As it so happens, the demands of VR headsets mean that video cards available now are nowhere NEAR adequate. As a poster south of me says, you need at LEAST dual 4k - one for each eye - and fovea tracking - and at LEAST 90 FPS. All the time. With minimal latency.
Believe it or not, but not even the most expensive GPU money can buy - heck, not even unreleased GPUs that Nvidia has in Tesla cards (they are "released" but you can't use em as a graphics card) - is anywhere close to being able to push this kind of resolution and framerate at a low latency.
It literally cannot be done with current chip construction. Maybe with a 4 or 8 GPU solution.
Apparently that "just" bit requires new GPU hardware, and at this instant in time, only 2 GPUs (the 2 new Nvidia 1000 cards) even support it at all. Any VR developer who wants to eat has to support AMD hardware as well because it's the chip in the PS4 and probably the chip used in the new generation of VR supporting consoles.
No, it's correct. For a single GPU solution without Nvidia's new tech (that won't be widely used until AMD releases an equivalent) you render the frame for one eye, clear buffers, render it for the other. That means if you sent all frames rendered to a single monitor you'd get 180 FPS.
What the OP means is that if say, you learn to do something new but can't get a job because no one will hire you due to your age, that is in fact a structural problem...
Our society has a very elaborate system where you must have the right credentials from the right places - and earning those credentials typically is a very long and expensive process yet most of the knowledge taught you will not use - and be the right age, and these days you need an internship where you worked for free for a period of time for a job you had to be competitive for, and so on and so forth.
Then you do everything right and they hire an H1B by scamming the Federal government.
TLDR : the only game that shows a difference is one where the 480 doesn't have enough GPU power to render the higher resolution textures that eat up more than 4gb of VRAM.
University professors are under constant pressure to come up with something interesting to show they are a world class expert in their field. And grad students who do most of the grunt work are under pressure to prove themselves as well. So this is yet another impractical technique. No hacker is going to bother with something this hard to make work. Maybe a nation state hacking team might, but probably not.
Much simpler to install a hidden camera or a direct electrical monitor on the button presses from the keypad itself. Also, look at it this way. On that bitcoin bazaar, Evolution I think it was called, people's pin numbers were about 10 bucks each. Not worth this kind of hassle. This tells me there is far more stolen information readily available than there are crooks to use that information to make fraudulent purchases and cash withdraws with.
Which makes sense - there are probably still many, many ways to gain access to a database of credit card numbers, or places to set up a skimmer. The actual task of writing the number to a fake credit card and then using it somewhere in person is a far riskier task and one far more likely to result in one's eventual arrest and imprisonment...
It's also $700. You can buy both current consoles for that, and most likely a year or 2 after release, these new consoles will be $350 or so on sale.
In addition, if you buy a console, there will be a ton of games available that efficiently utilize 100% of it's processing power. If you buy a 1080, this is far from the case. You will have to wait years until commonly available, well optimized games exist that efficient use the full power of a 1080.
Xbox One/PS4 1.0 : you can play 960p upscaled to 1080p at 30 fps
Scorpio/the PS4 one : you can play 1080p at 60 fps OR VR OR 4k at about 30 fps.
That's the plan. This new generation of consoles is supposed to take advantage of the fact that there's now a heterogenous set of targets, one where the GPU horsepower requirements are radically different. It'll be the same game engine and the same game assets, just different targets. Using high level APIs the code would be almost the same, or if the new GPU in the new consoles is microcode compatible, just fatter, it might even let you get the benefits of both high efficiency and minimal code differences between the 2 consoles.
Have you considered that your analysis of the facts might be blinded by your own political agenda? Those 13k - in today's dollars - entry level cars have plenty of embedded computers, pollution controls, and some airbags. That's a ton of "simple" mechanical systems replaced with electronics.
Electronics are usually cheaper because you can use the same under a dollar microcontroller to do control tasks that would take a room sized mechanical computer. Also, you don't need to design custom mechanical components - you just program the same microcontroller to fill a different role.
Also, 5. The recent economic recession and slow recovery has meant that many people want to buy used cars to save money. More demand, less supply (cash for clunkers, less new cars bought) means higher prices for used.
1. These "services" all offer an awful lot of service for free, but have to pay per song played. This is a guaranteed trip to the poorhouse.
