Yeah yeah. A decade ago I goofed it up but I had a 50 karma by that point so I kept plugging away.
This is only the 2nd time anyone's noticed, and it took my first submitted story to get that much attention. My other one being the introduction of the new 5 blade razor lo these decades ago, rejected.
In any case:
> Intel Says to Prepare For "Thousand and Twenty Fours of Cores"
"Back in my day, we didn't have no steenking kilo-core processors. No, back in my day, we had one core, and played Core Wars with one thread in that one core! And it wasn't even thread, or even a process. It was basically a round robbin executive loop executing one pseudo-instruction per worm or virus or whatever the hell you thought you were programming while Push-Up orange drool dripped down your chin and got in the keyboard which required four hundred dollars to replace, not $19.99 from the toy aisle in the local drug store. And we liked it! >:( "
> Their groundbreaking work identified a single network core, or hub, that may > be key to the workings of both hemispheres of the brain.
Important, yes. Key to the Big Picture, i.e. consciousness? Doubtful. Your brain is really two brains, each lobe capable of thought and consciousness without the other. People can and do have hemispherectomies, believe it or not, and still remain conscious.
I wonder if anyone like this ever understood AI and could describe the experience, though.
Google could run a simple select * or equivalent, changing each name to a guid of some kind. This would allow analysis of all users, per user, if necessary (which is doubtful anyway), without revealing any identifying info.
Worse, this also reveals a trade secret -- Google can (and probably is) datamining to find what users actually choose to watch, which I'm sure Viacom wants to get their hands on.
Think about what that data would be worth for creating new programs. This has stupidity and scam written all over it.
> The NY Times has an opinion piece on how the next Windows could be designed > (even through Microsoft has already laid plans for Windows 7). The author > suggests 'A monolithic operating system like Windows perpetuates an obsolete > design. We don't need to load up our machines with bloated layers we won't use.'
Ahhh, you give them eyes, but they cannot see.
1. By adding in tons of stuff, especially things that "work", i.e. sell well, which is done after someone else figures out that X sells well, that cuts down on competition.
2. The more things in the OS, the more applications that use it are dependent on Windows, and the less likely they are to be ported to other operating systems, and thus create a threat to Microsoft's primary advantage, Windows itself, one of the priciest components of almost every computer sold the past 15+ years.
> 60-pixels doesn't sound like much, but the 1st gen artificial retina brought > tears to the eyes of its six recipients, who claim they can now count large > objects with just 16-pixels. If all goes well, a 200-pixel retina will be > ready in three years
Like all the new technologies, it'll be rapidly driven by pr0n!
2. Next-stop, cold fusion?: The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER)
This first-ever demo-level fusion reactor will be built in southern France and promises to deliver the world's first sustained fusion reactions; In layman's terms: more bang for your buck. And at a projected cost of CDN $14.4 billion, it better.
When the eight-year construction project is complete (scheduled for late 2015), ITER will generate 500 MW of fusion power for extended periods of time.
For those not in the physics know-how, fusion is exceptionally difficult to achieve - and is the subjects of many controversial experiments. That fusion reproduces our sun's energy, without the greenhouse gas emissions and radioactive waste of other methods. (more...)
3. The finished International Space Station, circa 2011
When completed in 2010 (though that will likely slip to 2011) the International Space Station will be the largest multinational engineering project of all time.
With an estimated final pricetag of a tenth of a trillion dollars, the finished structure - with its outstretched solar arrays - will be the size of a football field.[/quote]
Are you saying leaving ANWAR off-limits is not really about protecting Alaska real-estate and Elk and whatnot (itself a fraudulent "necessity" given how ungodly massive Alaska is compared to the land that would be drilled) but is rather about limiting emissions or something?
That's fine. Except I want laws passed using that for a reason. Not some backdoor crap like what's going on now.
I want elected politicians to say, "We are NOT going to open up Alaska because we don't want more pollution from oil in the air. It has nothing to do with Alaska's ecology." Then take their chances at the next election.
And to the poster who would respond as they did above, that the people are dumb, this is good for them even if they would vote against it, etc., well, that may or may not be true. But I do know that, given human history, the alternative with people passing unpopular things "for the people's good" doesn't tend to turn out too well in the long run. Giving the government that ability will quickly interest demagogues who will swipe away all the kind-hearted scientists once those "useful idiots" have done their service.
Like trial by jury, gun ownership, free speech, and so on, the real reason is to prevent the development of dictatorship, in spite of the abuses those rights introduce when misused.
