Of course, that depends on who the user of the technology (such as, advertisement agencies), not the technology itself. The technology simply detects who is looking at the billboard, and how old the person is. It's entirely up to the ad agency to show adult dating sites or whatsoever on the billboard.
Thus, I think the ad agencies will end up putting ads that aren't so offensive to any demographic, anyway. Unlike popups from the web, it's intended to be placed on public space.
Password protection was supported for a long time, and is a part of the standard ATA specifiation. Although it typically has nothing to do with full-disk encryption, it was more or less enough to keep honest people honest, and add a little bit of cost+effort to bypass it.
Many RAID controllers use this feature to prevent the user from connecting a RAID-formatted hard drive to a normal ATA controller, thereby accidently destroying all data. Unlocking the drive is a non-issue, since they use the same password that you might find after a few minutes of googling, and if the RAID controller that locked it is available, you can unlock it without any problem.
Yes, it doesn't work. If you ever tried to design something using Verilog or VHDL, and tried to generate a real-world design, either an FPGA or a real chip, you will see that things aren't so easy.
I learned it the hard way, while doing my last year of undergraduate course. The simulation worked perfectly - correct input, correct output. On the other hand, making it work on the FPGA was a horrible, horrible, horrible job. Took 2 weeks of trying this, trying that, still with no clue.
Although the problem was a small behavior/synthesis mismatch, I found out that this was going to be a horrible job, because you may have bosses thinking just like you, and ask you to complete the implementation job by a few days. The truth is, that each synthesis job (equivalent to compiling) takes hours (if not days) to complete, and it is almost certain that it won't run on the first try. Believe me, there is a reason that there is a multi-billion dollar market for designing and verifying chips, where a huge portion of that is verification and debugging.
For firmwares, it is sorta similar state. You have to work around hardware bugs, e.g. you have to avoid calling some instruction that is supposed to work, and did work on simulation, because the processor screws itself when that instruction is called once every million time. The problem is, not calling that instruction may be possible, but identifying the problem gets really dirty.
Now I write simulators and models for simulation, rather than writing HDL code that should end up inside some FPGA or ASIC. I am much happier now, since Intel and AMD did a lot of work to verify and fix their dirty bugs, and I can trust the underlying hardware.
2,800lb flywheels, plus the related cirtuits, plus maintainence of the flywheel ain't cheap.
Plus, proper power capping can reduce infrastructure cost, since the power distribution/conversion whatsoever system in the datacenter needs to be designed according to the maximum load, which means they need a lot of headroom on their power supply. By doing so, they can reduce the maximum load.
The only problem... is how they will reduce power while minimizing the interruption to the workload on peak times. Not an easy job, but I don't think it would be impossible. We should try, at least.
It is common to deliberately add a check that breaks the whole stuff when some 'unexpected' condition happens. You know, assertions.
Which one is better? Not working at all, or seems like working but a not-so-commonly-used-some-sort-of-admin-command somehow gets screwed and the web browser fires a do-not-touch-this-unless-you-want-complete-meltdown-command because there was some minor difference on the javscript engine parsing some parameters? Yeah, can be extremely rare, but if it isn't tested, nobody can be sure.
Obviously, the best thing to do would be to test all possible conditions. However, if you can't, then there can be three choices:
1) Leave it to the users, Nah, I'm not gonna test it. 2) Launch a big warning message and blame the users if something goes wrong, or 3) Make it never work when some unknown condition is reached.
Number 1 is perfectly reasonable when the worst consequence isn't so bad. For example, a web forum interface, or things like Facebook. Maybe number 2 would be better in most cases. But, if an untested scenario may cause huge, irrecoverable damage, number 3 may be the best choice. (You should remember that the product in question was the server management console, which can bring the whole datacenter down when things go wrong.)
My opinion is that, deliberately excluding Opera was a quite reasonable idea. Trying to sell a product that deliberately excludes Opera (web browser) to Opera (the company) was the stupid idea.
Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in United States, I live in a country where millitary service is mandatory) I also highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens. On the other side, it is a good way to turn useful people into far less productive citizens.
My opinion is that, the main goal of the boot camp is to create an average person, not too smart, not to dumb, not too hardworking, not to lazy, etc. Transforming normal people into standardized soldiers.
The problem is, that when that person returns to his original environment, it doesn't take so long to see a 'standardized' person to return to his normal lifestyle. I saw numerous friends who found out 'how lazy they were, and how worthless they were' on the boot camp, and found that they also can achieve things if they try hard enough. However, after finishing their millitary service and returning to their original environment, it didn't take long to return to their original life pattern.
What I saw, along with many other people saw, was that game addiction, and probably web addiction, is an symptom of other problems, not itself being the problem. Those guys may have problem with their friends, their school, their parents, or whatsoever. Sending them to the boot camp may solve some of them (no more school, no more previous friends, and no more parents yelling at you), but once they are out of the boot camp, everything returns to the previous state.
Of course, it is cheaper to just use the record right now. However, it isn't that simple.
What I find, is that the situation is similar to animated videos. You can draw some cartoonish character, a few cuts manually, and send the whole stuff to some country with massive number of people drawing all the in-between scenes *manually*. Just like 'The Simpsons' or 'South Park' or whatsoever.
