TFA is accompanied by a terrible image of two head scans. They are obviously not sized the same. One skull is about 50 percent larger than the other. I'm not a radiologist, but the scans appear to be different resolutions too. It's like they wanted to show people "different brains sizes" so they deliberately chose images heads with different sizes so we'd get the point. Lies, damn lies (the pictures I mean).
The plug really should be in front, right in the center. Not sure why they tend to be on the side - as if you're going to pull up to a charging station and stand there pumping electrons for 6 hours.
I feel relieved that, knowing that moderate funds and a scientific background are now sufficient to create a disease that could kill billions, or target entire ethnicities for genocide, at least the president is safe.
Oh, that's been possible for at least a decade and is easier than this. You just transfer one nasty gene (there are several choices) into a flu virus and let it go. It's the targeting specific people that's new. But still, what could go wrong? The fact that people actually think they could control something like that is proof of some kind of god complex.
Why is you web browser sized so wide? My display is 1680 and I only use 2/3 of the width for this. I suppose if you go to jumbo fonts it might be OK, but then resolution is not what you need.
FTFA: "[A] person who scored 100 a century ago would score 70 today". So this means the scale has been adjusted and what we call average today would have been quite smart a century ago. You can't measure absolute IQ of a society, but you can do comparative studies of different societies or the same society at different times in its history.
Abstract reasoning used to be the almost exclusive province of mathematicians and philosophers. Now we teach it in schools.
Perhaps, but we also use it now. We teach and use it on our electronic devices. Remember the "desktop metaphor"? People including kids regularly manipulate things through at least one layer of abstraction. We build this in starting around 3 years old these days.
Example:
My kid wants some new song on moms iPod, we have to "get it" on there. They navigate through the "store" to find it, then "buy it" and now it resides somewhere on the iPod where it wasn't before. While we take if for granted, this virtual world is far more abstract than buying a physical CD (record, tape) off the store shelf and then having to put it in/on a physical device to play it.
I have often suspected one of the reasons bilingual people tend to score as smarter is that they have abstracted the physical world away from the concept of "the word is the thing" out of necessity. Once you have a more abstract concept of a thing with words associated with it, you can think about it somehow at a more abstract level. I wonder if some of our virtual things these days are giving some of that benefit.
That and the fact that they teach reading earlier - my first grader could read most of this post, whereas I remember reading Dick and Jane around that age.
I thought SSL in general was susceptible to man in the middle attacks, so ANY app that uses it would be too. That doesn't mean a death knell. It means something like Domain Keys need to be used to make these even more secure.
You sir have learned the lesson from Age of Empires well. Always go out an mine the remote resources first - then when they run out and people are fighting, you'll have plenty of supply back home.
Unfortunately in the US, we export coal (for example) while offering subsidies to those companies.
Arrogance comes from thinking that you're better than people around you. Sometimes it's actually true.
If by "better than" you mean more knowledgeable then I'd agree, otherwise go fuck yourself. There is a fine line between confidence and arrogance - make sure you keep yourself on the right side if it.
BTW, when I was nearing the end of college a friend of mine pointed out that I had this very problem. Being better at something doesn't make it OK to be an ass. I took that to heart and worked hard on fixing it over the years and that effort has probably paid off more than going to college.
1. Shrunk their circuits with new fabrication that AMD couldnt' afford. Electricity moves faster and transistors switch quicker when electrical signals move in one direction rather than spread through thicker conduits.
Nope. That just allows higher clock speeds. AMD is getting nead 4GHz too these day. I also specifically said "single core per-clock performance". This means architectural changes - significant ones.
2. Can get data before it even arrives using mathematical tricks! AMD needs a ton of i/o to fetch the data while the intel ones can guess it with 85-90% accuracy without it even arriving and is already on the next data fetch without the first one even there yet.
Citation please. I don't buy that hand waving mumbo jumbo for a second without a reference - could be your wording but you even say it sound strange;-) So I'm still wondering.
Gotta agree that AMD cut all the wrong things under Ruiz and it's cost them dearly.
Why does Mesa even exist? It was supposed to be a software implementation of OpenGL, but it never had good enough performance for much of anything. Instead it became some sort of wrapper for OpenGL drivers. They said it could be used as a fallback for any features not implemented in the hardware drivers (but with terrible performance). And now with the LLVM pipe driver it's not even used for software rendering any more. Somehow it just keeps sticking around. What's up with that?
