What if the goal of a non-negligible fraction of feminists isn't to eliminate sexism, but to emasculate men ? that would match the fact pattern.
Fortunately there are some extremely good women feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers and Karen Straughan who are working to try ensure the 3rd wave feminists don't go too far - more power to them, I say.
I was considering replacing my MacBook Pro 2013 with a new MBP. Unfortunately to get a machine of roughly the same specs as I had (formerly top-of-the line for 2013, 1 TB SSD, discrete SSD, etc) it now costs 33% more. To get the top of the range 2016 MBP it now costs 66% more. I wouldn't mind paying for this but I do a lot of OpenGL coding and the GPU on the MBPs is quite weak. So I've been looking for alternatives.
In addition to the Dell XPS i considered the Microsoft Surface Books, but their GPU is so-so.
Three manufacturers of great 15" laptops with decent GPUs are:
1) Origin PC, http://www.originpc.com/ - which has a thin laptop with moderate GPU power, and a heavier laptop with more power.
2) System76 has just released a laptop with a 4k display and a GTX 1070 GPU https://system76.com/laptops/o... - my friend has one with a 1080p display and it looks very good,
3) Razer also has an option of a small and light laptop with external GPU. The laptop is a bit small for me, but the external GPU is intriguing. http://www.razerzone.com/store...
I haven't made up my mind which to get. But I hope this may be of some interest to anyone else who'd like a bit more GPU power than the Apple MBP can give, without having to haul a brick.
Your Third Category is the same as the First. Only you cannot see it.
It would also help if you learned more about Climate Science before expounding on it, but then this is Slashdot.
As a physicist I have reduced the debate to the core point of difference. Perhaps if you use the Scientific Method instead of engaging in fact-free ad hominem then we could make some progress.
Which magnitude of Climate Sensitivity is the one you agree with? the one estimated by computer simulation, or the observed value that is vastly lower that is actually measured by two satellites and thousands of balloons of the LTT ? I chose reality. I'm guessing you choose philosophy, which is the incorrect conflation of computer models as data rather than hypothesis.
There is Global Warming relative to the start of regular thermometer readings (from around 1850 onward).
There is Global Warming relative to the end of the Little Ice Age.
There is Global Cooling relative to the Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, and Medieval Warm Period.
There is Global Cooling relative to the start of the Holocene Climate Optimum.
Humans affect the global climate. The human induced component of warming is called 'Anthropogenic Global Warming' (AGW)..
Nature affects the global climate.
The effects of Natural and Anthropogenic Global Warming Effects combine into 'Global Warming' (GW), which contains a component of AGW.
The difference between an Anthropogenic Global Warming 'alarmist' and an Anthropogenic Global Warming 'skeptic' is the degree to which each believes the human component believes that the natural component dominates the human component.
The effect of doubling CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is a rise of approximately 1.1 K. Neither alarmists nor skeptics dispute this !
In addition to the warming effect of CO2 there is an additional factor due to water vapor. The AGW debate is all about the magnitude of the water vapor effect.
Alarmists run computer simulations of global warming, and the range of effects of water vapor range from a factor of 2 to 9 times the effect of CO2
Skeptics point out that the computer simulations are unable to model water vapor correctly, and point out the observed effect of CO2 combined with the water vapor effect produces a sensitivity of around 1.6 K per doubling of CO2.
Under the Scientific Method the computer simulations (which cannot model water vapor effects accurately as they are too complex) are considered "hypothesis", and the satellite and balloon datasets are considered "observation". The computer simulations predict warming of around to 3 times that which is observed.
The Scientific Method thus rejects the simulated AGW as an accurate hypothesis. The Null Hypothesis must be accepted instead until a new hypothesis can be generated.
A new hypothesis will either posit that water vapor effects are signfiicantly less powerful than AGW alarmists fear, or that another mechanism is controlling the warming and not human-emitted CO2. The interaction of solar magnetic activity -> heliosphere -> cosmic ray absoprtion -> cloud formation -> global warming has shown very promising observational leads.
