I wouldn't have problem if they made rational decision on hard data.
Global Warming: 30 years ago scientific evidence showed evidence of another ice age. New "scientific" evidence shows we are going to cook.
Rising Oceans: Many predict oceans will rise several feet due to thawing glacier. But now new evidence shows antartic ice cap thickning.
Ozone hole: 20 years of data, indicates existent hole found is getting larger. We know the hole fluctuates between seasons, we also know it existed since we started taking data. 20 years 5 billion
If there is conclusive evidence then yes id go along with extreme measures people want to do. If a real scientist wants to prove a real theory in the concrete sciences, it would take alot more than these loose "facts".
OR maybe a legitmate applet loads, shows flashy little animation and does something amuzing, with a sneaky "bonus" thread that steals away precious clock cycles and memory.
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SO thats why my up rate is at at a constant 100Kb/s.
I thought my computer was just talking to that network thingy at the cable company.
Re:And why not turn lead into gold while we're at
on
Inside Intel
·
· Score: 1
My point was that they need to focus more on researching those fields rather than on clock speed.
Think about what you said. More conventional enhancments from what you said = faster clock speed. Well think about the biggest bottleneck with the computer. Computers today are not limited by clock speed at all. Its memory bottlenecking. Yes there are some improvements in memory but if there werent any, your processor is just going to get to the idle state much faster and sit there much longer.
The idea is about allocation of research resources. IF they spend more money on caching technologies and main memory speed, it will most likely yield a more efficient processor instead of executing so many useless no-ops remaining idle til memory finds its way into the cache. Each level you go up from the registers in teh memory hiearchy access time increases about 10 fold each level, even more as u get to secondary storage.
Whats the use of a processor that zips along with the few instructions it has in cache only to wait wasting time doing nothing. The processor is constantly waiting for the slow as hell IDE hard disks which are just as fast as they were several years ago, main memory, and its own cache.
Now, im not talking about making lead into gold, im just saying its almost obvious if you want technologically superior chips, you need to invest in the obvious bottleneck, not what the marketing department says is most effective.
Intel's approach
on
Inside Intel
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think Intel does need to jump off it's approach to sales by clock speed.
Maybe instead of constantly worrying about clock speeds they spend more research into being able to add larger amounts of cache or try to achieve one clock cycle access to main memory
Yes chips will most likely continue to follow moore's law but computers are not much faster now than 2 years ago
what their worries should be
Improve memory speed
Make instruction set more efficient (ie make alu more efficient, the intel is no RISC)
Good to see an advancement in the multimedia capabilities of a reliable system.
Now maybe one day linux users will get to play what people call a "Video Game" on their computer. Then linux monkies can get rid of their horribly useful winblows partition after all
Then we could frag our way to/from school on the bus. You get come home to see that the bumpy ride home threw you off the ngWorldStats top 100, wait hell you can check that while your backtracking home because you missed your stop.
What has always been beyond is why alot of people especially slashodotters have a problem with buying software.
A good large number of them work in the software field and make money from software and hardware being sold.
As a CS major and one hoping to make a living off of the fact that people buy software withing the next 6 months, I can see how the manufacturers feel. How can you keep yourself from keeping a copy of a piece of software on your computer and then sell it to someone else. No one is goig to delete it because they sold it. I mean the only thing i do have a problem with is if u buy a piece of software for personal reasons and u have more than one computer, it's asinine that you must buy another liscense if you own the computer, I think this would actually discourage sale of a product to an extent.
I think the open source community promotes better software in the industry, but I disagree with trying to fight liscensing agreements, if u dont agree dont use it.
No thats what windows 2000/xp is based on, tiny parts, or microkernels. This is partly why it is much more reliable than in the past. (No snickering linux monkeys cause i said windows was reliable, windows is getting more reliable and as always, very functional)
Unix and Linux on the other hand have these small parts put into a nice big kernel still. Maybe people will make them a bit more modular one day. Im sure they will be as good as they are now if not more reliable with a microkernel implementation.
But i do have to admit loadable modules in Linux a huge advantage over any other os for personalizing it.
I agree, with file sharing utilities already using as much bandwidth as we can possibly imagine. Future applications such as distibuted systems will have more of a latency problem than overall bandwidth issue. I would also think places in silicon valley and everyelse in california subject to fault movement may require constant adjusting of alignment of the equipment.
Don't forget you all freely broadcasting through the air information. Many geeks/hackers with too much time on their hands will have fun with this.
Slashdot Mirror
Awesome, i cant wait til they do that.
