The list of robbed Bitcoin exchanges is long and growing. In almost all cases the stolen coin can be traced (since all transactions are public thanks to the protocol). I wonder if the running exchanges have some sort of blacklist that detects whether previously stolen funds get moved to their wallets and if they will confiscate those.
Computing has always been tiered: a small elite which pioneers what ultimately tickles down to the masses. When the first abacus was made, not everyone was able to use it. But when the masses learned to use it, the Mesopotamian elite already had adopted written language for accounting (sorry, only the German Wiki page contains said info). The first computers were all elitist devices. The masses were using tables to approximate sin/cos/log etc.
Today we call this elite supercomputers. Techniques developed for these eventually get adopted for mainstream hardware. The GPUs we have today are essentially modeled after the vector CPUs used in the supercomputers of the 1980s.
You're right though, that there is a feedback between both: the mainstream with its incredible volume drives manufacturing. As we approach the 7nm wall, manufacturing is becoming increasingly expensive. Only mass markets can finance the required R&D. Supercomputing is increasingly taking advantage of mainstream tech. E.g. ORNL's Titan is based on NVIDIA Tesla K20x GPUs, which technically aren't your average gamer GPUs, but the chips are essentially spin-offs of these.
Yeah, OpenCL is a different thing. But if you talk to laymen, they will often repeat the marketing speed that you take your OpenMP(!) code written for traditional multi-cores, recompile and enjoy... Not true, in my experience.
I wonder how nice these will be to program. The "just recompile and run" promise for Knights Corner was little more than a cruel joke: to get any serious performance out of the current generation of MICs you have to wrestle with vector intrinsics and that stupid in-order architecture. At least the latter will apparently be dropped in Knights Landing.
For what it's worth: I'll be looking forward to NVIDIA's Maxwell. At least CUDA got the vectorization problem sorted out. And no: not even the Intel compiler handles vectorization well.
With some cities existing for >1000 years and having been dug over in WW2, there is often no knowing of what to expect when digging through the underground. Recently a builder operating a digger was killed by a WW2 era dud. Experts estimate that there are still 100k duds lying around and each year about 5k are being found.
BTW: I just had a look at your website and I'd hazard the guess that there are almost as many typos as words on it. What's your "professional agenda" behind those?;-)
Since you seem to believe that a simple typo represents a fallacy, I dare say that your conclusion "Ruby is in serious declining" is a fallacy by itself: in your link Ruby's curve appears to be rather stable (2% over the past 5 years). In my world decline means something different.
You're right though that your search terms are more suitable.
What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?
Your agenda. Your post is clearly biased on defending Ruby.
Interestingly I do not have an agenda on Ruby and in fact it was a simple typo. As a non-native speaker I find the way how names and compounds are handled in the English language confusing at best. It's much easier in German: all compounds are written in one single word, no spaces, no dashes. You're allowed to add dashes to make life for the reader easier (Atombombenzündmechanismus is not a handy word).
That would be Ok, we're all biased somehow - but experience taught me that tech people has a strong inclination to include lies and fallacies while arguing on subjects he/she has a bias on.
Isn't it ironic that your own post represents a fallacy? Of course I have the arrogance to assume that I know best which motives my original post was based on -- and which not.
"Javascript" is a word massively disseminated - very improbable that one professional that makes a living in this field would misspell this word the way you did.
See, indeed I am a CS professional. I've specialized in HPC. The way I use Ruby is very different from what the web folks use it for: thanks to Puppet Ruby has become a popular language for managing system configuration, especially for large scale deployments. Hence I do have a significant exposure to Ruby, without ever doing any serious JS coding. And that's what I criticize in TFA: it seems to equate Ruby with "language for web apps". Its argument revolves around "b/c of node.js becoming popular, Ruby is/might be dying". And that's just wrong because even if Rails would just disappear, there would still be tons of valid use cases for Ruby (text mangling, build automation, rapid prototyping, network automation...).
If fact I don't care much about whether Ruby is popular or not. I've used it before Rails was popular, and I wouldn't have any second thoughts about adding another language to my portfolio, should I see any major benefit in it.
Short answer: no
on
Is Ruby Dying?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Long answer: a better indicator is how many Google queries for the respective languages are issued. And those suggest that Ruby is standing stronger than ever. Ruby is more than just Rails. And just because there is yet another web apps framework, it doesn't mean that the other ones automatically lose traction.
The advantage of (real) Supercomputers is that they can tackle large scale simulations (instead of large numbers of small scale simulations, which is what "Folding@Home" and co. do). Would the quality of the predictions go up if they used a more accurate (and thus computationally complex) model of the forcefield?
AFAIK DE Shaw Research is building their "Anton" line of supercomputers for the simulation of molecular dynamics.
TFA is light on the technical details, so I wonder if they've really been using a supercomputer or rather "a giant heap of ordinary computers". IIRC Google has more of the latter and fewer of the former.
Slashdot Mirror
History is full of tragedies facilitated by people "just doing their job".
Source: I'm from Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
I hope you refer to the carpal tunnel syndrome, b/c a carpel tunnel is definitely something I'd rather not have in my body.
EMACS OTOH is increasingly getting replaced by all kinds of IDE's and what not. The number of new users are dwindling, it has no future.
*citation needed
You can download the successor to vim here. FTFY.
