And sometimes you need an ISA slot. It's rare, but recently I've had occassion to really, really need one (in fact several...).
Sure they're slow, ancient, legacy (appologize for the redundancy there) but sometimes you just really need an older piece of hardware or a board you can solder and design yourself without an EE degree.
The same will be true of PCI. There are more PCI cards out there than ISA, so PCI-Express should really be backwards compatible, capable of both modes. Or at least have a few slots on it that are mutual, then faze it out over a few years.
Why don't major vendors get the fact that some of us like our legacy stuff and don't want to move just because we "have" to?
Even more stuff that as someone who uses computers primarily for work, I don't need.
Sure it looks good, yea, I'm all exited about a "new era of computing," but it breaks backwards compatibility with all of my old stuff and I bet it still can't outperform the mainframe I program on now in terms of raw MIPS.
Why did we ever move to PC's from thin clients in the first place? We have consoles for gaming, windows for PC gaming, and *nix for serious work (try doing something else under say Solaris, and posting to slashdot doesn't count.) now. Why all of the redundancy? Aren't we in an economic downturn? The bus speeds and improvements are nice, don't get me wrong... but in a PC? It removes the PCI bottleneck problem, but I don't see where it removes the HDD bottleneck in terms of raw speed.
All in all i'd say it's a nifty gadget.
When we get holographic/full immersion, give me a call. I'd love to see what my brain can output in raw source without needing to actually type.
--I'm just continuing my tradition of posting drunk, pay me no head. Don't post to slashdot under wine.
I don't see what the big deal with palladium is. Maybe I haven't become as scared[dual meaning, rule] as your typical/. reader over the years, but I personally have the following view: If MS seeks to control every aspect of the desktop, the masses will rebel. Unless, of course they do it in such a way that a great majority are happy with it. In which case it comes down to best tool for the job. If that's MS, use MS, if that's linux, use linux. If more people just thought that way, instead of MS is evil, Linux is great, or MS is good, Linux is too hard to use... etc. etc. then I think we could put all these wars to rest. It all comes down to that... best tool for the job.
Then again, *nix is an OS by developers, for developers, so I'm just a weee bit biased towards those variants...
It's been awhile since I posted, and I'm a tad bit tipsy now,someone let me know which UID I'm posting under...
Anyway, Redhat is a good company, they contribute to the Open Source Community. They may have a bit of a bloatware OS(that being an understatement), but so long as they contribute, hell they're great.
I measure systems I custom compile/build against redhat. And I generally include RPM for them, so they can't be all bad(and they aren't), certainly no Redmond.
When I see the home directory named "My Home" I may begin to draw the comparison. Then they begin to think that "MY" computer is their home.
no paralells meaning to be drawn, school come mornin', and 27 shots in me, gimme a freakin' break here will ya? I run linux from scratch.
Intel's 64 bit offering is a load of garbage... extremely complex, and it looks like it was designed by two groups, architecture designers and a compiler core. It's what happens when you let coders define an architecture. Multi-million dollar mistake. A purely RISC 64-bit chip the likes of Alpha would've been great, but Intel took the job, butchered it and then ran it through a shredder. Alpha was pure, and a great architecture, IA64 is NO Alpha. It couldn't hold Alpha's coffee mug in the mornings. It's an absolutely enormous die (meaning higher manufacturing costs) and processors aren't really divided into RISC and CISC anymore. Hammer is a better architecture from a market standpoint, and from a technological standpoint as well. From everything I've read on it, it appears to be part of AMDs long term strategy... and it's a good strategy. Just remember which company got most of the Alpha engineers. But hey, here's a link, go read up on processors here.
It seems to me that Dr. Wallace is half right on his interpretation. His transistor/operating system analogy would seem to be fairly compelling and makes a lot of sense to me.
The question I wish had been asked is, we all know emulation is slower and normally less accurate than a native system. If you are approaching AI from the standpoint of developing the operating system before developing the system itself, how is this a more accurate approach or will both approaches yield to a final positive result?
His answers basically make me think that a true AI is most likely to evolve on two fronts. First, the development of models that emulate the structure of the brain (neural networks/etc.), and second the development of models that emulate the way it actually behaves. NNs are quite good at learning things from an input layer, but how do you go about getting that input layer without an appropriate model of what human behavior is?
This is why I think that models like ALICE will be used to approximate behavior and then a neural network will be used to learn how to emulate that logic with an adaptive input layer(being a next generation ALICE equivalent). IANITF(I am not in the field) however. Last thing I read in it was on perceptors, logic grammars, and kohenegan[sic] SONs. Any other/.ers who may be more informed have any thoughts?
