I've heard from various sources that not more than 256 can be displayed simultaneously, even though the total palette is 24-bit. Why is it that not more than 256 colours can be displayed simultaneously though? That seems like a huge disadvantage.
This post is intended to be a useful programmer's guide to dealing with random access memory.
Now as we all know, random access memory (or RAM as it's more commonly known) is memory that is NON-PERSISTANT. In other words, when you cut off power, whatever data was contained in that RAM is gone.
There is another type of memory, called ROM, PROM, or EPROM (Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory), but we won't deal with that here. The name is self explanatory enough, really.
There's one thing that sets good RAM apart from normal or low-quality RAM. Nowadays, you'll be hard pressed to find single input module memory RAM (SIMM). But that isn't the thing - in this day and age, that sets good RAM apart from bad RAM.
Good RAM has built-in cyclic partiy checkers. Not only can this help to prevent incorrect binary descriptors, but it also allows one to redigitize random access memory compatible dual input values - saving many hours of programming time. Most RAM these days has this, but there are a lot of "cheap" DIMMs out there which don't support it. Be wary of them.
Thanks, that's about all I have to say about RAM. I hope that you have found this useful.
As someone who was involved with satellite application programming, I can say that the problems involved in creating satellite based applications for non-analogue streamed data are enormous. Firstly, to prove boolean associative arrays on a parallel output device mediator such as a satellite demodulator is a difficult thing to do...the easiest way would be to retrometricise closed set compatible software using the tried-and-trusted method of numerically programming diagonally matrixed queries. The only other way to do this would be to program imaginary integer specific diagramatics, and I think that most programmers reading this would agree that that's not a good idea, since it could lead to several complications - including the possible need to macrodesign boolean polynomial equation identifiers specific to the application in question - not a nice thought, especially if you're running multiple satellite channels - then it'll also be neccessary to quantify timed long integer paradoxes on top of everything else! The general rule should be: if you're programming multiple memory stacks over multiple satellite channels, then PLEASE be aware that you need to redigitize logically programmable theoretical pipes and hypothesize cutting pipe contrived radials, otherwise your program WILL NOT WORK VERY WELL. The most efficient way to deal with this problem is to virtually trivialize complex conjuction composed computer generated interfaces and conglomerate statically linked theoretical pipes. If you keep all of this in mind, your satellite application development will be flawless.
Scientifically explained Artificial Intelligence.
on
Son of HAL For Sale
·
· Score: 1
While many have tried to hypothesize logically programmable dynamics, it's unlikely that anyone will be able to skirt around the physical mathematical limitations of the binary data distribution method. Simply, we need to do more than code crunch turing complete void resultants and use conventional chaos math. We need to start focusing on finding ways to encapsulate zero division dynamics. Once we've done this, we can start to analyze fuzzy logic mathematical heterogeneric virtual input/output systems by quantifying supercomputerized memory stacks that are dependent on imaginary integer based equations. You see, what many people don't realize about artificial intelligence is that the key isn't to duplicate intelligence at all, the key is to conglomerate neural networked, parallel output device mediators. In this way, the key to artificial intelligence can be found. The equations involved are enormous though, and not many people are up to the task. Not even great scientests or programmers can handle the amount of calculation required - the one man who might, though, is Steve Woston of J-J-J-Julius. As to the ethical questions, yes indeed - there's always a possibility that creating machines that are "too" intelligent would be a dangerous thing to do, for even if they don't surpass the humans, uncooperative machines could be a major economic deterrant. However, with people like Woston around, and others who symbolize the very nature of human intelligence - there is no possibility that machinekind will ever surpass humans.
The problem with Microsoft's brand of "innovation" up until now is that it's been too centered on desktop applications to really have an effect on the mindshare of the actual community that supports innovation itself. The are trying to make up for that with their new.NET approach, trying to incentivize distributed applications in order to aggregate back-end e-tailers and architect visionary technologies, but it might indeed be too late. Some of the top technology in the world, in the near future, will be made up for cross-platform and internet technology-based products such as Python language, Java language, Amiga Tao Elate Virtual Processor, etc. The only thing Microsoft has really done well is realize that they needed to target visionary partnerships early on, partnering with IBM and Intel early on, and overtaking them later. But that was then, this is now - it's a whole new ballgame. Now, they must either change their focus and start trying to e-enable enterprise e-commerce and iterate cutting-edge applications, or they will surely not be able to redistribute their current mindshare effectively or even grow their enterprise marketshare beyond a percentage of their competitors fractional increases.
