Re:In case of emergency... break IP rights.
on
Open Source Life?
·
· Score: 1
Yes, that's what it says, but it simply isn't true. Oh, it's true if you sign up for doublethink where you distort or redefine the meaning of every word in order to make it true, which is how the US Constitution works (which isn't necessarily intended as a criticism BTW), but in ordinary everyday English usage it's plain false.
Re:In case of emergency... break IP rights.
on
Open Source Life?
·
· Score: 1
Eh? Only in some weird sense defined purely for the purpose of making this statement.
Obviously someone thought that having a high contrast in an MRI scan was actually the same as literally glowing.
I take issue with that article
on
War Kayaking
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It says
For about $12 per hour you can kayak around one of the most amazing places in the world
Let me tell you, I've not traveled anwhere as widely as I'd ike to, but I have visited Seattle, and I can tell you for a fact that Lake Union, while it's pleasant enough, is not one of the most amazing places in the world. I don't think it gets onto my top 1,000 list. Probably not on my top 10,000 either. It probably gets into my top 100,000 though.
Not only can they ask your name but if you meet a cop in the street they can look at your face, see how tall you are, see how you dress, see where you were at that moment in time and glean a whole lot of other information from you without even asking and without you even knowing. Hell, if you have a personal problem like acne on your face they can see it there and then unless you make a special effort to hide your face. It's shocking and nobody's even talking about what a scandal this is!
I expect I could do a lot better with traditional optimization methods. Genetic algorithms are notoriously slow at converging and are only any good when all other methods fail. I expect that for a racing simulation the output is, almost everywhere, a differentiable function of the input parameters, and hence you can use some kind of calculus based minimization algorithm. People use adjoint methods all the time to differentiate fluid dynamics simulations or orbital manoeuvers so I don't see that these methods would fail for a racing sim. In fact this paper is probably a good place to start.
In many cases it's because they believe that the Creator of the Universe has declared that it is sinful to see naked breasts outside of the context of marriage. That's kinda a tricky position to argue with even if I don't care for it much.
sqrt(NOT) on its own is uninteresting. Even doing lots of sqrt(NOT) operations on individual qubits is uninteresting and can easily be emulated efficiently in hardware or software today. They only become interesting when you perform them on entangled qubits.
My laptop is 2D. I hate the way it's so flat. It's horrible to type on because the keys have no travel. It's easy to bend and tear by accident. Sometimes it's really hard to see because when you look at it edge on it has no thickness. It disappears in piles of paper. A 3D laptop would be much better!
Look, imagine the world was classical. Then in theory, you could 'teleport' something by measuring every aspect of something, sending the description, and then reconstructing it somewhere else. Strictly speaking this is a true statement but nobody would say "hey, we can teleport stuff now that we have invented the ruler".
Something similar happens in quantum 'teleportation'. Although Heisenberg tells us we can't measure the entire quantum state of a particle we can still transmit the information we need to reconstruct its state somewhere else. (BTW Unlike in the classical case we are forced to mess up the state of the input.) But there's no more reason to see this as a real teleportation then there is to see the ruler as a teleportation device.
This is a troll right? I'm sure the people who repeatedly ask this question on sci.physics are just some evil cabal trying to clog up the discussion.
Anyway, if you push on one end it'd probably take about a year before the other end responded. Mechanical signals travel through steel at around 4,500 m/s, a slong way short of the speed of light.
I've seen tv shows with twins that think similarly, or if one cuts themselves, the other is somehow aware...
Have you every watched Star Trek? In that the characters travel round faster than light. There's a simple explanation for how they do it. Star Trek is fiction.
This isn't completely correct. If you naively look at what happens in a quantum computer it's easy to think that you're running things in parallel - but in the most obvious sense you're not. In fact Deutsch's original paper shows how this naive interpretation of quantum computers doesn't really get you anything. Shor's factorng algorithm doesn't work because it tries every factor simultaneosuly - it works because it uses a cunning variation of the discrete fourier transform to tangle up different potential factors in such a way that non-factors cancel each other out and factors interfere constructively. It's a very special algorithm tailored for a particular problem, not a direct implementation of massive parallelism.
This isn't to say that what you argue is completely incorrect either. For example, if you want to search a database with N entries for one matching a given specification, then on a classical serial machine it might take time O(N), and on a large parallel machine it might take time O(1). On a quantum computer you can use Grover's algorithm and find it in time O(sqrt(N)) (and this is known to be optimal in some sense). So quantum computers are a bit like the geometric mean of serial and massively parallel machines.
Is that so? Care to tell us about the quantum computers that aren't based on entanglement?
If you want to know whether this is the...
on
Is This The Big One?
·
· Score: 0, Troll
...'big one' can I suggest posting on a seismologist's forum?/. is populated by geeks who aren't really expert in this field and the only quake they're likely to know about is the one they use to benchmark their graphics cards.
I'll second that. Template metaprogramming generates notoriously complex error messages but I've found that with g++ you can actually claw your way through them to figure out what the problem is. But check out MSVC 7.1 which is pretty standards compliant these days.
What does Linux have to do with it? It's a story about Java and C++.
