Yet that's apparently why the "easy to read" one is such a horrendous mess.
Really? "Horrendous mess"? Are you sure you are not overstating that one, just a tiny bit?
IF you map it in three dimensions, though, it also can fit exotic matter as well.
Right, for all those times when you need a handy reference for exotic matter... because, you know, the second time they create one of those particles, it will be really handy to look it up on a chart.
And it shows us that the periodic table is without a doubt in need of a major revision from what we've always assumed to be correct.
What do you mean? The point of the story was that if you create exotic matter, you can't just plop it down on the periodic table; doesn't mean it's not correct for normal matter.
I didn't see a single version on that page that wasn't obnoxiously difficult to read.
But garbage collections is often slower than free, for large apps (practical observation).
Well, sure, but garbage collection in Java is already parallelized, and in a much more sophisticated way than the algorithm mentioned. It doesn't really even make much sense to compare garbage collection and free, what really matters is how Java allocation + garbage collection compares to malloc + free; and there you are basically getting fairly extensive optimization (without having to write any code for it) at the expense of predictability. Obviously the trade-off is different in different scenarios.
I really doubt that the asynchronous malloc/free would perform better than the Java model, in the general case.
Java tends to generate a far greater number of malloc/free operations than a typical C program, and so this algorithm might yield particularly good performance on Java modules.
That's not my understanding of how Java works. In fact, I can't see any benefit from this approach in Java at all: new object allocation is extremely fast (trivial, really) and heap compacting / garbage collection is already parallelized, and much more optimized than what malloc/free can do.
I may be wrong about this, but the only time Java actually uses malloc is: a) expanding the heap, and b) allocating direct buffers (there's probably some other io-related cases).
So, if the only worth of art is in the perception of an individual, does that mean that skill and talent are completely irrelevant? Or don't exist at all?
Poorly articulated angry tirades aside, it's good to see that some vestige of varied opinions might remain despite our overly homogenized wal-mart, mcdonalds, abercrombie & fitch society.
I love your optimism, but I'm pretty sure that hating anything that the Ivory Tower Elites try to shove down your throat as "classics" is firmly part of the psyche you describe.
Now that everyone has a voice that can be heard, will have modern classic?
Of course! Now that everyone can weigh in with their unique point of view, we'll have a truly representative and democratic process for selecting the classics of our time.
And the people have already spoken: the great works being produced now, those that will stand the test of time and will still be read by future generations, are written by Stephenie Meyer and Dan Brown.
(By the way, do you really think that most classics are considered that because of "suppressed dissent"?)
This is exactly the valley. It looks like a robot.
The thing is, it's not even in the valley, it's nowhere near the valley. You look at it and think "Huh, it's a crappy animatronics doll", not "Hmm, that chick seems weird".
Just ban them from listening in on Americans, as an official policy, and don't worry about it.
The NSA's policy notwithstanding, isn't it actually against the law for them to gather intelligence domestically? I know, I know, here I go with my pre-9/11 thinking again.
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?
Decimate means to lose exactly 10% of your forces. It was a punishment used by the Romans. They'd kill every 10th soldier.
I suspect you know this, but in modern English usage, decimate does mean "destroy a large proportion of" (as the "Current usage of the word" section of the Wikipedia article points out).
Yes, it's a matter of degree - the "incorrect" meaning of decimate has been in common use long enough that it's now an accepted meaning of the word (primary meaning, in fact). Whereas "Pyrrhic victory" has remained pretty stable, even though some people use it incorrectly sometimes.
Another example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but was considered otherwise because previous Microsoft products were less than excellent. I chose my words carefully.
So we have "nominal success at a great cost" and "perception of success undermined by reputation" - I'm not sure I see any connection. Pyrrhic victory is a fairly specific idiom, it doesn't just mean any victory that's hollow or unsatisfying.
Windows 7 is the best product MS has released in years. While this may be considered a pyrrhic victory (ME, anyone?), the fact remains that Windows 7 is a solid product.
Just because I'm bored: a Pyrrhic victory is one that comes at too high a price. An example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but the development effort bankrupted Microsoft. Here you just mean that the praise may be disingenuous.
(I like being an asshole about language, alright?)
Hmm, I can't really think of any shows (apart from Family Guy) that were good up until their cancellation and became bad after returning. There's certainly a few that already sucked pretty hard for years before getting canceled/uncanceled (SG1, Scrub).
I guess if we're counting follow-on movies then Farscape and Firefly (somebody had to say it).
Slashdot Mirror
Yet that's apparently why the "easy to read" one is such a horrendous mess.
Really? "Horrendous mess"? Are you sure you are not overstating that one, just a tiny bit?
IF you map it in three dimensions, though, it also can fit exotic matter as well.
Right, for all those times when you need a handy reference for exotic matter... because, you know, the second time they create one of those particles, it will be really handy to look it up on a chart.
I don't see how this metric has any use at all, especially given their criteria for determining popularity.
Oh, I don't know, might give you a hint as to where the jobs are, for one thing?
Can't speak to their methodology (it does sound pretty sketchy, though).
And it shows us that the periodic table is without a doubt in need of a major revision from what we've always assumed to be correct.
