I'm a CS grad student at the University of North Carolina. I've never used BeOS, but I'm confident that responsiveness will increase, because the work I'm doing right now is attended to address this very issue.
The thing that makes multi threaded programming so difficult is concurrency control - it's extremely easy for programmers to screw up lock-based methods, deadlocking the entire system. The are newer methods of concurrency control that have been proposed, and the most promising method (in my opinion) is 'Software Transactional Memory' which makes it almost trivial to convert correct sequential code to code that is thread-safe. Currently, there are several 'High Performance Computing Languages' in development, and to my knowledge, they all include transactional memory.
The incredible difficulties involved in making chips faster are precipitating a shift to multicore machines. The widespread prevalence of these machines, coupled with newer concurrency control techniques will undoubtedly lead to an increase of responsiveness.
People would object to measures that are being implemented when they have heavy costs - it costs money for companies to reduce emissions and for the government to enforce standards.
What's the political organization in that office? The article made it sound as if political appointees outside the office were trying to tell him what to do? Who was it that had authority over this guy?
All the processors in the world won't do you any good if you can't write the software to harness them, and conventional lock-based techniques are really really easy to screw up. I'm really curious to see what those 'rich algorithmic' solutions they've got are.
Is there a group somewhere consisting of people who know computers using their skills to attack computer systems run by oppressive regimes and shut down their ability to do this sort of thing? If not, somebody who knows more than I do ought to start one. I'd love to use what little skill I've got to try to break into computer systems run by thugs and shut them down.
"unprovoked and for solely mercantile reasons"
Theft doesn't count as provocation? The Egyptians "nationalized" (i.e. stole) the canal from French and British investors. That's a perfectly good justification for military action in my book. Even the UN sided with israel on this one.
Yup. You've got it. You're supposed to keep it 'secret' but you have to give it out to a lot of people all the time. It's a really stupid system. George W Bush proposed getting rid of it, but the democrats howled and their really wasn't much popular support.
Every American citizen is issued a "social security number." Social Security is a "retirement" program instituted by the American government to provide for its citizens when they retire. The numbers are now used largely to identify citizens by banks, schools, hospitals, and many other organizations. If you have someone else's social security number and driver's license, you can most likely apply for a line of credit in their name.
It's basically a combination user-id and password which is transmitted in plain text. Very stupid.
The entire social security program is absurd. Ignoring the economics of the retirement portion of the program, using SSN's for identification is a terrible idea. The program was never initially designed for the numbers to be used as ID's, but the need for one was so overwhelming that people started accepting them.
Scrap the entire Social Security program. If you think the government ought to force people to prepare for their retirement, withdraw money from their paychecks and put it in a personal account for them. Hell, even a bank account with 1% interest would give you a better return than social security, and it guarantees ownership of your money, instead of allowing the government to waste it building bridges to nowhere when you die.
Once that's done, let's design a proper identification system, so it doesn't matter if someone gets your ID number.
Because you can't trust it completely? That is true of every source. I think the rise of wikipedia is a great thing, if it teaches people to be skeptical of any source they use. I've been saying this for a while.
Power Companies are granted monopolies by the public. Part of the deal is that, because the power companies are granted a monopoly by the public, they have to publicize all transactions they undertake.
Why? Otherwise, you could have sweat-heart deals between the power companies and their customers. Instead of paying the power company (and thereby the people) for your power usage, you could pay the owners of the power company to give you a huge discount. The power copmany then can just raise rates on consumers who have no say in who gives them power. By forcing the company to keep the books open, you prevent the possibility of impropriety.
I would argue that such issues are a good reason to switch to more heavily privatized models. Ideally, the government would maintain the infrastructure, and anybody who wanted could add power to the grid. That'd be sweet.
Nothing to see here folks. They kidnapped a bunch of our soldiers and our response was an embarrassment to the once proud history of the British navy, but real danger we have to look out for is communists...
There are scientists from many credible institutions up here. I can't check all of their reputations. That's irrelevant. Science is not a popularity contest. The environmental movement would like to make it one.
Sure, you can play with the models, but there's no guarantee that the models are accurate.
The experimental data seems questionable; they're saying that that the average temperature has risen less than one degree over the past century - I don't think you could possibly gather data that precise on temperatures, especially over 50 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a CS grad student at the University of North Carolina. I've never used BeOS, but I'm confident that responsiveness will increase, because the work I'm doing right now is attended to address this very issue.
The thing that makes multi threaded programming so difficult is concurrency control - it's extremely easy for programmers to screw up lock-based methods, deadlocking the entire system. The are newer methods of concurrency control that have been proposed, and the most promising method (in my opinion) is 'Software Transactional Memory' which makes it almost trivial to convert correct sequential code to code that is thread-safe. Currently, there are several 'High Performance Computing Languages' in development, and to my knowledge, they all include transactional memory.
