If you run doxygen on an existing codebase that was developed without doxygen support already built-in, all you get is a giant list of classes and member names, and empty spaces where any descriptions would go. This has little to no value in trying to understand existing architecture or functionality.
I'm thinking that no company is really any better than Sony in actually caring about their customers rights and privacy. Its just that Sony and Microsoft are incompetent enough to make it obvious, while companies like Google and Apple have smarter PR people and a larger marketing budget.
If 2 years of CS is actually equivalent to a "World Lanuage" (whetever that is), since I can speak 3 langauges, where do I collect my free (2nd) CS degree?
In the case of Sandy Hook, it seems clear that the perpitrator was actually mentally ill, so was literally malfunctioning mentally.
The terrorists not only clearly knew what they were doing and chose to do it anyway, but had planned it beforehand, and then further used it to try to incite mass terror on a wider scale. Unlike the Sandy hook perpitrator, their intention was to not just kill the victim(s), but to make him suffer in the worst way possible before he died, and then also publicise it as a sick and callous attempt at prmoting their own political agenda.
There is no way that the perpitrators of these two events can be considered morally equivalent.
>> In December 2011, Hammond stole roughly 5 million confidential emails and thousands of credit card numbers
I think the problem in labelling every cyber criminal a terrorist is that it dilutes the whole importance of the label when you're dealing with actual terrorsts.
It seems that its not unlike being an ex-con in the US. So many people in the US get locked up for even relatively trivial offences that having served time doesn't carry half the social stigma in the US that it does in other countries. Therefore encarceratiion in the US is probably less effective as a deterrent than in other countries.
These show the frightening level of ignorance about science in the general US population: http://news.nationalgeographic... http://www.pewinternet.org/201... Depending on which study you look at, apparently only 40% - 66% of Americans even believe evolution is real. What are you guys smoking over there?
That would automaitcally solve itself if most American voters would stop voting from partisan habit and against the party they least want, to actually voting for the person they do want.
...Which again makes no mention at all of crashes occuring as he stated several times. Seems he's just trolling with no actual evidence. Probably just another rabid ATI fanboi.
Yeah I know. Its basicaily what I meant when I listed bitmaps.
The whole point of using mipmaps is as a strategy to reduce GPU memory/bandwidth usage. Consequently I don't think differentiating between bitmaps and mipmaps is actually relevant to the larger discussion here.
>> I run three 30" 2650x1600s Thats pretty much irrelevant. GPU ram isn't used that way at all. Its used to hold the 3D geometry, bitmaps, bump maps etc of assets and other processing data which is largely if not completely independent of screen resolution/no.of screens.
Do the math: 2560 x 1600 x 4 (4 bytes per pixel for 32 bit color) = 15.625 Mb * 3 monitors = screen buffer for 3 screens total size = 46.875 Mb.
Even triple buffering your total screen buffer requirement for all 3 monitors is less than 150Mb.
>> *Ever run RAM of two different speeds in a desktop? Wonder where those crashes are coming from?
No I'm not that stupid. And yours is a *terrible* analogy. You're not meant to mix different speed ram for your system. At least it says so in every motherboard manual I've ever read, which is a LOT in over 30 years of building my own PCs. If you do then you are not only operating outside the design parameters of the motherboard maker, but cluless about computers. Also, GPU memory is functionally totally different than system memory. Fuirthermore unlike some idiot who mixes ram even though the manual says not to, this is a decision taken by the manufacturer and until you post credible links proving otherwise, I'm going to stick with the fact that it is well-tested and does NOT cause any failure in actual operation, just a performance decrease compared to the more expensive 980.
>> there are some people who do have cause to complain if they would have changed their purchasing decision based on having the correct information at the time of their purchase.
While I agree that nVidia should have got the published details correct, do you seriously think a customer exists that would not have bought this card had they knew the memory handling strategy was slightly different than published, even though the overall performance of the card was advertised correctly?
That would be as insane as basing a car purchasing decision entirely on the colour of plastic used for the radiator cap.
This is a blatantly misieading thing to say. The cards don't crash at all. The only thing that happens as a result of this is a properly handled decrease in real world performance compared to the 980.
Are you seriously trying to claim that the 970 _should_ have the same performance as the 980?
Good! Finally! This is exactly what they should have been doing all along, instead of launching mass-spying programs on every citizen from the safety and anonymity of their office desks.
Slashdot Mirror
I think they all would if they thought they could get away with it.
If you run doxygen on an existing codebase that was developed without doxygen support already built-in, all you get is a giant list of classes and member names, and empty spaces where any descriptions would go.
This has little to no value in trying to understand existing architecture or functionality.
I'm thinking that no company is really any better than Sony in actually caring about their customers rights and privacy. Its just that Sony and Microsoft are incompetent enough to make it obvious, while companies like Google and Apple have smarter PR people and a larger marketing budget.
If 2 years of CS is actually equivalent to a "World Lanuage" (whetever that is), since I can speak 3 langauges, where do I collect my free (2nd) CS degree?