On the other side, you can just generate everything using your computer. Create some 3D model of some character, create a virtual world, and then make it act. Examples are those stuff from Pixar or Dreamworks.
The problem isn't just whether it is realistic or not. Another aspect of this stuff is productivity. For example, if you are playing some kind of MMORPG and you want to have every character to have some kind of voice, good luck hiring a horde of voice actors for a gazillion number of lines. Instead, you can write some kind of 'voice simulator' which does text-to-speech remarkably well, and let it create all the recordings. No actors, just computers. Much cheaper.
Actually, recording realistic sound effects are really difficult, because it isn't just 'stick the microphone to the stuff that emits the sound'. Recording the perfect sound effect actually takes a lot of engineering and trial-and-error, which can be really expensive if you want to take a lot of sound effects.
In conclusion, real-time synthesis - probably not yet. Content generation - definitely yes.
noop scheduler isn't SSD support. Seems like you didn't RTFA, which means that you didn't understand what TRIM is.
From the article, page 4:
"If the drive broadcasts itself as a solid state drive (which can be done through the latest ATA specification), Windows 7 can make adjustments to ensure that the drive performs at its best. For example, if Windows 7 can verify that you're running a solid state disk, it will disable defragmentation for that drive (as defragging puts un-necessary wear on SSD's and doesn't help performance). Windows 7 will also enable support for "TRIM", also known as DisableDeleteNotify, an add-on to the ATA specification which allows for enhanced performance and decreased strain on the drive. According to Microsoft, here's what TRIM brings to the table.
* Enhancing device wear leveling by eliminating merge operation for all deleted data blocks
* Making early garbage collection possible for fast write
* Keeping deviceâ(TM)s unused storage area as much as possible; more room for device wear leveling.
Basically, Windows 7 will send TRIM commands down the storage chain, but it's up to the drive to accept the commands and utilize them. In order for TRIM to work, you not only need Windows 7, but you'll need a solid state hard disk which has support for TRIM via its Firmware."
Every time I install Windows, it takes three or four hours to complete setup - install drivers, install patches, install cygwin, MS office and whatsoever, restore backup data, and I'm ready to work.
Every time I install Linux, it takes three or four days to complete setup - install Linux, install packages, change font configurations because the default rendering is so ugly, search on the net to figure out how I can get (insert some hardware here) working on my PC, search on the net to figure out why my PC doesn't shut down properly, search on the net why XXXX doesn't work anymore, search on the net for an older version of some package so that I don't need to touch some old code (that I don't intend to fix), search for this, that, etc. Have to do the same thing for every distribution, because one method that worked for one distribution doesn't work for the other one.
Even after the settings are done, I have to cope with poor localizations. Typing in other languages such as Korean or Japanese is still horrible, though I must admit the situation has improved vastly. Messages are badly translated, or some messages aren't translated at all. Now I just gave up using any language other than English on my Ubuntu desktop.
Yes, they are indoctrinated to a world of horrible things. They refuse to open their mind to anything else. So what? They find their computer as a tool, and if the tool does what they need to do, that's enough. I can't teach my wife how to configure SCIM, how to deal with the messages not translated properly, and how to deal with the website that doesn't get rendered properly on Firefox (though in this case, the website is to blame), while all she uses is some simple word processing and web surfing (total 2 hrs per week) which all works perfectly well on Windows. I'd rather deal with the malwares than teaching her all that stuff.
What is worse, is that the original code doesn't even looks like it is 'supposed to give better performance on x86'.
The code was assuming that struct alignments are done in four bytes. Good luck when it becomes something larger, because I guess it will increase to something bigger in a not-so-distant future.
Although not mentioned on the article, I am damn sure that the guys on iSuppli will be thinking something like 'OMG how can they do business with such a high material cost?'. 50% looks tooooooo high to me, and I am damn sure that they are selling it for a loss.
Believe me, iSuppli did many, many, and many work something like this before, and their purpose is to understand how those companies operate.
It's no secret that material cost is only a tiny fraction of the retail price on this kind of high-tech business. Screaming socialism on this kind of article is completely laughable.
Yes, you can lie and submit a fake name/number combination. How they implement the verification system is their problem. Some never check at all, many others just check the hash value (the national ID number has its last digit generated from a simple hash function), others check against other databases suchas ones from credit rating agencies, and ask for a photocopy of their ID card if it doesn't exist on the database. Sadly, records occasionally leak due to incompetent server admins, rouge employees, and even careless people posting their ID publicly on the net. There actually has been some class action lawsuits regarding ID leaks, and several prosecutions related to databasae leaks.
The only thing that prevents you from using a fake or somebody else's name/number is that doing so is a criminal offense.
I think that the national ID number must be abolished or make it practically useless other than as a hash number, since it is so easy to obtain someone else's ID number and abuse it.
However, the problem is that he didn't have any stocks or any assets. He was merely a jobless man on his early thirties who didn't have any formal education on economy. That's why the DA is not convicting him for some kind of law on securities or market arbitration, which is far more severe than publishing false information. what he claims is that the DA is charging him because he was merely grumbling that the government is a stupid big liar, though some of the information was not throughoutly fact-checked.
Of course, there are conspiracy theories that there are other people behind him, since they was shocked that his real-world identy was a jobless man who merely graduated community college, and still could post articles with in-depth analysis on the current financial situation. However, that's another story.
