It strikes me that a "script" is a list of things to do in order (such as a theatrical script), with a high level of abstraction.
A program on the other hand is more low-level. It is concerned with data structures and flow control and is generally harder work to write and interpret.
It is quite possible to write script in C (hello-world is a good example - it does everything in order, and what it does do it calls from elsewhere). Likewise, in most languages it is possible to write a complex program. Of course, C is much better adapted to "programming", and, say shell is better adapted to "scripting", but this does not mean that they could not do the same job as each other.
Therefore I conclude: - The distinction between "programming" and "scripting" is not discrete, but continuous. - For a job at a particular point on the scale, almost any language could be used, but some languages will be better than others.
Have a look at this. (The Easter Egg is in the JavaScript). Sorry about the rest of the site - the web server seems rather badly configured atm. And sorry to Mozilla users - it doesn't seem to like the Egg much. I don't know why (anyone?).
Just to be a little more accurate with the terms: The epicentre (or epicenter if you want) was not 4.7 miles beneath the surface - the focus was. The epicentre is always a point on the surface - usually directly above the focus.
Trivial: to confirm your identity, all the police have to do is look at you.
Note: the police do this already. Every time one of them walks past you they are scanning your face and checking it against a database of wanted people stored on a device that every policeman carries called a "brain". Indeed, every person has a "brain" buried in their head and the police periodically distribute pictures of suspects to these "brains" via the popular media.
TJ
(Yes, I'm being sarcastic, and yes I know there are privacy issues involved, but they are no where near as severe as some people are making out)
What you really want is for the other person's head up display to be monitoring their iris. If they look at you and their pupil dilates, when it adds an entry into their database to this effect. If you then look at them, your head up display displays a set of red cross-hairs for a possible target...
Thinking about it, this could create something of a Cupid's Arrow Effect. Say you are looking at someone in a room and the lights go out - instantly you end up targetted in their display.
Maybe a more reliable system would be needed, but it sure would be interesting.
otoh, how attractive can a person be wearing goggles?
> No, there's no "class of people" who shouldn't be allowed to produce. As far as I'm concerned, the Chinese have it right (about this one thing only). One child per couple. No more.
I agree with the sentiment, but it makes me wonder: Does being an only child have an impact on the socialogical and physcological development of children? What about the parents? Does restricting parents to one child (which, after all is targetted at heavy population fall) affect the stability of society as a whole?
- The size quoted is die area, not package size. As the article says it IS very, very big.
- This processor is not aimed at the consumer market (ie. it is not intended to replace whatever you have in your machine). The price and production volumes reflect this.
- CPI ([clock] cycles per instruction) is just as important as clock frequency. And to a limited extent so is the instruction set architecture, cache sizes, branch prediction mechanism, datapath width (the number of bits), data bus width, external bus architecture and a whole load of other stuff. Trust that Intel have done their maths and have produced a product that will provide the performance required for the target market.
I fear Slashdot is rapidly becoming infamous not just for high server loads, but for somewhat uninformed "but can you run Linux on it?" style postings.
(Please note, I have no objection to people actually asking "can you run Linux on it?" - just people making uninformed comments)
I just thought about how this related to the Data Protection Act (1998 iirc). If someone were to create a link to an individual's website, and write: Here is a link (nb. this link does not work) to Joe Bloggs' website, does that link constitute personal data? After all, a link is like saying Here is Joe Bloggs' address:..., and an address (so long as there is a name associated with it) is personal data.
If a link is personal data, does that mean that to link to Joe Bloggs' website you must either be registered with the Data Protection People or have Joe Bloggs' permission? In fact, wouldn't it be worse than that because you would have to make a reasonable effort to ensure that the personal data was secure (placing it on the internet is nothing like secure).
Any thoughts? Can we all go out and start sueing our friends?
TJ
PS. Appologies to our US friends. The DPA governs how people may use data about other people in the UK. It gives citizens the right to know what data someone holds on them (yes, even the security services), the right for that data to be accurate, and a number of rights governing how that data is used. Crucially, it often means that someone must have your permission before they can store data on you. This applies to paper and electronic data. Don't try to read the Act - it's boring.
At about one thousandth the size of a regular power station
I think that a regular power station is a little bigger than this (I would say 10,000 times - on a linear scale). If you consider volume, then it is many times more.
The power to volume ratio of this device is quite impressive compared to the regular power station.
If you want to store gigabytes of images or gigabytes of game install files, however, they won't be sufficient.
Hence the new breeds of static RAM that are in development atm. MRAM (using giant magnetoresistance) and FRAM (using ferroelectric materials) promise to do just that - replace gigabytes of disc with memory. Not only that, but static memory should be faster too.
Of course, all the above comments about vapourware are equally valid - but new types of static RAM look quite promising.
Even on a cloudy day, the earth receives a load of power from the sun. (In strong sunlight about 1kW/square metre, in cloud at high latitudes it can go down to 300W/m.m). It is possible if you cover your roof with solar tiles to generate (on average) the same amount of power as you consume. With the current low-cost of electricity (which does not take into account the cost of the carbon emissions), the economics are poor though.