But I want Patrick Stewart as Spider Jerusalem wielding it in real life. They won't develop it, remember the smiler was the one who said, "There ought to be limits to freedom." Damn that pollen, it's got my head all screwed up.
Technical superiority, in this case I think it comes down more to preference, although I can cite a few examples.
Pre 2K/XP your computer would encounter problems for no reason due to poor memory management and other general bugs. 2K also has a memory leak which becomes evident after several days to weeks of uptime. XP probably has a similar if slightly less obvious problem as it is based on 2K.
Secondly, there are a startling amount of bugs and security issues discovered in Microsoft products. Same with linux programs, but the difference will become clear later.
Linux is modular, windows is not, you have a core of components, but you could replace all of them if you wanted to. The kernel is quite stable and fairly bug free.
The windows kernel may be similarly stable but it is tied in with a slew of other components and thus the whole must be judged instead of compartmentally. If a core windows component has an issue, that component can not be swapped out or generally even disabled due to the lack of complete modularity of the operating system. In Linux, it can be.
Direct access to hardware, Linux programs do not have it, while windows programs do. This is more a matter of preference and opinion than anything else. In my opinion, Linux handles this aspect better, but that is just that, my opinion.
Complexity and compile time. Linux, as a whole distribution compiles quicker, this points to a couple things[see a previous slashdot article I am not taking the time to cite]. Either the compiler itself is more efficient or the code itself is more efficient. Either way, this would give linux a very slight technical nod from most computer scientists (including me).
Configurability. Hands down, linux beats windows on how far you can tweak it and how deep into it you can go. Even without touching the source. Touching the source and it is infinately configurable. Once again, a matter of preference. Due to it's modular nature however, one or even several bad configuration files will not crash the system under linux[Bar Lilo or Grub configuration, but similarly if the MBR gets messed up under windows, same problem]. Under windows, this is a different story, each crucial file is a fault point, as is each driver. Linux has a lot less fault points then windows, and is a lot more recoverable, mainly due to it's much more modular nature.
Where linux fails is ease of use. It is much more complex and less intuitive to use then Windows. This puts it more into the realm of the advanced or new user.
I am certain I have missed things and I am certain that there are certain points that are more my opinion then fact as well as certain points I have inadequately fleshed out, but I think that's a pretty good summary for 10 minutes spent at work.
All of these identification systems seem to be like the IdentiEze from the hitchhikers trilogy[Some slashdotter tosses a towel at me screaming "attack," I can see it now], or the SIN system popularized by Gibson and that genre of literature[As well as RPGs such as Shadowrun]. Eventually will we be moving to a point where anonymity is a comodity that puts you completely into some form of shadow world?
I hope not, I like my data being spread out, having one system (Passport or LA's) may be convienant,
but it's certainly not good for those of us who like to wear tinfoil hats.
Holding stores accountable, that's an interesting viewpoint. I'm not sure if I agree with it or not... but it seems like a nice compromise (banning stores from selling adult games to children). Banning it outright, that's just unacceptable, and unless you change the constitution, ain't gonna happen.
I will not allow the freespeech clause to be taken away or altered just so that bad parents don't have to watch their children anymore.
I'm currently allowed to burn the flag, hell I could make a t-shirt with our pres on it, with big flaming words saying "praying for a congenital heart defect." The day some idiot touches the first amendment is the day I buy an island and start up my own country.
Since someone is going to say something about running water through your system and how you don't trust it, etc. etc. etc.. There are alternatives out there such as flourinert that have similar thermal properties but don't carry charges well. More expensive then water + wetting solution, but gives MUCH more peace of mind if you happen to be a paranoid person. Here's a link to an OC forum with a story or two on how the product behaves as well. A better article on watercooling (to the insane extreme) can be found here.
When I read this, I didn't think it was news, pretty much anyone who has had a professional job can say, yea we aren't supposed to use our work computers for much besides work (Doesn't mean you do always use it for work, you always have some leeway.)
Typically, the RIAA receives tips about alleged illegal file swapping through its anonymous tip line. It then threatens legal action and asks companies to stop. So far, the tactics may be working.
That is what scared me... how BSA like the RIAA is. Anonymous file sharing tip line? So some disgruntled employee anonymously says they traded MP3s and they go after the company. That's just a new low for them.
Slashdot Mirror
And sometimes you need an ISA slot. It's rare, but recently I've had occassion to really, really need one (in fact several...).
