Yes, in principle that could happen (as I said in my post), but the potential barrier is absolutely gigantic, I mean the probability of tunnelling a single atom from earth to the Sun is so vanishingly small to be utterly negligable. And you are talking about the whole atmosphere? Get real!
I guess you're referring to the original (not available for sale) RC heli?
I guess it is plausible that it is relatively easy to fly. The problem is though I bet a bunch of people are going to buy one of the other mini RC helis (that are NOT easy to fly) and be very disappointed when they crash and/or hurt someone on its first flight.
Interesting. I had always assumed it was just a matter of numbers. Like, by the time of Columbus, Europeans had already traveled a bit and had collected a vast number of diseases and resistances, whereas the Indians were comparatively isolated. Presumably, some diseases endemic to the Indian population did cause problems for Europeans, but there were simply much fewer of them that it was less of a problem than the vast storehouse imposed on the Indians by Europeans.
Well, there is actually a reason why that could not happen. The weather system doesn't contain that much energy.
Speaking of probabilities, once you get to quantum mechanics, the probability of practically *anything* happening is non-zero, so tiny to be irrelevant. Like, the probability of an object spontaneously jumping a few feet in the air due to a quantum fluctuation is non-zero, but small enough (10^-60 or so?) that the probability of seeing it happen, anywhere in the universe, anytime in the lifetime of the universe, is much much smaller than 1.
Ie, the moral is, knowing whether or not a probability is non-zero doesn't help. You need to actually do the calculation and find out exactly how probable it is.
The phrase "cold war" refers to East vs West conflict (by no means was it restricted to the USA, many parts of Europe were affected too, to a much greater extent in fact). The "iron curtain" refers to the general lack of information from the East getting to the outside world.
Irrespective of when these terms were invented, the seeds were sown well before world war II.
Think really hard and do some research before you buy an RC helicopter. They are not easy to fly, and it takes a *lot* of practice to even get to the first step of being able to just hover.
Expect to have frequent, expensive crashes while learning how to fly. You will do save yourself a huge amount of time if you spend a few hours (or even a few minutes) browsing some RC forums before toy buy. eg, http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/index.php is a good start.
Also, a mini RC helicopter is much harder to fly than a larger, specially designed trainer. Be warned.
Not really, the best guess neutrino mass is at least a couple of orders of magnitude smaller than what would be required to explain all the dark matter. So, rather than being a large compinent of dark matter, at best they are a very small component.
Is this evidence that it is getting harder to make money from spam, and therefore spammers are resorting to attacking each other? If some group of spammers can make their spam legal while making the other-guy's spam illegal, they stand to corner the market - at least for big spammers. Then, any spammers spammer not in the ESPC cartel who make enough money to get noticed in RL gets a knock on the door from the FBI, while ESPC spams away untouched. (Small-time spammers will probably always slip under the radar, but I suspect its getting increasingly harder to make money this way, so ESPC don't care as much about it.)
None of this applies to spammers based outside the USA of course.
Does this mean that NSA currently knows of backdoor(s) in BSD, and enjoys playing around with them a little too much? To the extent that when NSA find out that DARPA is funding a project that includes some security auditing of BSD, the NSA force DARPA to can it?
Maybe I am a bit too paranoid - but does anyone have a non-paranoid explanation?
Yes, but it is parallelism at a different level. At assembly language level, the processor is completely sequential. Higher level parallelism (ie, multiple processors) is potentially far more efficient.
Well, just to be picky (I am a physicist;) it isn't _quantum_ as such because that implies there are non-commuting observables, i.e. that it is NOT possible, even in principle, to make measurements on the system without affecting the results of other measurements.
But even on an out-of-order CPU, you CAN completely describe the state of all gates exactly at all times (at least, asuming the behaviour is that of an 'ideal' digital circuit). This is not true for a quantum circuit.
But you have a point, a possible route to higher parallelism is to substantially increase the amount of out-of-order execution. But there are huge barriers to this, it would surely be easier to build an auto-parallelizing compiler (which exist, with variable results).
Sure, but they are only variations on the theme of single threaded execution. There is still only one Instruction Pointer, even if it is not always exactly defined due to out-of-order execution or other trickery. Logically, there is still only a single instruction sequence that appears as if it is executed in order. It is nothing like the concurrent processing of, say, the brain, or even a transputer.