2. Those payments per song? They don't go down with scale or time. Google and other internet companies, their cost of delivering service goes down with technology advances and sheer size. It costs google a lot less to deliver gmail service or web searches than when they started.
The only way this can work is if the record labels - who own everything and do not have to pay themselves - offer a service. Kind of how all of the free porn sites who also own most of the porn producers are owned by the same company.
Wait, what? The best way to stop a vehicle with failed brakes is to 1. Use the engine and e-brake 2. While this is going on, continue to avoid obstacles as long as possible 3. If flat, higher friction surfaces are available, drive on them (pull off onto the road shoulder if there is a shoulder and the speed is low enough, for example - the gravel there at some road shoulders will slow the car down more than driving on pavement)
The only time crashing head on is a good idea is if it's unavoidable or a choice between that and going off a cliff.
Nothing immoral about having the car minimize injury to the driver, and fuck everyone else. In most cases this will also minimize injury to those outside the car.
You can, it just depends on leverage. If you can pay for a multimilion dollar defense, prosecuting you is going to be expensive, and you can negotiate a much better plea bargain than if you have a public defender. If you aren't even reachable because you're safe in a country without extradition, you can negotiate an even better deal...
Maybe Snowden doesn't deserve to get off scot free, but do you believe he should be locked in a cage until he dies of old age? Because that's what is slated for him. In the Federal system, judges decide the penalty and that's what he'd get. There is no parole. The fact that he revealed a number of blatantly illegal actions by his superiors as well as a number of secret programs the general public does not support and would have never voted for - is not a defense his attorneys are permitted to argue in court.
He has in fact offered to negotiate a reasonable prison sentence. The DoJ refuses to negotiate unless he physically puts himself in their custody, at which point they obviously don't have any reason to negotiate.
It takes only a pencil and napkin to see the industry would shrink. In a semi efficient marketplace (there are a large number of competing firms), the percentage of premiums paid as claims must be greater than 50%. (my google fu fails me but it has to be at least that high)
If autonomous cars have accidents at 1/10 the current rate, and eventually 90% of cars on the road are autonomous, accidents committed would fall to 20% of the current levels (in this example, the 10% of jerks still driving manually are causing as many accidents as the other 90% of vehicles - hopefully cause for legislative action to make this illegal). If the percentage paid as claims stays the same, the money flowing in to the auto insurance industry falls by a factor of 5.
Also, in this example, people who drive manually will have insurance rates TEN TIMES what people who drive autonomously pay. Also, since every car will effectively be recording telemetry that is video from multiple cameras, and all kinds of other data, nearly every accident will be "witnessed" by autonomous vehicles as witnesses. (either one of the cars in the collision will be autonomous and they recover the data recorder from the wreckage or look at feeds from other cars driving by)
So it will be very clear who the fault is. Someone else posted that at fault insurance would be common - no. It will be abundantly clear with almost every wreck that does happen who did it.
To be fair, the way corporations are structured, this is expected. Corporate ethical responsibility really ends at "don't lie about what you're doing, and be at least a little generous to employees you have to harm" (by laying them off, etc).
Anything else is the role of government. Government has to do something about this growing problem. Naturally, in conservative states, the strategy is to just ignore the problem even exists, and assume any adult with a functioning body is able to get a job.
They call it a natural monopoly because it's a natural law. I know you seem to want to believe otherwise, but physics and engineering principles should trump faith. Your examples are very old and are from highly populated areas where running multiple cables was feasible and the main cost of running a telephone service would have been the switching stations with all those paid operators.
The physics and engineering principle is that for any cable run, there is exactly one optimal routing. Duplicate cables mean either the second set of cables must take a suboptimal routing, or both sets must be routed suboptimally. In established areas, it would cost a fortune to dig things up and establish a "competing" set of cables - far more than the first set cost. That's the reason.
In a place where it takes a large investment to set up an infrastructure, that tactic of lowering prices whenever a competitor arises - to kill them before they can collect enough profit to expand - means there will always be only one provider. This is why there is not 2 or mores sets of electric wires, sewer lines, water lines, or roads to every house. Or phone cables. The other reason this type of monopoly is natural is there is that a second or third, etc provider is hugely less efficient - there's barely enough roadspace for 1 set of roads, imagine the cost of a second parallel set. (it could be done but it would basically have to be all elevated)
Now, there is a hybrid form of government control for power generation, where the electric wires are still being maintained by a government regulated utility company, but the electric generators are from competing firms. Since you can obviously install a new generator in many possible locations on a power grid and join the market and compete.
