Your "neutronium" example presumes we are not allowed to play with any other dimensions.
a) Going 3d with the same transistor size gives an easy 32768 increase = 2^15 increase (1 billion transistors is approx 32768 by 32768 transistors)
b) Increasing the size from 1 cubic centimetre to 1 cubic meter gives a 100x100x100 increase = 1000x1000 approx = 2^10 * 2^10 = 2^20
c) You want 2^54, so we are still short a hefty 2^19. To increase density by 2^20 needs 100x100x100 cells per existing cell, so a 45nm process goes to a 0.45nm process.
Meanwhile, if we presume we don't reduce heat output our new processor will output 2^54 more heat than our current processors. We can use the waste heat to run our cars for free:)
I would paraphrase TBR as saying "hey, there is a problem with how the LHC was reported. How can we rate web pages for trustworthiness to help solve that problem?". I see little difference between rating web sites compared with rating articles or people (e.g. slashdot moderation or friends/foes).
In particular your statement:
I'm opposed to the idea of any kind of trust ranking. It promotes intellectual laziness, which we already have enough of, and would work against what you promote.
could be seen as rather hypocritical (even if you browse at -1) because you are participating in Slashdot, and rankings are crucial to it's success.
Of course, the question of how much "trust" and "mod points" have in common is another question... but I would hope there was some positive correlation!
Finally TBR said "I'd be interested in different organisations labelling websites in different ways" which may imply rankings from different POVs (Scientific, Marxist, Geeks, Catholic, etc) or a choice of rankings (not just truthiness or trustworthiness dimensions).
Now you might read this and think: "What's the big deal? All I need to test if I have a trusted compiler is...another trusted compiler. Isn't it turtles all the way down?"
Not really. You do have to trust a compiler, but you don't have to know beforehand which one you must trust. If you have the source code for compiler T, you can test it against compiler A. Basically, you still have to have at least one executable compiler you trust. But you don't have to know which one you should start trusting.
And the definition of "trust" is much looser. This countermeasure will only fail if both A and T are infected in exactly the same way. The second compiler can be malicious; it just has to be malicious in some different way: i.e., it can't have the same triggers and payloads of the first. You can greatly increase the odds that the triggers/payloads are not identical by increasing diversity: using a compiler from a different era, on a different platform, without a common heritage, transforming the code, etc.
Also, the only thing compiler B has to do is compile the compiler-under-test. It can be hideously slow, produce code that is hideously slow, or only work on a machine that hasn't been produced in a decade. You could create a compiler specifically for this task. And if you're really worried about "turtles all the way down," you can write Compiler B yourself for a computer you built yourself from vacuum tubes that you made yourself. Since Compiler B only has to occasionally recompile your "real" compiler, you can impose a lot of restrictions that you would never accept in a typical production-use compiler. And you can periodically check Compiler B's integrity using every other compiler out there.
You can ask them to donate an amount to an organization you would like to support, but wouldn't normally give the cash to.
I did this and got the buyer to donate some few hundred dollars to EFF. They did the donation, and I rang up the EFF directly to check that the money was donated.
If you want pure cash, have a look for domain escrow services - they are supposed to help prevent fraud.
Joker can work to convince distros to include her improvements.
Joker can work to convince other branch maintainers to include her improved scheduler in their branch.
Popular code eventually gets mainlined (my impression is that Linus always supports Darwinian selection).
The kernel uses distributed source control precisely to allow Joker to use and prove their code. Forking is cheap and gives us all the opportunity to share our code with others without Linus' explicit seal of approval.
If a poor photographer uses a cheap video camera - what can be acheived using image processing?
In theory signal processing of a long enough video could:
Remove blur using deconvolution - multiple frames can be used to reduce deconvolution noise sensitivity and multiple frames help calculate point spread functions. Of couse motion blur is also avoided in video cameras by using Image Stabilisation (adaptive optics are becoming common even in low end cameras - eg. TX-1).
Multiple frames can be used to remove most forms of noise (and sensor noise in particular), remove specular reflections, remove obscuring objects (if can see around obstruction using different POVs), perhaps even help with removal of some shadows (maybe by moving point lighting while videoing).
With enough frames and not far out of focus, DOF can be increased. Also normal focus hunting, or by using say CHDK to continually vary focus, can synthetically increase DOF in post processing.
