Brilliant! I assume they've got rid of those things called header files by now.
And before anyone moans that "header files provides a good overview of a project", well, it should be up to the IDE to display information (much better presented) about a project and its classes and members. Even Bjarne Stroustrup said that header files were a kludge,
Break backwards compatibility a little bit and you can do so much stuff better. Otherwise you ultimately have a dying language.
Rather than the ultra-megawide screen setup that 2 monitors provide, I own a large 26" monitor (and am planning to get a 30" in the future when I can afford it). You get great height (good for coding), decent width, a unified desktop so that you don't have a big black bar down the middle (the space between the monitors!), and a bigger screen for watching movies from a more comfy chair.
Ignoring paranoia over weapon potential. And ignoring safety to a large degree, and even semi-ignoring nuclear waste to a degree, what is the most efficient/cheapest/most power giving nuclear reactor there is with current tech?
Can't we just have the 3D CPU running at a much lower clock rate (say 100 Mhz). We'll get amazingly fast parallel computers, and AFAIK, the heat drops down much quicker than the raw computing power would in such a case.
We're sort of at the limit for serial processing anyway, but parallel computers are wonderful for all the stuff we'll love in the future (raytracing, giant resolutions,p hysics/particles, and AI etc.).
I'm not so sure that it's not the direction GPUs are heading. For example, NVidia's future Maxwell chip that combines a CPU and GPU into one will have true multitasking, and maybe take the pressure off the CPU completely. Perhaps AMD's Fusion already supports that kind of thing? You're right though, it would be great to have DMA to the GPU.
I just wish they gave us an easier way to access the gfx card's pixel buffer - you know what ultimately comes out on the monitor. It's ridiculous the amount of code that's needed to write a simple pixel to a screen or window, especially if animation/video is involved.
Good points, though I'm thinking of big companies other than just ISPs which may be thinking of paying ISPs to give them priority. On that front, I'm tending to think instead that these companies may get a lot of complaints from customers about stuttering video/audio, and that they want this reduced. An advantage over competitors would be nice sure, but even more, they want happy customers with a consistent connection that doesn't keeping timing out, or producing an intermittent signal.
They aren't separate issues since certain the problems/stuttering we're having with big services like VoIP or video streaming wouldn't exist (or be heavily reduced) if these latency problems weren't there. With bufferbloat fixed, big companies wouldn't care so much about having priority, since everything would run fine in the first place. Instead there'd be a push more towards higher bandwidth generally for small and big companies. As you can see, that saves us all a layer of complexity at each network point.
Bear in mind that the recent discovery of bufferbloat we've seen inside networks all around the world could be partially to blame. According to Jim Gettys (who was the subject of an earlier slashdot story), big services are being affected by bufferbloat too. Here's the full article:
Let's get this insidious Bufferbloat fixed first, and THEN worry about whether we really need network neutrality or not. There are apparently many things we can do to enhance and optimize queuing and sorting of packets before we add another layer.
Re:Any random numbers would produce the same resul
on
What Pi Sounds Like
·
· Score: 1
I think his point is that you could pick any complicated number (e, sqrt(2), or a completely random number), and get exactly the same kind of emotional response.
Those weren't 'hand picked' over weeks or years, but found after a quick search today in Google news. Also, afaik, there are still potential economical challenges with Thorium based reactors. Not sure about that though.
Rather than stating the obvious, which isn't actually true anyway because I for one wouldn't mind a Thorium reactor near me, we should instead be marketing Thorium to the public, saying it's the new 'green fuel', and giving incentives to nearby urban areas by giving them drastically reduced fuel prices (say 50-75% off).
I think it's a great time to cash in on all the latest research, so we can have our cake and eat it (low pollution, AND high energy - our energy needs are only going to grow anyway).
Probably the best solution to this deletist/keepist nonsense is to rate articles according to their noteworthiness. This rating can either be derived according to how many other articles link in, or according to human judgement. Using this system, lower ranked articles will be naturally found far less, but at least they're there if you dig. It'd work like pagerank to a degree.
Keeping or deleting is otherwise a false dichotomy. There isn't a magical line that makes an article suddenly not important any more. There are however shades of grey.
Something I've always wanted to know is why can't scientists throw UV or even xrays on the matter in question and 'transpose' or shift any reflected light back up to the normal visible spectrum? Of course, xrays penetrate objects, but is this 100%, or is a tiny percentage reflected back?
Can you tell me what the site and search keywords are? I'm just curious to see if/when it goes back to how it should be.
I hope google uses a system where they know of 1000 sites or so which they know are definitely the 'first', and then they try to reduce the number of false sites as much as possible before the results go live.
I've only just skimmed the summary, but I completely agree, it'd be wonderful to have multiple recycle bins, each a different colour so I can organize my trash. I put red files/icons in the red trash, and green ones in the green etc. I'm pretty sure this helps the OS with housekeeping, because it makes it easier to restore the bits for future files. Sometimes, the colour is not seen before, so I've set up a system to pick the trashcan colour from a colour wheel - this helps organization further.