I am a native South Korean who live in Seoul, and maybe I can (sort of) explain a bit about the law.
Yes, the websites hate the law pretty much (because it requires the companies to add 'ID authentication system', which isn't cheap in a market with razor-thin profits), and many Koreans who do care about privacy also hate it, too. I also feel sort of sad when that law passed.
Well, the reason behind this law was something like this. In slashdot, if you see a troll, you simply moderate that reply a '-1, troll', and move along. In Korea, people start 'feeding' the troll in more cruel ways, e.g. track down the real-world identy of that guy, bomb his personal website with hate spams, bomb his e-mail, and in some occasions, even e-mails of people close to him. Yup, the replies on that troll became the real-world identy of that guy, rather than another troll, or any reasonable reply.
The horrifying thing was that this phenomenom wasn't limited to real-world celeberities. It could be you, or me, or anybody on the net. Yes, being a troll, or saying something stupid isn't a good thing to do, but we all do make mistakes. I've seen people ranging from teenage girls to senior citizens getting horribly bullied by anonymous mobs. Occasionally, there were news reports on people commiting suicide because of the mental horror they had to undergo. It got so serious that people needed to stay completely anonymous on all occasions, or having some way to stop this maddness.
Yes, I feel that many of the Korean people don't think political freedom is such an important thing compared to things such as security or wealth. This may be because their history of democracy has been so short, and they have been living a hard life for many years suffering from poverty, hunger, and North Korea. Republic of Korea is merely some 60-years old, and approximately half of that period was under the rule of dictators. In such a society, it is difficult to teach why political freedom is important and dictatorship is bad, because those people who benefited a lot from the dictatorship still exists in many core positions of the society. I believe it may take some time, patience, education, and continuous struggling.
Re:Bad jobs? Maybe. But some people will take them
on
Even Dirtier IT Jobs
·
· Score: 1
...and how about the cost of living in California?
As many others said, the simple reason is because the headphone is meant to work as a remote controller, so that Apple can eliminate all controls from the surface of the iPod. Nothing so innovative - we had CD players and tape recorders with remotes for years. The remotes disappeared because, I think, the media players got compact enough, so that they no longer need to have remotes to control the players that previously had to stay somewhere inside a pocket or some kind of bag.
Just think of the smallest media players - they are already as small as the remote controllers we used decades ago. why in world do we need a remote when the media player itself is small enough? Looks like a flawed design decision.
That's exactly why they want (and need) the kill switch - protecting the radio spectrum, and the phone itself. (Many parts of the phone, including batteries, can be damaged by misbehaving software) Of course, the right way to protect them is to implement a thin hypervisor layer, but security holes, program errors, conceptual flaws, etc. etc. all do happen. I believe Google probably needs the 'remote termination' as a last resort.
I just hope Google doesn't abuse the kill switch just like Apple did.
In short - because tranditional generation GPUs weren't designed to process general workloads.
The long answer : because GPUs traditionally were designed to generate real-time rendered scenes, which generates output for the desktop screen, with an adequate framerate and an adequate picture quality.
To meet the constraints with the lowest cost possible, traditional GPUs were designed to do nothing else other than rendering real-time game scenes - we had pipelines with fixed amount of precision and fixed functionalities with little programmability, AGP buses which had enourmous bandwidth from CPU to GPU while bandwidth from GPU to CPU was somewhat pathetic (The CPU usually doesn't need to re-read what actually was renedered - it goes directly to the screen and nothing else), fixed APIs only for rendering real-time 3D scenes (since the hardware was only for that purpose, why bother to make a general-purpose computing engine?), etc.
Now, things have changed. GPU designers have insane amount of silicon available. Game designers actually need all that general-purpose computing for implementing something other than rendering (such as physics simulation). The guys from nvidia and ATI found that their GPUs could handle many workloads that hammered the CPUs heavily more efficiently, with some modifications on the GPU hardware. Plus, both nvidia and ATI have grown up to 600 pound gorillas which can make it work. Thus, modern GPUs turned into something close to a large array of DSPs, unlike traditional GPUs with most features hardwired.
So, it wasn't Adobe's fault - it was mostly because nvidia and ATI's didn't supply the hardware Adobe needed. However, I believe it was a right decision not to design general-purpose computing monsters five years ago, since there wasn't a market for what they could deliver five years ago.
First, I see a lot of people assuming that now there exists a computer program which can beat a human, but, it is still far from beating a human. In go, having a nine-stone handicap is somewhat equivalent of playing chess without a queen (or maybe, even worse).
The reason computers aren't good at go is not only because of its vast number of possible moves. Another serious reason is because a good/bad move isn't immediately evident, and in many cases, can be figured out only after about 100 moves. Good luck reading 100 moves ahead using a computer. Human players are very good at making educated guesses.
Additionally, when playing chess, one small mistake can be disastrous. However, in Go, small mistakes simply add up, and you simply lose scores. In other words, go is generally generous to small mistakes, which gives an additional advantage to human players. (Of course, catastrophic mistakes are equally devastating on go games, too, but small mistakes are generally less serious, and there usually exists some way to do damage control.) Go is a strategic game - you can lose local battles, but still win the war. In chess, it isn't so easy to win the game once you lose a local battle.
