After spending so much time on this, and if the final results are positive, I feel that simply posting this type of work on a blog might not be the best option, so I'm looking into something more formal like a research paper.
Why not post it into a blog? Put it there, post a link on Slashdot; if it's any good, the word will get around.
Maybe we should create an Independent Research wiki or something for this kind of things?
Food and land. Actually, just land, since if you have that (good land, anyway) you can grow food. Agreed that the "worth" of just about everything else, including gold, is an agreed-upon fiction, but there really is an absolute standard of value: the stuff you need to survive. In the modern industrialized world, of course, we tend not to worry too much about that, but it's good to remember that there is something at the base of the pyramid.
Except that these, too, don't have any "real" value. You don't need to survive, you just want to. You likely want survival more than you want, say, Pokemon, but in the end, both are just wants.
Neither food nor land have any value that people don't assign them. There's nothing at the base of the pyramid; it's fiction all the way down. Sweet dreams, shareholders.
So, as usual, the root cause of the problem is the government funneling money into the markets through artificial incentives.
Once, when I was younger, I read a book on "Christian sexual ethics" or something like that. And that book had a chapter on masturbation. The writer analyzed the Bible at length, trying this angle and that, until he(?) finally found a (very far-fetched) explanation for why it might be a sin (it's "self-centered" activity). Not only did he immediately stop any further examination, but also proceeded to spend the rest of the chapter describing various ways of avoiding this abomination which, if actually followed, would make masturbation - or avoiding it - the center of one's life to the point which even the worst obsessive-compulsive letch couldn't possibly match.
All too often, when reading these comments about how the Government is supposedly to blame for all economic problems ever, I'm reminded of that book. The book was very educational, as it taught me a lot about intellectual dishonesty and perversions of logic, and these comments are just as much so, since they keep on demonstrating that deciding the answer before analysis has been performed is not limited to the religious.
The only entity that benefits is the high speed trader who made himself an unwanted middleman in a transaction that would have actually been easier without him.
In other words, sigh speed traders are the scalpers of stock markets: annoying parasites.
People wanted "net neutrality." Well, this is what you get when you hand control of the Internet over to the government.
Net Neutrality doesn't mean handing over the control of the Internet to the government - it already has that, running the root DNS servers for example. Net Neutrality means that an ISP may not prioritize or filter Internet traffic based on source or destination. This prevents corporations from blocking or sabotaging their competitors, or keep their customers in the dark about something; for example, your ISP can't block Slashdot to promote their own discussion forum with automatic upmodding for astroturfers, nor can Sony pay them to prevent access to less than favourable reviews of Sony televisions on some site.
I've never understood what goes on in the head of a net neutrality supporter who wants the government to regulate net traffic, as if the government isn't more corrupt, inept, and power-hungry than corporations.
Probably some actual knowledge of the issue, rather than right-wing propaganda. You know, actually knowing what Net Neutrality means, which you obviously don't.
Not only will the government want a kill switch, but they'll also be susceptible to lobby groups like the RIAA that make political donations to candidates who then go on to "regulate" P2P traffic for them.
Without Net Neutrality these various Mafias can simply pay/threaten the ISPs directly to filter traffick.
Saying that Apple didn't invent anything when they created the Iphone is like saying that Thomas Edison didn't invent anything when he produced the electric light. Glass wasn't new and neither was carbon or the other materials his bulbs were made from. It was the unique combination of those existing technologies that made the electric light an invention. In the world of cell phones - what Apple created and called the Iphone is very much an invention.
IPhone is an invention in the same way that a lightbulb with a smiley face painted on the bulb would be. Or perhaps we should compare it to the infamous patent on swinging sideways? Or those innumerable "X... in the Internet!" -"inventions" that plagued dot-boom?
No, iPhone is not an invention. It has no features that some existing device didn't already have, or which wouldn't be obvious extensions of some existing features. Given a list of iPhone's features, any engineer could put it together. It's just a smartphone with Apple logo on it.
In a truly free market, why shouldn't you be allowed to "copy other's inventions and profit from someone else's ideas.". Think it through.
There is no "truly free market". In the presence of any regulation, the market is not "truly free", and in the absence of it there is no market, since people can simply take what they want by force.
"Free market" is an abstract economic concept which some people have elevated to the status of divinity - or would that honor go to the "Invisible Hand"?
That's what grates me, these people harp on about how they're love a free market, yet everything they DO says otherwise.