Foxconn is already doing arcologies. Workers never have to leave the company's premises. I don't know whether they already include graveyards.
The list of robbed Bitcoin exchanges is long and growing. In almost all cases the stolen coin can be traced (since all transactions are public thanks to the protocol). I wonder if the running exchanges have some sort of blacklist that detects whether previously stolen funds get moved to their wallets and if they will confiscate those.
...or humor.
For the curious: here is a link to Sumo, which is a real, scientific traffic simulation software developed by the DLR in Germany.
Computing has always been tiered: a small elite which pioneers what ultimately tickles down to the masses. When the first abacus was made, not everyone was able to use it. But when the masses learned to use it, the Mesopotamian elite already had adopted written language for accounting (sorry, only the German Wiki page contains said info). The first computers were all elitist devices. The masses were using tables to approximate sin/cos/log etc.
Today we call this elite supercomputers. Techniques developed for these eventually get adopted for mainstream hardware. The GPUs we have today are essentially modeled after the vector CPUs used in the supercomputers of the 1980s.
You're right though, that there is a feedback between both: the mainstream with its incredible volume drives manufacturing. As we approach the 7nm wall, manufacturing is becoming increasingly expensive. Only mass markets can finance the required R&D. Supercomputing is increasingly taking advantage of mainstream tech. E.g. ORNL's Titan is based on NVIDIA Tesla K20x GPUs, which technically aren't your average gamer GPUs, but the chips are essentially spin-offs of these.
Sorry, typo...
Thanks.
Yeah, OpenCL is a different thing. But if you talk to laymen, they will often repeat the marketing speed that you take your OpenMP(!) code written for traditional multi-cores, recompile and enjoy... Not true, in my experience.
I wonder how nice these will be to program. The "just recompile and run" promise for Knights Corner was little more than a cruel joke: to get any serious performance out of the current generation of MICs you have to wrestle with vector intrinsics and that stupid in-order architecture. At least the latter will apparently be dropped in Knights Landing.
For what it's worth: I'll be looking forward to NVIDIA's Maxwell. At least CUDA got the vectorization problem sorted out. And no: not even the Intel compiler handles vectorization well.
With some cities existing for >1000 years and having been dug over in WW2, there is often no knowing of what to expect when digging through the underground. Recently a builder operating a digger was killed by a WW2 era dud. Experts estimate that there are still 100k duds lying around and each year about 5k are being found.
...to the second picture.
BTW: I just had a look at your website and I'd hazard the guess that there are almost as many typos as words on it. What's your "professional agenda" behind those? ;-)
Since you seem to believe that a simple typo represents a fallacy, I dare say that your conclusion "Ruby is in serious declining" is a fallacy by itself: in your link Ruby's curve appears to be rather stable (2% over the past 5 years). In my world decline means something different.
You're right though that your search terms are more suitable.
What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?
Your agenda. Your post is clearly biased on defending Ruby.
Interestingly I do not have an agenda on Ruby and in fact it was a simple typo. As a non-native speaker I find the way how names and compounds are handled in the English language confusing at best. It's much easier in German: all compounds are written in one single word, no spaces, no dashes. You're allowed to add dashes to make life for the reader easier (Atombombenzündmechanismus is not a handy word).
That would be Ok, we're all biased somehow - but experience taught me that tech people has a strong inclination to include lies and fallacies while arguing on subjects he/she has a bias on.
Isn't it ironic that your own post represents a fallacy? Of course I have the arrogance to assume that I know best which motives my original post was based on -- and which not.
"Javascript" is a word massively disseminated - very improbable that one professional that makes a living in this field would misspell this word the way you did.
See, indeed I am a CS professional. I've specialized in HPC. The way I use Ruby is very different from what the web folks use it for: thanks to Puppet Ruby has become a popular language for managing system configuration, especially for large scale deployments. Hence I do have a significant exposure to Ruby, without ever doing any serious JS coding. And that's what I criticize in TFA: it seems to equate Ruby with "language for web apps". Its argument revolves around "b/c of node.js becoming popular, Ruby is/might be dying". And that's just wrong because even if Rails would just disappear, there would still be tons of valid use cases for Ruby (text mangling, build automation, rapid prototyping, network automation...).
If fact I don't care much about whether Ruby is popular or not. I've used it before Rails was popular, and I wouldn't have any second thoughts about adding another language to my portfolio, should I see any major benefit in it.
Nice try (intentionally spelling "java script" is not cute, dude!).
What makes you think that this was intentional and not just a typo?
You're close. Both ways. Funny. 32, not 35. ^^
A case of too much plum pudding?
Long answer: a better indicator is how many Google queries for the respective languages are issued. And those suggest that Ruby is standing stronger than ever. Ruby is more than just Rails. And just because there is yet another web apps framework, it doesn't mean that the other ones automatically lose traction.
The advantage of (real) Supercomputers is that they can tackle large scale simulations (instead of large numbers of small scale simulations, which is what "Folding@Home" and co. do). Would the quality of the predictions go up if they used a more accurate (and thus computationally complex) model of the forcefield? AFAIK DE Shaw Research is building their "Anton" line of supercomputers for the simulation of molecular dynamics.
TFA is light on the technical details, so I wonder if they've really been using a supercomputer or rather "a giant heap of ordinary computers". IIRC Google has more of the latter and fewer of the former.