A lot of this problem hinges on a single fact: Analog by nature is in a state of constant flux, think of a curve-like wave in comparision with constant packet-like bundles of binary data. Yes, I know that's a rehash of what many people already know, but consider the finer points of it:
Analog can, in fact, be replicated using certain methods of transfer over a network or indeed, on a local host, over the local bus of that host. The trick is to triangulate hexadecimally produced void resultants, so that static resultants in the codec delimiter don't stay at one logical depth the whole time. In other words, we need to retrometricise symbolically compressed equation identifiers in such a way that the resultants of the code interacting with the codec is in a state of flux similar to that of analog motion. Using these methods, we can design octadecimal output tuned theoretical pipes in the software interfaces interacting with the codecs and create logically programmable integrated exchange dividers within the codec interface itself. This will basically eliminate the problem with digital resolution/colour.
I didn't think that PowerPC was 64-bit, at least not until G5; though Power (a relative) is.
Indeed! The main difference, essentially, is that while the PPC and Power might differ in actual architecture as far as triangulating bitrate channeled processors goes, they are both able to numerize vector state linked pseudo-activated code processors and analyze bootstrap algorithmic void resultants, something that other processors struggle with.
Regardless, I don' t think the RAM limitation of each node has anything to with that. The current G4 towers, for example, can go up to 1.5GB of RAM, and the high-end iMacs can go up to 1.0GB
Ok, you've missed the point slightly here...the amount of RAM has little to do with the ability to preset raw input geared programs. However, on the RAM side it is important to be able to effectively numerize random access memory compatible integer resultants.
we needed tensile infomediaries the transition, the Web-preparation of collaboration of the trade name and ocular globes of the connect-and-game of the target if Mozilla is always to reach its goal of the affluent execution in the robust tests patterns of the and-service that saying, would be interesting to see if the community of Mozilla can compete with Microsoft by the content without threads e-e-enabling of envisioneer of the initiatives of the company.
Any video news on Linux is good. The video players suck under it. RP Alpha is the only one that's passable. MTV is ok, but it's too small (window size, unadjustable) and stops working after a few minutes. The remaining ones freeze up and go too slow and are generally not high-quality. If there was finally an all-in-one video/media player for Linux that actually worked, it would be a boon to the community.
Some of the best mathematicians I've know have been professors....most over 50. Maybe in *SOME* people skills start declining in their 30s, but I think that a blanket statement like that is quite idiotic and unprovable.
The simple truth of the problem is that there is no one answer to it...
Not many people have a firm grasp of what this problem is really all about. Sure, you'll study it in your B.Sc or B.Tech...but really, even graduates fail to grasp some key concepts, although they study the tougher concepts....basically, this is how it goes:
P is the set of problems that can be solved in deterministic polynomial time. That means for a problem with inputs of size N, there must be some way to solve the problem in F(N) steps for some polynomial F. F can be any polynomial, even N to the 10 millionth power.
NP is the set of problems you can solve in non-deterministic polynomial time. That means for a problem with inputs of size N, there must be some way to solve the problem in F(N) steps for some polynomial F just as before. In NP, however, the student is allowed to make lucky guesses, though it must prove the solution is correct. The standard format for a program in NP is:
Guess the answer.
Verify that the answer is correct in polynomial time.
For example, factoring is in NP. Suppose you have a number A that you want to break into two factors. The NP program is:
Guess factors P and Q.
Multiply P times Q and verify that the results is A.
This takes only two non-deterministic steps so the problem is in NP.
Therefore, considering the differences between the two and the estimation involved, how is it possible to prove something like this?
You can't "prove this". You can't disprove it either, but that's not the point - minesweeper is not going to help you with this.
As far as I know, Yahoo use their own propreitry Perl scripts and Google is coded mainly in Python. There's a world of difference. The most accurate engine is Google - perhaps telling you a little something about the languages each was written in.
Car companies don't weld the hood shut. Yes, you can tamper with car engines if you know what you're doing - and you can pretty much customize your car "how you like it"
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard from various sources that not more than 256 can be displayed simultaneously, even though the total palette is 24-bit. Why is it that not more than 256 colours can be displayed simultaneously though? That seems like a huge disadvantage.
Now as we all know, random access memory (or RAM as it's more commonly known) is memory that is NON-PERSISTANT. In other words, when you cut off power, whatever data was contained in that RAM is gone.