I am a Korean, who also uses Ubuntu on a daily basis. Maybe I can answer this question.
To get the Korean people use Linux, some things must be solved first. 1) A good localization team which can catch up all the changes 2) ActiveX-free site designing practices
It seems that 2) is somewhat getting better, since I find that many webpages that didn't render properly starts to get rendered quite well on Firefox. Although there still are many websites that doesn't properly run without ActiveX, it isn't that serious in many cases. I guess it is because people are suddenly figuring out that ActiveX is insecure, unreliable, and may cause a whole lot of portability problems (surprise, surprise). Now, they try to implement them using Flash or plain Javascript.
Now, what remains is when doing anything related to banking or shopping, since the Korean government requires all financial transactions to use their own way of digital signatures, which requires additional libraries. AFAIK, there is no regulation which limits its implementation to be in ActiveX, but the only problem is that nobody implements it in anything else. I believe there is a Java implementation which ran as an applet, but is seriously outdated since most people stuck with Windows anyway.
Actually, I think the localization problem is more serious. Although many applications are well localized, it's still hard to find every newest distribution to be fully localized (I'm not even talking about beta versions). And it may cause problems, even if the number of non-localized messages is small.
Combining it with a lack of cheap Linux programmers (also caused by the lack of localization, since the cheap workforce isn't so good at English anyway), I don't think we in Korea would see some serious Linux usage over here.
ps : the mad cow demonstration isn't actually against United States - it's against the Korean government which didn't even try to do any negotiation at all - they simply threw the towel, even giving up their right to have any power to protect themselves in case of an outbreak of mad cow disease or whatsoever. Now suddenly, the government figured out that people actually did care about public health. (surprise, surprise).
Of course, they have a very lowsy record of promoting closed interfaces/standards, but if you read the press release throughoutly, Sony doesn't seem to promote this as a closed one. I guess (and hope) that Sony finally realized that if they promote any interface as a closed standard, 1) someone will come out with an open standard with a similar feature set, 2) everybody except Sony will gather around it, and 3) only Sony loses.
Since so many people have given explanations why the 3cm range is a feature not a flaw, I don't think I would need to mention it furtuer more.
Although many would think that there may be many devices which aren't capable to have a 'contact point', I don't think so - they can design moderately-sized pads which are connected with wires to the host (e.g. TVs, maybe via an open standard interface such as USB or IEEE1394), and simply placing the device (e.g. camcoder) on the pad would be connecting it to the host.
The research group is mentioned to be in "Korea Institute of Science and Technology", which is better known as KIST here in Korea, isn't a company. It is a government research agency.
The most would-be-shocking fact is that more than half of the non-technical people doesn't even know what google is (for example, my mom). In contrast, I find most of my non-technical friends have naver.com as their first page on IE. In Korea, it's quite common to see TV commercials say "search XYZ in Naver", instead of displaying its URL.
The biggest reason is because Naver actually hosts content, rather than just indexing content. Not only that Naver is a strong search engine company, it hosts a vast amount of blogs, forums, an online game site (Hangame), user-provided knowledge base, plus third-party licensed contents (such as dictionaries, public transportation routes, news contents provided by other medias, etc.). All these contents are prohibited to robots (via robots.txt), which means Google can't even index them. Thus, no matter how great Google's search algorithm is, it will be almost impossible to match Naver's quality.
Plus, running a homepage *that looks cool* is a very complicated job for a non tech-savvy person. Thus, they don't get webhosting - they upload contents to big portals. I've even seen many small businesses forget about homepages, and instead have a blog/user-created forum/whatsoever on every major player. It would be much easier for normal users to reach them (since memorizing a URL written in a non-native language would be painful), and cheaper (near zero) to maintain.
Another downside of Google is that it DISPLAYS English search results, which would be useless to them. Yes, people are lazy enough to select the 'Search for Korean contents only'.
In terms of actual users, I believe Google would fall even further behind (far behind 10th place), since there is another big portal cyworld (http://cyworld.com/), which provides personal blogging services and web-based communities.
I use many different searching methods
- Naver or Yahoo for local information (public transport route, looking for a place for a nice dinner, etc.)
- Wikipedia for something that's expected to exist on an encyclopedia
- danawa.com and enuri.com for searching best deals (equivalent to PriceGrabber or whatsoever)
- Naver for anything else in Korean
- Google for everything else, or if all methods above doesn't give a good enough result.
As a result, I get to use google less and wikipedia more, while naver and everything else remains somewhat constant.
Two things again: 1. Do you really wish to manipulate the clock for every non-privileged instruction, which will result in a horrible VM performance?
2. Yes, your grandpa won't notice a 50% slowdown, but your anti-virus software will easily notice. It's either your grandpa doesn't notice and your anti-virus does, or your anti-virus doesn't and your grandpa does (assuming the anti-virus software does a extensive amount of checking)
What I was trying to say was that it takes a painful amount of performance overhead to make it exactly look like a physical machine (if it actually is possible to implement one), so that it would be easily noticed by a user. Hiding from a casual user who occasionally types 'ps' and inspects some well-known files on/proc won't be so hard, but it will be a big challenge to hide from a well-written piece of VM detecting code. Especially if it's running on kernel mode.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, that depends on who the user of the technology (such as, advertisement agencies), not the technology itself. The technology simply detects who is looking at the billboard, and how old the person is. It's entirely up to the ad agency to show adult dating sites or whatsoever on the billboard.
