The models and dating systems could be wrong. They can't possibly be SO wrong that we measure billions of years and it's only a few thousand. They could be wrong by a few orders of magnitude and 6000 years would still not make sense. Either a higher being made things to appear to be older, or they ARE older. There's no doubt about that.
The problem with the kind of creationism some people are advertising is that they insist that it happened around 6000 years ago. A lot of scientists would be ok with the idea of creationism -- if you allow it to happen billions of years ago as the spark that created life, but then let life evolve independently. But of course then humanity is not special -- unless the creator helped things happen this way for the purpose to create intelligent life.
So creationism/intelligent design is OK, and a higher being managing/guiding the universe is OK; it just doesn't make sense for it to have happened 6000 years ago.
Because my computer is >1000 times more powerful than your 486, so I expect the graphical environment to similarly be >1000 times more powerful than it is on your 486. X11 can't give me that, it seems. Wayland might. We'll see.
I have heard it said that the general purpose solutions (OpenCL and DirectCompute both) can't represent the GPU architecture in enough detail to get the same level of efficiency as using a platform-specific API such as CUDA. If you want your code to be as fast as possible, and you know you are building a system around NV hardware, then CUDA is supposedly a better target.
Of course the alternative is that NV isn't putting as much effort in making the OpenCL/DirectCompute driver interfaces as efficient as CUDA, and what I said above is just an excuse, but I can't prove either.
They are not testing for development purposes. They are testing if they STILL WORK. Because you wouldn't want to be attacked and then realize the missile has been dead for a decade or 2.
I dived into Gentoo once, without any unix experience whatsoever. I succeeded in building from stage1, up to the point where I had a working X.org with some WM or another, then I somehow decided to execute "umount -f/" or similar, from a root terminal. And it worked. And then it started spamming me with bad inodes, then it kernel-panicked to death. That is not my main reason to not switch, though. The main reason is that it have a mostly irrational hate for POSIX, X11, and variable/function names with underscores. To me, Wayland was a nice beacon of hope for a while, until I decided to look at the documentation and I saw that the api was based on naming functions with underscores. So I'm back to shrugging and hoping there's a working alternative to Windows 7 (be it from Microsoft or from somebody else), by the time it becomes too obsolete.
Not really. The codebase is OpenGL ES for all of them, they just need to change the translation backend of libEGL in each platform, which would be happening either way, ANGLE or not.
If being discredited was a reason for anyone to stop trying, then no one would come out of their tiny holes. Fall, learn from your mistake, stand up, and try again.
OpenGL is not an opensource project. It's an open standard managed by a group that's composed of experts from hardware and software corporations, and sponsored by those (and maybe other) companies. The group's name is Khronos. and yes, THEY decide what OpenGL looks like, and who can use the OpenGL logo. Of course you could create a LibreGL, that bases itself on OpenGL, but flows in a different direction, but then you will NOT be sponsored by all those large corporations, who will most probably ignore your effort, good or bad. If you did succeed, though, it would be a truly amazing achievement.
On a side note, OpenGL 3.0 was supposed to be exactly that. They were supposed to remove all then nonsense from the API, and give us something clean and effective. But by the time it was out of the box, it turned out to be just yet another set of extensions added into the core, and some little side notes in old features saying they were now considered deprecated. They did add non-backwards-compatible profiles in version 3.1, which, if activated, disable all of the old features that were marked as deprecated in 3.0, but they had already disappointed everyone by then.
It is a standard. At least in name. The Khronos group manages it here. The "the security and stability implications of exposing the most volatile piece of computing hardware through the browser" is exactly why every browser exposes WebGL through a wrapper/translator library that acts as a validator to prevent bad behaviour. WebGL-based exploits have been shown in the past.