There is another type of memory, called ROM, PROM, or EPROM (Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory), but we won't deal with that here. The name is self explanatory enough, really.There's one thing that sets good RAM apart from normal or low-quality RAM. Nowadays, you'll be hard pressed to find single input module memory RAM (SIMM). But that isn't the thing - in this day and age, that sets good RAM apart from bad RAM.
Good RAM has built-in cyclic partiy checkers. Not only can this help to prevent incorrect binary descriptors, but it also allows one to redigitize random access memory compatible dual input values - saving many hours of programming time. Most RAM these days has this, but there are a lot of "cheap" DIMMs out there which don't support it. Be wary of them.Thanks, that's about all I have to say about RAM. I hope that you have found this useful.
As someone who was involved with satellite application programming, I can say that the problems involved in creating satellite based applications for non-analogue streamed data are enormous. Firstly, to prove boolean associative arrays on a parallel output device mediator such as a satellite demodulator is a difficult thing to do...the easiest way would be to retrometricise closed set compatible software using the tried-and-trusted method of numerically programming diagonally matrixed queries. The only other way to do this would be to program imaginary integer specific diagramatics, and I think that most programmers reading this would agree that that's not a good idea, since it could lead to several complications - including the possible need to macrodesign boolean polynomial equation identifiers specific to the application in question - not a nice thought, especially if you're running multiple satellite channels - then it'll also be neccessary to quantify timed long integer paradoxes on top of everything else! The general rule should be: if you're programming multiple memory stacks over multiple satellite channels, then PLEASE be aware that you need to redigitize logically programmable theoretical pipes and hypothesize cutting pipe contrived radials, otherwise your program WILL NOT WORK VERY WELL. The most efficient way to deal with this problem is to virtually trivialize complex conjuction composed computer generated interfaces and conglomerate statically linked theoretical pipes. If you keep all of this in mind, your satellite application development will be flawless.
While many have tried to hypothesize logically programmable dynamics, it's unlikely that anyone will be able to skirt around the physical mathematical limitations of the binary data distribution method. Simply, we need to do more than code crunch turing complete void resultants and use conventional chaos math. We need to start focusing on finding ways to encapsulate zero division dynamics. Once we've done this, we can start to analyze fuzzy logic mathematical heterogeneric virtual input/output systems by quantifying supercomputerized memory stacks that are dependent on imaginary integer based equations. You see, what many people don't realize about artificial intelligence is that the key isn't to duplicate intelligence at all, the key is to conglomerate neural networked, parallel output device mediators. In this way, the key to artificial intelligence can be found. The equations involved are enormous though, and not many people are up to the task. Not even great scientests or programmers can handle the amount of calculation required - the one man who might, though, is Steve Woston of J-J-J-Julius. As to the ethical questions, yes indeed - there's always a possibility that creating machines that are "too" intelligent would be a dangerous thing to do, for even if they don't surpass the humans, uncooperative machines could be a major economic deterrant. However, with people like Woston around, and others who symbolize the very nature of human intelligence - there is no possibility that machinekind will ever surpass humans.
The problem with Microsoft's brand of "innovation" up until now is that it's been too centered on desktop applications to really have an effect on the mindshare of the actual community that supports innovation itself. The are trying to make up for that with their new .NET approach, trying to incentivize distributed applications in order to aggregate back-end e-tailers and architect visionary technologies, but it might indeed be too late. Some of the top technology in the world, in the near future, will be made up for cross-platform and internet technology-based products such as Python language, Java language, Amiga Tao Elate Virtual Processor, etc. The only thing Microsoft has really done well is realize that they needed to target visionary partnerships early on, partnering with IBM and Intel early on, and overtaking them later. But that was then, this is now - it's a whole new ballgame. Now, they must either change their focus and start trying to e-enable enterprise e-commerce and iterate cutting-edge applications, or they will surely not be able to redistribute their current mindshare effectively or even grow their enterprise marketshare beyond a percentage of their competitors fractional increases.