Thus, I think the ad agencies will end up putting ads that aren't so offensive to any demographic, anyway. Unlike popups from the web, it's intended to be placed on public space.
Password protection was supported for a long time, and is a part of the standard ATA specifiation. Although it typically has nothing to do with full-disk encryption, it was more or less enough to keep honest people honest, and add a little bit of cost+effort to bypass it.
Many RAID controllers use this feature to prevent the user from connecting a RAID-formatted hard drive to a normal ATA controller, thereby accidently destroying all data. Unlocking the drive is a non-issue, since they use the same password that you might find after a few minutes of googling, and if the RAID controller that locked it is available, you can unlock it without any problem.
Yes, it doesn't work. If you ever tried to design something using Verilog or VHDL, and tried to generate a real-world design, either an FPGA or a real chip, you will see that things aren't so easy.
I learned it the hard way, while doing my last year of undergraduate course. The simulation worked perfectly - correct input, correct output. On the other hand, making it work on the FPGA was a horrible, horrible, horrible job. Took 2 weeks of trying this, trying that, still with no clue.
Although the problem was a small behavior/synthesis mismatch, I found out that this was going to be a horrible job, because you may have bosses thinking just like you, and ask you to complete the implementation job by a few days. The truth is, that each synthesis job (equivalent to compiling) takes hours (if not days) to complete, and it is almost certain that it won't run on the first try. Believe me, there is a reason that there is a multi-billion dollar market for designing and verifying chips, where a huge portion of that is verification and debugging.
For firmwares, it is sorta similar state. You have to work around hardware bugs, e.g. you have to avoid calling some instruction that is supposed to work, and did work on simulation, because the processor screws itself when that instruction is called once every million time. The problem is, not calling that instruction may be possible, but identifying the problem gets really dirty.
Now I write simulators and models for simulation, rather than writing HDL code that should end up inside some FPGA or ASIC. I am much happier now, since Intel and AMD did a lot of work to verify and fix their dirty bugs, and I can trust the underlying hardware.
2,800lb flywheels, plus the related cirtuits, plus maintainence of the flywheel ain't cheap.
Plus, proper power capping can reduce infrastructure cost, since the power distribution/conversion whatsoever system in the datacenter needs to be designed according to the maximum load, which means they need a lot of headroom on their power supply. By doing so, they can reduce the maximum load.
The only problem... is how they will reduce power while minimizing the interruption to the workload on peak times. Not an easy job, but I don't think it would be impossible. We should try, at least.
It is common to deliberately add a check that breaks the whole stuff when some 'unexpected' condition happens. You know, assertions.
Which one is better? Not working at all, or seems like working but a not-so-commonly-used-some-sort-of-admin-command somehow gets screwed and the web browser fires a do-not-touch-this-unless-you-want-complete-meltdown-command because there was some minor difference on the javscript engine parsing some parameters? Yeah, can be extremely rare, but if it isn't tested, nobody can be sure.
Obviously, the best thing to do would be to test all possible conditions. However, if you can't, then there can be three choices:
1) Leave it to the users, Nah, I'm not gonna test it.
2) Launch a big warning message and blame the users if something goes wrong, or
3) Make it never work when some unknown condition is reached.
Number 1 is perfectly reasonable when the worst consequence isn't so bad. For example, a web forum interface, or things like Facebook. Maybe number 2 would be better in most cases. But, if an untested scenario may cause huge, irrecoverable damage, number 3 may be the best choice. (You should remember that the product in question was the server management console, which can bring the whole datacenter down when things go wrong.)
My opinion is that, deliberately excluding Opera was a quite reasonable idea. Trying to sell a product that deliberately excludes Opera (web browser) to Opera (the company) was the stupid idea.
What the military does is most certainly brainwashing.
So is the TV, public schools, parents, friends, and whatever. You can even brainwash yourself.
Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in United States, I live in a country where millitary service is mandatory) I also highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens. On the other side, it is a good way to turn useful people into far less productive citizens.
My opinion is that, the main goal of the boot camp is to create an average person, not too smart, not to dumb, not too hardworking, not to lazy, etc. Transforming normal people into standardized soldiers.
The problem is, that when that person returns to his original environment, it doesn't take so long to see a 'standardized' person to return to his normal lifestyle. I saw numerous friends who found out 'how lazy they were, and how worthless they were' on the boot camp, and found that they also can achieve things if they try hard enough. However, after finishing their millitary service and returning to their original environment, it didn't take long to return to their original life pattern.
What I saw, along with many other people saw, was that game addiction, and probably web addiction, is an symptom of other problems, not itself being the problem. Those guys may have problem with their friends, their school, their parents, or whatsoever. Sending them to the boot camp may solve some of them (no more school, no more previous friends, and no more parents yelling at you), but once they are out of the boot camp, everything returns to the previous state.
Of course, it is cheaper to just use the record right now. However, it isn't that simple.
What I find, is that the situation is similar to animated videos. You can draw some cartoonish character, a few cuts manually, and send the whole stuff to some country with massive number of people drawing all the in-between scenes *manually*. Just like 'The Simpsons' or 'South Park' or whatsoever.