Sure they're slow, ancient, legacy (appologize for the redundancy there) but sometimes you just really need an older piece of hardware or a board you can solder and design yourself without an EE degree.
The same will be true of PCI. There are more PCI cards out there than ISA, so PCI-Express should really be backwards compatible, capable of both modes. Or at least have a few slots on it that are mutual, then faze it out over a few years.
Why don't major vendors get the fact that some of us like our legacy stuff and don't want to move just because we "have" to?
Even more stuff that as someone who uses computers primarily for work, I don't need.
Sure it looks good, yea, I'm all exited about a "new era of computing," but it breaks backwards compatibility with all of my old stuff and I bet it still can't outperform the mainframe I program on now in terms of raw MIPS.
Why did we ever move to PC's from thin clients in the first place? We have consoles for gaming, windows for PC gaming, and *nix for serious work (try doing something else under say Solaris, and posting to slashdot doesn't count.) now. Why all of the redundancy? Aren't we in an economic downturn? The bus speeds and improvements are nice, don't get me wrong... but in a PC? It removes the PCI bottleneck problem, but I don't see where it removes the HDD bottleneck in terms of raw speed.
All in all i'd say it's a nifty gadget.
When we get holographic/full immersion, give me a call. I'd love to see what my brain can output in raw source without needing to actually type.
--I'm just continuing my tradition of posting drunk, pay me no head. Don't post to slashdot under wine.
I don't see what the big deal with palladium is. Maybe I haven't become as scared[dual meaning, rule] as your typical /. reader over the years, but I personally have the following view: If MS seeks to control every aspect of the desktop, the masses will rebel. Unless, of course they do it in such a way that a great majority are happy with it. In which case it comes down to best tool for the job. If that's MS, use MS, if that's linux, use linux. If more people just thought that way, instead of MS is evil, Linux is great, or MS is good, Linux is too hard to use... etc. etc. then I think we could put all these wars to rest. It all comes down to that... best tool for the job.
Then again, *nix is an OS by developers, for developers, so I'm just a weee bit biased towards those variants...
It's been awhile since I posted, and I'm a tad bit tipsy now,someone let me know which UID I'm posting under...
Anyway, Redhat is a good company, they contribute to the Open Source Community. They may have a bit of a bloatware OS(that being an understatement), but so long as they contribute, hell they're great.
I measure systems I custom compile/build against redhat. And I generally include RPM for them, so they can't be all bad(and they aren't), certainly no Redmond.
When I see the home directory named "My Home" I may begin to draw the comparison. Then they begin to think that "MY" computer is their home.
no paralells meaning to be drawn, school come mornin', and 27 shots in me, gimme a freakin' break here will ya? I run linux from scratch.
Intel's 64 bit offering is a load of garbage... extremely complex, and it looks like it was designed by two groups, architecture designers and a compiler core. It's what happens when you let coders define an architecture. Multi-million dollar mistake. A purely RISC 64-bit chip the likes of Alpha would've been great, but Intel took the job, butchered it and then ran it through a shredder. Alpha was pure, and a great architecture, IA64 is NO Alpha. It couldn't hold Alpha's coffee mug in the mornings. It's an absolutely enormous die (meaning higher manufacturing costs) and processors aren't really divided into RISC and CISC anymore. Hammer is a better architecture from a market standpoint, and from a technological standpoint as well. From everything I've read on it, it appears to be part of AMDs long term strategy... and it's a good strategy. Just remember which company got most of the Alpha engineers. But hey, here's a link, go read up on processors here.
It seems to me that Dr. Wallace is half right on his interpretation. His transistor/operating system analogy would seem to be fairly compelling and makes a lot of sense to me.
/.ers who may be more informed have any thoughts?
The question I wish had been asked is, we all know emulation is slower and normally less accurate than a native system. If you are approaching AI from the standpoint of developing the operating system before developing the system itself, how is this a more accurate approach or will both approaches yield to a final positive result?
His answers basically make me think that a true AI is most likely to evolve on two fronts. First, the development of models that emulate the structure of the brain (neural networks/etc.), and second the development of models that emulate the way it actually behaves. NNs are quite good at learning things from an input layer, but how do you go about getting that input layer without an appropriate model of what human behavior is?
