You don't have to 'trust' academics. You can read the reports yourself, look at the emails themselves, and determine whether the reports make sense, or whether the misconduct actually seems bad. To me, threatening to 'change peer review' to keep out papers you don't like is prima facie bad.
I agree with you, but I'm not very enthusiastic about it. As soon as the meetings become public, the events of the meeting either devolve into showmanship (like in UK parliament) or become dreadfully dull (like in the US congress). The politicians move the actual discussion and policy making gets done else-where.
The United States in its 240 years of history, in one way or another has interfered in the politics of nearly every country in the world.
If that's the standard you're going by, then El Salvador has definitely interfered in the politics of America, too. For that matter, the FMLN made attempts at interfering, too.
all the countries where it directly interfered and even overthrew or attempted to overthrow democratically elected governments, such as.......El Salvador
Worth mentioning that a lot of poor people are leaving. Lot's of people leaving. But it's kind of sucky to force people to move because they can't find a house. We should instead build enough houses for everyone.
I'm curious what exactly you'd like to run at 20 Ghz through the general purpose CPU registers that can't be done better/faster with extensions using specialized hardware
Anything (pretty much) can be done faster with specialized hardware (hardware RAIDs are usually slower than software RAIDs for some reason), but the more processing you can get done between frames at 50fps the better.
I refuse to talk to anyone about the gold standard unless they can also knowledgeably discuss the bi-metallic standard. That's my shibboleth for people who are too ignorant to talk to on the topic.
What kind of 'new' stuff do you want? I don't really want anything new from Intel's architecture, I just want a faster chip. New instructions seem dumb to me (but I'm sure some people want them).
Intel gave up on increasing clock speeds way back when they hit 4Ghz
Well yeah, they 'gave up' because the technology wouldn't allow them to increase the clock speed. Halfing the die size didn't give an automatic speed boost like it had in previous generations.
But if the next halfing of the die size does give a speed boost, do you think Intel will reject it? Of course not. A doubling of clock speed (all else equal) gives you better performance than adding an extra core.
The only thing inherently inefficient about parallel computing
Not all things are parallelizable. Sometimes you must wait for part A to finish before part B can begin. The obvious example is anything requiring user input (like games). Another example is databases.....when they wan to maintain ACID, they must do some things sequentially (which is unfortunately a huge bottleneck). See also, Amdahl's law.
If I recall correctly, the first time someone got over 8 Ghz was back in ~2004, over a decade ago. I know clock speed isn't everything, but parallelism will only get you so far. I really hope before we get to 5nm chips, we can get some 20 Ghz clock speeds. The amount of work you'll be able to do on a single thread will be amazing.
I'm not clear about your point there.......Based upon your insistence, I just looked at it,
ok, good.
The point is, Windows is dead. It's only a small portion of the revenue anymore, and falling. Their own internal goal is to make money based on the cloud. That is what the CEO wants. That is the only way they can grow revenue to the point that they are worth $1trillion. If we're lucky, they'll die, but we're not lucky.
Except all the money "given to banks" in the bailout was a *loan* that's been paid back in full
Lies....TARP was paid back through other FED initiatives to give money to banks.....like QE or actually buying mortgage backed securities at above market price.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have to 'trust' academics. You can read the reports yourself, look at the emails themselves, and determine whether the reports make sense, or whether the misconduct actually seems bad. To me, threatening to 'change peer review' to keep out papers you don't like is prima facie bad.
Blind trust is academics (or anyone) is foolish.
I agree with you, but I'm not very enthusiastic about it. As soon as the meetings become public, the events of the meeting either devolve into showmanship (like in UK parliament) or become dreadfully dull (like in the US congress). The politicians move the actual discussion and policy making gets done else-where.
it's best to be cautious in regards to accusations by US government, especially when very little evidence has been presented.
I definitely agree with you.
The United States in its 240 years of history, in one way or another has interfered in the politics of nearly every country in the world.
If that's the standard you're going by, then El Salvador has definitely interfered in the politics of America, too. For that matter, the FMLN made attempts at interfering, too.
US didn't try to overthrow any governments in El Salvador.
Especially seeing as the way this has been covered 50% of Democrats now think the Russians hacked voting machines
"Truth has a liberal bias," right?
all the countries where it directly interfered and even overthrew or attempted to overthrow democratically elected governments, such as.......El Salvador
When did that happen?
Developers would happily build both luxury and affordable housing if cities would approve it.
bi-metallic standard.
Worth mentioning that a lot of poor people are leaving. Lot's of people leaving. But it's kind of sucky to force people to move because they can't find a house. We should instead build enough houses for everyone.
I'm curious what exactly you'd like to run at 20 Ghz through the general purpose CPU registers that can't be done better/faster with extensions using specialized hardware
Anything (pretty much) can be done faster with specialized hardware (hardware RAIDs are usually slower than software RAIDs for some reason), but the more processing you can get done between frames at 50fps the better.
How many people really need faster or more powerful computers?
*raise my hand*.
Imagine having an embedded CPU running at 10 GhZ.
So like, 10% improvement per generation?
I refuse to talk to anyone about the gold standard unless they can also knowledgeably discuss the bi-metallic standard. That's my shibboleth for people who are too ignorant to talk to on the topic.
What kind of 'new' stuff do you want? I don't really want anything new from Intel's architecture, I just want a faster chip. New instructions seem dumb to me (but I'm sure some people want them).
Intel gave up on increasing clock speeds way back when they hit 4Ghz
Well yeah, they 'gave up' because the technology wouldn't allow them to increase the clock speed. Halfing the die size didn't give an automatic speed boost like it had in previous generations.
But if the next halfing of the die size does give a speed boost, do you think Intel will reject it? Of course not. A doubling of clock speed (all else equal) gives you better performance than adding an extra core.
Not everyone is putting their crap on AWS. Some of us still like our crap local. Not everything is 'in the cloud' or even 'web based.'
Learn C#6 ....Nothing else scales.
Lies lol
The only thing inherently inefficient about parallel computing
Not all things are parallelizable. Sometimes you must wait for part A to finish before part B can begin. The obvious example is anything requiring user input (like games). Another example is databases.....when they wan to maintain ACID, they must do some things sequentially (which is unfortunately a huge bottleneck). See also, Amdahl's law.
If I recall correctly, the first time someone got over 8 Ghz was back in ~2004, over a decade ago. I know clock speed isn't everything, but parallelism will only get you so far. I really hope before we get to 5nm chips, we can get some 20 Ghz clock speeds. The amount of work you'll be able to do on a single thread will be amazing.
I'm not clear about your point there.......Based upon your insistence, I just looked at it,
ok, good.
The point is, Windows is dead. It's only a small portion of the revenue anymore, and falling. Their own internal goal is to make money based on the cloud. That is what the CEO wants. That is the only way they can grow revenue to the point that they are worth $1trillion. If we're lucky, they'll die, but we're not lucky.
Microsoft is not cheap but they are less likely to shove extra licenses down your throat just because they can.
Not sure that's true, I've seen them try to push MSDN licenses pretty hard.
I'm not clear about your point there.
Did you read the article I linked to?
The big question for me as regards cloud computing is why Sun didn't manage to establish a dominant position.
My guess is because they were focused on scientific computing, not web hosting. At least, that's the impression I got at the time.
Except all the money "given to banks" in the bailout was a *loan* that's been paid back in full
Lies....TARP was paid back through other FED initiatives to give money to banks.....like QE or actually buying mortgage backed securities at above market price.
I don't know what you think I said, but in general:
Postgres > MS SQL > mysql
But there's no reason to pay either Oracle's or Microsoft's licensing costs.