Well, the problem is that you need a fast encryption engine to do encryption that fast. Even if it's in hardware, I doubt you could do it without tripling the cost of your CPU.
Also, it's not impossible to modify memory contents on the fly. Today's FPGA devices have very impressive capabilities. Simply hijack the memory bus at the right time, and you can inject whatever code is necessary.
Obviously, this could be solved by using 100% custom chips, possibly with extremely inconvenient physical specifications (say, microBGA, with all important traces routed on an inner layer of a 6-layer PCB), but the problem there is that you jack up cost tremendously. This is not something you want to do with a low-margin device, because you don't want to be losing $100 on every unit sold. And the problem with custom chips is that they don't tend to fall in price very fast, if at all.
Pretty much any security measure will end up being a compromise between cost to make the device and cost to hack the device. Keep in mind that even integrating everything on one chip is not 100% secure. If you are willing to spend a few million bucks, it's possible to reverse-engineer anything. Of course, eliminating all trivial hacks would pretty much keep most weekend hackers at bay.
It's damn near impossible to lock code out of the CPU. They would have to do something like on-the-fly encryption so you can't just modify memory contents. Not likely with 22GB/s memory bandwidth.
Your post, quite possibly, is the stupidest one I have ever seen on this subject. I am sure you have not written a single line of code in your entire life. Otherwise, you would know that programming anything more complex than a message board script in PHP is hard work, and people don't like to do hard work for free.
The GPL is a fair license -- if I release my code for everyone to use, I expect you to do the same if you use it. The only people who don't like this system are freeloaders who want to take things and not give them back. Somehow, companies like IBM, Novell, and Red Hat have no problem contributing to GPLed projects such as Linux.
Granted, the BSD license has its uses. Things that need to be standard, such as image loading libraries, TCP/IP stacks, and stuff like that is better off being BSD-licensed. However, the LGPL works even better in this situation by keeping companies from making incompatible closed-source versions.
Do you feel a lot of heat if you plug one end of a power cord into an outlet
Hell yes. A good portion of fires is caused by short circuits. Of course, if the resistance is low enough, you are causing a very large current to flow. This will heat up the little piece of wire, as well as your house and utility wiring. This will cause your wiring to catch on fire if the breaker doesn't trip soon enough.
Now I wish all you morons who have no real grasp of how physics works in the real world would just fuck-off and stop making the same incorrect statements over and over again...
The computer is not moving. It's doing some work on air (fans), and it's overcoming friction (fans and hard drive). The fans accelerate the air, and then it decelerates due to friction between air particles and various objects, thus producing HEAT. The tiny amount of energy that is stored in the rotational energy of the fans and hard drives is constantly converted to heat due to friction, thus the need to constantly accelerate the hard disks to keep them spinning.
vibration
Unless the computer is vibrating the whole planet, the vibrations simply end up heating up your desk/walls/whatever a tiny amount when they are absorbed.
electro-magnetic
If your computer put out a significant amount of electromagnetic energy (also called EMI/RFI), then the FCC would be on your ass pretty fast. Yes, you do lose some energy due to that, but it's a tiny amount (maybe milliwatts).
There is also a good portion of electricity that is essential unused, sent to the ground.
The magnitude of your sheer idiocy is unmatched, especially for someone who supposedly has an EE degree. Is it from DeVry or something? Has anyone ever taught you the P=EI=I^2R equation? Do you understand what the hell that means? If I showed this sentence to one of your professors, they would probably try to take back your degree.
Either you are completely ignorant or are a really good troll. If it's the former, PLEASE do the world a favor and read a physics book.
Although most ends up as heat, a lot of it is doing WORK, like spinning your hard drive.
Hello, McFly, anybody in there? The reason you need to spin the hard drive is because energy is lost to friction. Let's see, what is friction? HEAT!!
Sure, that produces heat, but not as much heat/watt as an effecient heating coil would.
OK, then where does the energy go? The hard drive is not increasing in mass and it's not radiating much electromagnetic or nuclear energy (except heat). So how can it be using energy?
I didn't just learn this in 9th grade science class, I majored in electrical engineering.
Very impressive for someone who doesn't understand basic physics. Of course, about the only pre-requisite for getting a degree these days is the tuition. And people wonder why companies outsource so much...
Electricity is much less effecient than natural gas, propane, etc., at heating.