AMD is getting spanked badly in per-core performance. AMD was actually quite competitive a while back. From the benchmarks it looks like Intel had a very substantial leap in per-core performance with one generation of their core architecture. What did they do that made such a huge gain? And it's not that they're ahead on fab process. The single core per-clock performance jumped. What's up with that? How'd they do it?
so when the article claims that "MIT found that campus WiFi (2% packet loss) jumped from 1Mbps to 16Mbps" shouldn't the increase in speed be only 2% and not 16x?
Nope. Because when those 2 percent of packets are lost, they not only need to be retransmitted but TCP backs off on transmission speed because it thinks there is congestion on the network. By getting helping the packets get through TCP will not throttle itself.
This might actually hurt them then because they charge by what was transmitted, not by what was received.
Yeah, but you have to consider how they do math. You assume they calculate profit based on usage and rates. The reality is they calculate the rate based on the desired profit and usage. So when you use less data (fewer retransmits) they will just charge you more for the bits that get through.
The only part of X11 that people need is network transparent remote display, but that's the one part that the developers are absolutely hell bent on removing.
I thought people needed memory management, window management, font management, text rendering capability, graphics drawing, backing store, OpenGL, composited desktops, the ability to sync sound and video, stuff like that. You must mean that network transparency is the one feature that sets X apart.
In fact it's the only part of X that's still relevant. KMS, DRI, cairo, pango, GTK or QT, Gnome or KDE libs etc have taken over almost every part of X. Wayland simply acknowledges this and aims for simplicity by allowing those other parts of a modern system to do their jobs and doing little else. Networked display will show up at some point via some method that's better than VNC too.
However, I really don't understand why Intel won't play both sides of the fence. Why not build an AMD line/factory to offer both types of chips. Take away business from competitors. Get the past to pay for the future.
ARM is killing all the other companies in a blood bath of competition. Meanwhile Intel is absolutely dominating in fabrication. The foundries don't feel a need to compete with Intel because x86 isn't their market so they don't feel the need to worry.
I'm not sure where anywhere near there yet. But with Qualcomm feasting on the remains of AMD, Samsung producing millions of parts a year and a few others with them it's entirely possible that within the next 10 years ARM will be a major competitor to x86.
ARM is competing with itself. With all those companies making ARM chips they have significant price competition which will lead to reduced R&D budgets. Meanwhile if you want top performance there is only one game in town and they get to charge top dollar. If Intel ever does view ARM as a threat, they can just license the designs like everyone else and throw their own GPU and radio hardware into the mix on a more advanced process for less money. Or perhaps they'll license ARM instruction set only and slap both ARM and x86 decoders on their existing cores, along with a GPU, radio, and better process.
ARM has great instruction density... But it doesn't really matter, because you can power an ARM core and an instruction decompressor with less power than you needed for a x86 core, and zipped instructions have a much bigger density than x86, whatever architecture it is.
...with less power... given the same process. Intel is now making 22nm tri-gate or whatever they're calling it. TSMC is not at 22nm yet and plans to use planar transistors when they do get there. So Intel probably has about a 2 year lead in power per transistor.
Meanwhile I wonder which ARMs even have instructions like divide or reciprocal square root.
Intel has the best process engineers in the business and if things in the foundry business keep going like they are (TSMC and Global Foundaries have both been very very late moving forward on process while Intel hasn't missed a stride) they are going to be two steps ahead on process in the next year or two and that would be an advantage not even the best ARM design could beat even if Intel bungles their design.
Intel is not playing the same game. With everyone else (except AMD) making ARM devices on older process nodes, Intel should not make ARM chips because that would create the perception of competition and force TSMC and GF to advance their process. So long as all the foundry customers appear to be competing with each other it looks like a close race and there may be less pressure to advance. The further Intel stays away from their products, the less those guys will feel like they are competing with Intel and they will not worry about the process gap so much - they're still close to their "competitors" capability after all.
Everyone seems to have forgotten what business they're in. Those who can design have gone fabless while those who can fab now have more than enough customers to not care about process advancement so long as they can keep up with their perceived competition. In fact, all those customers probably slow them down with countless designs that each need scheduling and a design tweak or two. Meanwhile Intel turns that crank every 2 years. The longer people forget that they're all in the same business, the wider the gap is going to get.
Instead we get a version that means a 100% dead car = a trip tot he mechanic as it cant "command" the connection to start charging.
