Of course it is relatively, hardly a modicum, less than a jot, a tad at best. But Six hundred Million Dollars sure sounds like a shitload of cash. That's what the public hears and that's the effect.
Yes, indeed, us British have already trodden this road of rise and fall of empire (on many levels) and America might do well to look at how we have adapted. Once the home of great research and invention there used to be a saying about the economic brain drain, "Invented in England, designed in America, built in Japan." As science and technology evolved it became impossible for the lone inventor to come up with Radar or Hovercraft or Television in their garden sheds. Modern research required huge budgets and teams of tens or hundereds of people. Only the Americans could offer this. We could do the conceptual work, but couldn't afford to develop the ideas from research into technology. We were too small, economically and academically to carry the weight anymore.
I think America is reaching the same stage of saturation compounded by isolationism. The frontiers of research as conducted at CERN etc. are reaching towards the last stages of human scientific knowledge, budgets are measured in billions, teams are measured in thousands. In short, only large scale collective enterprises are possible.
Sure there will remain maverick individuals and occasional breakthroughs by small teams, but 'fundamental' research that will take us to other solar systems and create limitless free energy are out of reach of individual nations, never mind individual companies.
When we realised this we threw our lot in with our allies, USA and greater Europe. There are very few companies in Britain that work in isolation. America on the other hand clings to an illusion of grandeur that perpetuates isolation in many areas. The ISS is a notable counterexample.
Fundamental research has never been something a nation should chase for competitive advantage. Technological research (the details) is different, but the goals dictated by Wall St. to US companies on this front are sad. Digital rights management? Pharmacuticals to enhance sex? Is this really worthwhile utilitarian research we should be doing?
I'm sure Bell will pull through this anyway, pure research has always been an impoverished area. My own doctoral research was conducted in a financial vacuum, I had to salvage junk computers to equip my lab, but the spirit survives.
Gygax: Anyone wanna play dungeons and dragons for the next quadrillion years?
Fry: Sure.
Hawking: I guess.
Deep Blue: Pawn to rook 8.
Hawking: Every probvlem in life can't be solved by chess moves, someday you'll realise this.
Al Gore: I'm a 10th level vice president!
It's been a *rolls dice*... +1 Funny , post.
Thermal stress is about temperature gradient.
If you don't cool evenly then yes the thing might just shatter. Since semiconductors are designed for good thermal flow in the first place this shouldn't be a problem, so long as you aren't just plunging the thing from +250 to -100 instantly.
Resistance is fu^H^H inversely proportional to temperature. Metal on silicon is just the same as any conductor in this respect.
Perhaps a real physicist can fill in the gaps as to the relationship between frequency (and consequent electron flux density) and resistance.
So there is an absolute corelation between temperature and frequency as far as I know.
This is a separate issue from the thermodynamics of the system, how heat is conducted away.
Can't read the article, but I assume its old news since Cryotek were making 1GHz systems almost 6 months before AMD and Intel officially released 1G uPs using referigerant tech.
btw, I have always wondered why systems don't use peltier effect heatsinks more for this.
What is the financial regulatory authority in the States that acts as a watchdog on this sort of thing?
Using Windows XP in an ATM instead of a hardened embedded system is criminal negligence, no two ways about it.
Ah!!!!! Pictures. More pictures. I've been looking at pictures of these since NOVEMBER 2003.
The puddle of drool on the floor is already deep enough to support a diverse ecosystem of fish.
STOP TEASING US.
When will these things be shipping so we can play?
"Given that one is convinced that nuking a city was necessary, was it necessary to nuke a second city?"
Indeed, this question isn't heard often enough.
imho, the first bomb at Hiroshima was an awe inspiring, history changing moment that must have taken great courage to go ahead with.
Having seen what happened, the second bomb at Nagasaki was a disgusting war crime for which the commanding officers should have been publicly executed. (notwithstanding the fact that Japan did not immediately surrender)
What you say is correct, but there's no need to point the finger at America for it. Every nation does its fair share of spilling blood and almost every nations order embodies the same hypocritical reasoning (except maybe the Dutch).
Ask yourself what is the psycological/cultural basis for it? Why is it fine to revel in violence, torture, and brains spilled on the floor but not to even talk about consensual sexuality?
My pet theory is that the psych profile of those who are drawn to seek power is actually sexually abnormal, such individuals are riddled with guilt and frustration on various levels, and this is manifest as an attempt to control others sexual behaviour.
That is the the main concern of the article. Sex is just so much a part of normal life that you can't put it in a box and hope to keep it away from the rest of the net. By creating a safe walled zone material of a sexual nature is ostracised. The problem is that it cannot be thus contained because it crosses over with so many other areas, examples cited are discussions about AIDS and birth control.
As to 'reasonable limits' that's a whole can of worms.
Simon you forgot to mention our favourite nanny, Mary Whitehouse. I think the psychology of the prude is epitomised by that crazy woman, but we
don't hear so much from her anymore. Harmless as _she_ may be I think these American FCC regulations sound far more sinister. It's open ended censorship. One objective is likely to quiet dissent as America moves towards a troubled political future.
On the other hand it may increase intelligent use of English as a language and expand the vocabularies heard on all platforms. Instead of saying "Bush/Blair is a cocksucking little twat", one would have to say something like "Bush/Blair is a weak minded, objectionable little apology for a man". The latter actually conveys far more meaning and is much nastier than the former.
Additionally, given the dumbed down limited 'news-speak' vocabularies of so many prominent public figures who one may wish to attack the use of a richer and more sincere volcabulary would not be a bad thing. It ensures that those who take the platform must destroy their enemies with wit, rhetoric and wordcraft rather than poison and vitriol. In many cases those who would limit speech are those who have the least articulate voices, take Bush for example who seems to be singulary uneducated.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it is relatively, hardly a modicum, less than a jot, a tad at best. But Six hundred Million Dollars sure sounds like a shitload of cash. That's what the public hears and that's the effect.
