"It us not about journaled, reversible changes to data and that is a completely different problem with completely different requirements and approaches." That is not what I am talking about. Stop lying.
"True, but Amazon is getting into an area where it has no core-competency."
I repeat: *unannounced product*. We don't even know that they are getting into the area let alone that they are incompetent at it.
"a great phone - at least a Xiaomi "
A who? Whatever it is it has already failed because no one knows about it.
Also: “We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” Palm CEO Ed Colligan on the iPhone
"You are talking about a different problem" Confiming the discussion to one specific subset on one specific person's storage needs would make it a pretty useless public discussion.
"You are talking about database-sores and the like." No I am not. Stop lying.
How do you distinguish between intentional and unintentional changes? How much storage overhead do you need to keep all changes so that you can roll back any unintentional change?
"So what is the point of scanning and making the info from the scan available if they don't reveal anything from the text?"
The same point behind card catalogs at the library, or Google: so that you can find sources that have the kind of information you are looking for instead of trying to buy all of the books everywhere on the off chance that any one might have what you are looking for.
"have you ever noticed that when a weather event supports AGW, it's caused by AGW, but when one doesn't, it's "just weather"."
Actually no, I have never once seen anyone make a scientific argument that a single weather event represents a long term AGW trend. Care to cite some examples?
I have seen people shoot their mouths off in eitheir direction while supplying no basis, or make joke where an analysis is not expected, and as such I find them to be equally dismissible.
"There's nothing wrong with asking why something happens."
There is nothing wrong with asking in good faith. However, it is possible to ask a question in bad faith as a way of making a stipulation that has not been supported by evidence. This is known in journalism as "telling a question".
For example, here is a slight modification of a classic: "Why did you stop beating your wife?" It carries with it the stipulation that the questioned person has been beating his wife. Any subsequent discussion is implicitly based on wife-beating having occurred, and any attempt to back up and establish whether there is a factual basis can be shown to be a diversion from the substance of the discussion.
So let's go back to the OP: "How can the water level on earth rise faster in some places than in others? I would expect water to rise uniformly on the surface of a sphere (egg)." This is not just a question about why something happens; there is also a statement about expectations not being met. The stated expectations now change the framing of the subsequent dialog. Whether the question is asked in good faith now depends on whether the expectation could be held by a reasonable person AND whether someone actually holds it. The expectation could be absurd ("I would expect water to rise uniformly because unicorns would drink the excess.") or it could not actually be held by anyone (a strawman or a concern troll).
This is more of a concern in some discussion where a side can benefit even if its own arguments are invalid. If one side employs a large number of bad faith arguments then eventually even the opposite side gets cast into doubt as a) it makes all of the participants look foolish, and b) it provokes bad behavior out of frustration from the side attempting to make good faith arguments. This discourages any action by third parties so if a side's goal is to maintain the status quo this is a practical tactic.
So that I can receive the calls to my original number, instead of trying to convince people to change the number they use for a small number of days then switch back.
Nobody does x86 natively any more, it's all just additional translation. Back when IBM was producing Pentium and PowerPC, they pretty much only changed the front-end and kept the same exec stack, caches, etc.
If you really needed it Arm could be just another byte code, with just another front end.
"or buy the international package" The list of countries included in the international package changes over time. Once it changed on me while I was traveling.
"Just get a foreign sim card" 1) Unless you also have a multi-SIM phone, you now also have a foreign number and cannot receive calls to your regular number. 2) This also assumes that you do not also have to fill out paperwork that will take more time that your stay in the foreign country.
If you have pre-paid voice and domestic data on T-Mobile they do not offer any way to get any international data, either by pre-paid, monthly payment, or pay as you go.
"The thing is, these measurements are either synthetic (who has code consisting of nothing but FMA?), hard and uncommon to use (Integer SIMD is rare and AVX2 has a confusing idea of "lanes" that splits some 256-bit ops into two 128-bit ones), or not on all CPUs (TSX is disabled on their unlocked K line for some reason)."
Except to the people buying top-bin parts by the thousands that really do need all of these obscure ops.
Slashdot Mirror
My upload speed already is faster for LTE than for my cable modem (Oregon, USA). Download is about 1/2.
"It us not about journaled, reversible changes to data and that is a completely different problem with completely different requirements and approaches."
That is not what I am talking about. Stop lying.
"True, but Amazon is getting into an area where it has no core-competency."
I repeat: *unannounced product*. We don't even know that they are getting into the area let alone that they are incompetent at it.
"a great phone - at least a Xiaomi "
A who? Whatever it is it has already failed because no one knows about it.
