Like with solving poverty relies on educating on how to plan to use money wisely (something that _should_ be taught at school), maybe solving this parenting problem could be dealt with in similar fashion - by informing children on what they can do to make their parenthood less of a problem.
I suspect if people understand how to use their money more cleverly, they may end up not having to work overtime and be able to spend more time with their children. Letting the TV or the computer educate children is often a side-effect of an overworking parent. It's quite common for families to, out of ignorance, try to live outside their possibilities and end up in a dangerous cycle of working only to pay their debts. Unfortunately, children in such settings tend to suffer.
"A bunch of science majors flipping burgers doesn't lead to any advances in science and engineering."
It's hard to keep a talented science major flipping burgers. You know... these people have very fertile minds and tend to do unexpected things with all that smarts.
I think neither T1 nor T2 are mesh networked. IIRC, all cores share a single internal bus. The shared bus design is easier to program as it resembles more traditional SMP architectures. This Tilera beast breaks away from this idea and implements a more supercomputer-like design.
I wish them luck. As I said earlier, this x86-dominated desktop world is boring.
"'What will make or break Tilera is not how many peak theoretical operations per second it's capable of (Tilera claims 192 billion 32-bit ops/sec), nor how energy-efficient its mesh network is, but how easy it is for programmers to extract performance from the device. That's the critical piece of TILE64's launch story that's missing right now"
Build a USD1000 desktop workstation, port Debian Linux to run on it and let the geeks out there adopt it.
There is no better way to explore a device's capabilities than to let the market do it.
I want one for myself. I am tired of the x86 architecture.
Actually, quite a few computers in the late 70s and early 80s had cassette tape drives built in. I remember the PET, of course. There were some ZX Spectrum-based machines (in the post-Sinclair life-cycle) and I remember a TRS-80 model I clone made by Dismac (I am from Brazil) that had one next to its keyboard.
"(Good thing we didn't expect zero casualties in the era of test pilots, or aviation would not have gotten very far.)"
What bothers me isn't that there are people taking risks to advance our knowledge. What bothers me is that they are taking risks to prevent advancing our knowledge.
It took more than 100 flights and the loss of a ship with its crew to make NASA start looking at what happens to a shuttle during launch.
It's one thing when people die because you couldn't foresee a problem in a new wing design or a new engine technology. It's something entirely different when people die when you are unwilling to foot the bill of an EVA to inspect the spaceship while in orbit. It should have been done on the first flight of the Columbia (it wasn't possible at the time - no MMU, two crewmen). It should have been done when they decided to get rid of the white paint for the main tank. The belly inspection should have been conducted on the first time the shuttle docked with Mir. It was inexcusable not to do it as soon as the MMU became available and the shuttle started making regular trips to the ISS.
I wouldn't trust their lack of panic. The lack of panic with Columbia was because until then NASA has never even inspected a shuttle while in orbit in order to assess the damage it may suffer during launch. They were not worried until they learned (the hard way) damage suffered during launch can doom a spaceship.
Their mission includes science. In fact, they should be more worried in learning than in having competitive launch technology (the shuttle is anything _but_ competitive). NASA should be committed to learn whatever they can from their hardware and it shocked me deeply they never conducted even a visual inspection of the underside of a shuttle until the loss of the Columbia.
They should be at least curious. Bi-monthly flights of a 5-vehicle fleet (now reduced to 3) are hardly routine.
On a side note, I remember one of the first movies I rented myself was the first Robocop. At the time, I remember how ridiculous a police going on strike looked and how much I laughed at such blatant exageration.
The following week, the São Paulo police force went on strike.
If you move, they win. If fear makes you move, terror wins.
Disconcerting as it is, you should fight such moves. You have a right to a certain degree of privacy and I am sure a detailed log of all your uncle's phone calls for the last 10 years obtained with very little trouble is well beyond what a government should be able to do.
It's what extremists on both sides want - to separate us based on our races and religions and to make us fear each other. I refuse to cooperate with them.
Maybe there should be some visible element depicting the last few significant changes. It's not enough that the data is available. It must be obvious to get and easy to understand.
"A language which supports functional, generic, procedural, object-oriented programming, with static typing, metaprogramming, and heavily geared towards native building?"
The real question is "do we need a single language that has all these different goals built in?"
We probably have better solutions in each and every problem C++ proposes to solve.
It's clear that Microsoft is not interested in the future of C++.
They more or less own the market for C# and IDEs for.NET. Why would they still be interested in something that could be used to migrate away from Windows?
BTW, it's really hard to migrate a Windows C++ program away from Windows. A Windows C++ program may be legal C++, but is something horridly deformed and barely recognizable.