Yes, indeed, us British have already trodden this road of rise and fall of empire (on many levels) and America might do well to look at how we have adapted. Once the home of great research and invention there used to be a saying about the economic brain drain, "Invented in England, designed in America, built in Japan." As science and technology evolved it became impossible for the lone inventor to come up with Radar or Hovercraft or Television in their garden sheds. Modern research required huge budgets and teams of tens or hundereds of people. Only the Americans could offer this. We could do the conceptual work, but couldn't afford to develop the ideas from research into technology. We were too small, economically and academically to carry the weight anymore. I think America is reaching the same stage of saturation compounded by isolationism. The frontiers of research as conducted at CERN etc. are reaching towards the last stages of human scientific knowledge, budgets are measured in billions, teams are measured in thousands. In short, only large scale collective enterprises are possible. Sure there will remain maverick individuals and occasional breakthroughs by small teams, but 'fundamental' research that will take us to other solar systems and create limitless free energy are out of reach of individual nations, never mind individual companies. When we realised this we threw our lot in with our allies, USA and greater Europe. There are very few companies in Britain that work in isolation. America on the other hand clings to an illusion of grandeur that perpetuates isolation in many areas. The ISS is a notable counterexample. Fundamental research has never been something a nation should chase for competitive advantage. Technological research (the details) is different, but the goals dictated by Wall St. to US companies on this front are sad. Digital rights management? Pharmacuticals to enhance sex? Is this really worthwhile utilitarian research we should be doing? I'm sure Bell will pull through this anyway, pure research has always been an impoverished area. My own doctoral research was conducted in a financial vacuum, I had to salvage junk computers to equip my lab, but the spirit survives.
Gygax: Anyone wanna play dungeons and dragons for the next quadrillion years? ... +1 Funny , post.
Fry: Sure.
Hawking: I guess.
Deep Blue: Pawn to rook 8.
Hawking: Every probvlem in life can't be solved by chess moves, someday you'll realise this.
Al Gore: I'm a 10th level vice president!
It's been a *rolls dice*
Thermal stress is about temperature gradient. If you don't cool evenly then yes the thing might just shatter. Since semiconductors are designed for good thermal flow in the first place this shouldn't be a problem, so long as you aren't just plunging the thing from +250 to -100 instantly.
Resistance is fu^H^H inversely proportional to temperature. Metal on silicon is just the same as any conductor in this respect. Perhaps a real physicist can fill in the gaps as to the relationship between frequency (and consequent electron flux density) and resistance. So there is an absolute corelation between temperature and frequency as far as I know. This is a separate issue from the thermodynamics of the system, how heat is conducted away. Can't read the article, but I assume its old news since Cryotek were making 1GHz systems almost 6 months before AMD and Intel officially released 1G uPs using referigerant tech. btw, I have always wondered why systems don't use peltier effect heatsinks more for this.
What is the financial regulatory authority in the States that acts as a watchdog on this sort of thing? Using Windows XP in an ATM instead of a hardened embedded system is criminal negligence, no two ways about it.
Ah!!!!! Pictures. More pictures. I've been looking at pictures of these since NOVEMBER 2003. The puddle of drool on the floor is already deep enough to support a diverse ecosystem of fish. STOP TEASING US. When will these things be shipping so we can play?
"Given that one is convinced that nuking a city was necessary, was it necessary to nuke a second city?" Indeed, this question isn't heard often enough. imho, the first bomb at Hiroshima was an awe inspiring, history changing moment that must have taken great courage to go ahead with. Having seen what happened, the second bomb at Nagasaki was a disgusting war crime for which the commanding officers should have been publicly executed. (notwithstanding the fact that Japan did not immediately surrender)
What you say is correct, but there's no need to point the finger at America for it. Every nation does its fair share of spilling blood and almost every nations order embodies the same hypocritical reasoning (except maybe the Dutch). Ask yourself what is the psycological/cultural basis for it? Why is it fine to revel in violence, torture, and brains spilled on the floor but not to even talk about consensual sexuality? My pet theory is that the psych profile of those who are drawn to seek power is actually sexually abnormal, such individuals are riddled with guilt and frustration on various levels, and this is manifest as an attempt to control others sexual behaviour.
That is the the main concern of the article. Sex is just so much a part of normal life that you can't put it in a box and hope to keep it away from the rest of the net. By creating a safe walled zone material of a sexual nature is ostracised. The problem is that it cannot be thus contained because it crosses over with so many other areas, examples cited are discussions about AIDS and birth control. As to 'reasonable limits' that's a whole can of worms.
Simon you forgot to mention our favourite nanny, Mary Whitehouse. I think the psychology of the prude is epitomised by that crazy woman, but we don't hear so much from her anymore. Harmless as _she_ may be I think these American FCC regulations sound far more sinister. It's open ended censorship. One objective is likely to quiet dissent as America moves towards a troubled political future. On the other hand it may increase intelligent use of English as a language and expand the vocabularies heard on all platforms. Instead of saying "Bush/Blair is a cocksucking little twat", one would have to say something like "Bush/Blair is a weak minded, objectionable little apology for a man". The latter actually conveys far more meaning and is much nastier than the former. Additionally, given the dumbed down limited 'news-speak' vocabularies of so many prominent public figures who one may wish to attack the use of a richer and more sincere volcabulary would not be a bad thing. It ensures that those who take the platform must destroy their enemies with wit, rhetoric and wordcraft rather than poison and vitriol. In many cases those who would limit speech are those who have the least articulate voices, take Bush for example who seems to be singulary uneducated.