noted that Fingerworks keyboard would be ideal for miniaturized laptops... The technology has the capability to become as thin as a sheet of paper, and space need not be wasted on an extra trackpad or trackball. It would allow thinner machines that have larger effective keyboards relative to their case size.
Don't get me wrong, I think I'd hate to use one myself, but the secretaries in our department use them all day long, and they work very well with them... The keyboard reduce RSI effects dramatically, and they speed up everything but sheer typing speed that a word processor needs to do.
I can see a good reason to avoid a .kids domain name: Namely that it's, in my opinion, highly unlikely to be used for its intended purpose. I can envision a world filled with www.theworldssexiest.kids and similar domain names, and if the .kids domain is marketed as being a place for "safe" domain names (www.education.kids), then it may lead to things like filtering software overlooking the porn sites that are sure to move in.
.kids (or .xxx, even), if they get filled up with sites that don't have anything to do with the tld? The state that our current tlds are in, i.e., filled up and abused, is due to the notion that anyone can register anything.
.kids, .xxx, .business, .whatever, and instead just go for generic names (.one, .two, .three, or what have you) that better represent the eventual content of those domains?
I don't think many of these targeted domain names are going to meet with much success unless some agency (ICANN, perhaps) manages to come up with a way to restrict the registerable domain names to on-topic sites. What's the good of having
If the people in charge aren't going to restrict use of the new domain names to on-topic sites, why name them