Shouldn't the national ID be uniform across the country? In the sense that the kind of info displayed on the card and the lay out. If it is not uniform, then it's harder to detect forgery on those ID, especially if the ID is out-of-state.
Then, the question on the on-card security add-on implies that we're effectively getting a new driver's licence ID. I dunno why don't they just enforce a single, uniform ID in the first place?
That's true. Hard drives are cheap nowadays. However, storing data in hard drives can risk your data, namely in bad sectors problem. Don't rely on MTBF scores, they're not too reliable.
You'd probably want to have the backups in any flavor of DVD discs -- 8.5 G for double sided discs, about $10-20 each. DVD lifetime is claimed to be 50+ years(?).
Or, alternatively, you can make a IDE-disc based RAID system to overcome data losses.
it takes 2 operantions to distinguish a ternary system: v < 1 ? 0 : v < 2 ? 1 : 2 as oppose to binary: v < 1 ? 0 : 1
You're applying binary logic to ternary digits. I would foresee that the logic would be something like this: cmp(v) ? -1 : 0 : 1;
C's '?' operator inherently assumes binary digit. So, I think that if we were going to implement trit-based computer, we have to slightly change programming language structures.
Anyway, it won't happen, because people don't like radical changes. Besides, a lot of investments already take place in bits...
This term is rather confusing. To scientists, conference papers means scientific papers on recend findings submitted for scientific conferences. These are copyrighted to the owners (usually) but you can read it if you subscribe to IEEE, for example -- and extend it or cite it for your works. I was confused at first at the term "Public Domain".
You should give this post a title like "Conference Paper of Center for the Public Domain" to distinguish this from scientific conference papers.
Well, code morphing itself does not worth the performance. For example, let's compare Intel Celeron vs Crusoe with the same speed. I doubt that Crusoe can even beat Celeron, even with the super-optimized morphing that has run for months.
The problem here is that no matter how good is the morphing, it is still "emulation". You can do morphing or maybe mixed with dynamic recompilation, you cannot beat the real stuff that run natively. There are lots of examples.
The real power of Crusoe processor is that it is a VLIW processor, which can jam-pack several instructions into one. *This* is the real power. Notice that P4 adopt this solution too (3 instr to 1). Intelligent compiler can arrange the machine code so that the instruction bundles are used very efficiently. Now, let's say that Crusoe has 32-bit instruction wide and it has 128-bit. Theoretically, you can jam-pack 4 instruction at once, thus yielding 4 times the MHz rate. *This* is what I really want to see.
About the power problem: I really pessimistic about processor power that can prolong battery life n times (with n > 2), as claimed by Transmeta. IIRC, *the* major power drain is at LCD and hard drive. If those bogger are attacked, I wouldn't have been surprised that the battery life would be prolonged. But, let's recall that before Crusoe came, P3 processor only consumes about 2W. How many portions was that to the total laptop consumption? Now, Crusoe reduce that into a mere 1W -- and *that* was claimed as *the* dramatic power saver. I smelled rat.
I don't want to attack your "belief" as Crusoe adherents, but please understand the underlying problem before you answer.
That's what I have said. My point was that the 28% gain is basically on-par with P4. Athlon gains weren't too shabby either. Meanwhile, we understand that current Crusoe performance is pretty dismal compared to P4 or Athlon. So, 2% difference on performance gain doesn't mean that Crusoe performance is now leveraged into a new level.
If it were compiled into its native, we then can see Crusoe's raw power and compare them neck to neck. The story would have been much different.
Note also that I am not a revisionist. I believe Slashdot community is intelligent enough figuring out what I said.
Intel's C++ compiler still compiles code to x86. This is really great, considering that the approx. 28% speedup in Crusoe is not the native Crusoe. I wonder how Crusoe will fare once there is a compiler that build straight to its native.
For me, Crusoe + icc + GNU/linux is a winning combination.
Well, to me, it's a hasty conclusion. P4 gains 26%, Athlon XP gains 19%, and plain Athlon gains 16%.