So, no, I will not say, yes daddy, please pass laws most people don't want because we're too stupid to know it, by lying and tricking us and by having regulators do it without your direct vote, thxbie.
I wonder if most of the people angry over this agency doing this without Congress directly considering this possibility, and just assuming they have it, are happy the Supreme Court ruled the EPA must consider regulations regarding carbon in the air.
In other words, one agency assumes a power with only indirect (and presumed) authority from Congress, and that is bad. Another refuses to, presuming it doesn't, and is ordered to, without direct Congressional authority, and that is good.
Hmmmmmmm. Does anyone realize they should have a standard based on something besides just whether you like the regulation or not?
I humbly await my downmod for snapping you in the nose with a rubber band for describing the logic of most people's beliefs.
Personally, I think Congress should vote directly on such a massive regulation that could impact hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars of economic development.
That's far, far too much power to be wielded by officials not directly elected by the people. And, worse, have their non-election touted as a benefit by supporters...of the regulations. They don't have to "worry about politics."
Not a very Founding Fathers-ish attitude. Break part of the separation and limitations of powers simply because, you know, you can get your laws, i.e. regulations, jammed down the throats of people that way.
There was a reason Congress was expressly forbidden from delegating its lawmaking authority. This was so it couldn't avoid passing laws the people might not want, and would cause them to lose the next election. Shielded by this layer, with unpopular regulations they could just throw up their hands and lie, "Gee, I wouldn't have voted for that!" Uhh, you can vote to reverse it, though. "Yeah, we'll get around to that as soon as possible."
It isn't an issue of the value of the regulation, i.e. law. It's an issue of Constitutional propriety. If a law is so necessary, it should be passed by vote with little or no problem.
You'd think the protocol would suggest that not puttingn even a token password or encryption on your little wifi network implied any computer was free to use it.
Making it a responsibility of a computer user to ask a wide open wireless network to ask permission first seems rather silly.
Of course, monitoring traffic, searching for said password, or otherwise hacking into it without permission should indeed be illegal.
Why is it always so damned difficult?
(This neglects the philosophical notion that you should have the freedom to access airwaves on your property. This may not affect listening and cracking in this case, but would definitely forbid you from using the network, i.e. broadcasting off your property onto theirs.
This was known for at least a decade, that extra resources would better serve "society" by helping the advanced kids move along better than it would making sure a busboy is qualified to be a night watchman.
It long preceeds NCLB, though that would, of course, exacerbate it.
Young grasshoppers, you are learning the difference between "what sounds good", which is what gets you elected, and what actually works, which is science.
Cool! A Minnie Driver/Anne Hathaway love scene!
on
Pimp My Datacenter
·
· Score: 1
"It's now a bona-fide 21st century datacenter equipped with some of the glitziest and most functional gear known to datacenter-building man! We will now take your questions. You, yes?"
"This is Hawaii. Is it earthquake proof like the old one?"
Yes, but it's not like the technology for a "broadcast" message hasn't been developed, where it's only split up to individual destinations after it makes most of the journey, thus reducing traffic by an order of magnitude. Or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 orders of magnitude in a case like this.
After spending 10 years doing Windows programming, including the occasional driver, I went to the embedded world and realized they had a whole different look on things.
Embedded has a whole level of bug prevention regular windows programming doesn't have. And if you have a higher safety classification rating (read: something in a car that, if it breaks, can cause an accident = millions in damages + bad rep for your company) it's a whole 'nother level still.
And I don't care how "skilled" a Windoze or Linux programmer thinks they are -- unless you've been in the embedded world, you don't know what you're talking about, no matter how many books you've read.
"Regular" programming has good techniques, too. As embedded RAM gets cheaper, they're toying with C++. And even with just C, there's something to be said for pseudo-encapsulation of all your data, i.e. everybody must use an access function for globals, and modification functions, rather than just modifying data directly in this or that source file, pell-mell.
If you did both for some time, you'd be well-rounded. Take some Lisp on top of that and assembly, and you'd be a god. Like me.
I'd consider a detailed knowledge of HTML to be a kind of programming. It's another language, even if it doesn't have control structures without invoking Java or whatever.
What's truly scary, though, is people claim they "know HTML" when in fact all they know how to do is design a web page using a WYSIWYG layout editor. They don't even know how to FTP it up to their hoste -- the layout editor, built in with the host's offerings, does it all automatically.
No, you can't apply for an "HTML required programming job" because you can edit a little Myspace page and copy and paste whole hog a few news articles as your updates.
> "Given that Khan's revelations were made in early 2004, does > that mean it took the IAEA 1-2 years to brute-force the encryption?"
