Again, maybe you don't get anything of what this means. I'll try again.
Not a single one of these companies that are in the list means they are "on board" with anything. It just means they're able to read the standard specifications.
Many organizations don't require you to be a "member" to read their specifications. MPEG-LA does. That's all it means. ANSI, ISO, neither of those requires you to be a member to read the specifications. Want to know how many companies in your list are "on board" with ansi and ISO? all of them. ISO 9000 is required by basically all companies worldwide. Some are members and some aren't.
LG, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Canonical, Lockheed Martin, and all the rest are simply wanting to be informed. It's the same as buying a share in a company so you can get better access to their financials.
Please, please let them actually insinuate a patent war against linux. All they have to do is show the patents, which, you know, they never did before. At which point people will initiate prior art reviews faster than MS can request patents from the patent office.
This way, we can invalidate them, move on, and ignore windows as most people have done. I am amused when people think windows is a bigwig and enterprise basically has no interest in it, other than for their employee desktops, and mostly because people don't even know how to use anything else at this point.
in case you're wondering, the first 2 arguments are not surprising. The rest are beyond outlandish.
The mercury in the CFL isn't going to kill us, but I think it's something easy for people to have irrational concern over. Really, people probably think "mercury = bad", and then drop it at that. That part wouldn't even be unfounded, even if the amount in a CFL is ridiculously small.
The second issue is also a concern - I don't have a factual basis but when comparing 60 watt incandescents to 40 watt LED's, there definitely seems to be a huge difference in the lighting of a room. I do understand that technically, the LED's should be more efficient with significantly more lumens, but maybe someone else with an actual science background might be able to explain why better than I can. I'm sure it could have been the specific set of LED's I purchased but the difference was huge for equal wattage.
Meanwhile, I'm talking about LED even. they should be *brighter* than CFR's.
I don't care what you hate or don't but really, you're comparing healthcare to communism. That alone means it's genuinely clear you don't have a shred of an inkling of what you are talking about.
Please tell me again how socialism equals communism when we already live in a socialist society. (notice the words there!) Not that you have an answer to this.
Examples: welfare, social security, education, public roads, public transportation.
Are you going to tell me all of those are communist and/or that Canada (and the US, as you are implying) is communist? If so I'd like to remind you that we are neither a communist society, or a democratic society.
If you don't like it you're welcome to leave the country.
I don't know the specifics, but I suspect bengie is correct that the heat isn't the biggest issue. Both have thermal ranges that are close to eachother and have not that substantially different heat generation.
one of a multitude of issues is: how can you get the instruction sets to sync up? One is a general purpose unit and the other is a specific instruction unit. We're also talking about say, 1600+ cores on one versus 16 to maybe 32 (or say 64-256 in the near future) cores on the other. Remember, this will likely be done on enterprise before it hits consumer level - rendering farms would love it.
This is not just a translation issue, the question of interface/API's to facilitate the transmission and what error checking on a base level are small fry compared to other issues that no doubt come up.
I'm sure "what's get processed where?" will be a question for that too, and not a simple question at all. First step will be sandwiching them together essentially, second will be them being truly hybrid. I don't see the latter coming any time soon, honestly. It's of considerable interest for amd/nvidia/intel, but I don't think we're looking at something in the next few iterations of processing (even if roadmaps say so).
These questions won't only affect the logical side of the device but the actual physical makeup too. If it's not efficient enough I doubt there will be compelling reasons to deviate from cpu and GPU as we have currently.
just because people are licensees doesn't mean they're going to implement it. I think you fail to understand what the significance of that list is. Maybe you should read at the bottom when it says (my bold/italic)
companies listed above may produce some or no products which are licensed under their respective agreement and, therefore, no conclusion may be drawn from this list that any particular products they manufacture are licensed.
It's more likely that people have to be licensees to be able to read the implementation,and far less likely that it implies that they support it or use it.
Don't get me wrong, I agree H264 is pretty mainstream right now, and I'd like to see an open source alternative (h264 is not going to last if they don't go 100% royalty free, and if they did do that everyone would use it), but relying on the MpegLA list is anything but reliable.
As an aside, GPU's have up to 2GB and soon to be 4GB. The rest of what you said it dead on.
You are right though, the concept of gpu/cpu hybrid seems to be a possible end result if the combination can be run successfully. I suspect there is a lot of very tough engineering involved with getting such a concept working.
without my understanding, my initial reaction was "how was this new" and/or "will this even work"? You seem to feel that it will.
Care to clarify as to why it would/wouldn't? I'm trying to wrap my head around this thing, and nothing says "ah, this would work".