On the other side, you can just generate everything using your computer. Create some 3D model of some character, create a virtual world, and then make it act. Examples are those stuff from Pixar or Dreamworks.
The problem isn't just whether it is realistic or not. Another aspect of this stuff is productivity. For example, if you are playing some kind of MMORPG and you want to have every character to have some kind of voice, good luck hiring a horde of voice actors for a gazillion number of lines. Instead, you can write some kind of 'voice simulator' which does text-to-speech remarkably well, and let it create all the recordings. No actors, just computers. Much cheaper.
Actually, recording realistic sound effects are really difficult, because it isn't just 'stick the microphone to the stuff that emits the sound'. Recording the perfect sound effect actually takes a lot of engineering and trial-and-error, which can be really expensive if you want to take a lot of sound effects.
In conclusion, real-time synthesis - probably not yet. Content generation - definitely yes.
noop scheduler isn't SSD support. Seems like you didn't RTFA, which means that you didn't understand what TRIM is.
From the article, page 4:
"If the drive broadcasts itself as a solid state drive (which can be done through the latest ATA specification), Windows 7 can make adjustments to ensure that the drive performs at its best. For example, if Windows 7 can verify that you're running a solid state disk, it will disable defragmentation for that drive (as defragging puts un-necessary wear on SSD's and doesn't help performance). Windows 7 will also enable support for "TRIM", also known as DisableDeleteNotify, an add-on to the ATA specification which allows for enhanced performance and decreased strain on the drive. According to Microsoft, here's what TRIM brings to the table.
* Enhancing device wear leveling by eliminating merge operation for all deleted data blocks
* Making early garbage collection possible for fast write
* Keeping deviceâ(TM)s unused storage area as much as possible; more room for device wear leveling.
Basically, Windows 7 will send TRIM commands down the storage chain, but it's up to the drive to accept the commands and utilize them. In order for TRIM to work, you not only need Windows 7, but you'll need a solid state hard disk which has support for TRIM via its Firmware."
Every time I install Windows, it takes three or four hours to complete setup - install drivers, install patches, install cygwin, MS office and whatsoever, restore backup data, and I'm ready to work.
Every time I install Linux, it takes three or four days to complete setup - install Linux, install packages, change font configurations because the default rendering is so ugly, search on the net to figure out how I can get (insert some hardware here) working on my PC, search on the net to figure out why my PC doesn't shut down properly, search on the net why XXXX doesn't work anymore, search on the net for an older version of some package so that I don't need to touch some old code (that I don't intend to fix), search for this, that, etc. Have to do the same thing for every distribution, because one method that worked for one distribution doesn't work for the other one.
Even after the settings are done, I have to cope with poor localizations. Typing in other languages such as Korean or Japanese is still horrible, though I must admit the situation has improved vastly. Messages are badly translated, or some messages aren't translated at all. Now I just gave up using any language other than English on my Ubuntu desktop.
Yes, they are indoctrinated to a world of horrible things. They refuse to open their mind to anything else. So what? They find their computer as a tool, and if the tool does what they need to do, that's enough. I can't teach my wife how to configure SCIM, how to deal with the messages not translated properly, and how to deal with the website that doesn't get rendered properly on Firefox (though in this case, the website is to blame), while all she uses is some simple word processing and web surfing (total 2 hrs per week) which all works perfectly well on Windows. I'd rather deal with the malwares than teaching her all that stuff.
What is worse, is that the original code doesn't even looks like it is 'supposed to give better performance on x86'.
The code was assuming that struct alignments are done in four bytes. Good luck when it becomes something larger, because I guess it will increase to something bigger in a not-so-distant future.
Although not mentioned on the article, I am damn sure that the guys on iSuppli will be thinking something like 'OMG how can they do business with such a high material cost?'. 50% looks tooooooo high to me, and I am damn sure that they are selling it for a loss.
Believe me, iSuppli did many, many, and many work something like this before, and their purpose is to understand how those companies operate.
It's no secret that material cost is only a tiny fraction of the retail price on this kind of high-tech business. Screaming socialism on this kind of article is completely laughable.
Yes, you can lie and submit a fake name/number combination. How they implement the verification system is their problem. Some never check at all, many others just check the hash value (the national ID number has its last digit generated from a simple hash function), others check against other databases suchas ones from credit rating agencies, and ask for a photocopy of their ID card if it doesn't exist on the database. Sadly, records occasionally leak due to incompetent server admins, rouge employees, and even careless people posting their ID publicly on the net. There actually has been some class action lawsuits regarding ID leaks, and several prosecutions related to databasae leaks.
The only thing that prevents you from using a fake or somebody else's name/number is that doing so is a criminal offense.
I think that the national ID number must be abolished or make it practically useless other than as a hash number, since it is so easy to obtain someone else's ID number and abuse it.
(ps : I am a South Korean.)
However, the problem is that he didn't have any stocks or any assets. He was merely a jobless man on his early thirties who didn't have any formal education on economy. That's why the DA is not convicting him for some kind of law on securities or market arbitration, which is far more severe than publishing false information. what he claims is that the DA is charging him because he was merely grumbling that the government is a stupid big liar, though some of the information was not throughoutly fact-checked.