On top of this scheme, I have various levels of trash: shallow, deep, and megadeep. When I first delete a file, it goes into the shallow trash so that I can restore the file immediately if I've made a mistake. If I'm really sure I don't want a file, or I need more disk space, every so often, I dig into the shallow trash, and move them into the deeper trashcan, and again with the other levels, finally to be deleted at the end of the chain. It's cumbersome, but this way I can make sure I won't delete very important files too easily.
I've seen it time and time again, people just generally don't care about latency, or even deny it exists in many cases (buffer bloat is certainly one cause of latency).
Everything from changing channel on your TV remote, to a mobile phone number entry, to the frame delays you get from LCD monitors, to the soundcard delay, to the GUI widgets you click on;......... it's all over the place, and it can wreck the experience, or reduce it somewhat according to how big the delay is. Just because latency is harder to measure, that doesn't mean it isn't very important, especially when it builds up with lots of other 'tiny' delays to make one big delay.
I don't know about anyone else, but I often like to change the pitch/time of music so that I can hear it slower/lower/higher/faster. You then hear many intricacies in detailed music which you otherwise may not catch on to. It also gives a slightly different atmosphere to the tune too.
So for those reasons, I would prefer a 88Khz upgrade, and not 24-32 bit, though both would be nice.
Same here. Only tried the 3D version of Zelda64 though. Too much roaming, not enough action, lack of detail in the graphics, and general 3D unfun compared to the SNES 2D version I find.
Are the other 2D variants (which I haven't tried) not as good ad Zelda 3 on the SNES? Any idea why?
Why the hell would I want to do that? If I'm looking for it, it's useful to me. If I'm not, it's not.
Well, it would be to filter a list even quicker. Say if the initial filter produced 100 results, then the highest rated/used/valuable would be nearer/at the top.
Well, unless we both go into massive detail, I'm through I think for now. I know you're still against the idea of a metadata filesystem generally, but hopefully I've pulled you towards that direction, or a subset of that direction, even it's just by an inch.
Slashdot Mirror
Brilliant! I assume they've got rid of those things called header files by now.
And before anyone moans that "header files provides a good overview of a project", well, it should be up to the IDE to display information (much better presented) about a project and its classes and members. Even Bjarne Stroustrup said that header files were a kludge,
Break backwards compatibility a little bit and you can do so much stuff better. Otherwise you ultimately have a dying language.
Yes, now all they need to do is fix the lag which can be quite high, maybe even 200ms:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weZOjotbuSU
Something really low like 16ms or better is needed so that we don't notice, according to this article:
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/km3/hfes.pdf
Rather than the ultra-megawide screen setup that 2 monitors provide, I own a large 26" monitor (and am planning to get a 30" in the future when I can afford it). You get great height (good for coding), decent width, a unified desktop so that you don't have a big black bar down the middle (the space between the monitors!), and a bigger screen for watching movies from a more comfy chair.
Ignoring paranoia over weapon potential. And ignoring safety to a large degree, and even semi-ignoring nuclear waste to a degree, what is the most efficient/cheapest/most power giving nuclear reactor there is with current tech?
Can't we just have the 3D CPU running at a much lower clock rate (say 100 Mhz). We'll get amazingly fast parallel computers, and AFAIK, the heat drops down much quicker than the raw computing power would in such a case.
We're sort of at the limit for serial processing anyway, but parallel computers are wonderful for all the stuff we'll love in the future (raytracing, giant resolutions,p hysics/particles, and AI etc.).
I'm not so sure that it's not the direction GPUs are heading. For example, NVidia's future Maxwell chip that combines a CPU and GPU into one will have true multitasking, and maybe take the pressure off the CPU completely. Perhaps AMD's Fusion already supports that kind of thing? You're right though, it would be great to have DMA to the GPU.
I just wish they gave us an easier way to access the gfx card's pixel buffer - you know what ultimately comes out on the monitor. It's ridiculous the amount of code that's needed to write a simple pixel to a screen or window, especially if animation/video is involved.
I meant the value of an article doesn't fall under 2 brackets, and so the end result (keeping or deleting) is inappropriate.
Good points, though I'm thinking of big companies other than just ISPs which may be thinking of paying ISPs to give them priority. On that front, I'm tending to think instead that these companies may get a lot of complaints from customers about stuttering video/audio, and that they want this reduced. An advantage over competitors would be nice sure, but even more, they want happy customers with a consistent connection that doesn't keeping timing out, or producing an intermittent signal.
They aren't separate issues since certain the problems/stuttering we're having with big services like VoIP or video streaming wouldn't exist (or be heavily reduced) if these latency problems weren't there. With bufferbloat fixed, big companies wouldn't care so much about having priority, since everything would run fine in the first place. Instead there'd be a push more towards higher bandwidth generally for small and big companies. As you can see, that saves us all a layer of complexity at each network point.
