Well, you really only have to change two things. Traction control, and the shift personality. If you don't kill the traction control (usually a good thing, IMO), it'll keep the wheels from burning out. You also have to tell the tranny to trust you, though it obviously shouldn't.
Wouldn't going "downhill" be beneficial to the speed of the cars??? *rimshot*
*dodges tomatoes*
seriously, though... Any "downward" movement in cars is a result of smaller, more efficient engines, thanks to governmental restrictions. The government doesn't demand a quality vehicle, it demands an efficient one. So now, cheap slow cars are all any domestic companies can make! You want speed, you go foreign. End of story.
"skimming" implies that they take a small portion of the proceeds, and give the rest to the artist. Instead, they skim a bit to give to the artist, and keep the lion's share.
Uh... no. Not everybody that uses SQL is a bank. Banks shouldn't be using MySQL, and to my knowledge.
My webserver needs to be very fast, because my site doesn't get many hits, but my users pay good money for it. My site performs a very complex, but non-critical task. Since it is searching on loosely-defined guidelines anyway, performance occasionally comes before correctness.
I don't need any of the functionality missing in MySQL. I use MySQL because it does what I need in a very fast manner.
Yup, yup. 2000 degree lava makes 100 degree water (and 100 degree lava-oven surface) until all the water is gone. All that hot, high-pressure water is getting injected into the chicken at an incredible rate, but all the tender juiciness is trapped in the banana leaves! Yum! Psychadelic mushrooms are fun and all, but not necessary for the process. (in fact, they'd make timing the process rather difficult...)
You might try reading that again. As Michael said, glass is not a liquid: "simply that glass is another state of matter which is neither liquid nor solid"
Sheesh. My productivity dropped off when I got depressed, but I was usually pretty up-front with my boss about it. When I got too depressed, I dumped the girlfriend. Four times. God did that suck.
Why posting anonymously? Four years from now, you'll have probably gotten laid off anyway! In my past experience, employers don't like their employees looking for jobs on company time. But if their employees are making a big life choice, like moving to a different city in four fucking years, they're usually pretty supportive. I've given my bosses 6 months notice (after I make the decision, I give myself 6 months to tie everything off) for a move in the past, and they've always been grateful and supportive. One offered the opportunity to telecommute. It was perfect for a long time... 'till seeing nobody but my bitter and angry girlfriend day to day because I had no friends and no life drove me crazy. I was writing web apps, search engines, etc. Any web-based job like that would work perfectly. You could remotely administer an entire ISP, if you tried hard enough.
Fibres can be grown in place... so where standard lithography fails, we've still got the power to make a crystalline fibre grow where and when we want. Labs are already making self-building chips. Currently, optics DO work on a larger scale than electrons. Much larger. We send billions of photons for every bit sent down a fiber line. I'm talking about optics that work on single photons.
So even as we are developing monomolecular transistors after decades of improvement, we're still only figuring out how to build optical logic components right; I don't think the comparisson is quite fair. An electron is much more massive (on a handful of orders of magnitude, IIRC) than a photon, and requires more energy to toss around. This implies to me that there is much more room for improvement. And optical doesn't necissarily mean visible. We can (in theory) build optical circuits that work with X-rays with a wavelength under 1nm. Doing a search for molecular transistors, I find that the smallest we've made is still larger than 1nm. IIRC, the optical components have to be around 2nm for them to work on 1nm light. Double the frequency, halve the feature size. Electrons don't "shrink" like that.
If you want a single electric-circuit-killing uber-feature of optics, you won't find one. Optics is still a very young technology. Think about your statement, "100 million transistors (typical CPU) would fill a small room with even the smallist optical transistors." I seem to recall using a room-sized computer not so many years ago. It ran on electrical transistors.
I'd lose some toes for that! I'm fascinated by meteorites (all rocks, really... but meteorites are more interesting by a few orders of magnitude)... I've never heard of anybody being struck by a meteorite in recorded history! If one just fell out of the sky and landed on my foot, I'd be too happy to notice the pain!
Meteorites fetch quite the premium... over $2000/g for some!
If you'd read the article, you'd see that there are many more applications for materials with a negative refraction index than just optical computing. The article discusses perfect lenses which would enable us to see details as small as a single molecule... but you want to know about optical computers.