This is why I think that models like ALICE will be used to approximate behavior and then a neural network will be used to learn how to emulate that logic with an adaptive input layer(being a next generation ALICE equivalent). IANITF(I am not in the field) however. Last thing I read in it was on perceptors, logic grammars, and kohenegan[sic] SONs. Any other
But I want Patrick Stewart as Spider Jerusalem wielding it in real life. They won't develop it, remember the smiler was the one who said, "There ought to be limits to freedom." Damn that pollen, it's got my head all screwed up.
Hey now I thought you were cool up until that C++ being the best stuff.... We all know, they best is assembly thank you very much! ;)
Technical superiority, in this case I think it comes down more to preference, although I can cite a few examples.
Pre 2K/XP your computer would encounter problems for no reason due to poor memory management and other general bugs. 2K also has a memory leak which becomes evident after several days to weeks of uptime. XP probably has a similar if slightly less obvious problem as it is based on 2K.
Secondly, there are a startling amount of bugs and security issues discovered in Microsoft products. Same with linux programs, but the difference will become clear later.
Linux is modular, windows is not, you have a core of components, but you could replace all of them if you wanted to. The kernel is quite stable and fairly bug free.
The windows kernel may be similarly stable but it is tied in with a slew of other components and thus the whole must be judged instead of compartmentally. If a core windows component has an issue, that component can not be swapped out or generally even disabled due to the lack of complete modularity of the operating system. In Linux, it can be.
Direct access to hardware, Linux programs do not have it, while windows programs do. This is more a matter of preference and opinion than anything else. In my opinion, Linux handles this aspect better, but that is just that, my opinion.
Complexity and compile time. Linux, as a whole distribution compiles quicker, this points to a couple things[see a previous slashdot article I am not taking the time to cite]. Either the compiler itself is more efficient or the code itself is more efficient. Either way, this would give linux a very slight technical nod from most computer scientists (including me).
Configurability. Hands down, linux beats windows on how far you can tweak it and how deep into it you can go. Even without touching the source. Touching the source and it is infinately configurable. Once again, a matter of preference. Due to it's modular nature however, one or even several bad configuration files will not crash the system under linux[Bar Lilo or Grub configuration, but similarly if the MBR gets messed up under windows, same problem]. Under windows, this is a different story, each crucial file is a fault point, as is each driver. Linux has a lot less fault points then windows, and is a lot more recoverable, mainly due to it's much more modular nature.
Where linux fails is ease of use. It is much more complex and less intuitive to use then Windows. This puts it more into the realm of the advanced or new user.
I am certain I have missed things and I am certain that there are certain points that are more my opinion then fact as well as certain points I have inadequately fleshed out, but I think that's a pretty good summary for 10 minutes spent at work.
All of these identification systems seem to be like the IdentiEze from the hitchhikers trilogy[Some slashdotter tosses a towel at me screaming "attack," I can see it now], or the SIN system popularized by Gibson and that genre of literature[As well as RPGs such as Shadowrun]. Eventually will we be moving to a point where anonymity is a comodity that puts you completely into some form of shadow world?
I hope not, I like my data being spread out, having one system (Passport or LA's) may be convienant, but it's certainly not good for those of us who like to wear tinfoil hats.
Holding stores accountable, that's an interesting viewpoint. I'm not sure if I agree with it or not... but it seems like a nice compromise (banning stores from selling adult games to children). Banning it outright, that's just unacceptable, and unless you change the constitution, ain't gonna happen.
I will not allow the freespeech clause to be taken away or altered just so that bad parents don't have to watch their children anymore.
I'm currently allowed to burn the flag, hell I could make a t-shirt with our pres on it, with big flaming words saying "praying for a congenital heart defect." The day some idiot touches the first amendment is the day I buy an island and start up my own country.
Since someone is going to say something about running water through your system and how you don't trust it, etc. etc. etc.. There are alternatives out there such as flourinert that have similar thermal properties but don't carry charges well. More expensive then water + wetting solution, but gives MUCH more peace of mind if you happen to be a paranoid person. Here's a link to an OC forum with a story or two on how the product behaves as well. A better article on watercooling (to the insane extreme) can be found here.
When I read this, I didn't think it was news, pretty much anyone who has had a professional job can say, yea we aren't supposed to use our work computers for much besides work (Doesn't mean you do always use it for work, you always have some leeway.)
Typically, the RIAA receives tips about alleged illegal file swapping through its anonymous tip line. It then threatens legal action and asks companies to stop. So far, the tactics may be working.
That is what scared me... how BSA like the RIAA is. Anonymous file sharing tip line? So some disgruntled employee anonymously says they traded MP3s and they go after the company. That's just a new low for them.