Blame Congress. Seriously. The guy spent a long time at NASA working on VASIMR technology. He only went private sector after Congress voted to ban NASA from funding research into VASIMR about ten years ago, for some idiotic reason (does Congress need any other?). So his job at NASA was gone overnight and he went private sector instead of just occupying a desk.
Personally I'm thrilled the research continues, since this is a very important piece of technology, in my opinion.
Re:Appallingly mediocre.
on
Stargate Universe
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Eh, it feels to me like you're stretching to fit characters into pre-alloted roles/tropes. I don't get that sense from him, personally.
And to be honest, if you can't sympathize with a smart guy running around trying to put out fires while everybody else is running around like a chicken with their heads cut off because they don't know what to do... you probably don't belong on/.:D
Evil Doctor? I would think most denizens of/. would like Dr. Rush. Sure he has his own agenda, somewhat, but he doesn't strike me as evil. Most of the show consists of him running around trying to figure out how to keep everybody alive while everybody else gets in his way because they're pissed at him.
You're thinking yourself in circles. Most ancient technology is durable. Having a ship full of ancient repair robots would be weird since I don't think we've ever seen anything similar. The problems presented in the show are that: 1. certain consumables are well past their design life (CO2 scrubbers). 2. The ship has taken battle damage. 3. It's running low on power. And if you watched the end of the show, you'd see that the plot point is the ship didn't need automated robots to replace CO2 scrubbers because it wasn't supposed to have been left unmanned long enough for that to be a problem. Yes, it's a setup for episodic adventures, but it also makes internal sense.
SG isn't perfect, but one thing I'll say is that the writers have always made a lot more effort to maintain internal consistency than most other sci-fi shows do.
Mmm, copypasta. To keep a trademark you have to defend it. That doesn't mean you have to sue everyone under the sun 'just in case.' Apple doesn't want to protect its trademark, they want to lay claim to the entire concept of Apples (and similar fruit), in the branding world.
Criminal? Have you entertained the possibility that neither are doing anything illegal? It sounds like what you're saying is that Apple is relying on the DMCA somehow, and Palm is in the clear under the interoperability provisions (although that still wouldn't mean Apple is doing anything wrong). At most, I suspect Palm is violating whatever agreements it has with the USB-IF, which probably requires conforming to certain standards in exchange for use of its trademark.
Personally, I'm curious why Palm is adopting this tactic. A number of people have mentioned that Apple provides some form of syncing API for iTunes? What is the disadvantage of that which leads Palm to this sneakier technique?
Getting fired from The Inquirer for playing fast and loose with the truth is like getting kicked out Atilla's horde for being a little TOO good at raping and pillaging. Kind of impressive, in a disturbing way.
Absolutely. The most important thing we've learned from the ISS is how to build a complex habitation in space and operate it autonomously. If you're going to Mars or anywhere else more than a few days from earth, even simple things like a toilet failing could have dire consequences (hygiene problems, running out of water without recycling, etc...) if you're halfway to Mars. If your oxygen generator has an unexpected and unplanned failure mode, it's much better to learn about that in orbit of earth than it is halfway to mars.
Some people hate success. But success is also a powerful spotlight to illuminate a company's misdeeds.
Apple receives a lot more attention, from a lot more sources than it did five years ago. Many of those new interested parties are a lot less willing to put up with Apple's shenanigans than its traditional fanbase.
HPC has a very, very long tail. The market for systems in the $50k-$200k range, and beyond, is enormous. Companies like Exxon and Saudi-Aramco have an insatiable desire for computing power and more money than god. Everything is done in simulation these days.
I mean, look at Agilent. Agilent has twice NVIDIA's revenue and they make testing and lab equipment. As for Roadrunner itself, IBM makes a lot more money on the day-to-day HPC business than they do on the occasional hypercomputer for the US government.
