"By the report the G5 processors are just as fast as the fastest x86."
Which is funny, because they took the fastest available G5s and pitted them against the second fastest available single-core Opterons.
I also don't buy the gcc as an equalizer assertion given in the test. They've already shown that gcc doesn't produce apples-to-apples results, and now they've shown that it doesn't produce improving (or even consistent) results in newer versions.
I'm willing to accept that they've produced some real-world tests, but the synthetic ones are a bit of a stretch. Yes, the processors have similar performance envelopes, but saying anything more than that is just creating a conclusion with too little real information.
Anyone with an armchair understanding of economics and a slight interest in libertarianism just lost that interest. Other responders have already pointed out the practical flaws behind concepts that, even in theory, you are wrong about. I won't belabor the point, or drum up Smith again.
I'm struggling to actually find a sentence in your post that can be seen as true or accurate with even a moderate respect for rational thought. I know a few libertarians. A couple of them would be angry at how stupidly their ideas are being represented, but one of them would just plainly love it. He's merely a libertarian to be a troll when talking about politics.
There is not just one Linux. Sure, there's not one Windows either.
Two Windows' on store shelves already confuses people. Now, imagine every variant of Linux in front of a user. The list of available applications with many distributions is also daunting.
I think there were at least four distros listed in that writeup. Explain that, or compilation of an application, to my mother.
We'll get there eventually, but claiming that we're already there might be a bit premature.
These are not nuclear powered rockets of the Tintin variety, and the environmental impact is, in total, quite low.
We should worry more about vinyl siding production for houses, cars, etc. Seriously, this is like optimizing the property page rendering code for blurring an image and not optimizing the blur. It'll be faster, but not by much. Hit the big-ticket pollution items before you belabor the horrors of the rarely occurring ones.
Being "a lot of launches" doesn't mean that it contributes to the measurable pollution of the planet in a percentage that would show within four significant digits.
This guy says that it was smoke and mirrors because some possibilities were under-served on the current generation?
It was production-grade hardware, running demos. "Smoke and mirrors" is faking it. Sure some suggestions might be made about applications, but there's nothing keeping those things from happening on the hardware.
This guy is indeed a wet blanket, a wet blanket of abject stupidity.
This is just another case of California's government going off the deep-end.
The very idea that the tax should only be paid by those who directly use a given service provided by government is a bad one, as many indirectly benefit from services provided to others. Fast shipping? Roads. Not being robbed by people so uneducated that they have nothing to do but feed off of society? Public education. Being able to breathe? More efficient cars that pollute less.
Governments seem to talk of tax as a tool for public betterment and behavior control only until they find that they've budgeted themselves into a corner. Then they just do their best to tax the minority. In this case, that minority would be the people with the social responsibility to consider a more efficient means of transportation with no discernable long-term cost savings available (of course, I drive a sports car, so I'm going to hell).
What of the problems for California's citizens? I've had a GPS receiver displace my displayed position by several hundred miles for a brief moment. Will a person be taxed for error?
How long will it be before the police begin harvesting data regarding a person's wherabouts, akin to having a view of history obtained before a warrant was issued?
When are you people going to learn that we should invariably modify and control the places that we discover as soon as it is technically feasible to do so, resulting in an eventual conflict with a vastly superior race of aliens who then take it upon themselves to erradicate mankind, most notably for our retention of nuclear weapons. Come on... I've seen enough science fiction movies to know that this is just the way that things work.
Getting back to what really should be done, this might not be a bad way to go about things once we have harvested what information we can from the planet in its current virgin state. We're eventually going to set out to do this to planets that we encounter as we colonize space, so why not start close to home?
As much as I hate to admit it, science may end up merely serving as a tool for the propagation of our species and financial interests. Being given time to explore Mars before someone else takes the initiative to begin modifying it is quite a luxury. When a fiscally sound argument can be made for colonizing Mars, regardless of the destruction involved, keeping people from it will be a nearly impossible task.
