On a small animal, super muscle would allow for simply extraordinary athletic feats.
What are you talking about? No offense, but you sound like a seventh grader. Stephen J. Gould (RIP) wrote some excellent books explaining evolutionary theory. You should check them out.
So, it would be reasonable to conclude that most had this super muscle. But birds and mammals both evolved from these things... why give up such a big advantage? Evolutionarily speaking, it just wouldn't happen. You don't select for weak muscle, especially to such a degree that absolutely zero examples exist today.
Mammals did not evolve from dinosaurs and, I'm guessing, birds could have evolved from small dinosaurs. Not all dinosaurs were huge. Also, evolution will select for whatever is better at making babies. It only favors bigger muscles if bigger muscles have a significant reproductive advantage. But apparently they were all wiped out my an asteroid so the point is moot.
Hmmm... a (broken) WorldNet Daily link to back up your argument? Why don't you just cite NewsMax or the Heritage Foundation too and be done with it? Then the parent can trout out Mother Jones and Alternet and we all can learn absolutely nothing.
We offer the opportunity for competitive rates of return on investment, but can manage funds only for qualified individuals and institutions who appreciate the potential and risks inherent in dealing in these markets.
Because we protect the confidentiality of our investors, and our own methods, we can make only certain information about our firm available on the internet, through the operating links below.
Sounds like "If you've got a lot of money that you can afford to lose and don't ask too many questions, invest with us." Most of the links on that site are broken, too.
It always amazes me that people have the nerve to pull stunts like this guy does. I just have to believe that his Karma will catch up with him eventually.
Linux is about 13(?) years old. No one. No one can accurately predict what's going to happen with Linux and open-source software because no one has enough experience in open-source business models. No one. There just isn't enough (if any) data/time to be able to say anything meaningful about this space. It's still young and has lots of growing to do. It's like trying to predict the adult career of a toddler based on how he plays with blocks.
Articles like this are rampant in the tech press and serves one purpose: attract attention. It's a troll that makes money on ad impressions. There's nothing constructive here, move along.
While much of software will be custom applications, there are common packages that you'll find for simulatiing molecular interactions, doing sequence analysis, etc.
I think ORNL and PSC know a lot more about supercomputing than you (or Internet rag pundits) do. As others have noted, there are real reasons for Big Iron.
Clusters are great for certain problems but for heavy computation -- think simulating two galaxies colliding or earthquake modeling -- off the shelf clusters don't cut it.
They're not wasting tax-payer money unless you consider basic researcher a waste.
I think most tech journalists consider an interview to be a list of questions that you e-mail to someone. Then you print their answers with the questions. Of course that's not really an interview at all but an outline for an article that you want someone else to write. Unfortunately, the idea goes almost unquestioned in tech news outlets *cough*Slashdot*cough*.
Something I've noticed with techies: They're very demanding about getting technical things right and go to great lengths to be accurate. They're most eloquent when discussing technical matters. When it come to things outside their domain -- journalism, graphic/ui design -- they settle for the path of least resistance. I suppose that's natural but what bothers me is that they don't seem to recognize that they're not so good that those things. It's the reason the journalism sucks and the desktop interfaces are derivitive and unimaginative.
Of course that's a gross generalization but it definitely applies to this interview in more than one respect.
You are completely brainwashed by Apple's marketing -- amazing.
No, I use Apple products and they work. They work very well.
I don't care if others use Apple products. I don't understand why you think I perceive Apple as a "Threat" to me...
Because, you're making ad hominem attacks on them. You dismiss them as 'tacky' and only worth the logo on the case when, in fact, there are plenty of serious computer users and programmers out there who consider Apple a worthwhile platform. In my experience, people only attack when they feel threatened.
what I'm trying to make clear is that I don't want to be a part of the Apple Culture regardless of how their products perform.
I am not part of the 'Apple Culture.' I use a PowerBook and and iPod. They are tools and toys. They do not define me. They play well with my Linux box at home. You can respect Apple products, or any product, and not be a part of the 'culture.'
Just like I wouldn't buy an overpriced sweatshirt with a huge GAP on the front,
Neither would I and that has absolutely nothing to do with Apple. I don't wear my Powerbook on my sleave. I don't dismiss Dells and Gateways as overpriced toys. I don't dismiss homebrew PCs as nothing but geek machismo. I don't care about appearances.