GTX 280 is a graphics card. The GT200 is the GPU core the GTX 280 card is based on. Likewise the 8800 series graphics cards were based on the G80 chip (and later G92, I think). There were also the G84, G86, G94 that power a number of nvidia's economy or mobile platforms. The Quadro 5600 and 4600 are also G80 based. There were other, cheaper Quadros based on the G84. The Quadro 5800 is based on the GT200 chip. The Tesla 870s were based on G80s, the 1070s are based on GT200. The cards also tend to have different memory interfaces (and amounts), clock rates and even firmware, which is why there are many different cards all based on the same handful of chips.
So no, I do mean the GT200. The GT200 processor supports double-precision, the G8x and G9x processors do not.
Notice the features being marketed: concurrent CUDA kernels, high performance IEEE double-precision floating point performance, multi-level caching and expanded shared memory, high performance atomic global memory operations. NVIDIA doesn't care about you anymore. Excepting a small hardcore, gamers are either playing graphically trivial MMOs (*cough*WoW*cough*) or have moved to consoles.
They won't want to sell you this chip for a hundred bucks, they want to sell it to the HPC world for a couple thousand bucks (or more... some of NVIDIA's current Tesla products are 5 figures). The only gamers they're really interested in these days are on mobile platforms, using Tegra.
Huh? DX10 and 11 are nice advancements.... big steps forward. The defining feature of DX10 (apart from throwing away the vestigal fixed-function API stuff) was geometry shaders, and the defining feature of DX11 is computation shaders. Both of which the XBox 360 lacks, because the Xenos chip is a DX9 generation GPU. The feature that Microsoft dropped from DX10 on NVIDIA's request was memory virtualization.
As a developer, I couldn't give a rats ass that NVIDIA is dropping support for a configuration which is either rare and weird or uninteresting (depending on the devices).
Larrabee was Intel's pride and joy for a while. They were gushing over it like a proud new parent, which is SOP for anything Intel is excited about. Given how little they've said about it recently, my feel on Larrabee is it's hit some pretty nasty roadblocks and is firmly vaporware.
25%? Really? There are two possible usage scenarios they've killed:
1. An onboard NVIDIA device with a discrete ATI graphics card. From what I've heard, PhysX running on integrated devices isn't any faster than running on the CPU in software mode, so nothing has been lost. So no target market has been lost there.
2. Having both a discrete ATI graphics card, and an unused GeForce 8000+ or Tesla. That is a pretty fucking weird configuration. I can't see that being more than a tenth of a percent of gamers. I've personally never encountered someone who runs both.
Given that the most predominant attack vector is users ignorance and stupidity.... no, it really should be automatic. At the very least, a prompt should only be enabled by a very obscure setting somewhere.
DU rounds also don't absorb energy on impact by deforming (blunting), they tend to fracture instead. A properly manafactured DU round will 'self-sharpen' as it passes through another object, allowing much deeper penetration for the same KE.
That doesn't make sense. Code that can break out of an emulator sandbox would be exploiting a security vulnerability. You could apply the same argument to say that Apple shouldn't allow email on the iPhone, because that could exploit some vulnerability and install malware. Which is particularly ironic given the iPhone's SMS vulnerability. An emulator is just a program that takes some user input and does something with it... there's nothing special there and any program which 'takes some user input and does something with it' is equally problematic.
I don't know about that... with notable counterexamples (remember 'DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run?' and Netscape), Microsoft has generally been pretty hands off, encouraging people to develop whatever they want. It's somewhat ironic, but Windows Mobile is arguably the most open platform of all. It has no restrictions or policies, no centralized distribution channel, and it doesn't restrict your access to the hardware.
My next phone will probably be Android, but even that doesn't give you root.
Slashdot Mirror
Blame Congress. Seriously. The guy spent a long time at NASA working on VASIMR technology. He only went private sector after Congress voted to ban NASA from funding research into VASIMR about ten years ago, for some idiotic reason (does Congress need any other?). So his job at NASA was gone overnight and he went private sector instead of just occupying a desk.