As some employees claim to read the mails in question, some have even purchased the products advertized, it appears that the bulk of this cost isn't that the mails are sent but that the employees are willfully seeking distractions in the first place. I would call this the usual cost-hunting nonsense, because people sitting in front of modern computers are not machines.
These are web-connected, multi-tasking, bright-colors-and-lights computers, and expecting employees to stay constantly focused on the task at hand is folly, at best.
I mean, look at me. I'm checking out slashdot while waiting for my build to finish when I could be answering work emails or reading code that I'm about to change. It is a personal decision that one could construe to have cost the company money, but it's really more a part of conducting business with human employees.
If you had read the article in question, you would have found that, of those surveyed, the average time supposedly spent deleting the 18.5 spam messages received per day was 2.8 minutes, rather than 12. I spend more than 2.8 minutes per day going to the restroom.
Do we see reports on CNN saying that allowing employees to use the facilities costs businesses $44 Billion/year? Should we all be in diapers to increase productivity? Would it increase productivity to be in diapers? I know that this is an inevitable result of employing non-slave labor, but the point here is that attempting to quantify these costs in an attempt to demonize spam is an exercise in futility.
This sounds a lot like the wildly fictitious "cost of hackers" reports that we have all seen before.
You don't see me declaring that theifs have cost me $120 because I have locks on my doors, do you?
I know that this is a claim of lost productivity, but people sitting in front of computers aren't 100% productive. Expecting them to be so is absurd, and pinning their less-than-perfect output on spam is just scapegoating. We all hate spam, but this is just the usual cost-hunting nonsense....
But there have been security vulnerabilities in Linux distros, and virii aren't absent from the landscape, either. As to which OS is more/less secure, it seems that the more important question would be "is Linux as secure as is perceived by the general public, and is Windows as insecure?" I would have to say that such levels of security/insecurity would be amazing.
First off, the key doesn't use static from the ignition. Read about this baby that swallowed a key to have that bit set straight.
Secondly, responding to the parent of this post's parent, a neighbor of mine who owned an Integra Type R (that, it just so happens, was exactly like mine) had his car stolen in under two minutes while mall security guards watched. The monkeys smashed the window, opened up the passenger floorboard, snipped the immobilizer lead, shoved a screwdriver into the ignition, and drove off.
The very next morning his car was found, minus its motor and expensive bits, rolled over, several times, into a lake. That he didn't have insurance at the time doesn't make the implementation details of immobilizers more or less important. Improperly implemented, these chips are about as potent as Master locks on chicken-wire fences.
I entirely agree, but we have information and technologies available now that we have chosen (more, our congress has chosen) to ignore.
I don't really know what that has to do with my argument. I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of plans that consider all radioactive materials equal.
It's not that these materials are radioactive, but that these materials are composed of isotopes and elements that are *very* rarely found in nature.
Strontium-90, cesium-137, and plutonium are not materials that one can regularly dig up in anything greater than trace amounts, but we have manufactured at least several hundred thousand kilograms of each. To suggest putting these low-half-life materials into populated regions or atomizing them for atmospheric delivery is humorous folly at best.
If we can actually revert the materials in question to their originals (without costing us *more* energy than we originally received from fission; a task that, just to be clear, is impossible) before burial, then I'm all for it. In actuality, your naive suggestions merely show a lack of understanding of the fundamental problem, but this lack of understanding is not unique. That very thinking likely led to the hatching of the Yucca mountain plan in the first place.
As we depart the steel age and forge into the composite-ceramic age, we stand a very good chance of improving existing technologies that show promise in solving this problem completely.
Before we decide to package these materials as a dangerous slurry in a mountain about which we intend to forget, we should seriously consider investing in technological advances that have been before us for over a decade.
Please, we're both in Wisconsin, so you can come over and see that I haven't donned a tin-foil hat since dressing as a robot at age 8.