Yeah I noticed that. But you can always use a 12V charger or jump-start to get the low voltage systems up and running enough to receive the command. A hassle, but not nearly as bad as towing.
.By allowing the car to switch between DC or AC current as the situation requires. DC requires more hardware on the charging unit, but allows much faster charging because the car doesn't have to manage heat from conversion
Most car chargers convert the AC to higher voltage DC and then use high frequency AC through a small transformer and then back to the DC level of the battery. Even with all those conversions this can be done end-to-end at greater than 92 percent efficiency. The challenge is that there is a desire (requirement?) to have isolation between the car battery and the grid and transformers that can transfer that kind of power at 60Hz would be very large and heavy. You also have to contend with the voltage change of the battery as it charges, so no fixed ratios.
Power conversion is an interesting area with lots of active development.
Of course, the charger being able to supply such high power to a car is predicated on the charger having that kind of power available to it. You won't get charge times on the order of one hour from a typical residential installation - not unless you have your own substation.
One could have a battery powered charger. It could charge at 6kW for much of the day and then dump that at a much higher rate into the car battery. It's not optimal, but it could provide fast charging of the car without increasing the peak power usage of the home.
Slashdot Mirror
TFA is accompanied by a terrible image of two head scans. They are obviously not sized the same. One skull is about 50 percent larger than the other. I'm not a radiologist, but the scans appear to be different resolutions too. It's like they wanted to show people "different brains sizes" so they deliberately chose images heads with different sizes so we'd get the point. Lies, damn lies (the pictures I mean).
The plug really should be in front, right in the center. Not sure why they tend to be on the side - as if you're going to pull up to a charging station and stand there pumping electrons for 6 hours.
Oh, that's been possible for at least a decade and is easier than this. You just transfer one nasty gene (there are several choices) into a flu virus and let it go. It's the targeting specific people that's new. But still, what could go wrong? The fact that people actually think they could control something like that is proof of some kind of god complex.
Why is you web browser sized so wide? My display is 1680 and I only use 2/3 of the width for this. I suppose if you go to jumbo fonts it might be OK, but then resolution is not what you need.
Not even with Bluray.
FTFA: "[A] person who scored 100 a century ago would score 70 today". So this means the scale has been adjusted and what we call average today would have been quite smart a century ago. You can't measure absolute IQ of a society, but you can do comparative studies of different societies or the same society at different times in its history.
Perhaps, but we also use it now. We teach and use it on our electronic devices. Remember the "desktop metaphor"? People including kids regularly manipulate things through at least one layer of abstraction. We build this in starting around 3 years old these days.
Example:
My kid wants some new song on moms iPod, we have to "get it" on there. They navigate through the "store" to find it, then "buy it" and now it resides somewhere on the iPod where it wasn't before. While we take if for granted, this virtual world is far more abstract than buying a physical CD (record, tape) off the store shelf and then having to put it in/on a physical device to play it.
I have often suspected one of the reasons bilingual people tend to score as smarter is that they have abstracted the physical world away from the concept of "the word is the thing" out of necessity. Once you have a more abstract concept of a thing with words associated with it, you can think about it somehow at a more abstract level. I wonder if some of our virtual things these days are giving some of that benefit.
That and the fact that they teach reading earlier - my first grader could read most of this post, whereas I remember reading Dick and Jane around that age.
I thought SSL in general was susceptible to man in the middle attacks, so ANY app that uses it would be too. That doesn't mean a death knell. It means something like Domain Keys need to be used to make these even more secure.
You sir have learned the lesson from Age of Empires well. Always go out an mine the remote resources first - then when they run out and people are fighting, you'll have plenty of supply back home.
Unfortunately in the US, we export coal (for example) while offering subsidies to those companies.
If by "better than" you mean more knowledgeable then I'd agree, otherwise go fuck yourself. There is a fine line between confidence and arrogance - make sure you keep yourself on the right side if it.
BTW, when I was nearing the end of college a friend of mine pointed out that I had this very problem. Being better at something doesn't make it OK to be an ass. I took that to heart and worked hard on fixing it over the years and that effort has probably paid off more than going to college.
Nope. That just allows higher clock speeds. AMD is getting nead 4GHz too these day. I also specifically said "single core per-clock performance". This means architectural changes - significant ones.
Citation please. I don't buy that hand waving mumbo jumbo for a second without a reference - could be your wording but you even say it sound strange ;-) So I'm still wondering.