You don't have to have batteries - you can remain connected to the grid, and sell or buy electricity as needed. Not good if you are trying to survive a brownout though.
Packet radio - the data protocol for radio hams. As I understand it data is bounced from node to node, and there are a few nodes that offer gateways onto the internet. Very slow, but you might just be able to get e-mail happening. Oh, and you'll need a licence
Satellite - I think I can be pretty sure this is what the US Navy uses. I know it is quite common for ships to get data this way (the British Antarctic Survey use it for one). Sadly nothing else much is going to reach the oceans - and this is why it is expensive.
SOI = Silicon-on-Insulator Most chips are fabricated on pure silicon wafers. SOI wafers have a layer of silicon dioxide close to the surface. The transistors are built above this layer.
Why SOI? The gate of a MOS transistor is essentially a capacitor, and the speed at which it can operate is determined by how long this capacitor takes to charge/discharge. Basic physics will tell you that the thicker the capacitor, the smaller its value, and the faster the transistor. By putting the transitor on an SOI wafer, the silicon-dioxide layer acts as extra thickness for the capacitor, reducing its value, and making the thing faster.
Sounds kinda like the BBC Microcomputer - designed in stupidly short amounts of time, partially on napkins, and incredibly sucessful.
I know that one still has a use in the computing service at Cambridge University. What's more, that BBC could not easily be replaced by another machine.
I think the Americans missed out on that one. (they didn't ever get them did they?)
TJ
PS Note that use of a BBC does not reflect the standard of computing at Cambridge in general.
iirc most of the world's oil is Mesozioc, just as the dinosaurs are. Certainly oil cannot come from Cambrian strata, since after that amount of time it is usually either "over-cooked" or has leached away. Oh, and Cambrian sediments are not exactly common.
Plenty of people have pointed out that oil does not come from dinosaurs, firstly there were not that many of them and secondly, they would tend to produce gas not oil. (Also iirc).
Slashdot Mirror
...it's what you do with it.
It strikes me that a "script" is a list of things to do in order (such as a theatrical script), with a high level of abstraction.
A program on the other hand is more low-level. It is concerned with data structures and flow control and is generally harder work to write and interpret.
It is quite possible to write script in C (hello-world is a good example - it does everything in order, and what it does do it calls from elsewhere). Likewise, in most languages it is possible to write a complex program. Of course, C is much better adapted to "programming", and, say shell is better adapted to "scripting", but this does not mean that they could not do the same job as each other.
Therefore I conclude:
- The distinction between "programming" and "scripting" is not discrete, but continuous.
- For a job at a particular point on the scale, almost any language could be used, but some languages will be better than others.
TJ
I really hope this is a joke - otherwise I badly misunderstood what happened to the Dodo.
Have a look at this. (The Easter Egg is in the JavaScript). Sorry about the rest of the site - the web server seems rather badly configured atm. And sorry to Mozilla users - it doesn't seem to like the Egg much. I don't know why (anyone?).
(Hint: double click the logo)
Nah. Big things are easier to simulate than little things. You can ignore quantum properties for one thing.
The problem comes when you try to simulate LOTS of little things. The Earth falls into this category.
Just to be a little more accurate with the terms:
The epicentre (or epicenter if you want) was not 4.7 miles beneath the surface - the focus was. The epicentre is always a point on the surface - usually directly above the focus.
Trivial: to confirm your identity, all the police have to do is look at you.
Note: the police do this already. Every time one of them walks past you they are scanning your face and checking it against a database of wanted people stored on a device that every policeman carries called a "brain". Indeed, every person has a "brain" buried in their head and the police periodically distribute pictures of suspects to these "brains" via the popular media.
TJ
(Yes, I'm being sarcastic, and yes I know there are privacy issues involved, but they are no where near as severe as some people are making out)
My second sentence should be "...then it adds and entry..."
Sorry. I did preview, honest.
What you really want is for the other person's head up display to be monitoring their iris. If they look at you and their pupil dilates, when it adds an entry into their database to this effect. If you then look at them, your head up display displays a set of red cross-hairs for a possible target...
Thinking about it, this could create something of a Cupid's Arrow Effect. Say you are looking at someone in a room and the lights go out - instantly you end up targetted in their display.
Maybe a more reliable system would be needed, but it sure would be interesting.
otoh, how attractive can a person be wearing goggles?
TJ
In answer: no. Fireflies are not pendulums.
Firefies do, however, behave like phase-locked loops, and probably syncronous networks. I say this without much of a clue how eg. SDH works...
This (non) explaination has two solutions; the pendulums can swing in phase or in anti-phase. The observation says they always swing in anti-phase.
Stick to the Etymology/Entomology, whichever it is.
> No, there's no "class of people" who shouldn't be allowed to produce. As far as I'm concerned, the Chinese have it right (about this one thing only). One child per couple. No more.
I agree with the sentiment, but it makes me wonder: Does being an only child have an impact on the socialogical and physcological development of children? What about the parents? Does restricting parents to one child (which, after all is targetted at heavy population fall) affect the stability of society as a whole?
TJ
Three obvious points:
- The size quoted is die area, not package size. As the article says it IS very, very big.