Check out my page to see how CNN silently revised its exit poll results for Ohio between 12:24am and 1:41am. In order for their numbers to make sense, Kerry must have received negative votes in later exit polls.
The technology on this just flat out smokes the design execution. This would have been better as a Nomad given the shoddy design of the costume as a whole.
I have, and it's a pretty impressive OS. Microsoft is looking to do a lot of things to facilitate multi-tasking by the user, rather than just by the OS.
It's certainly not ready for prime time, but it's not a bad direction to take. I've also used Mac OS X extensively. Like most of you, I have a stack of running computers under, on, behind, and around my desk. I'm very sure that I would *not* switch to OS X were it available on x86.
One of the most common methods of payment for syndication is through barter. Networks syndicating a given show will supply some portion of the commercial time during the show (or, on occasion, at completely different times) in exchange for the right to air the show.
Sony Pictures can then hold on to this time until very close (within hours, if need be) to air-time.
Think of the ratings for the show in which Ken falls. Wouldn't you want your commercial to air during that historic event?
Nearly all of the talks this year (papers, sessions, panels, etc...) will be available on DVD-ROM for $249. They're completely free as streaming courses in the ACM Portal.
This is *almost* all of the content, but expect to get pretty much everything that is cutting edge in these talks. Use your ACM Portal membership to also read the paper on the side.
In short, if you're serious about doing work in this industry as a programmer and you don't have an ACM portal membership, I'd suggest getting one.
Slashdot Mirror
"By the report the G5 processors are just as fast as the fastest x86."
Which is funny, because they took the fastest available G5s and pitted them against the second fastest available single-core Opterons.
I also don't buy the gcc as an equalizer assertion given in the test. They've already shown that gcc doesn't produce apples-to-apples results, and now they've shown that it doesn't produce improving (or even consistent) results in newer versions.
I'm willing to accept that they've produced some real-world tests, but the synthetic ones are a bit of a stretch. Yes, the processors have similar performance envelopes, but saying anything more than that is just creating a conclusion with too little real information.
Anyone with an armchair understanding of economics and a slight interest in libertarianism just lost that interest. Other responders have already pointed out the practical flaws behind concepts that, even in theory, you are wrong about. I won't belabor the point, or drum up Smith again.
I'm struggling to actually find a sentence in your post that can be seen as true or accurate with even a moderate respect for rational thought. I know a few libertarians. A couple of them would be angry at how stupidly their ideas are being represented, but one of them would just plainly love it. He's merely a libertarian to be a troll when talking about politics.
There is not just one Linux. Sure, there's not one Windows either.
Two Windows' on store shelves already confuses people. Now, imagine every variant of Linux in front of a user. The list of available applications with many distributions is also daunting.
I think there were at least four distros listed in that writeup. Explain that, or compilation of an application, to my mother. We'll get there eventually, but claiming that we're already there might be a bit premature.
Everyone who puts their name on the list gets vaporized when the residents of Pluto come looking for whoever bombed their pseudo-planet?
I'm game.
Every girlfriend I've had has been less intelligent than me.
I mean, come on, they dated me .
These are not nuclear powered rockets of the Tintin variety, and the environmental impact is, in total, quite low.
We should worry more about vinyl siding production for houses, cars, etc. Seriously, this is like optimizing the property page rendering code for blurring an image and not optimizing the blur. It'll be faster, but not by much. Hit the big-ticket pollution items before you belabor the horrors of the rarely occurring ones.
Being "a lot of launches" doesn't mean that it contributes to the measurable pollution of the planet in a percentage that would show within four significant digits.
Seriously, this sort of data collection could lead to:
A) Awesome video games
B) Large questions about privacy when Google scans you in your house
C) Really awesome video games
This guy says that it was smoke and mirrors because some possibilities were under-served on the current generation?
It was production-grade hardware, running demos. "Smoke and mirrors" is faking it. Sure some suggestions might be made about applications, but there's nothing keeping those things from happening on the hardware.