A new feature that i will have to pay more money for just to insure them that i am already paying more.
Hey guys we might as well cough up my money now and help these poor guys research this.
I wouldn't have problem if they made rational decision on hard data.
Global Warming:
30 years ago scientific evidence showed evidence of another ice age. New "scientific" evidence shows we are going to cook.
Rising Oceans:
Many predict oceans will rise several feet due to thawing glacier. But now new evidence shows antartic ice cap thickning.
Ozone hole:
20 years of data, indicates existent hole found is getting larger. We know the hole fluctuates between seasons, we also know it existed since we started taking data. 20 years 5 billion
If there is conclusive evidence then yes id go along with extreme measures people want to do. If a real scientist wants to prove a real theory in the concrete sciences, it would take alot more than these loose "facts".
yeah unfortunately we will all be dead when we get some of this matter to move us from A to B at high speed.
OR maybe a legitmate applet loads, shows flashy little animation and does something amuzing, with a sneaky "bonus" thread that steals away precious clock cycles and memory.
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
SO thats why my up rate is at at a constant 100Kb/s.
I thought my computer was just talking to that network thingy at the cable company.
My point was that they need to focus more on researching those fields rather than on clock speed.
Think about what you said. More conventional enhancments from what you said = faster clock speed. Well think about the biggest bottleneck with the computer. Computers today are not limited by clock speed at all. Its memory bottlenecking. Yes there are some improvements in memory but if there werent any, your processor is just going to get to the idle state much faster and sit there much longer.
The idea is about allocation of research resources. IF they spend more money on caching technologies and main memory speed, it will most likely yield a more efficient processor instead of executing so many useless no-ops remaining idle til memory finds its way into the cache. Each level you go up from the registers in teh memory hiearchy access time increases about 10 fold each level, even more as u get to secondary storage.
Whats the use of a processor that zips along with the few instructions it has in cache only to wait wasting time doing nothing. The processor is constantly waiting for the slow as hell IDE hard disks which are just as fast as they were several years ago, main memory, and its own cache.
Now, im not talking about making lead into gold, im just saying its almost obvious if you want technologically superior chips, you need to invest in the obvious bottleneck, not what the marketing department says is most effective.
I think Intel does need to jump off it's approach to sales by clock speed.
Maybe instead of constantly worrying about clock speeds they spend more research into being able to add larger amounts of cache or try to achieve one clock cycle access to main memory
Yes chips will most likely continue to follow moore's law but computers are not much faster now than 2 years ago
what their worries should be
Good to see an advancement in the multimedia capabilities of a reliable system.
Now maybe one day linux users will get to play what people call a "Video Game" on their computer. Then linux monkies can get rid of their horribly useful winblows partition after all
Then we could frag our way to/from school on the bus. You get come home to see that the bumpy ride home threw you off the ngWorldStats top 100, wait hell you can check that while your backtracking home because you missed your stop.
flak cannon = UT weapon immune to bumpy rides
Hackers will now be able to write malicious code to flash bright white light into the users eyes and blind them.
What has always been beyond is why alot of people especially slashodotters have a problem with buying software.
A good large number of them work in the software field and make money from software and hardware being sold.
As a CS major and one hoping to make a living off of the fact that people buy software withing the next 6 months, I can see how the manufacturers feel. How can you keep yourself from keeping a copy of a piece of software on your computer and then sell it to someone else. No one is goig to delete it because they sold it. I mean the only thing i do have a problem with is if u buy a piece of software for personal reasons and u have more than one computer, it's asinine that you must buy another liscense if you own the computer, I think this would actually discourage sale of a product to an extent.
I think the open source community promotes better software in the industry, but I disagree with trying to fight liscensing agreements, if u dont agree dont use it.
No thats what windows 2000/xp is based on, tiny parts, or microkernels. This is partly why it is much more reliable than in the past. (No snickering linux monkeys cause i said windows was reliable, windows is getting more reliable and as always, very functional)
Unix and Linux on the other hand have these small parts put into a nice big kernel still. Maybe people will make them a bit more modular one day. Im sure they will be as good as they are now if not more reliable with a microkernel implementation.
But i do have to admit loadable modules in Linux a huge advantage over any other os for personalizing it.
I agree, with file sharing utilities already using as much bandwidth as we can possibly imagine. Future applications such as distibuted systems will have more of a latency problem than overall bandwidth issue. I would also think places in silicon valley and everyelse in california subject to fault movement may require constant adjusting of alignment of the equipment.
Don't forget you all freely broadcasting through the air information. Many geeks/hackers with too much time on their hands will have fun with this.