Indeed. Moreover, regardless how depressive the pilot is in the cockpit, he will be way less tempted to perform such a silly suicide action with someone just close to him. We're not talking about a jack-bauer style terrorist here. Quite the opposite actually.
I wouldn't jump to any conclusion quite yet. I've know people who were depressed, even known ones who were suicidal, and none of them would ever want to take 150 other people, mostly strangers, with them. OTOH, I've seen a pretty outwardly-normal-seeming person have a psychotic break, and I can tell you, in that state, all bets based on prior behavior are off... (In fact, changing the subject, I've wondered if Darren Wilson's hard-to-believe description of his encounter with Michael Brown indicates that Brown had a psychotic break. Rare in the real world, but also somewhat concentrated in males his age, and consistent with the very very strange behavior claimed...)
It's stupid if you're benchmarking relative efficiency -- it's not an efficient implementation (and you'll have no trouble finding explanations for why the Python and Java code they wrote, while simpler, is not efficient).
I think we're talking at cross-purposes. When I said "not actually that stupid" I was referring to the implementation of String as immutable and highly-efficient to share cross threads, and implicitly including that there's StringBuilder for more-efficient building-up of strings. That design is not stupid.
I certainly did not mean that the benchmark or paper were "not actually that stupid". The benchmark was just ridiculously bad, and the paper utterly stupid. As some other poster said, showing that reallocating a string a million times and appending a single character each time is slower than writing a million characters into a buffer, that's literally a high-school level paper--I think I'd add that it's C-level (haha) high school work.
While a business shouldn't be allowed to not serve a segment of society, a business shouldn't be forced to contribute to something to which they object (on any grounds, but religious grounds for this argument). So while a bakery should have to sell a pre-made cake/cookie/whatever to any customer that walks in, it shouldn't have to make a cake promoting...
Although you wouldn't know it from my comment to which you are replying, I actually do agree with that. As soon as you force once bakery to provide a custom cake for a gay wedding, you open the door to the neo-Nazi who was offended when a bakery refused to inscribe a birthday cake for his little boy, whose first name is "Adolph" and middle name is "Hitler". (BTW, in case you missed it when it was news, I didn't make up that example, it actually happened.)
Doing business with whomever one wants, while denying to do so to others on whatever whim, is a fundamental tenet of freedom
That bullshit argument was rejected pretty soundly 50 years ago. It is reasonable in limited circumstances, for businesses which can only deal with a very limited range of customers. It is not considered reasonable for any business which claims to be open to the public--we decided long ago that you're either open to the public or you're not. You cannot be open to the public except for women; you cannot be open to the public except for blacks or latinos. Etc.
Not at all. If you wrote your C in memory string handling as stupidly as they wrote the Python and Java you will still get worse performance in C (e.g. each iteration malloc a new string and then strcpy and strcat into it, and free the old string; compared to buffered file writes you'll lose). It's about failing to understand how to write efficient code, not about which language you chose.
It's not actually that stupid, FYI. It's a tradeoff, and the advantage of doing it this way is greatly reduced locking when you have multiple threads and the possibility of strings being shared between threads.
Of course, the paper about which this article refers, is still garbage;-)
This sounds beyond useless. Going by my Mac Pro tower, and my $30 electric radiator: Mac Pro, expensive, never really gets all that warm, did almost nothing to warm up my room, draws more power. Electric Oil Filled Radiator, Wicked cheap, warms my room nicely enough, draws less power them my Mac Pro.
So, care to guess where the power drawn by the Mac Pro goes to?
A tiny, really tiny, amount to a power LED and a little to a fan. The rest winds up as heat. You know, that pesky conservation of energy thingie. If the Mac Pro actually drew more power (which it certainly does not), then it would also put out more heat.
And this will be the last of the money made by IBM in China. They're going to spend a few more years teaching other companies everything they know, and then the Chinese will kick them out and undercut them with their own technology. Just brilliant, IBM. *golf clap* Now they're actually training their own competitors for some short term profits.
