They're traveling across the wind, not just being pushed straight forward by it. Think of a racing sailboat keeling over to the side--clearly it's not being pushed from behind (or at least, not always).
Shannon entropy has been a standard tool in data communications for a very long time--telcos use this math to make your phones work. It's effectively a way of quantifying the informational content of a signal, which can be used to determine exactly what kind of bandwidth you need in a bandwidth-limited environment. I'm uncertain what it's used for in the context of a brain-machine interface. Any good data communications textbook would have some nice examples in it, and actually that wikipedia article posted is very readable and informative.
The quotes by Feynman are great, but the actual article linked (the blog post) is one of the most spectacularly uninsightful things I've ever read. I don't think that dud has ever worked on any sort of engineering project, ever. Can we just link straight to the good stuff next time, and not to some retard's blog?
Bull. If you fail to properly protect your computer, you'll probably become part of a botnet which spams my computer. I have a right to infect your computer with a fix just as soon as your computer is screwing up my network because you were too lazy to apply updates.
Re:So when do we get its successor?
on
X Power Tools
·
· Score: 1
Note: The earlier article posted here on Slashdot re: IE8 having 3 render modes (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/22/1837244) is worth reading. It describes fairly succinctly how/why the tag is broken (and it wasn't published by MS!). The solution provided by MS is actually a rather good idea.
from TFA:
'The map program reads a set of "records" from an input file, does any desired filtering and/or transformations, and then outputs a set of records of the form (key, data). As the map program produces output records, a "split" function partitions the records into M disjoint buckets by applying a function to the key of each output record. This split function is typically a hash function, though any deterministic function will suffice. When a bucket fills, it is written to disk. The map program terminates with M output files, one for each bucket.'
(key, data) = database output dude, RTFA
And by the way, databases can be used for computation
>If you take the time to read the article you'll find they use axiomatic arguments with lemmas like: "schemas >are good", and "Separation of the schema from the application is good, etc.
Actually, it says:
"The database community has learned the following three lessons from the 40 years that have unfolded since IBM first released IMS in 1968.
Schemas are good.
Separation of the schema from the application is good.
High-level access languages are good."
Way to conveniently drop important contextual information. Axioms like these, derived from 40 years of experience, carry a lot of weight for me.
Not true. Many people like to make this claim, but analog records have physical limitations as to the frequency content they can record. There is a noise level which limits the accuracy of recordings done on records, just as there is an associated noise power from continuous->discrete conversion in the A/D process. You can create digital recording which retain more of the originally produced sound than an analog record possibly can with increased sampling rates and low noise electronics.
He's running Vista x64, the address space allocation isn't the same. The address space is gigantic (2^64 possible locations, rather than the 2^32 = 4 GB VM locations on a 32 bit machine). The OS doesn't have the same limitations.
In other news, I am positive that there are no elephants in my house because of the elephant dust I sprinkled on the floor!
Your contention that your OS is secure because you don't see people attacking you is patently ridiculous. That only proves that you're not a prime target. It's just like presidential candidates claiming the PATRIOT act has prevented terrorism; we haven't been attacked so it must be working, right!? The primary security characteristic of a Mac is that it's a low market share OS, so it's not targeted as often.
Well, I came out of a good engineering program and I learned logic just fine. Did it ever occur to you that the problem might not be students in general, but the students you were looking at?
(posted at work... in Redmond)
"The real slap in the face of the whole thing is that said companies than have the audacity to complain that we don't have enough educated workers to provide a workforce here in America."
Major companies in the US are digging deeper into the US recruiting pool than they would like to. They used to be hiring from the top 5%, now they're hiring from the top 20%, and the quality of their employees is demonstrably worse. What's so audacious about their complaints?
"Microsoft tries too hard to be everything to everyone. Other operating systems do not follow this plan." Other operating systems aren't installed on 90% of computers in the world. Nor are they particularly profitable.
Wrong. You'd increase the percentage, yeah, but for all the freeloaders you'd also get a significant number of motivated people who didn't previously have college as an option, or who would be pursuing arts majors if they had the choice but are forced to pursue the science option (and are still plenty bright and capable). The cost/benefit analysis here should show the program to be a winner for society in general. Plus, you're not getting a free education, you have to teach for four years afterward.
And, the "computer science boom and bust cycle" has occurred a total of once (see 2001 stock bubble popping), so I don't think we get to call that a cycle yet.
I think - and correct me if I'm wrong - that this author really needs - to learn how to write something - a full paragraph, perhaps - without using - so - many - damned - hyphens. And using ALL of them in the WRONG way, incidentally.
This allows execution of arbitrary code... that's as bad as it gets. This could be used to do anything the computer can do. All files accessible to the current user could be uploaded somewhere else; machine could be made part of a botnet for DoS attacks; anything! Arbitrary code execution is a BAD, BAD thing.
The actual code is simple. With the stack based machine, the code and the actual process which ensues are simple. What you've shown there is not a mere 4 clock cycles, but more like ~15; it makes use of a complicated instruction set which implies a much larger amount of work to physically do than to write.
Investments are extremely effective ways to make money when you already have a lot to work with. If you've got $50,000 or more you might be able to do better than a savings account in the short term--maybe. It's unlikely you'll make any money making stock/bond investments with less than that, as trading costs eat up returns very quickly. As others seem to have suggested, living frugally is a far more effective way to keep money in the bank. You're probably not really going to be able to make money with money for some time (if you're anything like me, I'm in college too).
Slashdot Mirror
Horse****. They've both addressed the national debt. http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/fiscal/ObamaPolicy_Fiscal.pdf http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/JobsforAmerica/reform.htm
They're traveling across the wind, not just being pushed straight forward by it. Think of a racing sailboat keeling over to the side--clearly it's not being pushed from behind (or at least, not always).