Most people who preach about free market are actually trying to weasel their way out of having any responsibility towards their fellow man or the society in general, but are either too cunning to reveal that to others or too spineless to admit it to themselves.
It's an odd sort of freedom where a clearly winning strategy is to be aritificially restricted.
Only if it's a winning strategy for someone else against me. If I have patents/copyrights/whatever, the system is good and just, if I'm trying to manufacture something, and patents get in the way, they're eviiiiil. It's all about me.
That, arguably, is the biggest problem facing us nowadays: our society rewards egomaniacs and in fact glorifies them, while any talk of cooperation is socialism and therefore evil.
Like the first female President of the United States wouldn't be news? Like the first black President of the United States wasn't news?
Given that the first black President happened when the only alternative was a woman (no, Republicans didn't have a chance after 8 years of Bush), I wonder what it would take to get a woman elected - running against an openly satanist lesbian?
Xenon is a 3-core PowerPC CPU, with 2-way multithreading replacing out-of-order execution. This means there are six cores to emulate.
There are 3 physical cores to emulate. Also, the newest generations of x86 processors already have 6+ physical cores, with more on the way, and they all support out-of-order execution. Some of them also support HyperThreading, which also makes one physical core function as two logical ones.
The only halfway efficient PowerPC-to-x86 recompiler I can think of is the property of Apple, and Wikipedia's article about this recompiler states that it works far better for I/O-bound apps than for CPU-bound apps.
To put it bluntly, just how many exclusive applications does PowerPC have compared to x86? Has anyone besides Apple had any motivation at all to develop such a recompiler?
Not liking the terms under which a product is sold does not entitle you to pirate it.
You don't need entitlement to download a song any more than you need entitlement to listen to it on the radio. Sending and receiving information is a fundamental right. It's you who needs entitlement to curtail this right in any way, and strong entitlement at that.
Opera is a bit faster, Chrome is a lot faster, but we are talking about tenths of a second here when rendering anything other than extremely complicated web pages which to be honest would render a lot faster in any browser if the designers wouldn't include so much crap in them that demands connections to multiple websites for stupid things like a small advertising gif image from a server that is already overloaded.
The real problem with these pages is not that they are slow to render, but that the rendering sometimes has to wait for that advertisement, and you see nothing until it's loaded. Even more annoyingly, the whole browser UI sometimes freeses to wait for it.
I wonder if we'll see less of this now that plugins are separate?
Yes they are, in the way Greenpeace, the American Red Cross, or the FSF are "people". Corporations are simply groups of people acting together. Why should one group of people be allowed to pool their resources and influence, but not others?
They should be allowed to pool their resources, but the law shouldn't consider the resulting pool a person because, well, it isn't.
Now, for practical reasons corporations and other organizations do require some of the legal aspects of personhood, such as the right to make legally binding contracts, but that's just convenient legal fiction. When a court starts giving freedom of speech and other constitutional protections to fictional entities, something's gone terribly wrong.
It indirectly implies that dragons should be bound by human behavioral standards, and that human culture is therefore superior to dragon culture. Basically, it's a continuation of the hideously specist medieval stories where a "brave" knight slays the "evil" dragon to "save" a captured maiden, thus implying that no woman of virtue would associate with a man-eating monster voluntarily, and also reinforcing chauvinistic stereotypes about "virtuous" women simultaneously.
We must learn to treat all cultures equally, even the ones centered around eating innocent people and torching villages. To do otherwise is cultural colonialism.
Is this just theoretical, or do you know of an example of where a CPU has emulated a guest CPU that executes 50 percent more instructions per second per core than the host CPU?
Theoretical, otherwise I'd simply mentioned said example. Now why don't you tell us what you're comparing Xenon against to arrive at "50% more instructions per second per core", and why this is a significant, especially since Xenon seems to be a RISC-based processor so it should be possible to recompile into far fewer CISC instructions?
Powderpuff is just a single letter away from Powerpuff. If someone wants a powderpuff position, then maybe they know something you don't. For example, the Communist Party of good old Soviet Russia should really had thought more about who they appointed as a secretary...
Besides, with Moore's Law shifting focus from speed to number of cores, I see it becoming likely that the Xbox 360 and PLAYSTATION 3 won't be emulated any time soon.
Both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 use multi-core CPUs/GPUs, which can be effectively emulated by another multi-core CPU. Furthermore, even most single-core CPUs have long been parallelized - that's where speed increase have come from since Pentium. In other words, it's possible to parallelize the execution of a single instruction stream, which implies that multicore CPUs could emulate single-core CPUs efficiently. Finally, there's always dynamic recompilation.