Note: the term 'Climate Change' is meaningless as the climate has always changed naturally, and is never not changing. This is a not a hypothesis under the Scientific Method. The prediction of 'Global Warming' is a hypothesis, but with the slowdown in atmospheric warming over the last 18 years (contrary to the IPCC's AGW model) some slippery people have quietly moved from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change' and hoped people were not smart enough to spot the shift.
Thus, these activists are certain to lose. Not because there is a conspiracy to hide 'Climate Change', but because the plaintiffs don't appear to understand even the basic points of the current debate. To win they need to prove the Transient and Equilibrium Climate Sensitivities are as the IPCC says they are, prove that this is harmful (when the observational evidence shows the 'greening' of the planet as plants thrive with more CO2 and can survive with less water, so now grow in arid regions where they could not before), and prove that the US Government withheld some mythical evidence that is contrary to observe reality and the scientific understanding (which is NOT settled, as some activists would like you to believe). The students cannot win this, because they have the science completely wrong and fanaticism is no substitute for facts in a court of law (provided the jurists are apolitical).
Everyone agrees what CO2 does. Everyone! what is being debated is the effect of WATER VAPOR. And based on observational evidence the computer simulations predict far more warming than is observed (that i
Huh? OpenJDK is awesome and is truly Open Source. This is not the same as Oracle's Java - although they have common ancestry and feed in to each other.
What you have done is an ad hominem attack. That's all you can do, because you cannot argue the facts. You are ignorant of the Islamic doctrines I point out, which is why you are wrong. You are defending an evil totalitarian political ideology and attacking the people who stand up for Enlightenment Civilization against it. That makes you the bad guy in historical terms. You really should stop doing that.
Which of the facts I presented do you disagree with and why? Perhaps you should stop 'feeling' and start 'thinking' instead - then you wouldn't be stupid any more. Cheers.
You think I'm the ugly one by quoting Islamic doctrine accurately, and you wish me cancer ? look in the mirror lady, you are one evil and nasty person.
It is not that people hate Hillary (although they do). It was because the fundamental choice was between the USA being dissolved into a borderless province of the globalist New World Order where the 'elites' rule over a servile populace, or a return to a sovereign Constitutional Republic where the State/elites are given limited power in order to serve We The People. THAT is the reason. The movement chose Trump because he would fight for this, not the other way around. The Left are blind to this, but this is the real reason. It wasn't about people, it was about whether the State exists and whether the State serves the People (view of the Limited Government Right, where Individuals have more power than the State) or the People serve the State (view of the Big Government Left, where the State has more power than Individuals).
Trump wants to get rid of the corrupt "Old School Republicans". Sorry, the serial rapist and the nasty drunk are going away. They have nothing to bargin as Trump does not want to save the "Old School Republicans". This is one of the reasons the People elected him to power. The Democrats AND Republicans are the problem - all aristocratic thinking people are (including the new aristocracy in Silicon Valley). The inability of the supporters of the Big State Collectivist Left will continue to lose until they grok this. People do not want a Nanny State which treats them as babies - they want you to get the fsck out of their lives and stop using State force to steal the wealth they generate. But the Left will continue to deny this reality, which is why the Limited Government, Individual Liberty Right is growing all over the World. Please think about what I've written some more - because the Left will continue to lose until it starts to listen to the concern of the Family-centric, Limited Government Right. And we need competing ideas, not ideological conformity, so there is a place for a ***loyal*** opposition of the Left.
"was never anything but the enemy of ISIS."
If that is the case, why was she running heavy weapons through Benghazi to give to Jabhat Al Nusra (Al Qaeda in Syria) which had a splinter faction that formed ISIS ?
And if Hillary doesn't support the Muslim Brotherhood why does she keep Huma Abedin around?
Any why did Hillary, as sitting Secretary of State, work to smash Free Speech not only for US citizens but also for the people of all UN signatory states when she pushed through the repulsive UN HRC 16/18 which criminalizes "defamation of religion" - that is, lays the basis for enforcement of Sharia speech codes around the globe?