The incredible difficulties involved in making chips faster are precipitating a shift to multicore machines. The widespread prevalence of these machines, coupled with newer concurrency control techniques will undoubtedly lead to an increase of responsiveness.
Are you saying that entertainment isn't a form of wealth?
People would object to measures that are being implemented when they have heavy costs - it costs money for companies to reduce emissions and for the government to enforce standards.
What's the political organization in that office? The article made it sound as if political appointees outside the office were trying to tell him what to do? Who was it that had authority over this guy?
Would you rather they just used lead bullets when rioters take to the streets?
All the processors in the world won't do you any good if you can't write the software to harness them, and conventional lock-based techniques are really really easy to screw up. I'm really curious to see what those 'rich algorithmic' solutions they've got are.
Is there a group somewhere consisting of people who know computers using their skills to attack computer systems run by oppressive regimes and shut down their ability to do this sort of thing? If not, somebody who knows more than I do ought to start one. I'd love to use what little skill I've got to try to break into computer systems run by thugs and shut them down.
I thought fox was a republican lapdog?
Shouldn't he be an american?
Developing on the PS3 III is an absolute nightmare. Sony is simply looking to spread some FUD about the Xbox 360 as well.
Yes! i've been saying the same thing! http://markpneyer.com/wp/2005/11/01/i-saw-this-one -coming/
It only applies to soldiers fighting in uniform. It has no application those who fight under no flag, for no country.
Not if you think the only real evil entities in the world are bush, cheney, and walmart. That seems to be common around here.
"unprovoked and for solely mercantile reasons" Theft doesn't count as provocation? The Egyptians "nationalized" (i.e. stole) the canal from French and British investors. That's a perfectly good justification for military action in my book. Even the UN sided with israel on this one.
Yup. You've got it. You're supposed to keep it 'secret' but you have to give it out to a lot of people all the time. It's a really stupid system. George W Bush proposed getting rid of it, but the democrats howled and their really wasn't much popular support.
Every American citizen is issued a "social security number." Social Security is a "retirement" program instituted by the American government to provide for its citizens when they retire. The numbers are now used largely to identify citizens by banks, schools, hospitals, and many other organizations. If you have someone else's social security number and driver's license, you can most likely apply for a line of credit in their name.
It's basically a combination user-id and password which is transmitted in plain text. Very stupid.
The entire social security program is absurd. Ignoring the economics of the retirement portion of the program, using SSN's for identification is a terrible idea. The program was never initially designed for the numbers to be used as ID's, but the need for one was so overwhelming that people started accepting them.
Scrap the entire Social Security program. If you think the government ought to force people to prepare for their retirement, withdraw money from their paychecks and put it in a personal account for them. Hell, even a bank account with 1% interest would give you a better return than social security, and it guarantees ownership of your money, instead of allowing the government to waste it building bridges to nowhere when you die.
Once that's done, let's design a proper identification system, so it doesn't matter if someone gets your ID number.
Because you can't trust it completely? That is true of every source. I think the rise of wikipedia is a great thing, if it teaches people to be skeptical of any source they use. I've been saying this for a while.
Power Companies are granted monopolies by the public. Part of the deal is that, because the power companies are granted a monopoly by the public, they have to publicize all transactions they undertake.
Why? Otherwise, you could have sweat-heart deals between the power companies and their customers. Instead of paying the power company (and thereby the people) for your power usage, you could pay the owners of the power company to give you a huge discount. The power copmany then can just raise rates on consumers who have no say in who gives them power. By forcing the company to keep the books open, you prevent the possibility of impropriety.
I would argue that such issues are a good reason to switch to more heavily privatized models. Ideally, the government would maintain the infrastructure, and anybody who wanted could add power to the grid. That'd be sweet.
Effective Immediately: Do some Evil. Just, you know, not too much.
Nothing to see here folks. They kidnapped a bunch of our soldiers and our response was an embarrassment to the once proud history of the British navy, but real danger we have to look out for is communists...
There are scientists from many credible institutions up here. I can't check all of their reputations. That's irrelevant. Science is not a popularity contest. The environmental movement would like to make it one.
Sure, you can play with the models, but there's no guarantee that the models are accurate. The experimental data seems questionable; they're saying that that the average temperature has risen less than one degree over the past century - I don't think you could possibly gather data that precise on temperatures, especially over 50 years ago.
Trogolodytes? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_t he_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warm ing
People like you are ruining science.
Forgive me for not towing the line, but I find this stuff really hard to believe.