If you think that you have enough learning CS subjects, do some open source projects. Search Sourceforge or Freshmeat for interesting projects you think you want to contribute. Then, after some experiences, your interest in CS will grow as your curiousity is pricked and your realized that your knowledge in CS need growing. When that happens, go for another one or two years in Master studies. That will sure be a lot of fun.
The last pre seems to be OK, but Linus is still "working" on that. Did anyone know that the VM bugs are fixed? I don't see that in the change logs after pre8...
I think 21264B is the beefed up version with 0.18 Micron. You should look at the specs: here, while 21264 is here. You can then compare it side by side.
I'm tired of the $2 billion/year ego project that the ISS is.
The goal for ISS is to "conduct the most balanced, efficient, and effective space program". Moreover, it provides unprecendented breakthroughs in research. I think the price tag is worth it.
It defies Brook's Law because of its parallel release structure, extreme modularity, "trusted lieutenants" structure and as a consequence, co-ordination costs are almost negligible.
IIRC, Brook's law applies for networked communication. Hierarchical communication is therefore created to reduce this overhead. Extreme modularity doesn't prevent the merging cost. The interesting note here is that this paper doesn't address who is behind the scene to put all of this together.
I am not a Linux developer, but I believe Linus is the ruler of all of them. If he doesn't like the way things integrated, he just demote the component. Thus the maintainer does the job to comply. Recall on how many "new" components, such as ext3 and others must wait and comply to this rule? The rule is pretty rigid and widely accepted by all developers. All his "lieutenants", such as Alan Cox, also applies the same rule.
Moreover, Linux developers are all dedicated people, not just people that wants money to do their work. They want recognition. So, they will try very hard to push their "product" into the development line.
It's not just the Brook's Law, I suppose... Anyway, that's my 2c.
It's really hard to lock down developers. Usually developers demand some degree of freedom, especially the freedom to install their own tools. No people can work without the tools they familiar with. Thus, this can be detrimental to their productivity, which in turn is a loss to the company.
The tool itself can vary across colleagues even the primary usage is the same. My colleagues complain when they use other terminals when one of the alternatives is installed. Whining for some missing quirk they love and so on. I think tools like this should be allowed provided that they have the right license for the software.
Changing Windows registry would be unrealistic. Some software even store the Most Recently Used File (MRU) inside the registry (like WinZip, MSWord). Or even the last opened directory (like GetRight). Freezing the registry would cause these software to fail. Beware.
Barring some registry might be viable, but it could have a performance hit into the terminal (i.e. by intercepting all registry-add or change calls). Think of it. Developer hates their machine bogged down for some trifling-but-annoying issues.
Seems to me that this article puts its concern in battery life. However, there are a lot of other things to consider as well, which is not mentioned in the homepage (or do I miss anything?) like the dimension and the weight.
The other thing is the legal side. IANAL, but have you heard about the case that Nintendo sues fan sites by using unauthorized Pokemon pictures. Well, watchout, they could similarly get you with some similar reasons... (eventhough you claim it's just fan site and fair use)... Again, IANAL...
If you need Windows, you can get the old Win98, rather than buying Win2K or WinXP. I think Win98 also worth about $99 or maybe even cheaper. I dunno why they priced Lindows on par with the original (but old) thing. I think most of the apps today runs pretty well in Win98. The apps that need stability like webservers (Apache) are best run in Linux, IMHO.
Linux Rocks
on
Linux 2.4.13
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Well, apparently, it is perfectly understandable if Microsoft produces inferior OS.
Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to be a programmer?
Gates: No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't the national ID be uniform across the country? In the sense that the kind of info displayed on the card and the lay out. If it is not uniform, then it's harder to detect forgery on those ID, especially if the ID is out-of-state.
Then, the question on the on-card security add-on implies that we're effectively getting a new driver's licence ID. I dunno why don't they just enforce a single, uniform ID in the first place?
Just my 2c.
If you want to know who Zhang Fei was in detail, click here for the story of the Three Kingdoms.
$210,000 is not slightly more expensive. KLAT2 costs $41,000 and Cringely used only $6,000. AND it only ranks 385th while KLAT2 ranks 200th.