I understand you will deny that Hillary and Obama created ISIS, despite the now public Defense Intelligence Agency warning that is what would happen ("a Salafist Principality" could arise) and continue to funnel heavy weapons such as the US TOW missiles paid for by Muslim Brotherhood stronghold Qatar and Wahhabi back Saudi Arabia. But every time you do this denial, you provide a little bit of cover for the people who created ISIS.
As a foreigner it is my opinion that the denials of people like you about what Obama and Hillary were actually doing (advancing the Muslim Brotherhood's goals after incompetently assessing them as 'moderate" !!!!) is what made the rest of your fellow citizens so mad that they elected Trump.
Hillary and Obama allied with the Muslim Brotherhood. This is your team, everyone else can see this. Until you recognize and accept the truth you cannot work to defend Enlightenment Civilization from Sharia Supremacism that Hillary and Obama are allied with. Don't remain one of the bad people of this story, because history is not on their side. Stop defending the indefensible. Please.
I think you should read the Koran and hadith, while understanding the Doctrine of Abrogation. Why do you defend that which you have no understanding of? Islam is a fiction that has killed over 270 million and destroyed and erased numerous more advanced civilizations. Sharia is a totalitarian political system that is pretty close to National Socialism in goals (take over the World - Koran 9:29; exterminate all Jews, hadith Sahih Muslims 6985, kill all gays and Hindus, take all non-Muslim women as sex slaves, follow Mohammed's example by beheading infidels, use immigration as 'hijra' conquest, etc etc).
While Judaism and its heresy of Submission ideology (called "Islam" in Arabic) are both fiction, one is a personal faith and the other is a political ideology. They are not the same. People who value Enlightenment Civilization are right to oppose Sharia barbarism and bigotry. Your conflation of them shows you understand neither. You should stop doing this. Have you never considered that your fellow citizens oppose Sharia not because they are racists, but because they understand it while you do not ? if you ever understand Sharia and the Sunna you could not support Hillary Clinton who is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood (and is actively advancing their agenda in Libya, Egypt, Syria and at the UN with UN HRC 16/18 which criminalizes Free Speech with Sharia speech codes).
Has it never occurred to you that you could be on the wrong side of history now that the Democrat Party has allied itself with Islamic supremacists such as the CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood and had them overseeing your foreign and counter-terror policies while visiting the White House ? Because that is exactly what has been happening. Yet your news sources withheld this information from you - but the news sources the Trumpistas use do not (eg. Breitbart, GatesOfVienna, VladTespesBlog, JihadWatch, etc).
So the US falls from the Greatest Republic the World has ever known, to a lawless Banana Republic. Amazing to see.
What is even more amazing is that people think the Big State authoritarianism that inevitably follows in a Banana Republic is somehow "liberal" in the sense that people get to do as they please even if the political 'elites' don't like it.
Classic Liberalism has Diversity of Opinion. Modern "Liberalism" does not. Best not to confuse the two.
A lot of scientific software isn't written like commercial software. Scientific software does amazing things, but the source code is often completely awful. I know, I used to write scientific software. Once I started looking at how commercial people wrote software I got much better - but very many scientists are great at science but write terrible, terrible code from the perspective of professional commercial developers. It may not be the case in the instance of this lander, I'm just putting it out there that people great at science can be completely awful and undisciplined when it comes to software (like not writing automated Unit/Integration/System Tests and relying on manual testing only - often because they don't know about Unit Testing - few physicists know about modern software engineering practices because they are not taught them).
"The problem that frustrates them is the network"
How do you know this? why is everyone else not throwing away their mobile devices ? do you think they haven't bothered to create mobile hotspots near the field ?
You don't think they are valid users ? that every user of the Surface must have a PhD ? that a User Interface that can't be used by regular folks is ok ? perhaps you could do some research and learn about HUMAN INTERFACE DESIGN instead of just technology.