They (Chrome and Firefox) take that space only when maximized. Since both do the same, I assume there's a reason for that. I didn't know anyone used a web browser without it being maximized, though. I personally never cared much about "maximizing screen space". I prefer to keep menubar and bookmarks in the first bar, followed by navigation, followed by the tabs. I have a strong dislike for tabs-on-top layout, which is one of the main reasons I don't like Chrome (right after its complete lack of UI customizing, beyond simple skinning).
Even Firefox uses Google's ANGLE to translate WebGL to Direct3D.
From the ANGLE site: "The goal of ANGLE is to allow Windows users to seamlessly run WebGL and other OpenGL ES 2.0 content by translating OpenGL ES 2.0 API calls to DirectX 9 API calls. "
Microsoft's main line of business is still software development (be it desktop software or tablet/mobile OS), so you still have some expectation of the products being properly supported. On the other side, the only thing you can expect from Google are new ways for them to gather more information, and present more targeted ads.
Forgot to say, disable broadband connections (stick to GSM) and WiFi unless you need them, turn down the screen brightness, and avoid having background tasks, specially those with constant internet connections (PUSH notifications use a single service for all the notifications, and it's server-initiated instead of polled, so they don't matter as much). You can triple the battery life that way.
I hope you place it with the screen towards you, at least. I don't know where they place the antennas nowadays, but I wouldn't want a device emitting microwaves onto my lungs/heart... nor my genitals, either.
I don't think satellite-based entertainment will ever really grow much, as it's not interactive enough, or at least too laggy. TV over IP over optical fiber makes much more sense to reach the houses, and terrestrial wireless for mobile devices. Question then is how much of that content will be consumed from the mobile devices.
Slashdot Mirror
They mean from before they acquired it from SUN.
The models and dating systems could be wrong. They can't possibly be SO wrong that we measure billions of years and it's only a few thousand. They could be wrong by a few orders of magnitude and 6000 years would still not make sense. Either a higher being made things to appear to be older, or they ARE older. There's no doubt about that.
The problem with the kind of creationism some people are advertising is that they insist that it happened around 6000 years ago. A lot of scientists would be ok with the idea of creationism -- if you allow it to happen billions of years ago as the spark that created life, but then let life evolve independently. But of course then humanity is not special -- unless the creator helped things happen this way for the purpose to create intelligent life.
So creationism/intelligent design is OK, and a higher being managing/guiding the universe is OK; it just doesn't make sense for it to have happened 6000 years ago.
Because my computer is >1000 times more powerful than your 486, so I expect the graphical environment to similarly be >1000 times more powerful than it is on your 486. X11 can't give me that, it seems. Wayland might. We'll see.
I have heard it said that the general purpose solutions (OpenCL and DirectCompute both) can't represent the GPU architecture in enough detail to get the same level of efficiency as using a platform-specific API such as CUDA. If you want your code to be as fast as possible, and you know you are building a system around NV hardware, then CUDA is supposedly a better target.
Of course the alternative is that NV isn't putting as much effort in making the OpenCL/DirectCompute driver interfaces as efficient as CUDA, and what I said above is just an excuse, but I can't prove either.
Your outlet isn't giving out over 10KW of charging power, though.
Hint:
tamper /tampr/ Verb: Interfere with (something) to cause damage or make unauthorized alterations.
[...] in order to prevent attackers from accessing and tempering with them, [...]
temper /tempr/ Verb: Improve the hardness and elasticity of (steel or other metal) by reheating and then cooling it.
How does this relate to EV chargers and why would it be important to prevent people from using them for this task.
They are not testing for development purposes. They are testing if they STILL WORK. Because you wouldn't want to be attacked and then realize the missile has been dead for a decade or 2.
I dived into Gentoo once, without any unix experience whatsoever. I succeeded in building from stage1, up to the point where I had a working X.org with some WM or another, then I somehow decided to execute "umount -f /" or similar, from a root terminal. And it worked. And then it started spamming me with bad inodes, then it kernel-panicked to death. That is not my main reason to not switch, though. The main reason is that it have a mostly irrational hate for POSIX, X11, and variable/function names with underscores. To me, Wayland was a nice beacon of hope for a while, until I decided to look at the documentation and I saw that the api was based on naming functions with underscores. So I'm back to shrugging and hoping there's a working alternative to Windows 7 (be it from Microsoft or from somebody else), by the time it becomes too obsolete.