Also:
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” Palm CEO Ed Colligan on the iPhone
An unspecified feature for an unannounced product, but we already know exactly what's wrong with it and why it will fail.
"You are talking about a different problem"
Confiming the discussion to one specific subset on one specific person's storage needs would make it a pretty useless public discussion.
"You are talking about database-sores and the like."
No I am not. Stop lying.
Thanks for the response. The asset vs. currency advisory is a relevant point and I admit that I missed it.
How do you distinguish between intentional and unintentional changes? How much storage overhead do you need to keep all changes so that you can roll back any unintentional change?
"American regulatory practices"
Such as...?
"So what is the point of scanning and making the info from the scan available if they don't reveal anything from the text?"
The same point behind card catalogs at the library, or Google: so that you can find sources that have the kind of information you are looking for instead of trying to buy all of the books everywhere on the off chance that any one might have what you are looking for.
The same place as the TV ad, newspaper ads, and billboards are for Joe Self-published's book: in your fevered imagination.
We are now too old to learn to internet.
"How much marketing do you think they're going to throw at a book if they're only willing to pay the author $5,000?"
More than the author is capable of on his own if he was willing to accept a $5,000 advance..
"have you ever noticed that when a weather event supports AGW, it's caused by AGW, but when one doesn't, it's "just weather"."
Actually no, I have never once seen anyone make a scientific argument that a single weather event represents a long term AGW trend. Care to cite some examples?
I have seen people shoot their mouths off in eitheir direction while supplying no basis, or make joke where an analysis is not expected, and as such I find them to be equally dismissible.
"There's nothing wrong with asking why something happens."
There is nothing wrong with asking in good faith. However, it is possible to ask a question in bad faith as a way of making a stipulation that has not been supported by evidence. This is known in journalism as "telling a question".
For example, here is a slight modification of a classic: "Why did you stop beating your wife?" It carries with it the stipulation that the questioned person has been beating his wife. Any subsequent discussion is implicitly based on wife-beating having occurred, and any attempt to back up and establish whether there is a factual basis can be shown to be a diversion from the substance of the discussion.
So let's go back to the OP: "How can the water level on earth rise faster in some places than in others? I would expect water to rise uniformly on the surface of a sphere (egg)." This is not just a question about why something happens; there is also a statement about expectations not being met. The stated expectations now change the framing of the subsequent dialog. Whether the question is asked in good faith now depends on whether the expectation could be held by a reasonable person AND whether someone actually holds it. The expectation could be absurd ("I would expect water to rise uniformly because unicorns would drink the excess.") or it could not actually be held by anyone (a strawman or a concern troll).
This is more of a concern in some discussion where a side can benefit even if its own arguments are invalid. If one side employs a large number of bad faith arguments then eventually even the opposite side gets cast into doubt as a) it makes all of the participants look foolish, and b) it provokes bad behavior out of frustration from the side attempting to make good faith arguments. This discourages any action by third parties so if a side's goal is to maintain the status quo this is a practical tactic.
So that I can receive the calls to my original number, instead of trying to convince people to change the number they use for a small number of days then switch back.
Nobody does x86 natively any more, it's all just additional translation. Back when IBM was producing Pentium and PowerPC, they pretty much only changed the front-end and kept the same exec stack, caches, etc.
If you really needed it Arm could be just another byte code, with just another front end.
"A single engineer can replace a critical component without anyone ever needing to sign off?"
15 people have been fired so far.
"one guy did this"
15 people have been fired so far.
"but one bad engineer "
15 people have been fired so far.
15 people so far have been fired, not just this guy. 5 more have been disciplined, but not fired.
"or buy the international package"
The list of countries included in the international package changes over time. Once it changed on me while I was traveling.
"Just get a foreign sim card"
1) Unless you also have a multi-SIM phone, you now also have a foreign number and cannot receive calls to your regular number.
2) This also assumes that you do not also have to fill out paperwork that will take more time that your stay in the foreign country.
If you have pre-paid voice and domestic data on T-Mobile they do not offer any way to get any international data, either by pre-paid, monthly payment, or pay as you go.
"they managed to break the 4GHz barrier"
Dell sold a Presler-based system at 4.25 GHz in 2006: http://anandtech.com/show/1916...
"The thing is, these measurements are either synthetic (who has code consisting of nothing but FMA?), hard and uncommon to use (Integer SIMD is rare and AVX2 has a confusing idea of "lanes" that splits some 256-bit ops into two 128-bit ones), or not on all CPUs (TSX is disabled on their unlocked K line for some reason)."
Except to the people buying top-bin parts by the thousands that really do need all of these obscure ops.