I wouldn't buy an overpriced computer with a huge Apple logo on its face.
What about a reasonably priced computer with an Apple logo on the face?
If you want to buy an Apple product, I say go for it. Put on your Gap shirt, your Abercrombie jeans, your Nike Air Jordan's, get in your Eddie Bauer Edition Ford Explorer, drive to the Apple store and buy everything in sight. Surrender to the power of the logo.
You're not-so-cleverly avoiding the issue by pointing out that Macs have a logo on them. Does a logo necessarily mean overpriced crap? Or are you more concerned with the image than the product? I drive a Chevy Metro when I'm not taking the bus. I shop at the food co-op. I buy all my clothes at Gabriel Brothers and TJ Maxx. You know what? When I find a pair of Dockers at one of the stores I buy them because they fit well. I couldn't care less about the tag on the back.
The point is that Apple makes a decent product. If Microsoft made a decent product, I'd use that too (in fact, I have an MS joystick). If Abercrombie made decent clothes at a reasonable price, I'd wear them.
I doubt that. Maybe I'd be the only person to say it on/., but not the only person to say it anywhere. Apple brands the shit out of all of their stuff and it is so unbelievably tacky and tasteless that I would never buy an Apple product despite any evidence of superiority or advantage in price.
So, even if they put out a good product you won't use it, why? Because of the image? Then, you're as image concious as the 'yuppies' you hate.
Apple hardware is more expensive than its competitors and it doesn't offer any distinct advantages. Apple sells the brand and the image, not the product. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with that -- Nike and The Gap do it too -- but you can't expect a freethinker to buy into some corporate marketing campaign.
First, Apple is barely, if at all, more expensive than comparable PC hardware. Second, they also engineer the hell out of their products as well as branding them. A well funded marketing department doesn't necessarily mean a starved engineering department. e.g. SCSI, FireWire, Bluetooth, 802.11g.
And as for 'freethinkers,' I would expect they wouldn't let marketing affect their decision one way or the other. They'd decide on the merits of the product.
Yuppies buy for status, not for practicality.
The same can be said of geeks. Where is the practicality in mini-ATX? Overclocking? Case mods?
Apple products buy status and image above all else.
No, no they don't. Yes, there's strong status/image thing there but the fact is, at least since the release of OS X, that Apple has a strong computing platform for home use to computational science. They're putting out hardware and software that can get the job done.
Apple isn't a threat to you. If you open your mind a bit you may recognize that they produce good products at decent price points. Just because they're not your bag doesn't make them charlatans.
Doesn't matter. This whole agenda of Ashcroft's is going to piss off a whole lot of voters.
Oh, I agree and it has me scratching my head. I don't see the point in alienating the conservatives who like their porn just fine thank-you-very-much to appease the more 'wholesome' sector. Do 'wholesome' people vote more? Hopefully, they're digging their own grave.
I still want to see Flynt get involved just for the spectacle of it.
The sound you just heard was Larry Flynt dropping a bucket of money in John Kerry's lap... right next to the dancer.
I wonder what kind of dirt Flynt might have on DoJ people. He outed one congressman during the Clinton impeachment. I can only dream that he has something on Ashcroft. But, that might be asking a bit much.
If someone invents a programming language that includes a way to tell computer "do what I meant it to do and stop complaining about irrelevant crap", I might consider programming as a way to make living:)
You might want to check out Applescript. It might not be exactly what you dream of using, but you may find it interesting.
This seems like mostly the same thing. If this thing does get passed, it will probably be overturned quickly by a court.
IANAL but that doesn't make any sense.
The precedent is irrelevant. They're taking something that was legal under the law and passing a law to make it illegal. If a case is brought to court over that law and the law is found to be unconstitutional, then it might be overturned. The precedent would have no bearing since the law itself is changed.
In other words EV1Servers.Net is joining other companies and these other companies happen to be Fortune 1000 companies. Either way it's poor, imprecise language. It's supposed to be imprecise. It leaves them room to claim ignorance.
Is like the Mac way where the utiity windows disappear when the app loses focus? If so, that is an improvement. I think most people's (OK,,my) problem with GIMP's MDI would go away if they did this. I like Mac's MDI but the GIMP, for me, is a confusing mess.
Kodak also owns ophoto. My sister got some prints from there and I was surprised at how good they were. Better than you'll get from any desktop inkjet.