With varying F-stop post processing of a video stream could recover a higher dynamic range.
Aperture - I don't understand your point - video cameras have aperture control too.
Long exposure times - can be simulated via integration of multiple images - don't digital cameras do this internally anyway? Certainly the CHDK firmware does this to simulate exposure times over 65 seconds. Short exposure times can obviously be done with a suitable video camera.
Compression artifacts - yeah - a real problem.
Image processing is getting better - and I am definitely keen on using software to process videos to synthetically generate high definition images. My time and dollar resources are limited for getting the perfect photo.
I think the ideal is to team up with someone who has the skills or drive to learn in the areas you don't. Choose wisely and you get validation, the opportunity to learn from other's experience, and hopefully more drive and pleasure.
Trying to outsource critical parts (consultants, hired help) because you don't understand them usually leads to failure from what I have seen.
Either way, in my opinion modern success (and certainly success in technology) is mostly a function of learning on the job, and not over-specialising.
Good luck!
Two common situations; where Windows is part of the requirements (for whatever reason); and where Windows is locked in too deeply (COBOL is still common enough, even though there may be better languages now).
I made the conversion to Linux when I found one of my "common man" friends using Ubuntu - and he loves it. He is not a tech head in the slightest - he just wants something that works for him.
Linux can be productive for tasks you currently do (or want to do): perhaps just use Linux for such tasks and learn by example.
You want to learn Linux because you want to have options (e.g. for your CV, or you want to scout out tech that could affect you): read books, Slashdot, or whatever works to reach goals.
You are someone who likes learning tech for its own sake: I suggest just getting your hands dirty in some area of interest - true learning and probably more satisfying.
YMMV.
PS: 'shot at replacing Windows' - Linux already has in some domains, and it never will in others.
I just want a usable product that allows me to run my VMs. I suspect you have more complex needs than many, and you choose VMWare to fit those needs.
the built-in NAT networking is good enough for your purposes.
I am using bridging, not NAT. The ethernet connection is set up in promiscuous mode so the virtual machine has it's own MAC address on the network. It takes some skill to set it up (not suitable for grandma) but I know squat about Linux bridging (I was a complete newbie), and I got it working reliably using googled information...
See, the way I view it is that I shouldn't have to hit the source code for minor quibbles, and that readable, comprehensible error messages are far more valuable than available source.
Of course simple comprehensible warnings are desirable. However I have yet to hit an error in Virtual Box that I couldn't resolve easily. For me Virtual Box just works. I do care that the source code is available (Like most developers, I have been stung by closed source too many times).
Perhaps you should give the free of charge VMware Server a try as well.
I am not ignorant of VMWare's significant benefits. However, I haven't found a situation that I think justifies the cost of learning another system, when I already have a great VM that meets my needs. I did investigate VMWare, but I judged that it would take more time to learn to use it (amongst other reasons).
I find it reliable, simple to use, and reasonable to configure. It is especially good if you still need to use Windows, but want to use a Linux OS.
they've made it a royal pain to set up bridged-mode networking on Linux hosts. You get to write two scripts
I changed my/etc/network/interfaces file so the VM could see our network (used Google). I am a complete Linux newbie though, so maybe I have just misunderstood what you have said.
obscure ERROR_MESSAGES_THAT_LOOK_LIKE_THIS and provide minimal information, often requiring perusal of the source code to figure out what's wrong.
Yeah I have seen a couple of doozies - but a few minutes Googling helped me sort the problems out. I like to know the source code is there should I need it to resolve problems.
I tend to run a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit userspace.... VirtualBox doesn't support 64-bit guests at all.
I think plenty of users wouldn't have the same restrictions as you do.
I come from a windows background, and I find the GUI setup brilliant. I tried kvm, but I found it complex, and I couldn't get some features working (e.g. multi-core support, networking, ACPI problems). I would like multi-core support in VirtualBox but it isn't a biggie.
FOSS firmware that adds RAW support to higher-end Canon P&S cameras
The CHDK project - open source firmware to add pro features (such as capturing to raw format) and geeky features (movement capture) to Canon A###, S# and IXUS### point+shoot model cameras. The firmware boots from the SD card (the internal firmware is not changed).