A lot of this problem hinges on a single fact: Analog by nature is in a state of constant flux, think of a curve-like wave in comparision with constant packet-like bundles of binary data. Yes, I know that's a rehash of what many people already know, but consider the finer points of it: Analog can, in fact, be replicated using certain methods of transfer over a network or indeed, on a local host, over the local bus of that host. The trick is to triangulate hexadecimally produced void resultants, so that static resultants in the codec delimiter don't stay at one logical depth the whole time. In other words, we need to retrometricise symbolically compressed equation identifiers in such a way that the resultants of the code interacting with the codec is in a state of flux similar to that of analog motion. Using these methods, we can design octadecimal output tuned theoretical pipes in the software interfaces interacting with the codecs and create logically programmable integrated exchange dividers within the codec interface itself. This will basically eliminate the problem with digital resolution/colour.
I didn't think that PowerPC was 64-bit, at least not until G5; though Power (a relative) is.
Indeed! The main difference, essentially, is that while the PPC and Power might differ in actual architecture as far as triangulating bitrate channeled processors goes, they are both able to numerize vector state linked pseudo-activated code processors and analyze bootstrap algorithmic void resultants, something that other processors struggle with.Regardless, I don' t think the RAM limitation of each node has anything to with that. The current G4 towers, for example, can go up to 1.5GB of RAM, and the high-end iMacs can go up to 1.0GB
Ok, you've missed the point slightly here...the amount of RAM has little to do with the ability to preset raw input geared programs. However, on the RAM side it is important to be able to effectively numerize random access memory compatible integer resultants.Hope this helps
we needed tensile infomediaries the transition, the Web-preparation of collaboration of the trade name and ocular globes of the connect-and-game of the target if Mozilla is always to reach its goal of the affluent execution in the robust tests patterns of the and-service that saying, would be interesting to see if the community of Mozilla can compete with Microsoft by the content without threads e-e-enabling of envisioneer of the initiatives of the company.
George Bush
The above post is VERY insightful. C is becoming a bloated mess of a language and shouldn't be used unless totally neccessary.
Ummm, this language kicks arse compared to C. C looks quite toy-like compared to this language. (This is not a flame, just the truth)
What about Mosix?
Any video news on Linux is good. The video players suck under it. RP Alpha is the only one that's passable. MTV is ok, but it's too small (window size, unadjustable) and stops working after a few minutes. The remaining ones freeze up and go too slow and are generally not high-quality. If there was finally an all-in-one video/media player for Linux that actually worked, it would be a boon to the community.
Amiga 2000 had a PC-on-a-card available that could run MS DOS and MS DOS programs faster than a 286.
It's 2000....$1-million is nothing....
Some of the best mathematicians I've know have been professors....most over 50. Maybe in *SOME* people skills start declining in their 30s, but I think that a blanket statement like that is quite idiotic and unprovable.
Since I only have a Master of Technology qualification, and the United States doesn't recognize it, apparently (maybe I'm wrong, I don't know...)
The simple truth of the problem is that there is no one answer to it...
Not many people have a firm grasp of what this problem is really all about. Sure, you'll study it in your B.Sc or B.Tech...but really, even graduates fail to grasp some key concepts, although they study the tougher concepts....basically, this is how it goes:P is the set of problems that can be solved in deterministic polynomial time. That means for a problem with inputs of size N, there must be some way to solve the problem in F(N) steps for some polynomial F. F can be any polynomial, even N to the 10 millionth power.
NP is the set of problems you can solve in non-deterministic polynomial time. That means for a problem with inputs of size N, there must be some way to solve the problem in F(N) steps for some polynomial F just as before. In NP, however, the student is allowed to make lucky guesses, though it must prove the solution is correct. The standard format for a program in NP is: Guess the answer. Verify that the answer is correct in polynomial time. For example, factoring is in NP. Suppose you have a number A that you want to break into two factors. The NP program is: Guess factors P and Q. Multiply P times Q and verify that the results is A. This takes only two non-deterministic steps so the problem is in NP. Therefore, considering the differences between the two and the estimation involved, how is it possible to prove something like this?You can't "prove this". You can't disprove it either, but that's not the point - minesweeper is not going to help you with this.
What's that supposed to mean?
It stands for Autonomous System.
As far as I know, Yahoo use their own propreitry Perl scripts and Google is coded mainly in Python. There's a world of difference. The most accurate engine is Google - perhaps telling you a little something about the languages each was written in.
Everything he said was correct. The guy that was claiming that "perl is for crackheads" etc etc didn't have a keen grasp of logic.
The only argument against Perl that you need is this.Car companies don't weld the hood shut. Yes, you can tamper with car engines if you know what you're doing - and you can pretty much customize your car "how you like it"
Mandatory first female collie sex post.
what about sex with female collies?