OH PLEASE. That has never been Google's "mission statement". It appears in a small subsection in their company page and refers to their particular way of placing and identifying advertisements. That's all it's there for.
Can we just finally kill the "Google Promises To Do No Evil" meme? It is not Google's corporate motto, nor do they pretend that it is. Somebody just spotted it there and blew it out of all proportion.
Nvidia and ATI use confusing nomenclature -- those "cores" are nothing like CPU cores. It's easier to count the ALUs: the new Radeons have 3200 per chip. That's obviously a humongous amount. But there are extremely imposing limitations on what can be run when. The datasets must be of quite specific and distinct type to extract the "oomph". And regardless of data parallelism, any branchy code will simply suck -- the huge inherent latencies dictate that.
Excellent point. Also, where a "GPU" is good at, it still expects very large datasets, and no concern for latency of instruction execution or memory access. The total caching and execution pipeline is very long. For 3D graphics, this is perfectly all right. (And ditto for many non-graphics computing tasks -- GPGPU is a growing domain.)
By the way, "Do No Evil", as touted by Google fans for a decade now, has never been the company's "motto". The phrase appears in item #6 on their list of 10 principles. It relates to the way they place and present ads. Nothing else.
Mod this up if you're sick and tired of the "Do No Evil" hype. Google didn't start that so they shouldn't be blamed of hypocrisy on account of that.
(Then it's a completely separate issue what kind of company they are or purport to be. No comment on that in this post.)
That's not the point, the expectation developers and users had changed from Ext3 and the people in charge of Ext4 adamantly and arrogantly claimed the same things you are.
Check again what things he "claimed". In that view your complaint makes no sense. There's nothing arrogant about those.
(The second part of your post is too vague to comment on really. Hard to disagree with, certainly, but it'd help if you were more specific about your beef.)
From TFA: "Investigators say apart from falsifying pictures the company also distributed a computer virus in order to obstruct activities of its rival in the western district of the capital."
Gotta love Moscow.:-)
(And funny if they had the same images for months on end without the monitor watchers noticing anything odd. The article doesn't make it too clear whether the practice was occasional or continuous. Or if it was still images or video loops.)
Hey now. Sharing a "cultural" meme doesn't mean every member subscribes to it, just that they recognize it. Understanding an idea ain't the same as believing in its truth.:-)
> Haven't move to zfs yet, but given your pattern I'm guessing you're wrong again.
How retarded can you be? Please stop embarrassing us who dig and use FreeBSD but don't need to see it through rose-tinted glasses (or the whole scene as a pissing contest).
FWIW, I'm a long-time FreeBSD user (and can't wait to install and try out 8 even if I don't desperately need anything over 7) and I think you had good and interesting questions there. I'm a bit ashamed for the community (or rather the Slashdot faction) that you got so readily misunderstood and attacked.
To my knowledge there is no such corporate backing for BSD. It would be very interesting if there was, and in several ways it is just perfect for it. (Architecture, uniformity, licensing, etc.)
I totally agree that Apple doesn't count. It's a model example of BSD Licensing. The completely separate kernel and hugely moreso the interface give OS X a life completely divorced from FreeBSD. Doesn't matter if (the BSDL idea works and) Apple gives back to the BSD project. And... no problem.
The problem is that it's nearly impossible to properly translate a relaxed interview into a transcript. Removing any element has the potential to compromise the meaning the author was trying to convey, and this is something which I couldn't afford to have happen. I'd prefer a relaxed transcript to a properly formatted transcript which may have had its meaning lost in translation. Bear in mind that some of this person's statements aren't even complete sentences; I couldn't reasonably infer what this person intended with enough certainty to fill in the blanks, so I had to leave it as is.
It was an interview, right? The professional thing to do would be to ask follow-up questions to clarify what this person meant. The follow-up is a rather basic interview technique. But agreed, doing nothing is better than infering (guessing, really) to fill in the blanks. Thanks for the effort anyway, it was interesting as such.
In some cases, it's perfectly fine to keep some verbal mannerisms intact in an interview. It's usually done to preserve a human component which would otherwise be lost.
"Human component"? You usually interview robots, then?;-)
I did clean it up to an extent, but I only removed bits which would have otherwise compromised the meaning of a particular statement.
In light of the difficulty you mentioned, preserving all the content of a casually speaking interviewee, how did you know which bits to remove?
Good post. I'd like to add one detail where A5 may be categorically "better" than A9: the new L2 cache controller with multiple outstanding transactions. It's a boon for real-world apps that need to rapid fire to large essentially random datasets (like Web browsers do), especially when used in an in-order core.
Good point on the SoC nature of OMAP3430. I was mildly annoyed by the summary calling it a "core". (Not even "processor" or "chip".) Methinks we could have a bit less "Core" everywhere...
Slashdot Mirror
How do you "drive innovation"?
Car analogy please.
googles mission statement of "DO NO EVIL"
OH PLEASE. That has never been Google's "mission statement". It appears in a small subsection in their company page and refers to their particular way of placing and identifying advertisements. That's all it's there for.
Can we just finally kill the "Google Promises To Do No Evil" meme? It is not Google's corporate motto, nor do they pretend that it is. Somebody just spotted it there and blew it out of all proportion.
Please?
That's great! But in poem composition I'd say you still have something to learn from LB I...