- This processor is not aimed at the consumer market (ie. it is not intended to replace whatever you have in your machine). The price and production volumes reflect this.
- CPI ([clock] cycles per instruction) is just as important as clock frequency. And to a limited extent so is the instruction set architecture, cache sizes, branch prediction mechanism, datapath width (the number of bits), data bus width, external bus architecture and a whole load of other stuff. Trust that Intel have done their maths and have produced a product that will provide the performance required for the target market.
I fear Slashdot is rapidly becoming infamous not just for high server loads, but for somewhat uninformed "but can you run Linux on it?" style postings.
(Please note, I have no objection to people actually asking "can you run Linux on it?" - just people making uninformed comments)
John
For those of us in the UK:
I just thought about how this related to the Data Protection Act (1998 iirc). If someone were to create a link to an individual's website, and write: Here is a link (nb. this link does not work) to Joe Bloggs' website, does that link constitute personal data? After all, a link is like saying Here is Joe Bloggs' address: ..., and an address (so long as there is a name associated with it) is personal data.
If a link is personal data, does that mean that to link to Joe Bloggs' website you must either be registered with the Data Protection People or have Joe Bloggs' permission? In fact, wouldn't it be worse than that because you would have to make a reasonable effort to ensure that the personal data was secure (placing it on the internet is nothing like secure).
Any thoughts? Can we all go out and start sueing our friends?
TJ
PS. Appologies to our US friends. The DPA governs how people may use data about other people in the UK. It gives citizens the right to know what data someone holds on them (yes, even the security services), the right for that data to be accurate, and a number of rights governing how that data is used. Crucially, it often means that someone must have your permission before they can store data on you. This applies to paper and electronic data. Don't try to read the Act - it's boring.
Oh, and one more point. Your average power station is usually more than 20MW.
At about one thousandth the size of a regular power station
I think that a regular power station is a little bigger than this (I would say 10,000 times - on a linear scale). If you consider volume, then it is many times more.
The power to volume ratio of this device is quite impressive compared to the regular power station.
If you want to store gigabytes of images or gigabytes of game install files, however, they won't be sufficient.
Hence the new breeds of static RAM that are in development atm. MRAM (using giant magnetoresistance) and FRAM (using ferroelectric materials) promise to do just that - replace gigabytes of disc with memory. Not only that, but static memory should be faster too.
Of course, all the above comments about vapourware are equally valid - but new types of static RAM look quite promising.
In short - no. Batteries weigh a ton, and (weight for weight) they don't store much energy.
Even on a cloudy day, the earth receives a load of power from the sun. (In strong sunlight about 1kW/square metre, in cloud at high latitudes it can go down to 300W/m.m). It is possible if you cover your roof with solar tiles to generate (on average) the same amount of power as you consume. With the current low-cost of electricity (which does not take into account the cost of the carbon emissions), the economics are poor though.
You don't have to have batteries - you can remain connected to the grid, and sell or buy electricity as needed. Not good if you are trying to survive a brownout though.
Unfortunately I think you have only two options.
Packet radio - the data protocol for radio hams. As I understand it data is bounced from node to node, and there are a few nodes that offer gateways onto the internet. Very slow, but you might just be able to get e-mail happening. Oh, and you'll need a licence
Satellite - I think I can be pretty sure this is what the US Navy uses. I know it is quite common for ships to get data this way (the British Antarctic Survey use it for one). Sadly nothing else much is going to reach the oceans - and this is why it is expensive.
TJ
SOI = Silicon-on-Insulator
Most chips are fabricated on pure silicon wafers. SOI wafers have a layer of silicon dioxide close to the surface. The transistors are built above this layer.
Why SOI?
The gate of a MOS transistor is essentially a capacitor, and the speed at which it can operate is determined by how long this capacitor takes to charge/discharge.
Basic physics will tell you that the thicker the capacitor, the smaller its value, and the faster the transistor.
By putting the transitor on an SOI wafer, the silicon-dioxide layer acts as extra thickness for the capacitor, reducing its value, and making the thing faster.
TJ
Yes I remember Chuckie Egg (fondly).
Which reminds me of another: Elite. A massive game that was squeezed into just 32k - another good hack methinks.
TJ
I know that one still has a use in the computing service at Cambridge University. What's more, that BBC could not easily be replaced by another machine.
I think the Americans missed out on that one. (they didn't ever get them did they?)
TJ
PS Note that use of a BBC does not reflect the standard of computing at Cambridge in general.
What do they want with a .com address anyway, since they are an educational thingumy. Surely they should be after .edu or .edu.us
.com and not .org.us?
Come to think of it why do you have
I think that purdue != purdueonline anyway.
TJ
iirc most of the world's oil is Mesozioc, just as the dinosaurs are. Certainly oil cannot come from Cambrian strata, since after that amount of time it is usually either "over-cooked" or has leached away. Oh, and Cambrian sediments are not exactly common.
Plenty of people have pointed out that oil does not come from dinosaurs, firstly there were not that many of them and secondly, they would tend to produce gas not oil. (Also iirc).
TJ