It depends on where you live, how much electricity/gas/propane costs, and how much of it you are planning to use. You can't really say one is less efficient than the other. Electric plants and the grid are quite efficient, possibly more so than a small furnace.
There's nothing wrong with using electricity for heat. These days, gas is almost as expensive as electricity, is quite dangerous, and the typical gas furnace is less than 80% efficient. A small electric space heater can actually save you a lot of money in the winter, since it lets you just heat the room you are in.
OK, then try making a 3D first-person shooter, with 3D-accelerated video, multichannel 3D surround audio, various input options, and so on. You will probably have to implement half the stuff yourself. The thing is, X11 and KDE or GNOME is a much more important part of a modern desktop system than the underlying UNIX API. Hell, WinNT is POSIX compliant, but it's not like you can run Linux apps on it directly.
You seem to have flunked your Economics 101 class. The reason regulation is usually necessary is because direct costs (what you pay to the utility) are only a small part of the actual costs to society (pollution, health problems caused by pollution, increased medical costs, waste of natural resources, and so on). It is therefore often necessary to impose taxes or regulate things, even in a free-market economy.
I sincerely doubt that your computer puts out as much heat per dollar of fuel (electricity/natural gas) as your primary heating unit does.
I think you need to retake your basic 9th grade science class. One dollar of electricity buys you a fixed number of kilowatt-hours, which is a measure of energy. All electric energy eventually ends up as heat. Therefore, a computer that consumes 300W is just as effective at heating the house as a 300W heater would be.
It's not important for home use, and it won't help you save energy. It does increase the cost of wiring and supplying the electricity, though, so electricians should know about it. It's much more of a problem with large AC motors and such.
For a tightly grouped set of computers, you could have a dc bus (like a 48v system), and regulate down in each box.
That would be extremely stupid. The switching regulators have the same efficiency as an AC power supply, since it's exactly the same technology. You would only be compounding your losses, due to the need to step down the voltage.
That way, when no devices are in use the thing can drop to 0 power consumption.
That's already how a power supply works. If you are drawing 60 watts, and it's only 60% efficient, it will consume 100W. If you are drawing 0W, it will consume very little current.
High efficiency, high-current (500W+, where PC supplies are headed) are not cheap to produce.
That is true simply because there is no demand for them. Since most people don't know about power supply efficiency when buying PCs, the PC manufacturer gets the cheapest power supply, which is also likely to be inefficient. The inefficient power supplies become the most popular, and the high-quality ones start to cost more. In all likelihood, a high-quality power supply would cost about as much as a low-quality one if produced in large quantities.
This thing is unlikely to be more efficient than a standard PC power supply -- it's still a switching converter. Of course, if your UPS uses a 24V battery, it might make sense.
Contrary to Microsoft's, UNIX and POSIX APIs have been very stable.
You know why? Because the UNIX API doesn't do that much. Try developing on Linux and, say, GNOME, and you'll find that it's much worse than anything Microsoft ever came up with as far as backwards compatibility goes. You would be lucky if a GNOME app for GNOME 2.0 even compiles for 2.6. It will most certainly not run if it's already compiled.
Umm... Let's see, how many of today's PC games are available on the Mac? That's right, zero. So what's the point of having a fast CPU? Video encoding? Photoshop?
If they were trying to enforce contracts, they would sue the end-users of the program in question, since the program itself cannot and does not violate any contracts.
No, according to Nyquist's theorem, a signal with a frequency LESS THAN 22050KHz sampled at 44.1KHz will be UNIQUELY REPRESENTED. As in, mathematically recoverable. It says nothing about whether a particular filter/DAC/signal processor will be able to perfectly reproduce it. If your frequency is high enough, then you will just end up with some weird beat pattern that may be unique, but in no way represents the original signal when filtered.
Here's a website that explains it in more detail: here. A quote: Myth 3: `sampling at twice the maximum bandwidth is enough: Nyquist's theorem says so.' Wrong! Nyquist's limit is a theoretical abstraction. In practice, experts recommend figures of 2.5 to 10 times the maximum bandwidth.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, have you ever tried using another distribution? Mandrake installs the driver almost exactly like in Windows.
Seriously, dude, WTF is your problem? Are you the timecube guy or something?
Well, the problem is that you need a fast encryption engine to do encryption that fast. Even if it's in hardware, I doubt you could do it without tripling the cost of your CPU.