You'd get a speed up of double if you switched to non-Apple drivers. I have a late 2013 Mac Pro with dual D700s. I saw a post once where someone Bootcamped it and installed the closest AMD Windows drivers on the machine. OpenGL ran at twice the framerate. Apple's OpenGL drivers suck, badly. Apple blames OpenGL and wants people to use its proprietary Metal API, but the fact that AMD drivers run at twice the speed (as well as having OpenGL 4.5 while Apple is still stuck on 2010's OpenGL 4.1 show that it is Apple that is the problem).
I love the Mac Pro, and I know you're doing CUDA instead of OpenCL or OpenGL, I just wanted to point out what a bad job Apple are doing with drivers such as OpenGL.
Why do the people who scream "diversity" really hate Diversity of Opinion ? (the only diversity that actually matters!).
It is interesting to see Chairman Pao's hand in this - she has become an even more intolerant "Thought Crime" fascist. Time to remind her what Free Speech actually means.
Notice the disinformation? the misdirection from many outlets designed to have you worrying about whether the Russians did or did not hack the DNC and Clinton emails. This is so you focus on that rather than on the contents of the emails - which are extremely shocking in their levels of Machiavellian dealing, corruption, subversion of democratic processes and explicit contempt for the average American citizen and their vote.
It is time to withdraw Hillary as a candidate. The American people deserve better than her (or Trump). If Hillary is elected it is clear she'll be impeached in record time as the only people who like her are misogynistic dictators and theocrats who like people who accept naked bribes to sell out the American citizens.
The Democrats used to have some amazingly promising candidates, surely they can muster some now ?
Slashdot Mirror
What if the goal of a non-negligible fraction of feminists isn't to eliminate sexism, but to emasculate men ? that would match the fact pattern.
Fortunately there are some extremely good women feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers and Karen Straughan who are working to try ensure the 3rd wave feminists don't go too far - more power to them, I say.
I was considering replacing my MacBook Pro 2013 with a new MBP. Unfortunately to get a machine of roughly the same specs as I had (formerly top-of-the line for 2013, 1 TB SSD, discrete SSD, etc) it now costs 33% more. To get the top of the range 2016 MBP it now costs 66% more. I wouldn't mind paying for this but I do a lot of OpenGL coding and the GPU on the MBPs is quite weak. So I've been looking for alternatives.
In addition to the Dell XPS i considered the Microsoft Surface Books, but their GPU is so-so.
Three manufacturers of great 15" laptops with decent GPUs are:
1) Origin PC, http://www.originpc.com/ - which has a thin laptop with moderate GPU power, and a heavier laptop with more power.
2) System76 has just released a laptop with a 4k display and a GTX 1070 GPU https://system76.com/laptops/o... - my friend has one with a 1080p display and it looks very good,
3) Razer also has an option of a small and light laptop with external GPU. The laptop is a bit small for me, but the external GPU is intriguing. http://www.razerzone.com/store...
I haven't made up my mind which to get. But I hope this may be of some interest to anyone else who'd like a bit more GPU power than the Apple MBP can give, without having to haul a brick.
Your Third Category is the same as the First. Only you cannot see it.
It would also help if you learned more about Climate Science before expounding on it, but then this is Slashdot.
As a physicist I have reduced the debate to the core point of difference. Perhaps if you use the Scientific Method instead of engaging in fact-free ad hominem then we could make some progress.
Which magnitude of Climate Sensitivity is the one you agree with? the one estimated by computer simulation, or the observed value that is vastly lower that is actually measured by two satellites and thousands of balloons of the LTT ? I chose reality. I'm guessing you choose philosophy, which is the incorrect conflation of computer models as data rather than hypothesis.
There is Global Warming relative to the start of regular thermometer readings (from around 1850 onward).
There is Global Warming relative to the end of the Little Ice Age.
There is Global Cooling relative to the Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, and Medieval Warm Period.
