The annoying thing is I was actually considering the priv for my next phone. Because they actually went through the effort of getting it fips 140 acredited. This stance just makes me want them to die.
Pretty sure that fermions , bosons and helium-4 aren't conductors.
As I understand the Stern-Gerlach it shows you entanglement exists, it doesn't give a set of entangled things you can experiment on that we have been discussing so far. Even your link to the "original test" says nothing about the photon source.
Further more, I don't see any of this actually explaining anything, other than reinforcing what I said ealier, in that the "CHSH inequality" IS a set experiment, testing set theory (and crudely at that).
What link would that be? Stack exchange linking to Wikipedia doesn't count for much with this stuff imo.
And that's the only link I see in this thread.
Any experiment running close to absolute zero is using superconductivity. All these experiments, photons or electrons are currently using super cooled materials as far as I've seen.
actually, in pre industrial times, from the analytics I did on the data were somewhat better than now.
Back then there were thousands of stations all over the world (although missing in the poles)
now there is only a few hundred.
But since we are talking about the "global" temperature, which is highly varied, 1'C is insignificant - i.e. even back when we had 1000s of measurements a day, there still wasn't enough to get a measure of the "average" temperature of the earth with 1'C of accuracy.
For example you still can't estimate the average temperature of mount Everest of the course of 1 year with that accuracy.
Configured in raid 5 where we need fall over protection
And "raw" where we don't.
Have roughly 1TB of throughput a day in peak usage. So most of the data gets thrown away. Everything we can cache reduces the time for a job to complete.
Some other things we found. Internally we are on a mix of 10gb and 1gb ether net.
On aws save performance was abysmal. Some jobs that would take about an hour on what we had were still running a day later when we tested aws.
Debugging was also a nightmare. Because watching the events in real time on our kit slowed everything to an absolute crawl trying to watch them over the Internet.
That was a few years ago. I'm sure they have improved and got cheaper since then.
But trying to do that securely over the Internet on hardware in an unknown location with access by who knows who and monitored by god knows what nsa abomination...
Actually. That was the other thing. I was mostly against going aws because I was convinced the nsa were doing. What Snowden leaks proved they were doing.
Got a lot of criticism for that. Apparently I was overly paranoid. I'd of gone with our own kit even if it was more expensive. If it wasn't we'd of been on aws and had to leave afterwards. The level of vindication I felt when news of those leaks broke can't be over exaggerated.
We're on a large group of X5680's with about 2 times that in storage (SAS), less in CPU.
And the hardware was 2 orders of magnitude less than $4million.
There was a big cost overrun on cooling (was much harder than expected), but as one off costs the whole kit paid for itself in the first month, that's been good for a while now: http://i67.tinypic.com/mr8v3o....
Personell - virtually nothing - especially given the personell they replace, everything is pretty much fully automated.
So should probably get something more than "rough figures" for how much it would cost. because they are way out.
But she goes on to predict the fall of the cloud service providers.
She says "we will be out of business if your data is not secure".
Ooops. Probably should of thought of that before you invested all those billions.
As an aside. Amazon Web Services would cost $150,000 a MONTH for the computing power we bought about two years ago - with nowhere near that in initial investment. So talking "cost effectiveness" is bullshit to.
This video smacks of desperation, they've finally caught on that the entire cloud business model is flawed. That "big money" wont just hand over all their secrets to some unknown computer run by unknown people in some unknown country.
And "lots of small money" really can't be paying the bills.
For example: Dropbox Great while it was free now less usefull than btsync which is free to average joe. And very cheap (and secure) for "big money".
I see the storm clouds of another impending dotcom crash.
Slashdot Mirror
The annoying thing is I was actually considering the priv for my next phone. Because they actually went through the effort of getting it fips 140 acredited. This stance just makes me want them to die.
Most likely the person writing the report is annoyed at having to lie. And this is their way of making it obvious.
So maybe we consider "superconductivity" differently.
Your text says:
3.1. The free particle
Now we consider a free, spin-1/2 particle. The Hamiltonian consists only of translational kinetic energy
Are you saying that is achievable in a material with resistance?
Pretty sure that fermions , bosons and helium-4 aren't conductors.
As I understand the Stern-Gerlach it shows you entanglement exists, it doesn't give a set of entangled things you can experiment on that we have been discussing so far. Even your link to the "original test" says nothing about the photon source.
Further more, I don't see any of this actually explaining anything, other than reinforcing what I said ealier, in that the "CHSH inequality" IS a set experiment, testing set theory (and crudely at that).
->No, this is not true at all as only certain materials will transition in to superconductivity.
At absolute zero all conductors are super conductors.
some materials transition at higher temperatures.
The "useful" super conductors are the ones that transition above the boiling point on liquid nitrogen.
->Experiments involving electrons or photons travelling
But they are "entangled" in a super conductor first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"As I understand it"
->Stern-Gerlach experiment
Does that have Quantum entanglement?
Don't think it does.
What link would that be?
Stack exchange linking to Wikipedia doesn't count for much with this stuff imo.
And that's the only link I see in this thread.
Any experiment running close to absolute zero is using superconductivity. All these experiments, photons or electrons are currently using super cooled materials as far as I've seen.
Pretty sure all this requires interactions with super conductors at some point.
That's how dwave is doing it anyway.
->but the second thing he suggested, with state superposition, were non-set-theory.
Why.
We're mostly talking about electrons in a superconductor as far as I can tell.