Also, it's not impossible to modify memory contents on the fly. Today's FPGA devices have very impressive capabilities. Simply hijack the memory bus at the right time, and you can inject whatever code is necessary.
Obviously, this could be solved by using 100% custom chips, possibly with extremely inconvenient physical specifications (say, microBGA, with all important traces routed on an inner layer of a 6-layer PCB), but the problem there is that you jack up cost tremendously. This is not something you want to do with a low-margin device, because you don't want to be losing $100 on every unit sold. And the problem with custom chips is that they don't tend to fall in price very fast, if at all.
Pretty much any security measure will end up being a compromise between cost to make the device and cost to hack the device. Keep in mind that even integrating everything on one chip is not 100% secure. If you are willing to spend a few million bucks, it's possible to reverse-engineer anything. Of course, eliminating all trivial hacks would pretty much keep most weekend hackers at bay.
It's damn near impossible to lock code out of the CPU. They would have to do something like on-the-fly encryption so you can't just modify memory contents. Not likely with 22GB/s memory bandwidth.
Your post, quite possibly, is the stupidest one I have ever seen on this subject. I am sure you have not written a single line of code in your entire life. Otherwise, you would know that programming anything more complex than a message board script in PHP is hard work, and people don't like to do hard work for free.
The GPL is a fair license -- if I release my code for everyone to use, I expect you to do the same if you use it. The only people who don't like this system are freeloaders who want to take things and not give them back. Somehow, companies like IBM, Novell, and Red Hat have no problem contributing to GPLed projects such as Linux.
Granted, the BSD license has its uses. Things that need to be standard, such as image loading libraries, TCP/IP stacks, and stuff like that is better off being BSD-licensed. However, the LGPL works even better in this situation by keeping companies from making incompatible closed-source versions.
Or a new era of litigation
Don't worry, Apple hasn't gotten involved yet.
Who the hell modded this funny? I've been burned by ISA winmodems a couple of times.
Keep in mind that ISA winmodems do exist. To be sure, get an external serial one.
Do you feel a lot of heat if you plug one end of a power cord into an outlet
Hell yes. A good portion of fires is caused by short circuits. Of course, if the resistance is low enough, you are causing a very large current to flow. This will heat up the little piece of wire, as well as your house and utility wiring. This will cause your wiring to catch on fire if the breaker doesn't trip soon enough.
Now I wish all you morons who have no real grasp of how physics works in the real world would just fuck-off and stop making the same incorrect statements over and over again...
You are the only moron in this thread.
Kinetic energy
The computer is not moving. It's doing some work on air (fans), and it's overcoming friction (fans and hard drive). The fans accelerate the air, and then it decelerates due to friction between air particles and various objects, thus producing HEAT. The tiny amount of energy that is stored in the rotational energy of the fans and hard drives is constantly converted to heat due to friction, thus the need to constantly accelerate the hard disks to keep them spinning.
vibration
Unless the computer is vibrating the whole planet, the vibrations simply end up heating up your desk/walls/whatever a tiny amount when they are absorbed.
electro-magnetic
If your computer put out a significant amount of electromagnetic energy (also called EMI/RFI), then the FCC would be on your ass pretty fast. Yes, you do lose some energy due to that, but it's a tiny amount (maybe milliwatts).
There is also a good portion of electricity that is essential unused, sent to the ground.
The magnitude of your sheer idiocy is unmatched, especially for someone who supposedly has an EE degree. Is it from DeVry or something? Has anyone ever taught you the P=EI=I^2R equation? Do you understand what the hell that means? If I showed this sentence to one of your professors, they would probably try to take back your degree.
Either you are completely ignorant or are a really good troll. If it's the former, PLEASE do the world a favor and read a physics book.
Although most ends up as heat, a lot of it is doing WORK, like spinning your hard drive.
Hello, McFly, anybody in there? The reason you need to spin the hard drive is because energy is lost to friction. Let's see, what is friction? HEAT!!
Sure, that produces heat, but not as much heat/watt as an effecient heating coil would.
OK, then where does the energy go? The hard drive is not increasing in mass and it's not radiating much electromagnetic or nuclear energy (except heat). So how can it be using energy?
I didn't just learn this in 9th grade science class, I majored in electrical engineering.