Mod parent up already.
Remember the Pentium 4? That was a huge step in the GPU direction.
What?
(And try DSP for a better example of a CPU's SIMD goal rather than a GPU.)
Nvidia and ATI use confusing nomenclature -- those "cores" are nothing like CPU cores. It's easier to count the ALUs: the new Radeons have 3200 per chip. That's obviously a humongous amount. But there are extremely imposing limitations on what can be run when. The datasets must be of quite specific and distinct type to extract the "oomph". And regardless of data parallelism, any branchy code will simply suck -- the huge inherent latencies dictate that.
Excellent point. Also, where a "GPU" is good at, it still expects very large datasets, and no concern for latency of instruction execution or memory access. The total caching and execution pipeline is very long. For 3D graphics, this is perfectly all right. (And ditto for many non-graphics computing tasks -- GPGPU is a growing domain.)
By the way, "Do No Evil", as touted by Google fans for a decade now, has never been the company's "motto". The phrase appears in item #6 on their list of 10 principles. It relates to the way they place and present ads. Nothing else.
Mod this up if you're sick and tired of the "Do No Evil" hype. Google didn't start that so they shouldn't be blamed of hypocrisy on account of that.
(Then it's a completely separate issue what kind of company they are or purport to be. No comment on that in this post.)
Use another OS if it bothers you that much.
Sorry but this is the attitude to make sure Linux never gets anywhere.
That's not the point, the expectation developers and users had changed from Ext3 and the people in charge of Ext4 adamantly and arrogantly claimed the same things you are.
Check again what things he "claimed". In that view your complaint makes no sense. There's nothing arrogant about those.
(The second part of your post is too vague to comment on really. Hard to disagree with, certainly, but it'd help if you were more specific about your beef.)
One search to rule them all,
one search to find them,
one search to bing them all
and in the darkness squirt them.
Opps I was supposed to bash The G.
Yah I'll be here all week. Sorry.
From TFA: "Investigators say apart from falsifying pictures the company also distributed a computer virus in order to obstruct activities of its rival in the western district of the capital."
:-)
Gotta love Moscow.
(And funny if they had the same images for months on end without the monitor watchers noticing anything odd. The article doesn't make it too clear whether the practice was occasional or continuous. Or if it was still images or video loops.)
Am I doing it right?
Love / hate is just the beginning for a meaningful, fulfilling relationship...
Where is NYCL when we need him?
Meta-mods, take parent away from Troll. That one's obviously unfair.
Norsefire, thanks for bothering to explain your question. I was interested in the feedback as well.
Time is free. ;)
Work is for pay.
They aren't the same.
Hey now. Sharing a "cultural" meme doesn't mean every member subscribes to it, just that they recognize it. Understanding an idea ain't the same as believing in its truth. :-)
>> ZFS in double parity mode is broken
> Haven't move to zfs yet, but given your pattern I'm guessing you're wrong again.
How retarded can you be? Please stop embarrassing us who dig and use FreeBSD but don't need to see it through rose-tinted glasses (or the whole scene as a pissing contest).
FWIW, I'm a long-time FreeBSD user (and can't wait to install and try out 8 even if I don't desperately need anything over 7) and I think you had good and interesting questions there. I'm a bit ashamed for the community (or rather the Slashdot faction) that you got so readily misunderstood and attacked.
To my knowledge there is no such corporate backing for BSD. It would be very interesting if there was, and in several ways it is just perfect for it. (Architecture, uniformity, licensing, etc.)
I totally agree that Apple doesn't count. It's a model example of BSD Licensing. The completely separate kernel and hugely moreso the interface give OS X a life completely divorced from FreeBSD. Doesn't matter if (the BSDL idea works and) Apple gives back to the BSD project. And... no problem.
OK, off to tinker with 8.0 now...
The problem is that it's nearly impossible to properly translate a relaxed interview into a transcript. Removing any element has the potential to compromise the meaning the author was trying to convey, and this is something which I couldn't afford to have happen. I'd prefer a relaxed transcript to a properly formatted transcript which may have had its meaning lost in translation. Bear in mind that some of this person's statements aren't even complete sentences; I couldn't reasonably infer what this person intended with enough certainty to fill in the blanks, so I had to leave it as is.
It was an interview, right? The professional thing to do would be to ask follow-up questions to clarify what this person meant. The follow-up is a rather basic interview technique. But agreed, doing nothing is better than infering (guessing, really) to fill in the blanks. Thanks for the effort anyway, it was interesting as such.
In some cases, it's perfectly fine to keep some verbal mannerisms intact in an interview. It's usually done to preserve a human component which would otherwise be lost.
;-)
"Human component"? You usually interview robots, then?
I did clean it up to an extent, but I only removed bits which would have otherwise compromised the meaning of a particular statement.
In light of the difficulty you mentioned, preserving all the content of a casually speaking interviewee, how did you know which bits to remove?
*whoosh*
Good post. I'd like to add one detail where A5 may be categorically "better" than A9: the new L2 cache controller with multiple outstanding transactions. It's a boon for real-world apps that need to rapid fire to large essentially random datasets (like Web browsers do), especially when used in an in-order core.
Good point on the SoC nature of OMAP3430. I was mildly annoyed by the summary calling it a "core". (Not even "processor" or "chip".) Methinks we could have a bit less "Core" everywhere...