Light travels faster than electricity, and would encounter almost zero resistance, so I don't see anything to limit processor frequency. The heat generated by an optical circuit is negligable. Hell, you could probably put a bit of solar panneling on your computer and unplug it from the wall whenever you have the lights on.
Do you lose anything? Mostly just cooking surfaces, if you've been using AMD. Oh, and static pads... they'll be useless. You might have to keep connectors cleaner. All the logic works the same...
law of supply & demand: of course it'll be more expensive in the beginning, but if people want more optical than electrical, optical will get as cheap or cheaper than electrical, and optical will receive the majority of
With all the "intelligence" in this house, how could the designers even think to make changing out walls so difficult as to require a "handyman"? Its as simple as this: install small servo motors into the wall sections that move locking mechanical parts into and out of place (instead of the screws or whatever they use now). Put the wall into place, and it should have electrical pads to power it automatically. Press a button or two, and the wall locks into place and disengages the servo motors. Press some more buttons, and the wall reverses the process and unhooks from the floor/ceiling/surrounding walls.
The ball would simply be perfectly matte black. You would see no features on it, no shadows, no nothing. It would essentially look like a hole into black nothingness from any angle, no matter how much light was on it. You might see heat waves coming off of it, though, if you shine enough light on it.
Correction: I saved more than one otherwise fully qualified applicant the grief of working under my boss. If they couldn't work under pressure, they wouldn't have survived here a week.
My boss is pointy-haired in that he has no idea about what I, or the computers I control do. Fortunately, he understands his pointy-hairedness and put me (the only programmer at the time) in control of hiring my assistant. Hmm. I'm gonna have to work with this guy every day. He's sharing my freaking office, for crying out loud! I'm gonna find me the best partner I can get.
So... I looked through the resumes, put the straight-edgers (class presidents, etc.), PhDs, (we're making webpages, not rockets... we can't pay for that) into the "I'm keeping this because I'll get sued if I don't" pile, and called in some of the younger guys (my age) for interview.
When they came in for interview, I took them into my office with my music blaring, and shut the door. I seated them in an almost ridiculously small folding chair, contrasted by my boss's plush leather armchair that I was sitting in. There was a normal chair turned to face the wall, which only one applicant took (he was the only one that passed that test). I started out with a few questions, but other than a few skill-related questions, it was mostly personal. The less I liked them, the less personal it was.
Then I got down to business. I showed them my company's website, a little bit about how it works, and told them about a feature that we were adding. Told them a bit about how it was supposed to work, and showed them my prototype. It took me about 30 minutes to do, and I told them I expected the same of them. I sat them down, and watched them code. After about 20 minutes or so, I'd ask the applicant if they were uncomfortable from my presence. If they denied it, I stayed there. If they didn't, I got my homework out and worked alongside them. I got a very good picture of how they worked under pressure, and how they coded. I denied more than one fully-qualified applicant on the grounds that I knew I wouldn't get along with them. I'm still confident that I hired the best man for the job, 4 months later.
As the poster above said, you don't need to cut the string. However, due to the greater string resistance as a result of a third-party addition would cause a substantial decrease in delivery volume. However, since many string-and-can implementations are a single leg, line-of-sight transmission, security is rarely a problem.
However, it is possible. One would have to lay a taught length any type of transparent monofilament line (probably fishing line), affixed to thinner, lighter can. The tap could be easily missed by visual inspection, and would only lightly contact the main communication line, therefore only minutely changing the angle of the line. The lighter line and receiver would barely change the string resistance, and would be more difficult to detect.
IANAQME, but if you want one-bit graphics, give a pixel one qubit. If you want 64 bit graphics, give the pixel 64 qubits. But with the parallel computation and a million qubits... we could have analog (n-bit) graphics.
Quantum computers cleanly perform iterative loops in n time. Imagine searching an array of strings (8-bit characters). After 8 operations, you've weeded out all strings that don't start with the same letter. After 16, same 2 letters. No matter how many strings you have, the length of the search key is the only determinant factor in computation time.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you really only have to change two things. Traction control, and the shift personality. If you don't kill the traction control (usually a good thing, IMO), it'll keep the wheels from burning out. You also have to tell the tranny to trust you, though it obviously shouldn't.