This guy is indeed a wet blanket, a wet blanket of abject stupidity.
This is just another case of California's government going off the deep-end.
The very idea that the tax should only be paid by those who directly use a given service provided by government is a bad one, as many indirectly benefit from services provided to others. Fast shipping? Roads. Not being robbed by people so uneducated that they have nothing to do but feed off of society? Public education. Being able to breathe? More efficient cars that pollute less.
Governments seem to talk of tax as a tool for public betterment and behavior control only until they find that they've budgeted themselves into a corner. Then they just do their best to tax the minority. In this case, that minority would be the people with the social responsibility to consider a more efficient means of transportation with no discernable long-term cost savings available (of course, I drive a sports car, so I'm going to hell).
What of the problems for California's citizens? I've had a GPS receiver displace my displayed position by several hundred miles for a brief moment. Will a person be taxed for error?
How long will it be before the police begin harvesting data regarding a person's wherabouts, akin to having a view of history obtained before a warrant was issued?
When are you people going to learn that we should invariably modify and control the places that we discover as soon as it is technically feasible to do so, resulting in an eventual conflict with a vastly superior race of aliens who then take it upon themselves to erradicate mankind, most notably for our retention of nuclear weapons. Come on... I've seen enough science fiction movies to know that this is just the way that things work.
Getting back to what really should be done, this might not be a bad way to go about things once we have harvested what information we can from the planet in its current virgin state. We're eventually going to set out to do this to planets that we encounter as we colonize space, so why not start close to home?
As much as I hate to admit it, science may end up merely serving as a tool for the propagation of our species and financial interests. Being given time to explore Mars before someone else takes the initiative to begin modifying it is quite a luxury. When a fiscally sound argument can be made for colonizing Mars, regardless of the destruction involved, keeping people from it will be a nearly impossible task.
As some employees claim to read the mails in question, some have even purchased the products advertized, it appears that the bulk of this cost isn't that the mails are sent but that the employees are willfully seeking distractions in the first place. I would call this the usual cost-hunting nonsense, because people sitting in front of modern computers are not machines.
These are web-connected, multi-tasking, bright-colors-and-lights computers, and expecting employees to stay constantly focused on the task at hand is folly, at best.
I mean, look at me. I'm checking out slashdot while waiting for my build to finish when I could be answering work emails or reading code that I'm about to change. It is a personal decision that one could construe to have cost the company money, but it's really more a part of conducting business with human employees.
If you had read the article in question, you would have found that, of those surveyed, the average time supposedly spent deleting the 18.5 spam messages received per day was 2.8 minutes, rather than 12. I spend more than 2.8 minutes per day going to the restroom.
Do we see reports on CNN saying that allowing employees to use the facilities costs businesses $44 Billion/year? Should we all be in diapers to increase productivity? Would it increase productivity to be in diapers? I know that this is an inevitable result of employing non-slave labor, but the point here is that attempting to quantify these costs in an attempt to demonize spam is an exercise in futility.
This sounds a lot like the wildly fictitious "cost of hackers" reports that we have all seen before.
You don't see me declaring that theifs have cost me $120 because I have locks on my doors, do you?
I know that this is a claim of lost productivity, but people sitting in front of computers aren't 100% productive. Expecting them to be so is absurd, and pinning their less-than-perfect output on spam is just scapegoating. We all hate spam, but this is just the usual cost-hunting nonsense....
But there have been security vulnerabilities in Linux distros, and virii aren't absent from the landscape, either. As to which OS is more/less secure, it seems that the more important question would be "is Linux as secure as is perceived by the general public, and is Windows as insecure?" I would have to say that such levels of security/insecurity would be amazing.
First off, the key doesn't use static from the ignition. Read about this baby that swallowed a key to have that bit set straight.