What do you mean? The point of the story was that if you create exotic matter, you can't just plop it down on the periodic table; doesn't mean it's not correct for normal matter.
I didn't see a single version on that page that wasn't obnoxiously difficult to read.
But garbage collections is often slower than free, for large apps (practical observation).
Well, sure, but garbage collection in Java is already parallelized, and in a much more sophisticated way than the algorithm mentioned. It doesn't really even make much sense to compare garbage collection and free, what really matters is how Java allocation + garbage collection compares to malloc + free; and there you are basically getting fairly extensive optimization (without having to write any code for it) at the expense of predictability. Obviously the trade-off is different in different scenarios.
I really doubt that the asynchronous malloc/free would perform better than the Java model, in the general case.
Java tends to generate a far greater number of malloc/free operations than a typical C program, and so this algorithm might yield particularly good performance on Java modules.
That's not my understanding of how Java works. In fact, I can't see any benefit from this approach in Java at all: new object allocation is extremely fast (trivial, really) and heap compacting / garbage collection is already parallelized, and much more optimized than what malloc/free can do.
I may be wrong about this, but the only time Java actually uses malloc is: a) expanding the heap, and b) allocating direct buffers (there's probably some other io-related cases).
Slight problem there: nurses aren't doctors' assistants.
So, if the only worth of art is in the perception of an individual, does that mean that skill and talent are completely irrelevant? Or don't exist at all?
it has all the excitement and interest of being fed a heaping bowl of broken glass, one tiny spoonful at a time
Not to nitpick, but that sounds like it would be fairly exciting. It certainly wouldn't be pleasant, but I doubt you'd be bored during that procedure.
Poorly articulated angry tirades aside, it's good to see that some vestige of varied opinions might remain despite our overly homogenized wal-mart, mcdonalds, abercrombie & fitch society.
I love your optimism, but I'm pretty sure that hating anything that the Ivory Tower Elites try to shove down your throat as "classics" is firmly part of the psyche you describe.
Now that everyone has a voice that can be heard, will have modern classic?
Of course! Now that everyone can weigh in with their unique point of view, we'll have a truly representative and democratic process for selecting the classics of our time.
And the people have already spoken: the great works being produced now, those that will stand the test of time and will still be read by future generations, are written by Stephenie Meyer and Dan Brown.
(By the way, do you really think that most classics are considered that because of "suppressed dissent"?)
This is exactly the valley. It looks like a robot.
The thing is, it's not even in the valley, it's nowhere near the valley. You look at it and think "Huh, it's a crappy animatronics doll", not "Hmm, that chick seems weird".
This to me reads as "Warner Brothers is ripping off intelligent college students"
If they were intelligent, they wouldn't be getting ripped off, now would they?
People acting like assholes happens for actual reasons.
True, but in the vast majority of cases, the reason is that they are assholes.
Speed.
With 6000 cores, you could render the movie in real time (24 fps) if each core were allowed 4 minutes per frame.
I may be wrong, but I believe it takes way more than that to render a frame.
Can anyone say that their flying experience is actually better after TSA was created?
The TSA is supposed to make your flying experience better?
Just ban them from listening in on Americans, as an official policy, and don't worry about it.
The NSA's policy notwithstanding, isn't it actually against the law for them to gather intelligence domestically? I know, I know, here I go with my pre-9/11 thinking again.
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?
Well, let's put it this way: Zero.
Hopefully.
Decimate means to lose exactly 10% of your forces. It was a punishment used by the Romans. They'd kill every 10th soldier.
I suspect you know this, but in modern English usage, decimate does mean "destroy a large proportion of" (as the "Current usage of the word" section of the Wikipedia article points out).
Yes, it's a matter of degree - the "incorrect" meaning of decimate has been in common use long enough that it's now an accepted meaning of the word (primary meaning, in fact). Whereas "Pyrrhic victory" has remained pretty stable, even though some people use it incorrectly sometimes.
That's language for you.
I'm assuming you mean in some way other than money, considering Microsoft is still one of the richer corporations in the world.
Um, that was a hypothetical example of something that could be called a Pyrrhic victory.
Another example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but was considered otherwise because previous Microsoft products were less than excellent. I chose my words carefully.
So we have "nominal success at a great cost" and "perception of success undermined by reputation" - I'm not sure I see any connection. Pyrrhic victory is a fairly specific idiom, it doesn't just mean any victory that's hollow or unsatisfying.
Windows 7 is the best product MS has released in years. While this may be considered a pyrrhic victory (ME, anyone?), the fact remains that Windows 7 is a solid product.
Just because I'm bored: a Pyrrhic victory is one that comes at too high a price. An example would be if Windows 7 was an excellent product, but the development effort bankrupted Microsoft. Here you just mean that the praise may be disingenuous.
(I like being an asshole about language, alright?)
I'll let you know what the great things that exist today people are nostalgic for then.
I'm gonna go with "2D movies" and "the internet".
Hmm, I can't really think of any shows (apart from Family Guy) that were good up until their cancellation and became bad after returning. There's certainly a few that already sucked pretty hard for years before getting canceled/uncanceled (SG1, Scrub).
I guess if we're counting follow-on movies then Farscape and Firefly (somebody had to say it).