This is one of the possible ways to fix internet service, by splitting up maintaining the wires and actually running tech support, performing repairs at people's homes, or buying bandwidth from peering providers.
So the "wires" would essentially be government regulated while the other services would compete. This would probably eliminate this overage fee scam at least.
These are not equivalent. TLDR, the RF spectrum is limited. So inherently, wireless data is and always will be more expensive than wired data. What this has the effect of doing is limiting the monopoly abuse by putting a ceiling on how much wired ISPs can screw you by.
Why didn't Microsoft do this long ago with original Xbox? The main limiting factor I can think of is that games of that era were written at such a low level that slight differences in hardware would break them. That's actually still a problem now - even if a user has a video card and CPU more powerful than what is in an Xbox One, even if it's an AMD GPU, PCs don't have integrated memory. There are ways to take advantage of both the CPU and GPU sharing the same address space, and those tricks would fail on PCs (even if Microsoft invents some software trick to hide this difference so that Xbox One games don't just crash)
Hmm. Only way I can think of is that Microsoft could release an API that is completely shared in common between Windows 10 PCs and Xboxes. Any game written to use this API would work on both. Technically, this is semi-true for lots of software now.
Another major issues is that part of the entire reason for consoles to exist at all is that it is vastly harder to pirate games. This negates that advantage. Also vastly harder to cheat. If a bunch of PC users can join into CoD matches against console tweens, with their aimbots and optical mice, it would be a slaughter...
Are you saying his post is conceptually wrong or are you saying that since he didn't phrase it in the mathematically correct way, that makes him as "dumb as a rock"?
It's a lot easier for a trash truck to stop at every house instead of having to skip houses. It essentially give an inherent cost advantage to there being just 1 trash service. I take your point, though, this cost advantage is obviously modest, or we wouldn't have both UPS and Fedex at the same time.
Slashdot Mirror
As it so happens, the demands of VR headsets mean that video cards available now are nowhere NEAR adequate. As a poster south of me says, you need at LEAST dual 4k - one for each eye - and fovea tracking - and at LEAST 90 FPS. All the time. With minimal latency.
Believe it or not, but not even the most expensive GPU money can buy - heck, not even unreleased GPUs that Nvidia has in Tesla cards (they are "released" but you can't use em as a graphics card) - is anywhere close to being able to push this kind of resolution and framerate at a low latency.
It literally cannot be done with current chip construction. Maybe with a 4 or 8 GPU solution.
Apparently that "just" bit requires new GPU hardware, and at this instant in time, only 2 GPUs (the 2 new Nvidia 1000 cards) even support it at all. Any VR developer who wants to eat has to support AMD hardware as well because it's the chip in the PS4 and probably the chip used in the new generation of VR supporting consoles.
That's not how it works.
No, it's correct. For a single GPU solution without Nvidia's new tech (that won't be widely used until AMD releases an equivalent) you render the frame for one eye, clear buffers, render it for the other. That means if you sent all frames rendered to a single monitor you'd get 180 FPS.
It is an unsolvable problem. In order to create an intermediate frame you must know the future frame.
What the OP means is that if say, you learn to do something new but can't get a job because no one will hire you due to your age, that is in fact a structural problem...
Our society has a very elaborate system where you must have the right credentials from the right places - and earning those credentials typically is a very long and expensive process yet most of the knowledge taught you will not use - and be the right age, and these days you need an internship where you worked for free for a period of time for a job you had to be competitive for, and so on and so forth.
Then you do everything right and they hire an H1B by scamming the Federal government.
Both models are indistinguishable in performance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
TLDR : the only game that shows a difference is one where the 480 doesn't have enough GPU power to render the higher resolution textures that eat up more than 4gb of VRAM.
University professors are under constant pressure to come up with something interesting to show they are a world class expert in their field. And grad students who do most of the grunt work are under pressure to prove themselves as well. So this is yet another impractical technique. No hacker is going to bother with something this hard to make work. Maybe a nation state hacking team might, but probably not.