That said, to efficiently use an ever-increasing number of cores for any task, the PC is going to undergo a structural revolution eventually. Memory was already a bottleneck even for single-core machines, and is coming more so with multiple cores. Add the high cost of synchronization between cores and you have a problem.
I think we'll eventually switch to a dataflow-type programming paradigm, since that makes it much easier to write parallel programs, and also allows the underlaying hardware to switch away from the bottleneck-causing uniform memory space, which is pretty much mandated by C-derived languages.
You say "democratization" as if it's a good thing...
Yeah, it's the worst form of government ever, except for all the other forms. Why would anyone possibly want a say in their country's affairs, and laws that he is expected to obey?
The Cold War is over and won, so there's no more reason to pretend moral superiority. Now we get to enjoy the fruits of fundamentalist Capitalism, just as our Russian friends got to enjoy fundamentalism Socialism. The poles aren't really any different form one another, now are they?
Yes, they are. But only potential, as in "needs more careful surveillance to make sure".
There are plenty of reasons to dislike these systems, the utter inhumanity of a world where laws are always enforced as written being one of them (for the current set of laws), but these are not them.
Slashdot Mirror
Can or will? There's a little bit of a difference there...
Why not post it into a blog? Put it there, post a link on Slashdot; if it's any good, the word will get around.
Maybe we should create an Independent Research wiki or something for this kind of things?
Except that these, too, don't have any "real" value. You don't need to survive, you just want to. You likely want survival more than you want, say, Pokemon, but in the end, both are just wants.
Neither food nor land have any value that people don't assign them. There's nothing at the base of the pyramid; it's fiction all the way down. Sweet dreams, shareholders.
Once, when I was younger, I read a book on "Christian sexual ethics" or something like that. And that book had a chapter on masturbation. The writer analyzed the Bible at length, trying this angle and that, until he(?) finally found a (very far-fetched) explanation for why it might be a sin (it's "self-centered" activity). Not only did he immediately stop any further examination, but also proceeded to spend the rest of the chapter describing various ways of avoiding this abomination which, if actually followed, would make masturbation - or avoiding it - the center of one's life to the point which even the worst obsessive-compulsive letch couldn't possibly match.
All too often, when reading these comments about how the Government is supposedly to blame for all economic problems ever, I'm reminded of that book. The book was very educational, as it taught me a lot about intellectual dishonesty and perversions of logic, and these comments are just as much so, since they keep on demonstrating that deciding the answer before analysis has been performed is not limited to the religious.
In other words, sigh speed traders are the scalpers of stock markets: annoying parasites.
Net Neutrality doesn't mean handing over the control of the Internet to the government - it already has that, running the root DNS servers for example. Net Neutrality means that an ISP may not prioritize or filter Internet traffic based on source or destination. This prevents corporations from blocking or sabotaging their competitors, or keep their customers in the dark about something; for example, your ISP can't block Slashdot to promote their own discussion forum with automatic upmodding for astroturfers, nor can Sony pay them to prevent access to less than favourable reviews of Sony televisions on some site.
Probably some actual knowledge of the issue, rather than right-wing propaganda. You know, actually knowing what Net Neutrality means, which you obviously don't.
Without Net Neutrality these various Mafias can simply pay/threaten the ISPs directly to filter traffick.
IPhone is an invention in the same way that a lightbulb with a smiley face painted on the bulb would be. Or perhaps we should compare it to the infamous patent on swinging sideways? Or those innumerable "X... in the Internet!" -"inventions" that plagued dot-boom?
No, iPhone is not an invention. It has no features that some existing device didn't already have, or which wouldn't be obvious extensions of some existing features. Given a list of iPhone's features, any engineer could put it together. It's just a smartphone with Apple logo on it.
There is no "truly free market". In the presence of any regulation, the market is not "truly free", and in the absence of it there is no market, since people can simply take what they want by force.
"Free market" is an abstract economic concept which some people have elevated to the status of divinity - or would that honor go to the "Invisible Hand"?
Most people who preach about free market are actually trying to weasel their way out of having any responsibility towards their fellow man or the society in general, but are either too cunning to reveal that to others or too spineless to admit it to themselves.
Only if it's a winning strategy for someone else against me. If I have patents/copyrights/whatever, the system is good and just, if I'm trying to manufacture something, and patents get in the way, they're eviiiiil. It's all about me.