Pick a country that you like (culturally or otherwise), learn a few basics and go there to play or work. If possible get a girlfriend there that doesn't want to speak English. Immerse yourself completely (strongly avoid English speaking people).
Try to learn like a child does, not how most adults do. Your brain has the ability to naturally pick up grammar and pronounciation - let it. Especially avoid learning from reading (it screws you up in many many ways).
Try to learn using exact mimicing - copy someone as a good comedian can. Learn to listen and exagerate. Over-exageration is beneficial because it teaches you differences, and because we naturally avoid what feels like exageration to oneself (but is actually correct e.g. hoicking/nasal/gutteral sounds).
Make mistakes, laugh at yourself, and let others laugh at you. It's great fun and people love to help someone who tries. Getting hung up on perfection is a common mistake.
Listen to songs (or even better sing along); watch movies, TV, or youtube in that language (preferably without subtitles in english or the language, and avoid anything that is dubbed).
Enjoy yourself!
My opinions are based on watching for underlying learning errors behind the errors I notice English-as-second-language speakers make. Also I have used above opinions to try and learn Spanish.
Slashdot Mirror
Your "neutronium" example presumes we are not allowed to play with any other dimensions.
:)
a) Going 3d with the same transistor size gives an easy 32768 increase = 2^15 increase (1 billion transistors is approx 32768 by 32768 transistors)
b) Increasing the size from 1 cubic centimetre to 1 cubic meter gives a 100x100x100 increase = 1000x1000 approx = 2^10 * 2^10 = 2^20
c) You want 2^54, so we are still short a hefty 2^19. To increase density by 2^20 needs 100x100x100 cells per existing cell, so a 45nm process goes to a 0.45nm process.
Meanwhile, if we presume we don't reduce heat output our new processor will output 2^54 more heat than our current processors. We can use the waste heat to run our cars for free
OP is using (one, two, infinity) rather than the more classical (one, two, many) number system.
You don't need to use obtusive language.
I would paraphrase TBR as saying "hey, there is a problem with how the LHC was reported. How can we rate web pages for trustworthiness to help solve that problem?". I see little difference between rating web sites compared with rating articles or people (e.g. slashdot moderation or friends/foes).
In particular your statement:
I'm opposed to the idea of any kind of trust ranking. It promotes intellectual laziness, which we already have enough of, and would work against what you promote.
could be seen as rather hypocritical (even if you browse at -1) because you are participating in Slashdot, and rankings are crucial to it's success.
Of course, the question of how much "trust" and "mod points" have in common is another question... but I would hope there was some positive correlation!
Finally TBR said "I'd be interested in different organisations labelling websites in different ways" which may imply rankings from different POVs (Scientific, Marxist, Geeks, Catholic, etc) or a choice of rankings (not just truthiness or trustworthiness dimensions).
I've just figured out your game - you are a crypto-anarchist trying to bring down the system from the inside...
We have weapons and will fight back - you are now my first foe! Lynch him boys!
Soooo, you want to be moderated -1? Or were you trying for +1 ironic? Or have I just been trolled? Arrrggggh!
When can you consider a compiler "clean"?
Countering "Trusting Trust"
If you have any concerns with that, they should be answered in: David A. Wheeler's Page on Countering Trusting Trust through Diverse Double-Compiling (Trojan Horse attacks on Compilers)
If you find any holes in the theory that were not discussed, then consider writing up your findings for publication.
The ability to use a search engine to find exactly what you need amongst all the junk is a rare skill that you have, and that most people don't.
You can ask them to donate an amount to an organization you would like to support, but wouldn't normally give the cash to. I did this and got the buyer to donate some few hundred dollars to EFF. They did the donation, and I rang up the EFF directly to check that the money was donated. If you want pure cash, have a look for domain escrow services - they are supposed to help prevent fraud.
The kernel uses distributed source control precisely to allow Joker to use and prove their code. Forking is cheap and gives us all the opportunity to share our code with others without Linus' explicit seal of approval.
Image processing is getting better - and I am definitely keen on using software to process videos to synthetically generate high definition images. My time and dollar resources are limited for getting the perfect photo.
I think the ideal is to team up with someone who has the skills or drive to learn in the areas you don't. Choose wisely and you get validation, the opportunity to learn from other's experience, and hopefully more drive and pleasure.