There is Global Cooling relative to the start of the Holocene Climate Optimum.
Humans affect the global climate. The human induced component of warming is called 'Anthropogenic Global Warming' (AGW)..
Nature affects the global climate.
The effects of Natural and Anthropogenic Global Warming Effects combine into 'Global Warming' (GW), which contains a component of AGW.
The difference between an Anthropogenic Global Warming 'alarmist' and an Anthropogenic Global Warming 'skeptic' is the degree to which each believes the human component believes that the natural component dominates the human component.
The effect of doubling CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is a rise of approximately 1.1 K. Neither alarmists nor skeptics dispute this !
In addition to the warming effect of CO2 there is an additional factor due to water vapor. The AGW debate is all about the magnitude of the water vapor effect.
Alarmists run computer simulations of global warming, and the range of effects of water vapor range from a factor of 2 to 9 times the effect of CO2
Skeptics point out that the computer simulations are unable to model water vapor correctly, and point out the observed effect of CO2 combined with the water vapor effect produces a sensitivity of around 1.6 K per doubling of CO2.
Under the Scientific Method the computer simulations (which cannot model water vapor effects accurately as they are too complex) are considered "hypothesis", and the satellite and balloon datasets are considered "observation". The computer simulations predict warming of around to 3 times that which is observed.
The Scientific Method thus rejects the simulated AGW as an accurate hypothesis. The Null Hypothesis must be accepted instead until a new hypothesis can be generated.
A new hypothesis will either posit that water vapor effects are signfiicantly less powerful than AGW alarmists fear, or that another mechanism is controlling the warming and not human-emitted CO2. The interaction of solar magnetic activity -> heliosphere -> cosmic ray absoprtion -> cloud formation -> global warming has shown very promising observational leads.
Note: the term 'Climate Change' is meaningless as the climate has always changed naturally, and is never not changing. This is a not a hypothesis under the Scientific Method. The prediction of 'Global Warming' is a hypothesis, but with the slowdown in atmospheric warming over the last 18 years (contrary to the IPCC's AGW model) some slippery people have quietly moved from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change' and hoped people were not smart enough to spot the shift.
Thus, these activists are certain to lose. Not because there is a conspiracy to hide 'Climate Change', but because the plaintiffs don't appear to understand even the basic points of the current debate. To win they need to prove the Transient and Equilibrium Climate Sensitivities are as the IPCC says they are, prove that this is harmful (when the observational evidence shows the 'greening' of the planet as plants thrive with more CO2 and can survive with less water, so now grow in arid regions where they could not before), and prove that the US Government withheld some mythical evidence that is contrary to observe reality and the scientific understanding (which is NOT settled, as some activists would like you to believe). The students cannot win this, because they have the science completely wrong and fanaticism is no substitute for facts in a court of law (provided the jurists are apolitical).
Everyone agrees what CO2 does. Everyone! what is being debated is the effect of WATER VAPOR. And based on observational evidence the computer simulations predict far more warming than is observed (that i
Aren't the aliens already here? I saw it on a documentary called "The South Park Movie". Everything on TV is true, right ?
Huh? OpenJDK is awesome and is truly Open Source. This is not the same as Oracle's Java - although they have common ancestry and feed in to each other.
In addition to Android, a technology called 'Gluon' allows JavaFX to be run on the desktop, iOS and Android. It's pretty neat.
http://gluonhq.com/
You behind the eight ball. Please allow me to get you up to speed.
The replacement for Swing, JavaFX, works on the desktop, iOS and Android through a technology called 'Gluon':
http://gluonhq.com/
What you have done is an ad hominem attack. That's all you can do, because you cannot argue the facts. You are ignorant of the Islamic doctrines I point out, which is why you are wrong. You are defending an evil totalitarian political ideology and attacking the people who stand up for Enlightenment Civilization against it. That makes you the bad guy in historical terms. You really should stop doing that.
Which of the facts I presented do you disagree with and why? Perhaps you should stop 'feeling' and start 'thinking' instead - then you wouldn't be stupid any more. Cheers.