And maybe we should care more about "true nature and function of the universe", but I don't blame people for being "pie in the sky engineering types" when they realize how much their keen have accomplished when compared to those other people that insist man is insignificant and who claim to be trying to understand the Universe, but who give us back nothing but lots of more or less useless rhetoric.
Do you even realize the computer you are using and the network that connects it to millions of other computers forming the most powerful form of communication invented in the last couple centuries is the brainchild of those "pie in the sky engineering types"?
If what we have achieved disgust you so much, you are free to get back to a cave and live like our ancestors did before they had enough brain to aspire for more.
Man is not insignificant. Intelligence is the most important thing that happened in this little corner of the universe because, further down the road, intelligence is the only hope the very universe has to survive its cold death.
And don't worry. It sounds like a huge undertaking, but we have a good many billion years to figure it out. And, in the meantime, we will doubtlessly find brothers out there who are willing to share this effort.
Because we all know that when you take intelligent life out, the universe is nothing but a cruel, meaningless void.
As people before me well pointed out, it would be a valid complaint because the OOXML and the "Office Open XML" forms create confusion.
And I am sure it's no accident, thus, the complaint gets even more valid because MS is using it to create confusion and hurt OpenOffice.org ability to use its own brand.
Hurd is really cool technology. It's just not finished yet.
If it ever gets finished, I will consider using it. After all, Linux is just a kernel. It's quite easy to assemble a decent GNU/Something OS on top of some other kernel. Solaris runs the Gnome desktop, Nexenta adds APT and an Ubuntu userland on top of a Solaris heart. Most people would not be able to tell them from any Linux desktop.
I think that maybe NASA has too much on its plate to be really effective. They do research on a lot of different stuff that is not very much space-travel-related.
Maybe it is time to separate it in three different branches (as the goals are so distinct), one dealing with manned space exploration and another with unmanned probes and another taking up all base research and other activities.
Slashdot Mirror
Like with solving poverty relies on educating on how to plan to use money wisely (something that _should_ be taught at school), maybe solving this parenting problem could be dealt with in similar fashion - by informing children on what they can do to make their parenthood less of a problem.
I suspect if people understand how to use their money more cleverly, they may end up not having to work overtime and be able to spend more time with their children. Letting the TV or the computer educate children is often a side-effect of an overworking parent. It's quite common for families to, out of ignorance, try to live outside their possibilities and end up in a dangerous cycle of working only to pay their debts. Unfortunately, children in such settings tend to suffer.
I don't think the US is scared about Cuba. It's just that ending the trade embargo would be like admitting it was wrong in the first place.
_That_ scares politicians.
"There's going to be a run away effect at the top and society is going to have to rethink itself or else it will plunge into darkness."
I can't be optimistic on that.
"A bunch of science majors flipping burgers doesn't lead to any advances in science and engineering."
It's hard to keep a talented science major flipping burgers. You know... these people have very fertile minds and tend to do unexpected things with all that smarts.
Trust them.
I think neither T1 nor T2 are mesh networked. IIRC, all cores share a single internal bus. The shared bus design is easier to program as it resembles more traditional SMP architectures. This Tilera beast breaks away from this idea and implements a more supercomputer-like design.
I wish them luck. As I said earlier, this x86-dominated desktop world is boring.
"'What will make or break Tilera is not how many peak theoretical operations per second it's capable of (Tilera claims 192 billion 32-bit ops/sec), nor how energy-efficient its mesh network is, but how easy it is for programmers to extract performance from the device. That's the critical piece of TILE64's launch story that's missing right now"
Build a USD1000 desktop workstation, port Debian Linux to run on it and let the geeks out there adopt it.
There is no better way to explore a device's capabilities than to let the market do it.
I want one for myself. I am tired of the x86 architecture.
Actually, quite a few computers in the late 70s and early 80s had cassette tape drives built in. I remember the PET, of course. There were some ZX Spectrum-based machines (in the post-Sinclair life-cycle) and I remember a TRS-80 model I clone made by Dismac (I am from Brazil) that had one next to its keyboard.
A trip to http://www.old-computers.com/ should turn up a lot of them.
I think he says he never said that. There is no proof either way.
"(Good thing we didn't expect zero casualties in the era of test pilots, or aviation would not have gotten very far.)"
What bothers me isn't that there are people taking risks to advance our knowledge. What bothers me is that they are taking risks to prevent advancing our knowledge.
It took more than 100 flights and the loss of a ship with its crew to make NASA start looking at what happens to a shuttle during launch.
It's one thing when people die because you couldn't foresee a problem in a new wing design or a new engine technology. It's something entirely different when people die when you are unwilling to foot the bill of an EVA to inspect the spaceship while in orbit. It should have been done on the first flight of the Columbia (it wasn't possible at the time - no MMU, two crewmen). It should have been done when they decided to get rid of the white paint for the main tank. The belly inspection should have been conducted on the first time the shuttle docked with Mir. It was inexcusable not to do it as soon as the MMU became available and the shuttle started making regular trips to the ISS.
