Was going to post that IrDA supported 4Mbps and wondered if I remembered that correctly -> wikipedia check -> realize that IrDA actually supports up to 1Gbps!
Of course one can't bit-bang 4Mbps+ IrDA... Perhaps on those XMOS processors, they are designed for fast bit-banging.
Depends on how the LED is connected to the rest of the hardware. If the LED is connected to a GPIO pin on a microcontroller 1Mbps+ is easy to do (depends on the LED color and construction AFAIK).
Almost literally forcing => gave very good volume discount. For larger manufacturers it could be cheaper to ship Windows on a computer than not, some shipped machines installed with Windows even when another OS was to be installed later as they got a better profit. Some say the discounts were too aggressive as even selling a few computers without Windows drastically increased the prices. In combination with Windows being the preferred OS for most customers that made it very hard for manufacturers to both sell Windows and other OS installations.
Compare this to Intel that actually payed good money for e.g. Dell to sell more expensive (officially) processor with worse performance rather than selling better performing and less expensive AMD processors for (officially) better profits. That is Intel gave money in compensation to Dell and others for selling Intel systems, compensation that in some cases meant Dell earned money by "buying" Intel processors. Intel used their strong position to reduce demand and availability of AMD systems even if that meant large losses for a time. The result? A slap on the wrist, minor compensation to AMD (much less than potential losses) and some better conditions for AMD - Intel cross patent deals.
Sadly there's no "-1 poster is a complete idiot" either. However I reason that a complete idiot shouldn't be able to post at all and so the idiotic post is a trolling attempt.
I'd like to see a "-1/2 badly supported argument" option too, could perhaps encourage people to actually put some effort into their posts.
Oh well I get to that when I create my own website with blackjack and hookers...
Cyber is short for Cybernetic which is the study of flow and control/regulation of those flows. A network connected computer is obviously a cybernetic system as is a worm or a human, an oscillator or a clock.
But I agree that it obviously was used by someone that just thought it sounded cool, replacing it with "Computer" would be much better.
Hey super-idiot: you started the fucking name-calling and illogical extrapolations. Your post is stupid and by extension you are stupid, your reasoning is of the quality of a snail and your father smelt of elderberries.
(Intentionally childish post so that you may understand)
I agree with the anonymous gentleman (of whatever gender) that you don't have a clue. Hardware 3D acceleration was just a tiny part of the reason SGI was popular back in the day, scalability in processors, memory, networking, storage and performance were all very important. And that scalability extended to 3D acceleration too. Nobody* bought SGI systems to run crude 3D accelerated games.
(* Well some companies did use SGI systems to create VR game machines however the graphics wasn't crude for that time)
I think you misunderstood the meaning of that quote. The "PHB" (as you call him) obviously realized that computers needed people specialized in programming in the future rather than the jack-of-all-trades people involved in the early stages of computer evolution. However programming wasn't well defined at the time, not even programming languages had developed to a well defined stage.
Fire yourself then - everybody screws up and not realizing that means you are a liability to your operation*. If one contractor can cause such a huge problem there is a organizational level problem in British airways and finding a scapegoat doesn't resolve the real problem.
Nuclear power isn't the most dangerous one - fossil fuels are. Burning fossil fuels releases more radioactive elements into the atmosphere (and locally into the ground) than nuclear power and also releases a lot of other nasty things _proven_ to be hazardous to health. A modern nuclear reactor is pretty damn safe and the Fukushima mess* actually proves that - the complex suffered a tripple(!) meltdown with relatively little radioactive leakage most of which were due to hydrogen-oxygen explosions that destroyed containment features. Even the Chernobyl radioactive release were actually mostly due to the graphite moderator being on fire rather than actually suffering a meltdown without having any modern protective features (filter system, containment design).
Statistical analysis of nuclear vs fossil fuel deaths are showing clearly that the later is much more dangerous.
(* it was more than accident and more than one mistake combined -> a bloody mess)
Mostly people that have enough energy to learn of (mostly) theoretical methods reactors can be improved but not enough to learn how and why nuclear energy in general isn't a money efficient energy form. They also tend to ignore the risks and problems even with cleaner forms of nuclear energy, it still require fuel which means either uranium mining or fuel enrichment and they still generate waste products with high radioactivity. The core will always be highly radioactive and a security issue. Even the fact the power source is concentrated is a problem in itself making infrastructure more sensitive to attacks, breakdowns etc.
The post you replied to seem to think liquid metal cooling is something novel - enough proof of ignorance.
Boring may be (that is a matter of taste) but cheesy and predictable they aren't. Not my favorite author but I really wonder if you ever read anything by King.
His later works is IMHO stretching too little too much so I partially agree abut the boring...
Of course. But the requirements for complying with (what is now considered) basic safety features are very expensive. But you probably think those should be skipped too even though radioactive contamination from nuclear accidents are a global problem?
They were. Ordinary people was dumped into holes in the desert sand. One had to be very rich to be prepared for death (learning how to "survive" the kingdom of death), even richer to be mummified (it was a complicated long process needing expensive labor and substances) and incredibly rich to get some kind of structure around the mummified corpse.
Slashdot Mirror
Was going to post that IrDA supported 4Mbps and wondered if I remembered that correctly -> wikipedia check -> realize that IrDA actually supports up to 1Gbps!
Of course one can't bit-bang 4Mbps+ IrDA... Perhaps on those XMOS processors, they are designed for fast bit-banging.
Depends on how the LED is connected to the rest of the hardware. If the LED is connected to a GPIO pin on a microcontroller 1Mbps+ is easy to do (depends on the LED color and construction AFAIK).