Trying to outsource critical parts (consultants, hired help) because you don't understand them usually leads to failure from what I have seen.
Either way, in my opinion modern success (and certainly success in technology) is mostly a function of learning on the job, and not over-specialising. Good luck!
Two common situations; where Windows is part of the requirements (for whatever reason); and where Windows is locked in too deeply (COBOL is still common enough, even though there may be better languages now).
I am mostly happy that MS has traditionally been focused on short term gains rather than security.
It has helped a bunch of people to develop open source OSes and communities, which I think are fantastic.
Aside: I would love to see MS eat Yahoo - I think it would be poison pill.
Yeah, I rang Windows support last week — I am still on hold...
I made the conversion to Linux when I found one of my "common man" friends using Ubuntu - and he loves it. He is not a tech head in the slightest - he just wants something that works for him.
YMMV.
PS: 'shot at replacing Windows' - Linux already has in some domains, and it never will in others.
I just want a usable product that allows me to run my VMs. I suspect you have more complex needs than many, and you choose VMWare to fit those needs.
the built-in NAT networking is good enough for your purposes.
I am using bridging, not NAT. The ethernet connection is set up in promiscuous mode so the virtual machine has it's own MAC address on the network. It takes some skill to set it up (not suitable for grandma) but I know squat about Linux bridging (I was a complete newbie), and I got it working reliably using googled information...
See, the way I view it is that I shouldn't have to hit the source code for minor quibbles, and that readable, comprehensible error messages are far more valuable than available source.
Of course simple comprehensible warnings are desirable. However I have yet to hit an error in Virtual Box that I couldn't resolve easily. For me Virtual Box just works. I do care that the source code is available (Like most developers, I have been stung by closed source too many times).
Perhaps you should give the free of charge VMware Server a try as well.
I am not ignorant of VMWare's significant benefits. However, I haven't found a situation that I think justifies the cost of learning another system, when I already have a great VM that meets my needs.
I did investigate VMWare, but I judged that it would take more time to learn to use it (amongst other reasons).
they've made it a royal pain to set up bridged-mode networking on Linux hosts. You get to write two scripts
I changed my /etc/network/interfaces file so the VM could see our network (used Google). I am a complete Linux newbie though, so maybe I have just misunderstood what you have said.
obscure ERROR_MESSAGES_THAT_LOOK_LIKE_THIS and provide minimal information, often requiring perusal of the source code to figure out what's wrong.
Yeah I have seen a couple of doozies - but a few minutes Googling helped me sort the problems out. I like to know the source code is there should I need it to resolve problems.
I tend to run a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit userspace. ... VirtualBox doesn't support 64-bit guests at all.
I think plenty of users wouldn't have the same restrictions as you do.
I come from a windows background, and I find the GUI setup brilliant. I tried kvm, but I found it complex, and I couldn't get some features working (e.g. multi-core support, networking, ACPI problems). I would like multi-core support in VirtualBox but it isn't a biggie.
— You assume that total negative effect of changes is proportional to LOC.
— If I make same assumption as you then more LOC is a benefit because I get more features.
If someone can modify your JSON messages, they can inject script into any .js files requested.
If your JSON generation is unsafe, then go home.
Hmmmmm.....the invasion of Canada vote!!!! Prepare thyself, Oh Canada!!
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/gruentransfer/thepitch.htm
I'm upside down here in backwards little 'ol NZ, hoping that it is just a joke.
FOSS firmware that adds RAW support to higher-end Canon P&S cameras
The CHDK project - open source firmware to add pro features (such as capturing to raw format) and geeky features (movement capture) to Canon A###, S# and IXUS### point+shoot model cameras. The firmware boots from the SD card (the internal firmware is not changed).
Useful links are features and supported models (from the FAQ) and examples of results (see samples on right) using CHDK.
It is like getting a pro upgrade to your camera (Aside: I have a PowerShot TX-1 which I love and recommend to anyone who wants a P&S camera).
> without using tables for layout
You restrict yourself from using the obvious, most compatible solution and then complain?
My opinions are based on watching for underlying learning errors behind the errors I notice English-as-second-language speakers make. Also I have used above opinions to try and learn Spanish.