That's true. Hard drives are cheap nowadays. However, storing data in hard drives can risk your data, namely in bad sectors problem. Don't rely on MTBF scores, they're not too reliable.
You'd probably want to have the backups in any flavor of DVD discs -- 8.5 G for double sided discs, about $10-20 each. DVD lifetime is claimed to be 50+ years(?).
Or, alternatively, you can make a IDE-disc based RAID system to overcome data losses.
it takes 2 operantions to distinguish a ternary system: v < 1 ? 0 : v < 2 ? 1 : 2 as oppose to binary: v < 1 ? 0 : 1
You're applying binary logic to ternary digits. I would foresee that the logic would be something like this: cmp(v) ? -1 : 0 : 1;
C's '?' operator inherently assumes binary digit. So, I think that if we were going to implement trit-based computer, we have to slightly change programming language structures.
Anyway, it won't happen, because people don't like radical changes. Besides, a lot of investments already take place in bits...
only 0-9, a-z, dots, and it should end by two characters or com/net/org/edu
No, you cannot enforce this. How about non-English character domain name? Say, Chinese / Japanese domain name?
This term is rather confusing. To scientists, conference papers means scientific papers on recend findings submitted for scientific conferences. These are copyrighted to the owners (usually) but you can read it if you subscribe to IEEE, for example -- and extend it or cite it for your works. I was confused at first at the term "Public Domain".
You should give this post a title like "Conference Paper of Center for the Public Domain" to distinguish this from scientific conference papers.
Well, code morphing itself does not worth the performance. For example, let's compare Intel Celeron vs Crusoe with the same speed. I doubt that Crusoe can even beat Celeron, even with the super-optimized morphing that has run for months.
The problem here is that no matter how good is the morphing, it is still "emulation". You can do morphing or maybe mixed with dynamic recompilation, you cannot beat the real stuff that run natively. There are lots of examples.
The real power of Crusoe processor is that it is a VLIW processor, which can jam-pack several instructions into one. *This* is the real power. Notice that P4 adopt this solution too (3 instr to 1). Intelligent compiler can arrange the machine code so that the instruction bundles are used very efficiently. Now, let's say that Crusoe has 32-bit instruction wide and it has 128-bit. Theoretically, you can jam-pack 4 instruction at once, thus yielding 4 times the MHz rate. *This* is what I really want to see.
About the power problem: I really pessimistic about processor power that can prolong battery life n times (with n > 2), as claimed by Transmeta. IIRC, *the* major power drain is at LCD and hard drive. If those bogger are attacked, I wouldn't have been surprised that the battery life would be prolonged. But, let's recall that before Crusoe came, P3 processor only consumes about 2W. How many portions was that to the total laptop consumption? Now, Crusoe reduce that into a mere 1W -- and *that* was claimed as *the* dramatic power saver. I smelled rat.
I don't want to attack your "belief" as Crusoe adherents, but please understand the underlying problem before you answer.
That's what I have said. My point was that the 28% gain is basically on-par with P4. Athlon gains weren't too shabby either. Meanwhile, we understand that current Crusoe performance is pretty dismal compared to P4 or Athlon. So, 2% difference on performance gain doesn't mean that Crusoe performance is now leveraged into a new level.
If it were compiled into its native, we then can see Crusoe's raw power and compare them neck to neck. The story would have been much different.
Note also that I am not a revisionist. I believe Slashdot community is intelligent enough figuring out what I said.
Intel's C++ compiler still compiles code to x86. This is really great, considering that the approx. 28% speedup in Crusoe is not the native Crusoe. I wonder how Crusoe will fare once there is a compiler that build straight to its native.
For me, Crusoe + icc + GNU/linux is a winning combination.
Well, to me, it's a hasty conclusion. P4 gains 26%, Athlon XP gains 19%, and plain Athlon gains 16%.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Institute, California Hydrogen Business Council.
Read "Hydrogen Futures: Toward A Sustainable Energy System", from WorldWatch Institute. Check out its Q & A section.