I'm wondering how the conventional logic at either end of the process would manage to cope with three values. Can hardware be designed to work with more than on/off one/zero logic, i.e. perhaps one reaction for zero volts, another reaction for 2 volts, and a third reaction for 4 volts.
Dude, analog modems have been coding multiple bits per transition for DECADES, using both amplitude and phase to encode multiple values per transition. As do cable modems, DSL, and so on. Just about every transmission encoding method for the past 30 years...
In the example of 3 values, you get 0, 1 or 2. Then on the next transition, multiply by 3 and add 0, 1, or 2. And so on. That's simplified, because in fact there's typically more states than values, and mapping of states -> values involves techniques to mitigate the effects of interference.
Americans have to understand that Canadians actually more than one or two ISPs to choose from in all major cities. Granted, most lease their infrastructure from the big players (Bell, Videotron, Shaw, Rogers, and I believe Cogeco), but those smaller ISPs still compete for customers.
Sigh. It used to be somewhat like that in the US. Before the big players bought themselves some deregulation.
Instant loser right out of the gate. Intel cannot touch ARM for power efficiency. They have to pay US$ billions to get anybody to use their processors in tablets; almost nobody uses them in phones; using them in a watch is insanity.
Oh, wait, I forgot: TAG tends to make watches that are fucking HUGE. Never mind, TAG + Intel in a watch is actually a perfect match;-)
So even though in your example the rich guy paid 1000x more tax than Joe, you still want more?
Hell yes! Rich guy has 1,000x the gross income, at least 10,000x, maybe closer to 100,000x, what most of us would consider discretionary income. What's so bad about taxing him 2,000x or 4,000x???
The one renewable that load-follows really well is hydro. Solar and wind can be paired with dams on the grid, so long as the overnight rise in river level stays tolerable.
That's somewhat geographically constrained, but where you have a reservoir available, with the capacity to adjust levels daily like that, it works really well. West of Denver, there's one facility where they pump the water up a substantial distance during off-peak hours, so that there's more stored energy to be released when needed. But that requires mountainous terrain.
I knew guys who were working on a different system, basically a football-field-sized plastic air bladder anchored at the bottom of a reservoir. During off-peak hours pump air in, then when needed use the compressed air.
Anyway, what's needed for larger-scale solar is definitely better storage. Residential-scale would be really nice, but next best would be systems scaled appropriately for distribution stations, basically neighborhood-sized. General locally, store locally, use locally.
I have 2 generic servers in my closet that use Thunderbolt to talk to big ass arrays of disks. Nothing Apple related about them.
FYI, on OS X 10.9, if you hook up a Thunderbolt disk array built using the appropriate adapter, the OS supports AHCI 1.30 with FIS in the port multiplier and you get good throughput. Hook up the same array to a Mac running OS X 10.10, and it reports that the port multiplier only supports AHCI 1.20, and does not support FIS, and your throughput goes to hell.
So it seems to me that Apple is at least partly responsible for lack of adoption. Right now, on the current OS, a more expensive and more capable Thunderbolt-enabled drive array gives me the exact same performance as the cheapest USB 3 box. All because of problems with OS/drivers--the TB box should be giving me much higher performance.
Disclaimer, I am only 99% sure it's the OS version. To be picky, I have not absolutely proven that the regression did not happen with later hardware. But I doubt that. (More testing to come--have to move the array to try one more different Mac/OS combination...)
Slashdot Mirror
...we're talking about real life here, it's unlikely that a single man will be able to knock out anyone in an instant, especially while sitting down.
Indeed, the co-pilot is likely not a martial-arts expert, and would have a lot of things competing for his attention.
Indeed. Moreover, regardless how depressive the pilot is in the cockpit, he will be way less tempted to perform such a silly suicide action with someone just close to him. We're not talking about a jack-bauer style terrorist here. Quite the opposite actually.
I wouldn't jump to any conclusion quite yet. I've know people who were depressed, even known ones who were suicidal, and none of them would ever want to take 150 other people, mostly strangers, with them. OTOH, I've seen a pretty outwardly-normal-seeming person have a psychotic break, and I can tell you, in that state, all bets based on prior behavior are off... (In fact, changing the subject, I've wondered if Darren Wilson's hard-to-believe description of his encounter with Michael Brown indicates that Brown had a psychotic break. Rare in the real world, but also somewhat concentrated in males his age, and consistent with the very very strange behavior claimed...)