Wouldn't going "downhill" be beneficial to the speed of the cars??? *rimshot*
*dodges tomatoes*
seriously, though... Any "downward" movement in cars is a result of smaller, more efficient engines, thanks to governmental restrictions. The government doesn't demand a quality vehicle, it demands an efficient one. So now, cheap slow cars are all any domestic companies can make! You want speed, you go foreign. End of story.
Why not? I think its a great idea. Get crackin', we don't have all day! These worms are spreading like wildfire!
"skimming" implies that they take a small portion of the proceeds, and give the rest to the artist. Instead, they skim a bit to give to the artist, and keep the lion's share.
Dude, that would rock! Everybody would come to a party if Batman brought the booze!!!
Uh... no. Not everybody that uses SQL is a bank. Banks shouldn't be using MySQL, and to my knowledge.
My webserver needs to be very fast, because my site doesn't get many hits, but my users pay good money for it. My site performs a very complex, but non-critical task. Since it is searching on loosely-defined guidelines anyway, performance occasionally comes before correctness.
I don't need any of the functionality missing in MySQL. I use MySQL because it does what I need in a very fast manner.
Yup, yup. 2000 degree lava makes 100 degree water (and 100 degree lava-oven surface) until all the water is gone. All that hot, high-pressure water is getting injected into the chicken at an incredible rate, but all the tender juiciness is trapped in the banana leaves! Yum! Psychadelic mushrooms are fun and all, but not necessary for the process. (in fact, they'd make timing the process rather difficult...)
Psilocybin salad, of course!
You might try reading that again. As Michael said, glass is not a liquid: "simply that glass is another state of matter which is neither liquid nor solid"
"Nature is pretty" -- CmdrTaco
Sheesh. My productivity dropped off when I got depressed, but I was usually pretty up-front with my boss about it. When I got too depressed, I dumped the girlfriend. Four times. God did that suck.
Why posting anonymously? Four years from now, you'll have probably gotten laid off anyway! In my past experience, employers don't like their employees looking for jobs on company time. But if their employees are making a big life choice, like moving to a different city in four fucking years, they're usually pretty supportive. I've given my bosses 6 months notice (after I make the decision, I give myself 6 months to tie everything off) for a move in the past, and they've always been grateful and supportive. One offered the opportunity to telecommute. It was perfect for a long time... 'till seeing nobody but my bitter and angry girlfriend day to day because I had no friends and no life drove me crazy. I was writing web apps, search engines, etc. Any web-based job like that would work perfectly. You could remotely administer an entire ISP, if you tried hard enough.
Naw... they get married... usually to other female art profs... but any other prof will do.
Whos flaming? I'm not. This shit fascinates me.
Fibres can be grown in place... so where standard lithography fails, we've still got the power to make a crystalline fibre grow where and when we want. Labs are already making self-building chips. Currently, optics DO work on a larger scale than electrons. Much larger. We send billions of photons for every bit sent down a fiber line. I'm talking about optics that work on single photons.
So even as we are developing monomolecular transistors after decades of improvement, we're still only figuring out how to build optical logic components right; I don't think the comparisson is quite fair. An electron is much more massive (on a handful of orders of magnitude, IIRC) than a photon, and requires more energy to toss around. This implies to me that there is much more room for improvement. And optical doesn't necissarily mean visible. We can (in theory) build optical circuits that work with X-rays with a wavelength under 1nm. Doing a search for molecular transistors, I find that the smallest we've made is still larger than 1nm. IIRC, the optical components have to be around 2nm for them to work on 1nm light. Double the frequency, halve the feature size. Electrons don't "shrink" like that.
If you want a single electric-circuit-killing uber-feature of optics, you won't find one. Optics is still a very young technology. Think about your statement, "100 million transistors (typical CPU) would fill a small room with even the smallist optical transistors." I seem to recall using a room-sized computer not so many years ago. It ran on electrical transistors.
I'd lose some toes for that! I'm fascinated by meteorites (all rocks, really... but meteorites are more interesting by a few orders of magnitude)... I've never heard of anybody being struck by a meteorite in recorded history! If one just fell out of the sky and landed on my foot, I'd be too happy to notice the pain!
Meteorites fetch quite the premium... over $2000/g for some!