Gotta agree that AMD cut all the wrong things under Ruiz and it's cost them dearly.
Why does Mesa even exist? It was supposed to be a software implementation of OpenGL, but it never had good enough performance for much of anything. Instead it became some sort of wrapper for OpenGL drivers. They said it could be used as a fallback for any features not implemented in the hardware drivers (but with terrible performance). And now with the LLVM pipe driver it's not even used for software rendering any more. Somehow it just keeps sticking around. What's up with that?
AMD is getting spanked badly in per-core performance. AMD was actually quite competitive a while back. From the benchmarks it looks like Intel had a very substantial leap in per-core performance with one generation of their core architecture. What did they do that made such a huge gain? And it's not that they're ahead on fab process. The single core per-clock performance jumped. What's up with that? How'd they do it?
Nope. Because when those 2 percent of packets are lost, they not only need to be retransmitted but TCP backs off on transmission speed because it thinks there is congestion on the network. By getting helping the packets get through TCP will not throttle itself.
I didn't see the compression built in part? The correction allows better utilization but that's different than compression.
Yeah, but you have to consider how they do math. You assume they calculate profit based on usage and rates. The reality is they calculate the rate based on the desired profit and usage. So when you use less data (fewer retransmits) they will just charge you more for the bits that get through.
I thought people needed memory management, window management, font management, text rendering capability, graphics drawing, backing store, OpenGL, composited desktops, the ability to sync sound and video, stuff like that. You must mean that network transparency is the one feature that sets X apart.
In fact it's the only part of X that's still relevant. KMS, DRI, cairo, pango, GTK or QT, Gnome or KDE libs etc have taken over almost every part of X. Wayland simply acknowledges this and aims for simplicity by allowing those other parts of a modern system to do their jobs and doing little else. Networked display will show up at some point via some method that's better than VNC too.
ARM is killing all the other companies in a blood bath of competition. Meanwhile Intel is absolutely dominating in fabrication. The foundries don't feel a need to compete with Intel because x86 isn't their market so they don't feel the need to worry.
ARM is competing with itself. With all those companies making ARM chips they have significant price competition which will lead to reduced R&D budgets. Meanwhile if you want top performance there is only one game in town and they get to charge top dollar. If Intel ever does view ARM as a threat, they can just license the designs like everyone else and throw their own GPU and radio hardware into the mix on a more advanced process for less money. Or perhaps they'll license ARM instruction set only and slap both ARM and x86 decoders on their existing cores, along with a GPU, radio, and better process.
Meanwhile I wonder which ARMs even have instructions like divide or reciprocal square root.
Intel is not playing the same game. With everyone else (except AMD) making ARM devices on older process nodes, Intel should not make ARM chips because that would create the perception of competition and force TSMC and GF to advance their process. So long as all the foundry customers appear to be competing with each other it looks like a close race and there may be less pressure to advance. The further Intel stays away from their products, the less those guys will feel like they are competing with Intel and they will not worry about the process gap so much - they're still close to their "competitors" capability after all.
Everyone seems to have forgotten what business they're in. Those who can design have gone fabless while those who can fab now have more than enough customers to not care about process advancement so long as they can keep up with their perceived competition. In fact, all those customers probably slow them down with countless designs that each need scheduling and a design tweak or two. Meanwhile Intel turns that crank every 2 years. The longer people forget that they're all in the same business, the wider the gap is going to get.
Something like 0.3mm would be great. Then you can cut motor laminations. This would be much closer to replicating its own part than the other guys.
Yeah I noticed that. But you can always use a 12V charger or jump-start to get the low voltage systems up and running enough to receive the command. A hassle, but not nearly as bad as towing.
Most car chargers convert the AC to higher voltage DC and then use high frequency AC through a small transformer and then back to the DC level of the battery. Even with all those conversions this can be done end-to-end at greater than 92 percent efficiency. The challenge is that there is a desire (requirement?) to have isolation between the car battery and the grid and transformers that can transfer that kind of power at 60Hz would be very large and heavy. You also have to contend with the voltage change of the battery as it charges, so no fixed ratios.
Power conversion is an interesting area with lots of active development.
One could have a battery powered charger. It could charge at 6kW for much of the day and then dump that at a much higher rate into the car battery. It's not optimal, but it could provide fast charging of the car without increasing the peak power usage of the home.