It took no more than that. Alternatively, it could have taken seconds because the gov't. has a backdore it has secretly figured out, or has the same lists of 256-bit primes everyone else has, and more.
I mean, if 512-bit encryption is based on two roughly 256-bit primes, how many of the latter have been figured out by computer? If I were government, I'd be calculating them nonstop on large networks and generating enormous lists of them.
That's what I'd do anyway. Like a Google type operation, if smaller of scale.
> was found to have sexually explicit material on a publicly-accessible website.
As if normal Slashdotting wasn't bad enough to crush a local network...
> and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal.
Oh for Christ's sake. This is a humor video that's even been shown on TV! >:( It's prolly that idiot who's teasing the llama who eventually tackles him and starts trying to hump him.
But World of Warcraft is now just introducing badges, which games like City of Heroes have since day 1, 4+ years ago.
Some of my better and favorite badges, though I can't remember their names:
Killing 100 Hulks in Perrigrine Island, a tough, hard-hitting boss street trash with groupies (Grants +5% endurance or health or something)
Doing 1 million points damage
Taking 1 million points damage
Dying and resurrecting (many) times
Killing this or that Giant Monster, Monster, or Arch Villain
Nimble Mynx, for visiting the apartment of one of the main characters
By the way, you get your high speed travel power for free at level 14, and at 18 one can already leap well over 100' into the air and around at 60 MPH.
I could handle WoW badges, though. Here's some I'd like, then I might go back to it for awhile:
Slaughtering idiot Horde in Alterac Valley with my purple Tier 3 (? don't know, it does way more DPS than that level 70 purple crap on the AH) crossbow
Defending this or that village from a swarm of 70 Horde gankers.
Taking out solo a ganker level 54 Horde who was skull to me and was ganking me and others. Now that was sweet.
Earning over 1,000 gold purely by playing the AH
Earning over 10k gold purely by playing the AH
And so on
And some for others in WoW:
Shell Head You have spent over 100 hours turtling on the Field of Strife in Alterac Valley!
It Ain't Like Da Movies You have bravely rushed into battle against overwhelming odds and been soundly and rapidly defeated just as the odds actually dictate, over 5000 times!
Hot Stuff, Not! You have learned that when a male character comes up and stands next to you, then kinda looks away, he's actually rotating his camera around to get a good view of your cowgirl booty.
It's My Football! You don't play your class anything remotely like it was designed, like a priest specializing in damage, or a hunter specializing in melee and not even using a pet.
It's My Party And I'll Cry If I Want To! Requires It's My Football!, you have caused the catastrophic wipes of over 100 PUGs.
Jfasdfieoihsfpeoi You have sent out in-game email advertisements to over 100,000 players!
Usefulless You have gimped your class' primary function (tank, DPS, healing, etc.) to talent up some utility function that's Teh Bombe!
Galahad Requires Usefulless, your character is closely modeled after a real fictional character, but, since you don't actually hold Excalibur, which would be even higher than the ultra-rare orange reward swords, your alternative talent tree leaves you very gimped, hence the resemblence is mostly in your mind.
Astounding! Requires Galahad, It Ain't Like Da Movies, and It's My Party And I'll Cry If I Want To!, you have achieved level 70 on a PvP server without being on anybody's ignore or hit list.
Slashdot Mirror
> Bavarian Police Can Legally Place Trojans On PCs
Gross!
Oh wait. Nevermind. They're talking about condoms.
1. Imagine a tiny arsenic atom embedded in a tiny strip of silicon atoms.
2. An electric current is applied.
3. Something strange arises on the surface -- an exotic molecule.
4. ???????
5. Profit!!!!
Yeah yeah. A decade ago I goofed it up but I had a 50 karma by that point so I kept plugging away.
This is only the 2nd time anyone's noticed, and it took my first submitted story to get that much attention. My other one being the introduction of the new 5 blade razor lo these decades ago, rejected.
In any case:
> Intel Says to Prepare For "Thousand and Twenty Fours of Cores"
Fixed it for ya!
"Back in my day, we didn't have no steenking kilo-core processors. No, back in my day, we had one core, and played Core Wars with one thread in that one core! And it wasn't even thread, or even a process. It was basically a round robbin executive loop executing one pseudo-instruction per worm or virus or whatever the hell you thought you were programming while Push-Up orange drool dripped down your chin and got in the keyboard which required four hundred dollars to replace, not $19.99 from the toy aisle in the local drug store. And we liked it! >:( "
THANK YOU! The first one to figure out what the questioner was talking about.