If you'd read the article, you'd see that there are many more applications for materials with a negative refraction index than just optical computing. The article discusses perfect lenses which would enable us to see details as small as a single molecule... but you want to know about optical computers. Light travels faster than electricity, and would encounter almost zero resistance, so I don't see anything to limit processor frequency. The heat generated by an optical circuit is negligable. Hell, you could probably put a bit of solar panneling on your computer and unplug it from the wall whenever you have the lights on. Do you lose anything? Mostly just cooking surfaces, if you've been using AMD. Oh, and static pads... they'll be useless. You might have to keep connectors cleaner. All the logic works the same... law of supply & demand: of course it'll be more expensive in the beginning, but if people want more optical than electrical, optical will get as cheap or cheaper than electrical, and optical will receive the majority of
I bet it'd be better if you microwaved it first.
With all the "intelligence" in this house, how could the designers even think to make changing out walls so difficult as to require a "handyman"? Its as simple as this: install small servo motors into the wall sections that move locking mechanical parts into and out of place (instead of the screws or whatever they use now). Put the wall into place, and it should have electrical pads to power it automatically. Press a button or two, and the wall locks into place and disengages the servo motors. Press some more buttons, and the wall reverses the process and unhooks from the floor/ceiling/surrounding walls.
The ball would simply be perfectly matte black. You would see no features on it, no shadows, no nothing. It would essentially look like a hole into black nothingness from any angle, no matter how much light was on it. You might see heat waves coming off of it, though, if you shine enough light on it.
RTFA
Correction: I saved more than one otherwise fully qualified applicant the grief of working under my boss. If they couldn't work under pressure, they wouldn't have survived here a week.
Holy shit! They're planning before implementing??? I thought that was impossible, or at the very least, illegal!
My boss is pointy-haired in that he has no idea about what I, or the computers I control do. Fortunately, he understands his pointy-hairedness and put me (the only programmer at the time) in control of hiring my assistant. Hmm. I'm gonna have to work with this guy every day. He's sharing my freaking office, for crying out loud! I'm gonna find me the best partner I can get.
So... I looked through the resumes, put the straight-edgers (class presidents, etc.), PhDs, (we're making webpages, not rockets... we can't pay for that) into the "I'm keeping this because I'll get sued if I don't" pile, and called in some of the younger guys (my age) for interview.
When they came in for interview, I took them into my office with my music blaring, and shut the door. I seated them in an almost ridiculously small folding chair, contrasted by my boss's plush leather armchair that I was sitting in. There was a normal chair turned to face the wall, which only one applicant took (he was the only one that passed that test). I started out with a few questions, but other than a few skill-related questions, it was mostly personal. The less I liked them, the less personal it was.
Then I got down to business. I showed them my company's website, a little bit about how it works, and told them about a feature that we were adding. Told them a bit about how it was supposed to work, and showed them my prototype. It took me about 30 minutes to do, and I told them I expected the same of them. I sat them down, and watched them code. After about 20 minutes or so, I'd ask the applicant if they were uncomfortable from my presence. If they denied it, I stayed there. If they didn't, I got my homework out and worked alongside them. I got a very good picture of how they worked under pressure, and how they coded. I denied more than one fully-qualified applicant on the grounds that I knew I wouldn't get along with them. I'm still confident that I hired the best man for the job, 4 months later.
As the poster above said, you don't need to cut the string. However, due to the greater string resistance as a result of a third-party addition would cause a substantial decrease in delivery volume. However, since many string-and-can implementations are a single leg, line-of-sight transmission, security is rarely a problem.
However, it is possible. One would have to lay a taught length any type of transparent monofilament line (probably fishing line), affixed to thinner, lighter can. The tap could be easily missed by visual inspection, and would only lightly contact the main communication line, therefore only minutely changing the angle of the line. The lighter line and receiver would barely change the string resistance, and would be more difficult to detect.
IANAQME, but if you want one-bit graphics, give a pixel one qubit. If you want 64 bit graphics, give the pixel 64 qubits. But with the parallel computation and a million qubits... we could have analog (n-bit) graphics.
Quantum computers cleanly perform iterative loops in n time. Imagine searching an array of strings (8-bit characters). After 8 operations, you've weeded out all strings that don't start with the same letter. After 16, same 2 letters. No matter how many strings you have, the length of the search key is the only determinant factor in computation time.