Shannon entropy has been a standard tool in data communications for a very long time--telcos use this math to make your phones work. It's effectively a way of quantifying the informational content of a signal, which can be used to determine exactly what kind of bandwidth you need in a bandwidth-limited environment. I'm uncertain what it's used for in the context of a brain-machine interface.
Any good data communications textbook would have some nice examples in it, and actually that wikipedia article posted is very readable and informative.
The quotes by Feynman are great, but the actual article linked (the blog post) is one of the most spectacularly uninsightful things I've ever read. I don't think that dud has ever worked on any sort of engineering project, ever. Can we just link straight to the good stuff next time, and not to some retard's blog?
Encrypting virtual memory would be LUDICROUSLY, UNUSABLY, SICKENINGLY slow. But you could do it.
Bull. If you fail to properly protect your computer, you'll probably become part of a botnet which spams my computer. I have a right to infect your computer with a fix just as soon as your computer is screwing up my network because you were too lazy to apply updates.
X11 tunneling over SSH would be sorely missed.
Note: The earlier article posted here on Slashdot re: IE8 having 3 render modes (http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/22/1837244) is worth reading. It describes fairly succinctly how/why the tag is broken (and it wasn't published by MS!). The solution provided by MS is actually a rather good idea.
from TFA: 'The map program reads a set of "records" from an input file, does any desired filtering and/or transformations, and then outputs a set of records of the form (key, data). As the map program produces output records, a "split" function partitions the records into M disjoint buckets by applying a function to the key of each output record. This split function is typically a hash function, though any deterministic function will suffice. When a bucket fills, it is written to disk. The map program terminates with M output files, one for each bucket.' (key, data) = database output dude, RTFA And by the way, databases can be used for computation
>If you take the time to read the article you'll find they use axiomatic arguments with lemmas like: "schemas >are good", and "Separation of the schema from the application is good, etc. Actually, it says: "The database community has learned the following three lessons from the 40 years that have unfolded since IBM first released IMS in 1968. Schemas are good. Separation of the schema from the application is good. High-level access languages are good." Way to conveniently drop important contextual information. Axioms like these, derived from 40 years of experience, carry a lot of weight for me.
Not true. Many people like to make this claim, but analog records have physical limitations as to the frequency content they can record. There is a noise level which limits the accuracy of recordings done on records, just as there is an associated noise power from continuous->discrete conversion in the A/D process. You can create digital recording which retain more of the originally produced sound than an analog record possibly can with increased sampling rates and low noise electronics.
He's running Vista x64, the address space allocation isn't the same. The address space is gigantic (2^64 possible locations, rather than the 2^32 = 4 GB VM locations on a 32 bit machine). The OS doesn't have the same limitations.
MSFT does pay a dividend, $0.11/qtr. http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AMSFT
In other news, I am positive that there are no elephants in my house because of the elephant dust I sprinkled on the floor!
Your contention that your OS is secure because you don't see people attacking you is patently ridiculous. That only proves that you're not a prime target. It's just like presidential candidates claiming the PATRIOT act has prevented terrorism; we haven't been attacked so it must be working, right!? The primary security characteristic of a Mac is that it's a low market share OS, so it's not targeted as often.
Well, I came out of a good engineering program and I learned logic just fine. Did it ever occur to you that the problem might not be students in general, but the students you were looking at? (posted at work... in Redmond)
"The real slap in the face of the whole thing is that said companies than have the audacity to complain that we don't have enough educated workers to provide a workforce here in America." Major companies in the US are digging deeper into the US recruiting pool than they would like to. They used to be hiring from the top 5%, now they're hiring from the top 20%, and the quality of their employees is demonstrably worse. What's so audacious about their complaints?
"Microsoft tries too hard to be everything to everyone. Other operating systems do not follow this plan."
Other operating systems aren't installed on 90% of computers in the world. Nor are they particularly profitable.
Wrong. You'd increase the percentage, yeah, but for all the freeloaders you'd also get a significant number of motivated people who didn't previously have college as an option, or who would be pursuing arts majors if they had the choice but are forced to pursue the science option (and are still plenty bright and capable). The cost/benefit analysis here should show the program to be a winner for society in general. Plus, you're not getting a free education, you have to teach for four years afterward.
And, the "computer science boom and bust cycle" has occurred a total of once (see 2001 stock bubble popping), so I don't think we get to call that a cycle yet.
That's actually pretty damn cool. What's the catch?
I think - and correct me if I'm wrong - that this author really needs - to learn how to write something - a full paragraph, perhaps - without using - so - many - damned - hyphens.
And using ALL of them in the WRONG way, incidentally.
This allows execution of arbitrary code... that's as bad as it gets. This could be used to do anything the computer can do. All files accessible to the current user could be uploaded somewhere else; machine could be made part of a botnet for DoS attacks; anything! Arbitrary code execution is a BAD, BAD thing.
The actual code is simple. With the stack based machine, the code and the actual process which ensues are simple. What you've shown there is not a mere 4 clock cycles, but more like ~15; it makes use of a complicated instruction set which implies a much larger amount of work to physically do than to write.
Not checking baggae is the best way to ensure fast travel; you must not travel much. Businesspeople need to be living out of a carryon.
Investments are extremely effective ways to make money when you already have a lot to work with. If you've got $50,000 or more you might be able to do better than a savings account in the short term--maybe. It's unlikely you'll make any money making stock/bond investments with less than that, as trading costs eat up returns very quickly. As others seem to have suggested, living frugally is a far more effective way to keep money in the bank. You're probably not really going to be able to make money with money for some time (if you're anything like me, I'm in college too).
It will be very interesting to see where the Google usgov search engine comes out in terms of the political spectrum.