Slashdot Mirror
What are you talking about? No offense, but you sound like a seventh grader. Stephen J. Gould (RIP) wrote some excellent books explaining evolutionary theory. You should check them out.
Mammals did not evolve from dinosaurs and, I'm guessing, birds could have evolved from small dinosaurs. Not all dinosaurs were huge. Also, evolution will select for whatever is better at making babies. It only favors bigger muscles if bigger muscles have a significant reproductive advantage. But apparently they were all wiped out my an asteroid so the point is moot.
Hmmm... a (broken) WorldNet Daily link to back up your argument? Why don't you just cite NewsMax or the Heritage Foundation too and be done with it? Then the parent can trout out Mother Jones and Alternet and we all can learn absolutely nothing.
... is that 71% of Spammers are located in Florida and they're just using servers in China.
Why does Florida seem to be a haven for shady businessmen?
He's also affiliated with Democratic Centruy Fund:
Sounds like "If you've got a lot of money that you can afford to lose and don't ask too many questions, invest with us." Most of the links on that site are broken, too.
It always amazes me that people have the nerve to pull stunts like this guy does. I just have to believe that his Karma will catch up with him eventually.
Linux is about 13(?) years old. No one. No one can accurately predict what's going to happen with Linux and open-source software because no one has enough experience in open-source business models. No one. There just isn't enough (if any) data/time to be able to say anything meaningful about this space. It's still young and has lots of growing to do. It's like trying to predict the adult career of a toddler based on how he plays with blocks.
Articles like this are rampant in the tech press and serves one purpose: attract attention. It's a troll that makes money on ad impressions. There's nothing constructive here, move along.
That adds more meaning to the phrase "rock bottom."
While much of software will be custom applications, there are common packages that you'll find for simulatiing molecular interactions, doing sequence analysis, etc.
You can check out a list of software available on a CRAY T3E to get an idea.
I think ORNL and PSC know a lot more about supercomputing than you (or Internet rag pundits) do. As others have noted, there are real reasons for Big Iron.
Clusters are great for certain problems but for heavy computation -- think simulating two galaxies colliding or earthquake modeling -- off the shelf clusters don't cut it.
They're not wasting tax-payer money unless you consider basic researcher a waste.
I think most tech journalists consider an interview to be a list of questions that you e-mail to someone. Then you print their answers with the questions. Of course that's not really an interview at all but an outline for an article that you want someone else to write. Unfortunately, the idea goes almost unquestioned in tech news outlets *cough*Slashdot*cough*.
Something I've noticed with techies: They're very demanding about getting technical things right and go to great lengths to be accurate. They're most eloquent when discussing technical matters. When it come to things outside their domain -- journalism, graphic/ui design -- they settle for the path of least resistance. I suppose that's natural but what bothers me is that they don't seem to recognize that they're not so good that those things. It's the reason the journalism sucks and the desktop interfaces are derivitive and unimaginative.
Of course that's a gross generalization but it definitely applies to this interview in more than one respect.
So it goes.
No, I use Apple products and they work. They work very well.
I don't care if others use Apple products. I don't understand why you think I perceive Apple as a "Threat" to me...Because, you're making ad hominem attacks on them. You dismiss them as 'tacky' and only worth the logo on the case when, in fact, there are plenty of serious computer users and programmers out there who consider Apple a worthwhile platform. In my experience, people only attack when they feel threatened.
what I'm trying to make clear is that I don't want to be a part of the Apple Culture regardless of how their products perform.I am not part of the 'Apple Culture.' I use a PowerBook and and iPod. They are tools and toys. They do not define me. They play well with my Linux box at home. You can respect Apple products, or any product, and not be a part of the 'culture.'
Just like I wouldn't buy an overpriced sweatshirt with a huge GAP on the front,Neither would I and that has absolutely nothing to do with Apple. I don't wear my Powerbook on my sleave. I don't dismiss Dells and Gateways as overpriced toys. I don't dismiss homebrew PCs as nothing but geek machismo. I don't care about appearances.
I wouldn't buy an overpriced computer with a huge Apple logo on its face.What about a reasonably priced computer with an Apple logo on the face?