Much simpler to install a hidden camera or a direct electrical monitor on the button presses from the keypad itself. Also, look at it this way. On that bitcoin bazaar, Evolution I think it was called, people's pin numbers were about 10 bucks each. Not worth this kind of hassle. This tells me there is far more stolen information readily available than there are crooks to use that information to make fraudulent purchases and cash withdraws with.
Which makes sense - there are probably still many, many ways to gain access to a database of credit card numbers, or places to set up a skimmer. The actual task of writing the number to a fake credit card and then using it somewhere in person is a far riskier task and one far more likely to result in one's eventual arrest and imprisonment...
It's also $700. You can buy both current consoles for that, and most likely a year or 2 after release, these new consoles will be $350 or so on sale.
In addition, if you buy a console, there will be a ton of games available that efficiently utilize 100% of it's processing power. If you buy a 1080, this is far from the case. You will have to wait years until commonly available, well optimized games exist that efficient use the full power of a 1080.
What are you talking about?
Xbox One/PS4 1.0 : you can play 960p upscaled to 1080p at 30 fps
Scorpio/the PS4 one : you can play 1080p at 60 fps OR VR OR 4k at about 30 fps.
That's the plan. This new generation of consoles is supposed to take advantage of the fact that there's now a heterogenous set of targets, one where the GPU horsepower requirements are radically different. It'll be the same game engine and the same game assets, just different targets. Using high level APIs the code would be almost the same, or if the new GPU in the new consoles is microcode compatible, just fatter, it might even let you get the benefits of both high efficiency and minimal code differences between the 2 consoles.
Have you considered that your analysis of the facts might be blinded by your own political agenda? Those 13k - in today's dollars - entry level cars have plenty of embedded computers, pollution controls, and some airbags. That's a ton of "simple" mechanical systems replaced with electronics.
Electronics are usually cheaper because you can use the same under a dollar microcontroller to do control tasks that would take a room sized mechanical computer. Also, you don't need to design custom mechanical components - you just program the same microcontroller to fill a different role.
Also, 5. The recent economic recession and slow recovery has meant that many people want to buy used cars to save money. More demand, less supply (cash for clunkers, less new cars bought) means higher prices for used.
So it seems like there's 2 problems here :
1. These "services" all offer an awful lot of service for free, but have to pay per song played. This is a guaranteed trip to the poorhouse.
2. Those payments per song? They don't go down with scale or time. Google and other internet companies, their cost of delivering service goes down with technology advances and sheer size. It costs google a lot less to deliver gmail service or web searches than when they started.
The only way this can work is if the record labels - who own everything and do not have to pay themselves - offer a service. Kind of how all of the free porn sites who also own most of the porn producers are owned by the same company.
Wait, what? The best way to stop a vehicle with failed brakes is to 1. Use the engine and e-brake 2. While this is going on, continue to avoid obstacles as long as possible 3. If flat, higher friction surfaces are available, drive on them (pull off onto the road shoulder if there is a shoulder and the speed is low enough, for example - the gravel there at some road shoulders will slow the car down more than driving on pavement)
The only time crashing head on is a good idea is if it's unavoidable or a choice between that and going off a cliff.
Nothing immoral about having the car minimize injury to the driver, and fuck everyone else. In most cases this will also minimize injury to those outside the car.
You can, it just depends on leverage. If you can pay for a multimilion dollar defense, prosecuting you is going to be expensive, and you can negotiate a much better plea bargain than if you have a public defender. If you aren't even reachable because you're safe in a country without extradition, you can negotiate an even better deal...
This has happened before.
Maybe Snowden doesn't deserve to get off scot free, but do you believe he should be locked in a cage until he dies of old age? Because that's what is slated for him. In the Federal system, judges decide the penalty and that's what he'd get. There is no parole. The fact that he revealed a number of blatantly illegal actions by his superiors as well as a number of secret programs the general public does not support and would have never voted for - is not a defense his attorneys are permitted to argue in court.
He has in fact offered to negotiate a reasonable prison sentence. The DoJ refuses to negotiate unless he physically puts himself in their custody, at which point they obviously don't have any reason to negotiate.
