I have digital cable where I live (Rogers in Toronto, Canada)...and find the VoD service clunky. I would imagine this service would suffer the same "lags and jitters".
If Java is irrelavent for embedded systems....them you might want to mention that to Sun so they can stop producing J2ME:-p (Not least the whole slew of vendors who provide development tools and systems, or the crop of products that are based on embedded Java like RIM's Blackberry!).
Surprised there were no stats for embedded Java growth....with the advent of J2ME (and MIDP and CLDC specs), there's lots going on in the embedded Java space...including lots of new protoboards, Java "CPUs", and Java MCU modules.
No, they are not UNIX implementations....they are UNIX-like, semi UNIX-compatible (from a compilation/library point of view) operating systems.
For example, Linux is a POSIX-compliant kernel which is offered in "distributions", of which several are "UNIX-like" and offer a modicum of UNIX compatibility from a library point-of-view.
The term UNIX these days refers not just to underlying mechanics, but also whether or not you've licensed the rights to use the UNIX trademark from X/Open.
Plus, having a Mach kernel, you could argue that MacOS X isn't built upon anything remotely similar to any true UNIX distribution.
Just because it's got bits of *BSD above that kernel does not UNIX make it;-)
Not only is it unethical, it's also ILLEGAL in many places to do that. And in some places, can even come with relatively stiff penalties that will definitely be more than $30 if you get caught.
Plus...there are lots of not-for-profits that'll gladly recycle your machine for use...even come and pick it up, and somebody gets to benefit from it. This is "as cheap" as the dumpster and does someone some good.
The fact that he got *ANYWHERE* with the so-called heightened threat and supposed increased security at establishments like this is case for concern.
Case in point: Los Almos currently has worse security than many New York City office towers!!!! I don't care if it's not a "super clasffied ultra magic" section of Los Almos...it's the point that these sort of institutions often consider that security by obscurity ("who really wants to break into TA-33?") is adequate.
However, probably worth considering that if they actually got DNA computing working at any scale....the amount of energy required is a factor less than any traditional computing system by virtue of what can be done even with 1cm2 of DNA solution....
My money is still on quantum computing....but we're probably at least 50 years away from anything interesting there...and I'll probably be dead before you can buy a quantum computer;-)
You might want to consider doing some reading on how quantum computing would actually work.
Because of the inherent nature of quantum mechanics, ALL the solutions would be done at the same instant....therefore there wouldn't be a "shortest path" solution. Just the right answer to search for...
It's a fairly abstract idea to get your head around...
You couldn't create a brute force attack with the current implementation.
Everyone's getting bent out of shape with what this does for you today and what it could POTENTIALLY do for you.
Again, you coudl argue that quantum computing will also answer these issues....but that's also pie-in-the-sky right now.
Let's remember that journalism tends to be an industry based on sensationalism at the very best of times...and those articles make this sound a whole lot more than it it's actually capable of right now. (Not to say it's not interesting; it's just not very useful at this point in time and the "performance" benchmarks are somewhat moot because of that....)
It may perform 330 trillion operations per second, but it has NO PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS for that computing power. (Read the stories).
Granted that it's interesting....but it's not much further along than quantum computing.
Also, I'm wondering if Guinness would recognize my computer where I mix two liquid chemicals together and they change color as a computer that can switch froms 0s to 1s more-or-less instantly and on a massively parallel scale;-)
-psy
Re:(Hey Meirowsky!) Other possible sources for gea
on
HDTV via GNU Radio
·
· Score: 1
Whaddya mean? The card they used is only about US$1300;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Just what I was thinking too...
;-)
I bet, for the pilot program, they'll just give you the WEP key or something if you ask for it with your combo.
It'll be interesting war-driving through MacDonald's drive-thrus now
-psy
Yup...it's Video-on-Demand (VoD) on steroids.
I have digital cable where I live (Rogers in Toronto, Canada)...and find the VoD service clunky. I would imagine this service would suffer the same "lags and jitters".
-psy
SCSI is already at "SCSI320"....which is 320Mbyte/sec NOT 320Mbits/sec!!!!
That's already ~2.5Gbits/sec.
And isn't there a SCSI640 working group, too?
-psy
If Java is irrelavent for embedded systems....them you might want to mention that to Sun so they can stop producing J2ME :-p (Not least the whole slew of vendors who provide development tools and systems, or the crop of products that are based on embedded Java like RIM's Blackberry!).
-psy
Get some gro-tubes (fluoresents for indoor cultivation of plants)!
;-)
Don't be surprised if The Man comes-a-knocking, however
-psy
Surprised there were no stats for embedded Java growth....with the advent of J2ME (and MIDP and CLDC specs), there's lots going on in the embedded Java space...including lots of new protoboards, Java "CPUs", and Java MCU modules.