Of course, there are conspiracy theories that there are other people behind him, since they was shocked that his real-world identy was a jobless man who merely graduated community college, and still could post articles with in-depth analysis on the current financial situation. However, that's another story.
I am a native South Korean who live in Seoul, and maybe I can (sort of) explain a bit about the law.
Yes, the websites hate the law pretty much (because it requires the companies to add 'ID authentication system', which isn't cheap in a market with razor-thin profits), and many Koreans who do care about privacy also hate it, too. I also feel sort of sad when that law passed.
Well, the reason behind this law was something like this. In slashdot, if you see a troll, you simply moderate that reply a '-1, troll', and move along. In Korea, people start 'feeding' the troll in more cruel ways, e.g. track down the real-world identy of that guy, bomb his personal website with hate spams, bomb his e-mail, and in some occasions, even e-mails of people close to him. Yup, the replies on that troll became the real-world identy of that guy, rather than another troll, or any reasonable reply.
The horrifying thing was that this phenomenom wasn't limited to real-world celeberities. It could be you, or me, or anybody on the net. Yes, being a troll, or saying something stupid isn't a good thing to do, but we all do make mistakes. I've seen people ranging from teenage girls to senior citizens getting horribly bullied by anonymous mobs. Occasionally, there were news reports on people commiting suicide because of the mental horror they had to undergo. It got so serious that people needed to stay completely anonymous on all occasions, or having some way to stop this maddness.
Yes, I feel that many of the Korean people don't think political freedom is such an important thing compared to things such as security or wealth. This may be because their history of democracy has been so short, and they have been living a hard life for many years suffering from poverty, hunger, and North Korea. Republic of Korea is merely some 60-years old, and approximately half of that period was under the rule of dictators. In such a society, it is difficult to teach why political freedom is important and dictatorship is bad, because those people who benefited a lot from the dictatorship still exists in many core positions of the society. I believe it may take some time, patience, education, and continuous struggling.
...and how about the cost of living in California?
As many others said, the simple reason is because the headphone is meant to work as a remote controller, so that Apple can eliminate all controls from the surface of the iPod. Nothing so innovative - we had CD players and tape recorders with remotes for years. The remotes disappeared because, I think, the media players got compact enough, so that they no longer need to have remotes to control the players that previously had to stay somewhere inside a pocket or some kind of bag.
Just think of the smallest media players - they are already as small as the remote controllers we used decades ago. why in world do we need a remote when the media player itself is small enough? Looks like a flawed design decision.
Nah, I'll never buy it anyway.
That's exactly why they want (and need) the kill switch - protecting the radio spectrum, and the phone itself. (Many parts of the phone, including batteries, can be damaged by misbehaving software) Of course, the right way to protect them is to implement a thin hypervisor layer, but security holes, program errors, conceptual flaws, etc. etc. all do happen. I believe Google probably needs the 'remote termination' as a last resort.
I just hope Google doesn't abuse the kill switch just like Apple did.
In short - because tranditional generation GPUs weren't designed to process general workloads.
The long answer : because GPUs traditionally were designed to generate real-time rendered scenes, which generates output for the desktop screen, with an adequate framerate and an adequate picture quality.
To meet the constraints with the lowest cost possible, traditional GPUs were designed to do nothing else other than rendering real-time game scenes - we had pipelines with fixed amount of precision and fixed functionalities with little programmability, AGP buses which had enourmous bandwidth from CPU to GPU while bandwidth from GPU to CPU was somewhat pathetic (The CPU usually doesn't need to re-read what actually was renedered - it goes directly to the screen and nothing else), fixed APIs only for rendering real-time 3D scenes (since the hardware was only for that purpose, why bother to make a general-purpose computing engine?), etc.
Now, things have changed. GPU designers have insane amount of silicon available. Game designers actually need all that general-purpose computing for implementing something other than rendering (such as physics simulation). The guys from nvidia and ATI found that their GPUs could handle many workloads that hammered the CPUs heavily more efficiently, with some modifications on the GPU hardware. Plus, both nvidia and ATI have grown up to 600 pound gorillas which can make it work. Thus, modern GPUs turned into something close to a large array of DSPs, unlike traditional GPUs with most features hardwired.
So, it wasn't Adobe's fault - it was mostly because nvidia and ATI's didn't supply the hardware Adobe needed. However, I believe it was a right decision not to design general-purpose computing monsters five years ago, since there wasn't a market for what they could deliver five years ago.
First, I see a lot of people assuming that now there exists a computer program which can beat a human, but, it is still far from beating a human. In go, having a nine-stone handicap is somewhat equivalent of playing chess without a queen (or maybe, even worse).
The reason computers aren't good at go is not only because of its vast number of possible moves. Another serious reason is because a good/bad move isn't immediately evident, and in many cases, can be figured out only after about 100 moves. Good luck reading 100 moves ahead using a computer. Human players are very good at making educated guesses.
Additionally, when playing chess, one small mistake can be disastrous. However, in Go, small mistakes simply add up, and you simply lose scores. In other words, go is generally generous to small mistakes, which gives an additional advantage to human players. (Of course, catastrophic mistakes are equally devastating on go games, too, but small mistakes are generally less serious, and there usually exists some way to do damage control.) Go is a strategic game - you can lose local battles, but still win the war. In chess, it isn't so easy to win the game once you lose a local battle.