It takes only a pencil and napkin to see the industry would shrink. In a semi efficient marketplace (there are a large number of competing firms), the percentage of premiums paid as claims must be greater than 50%. (my google fu fails me but it has to be at least that high)
If autonomous cars have accidents at 1/10 the current rate, and eventually 90% of cars on the road are autonomous, accidents committed would fall to 20% of the current levels (in this example, the 10% of jerks still driving manually are causing as many accidents as the other 90% of vehicles - hopefully cause for legislative action to make this illegal). If the percentage paid as claims stays the same, the money flowing in to the auto insurance industry falls by a factor of 5.
Also, in this example, people who drive manually will have insurance rates TEN TIMES what people who drive autonomously pay. Also, since every car will effectively be recording telemetry that is video from multiple cameras, and all kinds of other data, nearly every accident will be "witnessed" by autonomous vehicles as witnesses. (either one of the cars in the collision will be autonomous and they recover the data recorder from the wreckage or look at feeds from other cars driving by)
So it will be very clear who the fault is. Someone else posted that at fault insurance would be common - no. It will be abundantly clear with almost every wreck that does happen who did it.
To be fair, the way corporations are structured, this is expected. Corporate ethical responsibility really ends at "don't lie about what you're doing, and be at least a little generous to employees you have to harm" (by laying them off, etc).
Anything else is the role of government. Government has to do something about this growing problem. Naturally, in conservative states, the strategy is to just ignore the problem even exists, and assume any adult with a functioning body is able to get a job.
They call it a natural monopoly because it's a natural law. I know you seem to want to believe otherwise, but physics and engineering principles should trump faith. Your examples are very old and are from highly populated areas where running multiple cables was feasible and the main cost of running a telephone service would have been the switching stations with all those paid operators.
The physics and engineering principle is that for any cable run, there is exactly one optimal routing. Duplicate cables mean either the second set of cables must take a suboptimal routing, or both sets must be routed suboptimally. In established areas, it would cost a fortune to dig things up and establish a "competing" set of cables - far more than the first set cost. That's the reason.
In a place where it takes a large investment to set up an infrastructure, that tactic of lowering prices whenever a competitor arises - to kill them before they can collect enough profit to expand - means there will always be only one provider. This is why there is not 2 or mores sets of electric wires, sewer lines, water lines, or roads to every house. Or phone cables. The other reason this type of monopoly is natural is there is that a second or third, etc provider is hugely less efficient - there's barely enough roadspace for 1 set of roads, imagine the cost of a second parallel set. (it could be done but it would basically have to be all elevated)
Now, there is a hybrid form of government control for power generation, where the electric wires are still being maintained by a government regulated utility company, but the electric generators are from competing firms. Since you can obviously install a new generator in many possible locations on a power grid and join the market and compete.
This is one of the possible ways to fix internet service, by splitting up maintaining the wires and actually running tech support, performing repairs at people's homes, or buying bandwidth from peering providers.
So the "wires" would essentially be government regulated while the other services would compete. This would probably eliminate this overage fee scam at least.
These are not equivalent. TLDR, the RF spectrum is limited. So inherently, wireless data is and always will be more expensive than wired data. What this has the effect of doing is limiting the monopoly abuse by putting a ceiling on how much wired ISPs can screw you by.
Why didn't Microsoft do this long ago with original Xbox? The main limiting factor I can think of is that games of that era were written at such a low level that slight differences in hardware would break them. That's actually still a problem now - even if a user has a video card and CPU more powerful than what is in an Xbox One, even if it's an AMD GPU, PCs don't have integrated memory. There are ways to take advantage of both the CPU and GPU sharing the same address space, and those tricks would fail on PCs (even if Microsoft invents some software trick to hide this difference so that Xbox One games don't just crash)
Hmm. Only way I can think of is that Microsoft could release an API that is completely shared in common between Windows 10 PCs and Xboxes. Any game written to use this API would work on both. Technically, this is semi-true for lots of software now.
Another major issues is that part of the entire reason for consoles to exist at all is that it is vastly harder to pirate games. This negates that advantage. Also vastly harder to cheat. If a bunch of PC users can join into CoD matches against console tweens, with their aimbots and optical mice, it would be a slaughter...
Are you saying his post is conceptually wrong or are you saying that since he didn't phrase it in the mathematically correct way, that makes him as "dumb as a rock"?
It's a lot easier for a trash truck to stop at every house instead of having to skip houses. It essentially give an inherent cost advantage to there being just 1 trash service. I take your point, though, this cost advantage is obviously modest, or we wouldn't have both UPS and Fedex at the same time.