That, arguably, is the biggest problem facing us nowadays: our society rewards egomaniacs and in fact glorifies them, while any talk of cooperation is socialism and therefore evil.
They wouldn't be newsworthy if they were. Let's not forget the true nature of the country:
Australian government, by the criminals, for the criminals!
Given that the first black President happened when the only alternative was a woman (no, Republicans didn't have a chance after 8 years of Bush), I wonder what it would take to get a woman elected - running against an openly satanist lesbian?
Infrared radiation follows the same rules as visible light, being just another part of electromagnetic spectrum. The grandparent's logic still holds.
There are 3 physical cores to emulate. Also, the newest generations of x86 processors already have 6+ physical cores, with more on the way, and they all support out-of-order execution. Some of them also support HyperThreading, which also makes one physical core function as two logical ones.
To put it bluntly, just how many exclusive applications does PowerPC have compared to x86? Has anyone besides Apple had any motivation at all to develop such a recompiler?
You don't need entitlement to download a song any more than you need entitlement to listen to it on the radio. Sending and receiving information is a fundamental right. It's you who needs entitlement to curtail this right in any way, and strong entitlement at that.
Yes, when an error is fixed before it can cause problems, those problems never manifest. Isn't it amazing?
The real problem with these pages is not that they are slow to render, but that the rendering sometimes has to wait for that advertisement, and you see nothing until it's loaded. Even more annoyingly, the whole browser UI sometimes freeses to wait for it.
I wonder if we'll see less of this now that plugins are separate?
They should be allowed to pool their resources, but the law shouldn't consider the resulting pool a person because, well, it isn't.
Now, for practical reasons corporations and other organizations do require some of the legal aspects of personhood, such as the right to make legally binding contracts, but that's just convenient legal fiction. When a court starts giving freedom of speech and other constitutional protections to fictional entities, something's gone terribly wrong.
It indirectly implies that dragons should be bound by human behavioral standards, and that human culture is therefore superior to dragon culture. Basically, it's a continuation of the hideously specist medieval stories where a "brave" knight slays the "evil" dragon to "save" a captured maiden, thus implying that no woman of virtue would associate with a man-eating monster voluntarily, and also reinforcing chauvinistic stereotypes about "virtuous" women simultaneously.
We must learn to treat all cultures equally, even the ones centered around eating innocent people and torching villages. To do otherwise is cultural colonialism.
Theoretical, otherwise I'd simply mentioned said example. Now why don't you tell us what you're comparing Xenon against to arrive at "50% more instructions per second per core", and why this is a significant, especially since Xenon seems to be a RISC-based processor so it should be possible to recompile into far fewer CISC instructions?
Powderpuff is just a single letter away from Powerpuff. If someone wants a powderpuff position, then maybe they know something you don't. For example, the Communist Party of good old Soviet Russia should really had thought more about who they appointed as a secretary...
To put it bluntly, can you name any Canadian accomplishment more significant than "Captain Kirk is a Canadian"?
Both Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 use multi-core CPUs/GPUs, which can be effectively emulated by another multi-core CPU. Furthermore, even most single-core CPUs have long been parallelized - that's where speed increase have come from since Pentium. In other words, it's possible to parallelize the execution of a single instruction stream, which implies that multicore CPUs could emulate single-core CPUs efficiently. Finally, there's always dynamic recompilation.
That said, to efficiently use an ever-increasing number of cores for any task, the PC is going to undergo a structural revolution eventually. Memory was already a bottleneck even for single-core machines, and is coming more so with multiple cores. Add the high cost of synchronization between cores and you have a problem.
I think we'll eventually switch to a dataflow-type programming paradigm, since that makes it much easier to write parallel programs, and also allows the underlaying hardware to switch away from the bottleneck-causing uniform memory space, which is pretty much mandated by C-derived languages.
Yeah, it's the worst form of government ever, except for all the other forms. Why would anyone possibly want a say in their country's affairs, and laws that he is expected to obey?
The Cold War is over and won, so there's no more reason to pretend moral superiority. Now we get to enjoy the fruits of fundamentalist Capitalism, just as our Russian friends got to enjoy fundamentalism Socialism. The poles aren't really any different form one another, now are they?
Yes, they are. But only potential, as in "needs more careful surveillance to make sure".
There are plenty of reasons to dislike these systems, the utter inhumanity of a world where laws are always enforced as written being one of them (for the current set of laws), but these are not them.
People steal to get heroin because heroin is expensive, and heroin is expensive because it's illegal.
Do people really destroy themselves to get heroin? Is it that heavenly?