For those of you who think this shouldn't be legal, how would you feel about having something that blocked all advertisements made illegal too?
On the other hand, I have a hard time believing that anyone would willingly sign up to be hit with more advertisements without getting hardly anything in return. Oh well.
I think its BS. Some people can concentrate better then other people, just like some people are taller then other people, and some people have darker skin, etc.
Anyone who takes Ritalin is going to be able to concentrate better then they were before, just like anyone who takes melatonix will have darker skin then otherwise and everyone who takes steroids will have bigger muscles then they were before.
Arbitrarily classifying people into "ADD" and "non-add" is stupid.
Man, more and more every personality trait is becoming a 'disease' complete with drugs to get rid of it. People talk about how this is caused by over psychologicalizing everything, but actually I think it has to do with our war on drugs. People think taking drugs for anything other then being sick is "wrong" so they convince themselves that they are "sick" in order to take drugs.
clearly, this is a disease. recreational pharmophobic syndrome, and should be cured by smoking liberal doses of pot.
Seriously though, if people want to take drugs to change parts of their psyche that they want changed, I say go for it. But I'd rather not see everything labeled as a 'disease' to be 'treated'
Real Translation: 0.4% slower, at 75% of the clock speed.
Real translation fastest G5 0.4% then mid-range p4. Don't forget it was you Mac zealots who screamed 'clock speed doesn't matter'! You could probably make custom hardware that would chew through this application at 100mhz if you really wanted to.
NASA's study found the Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 to score 498 MFLOPS for their Jet3D performance. A P4 running at 2.66GHz scored 255 MFLOPS: a 195.3% performance advantage for the G5 in this test. If we assume a direct correlation between MHz and MFLOPS for the P4 (which would actually overstate the performance of the P4) and increase the P4's score by 12.782% this would give the 3GHz P4 a score of 287.594 MFLOPS. This is still a 173.16% performance advantage for the G5, and NASA states that a 20% increase in performance for the G5 would be reasonable "when G5-aware compiler tools become available."
etc. Please try not to jump into discussions without knowing what people are talking about.
You are aware of this system where people make comments, and then other people can comment on their comments. My reply was to the comment above, not the article.
Who on earth would spend thousands and thousands of dolars on high-end hardware and then not even bother to use the compiler's optimization flags? Sheesh.
What are you talking about? Are you looking at the same graphs I am? A midrange p4 beat the highest end g5 available. How can you say that the g5 'won'?
Didja notice that overall the G4s were faster, too? Therefore the price of entry for a slower machine if $799, and it includes way more than that $900 PC.
Are you honestly claming that 129 is a higher number then 255? (fastest g4 to the fastest p4) Yeah, the g4 had a slightly higher flop/cycle score (that would have been much lower using the intel fortran compiler) but the p4's over all score was much higher.
When comparing the price of a 32bit system to that of a 64bit, it's a bit pointless...as you're getting so much more with the 64bit chip.
Um, no, you're not. For one thing these benchmarks were all done with floating point numbers, the Intel architecture has supported 64 bit floats since the 287. A 64 bit CPU won't have much of an advantage over a 32 bit CPU at all. Secondly, a 64 bit CPU can't do anything that a 32 bit CPU can't. It just needs to take more cycles. But that only happens in the rare case when you have to deal with a non floating point number which is larger then 2^32, or ~4.3 billion. That doesn't happen very often.
According to some of the comments on this board, the intel fortran compiler is about 50% faster then the portland compiler that was used. If the intel compiler had been used, the p4 would have scored 0.144 FLOPs/clock cycle*, which is much better then the g5.
(*which is exactly the same thing as MFLOPs/Mhz. And they wonder why NASA has so much trouble converting things...)
I'll be more impressed if the folks at the Langley Research Center compared the Apple Power Macintosh G5 with the 2.2 GHz PowerPC 970 CPU against a system running the Pentium 4 3.2 GHz CPU (which has Hyper threading instruction registers to have almost dual-CPU performance).
Hyper threading does not give you the performance of a multi-processor setup. Hyper threading speeds things up when you have lots of independent threads. Lets say You get into a situation where you have, say, a cache miss and the CPU has to wait like 100 cycles to read crap out of ram. With HT, the CPU can use those cycles to run programs running in other threads.
It's like having two CPUs, but only one can run at a time, so while one waits, the other runs.