From what I understand, they're hashing the ram itself is supposedly versus ram with the malware there. Meanwhile, I fail to figure out how that is possible without continuously hashing the ram, which would, well, change the hash constantly given whatever programs are running. It sounds like a logical conundrum to me. Just because you know that you have 6 gigs of ram doesn't tell you why the hash is going to exclusively be modified by the malware versus, you know, everything else running.
apple isn't exactly a company with inventive, complicated or unique features. How hard is it to make a computer run if all you're changing is some hardware and a few features?
touchscreen, epub, wifi, did I miss anything? none of those are exceptionally hard to program into any device really.
Oh right, actual clones will probably be able to use bluetooth/make calls/tether/be tethered to, as well. whoops.
as others replied to you, that market of non geek/nerd/techhead is only getting smaller over time.
trying to cater to that market is just going to become futile. The more popular/successful these devices get, the more people become geek/nerd/tech head.
hollowed out coin is going to look suspicious? They don't scan change. They give you a little basket to put crap in and then they pass it around the scanner.
Hence, there is no scanning of the device. you can probably put your cellphone in said basket too. Same thing applies even internationally.
google can easily continue to do business in china with or without their approval. It's a matter of the US standing up the protect them if necessary. Global (internet based) companies cannot simply be "removed" or "prevented" from a market. Look at our releasing of sanctions in countries recently for an example of the futility if china were to try to block google.
Re:Hiding in plain sight
on
Hollow Spy Coins
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
sure, that sounds good and all, but it's not realistic or related to what you're replying to. a cellphone is not a laptop. While both can hold enormous amounts of data (16gb/32gb microsd - I think most blackberries can only hold 16 max if I recall correctly), apparently border searches and the likes constitute searching laptops - they make a distinction.
My android phone holds significantly more data (and can do more, functionality wise) than your blackberry - it could be "more dangerous". Yet they could care less what phone any of us have, as they rarely ever inspect it.
So the coin makes sense but mostly all of the devices point out how security is basically stupid at best.
there's plenty of safety risks in partially oxidizing the gasoline prior to injection for combustion, too. That's like asking for a higher risk of gas fire from a frontal collision.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, maybe you don't get anything of what this means. I'll try again.
Not a single one of these companies that are in the list means they are "on board" with anything. It just means they're able to read the standard specifications.
Many organizations don't require you to be a "member" to read their specifications. MPEG-LA does. That's all it means. ANSI, ISO, neither of those requires you to be a member to read the specifications. Want to know how many companies in your list are "on board" with ansi and ISO? all of them. ISO 9000 is required by basically all companies worldwide. Some are members and some aren't.
LG, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Canonical, Lockheed Martin, and all the rest are simply wanting to be informed. It's the same as buying a share in a company so you can get better access to their financials.
not just that.
Please, please let them actually insinuate a patent war against linux. All they have to do is show the patents, which, you know, they never did before. At which point people will initiate prior art reviews faster than MS can request patents from the patent office.
This way, we can invalidate them, move on, and ignore windows as most people have done. I am amused when people think windows is a bigwig and enterprise basically has no interest in it, other than for their employee desktops, and mostly because people don't even know how to use anything else at this point.
in case you're wondering, the first 2 arguments are not surprising. The rest are beyond outlandish.
The mercury in the CFL isn't going to kill us, but I think it's something easy for people to have irrational concern over. Really, people probably think "mercury = bad", and then drop it at that. That part wouldn't even be unfounded, even if the amount in a CFL is ridiculously small.
The second issue is also a concern - I don't have a factual basis but when comparing 60 watt incandescents to 40 watt LED's, there definitely seems to be a huge difference in the lighting of a room. I do understand that technically, the LED's should be more efficient with significantly more lumens, but maybe someone else with an actual science background might be able to explain why better than I can. I'm sure it could have been the specific set of LED's I purchased but the difference was huge for equal wattage.
Meanwhile, I'm talking about LED even. they should be *brighter* than CFR's.
I don't care what you hate or don't but really, you're comparing healthcare to communism. That alone means it's genuinely clear you don't have a shred of an inkling of what you are talking about.
Please tell me again how socialism equals communism when we already live in a socialist society. (notice the words there!) Not that you have an answer to this.
Examples: welfare, social security, education, public roads, public transportation.
Are you going to tell me all of those are communist and/or that Canada (and the US, as you are implying) is communist? If so I'd like to remind you that we are neither a communist society, or a democratic society.
If you don't like it you're welcome to leave the country.
Why would they even need to bother? Our voltages aren't even the same.
I don't know the specifics, but I suspect bengie is correct that the heat isn't the biggest issue. Both have thermal ranges that are close to eachother and have not that substantially different heat generation.
one of a multitude of issues is: how can you get the instruction sets to sync up? One is a general purpose unit and the other is a specific instruction unit. We're also talking about say, 1600+ cores on one versus 16 to maybe 32 (or say 64-256 in the near future) cores on the other. Remember, this will likely be done on enterprise before it hits consumer level - rendering farms would love it.