I dare say that a flight attendant (mostly women) is not going to stop a (co)pilot (mostly men) with a plan for murderous suicide.
She doesn't have to overpower him. She only has to get that switch moved to a different position for a couple of seconds.
It's stupid if you're benchmarking relative efficiency -- it's not an efficient implementation (and you'll have no trouble finding explanations for why the Python and Java code they wrote, while simpler, is not efficient).
I think we're talking at cross-purposes. When I said "not actually that stupid" I was referring to the implementation of String as immutable and highly-efficient to share cross threads, and implicitly including that there's StringBuilder for more-efficient building-up of strings. That design is not stupid.
I certainly did not mean that the benchmark or paper were "not actually that stupid". The benchmark was just ridiculously bad, and the paper utterly stupid. As some other poster said, showing that reallocating a string a million times and appending a single character each time is slower than writing a million characters into a buffer, that's literally a high-school level paper--I think I'd add that it's C-level (haha) high school work.
We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone without reason.
Here's a clue for you: just because somebody posts it on a door, does not make it legal.
While a business shouldn't be allowed to not serve a segment of society, a business shouldn't be forced to contribute to something to which they object (on any grounds, but religious grounds for this argument). So while a bakery should have to sell a pre-made cake/cookie/whatever to any customer that walks in, it shouldn't have to make a cake promoting...
Although you wouldn't know it from my comment to which you are replying, I actually do agree with that. As soon as you force once bakery to provide a custom cake for a gay wedding, you open the door to the neo-Nazi who was offended when a bakery refused to inscribe a birthday cake for his little boy, whose first name is "Adolph" and middle name is "Hitler". (BTW, in case you missed it when it was news, I didn't make up that example, it actually happened.)
Doing business with whomever one wants, while denying to do so to others on whatever whim, is a fundamental tenet of freedom
That bullshit argument was rejected pretty soundly 50 years ago. It is reasonable in limited circumstances, for businesses which can only deal with a very limited range of customers. It is not considered reasonable for any business which claims to be open to the public--we decided long ago that you're either open to the public or you're not. You cannot be open to the public except for women; you cannot be open to the public except for blacks or latinos. Etc.
Not at all. If you wrote your C in memory string handling as stupidly as they wrote the Python and Java you will still get worse performance in C (e.g. each iteration malloc a new string and then strcpy and strcat into it, and free the old string; compared to buffered file writes you'll lose). It's about failing to understand how to write efficient code, not about which language you chose.
It's not actually that stupid, FYI. It's a tradeoff, and the advantage of doing it this way is greatly reduced locking when you have multiple threads and the possibility of strings being shared between threads.
Of course, the paper about which this article refers, is still garbage ;-)
This sounds beyond useless. Going by my Mac Pro tower, and my $30 electric radiator: Mac Pro, expensive, never really gets all that warm, did almost nothing to warm up my room, draws more power. Electric Oil Filled Radiator, Wicked cheap, warms my room nicely enough, draws less power them my Mac Pro.
So, care to guess where the power drawn by the Mac Pro goes to?
A tiny, really tiny, amount to a power LED and a little to a fan. The rest winds up as heat. You know, that pesky conservation of energy thingie. If the Mac Pro actually drew more power (which it certainly does not), then it would also put out more heat.
And this will be the last of the money made by IBM in China. They're going to spend a few more years teaching other companies everything they know, and then the Chinese will kick them out and undercut them with their own technology. Just brilliant, IBM. *golf clap* Now they're actually training their own competitors for some short term profits.
See: Dell ;-)
Why not just register everything?
Combinatorial explosion. No way to register "everything"; no practical way to predict what will actually be requested.
Actually find the male anatomy to be hilarious...
I'm wondering how the conventional logic at either end of the process would manage to cope with three values. Can hardware be designed to work with more than on/off one/zero logic, i.e. perhaps one reaction for zero volts, another reaction for 2 volts, and a third reaction for 4 volts.