"Oh my god, it's full of stars/cores/Natalie Portman's pubic hairs!" hasn't been a meme that "what, developed over the weekend?"
Some nerds ain't got no critical thinking ability...
> Their groundbreaking work identified a single network core, or hub, that may
> be key to the workings of both hemispheres of the brain.
Important, yes. Key to the Big Picture, i.e. consciousness? Doubtful. Your brain is really two brains, each lobe capable of thought and consciousness without the other. People can and do have hemispherectomies, believe it or not, and still remain conscious.
I wonder if anyone like this ever understood AI and could describe the experience, though.
Google could run a simple select * or equivalent, changing each name to a guid of some kind. This would allow analysis of all users, per user, if necessary (which is doubtful anyway), without revealing any identifying info.
Worse, this also reveals a trade secret -- Google can (and probably is) datamining to find what users actually choose to watch, which I'm sure Viacom wants to get their hands on.
Think about what that data would be worth for creating new programs. This has stupidity and scam written all over it.
> The NY Times has an opinion piece on how the next Windows could be designed
> (even through Microsoft has already laid plans for Windows 7). The author
> suggests 'A monolithic operating system like Windows perpetuates an obsolete
> design. We don't need to load up our machines with bloated layers we won't use.'
Ahhh, you give them eyes, but they cannot see.
1. By adding in tons of stuff, especially things that "work", i.e. sell well, which is done after someone else figures out that X sells well, that cuts down on competition.
2. The more things in the OS, the more applications that use it are dependent on Windows, and the less likely they are to be ported to other operating systems, and thus create a threat to Microsoft's primary advantage, Windows itself, one of the priciest components of almost every computer sold the past 15+ years.
Yay, we figured out a way to save ourselves from a deliberate design flaw in life created by God. Praise God!
> 60-pixels doesn't sound like much, but the 1st gen artificial retina brought
> tears to the eyes of its six recipients, who claim they can now count large
> objects with just 16-pixels. If all goes well, a 200-pixel retina will be
> ready in three years
Like all the new technologies, it'll be rapidly driven by pr0n!
From TFA:
Are you saying leaving ANWAR off-limits is not really about protecting Alaska real-estate and Elk and whatnot (itself a fraudulent "necessity" given how ungodly massive Alaska is compared to the land that would be drilled) but is rather about limiting emissions or something?
That's fine. Except I want laws passed using that for a reason. Not some backdoor crap like what's going on now.
I want elected politicians to say, "We are NOT going to open up Alaska because we don't want more pollution from oil in the air. It has nothing to do with Alaska's ecology." Then take their chances at the next election.
And to the poster who would respond as they did above, that the people are dumb, this is good for them even if they would vote against it, etc., well, that may or may not be true. But I do know that, given human history, the alternative with people passing unpopular things "for the people's good" doesn't tend to turn out too well in the long run. Giving the government that ability will quickly interest demagogues who will swipe away all the kind-hearted scientists once those "useful idiots" have done their service.
Like trial by jury, gun ownership, free speech, and so on, the real reason is to prevent the development of dictatorship, in spite of the abuses those rights introduce when misused.
So, no, I will not say, yes daddy, please pass laws most people don't want because we're too stupid to know it, by lying and tricking us and by having regulators do it without your direct vote, thxbie.
I wonder if most of the people angry over this agency doing this without Congress directly considering this possibility, and just assuming they have it, are happy the Supreme Court ruled the EPA must consider regulations regarding carbon in the air.
In other words, one agency assumes a power with only indirect (and presumed) authority from Congress, and that is bad. Another refuses to, presuming it doesn't, and is ordered to, without direct Congressional authority, and that is good.
Hmmmmmmm. Does anyone realize they should have a standard based on something besides just whether you like the regulation or not?
I humbly await my downmod for snapping you in the nose with a rubber band for describing the logic of most people's beliefs.
Personally, I think Congress should vote directly on such a massive regulation that could impact hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars of economic development.
That's far, far too much power to be wielded by officials not directly elected by the people. And, worse, have their non-election touted as a benefit by supporters...of the regulations. They don't have to "worry about politics."
Not a very Founding Fathers-ish attitude. Break part of the separation and limitations of powers simply because, you know, you can get your laws, i.e. regulations, jammed down the throats of people that way.
There was a reason Congress was expressly forbidden from delegating its lawmaking authority. This was so it couldn't avoid passing laws the people might not want, and would cause them to lose the next election. Shielded by this layer, with unpopular regulations they could just throw up their hands and lie, "Gee, I wouldn't have voted for that!" Uhh, you can vote to reverse it, though. "Yeah, we'll get around to that as soon as possible."