You're right. Points are based on the assumption you're displaying at 72dpi.
However, many graphics subsystems (even Apple's) run at higher dpi settings these days...meaning that you often don't get true WYSIWYG.
-psy
I haven't had my coffee yet and misread that as:
;-)
"European Life in Doubt"
-psy
No, they are not UNIX implementations....they are UNIX-like, semi UNIX-compatible (from a compilation/library point of view) operating systems.
For example, Linux is a POSIX-compliant kernel which is offered in "distributions", of which several are "UNIX-like" and offer a modicum of UNIX compatibility from a library point-of-view.
-psy
It never was UNIX...never will be.
;-)
The term UNIX these days refers not just to underlying mechanics, but also whether or not you've licensed the rights to use the UNIX trademark from X/Open.
Plus, having a Mach kernel, you could argue that MacOS X isn't built upon anything remotely similar to any true UNIX distribution.
Just because it's got bits of *BSD above that kernel does not UNIX make it
-psy
He did, however, omit the factoid that the new system was 50% less reliable ;-)
;-)
But it does crash 89% faster now, so who cares?
-psy
Re-read his post...he wants a small LCD that functions as MONITOR. Not something to *monitor* his system stats.
-psy
Actually, I believe WiReD magazine is owned by Condé Nast...no? Same people who publish Vogue, GQ, etc.
The WiReD news portal is run by Terra Lycos...however.
-psy
"The dumpster is cheaper"
Not only is it unethical, it's also ILLEGAL in many places to do that. And in some places, can even come with relatively stiff penalties that will definitely be more than $30 if you get caught.
Plus...there are lots of not-for-profits that'll gladly recycle your machine for use...even come and pick it up, and somebody gets to benefit from it. This is "as cheap" as the dumpster and does someone some good.
Or maybe you're just a silly dumpster troll?
I don't get it...we have to hold a member of the iridaceae family infront of a cash machine to get our money?
How are we expected to carry these flowers around without wilting and dying?
-psy
...bury you TiBook in the forest and leave it there....does it still make screen redraw noises? ;-)
The fact that he got *ANYWHERE* with the so-called heightened threat and supposed increased security at establishments like this is case for concern.
Case in point: Los Almos currently has worse security than many New York City office towers!!!! I don't care if it's not a "super clasffied ultra magic" section of Los Almos...it's the point that these sort of institutions often consider that security by obscurity ("who really wants to break into TA-33?") is adequate.
-psy
That's quite a valid point.
;-)
However, probably worth considering that if they actually got DNA computing working at any scale....the amount of energy required is a factor less than any traditional computing system by virtue of what can be done even with 1cm2 of DNA solution....
My money is still on quantum computing....but we're probably at least 50 years away from anything interesting there...and I'll probably be dead before you can buy a quantum computer
-psy
You might want to consider doing some reading on how quantum computing would actually work.
Because of the inherent nature of quantum mechanics, ALL the solutions would be done at the same instant....therefore there wouldn't be a "shortest path" solution. Just the right answer to search for...
It's a fairly abstract idea to get your head around...
-psy
You couldn't create a brute force attack with the current implementation.
Everyone's getting bent out of shape with what this does for you today and what it could POTENTIALLY do for you.
Again, you coudl argue that quantum computing will also answer these issues....but that's also pie-in-the-sky right now.
Let's remember that journalism tends to be an industry based on sensationalism at the very best of times...and those articles make this sound a whole lot more than it it's actually capable of right now. (Not to say it's not interesting; it's just not very useful at this point in time and the "performance" benchmarks are somewhat moot because of that....)
-psy
Actually, I believe you'll find that it currently has no practical applications....current tense.
;-)
You're referring to mostly FUTURE POSSIBILITIES. (Stress: future tense).
You could argue that quantum computing has equally earth-shattering potential....
As for answering "yes" or "no" questions....it's not a Magic 8-ball, k'now
-psy
It may perform 330 trillion operations per second, but it has NO PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS for that computing power. (Read the stories).
;-)
Granted that it's interesting....but it's not much further along than quantum computing.
Also, I'm wondering if Guinness would recognize my computer where I mix two liquid chemicals together and they change color as a computer that can switch froms 0s to 1s more-or-less instantly and on a massively parallel scale
-psy
Whaddya mean? The card they used is only about US$1300 ;-)
-psy
...tell her you won't wear your pocket protector anymore....or wear any clothing with Tux on it.... ;-)
....has a major crack near one of the hinges and paint thats coming off FROM NORMAL USE! :-o
Kinda sucks for a machine 9 months old that cost US$3000.