[anti-M$-hat: ON]
Wouldn't NSA want to have competent people? Just saying...
[anti-M$-hat: OFF]
I breathe with my mouth. Humans generally do. I'm not an idiot.
You on the other hand seem to be an ass-breathing idiot.
Almost literally forcing => gave very good volume discount. For larger manufacturers it could be cheaper to ship Windows on a computer than not, some shipped machines installed with Windows even when another OS was to be installed later as they got a better profit. Some say the discounts were too aggressive as even selling a few computers without Windows drastically increased the prices. In combination with Windows being the preferred OS for most customers that made it very hard for manufacturers to both sell Windows and other OS installations.
Compare this to Intel that actually payed good money for e.g. Dell to sell more expensive (officially) processor with worse performance rather than selling better performing and less expensive AMD processors for (officially) better profits. That is Intel gave money in compensation to Dell and others for selling Intel systems, compensation that in some cases meant Dell earned money by "buying" Intel processors. Intel used their strong position to reduce demand and availability of AMD systems even if that meant large losses for a time. The result? A slap on the wrist, minor compensation to AMD (much less than potential losses) and some better conditions for AMD - Intel cross patent deals.
Hmm?
Sadly there's no "-1 poster is a complete idiot" either. However I reason that a complete idiot shouldn't be able to post at all and so the idiotic post is a trolling attempt.
I'd like to see a "-1/2 badly supported argument" option too, could perhaps encourage people to actually put some effort into their posts.
Oh well I get to that when I create my own website with blackjack and hookers...
Cyber is short for Cybernetic which is the study of flow and control/regulation of those flows. A network connected computer is obviously a cybernetic system as is a worm or a human, an oscillator or a clock.
But I agree that it obviously was used by someone that just thought it sounded cool, replacing it with "Computer" would be much better.
The jargon file didn't come up with the word even if it tried to influence how it was used by others.
Hey super-idiot: you started the fucking name-calling and illogical extrapolations. Your post is stupid and by extension you are stupid, your reasoning is of the quality of a snail and your father smelt of elderberries.
(Intentionally childish post so that you may understand)
Hmm? I think you should re-read what you quoted from me...
I agree with the anonymous gentleman (of whatever gender) that you don't have a clue. Hardware 3D acceleration was just a tiny part of the reason SGI was popular back in the day, scalability in processors, memory, networking, storage and performance were all very important. And that scalability extended to 3D acceleration too.
Nobody* bought SGI systems to run crude 3D accelerated games.
(* Well some companies did use SGI systems to create VR game machines however the graphics wasn't crude for that time)
I think you misunderstood the meaning of that quote. The "PHB" (as you call him) obviously realized that computers needed people specialized in programming in the future rather than the jack-of-all-trades people involved in the early stages of computer evolution. However programming wasn't well defined at the time, not even programming languages had developed to a well defined stage.
TL;DR IMHO more insightful than PHB-worthy.
Don't confuse people with facts. They (generally) don't want to know anyway.
Citation needed.
"How to post as an Anonymous Coward, influencing people and winning friends"? "Posting cheap trash for fun and profit"?
Not by you, true. Frankly I don't want to work at "Mom's basement Inc." even if they get a competent leader...
Fire yourself then - everybody screws up and not realizing that means you are a liability to your operation*. If one contractor can cause such a huge problem there is a organizational level problem in British airways and finding a scapegoat doesn't resolve the real problem.
(* basement manager for your mom I assume)
Why do you talk about the mind of some other when you have your own to take care of? Because it (=your) seems really confused...
No.
Nuclear power isn't the most dangerous one - fossil fuels are. Burning fossil fuels releases more radioactive elements into the atmosphere (and locally into the ground) than nuclear power and also releases a lot of other nasty things _proven_ to be hazardous to health. A modern nuclear reactor is pretty damn safe and the Fukushima mess* actually proves that - the complex suffered a tripple(!) meltdown with relatively little radioactive leakage most of which were due to hydrogen-oxygen explosions that destroyed containment features. Even the Chernobyl radioactive release were actually mostly due to the graphite moderator being on fire rather than actually suffering a meltdown without having any modern protective features (filter system, containment design).
Statistical analysis of nuclear vs fossil fuel deaths are showing clearly that the later is much more dangerous.
(* it was more than accident and more than one mistake combined -> a bloody mess)
Mostly people that have enough energy to learn of (mostly) theoretical methods reactors can be improved but not enough to learn how and why nuclear energy in general isn't a money efficient energy form. They also tend to ignore the risks and problems even with cleaner forms of nuclear energy, it still require fuel which means either uranium mining or fuel enrichment and they still generate waste products with high radioactivity. The core will always be highly radioactive and a security issue. Even the fact the power source is concentrated is a problem in itself making infrastructure more sensitive to attacks, breakdowns etc.
The post you replied to seem to think liquid metal cooling is something novel - enough proof of ignorance.
Boring may be (that is a matter of taste) but cheesy and predictable they aren't. Not my favorite author but I really wonder if you ever read anything by King.
His later works is IMHO stretching too little too much so I partially agree abut the boring...
Of course. But the requirements for complying with (what is now considered) basic safety features are very expensive. But you probably think those should be skipped too even though radioactive contamination from nuclear accidents are a global problem?
Nuclear energy in itself is expensive.
They were. Ordinary people was dumped into holes in the desert sand. One had to be very rich to be prepared for death (learning how to "survive" the kingdom of death), even richer to be mummified (it was a complicated long process needing expensive labor and substances) and incredibly rich to get some kind of structure around the mummified corpse.