It isn't an issue of the value of the regulation, i.e. law. It's an issue of Constitutional propriety. If a law is so necessary, it should be passed by vote with little or no problem.
You'd think the protocol would suggest that not puttingn even a token password or encryption on your little wifi network implied any computer was free to use it.
Making it a responsibility of a computer user to ask a wide open wireless network to ask permission first seems rather silly.
Of course, monitoring traffic, searching for said password, or otherwise hacking into it without permission should indeed be illegal.
Why is it always so damned difficult?
(This neglects the philosophical notion that you should have the freedom to access airwaves on your property. This may not affect listening and cracking in this case, but would definitely forbid you from using the network, i.e. broadcasting off your property onto theirs.
This was known for at least a decade, that extra resources would better serve "society" by helping the advanced kids move along better than it would making sure a busboy is qualified to be a night watchman.
It long preceeds NCLB, though that would, of course, exacerbate it.
Young grasshoppers, you are learning the difference between "what sounds good", which is what gets you elected, and what actually works, which is science.
"It's now a bona-fide 21st century datacenter equipped with some of the glitziest and most functional gear known to datacenter-building man! We will now take your questions. You, yes?"
"This is Hawaii. Is it earthquake proof like the old one?"
"Did I mention it's glitzy? Next question..."
Yes, but it's not like the technology for a "broadcast" message hasn't been developed, where it's only split up to individual destinations after it makes most of the journey, thus reducing traffic by an order of magnitude. Or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 orders of magnitude in a case like this.
After spending 10 years doing Windows programming, including the occasional driver, I went to the embedded world and realized they had a whole different look on things.
Embedded has a whole level of bug prevention regular windows programming doesn't have. And if you have a higher safety classification rating (read: something in a car that, if it breaks, can cause an accident = millions in damages + bad rep for your company) it's a whole 'nother level still.
And I don't care how "skilled" a Windoze or Linux programmer thinks they are -- unless you've been in the embedded world, you don't know what you're talking about, no matter how many books you've read.
"Regular" programming has good techniques, too. As embedded RAM gets cheaper, they're toying with C++. And even with just C, there's something to be said for pseudo-encapsulation of all your data, i.e. everybody must use an access function for globals, and modification functions, rather than just modifying data directly in this or that source file, pell-mell.
If you did both for some time, you'd be well-rounded. Take some Lisp on top of that and assembly, and you'd be a god. Like me.
I'd consider a detailed knowledge of HTML to be a kind of programming. It's another language, even if it doesn't have control structures without invoking Java or whatever.
What's truly scary, though, is people claim they "know HTML" when in fact all they know how to do is design a web page using a WYSIWYG layout editor. They don't even know how to FTP it up to their hoste -- the layout editor, built in with the host's offerings, does it all automatically.
No, you can't apply for an "HTML required programming job" because you can edit a little Myspace page and copy and paste whole hog a few news articles as your updates.
> "Given that Khan's revelations were made in early 2004, does
> that mean it took the IAEA 1-2 years to brute-force the encryption?"
It took no more than that. Alternatively, it could have taken seconds because the gov't. has a backdore it has secretly figured out, or has the same lists of 256-bit primes everyone else has, and more.
I mean, if 512-bit encryption is based on two roughly 256-bit primes, how many of the latter have been figured out by computer? If I were government, I'd be calculating them nonstop on large networks and generating enormous lists of them.
That's what I'd do anyway. Like a Google type operation, if smaller of scale.
> was found to have sexually explicit material on a publicly-accessible website.
As if normal Slashdotting wasn't bad enough to crush a local network...
> and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal.
Oh for Christ's sake. This is a humor video that's even been shown on TV! >:( It's prolly that idiot who's teasing the llama who eventually tackles him and starts trying to hump him.
Well, at least the legislators of some countries are the ones making this decision, rather than one guy overstepping his constitutional boundaries.
If I could set up a keyboard to the X-box and a mouse, then configure any first person shooter to be a "mouser" style, ala a PC, I'd play that.
Otherwise, I'm sticking to the computer.
But World of Warcraft is now just introducing badges, which games like City of Heroes have since day 1, 4+ years ago.
Some of my better and favorite badges, though I can't remember their names:
By the way, you get your high speed travel power for free at level 14, and at 18 one can already leap well over 100' into the air and around at 60 MPH.
I could handle WoW badges, though. Here's some I'd like, then I might go back to it for awhile:
And some for others in WoW: