That's great for Apple that they hired an expert on machine learning.
Now all they need are google sized volumes of data to train their learning algorithms! So-called deep learning is very data hungry. If Apple wants to train their algorithms about the behavior of people, they will need to start saving a TON of data about Apple customers. Could this be the beginning of the end of Apple's excellent privacy policies?
The current rate of warming is about 50 times higher than any warming cycle detected in the geologic record.
So if we attribute the typical Milankovitch Cycle warming rate to be caused by natural orbital change, that would leave another 98% of the warming to be attributed to other, non-Milankovitch causes. Such as man-made global warming.
There is Steele: The SOLE source of the Russian based intel used to create the FISA request
Nope. Wrong. FALSE!
I have just finished re-reading the Nunes Memo, and nowhere does it assert that Steele is "the SOLE source of the Russian based intel used to create the FISA request." That's a narrative the right wing likes to put forth, but the Nunes Memo pointedly never says that.
In fact, the Russia investigation began with an Australian diplomat reporting to the FBI about bragging done by George Papadopoulos, another Trump advisor approached by Russians.
In fact, Carter Page was on the FBI's radar as early as 2013 due to contacts with Russian spies, spies who were later criminally charged. All along, Page's associates remarked how very pro-Russia he was. After Page joined the Trump campaign, he was invited to Russia for "discussions" and traveled there in July 2016. He got permission from the campaign to go, and reported back to the campaign afterwards about his Russian trip. These reasons, all external to the Steele Dossier, are part of why the FBI sought FISA warrants on Page's international communications.
Please, the assertion that the Russia investigation depends solely on the Steele Dossier is flat out false. And while we're on the subject of the Steele Dossier, it's also false to claim it was entirely funded by the Democrats. That oppo research was originally funded by the Washington Free Beacon, a website funded by major GOP. donor Paul Singer. Singer hired Fusion GPS to do oppo research on several GOP candidates.
The problems arising from the "doors" solution are "pressurization" and "structural integrity at altitude".
Actually, big planes have plenty of emergency doors, and they very rarely go "pop." According to https://aviation-safety.net/ai... a boeing 747-400 has 10 exits that can be used in emergency, plus a cockpit hatch.
Speaking only for myself, I am forgetful enough that if I don't immediately return the phone to one pocket or another, disaster may ensue. (Of course, this assumes the continued existence of phones so tiny they actually fit in pockets!) My phone unlocks when the appropriate finger touches the sensor on the back as I reach into a pocket, but I can see how face-up phone storage would imply different optimizations.
Honestly, why is a fingerprint scanner built into the display better than one on the back? On my phone, the scanner is high up in the center of the back, right where my index finger goes naturally when I grab the phone. This makes one-handed operation smooth and easy.
Seems to me a scanner on the front is just an ergonomically inferior gimmick. Perhaps some enlightened soul can cure my ignorance...
If you are referring to declaring current voting systems "critical infrastructure" I hardly see that as a major push to nationalize. If you are referring to something else, please be so kind as to provide infor,mation and links.
By the same argument, shouldn't Trump stick to what he knows? Such as preserving a huge inheritance, real estate development, managing beauty contests, replacing trophy wives, and clever tax evasion strategies?
The argument for Trump is that his success in his chosen fields, real estate development and building a personal "brand", qualifies him for the many disparate things required of a president. Why doesn't the same argument apply to Hawking? Despite extreme physical disabilities, he's a financial and scientific success with a powerful personal "brand." You have not provided any reason to value Hawking's political opinions less than Trump's.
If in the future Stephen Hawking has his science proven wrong is he then considered ignorant? Isaac Newton was proven wrong, he was ignorant. Did anyone prove Trump wrong? Or is it just opinion that doesn't have scientific merit?
Isaac Newton was so close to "right" that we still use Newton's equations instead of Einstein's 100 years after Einstein proved Newton wrong. Hawking is probably "wrong" in a similar way.
OTOH, Trump has proved himself wrong each time he has contradicted himself. If someone emits a pair of contradictory statements, then one of the pair must be false, and in most of Trump's cases, there's no room for "so close to right." So how often has Trump emitted contradictory pairs? See this list. I know you may disagree with the politics of the source, but if Trump made those statements, then Trump is wrong - in a big way - hundreds of times.
Because shorter wavelengths of light are preferentially scattered off the molecules in the earth's atmosphere (that's also why the sunset is orange - - when a light ray (low angled at sunset) passes thru enough atmosphere, most of the blue and green get scattered away). Why does light scatter that way? Because the molecules are much smaller than the wavelengths involved, but the closer the size ratio, the bigger the interaction. Why? There's probably some confusing equation in electrodynamics that explains it based on Maxwell's equations, but it's not a very satisfying explanation. And if it is satisfying, the "Why are Maxwell's equations true" question will probably be a stumper. Or the why after that. I don't think you can actually get to the bottom of the "why" questions.
Google brought in Sun's CEO Jonathan Schwartz to tell the jury that Sun had already blessed Google's use of Java. Perhaps the jury believed Mr Schwartz's testimony.
This architect doesn't seem to know enough about the physics of optimizing convective flow. It should be shaped more like a nuclear plant cooling tower, with a broader base, bigger cross section air inlets at the bottom, a bit of taper, and much larger diameter to height ratio.
> and then to turn around and sell the details of your life for even more money.
Not exactly. Google's ad model depends on them knowing a whole lot more about your life than anyone else. They don't sell the details of your life, they sell access to you based on their superior knowledge the details of your life, If they sold the details, their knowledge wouldn't be very superior for very long, would it? That's why it actually behooves Google to keep your details secret from their customers and only sell access.
Scientific Linux 6.0 thru 6.6 also use kernel 2.6.32. I'm seeing kernel-2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64.rpm dated 15-Dec-2015 as the newest SL6 kernel, The Upstream Vendor says they'll be supporting EL6 for 10 or 11 years, so roughly until 2020. Perhaps they'll be backporting changes from newer kernels to 2.6.32?
Gosh, I'd love to find the link and read the whole context of your Daniel Webster quote. I tried to googled it, and my meager search skills were unable to locate the source.
And, given the stuff Webster has written elsewhere about the public health approach, see http://annals.org/article.aspx... this quote doesn't really sound like Webster...
From what I've read about AMD's Zen architecture, they've dispensed with the "two single threaded cores per module" architecture and now have SMT allowing two threads in each core according to this, much like "hyper threading" on Intel chips.
If that's the case, and we can expect a 32 core chip to execute 64 threads, then that's an awful lot of threads to keep supplied with data and instructions. In comparison, the biggest Intel Xeon I know about, the E5-2699 v3 has 18 cores, 36 threads, 45MB of last level cache, and 4 memory channels (68GB/sec to RAM). Intel sticks pretty close to that 1.25MB cache per core in their big Xeons. So if you adhered to Intel's apparent rules, a 32 core 64 thread chip would need 80MB of LLC and maybe 6 memory channels. Anandtech estimates 5.7 billion transistors for the big Xeon. Scaling the Intel design from 18 to 32 cores would require over 10 billion transistors! That number leads me to believe that an SMT 32 core 64 thread chip built with 2016 technology would not be practical.
What might be practical is a chip with some "heavy" cores optimized for balls-to-the-wall floating point execution, and other "lighter" cores for lower power integer tasks. This has been done in "octocore" mobile phone chips and called a big LITTLE architecture. The idea is that the OS and various decoding and checksumming tasks can stay resident on the low power light cores, while the heavy cores do things like game physics and photo noise reduction. Because the multiprocessing is not symmetric, the OS kernel needs special rules to assign tasks to cores. Which leads me to wonder if AMD has something like big LITTLE up its sleeve for 32 core Zens.
"it could begin the next instruction while still computing the current one, as long as the current one wasn't required by the next"
Doesn't this go without saying?
Back in the day, pipelining - issuing, say, a new multiply instruction every clock, even though several earlier multiplies were still working their way thru the pipeline - was too expensive for most architectures. An instruction might take multiple clock cycles to execute, but in most architectures the multi-clock instruction would tie up the functional unit until the computation was done - you might be able to issue a new multiply every 10 clocks or something. Pipelining takes more gates and more design because you don't want one slow stage to determine the clock rate of the whole design.
Which leads us to the early RISC computers, I can recall an early Sun SPARC architecture that lacked a hardware integer multiply instruction. The idea at the time was every instruction should take one clock, and any instruction that demanded too long a clock should be unrolled in software. So this version of SPARC used shifts and adds to do a multiply. At the time, that was a pure RISC design. One of the key insights in RISC, still useful today, is to separate main memory access from other computations.
The CPU design course I took in the late 80's said Seymour Cray invented that idea of separating loads and stores from computation, because even then, even with static RAM as main memory, accessing main memory was slower than accessing registers. So by separating loading from RAM into registers and storing from registers into RAM, the compiler could pre-schedule loads and stores such that they would not stall functional units. Cray also invented pipelining, another key feature in most modern CPUs (I'm not sure when ARM adopted pipelining, but i'm pretty sure it's in some ARM architectures have it now). Of course Cray had vector registers and the consequent vector SIMD hardware.
I don't think Cray invented out of order execution, but I don't think he needed it; in Cray architectures, it would be the compiler's job to order instructions to prevent stalls. In CISC architectures, OOO is mostly a trick for preventing stalls without the compiler needing to worry about it (also, with many models and versions of the Intel instruction architecture out there, it would be painful to have to compile differently for each and every model). So, for example, the load part of an instruction could be scheduled early enough that the data would be in a register by the time the rest of the instruction needed it.
Anyway, the upshot is modern CPU designs have a bigger debt to Cray than to any other single design.
Now that the second and third largest tech companies have open sourced their machine learning algorithms for research use, it's time for the world's most valuable tech company to do the same. OK, Apple, show us your stuff!
Any time gambling gets mixed with sports you have a mechanism where cheating can get you money. Whether it's the 1919 Chicago "Black Sox" or one of these point shavers gambling always has the potential to lead to sports cheating.
Imagine if we owned our personal information as a form of intellectual property? Big corporations have gotten pretty good at protecting their intellectual property rights. Maybe it's time for us ordinary folks to own our personal information. Then we could license it to companies for particular uses, but they wouldn't have the right to sell it without our permission.
It does not crash the copy of Chrome running on my Win7 machine. I let the machine automatically update when it feels like it; the machine is currently running Chrome 45.0.2454.93
When I paste http://a/%%30%30 into the address bar, I seem to get a web search for 30 30, with the first two hits being.30-30 Winchester - Wikipedia & 30/30 Poetry. I get the exact same behavior pasting into the search box. So it seems the current default behavior is to treat a malformed URL as a text search.
P.S. This meme should be a bonanza for the good folks at 30/30 poetry!
Diesels are better at CO and unburnt hydrocarbons, because they always take in a full charge of air, no matter how small an amount of fuel is being injected (therefore combustion is more complete). They may be marginally better at CO2, but that is mostly because they tend to be under powered compared to "performance cars".
Radio is very noisy. Why would any advanced civilization think that it would be a great way to communicate over long distances?
Because microwaves near the 21cm band pass through dust clouds that would block visible light and various other frequency bands, so its good for really long distance communication. Hydrogen 21cm detectors are also a good way to measure the large scale structure of the universe. See The Watering Hole.
At the very least we should be looking for spread spectrum modulation methods. Amplitude and Frequency modulation are so last century. On the other hand, a good spread spectrum signal looks like band limited white noise, so we need better methods to detect it.
Slashdot Mirror
That's great for Apple that they hired an expert on machine learning.
Now all they need are google sized volumes of data to train their learning algorithms! So-called deep learning is very data hungry. If Apple wants to train their algorithms about the behavior of people, they will need to start saving a TON of data about Apple customers. Could this be the beginning of the end of Apple's excellent privacy policies?
The current rate of warming is about 50 times higher than any warming cycle detected in the geologic record.
So if we attribute the typical Milankovitch Cycle warming rate to be caused by natural orbital change, that would leave another 98% of the warming to be attributed to other, non-Milankovitch causes. Such as man-made global warming.
It isn't just one guy, and that is the problem.
There is Steele: The SOLE source of the Russian based intel used to create the FISA request
Nope. Wrong. FALSE!
I have just finished re-reading the Nunes Memo, and nowhere does it assert that Steele is "the SOLE source of the Russian based intel used to create the FISA request." That's a narrative the right wing likes to put forth, but the Nunes Memo pointedly never says that.
In fact, the Russia investigation began with an Australian diplomat reporting to the FBI about bragging done by George Papadopoulos, another Trump advisor approached by Russians.
In fact, Carter Page was on the FBI's radar as early as 2013 due to contacts with Russian spies, spies who were later criminally charged. All along, Page's associates remarked how very pro-Russia he was. After Page joined the Trump campaign, he was invited to Russia for "discussions" and traveled there in July 2016. He got permission from the campaign to go, and reported back to the campaign afterwards about his Russian trip. These reasons, all external to the Steele Dossier, are part of why the FBI sought FISA warrants on Page's international communications.
Please, the assertion that the Russia investigation depends solely on the Steele Dossier is flat out false. And while we're on the subject of the Steele Dossier, it's also false to claim it was entirely funded by the Democrats. That oppo research was originally funded by the Washington Free Beacon, a website funded by major GOP. donor Paul Singer. Singer hired Fusion GPS to do oppo research on several GOP candidates.
The problems arising from the "doors" solution are "pressurization" and "structural integrity at altitude".
Actually, big planes have plenty of emergency doors, and they very rarely go "pop." According to https://aviation-safety.net/ai... a boeing 747-400 has 10 exits that can be used in emergency, plus a cockpit hatch.
Thank you, Jared, now I understand.
Speaking only for myself, I am forgetful enough that if I don't immediately return the phone to one pocket or another, disaster may ensue. (Of course, this assumes the continued existence of phones so tiny they actually fit in pockets!) My phone unlocks when the appropriate finger touches the sensor on the back as I reach into a pocket, but I can see how face-up phone storage would imply different optimizations.
Honestly, why is a fingerprint scanner built into the display better than one on the back? On my phone, the scanner is high up in the center of the back, right where my index finger goes naturally when I grab the phone. This makes one-handed operation smooth and easy.
Seems to me a scanner on the front is just an ergonomically inferior gimmick. Perhaps some enlightened soul can cure my ignorance...
> You slobbered so much corrupt Clinton knob with that
> post that you need to change your name to Monica.
Observation: Anon Conservative cannot contest the facts so Anon Conservative shifts to personal attacks.
Translation: Anon Conservative is admitting defeat.
If you are referring to declaring current voting systems "critical infrastructure" I hardly see that as a major push to nationalize. If you are referring to something else, please be so kind as to provide infor,mation and links.
By the same argument, shouldn't Trump stick to what he knows? Such as preserving a huge inheritance, real estate development, managing beauty contests, replacing trophy wives, and clever tax evasion strategies?
The argument for Trump is that his success in his chosen fields, real estate development and building a personal "brand", qualifies him for the many disparate things required of a president. Why doesn't the same argument apply to Hawking? Despite extreme physical disabilities, he's a financial and scientific success with a powerful personal "brand." You have not provided any reason to value Hawking's political opinions less than Trump's.
If in the future Stephen Hawking has his science proven wrong is he then considered ignorant? Isaac Newton was proven wrong, he was ignorant. Did anyone prove Trump wrong? Or is it just opinion that doesn't have scientific merit?
Isaac Newton was so close to "right" that we still use Newton's equations instead of Einstein's 100 years after Einstein proved Newton wrong. Hawking is probably "wrong" in a similar way.
OTOH, Trump has proved himself wrong each time he has contradicted himself. If someone emits a pair of contradictory statements, then one of the pair must be false, and in most of Trump's cases, there's no room for "so close to right." So how often has Trump emitted contradictory pairs? See this list. I know you may disagree with the politics of the source, but if Trump made those statements, then Trump is wrong - in a big way - hundreds of times.
Because shorter wavelengths of light are preferentially scattered off the molecules in the earth's atmosphere (that's also why the sunset is orange - - when a light ray (low angled at sunset) passes thru enough atmosphere, most of the blue and green get scattered away). Why does light scatter that way? Because the molecules are much smaller than the wavelengths involved, but the closer the size ratio, the bigger the interaction. Why? There's probably some confusing equation in electrodynamics that explains it based on Maxwell's equations, but it's not a very satisfying explanation. And if it is satisfying, the "Why are Maxwell's equations true" question will probably be a stumper. Or the why after that. I don't think you can actually get to the bottom of the "why" questions.
Google brought in Sun's CEO Jonathan Schwartz to tell the jury that Sun had already blessed Google's use of Java. Perhaps the jury believed Mr Schwartz's testimony.
This architect doesn't seem to know enough about the physics of optimizing convective flow. It should be shaped more like a nuclear plant cooling tower, with a broader base, bigger cross section air inlets at the bottom, a bit of taper, and much larger diameter to height ratio.
> and then to turn around and sell the details of your life for even more money.
Not exactly. Google's ad model depends on them knowing a whole lot more about your life than anyone else. They don't sell the details of your life, they sell access to you based on their superior knowledge the details of your life, If they sold the details, their knowledge wouldn't be very superior for very long, would it? That's why it actually behooves Google to keep your details secret from their customers and only sell access.
Scientific Linux 6.0 thru 6.6 also use kernel 2.6.32. I'm seeing kernel-2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64.rpm dated 15-Dec-2015 as the newest SL6 kernel, The Upstream Vendor says they'll be supporting EL6 for 10 or 11 years, so roughly until 2020. Perhaps they'll be backporting changes from newer kernels to 2.6.32?
Gosh, I'd love to find the link and read the whole context of your Daniel Webster quote. I tried to googled it, and my meager search skills were unable to locate the source.
And, given the stuff Webster has written elsewhere about the public health approach, see http://annals.org/article.aspx... this quote doesn't really sound like Webster...
From what I've read about AMD's Zen architecture, they've dispensed with the "two single threaded cores per module" architecture and now have SMT allowing two threads in each core according to this, much like "hyper threading" on Intel chips.
If that's the case, and we can expect a 32 core chip to execute 64 threads, then that's an awful lot of threads to keep supplied with data and instructions. In comparison, the biggest Intel Xeon I know about, the E5-2699 v3 has 18 cores, 36 threads, 45MB of last level cache, and 4 memory channels (68GB/sec to RAM). Intel sticks pretty close to that 1.25MB cache per core in their big Xeons. So if you adhered to Intel's apparent rules, a 32 core 64 thread chip would need 80MB of LLC and maybe 6 memory channels. Anandtech estimates 5.7 billion transistors for the big Xeon. Scaling the Intel design from 18 to 32 cores would require over 10 billion transistors! That number leads me to believe that an SMT 32 core 64 thread chip built with 2016 technology would not be practical.
What might be practical is a chip with some "heavy" cores optimized for balls-to-the-wall floating point execution, and other "lighter" cores for lower power integer tasks. This has been done in "octocore" mobile phone chips and called a big LITTLE architecture. The idea is that the OS and various decoding and checksumming tasks can stay resident on the low power light cores, while the heavy cores do things like game physics and photo noise reduction. Because the multiprocessing is not symmetric, the OS kernel needs special rules to assign tasks to cores. Which leads me to wonder if AMD has something like big LITTLE up its sleeve for 32 core Zens.
"it could begin the next instruction while still computing the current one, as long as the current one wasn't required by the next " Doesn't this go without saying?
Back in the day, pipelining - issuing, say, a new multiply instruction every clock, even though several earlier multiplies were still working their way thru the pipeline - was too expensive for most architectures. An instruction might take multiple clock cycles to execute, but in most architectures the multi-clock instruction would tie up the functional unit until the computation was done - you might be able to issue a new multiply every 10 clocks or something. Pipelining takes more gates and more design because you don't want one slow stage to determine the clock rate of the whole design.
Which leads us to the early RISC computers, I can recall an early Sun SPARC architecture that lacked a hardware integer multiply instruction. The idea at the time was every instruction should take one clock, and any instruction that demanded too long a clock should be unrolled in software. So this version of SPARC used shifts and adds to do a multiply. At the time, that was a pure RISC design. One of the key insights in RISC, still useful today, is to separate main memory access from other computations.
The CPU design course I took in the late 80's said Seymour Cray invented that idea of separating loads and stores from computation, because even then, even with static RAM as main memory, accessing main memory was slower than accessing registers. So by separating loading from RAM into registers and storing from registers into RAM, the compiler could pre-schedule loads and stores such that they would not stall functional units. Cray also invented pipelining, another key feature in most modern CPUs (I'm not sure when ARM adopted pipelining, but i'm pretty sure it's in some ARM architectures have it now). Of course Cray had vector registers and the consequent vector SIMD hardware.
I don't think Cray invented out of order execution, but I don't think he needed it; in Cray architectures, it would be the compiler's job to order instructions to prevent stalls. In CISC architectures, OOO is mostly a trick for preventing stalls without the compiler needing to worry about it (also, with many models and versions of the Intel instruction architecture out there, it would be painful to have to compile differently for each and every model). So, for example, the load part of an instruction could be scheduled early enough that the data would be in a register by the time the rest of the instruction needed it.
Anyway, the upshot is modern CPU designs have a bigger debt to Cray than to any other single design.
Now that the second and third largest tech companies have open sourced their machine learning algorithms for research use, it's time for the world's most valuable tech company to do the same. OK, Apple, show us your stuff!
Any time gambling gets mixed with sports you have a mechanism where cheating can get you money. Whether it's the 1919 Chicago "Black Sox" or one of these point shavers gambling always has the potential to lead to sports cheating.
Imagine if we owned our personal information as a form of intellectual property? Big corporations have gotten pretty good at protecting their intellectual property rights. Maybe it's time for us ordinary folks to own our personal information. Then we could license it to companies for particular uses, but they wouldn't have the right to sell it without our permission.
It does not crash the copy of Chrome running on my Win7 machine. I let the machine automatically update when it feels like it; the machine is currently running Chrome 45.0.2454.93
When I paste http: //a/%%30%30 into the address bar, I seem to get a web search for 30 30, with the first two hits being .30-30 Winchester - Wikipedia & 30/30 Poetry. I get the exact same behavior pasting into the search box. So it seems the current default behavior is to treat a malformed URL as a text search.
P.S. This meme should be a bonanza for the good folks at 30/30 poetry!
Diesels are better at CO and unburnt hydrocarbons, because they always take in a full charge of air, no matter how small an amount of fuel is being injected (therefore combustion is more complete). They may be marginally better at CO2, but that is mostly because they tend to be under powered compared to "performance cars".
Radio is very noisy. Why would any advanced civilization think that it would be a great way to communicate over long distances?
Because microwaves near the 21cm band pass through dust clouds that would block visible light and various other frequency bands, so its good for really long distance communication. Hydrogen 21cm detectors are also a good way to measure the large scale structure of the universe. See The Watering Hole.
At the very least we should be looking for spread spectrum modulation methods. Amplitude and Frequency modulation are so last century. On the other hand, a good spread spectrum signal looks like band limited white noise, so we need better methods to detect it.