If you want to buy an Apple product, I say go for it. Put on your Gap shirt, your Abercrombie jeans, your Nike Air Jordan's, get in your Eddie Bauer Edition Ford Explorer, drive to the Apple store and buy everything in sight. Surrender to the power of the logo.You're not-so-cleverly avoiding the issue by pointing out that Macs have a logo on them. Does a logo necessarily mean overpriced crap? Or are you more concerned with the image than the product? I drive a Chevy Metro when I'm not taking the bus. I shop at the food co-op. I buy all my clothes at Gabriel Brothers and TJ Maxx. You know what? When I find a pair of Dockers at one of the stores I buy them because they fit well. I couldn't care less about the tag on the back.
The point is that Apple makes a decent product. If Microsoft made a decent product, I'd use that too (in fact, I have an MS joystick). If Abercrombie made decent clothes at a reasonable price, I'd wear them.
Check yourself. Who's a slave to the logos?
So, even if they put out a good product you won't use it, why? Because of the image? Then, you're as image concious as the 'yuppies' you hate.
Apple hardware is more expensive than its competitors and it doesn't offer any distinct advantages. Apple sells the brand and the image, not the product. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with that -- Nike and The Gap do it too -- but you can't expect a freethinker to buy into some corporate marketing campaign.First, Apple is barely, if at all, more expensive than comparable PC hardware. Second, they also engineer the hell out of their products as well as branding them. A well funded marketing department doesn't necessarily mean a starved engineering department. e.g. SCSI, FireWire, Bluetooth, 802.11g.
And as for 'freethinkers,' I would expect they wouldn't let marketing affect their decision one way or the other. They'd decide on the merits of the product.
Yuppies buy for status, not for practicality.The same can be said of geeks. Where is the practicality in mini-ATX? Overclocking? Case mods?
Apple products buy status and image above all else.No, no they don't. Yes, there's strong status/image thing there but the fact is, at least since the release of OS X, that Apple has a strong computing platform for home use to computational science. They're putting out hardware and software that can get the job done.
Apple isn't a threat to you. If you open your mind a bit you may recognize that they produce good products at decent price points. Just because they're not your bag doesn't make them charlatans.
There are ways to do MTU discovery and for the kernel to automatically adjust accordingly.
Oh, I agree and it has me scratching my head. I don't see the point in alienating the conservatives who like their porn just fine thank-you-very-much to appease the more 'wholesome' sector. Do 'wholesome' people vote more? Hopefully, they're digging their own grave.
I still want to see Flynt get involved just for the spectacle of it.
The sound you just heard was Larry Flynt dropping a bucket of money in John Kerry's lap... right next to the dancer.
I wonder what kind of dirt Flynt might have on DoJ people. He outed one congressman during the Clinton impeachment. I can only dream that he has something on Ashcroft. But, that might be asking a bit much.
Skins are to user interfaces what Type-R and VTEC stickers are to Honda Civics.
I feel the same way about Wal-Mart :P
You might want to check out Applescript. It might not be exactly what you dream of using, but you may find it interesting.
The syntax goes something like this:
I hear they're planning on optimizing page load times to be > 20 seconds to simulate the pointless geriatric greeter.
God knows that wherever I go I want to be slowed down by old people who are happy to see me.
Actually, I never shop at Walmart an neither should you.These are the kinds of bands I like but it's still too much, to me, for compressed audio. Or, rather, I'd pay that much for uncompressed audio.
'Id like someone to sell me the actual CD online but, while waiting for the CD to ship, give me access to MP3s or AACs of the album.
IANAL but that doesn't make any sense.
The precedent is irrelevant. They're taking something that was legal under the law and passing a law to make it illegal. If a case is brought to court over that law and the law is found to be unconstitutional, then it might be overturned. The precedent would have no bearing since the law itself is changed.
Well, they could blame it on the write/copyeditor and say it should be:
In other words EV1Servers.Net is joining other companies and these other companies happen to be Fortune 1000 companies. Either way it's poor, imprecise language. It's supposed to be imprecise. It leaves them room to claim ignorance.
I'd just like to point out that 12 nodes is not "massively parallel."
Is like the Mac way where the utiity windows disappear when the app loses focus? If so, that is an improvement. I think most people's (OK, ,my) problem with GIMP's MDI would go away if they did this. I like Mac's MDI but the GIMP, for me, is a confusing mess.
Kodak also owns ophoto. My sister got some prints from there and I was surprised at how good they were. Better than you'll get from any desktop inkjet.