It just lets the chip come closer to it's theoretical maximum speed.
Hahah, so the P4 does, on average 'less work' per cycle then the g5, so much for the g5 being superior "RISC" and the p4 being inferior "CISC"
Okay, I'm joking. But seriously, that information is a little useful. We can uses it as a baseline to compare new CPUs. So we'll know that a 3ghz g5 is still slower then a 5ghz p4.
This also tels you how many floating point ops per CYCLE the chip can do, which is always intresting.
Well, yes. If you compare the fastest possible dual G5 to the fastest single p4, the dual g5 would win. So what? If you want the fastest, get a dual athlon.
They should at least give royalties, Even if they are as low as 1% or something. Personaly, I'd rather have $75 of actual cash then 'bragging rights' at this point.
Fuck that shit. Holy christ, how many of these t-shirts do you think you'll sell? at least a couple thousand I would guess, if not more over the years. And you only want to pay $75!? That's worse then the RIAA! And not even real money, but store credit!
Oh wait, you're also throwing in copies of your own design! That makes it totaly worthwhile.
Back in the ICQ days someone msg'd me from french canada. I translated their speech using babelfish and my own back into french. I can belive this patent was granted, but, christ. It's blindingly obvious how to do it. The only problem is that there is no easily available 'translation libraries' to plug use that actualy work. Hrm, perhaps a good target for open source developers:)
That said, there is some prior art in William Gibson's Iduro where a conversation is translated back and forth between english and japanese. Sure, it was as audio, but really what's the diff?
Nope, sorry. In a fly-by-wire plane there are no mechanical links to the control surfaces. If the flight control computer completely dies, you have absolutely no control over the plane.
This is true, however there are only a few planes that actualy use fly-by-wire.
Slashdot Mirror
Of having Photoshop optimized for crazy performance on the mac?
For those of you who think this shouldn't be legal, how would you feel about having something that blocked all advertisements made illegal too?
On the other hand, I have a hard time believing that anyone would willingly sign up to be hit with more advertisements without getting hardly anything in return. Oh well.
I think its BS. Some people can concentrate better then other people, just like some people are taller then other people, and some people have darker skin, etc.
Anyone who takes Ritalin is going to be able to concentrate better then they were before, just like anyone who takes melatonix will have darker skin then otherwise and everyone who takes steroids will have bigger muscles then they were before.
Arbitrarily classifying people into "ADD" and "non-add" is stupid.
Man, more and more every personality trait is becoming a 'disease' complete with drugs to get rid of it. People talk about how this is caused by over psychologicalizing everything, but actually I think it has to do with our war on drugs. People think taking drugs for anything other then being sick is "wrong" so they convince themselves that they are "sick" in order to take drugs.
clearly, this is a disease. recreational pharmophobic syndrome, and should be cured by smoking liberal doses of pot.
Seriously though, if people want to take drugs to change parts of their psyche that they want changed, I say go for it. But I'd rather not see everything labeled as a 'disease' to be 'treated'
You can get dual-proc Xeon and Athlon PCs if you want.
Real Translation: 0.4% slower, at 75% of the clock speed.
Real translation fastest G5 0.4% then mid-range p4. Don't forget it was you Mac zealots who screamed 'clock speed doesn't matter'! You could probably make custom hardware that would chew through this application at 100mhz if you really wanted to.
NASA's study found the Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 to score 498 MFLOPS for their Jet3D performance. A P4 running at 2.66GHz scored 255 MFLOPS: a 195.3% performance advantage for the G5 in this test. If we assume a direct correlation between MHz and MFLOPS for the P4 (which would actually overstate the performance of the P4) and increase the P4's score by 12.782% this would give the 3GHz P4 a score of 287.594 MFLOPS. This is still a 173.16% performance advantage for the G5, and NASA states that a 20% increase in performance for the G5 would be reasonable "when G5-aware compiler tools become available."
etc. Please try not to jump into discussions without knowing what people are talking about.
You are aware of this system where people make comments, and then other people can comment on their comments. My reply was to the comment above, not the article.
Who on earth would spend thousands and thousands of dolars on high-end hardware and then not even bother to use the compiler's optimization flags? Sheesh.
What are you talking about? Are you looking at the same graphs I am? A midrange p4 beat the highest end g5 available. How can you say that the g5 'won'?