If you think that you have enough learning CS subjects, do some open source projects. Search Sourceforge or Freshmeat for interesting projects you think you want to contribute. Then, after some experiences, your interest in CS will grow as your curiousity is pricked and your realized that your knowledge in CS need growing. When that happens, go for another one or two years in Master studies. That will sure be a lot of fun.
21264 is based loosely on EV67 and 68, even EV6. IIRC, 21264B is based on EV68. Check out its reference manual.
The last pre seems to be OK, but Linus is still "working" on that. Did anyone know that the VM bugs are fixed? I don't see that in the change logs after pre8...
Better yet: Reference manual for 21264B. For 21264: here.
I think 21264B is the beefed up version with 0.18 Micron. You should look at the specs: here, while 21264 is here. You can then compare it side by side.
I'm tired of the $2 billion/year ego project that the ISS is.
The goal for ISS is to "conduct the most balanced, efficient, and effective space program". Moreover, it provides unprecendented breakthroughs in research. I think the price tag is worth it.
Others: For more info, read here:
It defies Brook's Law because of its parallel release structure, extreme modularity, "trusted lieutenants" structure and as a consequence, co-ordination costs are almost negligible.
IIRC, Brook's law applies for networked communication. Hierarchical communication is therefore created to reduce this overhead. Extreme modularity doesn't prevent the merging cost. The interesting note here is that this paper doesn't address who is behind the scene to put all of this together.
I am not a Linux developer, but I believe Linus is the ruler of all of them. If he doesn't like the way things integrated, he just demote the component. Thus the maintainer does the job to comply. Recall on how many "new" components, such as ext3 and others must wait and comply to this rule? The rule is pretty rigid and widely accepted by all developers. All his "lieutenants", such as Alan Cox, also applies the same rule.
Moreover, Linux developers are all dedicated people, not just people that wants money to do their work. They want recognition. So, they will try very hard to push their "product" into the development line.
It's not just the Brook's Law, I suppose... Anyway, that's my 2c.
but personally after 2000...
Well, this paper talks about observations waay back in the 40s. And... don't forget that Linux is created in the 90-s. :-)
Check the official homepage.
And check the parody site as well... :-)
Check here and the old article here. But now we have a little bit more detail...
It's really hard to lock down developers. Usually developers demand some degree of freedom, especially the freedom to install their own tools. No people can work without the tools they familiar with. Thus, this can be detrimental to their productivity, which in turn is a loss to the company.
The tool itself can vary across colleagues even the primary usage is the same. My colleagues complain when they use other terminals when one of the alternatives is installed. Whining for some missing quirk they love and so on. I think tools like this should be allowed provided that they have the right license for the software.
Changing Windows registry would be unrealistic. Some software even store the Most Recently Used File (MRU) inside the registry (like WinZip, MSWord). Or even the last opened directory (like GetRight). Freezing the registry would cause these software to fail. Beware.
Barring some registry might be viable, but it could have a performance hit into the terminal (i.e. by intercepting all registry-add or change calls). Think of it. Developer hates their machine bogged down for some trifling-but-annoying issues.
Seems to me that this article puts its concern in battery life. However, there are a lot of other things to consider as well, which is not mentioned in the homepage (or do I miss anything?) like the dimension and the weight.
The other thing is the legal side. IANAL, but have you heard about the case that Nintendo sues fan sites by using unauthorized Pokemon pictures. Well, watchout, they could similarly get you with some similar reasons... (eventhough you claim it's just fan site and fair use)... Again, IANAL...
If you need Windows, you can get the old Win98, rather than buying Win2K or WinXP. I think Win98 also worth about $99 or maybe even cheaper. I dunno why they priced Lindows on par with the original (but old) thing. I think most of the apps today runs pretty well in Win98. The apps that need stability like webservers (Apache) are best run in Linux, IMHO.
Well, apparently, it is perfectly understandable if Microsoft produces inferior OS.
Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to be a programmer?
Gates: No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system.
- from "Programmers at Work" by Microsoft Press