Personally I'm thrilled the research continues, since this is a very important piece of technology, in my opinion.
Eh, it feels to me like you're stretching to fit characters into pre-alloted roles/tropes. I don't get that sense from him, personally.
/. :D
And to be honest, if you can't sympathize with a smart guy running around trying to put out fires while everybody else is running around like a chicken with their heads cut off because they don't know what to do... you probably don't belong on
Evil Doctor? I would think most denizens of /. would like Dr. Rush. Sure he has his own agenda, somewhat, but he doesn't strike me as evil. Most of the show consists of him running around trying to figure out how to keep everybody alive while everybody else gets in his way because they're pissed at him.
You're thinking yourself in circles. Most ancient technology is durable. Having a ship full of ancient repair robots would be weird since I don't think we've ever seen anything similar. The problems presented in the show are that: 1. certain consumables are well past their design life (CO2 scrubbers). 2. The ship has taken battle damage. 3. It's running low on power. And if you watched the end of the show, you'd see that the plot point is the ship didn't need automated robots to replace CO2 scrubbers because it wasn't supposed to have been left unmanned long enough for that to be a problem. Yes, it's a setup for episodic adventures, but it also makes internal sense.
SG isn't perfect, but one thing I'll say is that the writers have always made a lot more effort to maintain internal consistency than most other sci-fi shows do.
Mmm, copypasta. To keep a trademark you have to defend it. That doesn't mean you have to sue everyone under the sun 'just in case.' Apple doesn't want to protect its trademark, they want to lay claim to the entire concept of Apples (and similar fruit), in the branding world.
Stop defending Apple. They don't deserve it.
At last! The fabled gift shop of the druids has been found!
Criminal? Have you entertained the possibility that neither are doing anything illegal? It sounds like what you're saying is that Apple is relying on the DMCA somehow, and Palm is in the clear under the interoperability provisions (although that still wouldn't mean Apple is doing anything wrong). At most, I suspect Palm is violating whatever agreements it has with the USB-IF, which probably requires conforming to certain standards in exchange for use of its trademark.
Personally, I'm curious why Palm is adopting this tactic. A number of people have mentioned that Apple provides some form of syncing API for iTunes? What is the disadvantage of that which leads Palm to this sneakier technique?
Getting fired from The Inquirer for playing fast and loose with the truth is like getting kicked out Atilla's horde for being a little TOO good at raping and pillaging. Kind of impressive, in a disturbing way.
Absolutely. The most important thing we've learned from the ISS is how to build a complex habitation in space and operate it autonomously. If you're going to Mars or anywhere else more than a few days from earth, even simple things like a toilet failing could have dire consequences (hygiene problems, running out of water without recycling, etc...) if you're halfway to Mars. If your oxygen generator has an unexpected and unplanned failure mode, it's much better to learn about that in orbit of earth than it is halfway to mars.
Besides, who says we can't have wireless green electricity.
Duh, household electricity is a 60Hz, green is ~560THz.
Some people hate success. But success is also a powerful spotlight to illuminate a company's misdeeds.
Apple receives a lot more attention, from a lot more sources than it did five years ago. Many of those new interested parties are a lot less willing to put up with Apple's shenanigans than its traditional fanbase.
HPC has a very, very long tail. The market for systems in the $50k-$200k range, and beyond, is enormous. Companies like Exxon and Saudi-Aramco have an insatiable desire for computing power and more money than god. Everything is done in simulation these days.
I mean, look at Agilent. Agilent has twice NVIDIA's revenue and they make testing and lab equipment. As for Roadrunner itself, IBM makes a lot more money on the day-to-day HPC business than they do on the occasional hypercomputer for the US government.