Secondly, responding to the parent of this post's parent, a neighbor of mine who owned an Integra Type R (that, it just so happens, was exactly like mine) had his car stolen in under two minutes while mall security guards watched. The monkeys smashed the window, opened up the passenger floorboard, snipped the immobilizer lead, shoved a screwdriver into the ignition, and drove off.
The very next morning his car was found, minus its motor and expensive bits, rolled over, several times, into a lake. That he didn't have insurance at the time doesn't make the implementation details of immobilizers more or less important. Improperly implemented, these chips are about as potent as Master locks on chicken-wire fences.
You mean, the way that Sony did? cough
I can't think of a swap being much more easy than that.
I entirely agree, but we have information and technologies available now that we have chosen (more, our congress has chosen) to ignore.
I don't really know what that has to do with my argument. I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of plans that consider all radioactive materials equal.
It's not that these materials are radioactive, but that these materials are composed of isotopes and elements that are *very* rarely found in nature.
Strontium-90, cesium-137, and plutonium are not materials that one can regularly dig up in anything greater than trace amounts, but we have manufactured at least several hundred thousand kilograms of each. To suggest putting these low-half-life materials into populated regions or atomizing them for atmospheric delivery is humorous folly at best.
If we can actually revert the materials in question to their originals (without costing us *more* energy than we originally received from fission; a task that, just to be clear, is impossible) before burial, then I'm all for it. In actuality, your naive suggestions merely show a lack of understanding of the fundamental problem, but this lack of understanding is not unique. That very thinking likely led to the hatching of the Yucca mountain plan in the first place.
As we depart the steel age and forge into the composite-ceramic age, we stand a very good chance of improving existing technologies that show promise in solving this problem completely.
Before we decide to package these materials as a dangerous slurry in a mountain about which we intend to forget, we should seriously consider investing in technological advances that have been before us for over a decade.
Please, we're both in Wisconsin, so you can come over and see that I haven't donned a tin-foil hat since dressing as a robot at age 8.
Check out my page to see how CNN silently revised its exit poll results for Ohio between 12:24am and 1:41am. In order for their numbers to make sense, Kerry must have received negative votes in later exit polls.
Did you miss the point in the second debate where Kerry pledged to not raise taxes on those earning less than $200k/year?
I think majority of this chatter is rather uninformed, but I can't just let this "prove a negative" garbage pass as an argument.
The technology on this just flat out smokes the design execution. This would have been better as a Nomad given the shoddy design of the costume as a whole.
I have, and it's a pretty impressive OS. Microsoft is looking to do a lot of things to facilitate multi-tasking by the user, rather than just by the OS.
It's certainly not ready for prime time, but it's not a bad direction to take. I've also used Mac OS X extensively. Like most of you, I have a stack of running computers under, on, behind, and around my desk. I'm very sure that I would *not* switch to OS X were it available on x86.
Jeopardy shows are filmed in five-shows-per-day blocks, with audiences seeing either two or three episodes in rapid succession.
Even the temp selling ice-cream on the lot knows the results of last-week's tapings. No one will find out who leaked this information.
One of the most common methods of payment for syndication is through barter. Networks syndicating a given show will supply some portion of the commercial time during the show (or, on occasion, at completely different times) in exchange for the right to air the show.
Sony Pictures can then hold on to this time until very close (within hours, if need be) to air-time. Think of the ratings for the show in which Ken falls. Wouldn't you want your commercial to air during that historic event?
Nearly all of the talks this year (papers, sessions, panels, etc...) will be available on DVD-ROM for $249. They're completely free as streaming courses in the ACM Portal.
This is *almost* all of the content, but expect to get pretty much everything that is cutting edge in these talks. Use your ACM Portal membership to also read the paper on the side.
In short, if you're serious about doing work in this industry as a programmer and you don't have an ACM portal membership, I'd suggest getting one.
'Our future is a positive future. We assume that things are basically going to get better, progress will continue,' Zuckerman says.
So, what they mean is that this show will have absolutely no basis in fact? Their next show will feature Auschwitz with supermarkets...