Not really. The codebase is OpenGL ES for all of them, they just need to change the translation backend of libEGL in each platform, which would be happening either way, ANGLE or not.
I use apps maximized, BUT I like to have the taskbar and titlebar and menubar/ribbon/whatever visible also all the time. Maximized, but not isolated.
If being discredited was a reason for anyone to stop trying, then no one would come out of their tiny holes. Fall, learn from your mistake, stand up, and try again.
OpenGL is not an opensource project. It's an open standard managed by a group that's composed of experts from hardware and software corporations, and sponsored by those (and maybe other) companies. The group's name is Khronos. and yes, THEY decide what OpenGL looks like, and who can use the OpenGL logo. Of course you could create a LibreGL, that bases itself on OpenGL, but flows in a different direction, but then you will NOT be sponsored by all those large corporations, who will most probably ignore your effort, good or bad. If you did succeed, though, it would be a truly amazing achievement.
On a side note, OpenGL 3.0 was supposed to be exactly that. They were supposed to remove all then nonsense from the API, and give us something clean and effective. But by the time it was out of the box, it turned out to be just yet another set of extensions added into the core, and some little side notes in old features saying they were now considered deprecated. They did add non-backwards-compatible profiles in version 3.1, which, if activated, disable all of the old features that were marked as deprecated in 3.0, but they had already disappointed everyone by then.
It is a standard. At least in name. The Khronos group manages it here. The "the security and stability implications of exposing the most volatile piece of computing hardware through the browser" is exactly why every browser exposes WebGL through a wrapper/translator library that acts as a validator to prevent bad behaviour. WebGL-based exploits have been shown in the past.
They (Chrome and Firefox) take that space only when maximized. Since both do the same, I assume there's a reason for that. I didn't know anyone used a web browser without it being maximized, though. I personally never cared much about "maximizing screen space". I prefer to keep menubar and bookmarks in the first bar, followed by navigation, followed by the tabs. I have a strong dislike for tabs-on-top layout, which is one of the main reasons I don't like Chrome (right after its complete lack of UI customizing, beyond simple skinning).
Even Firefox uses Google's ANGLE to translate WebGL to Direct3D.
From the ANGLE site: "The goal of ANGLE is to allow Windows users to seamlessly run WebGL and other OpenGL ES 2.0 content by translating OpenGL ES 2.0 API calls to DirectX 9 API calls. "
Microsoft's main line of business is still software development (be it desktop software or tablet/mobile OS), so you still have some expectation of the products being properly supported. On the other side, the only thing you can expect from Google are new ways for them to gather more information, and present more targeted ads.
Based on the content in the surrounding comments, it's safe to assume the devs are just deluded.
From barely 20-22 hours "idle", to nearly 70, in my case.
Forgot to say, disable broadband connections (stick to GSM) and WiFi unless you need them, turn down the screen brightness, and avoid having background tasks, specially those with constant internet connections (PUSH notifications use a single service for all the notifications, and it's server-initiated instead of polled, so they don't matter as much). You can triple the battery life that way.
I hope you place it with the screen towards you, at least. I don't know where they place the antennas nowadays, but I wouldn't want a device emitting microwaves onto my lungs/heart... nor my genitals, either.
... the quality of the average App will be about as good as the quality of the average website. Not like the existing ones are much better, though.
I don't think satellite-based entertainment will ever really grow much, as it's not interactive enough, or at least too laggy. TV over IP over optical fiber makes much more sense to reach the houses, and terrestrial wireless for mobile devices. Question then is how much of that content will be consumed from the mobile devices.
Firefox DOES warn you about vulnerable versions of plugins and suggests disabling as the better option. Here is a list of blocked versions: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/blocked/