Bear in mind that the recent discovery of bufferbloat we've seen inside networks all around the world could be partially to blame. According to Jim Gettys (who was the subject of an earlier slashdot story), big services are being affected by bufferbloat too. Here's the full article:
http://gettys.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/bufferbloat-and-network-neutrality-back-to-the-past/
Let's get this insidious Bufferbloat fixed first, and THEN worry about whether we really need network neutrality or not. There are apparently many things we can do to enhance and optimize queuing and sorting of packets before we add another layer.
I think his point is that you could pick any complicated number (e, sqrt(2), or a completely random number), and get exactly the same kind of emotional response.
Base 7 over 8 would be more suitable as the diatonic scale has 7 notes. You counted the first one twice (the octave), but they are the same note.
But perhaps we should go the whole hog, and say base 12 to use the full chromatic scale.
1:13 here in Bedford and I've got a cold. Beat that.
Even many environmentalists seem to be realising the potential benefits of a Thorium reactor. E.g. see:
http://www.fastcompany.com/1727914/will-green-nukes-save-the-world
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/feb/16/china-nuclear-thorium
Those weren't 'hand picked' over weeks or years, but found after a quick search today in Google news.
Also, afaik, there are still potential economical challenges with Thorium based reactors. Not sure about that though.
Rather than stating the obvious, which isn't actually true anyway because I for one wouldn't mind a Thorium reactor near me, we should instead be marketing Thorium to the public, saying it's the new 'green fuel', and giving incentives to nearby urban areas by giving them drastically reduced fuel prices (say 50-75% off).
I think it's a great time to cash in on all the latest research, so we can have our cake and eat it (low pollution, AND high energy - our energy needs are only going to grow anyway).
Probably the best solution to this deletist/keepist nonsense is to rate articles according to their noteworthiness. This rating can either be derived according to how many other articles link in, or according to human judgement. Using this system, lower ranked articles will be naturally found far less, but at least they're there if you dig. It'd work like pagerank to a degree.
Keeping or deleting is otherwise a false dichotomy. There isn't a magical line that makes an article suddenly not important any more. There are however shades of grey.
Something I've always wanted to know is why can't scientists throw UV or even xrays on the matter in question and 'transpose' or shift any reflected light back up to the normal visible spectrum? Of course, xrays penetrate objects, but is this 100%, or is a tiny percentage reflected back?
Can you tell me what the site and search keywords are? I'm just curious to see if/when it goes back to how it should be.
I hope google uses a system where they know of 1000 sites or so which they know are definitely the 'first', and then they try to reduce the number of false sites as much as possible before the results go live.
I've only just skimmed the summary, but I completely agree, it'd be wonderful to have multiple recycle bins, each a different colour so I can organize my trash. I put red files/icons in the red trash, and green ones in the green etc. I'm pretty sure this helps the OS with housekeeping, because it makes it easier to restore the bits for future files. Sometimes, the colour is not seen before, so I've set up a system to pick the trashcan colour from a colour wheel - this helps organization further.
On top of this scheme, I have various levels of trash: shallow, deep, and megadeep. When I first delete a file, it goes into the shallow trash so that I can restore the file immediately if I've made a mistake. If I'm really sure I don't want a file, or I need more disk space, every so often, I dig into the shallow trash, and move them into the deeper trashcan, and again with the other levels, finally to be deleted at the end of the chain. It's cumbersome, but this way I can make sure I won't delete very important files too easily.
I've seen it time and time again, people just generally don't care about latency, or even deny it exists in many cases (buffer bloat is certainly one cause of latency).
Everything from changing channel on your TV remote, to a mobile phone number entry, to the frame delays you get from LCD monitors, to the soundcard delay, to the GUI widgets you click on;......... it's all over the place, and it can wreck the experience, or reduce it somewhat according to how big the delay is. Just because latency is harder to measure, that doesn't mean it isn't very important, especially when it builds up with lots of other 'tiny' delays to make one big delay.
Future quantum dot tech will convert the LED light into something less harsh from what this says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjznErmcLnU
I don't know about anyone else, but I often like to change the pitch/time of music so that I can hear it slower/lower/higher/faster. You then hear many intricacies in detailed music which you otherwise may not catch on to. It also gives a slightly different atmosphere to the tune too.
So for those reasons, I would prefer a 88Khz upgrade, and not 24-32 bit, though both would be nice.
Same here. Only tried the 3D version of Zelda64 though. Too much roaming, not enough action, lack of detail in the graphics, and general 3D unfun compared to the SNES 2D version I find.
Are the other 2D variants (which I haven't tried) not as good ad Zelda 3 on the SNES? Any idea why?
Why the hell would I want to do that? If I'm looking for it, it's useful to me. If I'm not, it's not.
Well, it would be to filter a list even quicker. Say if the initial filter produced 100 results, then the highest rated/used/valuable would be nearer/at the top.
Well, unless we both go into massive detail, I'm through I think for now. I know you're still against the idea of a metadata filesystem generally, but hopefully I've pulled you towards that direction, or a subset of that direction, even it's just by an inch.