Very impressive for someone who doesn't understand basic physics. Of course, about the only pre-requisite for getting a degree these days is the tuition. And people wonder why companies outsource so much...
Electricity is much less effecient than natural gas, propane, etc., at heating.
It depends on where you live, how much electricity/gas/propane costs, and how much of it you are planning to use. You can't really say one is less efficient than the other. Electric plants and the grid are quite efficient, possibly more so than a small furnace.
There's nothing wrong with using electricity for heat. These days, gas is almost as expensive as electricity, is quite dangerous, and the typical gas furnace is less than 80% efficient. A small electric space heater can actually save you a lot of money in the winter, since it lets you just heat the room you are in.
OK, then try making a 3D first-person shooter, with 3D-accelerated video, multichannel 3D surround audio, various input options, and so on. You will probably have to implement half the stuff yourself. The thing is, X11 and KDE or GNOME is a much more important part of a modern desktop system than the underlying UNIX API. Hell, WinNT is POSIX compliant, but it's not like you can run Linux apps on it directly.
You seem to have flunked your Economics 101 class. The reason regulation is usually necessary is because direct costs (what you pay to the utility) are only a small part of the actual costs to society (pollution, health problems caused by pollution, increased medical costs, waste of natural resources, and so on). It is therefore often necessary to impose taxes or regulate things, even in a free-market economy.
I sincerely doubt that your computer puts out as much heat per dollar of fuel (electricity/natural gas) as your primary heating unit does.
I think you need to retake your basic 9th grade science class. One dollar of electricity buys you a fixed number of kilowatt-hours, which is a measure of energy. All electric energy eventually ends up as heat. Therefore, a computer that consumes 300W is just as effective at heating the house as a 300W heater would be.
It's not important for home use, and it won't help you save energy. It does increase the cost of wiring and supplying the electricity, though, so electricians should know about it. It's much more of a problem with large AC motors and such.
There is no flicker with modern fluorescent tubes, since they use a DC switching converter instead of an inductive ballast. Stop spewing bullshit.
For a tightly grouped set of computers, you could have a dc bus (like a 48v system), and regulate down in each box.
That would be extremely stupid. The switching regulators have the same efficiency as an AC power supply, since it's exactly the same technology. You would only be compounding your losses, due to the need to step down the voltage.
That way, when no devices are in use the thing can drop to 0 power consumption.
That's already how a power supply works. If you are drawing 60 watts, and it's only 60% efficient, it will consume 100W. If you are drawing 0W, it will consume very little current.
High efficiency, high-current (500W+, where PC supplies are headed) are not cheap to produce.
That is true simply because there is no demand for them. Since most people don't know about power supply efficiency when buying PCs, the PC manufacturer gets the cheapest power supply, which is also likely to be inefficient. The inefficient power supplies become the most popular, and the high-quality ones start to cost more. In all likelihood, a high-quality power supply would cost about as much as a low-quality one if produced in large quantities.
This thing is unlikely to be more efficient than a standard PC power supply -- it's still a switching converter. Of course, if your UPS uses a 24V battery, it might make sense.
Contrary to Microsoft's, UNIX and POSIX APIs have been very stable.
You know why? Because the UNIX API doesn't do that much. Try developing on Linux and, say, GNOME, and you'll find that it's much worse than anything Microsoft ever came up with as far as backwards compatibility goes. You would be lucky if a GNOME app for GNOME 2.0 even compiles for 2.6. It will most certainly not run if it's already compiled.
Umm... Let's see, how many of today's PC games are available on the Mac? That's right, zero. So what's the point of having a fast CPU? Video encoding? Photoshop?
If they were trying to enforce contracts, they would sue the end-users of the program in question, since the program itself cannot and does not violate any contracts.
No, according to Nyquist's theorem, a signal with a frequency LESS THAN 22050KHz sampled at 44.1KHz will be UNIQUELY REPRESENTED. As in, mathematically recoverable. It says nothing about whether a particular filter/DAC/signal processor will be able to perfectly reproduce it. If your frequency is high enough, then you will just end up with some weird beat pattern that may be unique, but in no way represents the original signal when filtered.
Here's a website that explains it in more detail: here. A quote: Myth 3: `sampling at twice the maximum bandwidth is enough: Nyquist's theorem says so.' Wrong! Nyquist's limit is a theoretical abstraction. In practice, experts recommend figures of 2.5 to 10 times the maximum bandwidth.