Dude, analog modems have been coding multiple bits per transition for DECADES, using both amplitude and phase to encode multiple values per transition. As do cable modems, DSL, and so on. Just about every transmission encoding method for the past 30 years...
In the example of 3 values, you get 0, 1 or 2. Then on the next transition, multiply by 3 and add 0, 1, or 2. And so on. That's simplified, because in fact there's typically more states than values, and mapping of states -> values involves techniques to mitigate the effects of interference.
Well, suppose that with each photon you can transmit 1 of 3 values: 0, 1, or 2. How many bits per photon would that be?
So, yes, you may well have been the only one wondering ;-)
...there is some additional asshattery...
There is some period for which they can register, then cancel, without paying fees upstream.
Americans have to understand that Canadians actually more than one or two ISPs to choose from in all major cities. Granted, most lease their infrastructure from the big players (Bell, Videotron, Shaw, Rogers, and I believe Cogeco), but those smaller ISPs still compete for customers.
Sigh. It used to be somewhat like that in the US. Before the big players bought themselves some deregulation.
Instant loser right out of the gate. Intel cannot touch ARM for power efficiency. They have to pay US$ billions to get anybody to use their processors in tablets; almost nobody uses them in phones; using them in a watch is insanity.
Oh, wait, I forgot: TAG tends to make watches that are fucking HUGE. Never mind, TAG + Intel in a watch is actually a perfect match ;-)
...it is a safe bet that at least some of it has burned through...
Really? So the containment structures were not in fact designed to contain the melted core? I somehow really really doubt that.
So even though in your example the rich guy paid 1000x more tax than Joe, you still want more?
Hell yes! Rich guy has 1,000x the gross income, at least 10,000x, maybe closer to 100,000x, what most of us would consider discretionary income. What's so bad about taxing him 2,000x or 4,000x???
The one renewable that load-follows really well is hydro. Solar and wind can be paired with dams on the grid, so long as the overnight rise in river level stays tolerable.
That's somewhat geographically constrained, but where you have a reservoir available, with the capacity to adjust levels daily like that, it works really well. West of Denver, there's one facility where they pump the water up a substantial distance during off-peak hours, so that there's more stored energy to be released when needed. But that requires mountainous terrain.
I knew guys who were working on a different system, basically a football-field-sized plastic air bladder anchored at the bottom of a reservoir. During off-peak hours pump air in, then when needed use the compressed air.
Anyway, what's needed for larger-scale solar is definitely better storage. Residential-scale would be really nice, but next best would be systems scaled appropriately for distribution stations, basically neighborhood-sized. General locally, store locally, use locally.
Give it 10 years ;-)
There is a limit as to how fast a plant can ramp.
Coal-fired has this problem. Natural gas generators can ramp much faster, and can easily cope with this kind of load variance.
Yeah, but aren't placebos effective? I thought even the FDA agreed ;-)
Take whatever story from back then, replace "Russia" with "USA" and "KGB" with "NSA" and you're good for another headline.
Shooting people dead for trying to leave the country?
I have 2 generic servers in my closet that use Thunderbolt to talk to big ass arrays of disks. Nothing Apple related about them.
FYI, on OS X 10.9, if you hook up a Thunderbolt disk array built using the appropriate adapter, the OS supports AHCI 1.30 with FIS in the port multiplier and you get good throughput. Hook up the same array to a Mac running OS X 10.10, and it reports that the port multiplier only supports AHCI 1.20, and does not support FIS, and your throughput goes to hell.
So it seems to me that Apple is at least partly responsible for lack of adoption. Right now, on the current OS, a more expensive and more capable Thunderbolt-enabled drive array gives me the exact same performance as the cheapest USB 3 box. All because of problems with OS/drivers--the TB box should be giving me much higher performance.
Disclaimer, I am only 99% sure it's the OS version. To be picky, I have not absolutely proven that the regression did not happen with later hardware. But I doubt that. (More testing to come--have to move the array to try one more different Mac/OS combination...)
In some US states only one party consent is needed...
Most US states, actually ;-)