Re:He used g++ to compare C++ with Java...
on
Java Faster Than C++?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
g++ isn't great at optimizing. For code I write it's somewhere between 0 and 50% slower than MSVC. It depends a lot on the type of code of course. For pure numerical work I think the Intel compiler usually scores highly so I'm surprised you're not seeing much difference.
He used g++ to compare C++ with Java...
on
Java Faster Than C++?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
...on x86? Please! Wake me up when someone who knows enough about C++ to pick a decent x86 compiler runs some benchmarks.
Compressing lossily and then decompressing doesn't give you back what you started with. Worse: for most types of lossless compression, compressing, uncompressing and then recompressing (at the same rate, sometimes even with the same codec) doesn't always reproduce the first compressed file. So transcoding typically does irreversible damage to the original data.
Not that I care, I think the people who claim they can reliably tell the differences between codecs at reasonable bit rates are delusional.
A lot can be told about your personality from this question: which superpower would you choose? Invisibility or flight? Something makes me think/.ers will generally pick invisibility.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that's what it says, but it simply isn't true. Oh, it's true if you sign up for doublethink where you distort or redefine the meaning of every word in order to make it true, which is how the US Constitution works (which isn't necessarily intended as a criticism BTW), but in ordinary everyday English usage it's plain false.
Eh? Only in some weird sense defined purely for the purpose of making this statement.
Anyway, unless you can prove that God is a logical necessity I don't see how my assertion can be inconsistent. That I'd like to see.
Not only can they ask your name but if you meet a cop in the street they can look at your face, see how tall you are, see how you dress, see where you were at that moment in time and glean a whole lot of other information from you without even asking and without you even knowing. Hell, if you have a personal problem like acne on your face they can see it there and then unless you make a special effort to hide your face. It's shocking and nobody's even talking about what a scandal this is!
voice? Reagan is going to be his running mate.
I expect I could do a lot better with traditional optimization methods. Genetic algorithms are notoriously slow at converging and are only any good when all other methods fail. I expect that for a racing simulation the output is, almost everywhere, a differentiable function of the input parameters, and hence you can use some kind of calculus based minimization algorithm. People use adjoint methods all the time to differentiate fluid dynamics simulations or orbital manoeuvers so I don't see that these methods would fail for a racing sim. In fact this paper is probably a good place to start.
My last 2D laptop was a Klein Bottle. Try reading /. when the text keeps flipping backwards when you scroll down too far.
In many cases it's because they believe that the Creator of the Universe has declared that it is sinful to see naked breasts outside of the context of marriage. That's kinda a tricky position to argue with even if I don't care for it much.
sqrt(NOT) on its own is uninteresting. Even doing lots of sqrt(NOT) operations on individual qubits is uninteresting and can easily be emulated efficiently in hardware or software today. They only become interesting when you perform them on entangled qubits.
My laptop is 2D. I hate the way it's so flat. It's horrible to type on because the keys have no travel. It's easy to bend and tear by accident. Sometimes it's really hard to see because when you look at it edge on it has no thickness. It disappears in piles of paper. A 3D laptop would be much better!
Something similar happens in quantum 'teleportation'. Although Heisenberg tells us we can't measure the entire quantum state of a particle we can still transmit the information we need to reconstruct its state somewhere else. (BTW Unlike in the classical case we are forced to mess up the state of the input.) But there's no more reason to see this as a real teleportation then there is to see the ruler as a teleportation device.
Anyway, if you push on one end it'd probably take about a year before the other end responded. Mechanical signals travel through steel at around 4,500 m/s, a slong way short of the speed of light.
Have you every watched Star Trek? In that the characters travel round faster than light. There's a simple explanation for how they do it. Star Trek is fiction.This isn't to say that what you argue is completely incorrect either. For example, if you want to search a database with N entries for one matching a given specification, then on a classical serial machine it might take time O(N), and on a large parallel machine it might take time O(1). On a quantum computer you can use Grover's algorithm and find it in time O(sqrt(N)) (and this is known to be optimal in some sense). So quantum computers are a bit like the geometric mean of serial and massively parallel machines.
Is that so? Care to tell us about the quantum computers that aren't based on entanglement?
...'big one' can I suggest posting on a seismologist's forum? /. is populated by geeks who aren't really expert in this field and the only quake they're likely to know about is the one they use to benchmark their graphics cards.
I'll second that. Template metaprogramming generates notoriously complex error messages but I've found that with g++ you can actually claw your way through them to figure out what the problem is. But check out MSVC 7.1 which is pretty standards compliant these days.
What does Linux have to do with it? It's a story about Java and C++.
g++ isn't great at optimizing. For code I write it's somewhere between 0 and 50% slower than MSVC. It depends a lot on the type of code of course. For pure numerical work I think the Intel compiler usually scores highly so I'm surprised you're not seeing much difference.
...on x86? Please! Wake me up when someone who knows enough about C++ to pick a decent x86 compiler runs some benchmarks.
Not that I care, I think the people who claim they can reliably tell the differences between codecs at reasonable bit rates are delusional.
A lot can be told about your personality from this question: which superpower would you choose? Invisibility or flight? Something makes me think /.ers will generally pick invisibility.
I'm sure that chick you keep eyeing every time she walks past would like to talk to you.
Just kidding. The guys at NASA have done a great job this time!