I am a Korean, who also uses Ubuntu on a daily basis. Maybe I can answer this question.
To get the Korean people use Linux, some things must be solved first.
1) A good localization team which can catch up all the changes
2) ActiveX-free site designing practices
It seems that 2) is somewhat getting better, since I find that many webpages that didn't render properly starts to get rendered quite well on Firefox. Although there still are many websites that doesn't properly run without ActiveX, it isn't that serious in many cases. I guess it is because people are suddenly figuring out that ActiveX is insecure, unreliable, and may cause a whole lot of portability problems (surprise, surprise). Now, they try to implement them using Flash or plain Javascript.
Now, what remains is when doing anything related to banking or shopping, since the Korean government requires all financial transactions to use their own way of digital signatures, which requires additional libraries. AFAIK, there is no regulation which limits its implementation to be in ActiveX, but the only problem is that nobody implements it in anything else. I believe there is a Java implementation which ran as an applet, but is seriously outdated since most people stuck with Windows anyway.
Actually, I think the localization problem is more serious. Although many applications are well localized, it's still hard to find every newest distribution to be fully localized (I'm not even talking about beta versions). And it may cause problems, even if the number of non-localized messages is small.
Combining it with a lack of cheap Linux programmers (also caused by the lack of localization, since the cheap workforce isn't so good at English anyway), I don't think we in Korea would see some serious Linux usage over here.
ps : the mad cow demonstration isn't actually against United States - it's against the Korean government which didn't even try to do any negotiation at all - they simply threw the towel, even giving up their right to have any power to protect themselves in case of an outbreak of mad cow disease or whatsoever. Now suddenly, the government figured out that people actually did care about public health. (surprise, surprise).
it comes up with some kind of new standard?
Of course, they have a very lowsy record of promoting closed interfaces/standards, but if you read the press release throughoutly, Sony doesn't seem to promote this as a closed one. I guess (and hope) that Sony finally realized that if they promote any interface as a closed standard, 1) someone will come out with an open standard with a similar feature set, 2) everybody except Sony will gather around it, and 3) only Sony loses.
Since so many people have given explanations why the 3cm range is a feature not a flaw, I don't think I would need to mention it furtuer more.
Although many would think that there may be many devices which aren't capable to have a 'contact point', I don't think so - they can design moderately-sized pads which are connected with wires to the host (e.g. TVs, maybe via an open standard interface such as USB or IEEE1394), and simply placing the device (e.g. camcoder) on the pad would be connecting it to the host.
The research group is mentioned to be in "Korea Institute of Science and Technology", which is better known as KIST here in Korea, isn't a company. It is a government research agency.
The most would-be-shocking fact is that more than half of the non-technical people doesn't even know what google is (for example, my mom). In contrast, I find most of my non-technical friends have naver.com as their first page on IE. In Korea, it's quite common to see TV commercials say "search XYZ in Naver", instead of displaying its URL.
The biggest reason is because Naver actually hosts content, rather than just indexing content. Not only that Naver is a strong search engine company, it hosts a vast amount of blogs, forums, an online game site (Hangame), user-provided knowledge base, plus third-party licensed contents (such as dictionaries, public transportation routes, news contents provided by other medias, etc.). All these contents are prohibited to robots (via robots.txt), which means Google can't even index them. Thus, no matter how great Google's search algorithm is, it will be almost impossible to match Naver's quality.
Plus, running a homepage *that looks cool* is a very complicated job for a non tech-savvy person. Thus, they don't get webhosting - they upload contents to big portals. I've even seen many small businesses forget about homepages, and instead have a blog/user-created forum/whatsoever on every major player. It would be much easier for normal users to reach them (since memorizing a URL written in a non-native language would be painful), and cheaper (near zero) to maintain.
Another downside of Google is that it DISPLAYS English search results, which would be useless to them. Yes, people are lazy enough to select the 'Search for Korean contents only'.
In terms of actual users, I believe Google would fall even further behind (far behind 10th place), since there is another big portal cyworld (http://cyworld.com/), which provides personal blogging services and web-based communities.
I use many different searching methods
- Naver or Yahoo for local information (public transport route, looking for a place for a nice dinner, etc.)
- Wikipedia for something that's expected to exist on an encyclopedia
- danawa.com and enuri.com for searching best deals (equivalent to PriceGrabber or whatsoever)
- Naver for anything else in Korean
- Google for everything else, or if all methods above doesn't give a good enough result.
As a result, I get to use google less and wikipedia more, while naver and everything else remains somewhat constant.
Two things again:
/proc won't be so hard, but it will be a big challenge to hide from a well-written piece of VM detecting code. Especially if it's running on kernel mode.
1. Do you really wish to manipulate the clock for every non-privileged instruction, which will result in a horrible VM performance?
2. Yes, your grandpa won't notice a 50% slowdown, but your anti-virus software will easily notice. It's either your grandpa doesn't notice and your anti-virus does, or your anti-virus doesn't and your grandpa does (assuming the anti-virus software does a extensive amount of checking)
What I was trying to say was that it takes a painful amount of performance overhead to make it exactly look like a physical machine (if it actually is possible to implement one), so that it would be easily noticed by a user. Hiding from a casual user who occasionally types 'ps' and inspects some well-known files on