You don't think it was a choice between dissolving the nation state by removing borders and demographic replacement versus nationalism ?
You think I'm the ugly one by quoting Islamic doctrine accurately, and you wish me cancer ? look in the mirror lady, you are one evil and nasty person.
It is not that people hate Hillary (although they do). It was because the fundamental choice was between the USA being dissolved into a borderless province of the globalist New World Order where the 'elites' rule over a servile populace, or a return to a sovereign Constitutional Republic where the State/elites are given limited power in order to serve We The People. THAT is the reason. The movement chose Trump because he would fight for this, not the other way around. The Left are blind to this, but this is the real reason. It wasn't about people, it was about whether the State exists and whether the State serves the People (view of the Limited Government Right, where Individuals have more power than the State) or the People serve the State (view of the Big Government Left, where the State has more power than Individuals).
Trump wants to get rid of the corrupt "Old School Republicans". Sorry, the serial rapist and the nasty drunk are going away. They have nothing to bargin as Trump does not want to save the "Old School Republicans". This is one of the reasons the People elected him to power. The Democrats AND Republicans are the problem - all aristocratic thinking people are (including the new aristocracy in Silicon Valley). The inability of the supporters of the Big State Collectivist Left will continue to lose until they grok this. People do not want a Nanny State which treats them as babies - they want you to get the fsck out of their lives and stop using State force to steal the wealth they generate. But the Left will continue to deny this reality, which is why the Limited Government, Individual Liberty Right is growing all over the World. Please think about what I've written some more - because the Left will continue to lose until it starts to listen to the concern of the Family-centric, Limited Government Right. And we need competing ideas, not ideological conformity, so there is a place for a ***loyal*** opposition of the Left.
"was never anything but the enemy of ISIS."
If that is the case, why was she running heavy weapons through Benghazi to give to Jabhat Al Nusra (Al Qaeda in Syria) which had a splinter faction that formed ISIS ?
And if Hillary doesn't support the Muslim Brotherhood why does she keep Huma Abedin around?
Any why did Hillary, as sitting Secretary of State, work to smash Free Speech not only for US citizens but also for the people of all UN signatory states when she pushed through the repulsive UN HRC 16/18 which criminalizes "defamation of religion" - that is, lays the basis for enforcement of Sharia speech codes around the globe?
I understand you will deny that Hillary and Obama created ISIS, despite the now public Defense Intelligence Agency warning that is what would happen ("a Salafist Principality" could arise) and continue to funnel heavy weapons such as the US TOW missiles paid for by Muslim Brotherhood stronghold Qatar and Wahhabi back Saudi Arabia. But every time you do this denial, you provide a little bit of cover for the people who created ISIS.
As a foreigner it is my opinion that the denials of people like you about what Obama and Hillary were actually doing (advancing the Muslim Brotherhood's goals after incompetently assessing them as 'moderate" !!!!) is what made the rest of your fellow citizens so mad that they elected Trump.
Hillary and Obama allied with the Muslim Brotherhood. This is your team, everyone else can see this. Until you recognize and accept the truth you cannot work to defend Enlightenment Civilization from Sharia Supremacism that Hillary and Obama are allied with. Don't remain one of the bad people of this story, because history is not on their side. Stop defending the indefensible. Please.
I think you should read the Koran and hadith, while understanding the Doctrine of Abrogation. Why do you defend that which you have no understanding of? Islam is a fiction that has killed over 270 million and destroyed and erased numerous more advanced civilizations. Sharia is a totalitarian political system that is pretty close to National Socialism in goals (take over the World - Koran 9:29; exterminate all Jews, hadith Sahih Muslims 6985, kill all gays and Hindus, take all non-Muslim women as sex slaves, follow Mohammed's example by beheading infidels, use immigration as 'hijra' conquest, etc etc).