And the "infinities" that produces is ALL set theory.
what else is
-> you can set it up such that the spins are vertical and opposite
Other than
"two objects from a single set with predetermined values"
So yes, If it means something different I don't understand the example. which is why I started with "and this is where you lose me everytime".
But this is just set theory.
Why is it a "miracle" that if you throw one element of a set into a black hole, that doesn't affect the other elements of the set.
Don't see how that answers anything.
what is so special about having some set
[A,B]
dividing them.
then measuring one of them, determining it is say A
And implying the other is B.
And, why, when the most interesting bit of all this is the superconductors.
Are we not discussing them.
If bob or Alice leave for the shop.
When you measure if it was bob or Alice that left for the shop.
You know if Alice or bob didn't leave for the shop.
There is nothing magical or even that interesting happening here.
And this is where you always lose me.
Nothing here proves it wasn't -1 the whole time.
Well spotted.
So to summerise
There is now to much data to spy on by sending it all over the Atlantic.
So the are moving the spy center to Germany. ..
And telling us its to keep our data safe from the nsa.
Sorry Microsoft, google and friends. Still not going to put anything of value on your hardware. Your cloud business model is still broken.
That's not actually what I said.
What I actually said was.
We could be 5'C hotter than preindustrial times
We could be 5'C colder.
We just have no way of comparing, because the real climate scientists mostly gave up measuring the temperature.
Probably because the only people who really care about it is the politicos that want j6p to pay more tax... sorry I mean buy carbon credits.
A plan that was originally designed to attack Chinas economy.
A plan that backfired massively when china didn't fall for it and catapulted their economy to be the biggest in the world. (Soon if not already).
actually, in pre industrial times, from the analytics I did on the data were somewhat better than now.
Back then there were thousands of stations all over the world (although missing in the poles)
now there is only a few hundred.
But since we are talking about the "global" temperature, which is highly varied, 1'C is insignificant - i.e. even back when we had 1000s of measurements a day, there still wasn't enough to get a measure of the "average" temperature of the earth with 1'C of accuracy.
For example
you still can't estimate the average temperature of mount Everest of the course of 1 year with that accuracy.
"The whole world" - No frickin chance.
Also
We paid about 4c or 5c a GB iirc.
Which is no more than $16,000 for 320TB.
Configured in raid 5 where we need fall over protection
And "raw" where we don't.
Have roughly 1TB of throughput a day in peak usage. So most of the data gets thrown away. Everything we can cache reduces the time for a job to complete.
Bleh bit sleepy.
4 more batches for 5 in total.
Some other things we found.
Internally we are on a mix of 10gb and 1gb ether net.
On aws save performance was abysmal. Some jobs that would take about an hour on what we had were still running a day later when we tested aws.
Debugging was also a nightmare. Because watching the events in real time on our kit slowed everything to an absolute crawl trying to watch them over the Internet.
That was a few years ago. I'm sure they have improved and got cheaper since then.
But trying to do that securely over the Internet on hardware in an unknown location with access by who knows who and monitored by god knows what nsa abomination...
Actually.
That was the other thing.
I was mostly against going aws because I was convinced the nsa were doing.
What Snowden leaks proved they were doing.
Got a lot of criticism for that. Apparently I was overly paranoid. I'd of gone with our own kit even if it was more expensive. If it wasn't we'd of been on aws and had to leave afterwards. The level of vindication I felt when news of those leaks broke can't be over exaggerated.
Only slight less in cpu.
I'm getting he 150k from
testing before we bought new hardware.
We spent about $15,000 in 2 weeks.
For the equivalent of the hardware we were already running.
Which we then bought 5 more batches of.
You forgot to mention most of the elite are also either paedophiles or their facilitators.
I here the next king has a rock on for small welsh boys. That will certainly improve things......
We're on a large group of X5680's with about 2 times that in storage (SAS), less in CPU.
And the hardware was 2 orders of magnitude less than $4million.
There was a big cost overrun on cooling (was much harder than expected), but as one off costs the whole kit paid for itself in the first month, that's been good for a while now:
http://i67.tinypic.com/mr8v3o....
Personell - virtually nothing - especially given the personell they replace, everything is pretty much fully automated.
So should probably get something more than "rough figures" for how much it would cost. because they are way out.
Dell gives significant discounts for bulk orders.
Exactly.
But she goes on to predict the fall of the cloud service providers.
She says
"we will be out of business if your data is not secure".
Ooops. Probably should of thought of that before you invested all those billions.
As an aside.
Amazon Web Services would cost $150,000 a MONTH for the computing power we bought about two years ago - with nowhere near that in initial investment.
So talking "cost effectiveness" is bullshit to.
This video smacks of desperation, they've finally caught on that the entire cloud business model is flawed.
That "big money" wont just hand over all their secrets to some unknown computer run by unknown people in some unknown country.
And "lots of small money" really can't be paying the bills.
For example:
Dropbox
Great while it was free
now less usefull than btsync
which is free to average joe.
And very cheap (and secure) for "big money".
I see the storm clouds of another impending dotcom crash.
But they dont have a "real date of birth or location" policy.
The two or three facebook accounts I use both now have me over a hundred years old and living in various conflict zones.
That must waste all sorts of time for said bullies.
I'm surprised more people aren't making the point of the implications of this for german us relations.
Best explanation I've seen yet. Although I'd add it's probably a mix of both.
That the emissions team only trained it for the emisions test environment. Not bothering to train "real world" emissions.
This is reinforced by the "up to 40x" I've seen elsewhere. I wonder if they brought in new testing standards recently...