Even hyperthreading is only a minor improvement in parallelism, exchanging one instruction pointer for a small number (2? 4?). Hardly a different architecture.
Hmm, I would bet money (not _much_ money, mind you) that there is some paragraph of some subclause somwhere that says that you must inform M$ whenever you increase the number of computers, and pay the extra fees for them for the partial yer (or maybe even a full year?).
Hmm, in my experience, from occasional glances at whatever spam I see before I delete it, 90%+ of it is actually fraudulent, or otherwise illegal (prescription drugs, etc).
I would want a convincing demonstration that this spammer is 'honest', the record of the profession doesn't warrant giving them the benefit of the doubt.
I agree that it is very hard to fit through a window. Unfortunately, that only means that being forced through one would be rather painful.
For a real example, when a cockpit window blows out, British Airways flight 5390. This link doesn't describe the event itself in much detail, but I do remember that he only survived through a pretty heroic effort by the flight attendants (like, his ankles were severly bruised from where they were holding onto him, all his clothes were blown off, etc). And this was only at 17,300 ft, it would have been much worse (certainly fatal) at 30,000 ft - even if the pilot had not been blown completely out of the aircraft he would have died of hypoxia after a matter of minutes.
I didn't spend long searching, but I couldn't find any real examples of incidents involving bad things happening with cabin windows, I wouldn't be surprised if the worst-case scanario (window blowing out while plane is cruising at high altitude) hasn't happened yet: the biggest danger is when the aircraft is ascending or descending and the pressure difference is changing rapidly. But this is less catastrophic than a depressurization at high altitude.
The Alpha port of NT used 32-bit legacy mode. I don't think there was ever a native 64-bit version of NT.
The 64-bit "Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition" sounds like beta sofware: "Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition customers will receive a no-charge upgrade to the 64-bit version of Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition when it is available." Doesn't give one confidence.
Do you remember back to a few yers ago, when Itani^H^H^H^H^HMerced was still vapor, and Intel were hyping it to the max?
I was probably not the only person expecting that my next upgrade would not be a Pentium 4 (which I had never heard of yet), but rather a IA-64 machine?
I also remember a few developer surverys going around which indicated that most people expected to be developing for IA-64 within the next year or two.
A couple of years later, and the mainstream is still stuck on 32 bits, the legendary Alpha has been buried by Intel despite (or more cynically, because of) being objectively better than IA-64, and Intel are now saying that the 'mainstream' won't get 64-bit computing until 2007?
My real hope is that AMD succeeds big time, Intel stocks plummet and they decide to abandon IA-64 in exchange for reviving Alpha on the high-end, and licensing x86-64 for the low-end.
Not same type, but same sizeof() & representation. I don't have a copy of the standard handy, and I can't find any other references; perhaps I was mistaken?
Yes, it is particularly difficult and nasty to implement.
Apparantly, it doesn't solve the slow compile problem either, it just means the compiler has to spend extra effort to work out where the definition actually resides before it can be instantiated.
Anyone who's actually used 'export', feel free to correct me of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Life's no fun any more.
Given the rapidly spiralling quality of slashdot in the past months, I suspect this reflects the opinion of most of the editorial staff..
Well, that has a much greater probability than half the atmosphere spontaneously evaporating at least ;)
Yes, in principle that could happen (as I said in my post), but the potential barrier is absolutely gigantic, I mean the probability of tunnelling a single atom from earth to the Sun is so vanishingly small to be utterly negligable. And you are talking about the whole atmosphere? Get real!
I guess it is plausible that it is relatively easy to fly. The problem is though I bet a bunch of people are going to buy one of the other mini RC helis (that are NOT easy to fly) and be very disappointed when they crash and/or hurt someone on its first flight.
What is the alternate explanation?
Speaking of probabilities, once you get to quantum mechanics, the probability of practically *anything* happening is non-zero, so tiny to be irrelevant. Like, the probability of an object spontaneously jumping a few feet in the air due to a quantum fluctuation is non-zero, but small enough (10^-60 or so?) that the probability of seeing it happen, anywhere in the universe, anytime in the lifetime of the universe, is much much smaller than 1.