While Judaism and its heresy of Submission ideology (called "Islam" in Arabic) are both fiction, one is a personal faith and the other is a political ideology. They are not the same. People who value Enlightenment Civilization are right to oppose Sharia barbarism and bigotry. Your conflation of them shows you understand neither. You should stop doing this. Have you never considered that your fellow citizens oppose Sharia not because they are racists, but because they understand it while you do not ? if you ever understand Sharia and the Sunna you could not support Hillary Clinton who is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood (and is actively advancing their agenda in Libya, Egypt, Syria and at the UN with UN HRC 16/18 which criminalizes Free Speech with Sharia speech codes).
Has it never occurred to you that you could be on the wrong side of history now that the Democrat Party has allied itself with Islamic supremacists such as the CAIR/Muslim Brotherhood and had them overseeing your foreign and counter-terror policies while visiting the White House ? Because that is exactly what has been happening. Yet your news sources withheld this information from you - but the news sources the Trumpistas use do not (eg. Breitbart, GatesOfVienna, VladTespesBlog, JihadWatch, etc).
What can we do to ensure there are more ?
So the US falls from the Greatest Republic the World has ever known, to a lawless Banana Republic. Amazing to see.
What is even more amazing is that people think the Big State authoritarianism that inevitably follows in a Banana Republic is somehow "liberal" in the sense that people get to do as they please even if the political 'elites' don't like it.
Classic Liberalism has Diversity of Opinion. Modern "Liberalism" does not. Best not to confuse the two.
A lot of scientific software isn't written like commercial software. Scientific software does amazing things, but the source code is often completely awful. I know, I used to write scientific software. Once I started looking at how commercial people wrote software I got much better - but very many scientists are great at science but write terrible, terrible code from the perspective of professional commercial developers. It may not be the case in the instance of this lander, I'm just putting it out there that people great at science can be completely awful and undisciplined when it comes to software (like not writing automated Unit/Integration/System Tests and relying on manual testing only - often because they don't know about Unit Testing - few physicists know about modern software engineering practices because they are not taught them).
"The problem that frustrates them is the network"
How do you know this? why is everyone else not throwing away their mobile devices ? do you think they haven't bothered to create mobile hotspots near the field ?
Yesssssss !!!!
You don't think they are valid users ? that every user of the Surface must have a PhD ? that a User Interface that can't be used by regular folks is ok ? perhaps you could do some research and learn about HUMAN INTERFACE DESIGN instead of just technology.
You'd get a speed up of double if you switched to non-Apple drivers. I have a late 2013 Mac Pro with dual D700s. I saw a post once where someone Bootcamped it and installed the closest AMD Windows drivers on the machine. OpenGL ran at twice the framerate. Apple's OpenGL drivers suck, badly. Apple blames OpenGL and wants people to use its proprietary Metal API, but the fact that AMD drivers run at twice the speed (as well as having OpenGL 4.5 while Apple is still stuck on 2010's OpenGL 4.1 show that it is Apple that is the problem).
I love the Mac Pro, and I know you're doing CUDA instead of OpenCL or OpenGL, I just wanted to point out what a bad job Apple are doing with drivers such as OpenGL.
Why do the people who scream "diversity" really hate Diversity of Opinion ? (the only diversity that actually matters!).
It is interesting to see Chairman Pao's hand in this - she has become an even more intolerant "Thought Crime" fascist. Time to remind her what Free Speech actually means.
Notice the disinformation? the misdirection from many outlets designed to have you worrying about whether the Russians did or did not hack the DNC and Clinton emails. This is so you focus on that rather than on the contents of the emails - which are extremely shocking in their levels of Machiavellian dealing, corruption, subversion of democratic processes and explicit contempt for the average American citizen and their vote.
It is time to withdraw Hillary as a candidate. The American people deserve better than her (or Trump). If Hillary is elected it is clear she'll be impeached in record time as the only people who like her are misogynistic dictators and theocrats who like people who accept naked bribes to sell out the American citizens.
The Democrats used to have some amazingly promising candidates, surely they can muster some now ?