Motive and cause.
In the case of Sandy Hook, it seems clear that the perpitrator was actually mentally ill, so was literally malfunctioning mentally.
The terrorists not only clearly knew what they were doing and chose to do it anyway, but had planned it beforehand, and then further used it to try to incite mass terror on a wider scale. Unlike the Sandy hook perpitrator, their intention was to not just kill the victim(s), but to make him suffer in the worst way possible before he died, and then also publicise it as a sick and callous attempt at prmoting their own political agenda.
There is no way that the perpitrators of these two events can be considered morally equivalent.
>> Terrorists should be dealt with the same way other criminals are dealt with.
Tell that to the family that watched a video of their son being burnt to death in a iron cage yesterday.
http://freedomoutpost.com/2015...
>> In December 2011, Hammond stole roughly 5 million confidential emails and thousands of credit card numbers
I think the problem in labelling every cyber criminal a terrorist is that it dilutes the whole importance of the label when you're dealing with actual terrorsts.
It seems that its not unlike being an ex-con in the US. So many people in the US get locked up for even relatively trivial offences that having served time doesn't carry half the social stigma in the US that it does in other countries. Therefore encarceratiion in the US is probably less effective as a deterrent than in other countries.
Jeremy Hammond? They'll be going after James Clarkson next.
These show the frightening level of ignorance about science in the general US population:
http://news.nationalgeographic...
http://www.pewinternet.org/201...
Depending on which study you look at, apparently only 40% - 66% of Americans even believe evolution is real. What are you guys smoking over there?
That would automaitcally solve itself if most American voters would stop voting from partisan habit and against the party they least want, to actually voting for the person they do want.
possibly but if so its still a stupid thing to say as its obviously going to confuse meaning.
...Which again makes no mention at all of crashes occuring as he stated several times.
Seems he's just trolling with no actual evidence. Probably just another rabid ATI fanboi.
Yeah I know. Its basicaily what I meant when I listed bitmaps.
The whole point of using mipmaps is as a strategy to reduce GPU memory/bandwidth usage. Consequently I don't think differentiating between bitmaps and mipmaps is actually relevant to the larger discussion here.
>> You people clearly have no idea what a frame buffer does.
They're probably the same people that also think buying/adding more ram speeds the processor up.
The only graphics-related article posted yesterday that I'm seeing is about openCL on Linux.
Stop trying to change the subject. The issue here is graphics cards and your claims that the 970 is causing crashes. I say prove it.
>> I run three 30" 2650x1600s
Thats pretty much irrelevant. GPU ram isn't used that way at all. Its used to hold the 3D geometry, bitmaps, bump maps etc of assets and other processing data which is largely if not completely independent of screen resolution/no.of screens.
Do the math:
2560 x 1600 x 4 (4 bytes per pixel for 32 bit color) = 15.625 Mb * 3 monitors = screen buffer for 3 screens total size = 46.875 Mb.
Even triple buffering your total screen buffer requirement for all 3 monitors is less than 150Mb.
>> window stickers stating the base model has a 5.7L 525HP V8 engine....They discover it's only putting out 450HP
Not at all, Nvidia has never advertised it as having more performance than it actually has.
>> Less than happy about this.
Why? How does it adversely affect you in the real world? You're stil getting the same GPU performance you paid for right?
>> *Ever run RAM of two different speeds in a desktop? Wonder where those crashes are coming from?
No I'm not that stupid. And yours is a *terrible* analogy. You're not meant to mix different speed ram for your system. At least it says so in every motherboard manual I've ever read, which is a LOT in over 30 years of building my own PCs. If you do then you are not only operating outside the design parameters of the motherboard maker, but cluless about computers.
Also, GPU memory is functionally totally different than system memory. Fuirthermore unlike some idiot who mixes ram even though the manual says not to, this is a decision taken by the manufacturer and until you post credible links proving otherwise, I'm going to stick with the fact that it is well-tested and does NOT cause any failure in actual operation, just a performance decrease compared to the more expensive 980.
>> where it can and does cause repeated and repeatable crashes
I call bullshit. Please post credible references to people actually experiencing crashes while gaming as a result of this.
>> there are some people who do have cause to complain if they would have changed their purchasing decision based on having the correct information at the time of their purchase.
While I agree that nVidia should have got the published details correct, do you seriously think a customer exists that would not have bought this card had they knew the memory handling strategy was slightly different than published, even though the overall performance of the card was advertised correctly?
That would be as insane as basing a car purchasing decision entirely on the colour of plastic used for the radiator cap.
>> causing them to crash out
This is a blatantly misieading thing to say. The cards don't crash at all. The only thing that happens as a result of this is a properly handled decrease in real world performance compared to the 980.
Are you seriously trying to claim that the 970 _should_ have the same performance as the 980?
Good! Finally!
This is exactly what they should have been doing all along, instead of launching mass-spying programs on every citizen from the safety and anonymity of their office desks.
>> They've been stuck at OpenCL 1.1 for years
That's because their own API (CUDA) is far better and more developed.