This is not just a translation issue, the question of interface/API's to facilitate the transmission and what error checking on a base level are small fry compared to other issues that no doubt come up.
I'm sure "what's get processed where?" will be a question for that too, and not a simple question at all. First step will be sandwiching them together essentially, second will be them being truly hybrid. I don't see the latter coming any time soon, honestly. It's of considerable interest for amd/nvidia/intel, but I don't think we're looking at something in the next few iterations of processing (even if roadmaps say so).
These questions won't only affect the logical side of the device but the actual physical makeup too. If it's not efficient enough I doubt there will be compelling reasons to deviate from cpu and GPU as we have currently.
just because people are licensees doesn't mean they're going to implement it. I think you fail to understand what the significance of that list is. Maybe you should read at the bottom when it says (my bold/italic)
It's more likely that people have to be licensees to be able to read the implementation,and far less likely that it implies that they support it or use it.
Don't get me wrong, I agree H264 is pretty mainstream right now, and I'd like to see an open source alternative (h264 is not going to last if they don't go 100% royalty free, and if they did do that everyone would use it), but relying on the MpegLA list is anything but reliable.
this kind of assumes people care about what internet explorer uses. That's becoming less relevant by the day.
I thought this was an excalibur joke about pulling out of China?
please. if you're trying to say you can't have free computing you're full of shit.
The difference here is that "Free" is a hell of a lot cheaper than something that "isn't free".
As an aside, GPU's have up to 2GB and soon to be 4GB. The rest of what you said it dead on.
You are right though, the concept of gpu/cpu hybrid seems to be a possible end result if the combination can be run successfully. I suspect there is a lot of very tough engineering involved with getting such a concept working.
you mean the one that horribly failed and wasn't even close to performing as good as a graphics card?
oh, right.
I'm sorry, where is the logic there?
Have you ever had your eyes open for the last 20 years about anything in existence?
free on computing: it generally rocks
free on healthcare: it generally rocks
free food: that sucks?
I'm an american and I think you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
okay, so followup question as others have posted: is there no way for malware to hide itself within the space on the disk?
you can't expect people from yale to always be smart. The smart ones usually don't seek publicity.
without my understanding, my initial reaction was "how was this new" and/or "will this even work"? You seem to feel that it will.
Care to clarify as to why it would/wouldn't? I'm trying to wrap my head around this thing, and nothing says "ah, this would work".
From what I understand, they're hashing the ram itself is supposedly versus ram with the malware there. Meanwhile, I fail to figure out how that is possible without continuously hashing the ram, which would, well, change the hash constantly given whatever programs are running. It sounds like a logical conundrum to me. Just because you know that you have 6 gigs of ram doesn't tell you why the hash is going to exclusively be modified by the malware versus, you know, everything else running.
people could do what the iphone could when it came out. What was exactly around for the iphone that wasn't around on others?
symbian already had touchscreen, custom os, etc. It just wasn't as popular.
apple isn't exactly a company with inventive, complicated or unique features. How hard is it to make a computer run if all you're changing is some hardware and a few features?
touchscreen, epub, wifi, did I miss anything? none of those are exceptionally hard to program into any device really.
Oh right, actual clones will probably be able to use bluetooth/make calls/tether/be tethered to, as well. whoops.
as others replied to you, that market of non geek/nerd/techhead is only getting smaller over time.
trying to cater to that market is just going to become futile. The more popular/successful these devices get, the more people become geek/nerd/tech head.
hollowed out coin is going to look suspicious? They don't scan change. They give you a little basket to put crap in and then they pass it around the scanner.
Hence, there is no scanning of the device. you can probably put your cellphone in said basket too. Same thing applies even internationally.
google can easily continue to do business in china with or without their approval. It's a matter of the US standing up the protect them if necessary. Global (internet based) companies cannot simply be "removed" or "prevented" from a market. Look at our releasing of sanctions in countries recently for an example of the futility if china were to try to block google.
sure, that sounds good and all, but it's not realistic or related to what you're replying to. a cellphone is not a laptop. While both can hold enormous amounts of data (16gb/32gb microsd - I think most blackberries can only hold 16 max if I recall correctly), apparently border searches and the likes constitute searching laptops - they make a distinction.
My android phone holds significantly more data (and can do more, functionality wise) than your blackberry - it could be "more dangerous". Yet they could care less what phone any of us have, as they rarely ever inspect it.
So the coin makes sense but mostly all of the devices point out how security is basically stupid at best.
actually the whole thing is a lot like "we can cancel your app at any time we want".
there's plenty of safety risks in partially oxidizing the gasoline prior to injection for combustion, too. That's like asking for a higher risk of gas fire from a frontal collision.
Considering that this packet validates constantly, it'd be ridiculously easy for someone to mimic the connection reply/confirmation.
After all, how would this game be cracked at all if it wasn't for that? It wouldn't be playable.