There is a lot wrong in this.
I wouldn't trust their lack of panic. The lack of panic with Columbia was because until then NASA has never even inspected a shuttle while in orbit in order to assess the damage it may suffer during launch. They were not worried until they learned (the hard way) damage suffered during launch can doom a spaceship.
Their mission includes science. In fact, they should be more worried in learning than in having competitive launch technology (the shuttle is anything _but_ competitive). NASA should be committed to learn whatever they can from their hardware and it shocked me deeply they never conducted even a visual inspection of the underside of a shuttle until the loss of the Columbia.
They should be at least curious. Bi-monthly flights of a 5-vehicle fleet (now reduced to 3) are hardly routine.
LOL +1 funny for you
On a side note, I remember one of the first movies I rented myself was the first Robocop. At the time, I remember how ridiculous a police going on strike looked and how much I laughed at such blatant exageration.
The following week, the São Paulo police force went on strike.
Your post just reminded me that.
I would advise you not to move.
If you move, they win. If fear makes you move, terror wins.
Disconcerting as it is, you should fight such moves. You have a right to a certain degree of privacy and I am sure a detailed log of all your uncle's phone calls for the last 10 years obtained with very little trouble is well beyond what a government should be able to do.
It's what extremists on both sides want - to separate us based on our races and religions and to make us fear each other. I refuse to cooperate with them.
Maybe there should be some visible element depicting the last few significant changes. It's not enough that the data is available. It must be obvious to get and easy to understand.
Obviously he regards his lawyers as family.
That's not surprising at all.
It's front page material because it allows us to have fun bashing Microsoft. ;-)
This is Slashdot, after all.
"A language which supports functional, generic, procedural, object-oriented programming, with static typing, metaprogramming, and heavily geared towards native building?"
The real question is "do we need a single language that has all these different goals built in?"
We probably have better solutions in each and every problem C++ proposes to solve.
It's clear that Microsoft is not interested in the future of C++.
.NET. Why would they still be interested in something that could be used to migrate away from Windows?
They more or less own the market for C# and IDEs for
BTW, it's really hard to migrate a Windows C++ program away from Windows. A Windows C++ program may be legal C++, but is something horridly deformed and barely recognizable.
oops... "anthropocentric". Sorry
It's not "egocentric", but "homocentric".
And maybe we should care more about "true nature and function of the universe", but I don't blame people for being "pie in the sky engineering types" when they realize how much their keen have accomplished when compared to those other people that insist man is insignificant and who claim to be trying to understand the Universe, but who give us back nothing but lots of more or less useless rhetoric.
Do you even realize the computer you are using and the network that connects it to millions of other computers forming the most powerful form of communication invented in the last couple centuries is the brainchild of those "pie in the sky engineering types"?
If what we have achieved disgust you so much, you are free to get back to a cave and live like our ancestors did before they had enough brain to aspire for more.
Man is not insignificant. Intelligence is the most important thing that happened in this little corner of the universe because, further down the road, intelligence is the only hope the very universe has to survive its cold death.
And don't worry. It sounds like a huge undertaking, but we have a good many billion years to figure it out. And, in the meantime, we will doubtlessly find brothers out there who are willing to share this effort.
Because we all know that when you take intelligent life out, the universe is nothing but a cruel, meaningless void.
As people before me well pointed out, it would be a valid complaint because the OOXML and the "Office Open XML" forms create confusion.
And I am sure it's no accident, thus, the complaint gets even more valid because MS is using it to create confusion and hurt OpenOffice.org ability to use its own brand.
Would it be so hard to automate a Soyuz to be remotely guided as a Progress can be? Hasn't it been done already?
;-)
The worst possible case would be to send up a whole lot of food and a couple extra beds while NASA figures out what to do next
I don't think the performance hit is that big. Compared to SATA disks, most CPUs are more than fast enough.
What I don't like about userland ZFS is that it looks like a kludge. File system access should be deeper in the OS than the userspace.
Hurd is really cool technology. It's just not finished yet.
If it ever gets finished, I will consider using it. After all, Linux is just a kernel. It's quite easy to assemble a decent GNU/Something OS on top of some other kernel. Solaris runs the Gnome desktop, Nexenta adds APT and an Ubuntu userland on top of a Solaris heart. Most people would not be able to tell them from any Linux desktop.
I think that maybe NASA has too much on its plate to be really effective. They do research on a lot of different stuff that is not very much space-travel-related.
Maybe it is time to separate it in three different branches (as the goals are so distinct), one dealing with manned space exploration and another with unmanned probes and another taking up all base research and other activities.