Ie, the moral is, knowing whether or not a probability is non-zero doesn't help. You need to actually do the calculation and find out exactly how probable it is.
The Z3 was a turing machine, but the proof only came much later.
Irrespective of when these terms were invented, the seeds were sown well before world war II.
Expect to have frequent, expensive crashes while learning how to fly. You will do save yourself a huge amount of time if you spend a few hours (or even a few minutes) browsing some RC forums before toy buy. eg, http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/index.php is a good start.
Also, a mini RC helicopter is much harder to fly than a larger, specially designed trainer. Be warned.
Not really, the best guess neutrino mass is at least a couple of orders of magnitude smaller than what would be required to explain all the dark matter. So, rather than being a large compinent of dark matter, at best they are a very small component.
None of this applies to spammers based outside the USA of course.
Maybe I am a bit too paranoid - but does anyone have a non-paranoid explanation?
You mean Hemos actually read the white paper? What the fuck is Slashdot coming to???
Is it possible this was deliberate?
Yes, but it is parallelism at a different level. At assembly language level, the processor is completely sequential. Higher level parallelism (ie, multiple processors) is potentially far more efficient.
But even on an out-of-order CPU, you CAN completely describe the state of all gates exactly at all times (at least, asuming the behaviour is that of an 'ideal' digital circuit). This is not true for a quantum circuit.
But you have a point, a possible route to higher parallelism is to substantially increase the amount of out-of-order execution. But there are huge barriers to this, it would surely be easier to build an auto-parallelizing compiler (which exist, with variable results).
Even hyperthreading is only a minor improvement in parallelism, exchanging one instruction pointer for a small number (2? 4?). Hardly a different architecture.
Hmm, I would bet money (not _much_ money, mind you) that there is some paragraph of some subclause somwhere that says that you must inform M$ whenever you increase the number of computers, and pay the extra fees for them for the partial yer (or maybe even a full year?).
here
Hmm, in my experience, from occasional glances at whatever spam I see before I delete it, 90%+ of it is actually fraudulent, or otherwise illegal (prescription drugs, etc). I would want a convincing demonstration that this spammer is 'honest', the record of the profession doesn't warrant giving them the benefit of the doubt.
I agree that it is very hard to fit through a window. Unfortunately, that only means that being forced through one would be rather painful.
For a real example, when a cockpit window blows out, British Airways flight 5390. This link doesn't describe the event itself in much detail, but I do remember that he only survived through a pretty heroic effort by the flight attendants (like, his ankles were severly bruised from where they were holding onto him, all his clothes were blown off, etc). And this was only at 17,300 ft, it would have been much worse (certainly fatal) at 30,000 ft - even if the pilot had not been blown completely out of the aircraft he would have died of hypoxia after a matter of minutes.
See also an interesting article on decompression
I didn't spend long searching, but I couldn't find any real examples of incidents involving bad things happening with cabin windows, I wouldn't be surprised if the worst-case scanario (window blowing out while plane is cruising at high altitude) hasn't happened yet: the biggest danger is when the aircraft is ascending or descending and the pressure difference is changing rapidly. But this is less catastrophic than a depressurization at high altitude.
The 64-bit "Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition" sounds like beta sofware: "Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition customers will receive a no-charge upgrade to the 64-bit version of Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition when it is available." Doesn't give one confidence.
I was probably not the only person expecting that my next upgrade would not be a Pentium 4 (which I had never heard of yet), but rather a IA-64 machine?
I also remember a few developer surverys going around which indicated that most people expected to be developing for IA-64 within the next year or two.
A couple of years later, and the mainstream is still stuck on 32 bits, the legendary Alpha has been buried by Intel despite (or more cynically, because of) being objectively better than IA-64, and Intel are now saying that the 'mainstream' won't get 64-bit computing until 2007?
My real hope is that AMD succeeds big time, Intel stocks plummet and they decide to abandon IA-64 in exchange for reviving Alpha on the high-end, and licensing x86-64 for the low-end.
Not same type, but same sizeof() & representation. I don't have a copy of the standard handy, and I can't find any other references; perhaps I was mistaken?
Apparantly, it doesn't solve the slow compile problem either, it just means the compiler has to spend extra effort to work out where the definition actually resides before it can be instantiated.
Anyone who's actually used 'export', feel free to correct me of course.