GTX 280 is a graphics card. The GT200 is the GPU core the GTX 280 card is based on. Likewise the 8800 series graphics cards were based on the G80 chip (and later G92, I think). There were also the G84, G86, G94 that power a number of nvidia's economy or mobile platforms. The Quadro 5600 and 4600 are also G80 based. There were other, cheaper Quadros based on the G84. The Quadro 5800 is based on the GT200 chip. The Tesla 870s were based on G80s, the 1070s are based on GT200. The cards also tend to have different memory interfaces (and amounts), clock rates and even firmware, which is why there are many different cards all based on the same handful of chips.
So no, I do mean the GT200. The GT200 processor supports double-precision, the G8x and G9x processors do not.
NVIDIA has had double precision support since the GT200 line. Performance was poor compared to single precision, but it was there.
Notice the features being marketed: concurrent CUDA kernels, high performance IEEE double-precision floating point performance, multi-level caching and expanded shared memory, high performance atomic global memory operations. NVIDIA doesn't care about you anymore. Excepting a small hardcore, gamers are either playing graphically trivial MMOs (*cough*WoW*cough*) or have moved to consoles.
They won't want to sell you this chip for a hundred bucks, they want to sell it to the HPC world for a couple thousand bucks (or more... some of NVIDIA's current Tesla products are 5 figures). The only gamers they're really interested in these days are on mobile platforms, using Tegra.
Huh? DX10 and 11 are nice advancements.... big steps forward. The defining feature of DX10 (apart from throwing away the vestigal fixed-function API stuff) was geometry shaders, and the defining feature of DX11 is computation shaders. Both of which the XBox 360 lacks, because the Xenos chip is a DX9 generation GPU. The feature that Microsoft dropped from DX10 on NVIDIA's request was memory virtualization.
As a developer, I couldn't give a rats ass that NVIDIA is dropping support for a configuration which is either rare and weird or uninteresting (depending on the devices).
Larrabee was Intel's pride and joy for a while. They were gushing over it like a proud new parent, which is SOP for anything Intel is excited about. Given how little they've said about it recently, my feel on Larrabee is it's hit some pretty nasty roadblocks and is firmly vaporware.
25%? Really? There are two possible usage scenarios they've killed:
1. An onboard NVIDIA device with a discrete ATI graphics card. From what I've heard, PhysX running on integrated devices isn't any faster than running on the CPU in software mode, so nothing has been lost. So no target market has been lost there.
2. Having both a discrete ATI graphics card, and an unused GeForce 8000+ or Tesla. That is a pretty fucking weird configuration. I can't see that being more than a tenth of a percent of gamers. I've personally never encountered someone who runs both.
Mountain. Molehill.
n/t
Yes, but this is apple.slashdot.org, better known as Bizzaro Slashdot.
Given that the most predominant attack vector is users ignorance and stupidity.... no, it really should be automatic. At the very least, a prompt should only be enabled by a very obscure setting somewhere.
DU rounds also don't absorb energy on impact by deforming (blunting), they tend to fracture instead. A properly manafactured DU round will 'self-sharpen' as it passes through another object, allowing much deeper penetration for the same KE.
That doesn't make sense. Code that can break out of an emulator sandbox would be exploiting a security vulnerability. You could apply the same argument to say that Apple shouldn't allow email on the iPhone, because that could exploit some vulnerability and install malware. Which is particularly ironic given the iPhone's SMS vulnerability. An emulator is just a program that takes some user input and does something with it... there's nothing special there and any program which 'takes some user input and does something with it' is equally problematic.
Mmm, posted in the first ten minutes and moderated 'Redundant'. Whatever, I've got Karma to burn. Go at it, astroturfers!
I don't know about that... with notable counterexamples (remember 'DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run?' and Netscape), Microsoft has generally been pretty hands off, encouraging people to develop whatever they want. It's somewhat ironic, but Windows Mobile is arguably the most open platform of all. It has no restrictions or policies, no centralized distribution channel, and it doesn't restrict your access to the hardware. My next phone will probably be Android, but even that doesn't give you root.