Didja notice that overall the G4s were faster, too? Therefore the price of entry for a slower machine if $799, and it includes way more than that $900 PC.
Are you honestly claming that 129 is a higher number then 255? (fastest g4 to the fastest p4) Yeah, the g4 had a slightly higher flop/cycle score (that would have been much lower using the intel fortran compiler) but the p4's over all score was much higher.
When comparing the price of a 32bit system to that of a 64bit, it's a bit pointless...as you're getting so much more with the 64bit chip.
Um, no, you're not. For one thing these benchmarks were all done with floating point numbers, the Intel architecture has supported 64 bit floats since the 287. A 64 bit CPU won't have much of an advantage over a 32 bit CPU at all. Secondly, a 64 bit CPU can't do anything that a 32 bit CPU can't. It just needs to take more cycles. But that only happens in the rare case when you have to deal with a non floating point number which is larger then 2^32, or ~4.3 billion. That doesn't happen very often.
You can easly build a dual Athlon system that could trounce an equivilant g5 for less cost. Xeon's arnt the only MP capable x86 chips out there...
According to some of the comments on this board, the intel fortran compiler is about 50% faster then the portland compiler that was used. If the intel compiler had been used, the p4 would have scored 0.144 FLOPs/clock cycle*, which is much better then the g5.
(*which is exactly the same thing as MFLOPs/Mhz. And they wonder why NASA has so much trouble converting things...)
The apple scored 0.39% less then a 2.6ghz p4. Given that there are 3.2ghz p4s out there, as well as dual athlons, I doubt this is the 'fastest ever'
I'll be more impressed if the folks at the Langley Research Center compared the Apple Power Macintosh G5 with the 2.2 GHz PowerPC 970 CPU against a system running the Pentium 4 3.2 GHz CPU (which has Hyper threading instruction registers to have almost dual-CPU performance).
Hyper threading does not give you the performance of a multi-processor setup. Hyper threading speeds things up when you have lots of independent threads. Lets say You get into a situation where you have, say, a cache miss and the CPU has to wait like 100 cycles to read crap out of ram. With HT, the CPU can use those cycles to run programs running in other threads.
It's like having two CPUs, but only one can run at a time, so while one waits, the other runs.
It just lets the chip come closer to it's theoretical maximum speed.
Hahah, so the P4 does, on average 'less work' per cycle then the g5, so much for the g5 being superior "RISC" and the p4 being inferior "CISC"
Okay, I'm joking. But seriously, that information is a little useful. We can uses it as a baseline to compare new CPUs. So we'll know that a 3ghz g5 is still slower then a 5ghz p4.
This also tels you how many floating point ops per CYCLE the chip can do, which is always intresting.
Well, yes. If you compare the fastest possible dual G5 to the fastest single p4, the dual g5 would win. So what? If you want the fastest, get a dual athlon.
My sound system is loud enough to cause me physical injuries! Hooray!
Damn dude, you totaly fucked that up. Should have used some san-serif font like Verdana or Ariel for the exclamation point, not that fugly thing.
Here you go:
click here!
They should at least give royalties, Even if they are as low as 1% or something. Personaly, I'd rather have $75 of actual cash then 'bragging rights' at this point.
Fuck that shit. Holy christ, how many of these t-shirts do you think you'll sell? at least a couple thousand I would guess, if not more over the years. And you only want to pay $75!? That's worse then the RIAA! And not even real money, but store credit!
Oh wait, you're also throwing in copies of your own design! That makes it totaly worthwhile.
Back in the ICQ days someone msg'd me from french canada. I translated their speech using babelfish and my own back into french. I can belive this patent was granted, but, christ. It's blindingly obvious how to do it. The only problem is that there is no easily available 'translation libraries' to plug use that actualy work. Hrm, perhaps a good target for open source developers :)
That said, there is some prior art in William Gibson's Iduro where a conversation is translated back and forth between english and japanese. Sure, it was as audio, but really what's the diff?
Nope, sorry. In a fly-by-wire plane there are no mechanical links to the control surfaces. If the flight control computer completely dies, you have absolutely no control over the plane.
This is true, however there are only a few planes that actualy use fly-by-wire.
Hack the 'hack proof system' and now you have a guided missle without the messy problems of taking over an aircraft or killing yourself.