So they're not exactly lying about the compression ratios, they're just redefining the term to describe compression not of data-sets but of data-sets-over-time.
That's kind of like the spot on the Colbert Report last night where they've redefined marshlands to include golf course water traps, and as a result our overall marshland has actually increased!
Firstly, graduating with a decent GPA from the U of A (I'm assuming University of Arizona) isn't that big of a deal depending upon your class sequencing as they've pretty much lobotomized the CS program...
Yes, I know... that's sad. I graduated in 1998, when we still learned on UNIX machines programming C and C++. It was actually a really good (and hard) program back then... shortly thereafter (the next year or two), they changed everything to Java (which isn't good when you're trying to teach about memory and pointers) and WinNT. Not sure what they're doing now, but I know that it's gone downhill.
Thirdly, if you actually take the time to do the activies you've enumerated above then you're highly unlikely to qualify as "geek" in many circles as you're not spending enough time behind the keyboard.
Yeah, maybe. Maybe I'm just not as much of a geek as I thought. Why won't everyone stop calling me that, then?:)
I believe you missed the point, or rather the analogy. The single task issue was more related to "why geeks can't handle certain tasks" such as meetings. The exercise was the analogy. Just as you cannot go out and do physical tasks you are not conditioned to do, so too with mental tasks. Apparently reading comprehension is a task you are not well conditioned at doing if you could not seperate the analogy of exercise from the point about the differences between multitasking and focusing on single specific task. The comments made by the doctor made it rather clear he encouraged people to meeting with physical therapists or personal trainers to get exercise.
I actually just like to take out my Jump to Conclusions Mat (patent pending) every once and awhile. It's part of my physical fitness regimen.
This guy is a quack.
I'm sorry, but putting up an excuse for not being physically active because your brain can't deal with only handling a single task is specious at best.
There are plenty of us programmers, geeks, and nerds who still engage in sports and athletic activities. I have my degree in Computer Science from the U of A, graduated with a > 3.5 GPA, work as a software engineer, and yet I still play soccer, go to the gym, mountain bike, snowboard and can run a mile no sweat.
Just cause this guy can't is no reason to stereotype the rest of us.
Lucas was quoted as saying, "They got it all wrong... now the fans will really get to see what I meant when I told the editors that Greedo should shoot first."
Re: Denial of Service, abbreviated DoS
on
Sun Grid DOS'd
·
· Score: 1
As opposed to Distributed Denial of Service, DDoS, which is when all the girls you know conspire not to give you any.
Does this definition make it impossible to move along the y axis because then the slope of our movement would be dy/dy? No. but it does say that if you move along the y axis your slope will be a constant.
No, because the slope is still dx/dy where dx is 0, and therefore your slope is 0. Which, yes, is a constant, but so is your slope over a straight line where you are moving constantly up x at the same rate as you go up y.
But still, yes, the logic based on that equation is stupid. A velocity of time change makes no sense, and says nothing about moving about in time.
Don't get me wrong; knowing how computers work from the metal up is very handy and quite fulfilling (in the same ways that Physics is), but unless you're good enough (and want) to work for Intel, AMD, nVidia or some other major designer, architecture (as typified by novel designs) seems dead.
I don't understand how you can say this. Chip architecture is alive and well in not just the major companies but many startups and smaller firms as well. x86 architecture doesn't scale well still (although this is attempting to be remedied). There are a number of companies who are creating chips that solve memory and execution scale problems for requied devices (e.g. edge network devices like load balancers, content processors, IDS/IPS, firewalls, etc). these markets may not be the desktop PC market in size, but they are still many millions of dollars of business.
And... the best embedded systems software engineers know how the hardware works from the metal up.
For example - how much faster do you think it would be to use the SSE2 16 byte registers to memcpy() instead of the C stdlib way of doing it byte by byte? A *LOT* faster.
My answer would be 16 times faster.
Which is only constant time faster, so in a linearly scaling problem, it quickly becomes *not a lot* faster.
This whole thread is so offtopic, but whatever...
All this talk about gun control not solving the problem is mostly correct, if misguided. It is true that as long as you have a large supply of guns out in the market that can be legally or illegally bought, no amount of control is going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
So get rid of the huge fucking supply. As long as you incent gun manufacturers to make as many guns and sell as many guns as possible (because it's just another product in a profit driven society), you will have lots of guns on the street, in the hands of both law abiding, and non-law abiding citizens.
Now, this is not a black and white issue. There are certain guns that have useful (i.e. hunting) purposes. There are other guns that are used primarily to shoot people (your rattlesnake hunting friend is in the minority... sorry). You can't have massive sweeping gun control laws (all guns taken away from all people), nor can you have fast and loose gun ownership (everyone should be allowed to own an UZI). It is a matter of degree.
The crux of the matter, or at least the point I'm trying to make, is that gun control (as it stands now) is going after the wrong problem... trying to pass laws inhibiting gun owners. The laws should be passed to keep manufacturers in check. The assault weapons ban, while flawed, was the only step I've seen in the right direction. It's quite sad to see that it was left to die the way it was.
Last thing... IMHO, the gun lobby should be illegal. Something like guns and gun laws should not be profit driven that way.
Seiously How are they even going to try to enforce this? Unless They have an army of trained web-content filtering monkeys, it's going to be next to impossible.
I, for one, welcome our new trained web-content filtering monkey overlords.
sorry, overplayed, but... just sounded funny to me.
The framework established for the Cold War is not suited to the current realities. But knowint that is different than moving the huge icebergs that government agencies become as they expand and atrophy.
I watched the panel discussion at the RSA conference with he and Jamie Gorelick (one of the 9/11 commissioners). Ms. Gorelick told the following story (this is my recollection of the story, not verbatim):
On 9/11, when the first plane disappeared off the radar, they wondered what happened, but since this had happened before because of technical glitches, they didn't concern themselves. When the second plane dropped off the radar, they knew they had a problem. They bypassed normal protocol and called whoever it was to scramble the two F-16s that are chartered to protect the NE portion of the U.S. The fighter pilots weren't told what they were looking for however. Later, when they were interviewed, they were asked what they thought they were looking for, and they both replied that they thought the Russians had sneaked past. The fact is that the Russians had not been considered a serious threat for the past 10 years.
Her point was that our defense infrastructure was still operating with a Cold War mentality.
All in all, that discussion is probably the best I've seen so far at the conference.
I'm here at the RSA Conference and just watched this announcement (plus most of the rest of the keynote). I honestly can't say I was particularly impressed. Bill and friends seemed to be hyping new security enhancments in IE and Windows as if these were new innovations instead of stuff that's been around in other browsers/OSs for a while now. Although I did think SpyNet had some promise.
This tactic allows him to avoid hidebound European safety regulations when he proposes, for instance, a steel footbridge whose design, sketched using industry-standard CAD software, has been radically distorted by a computer virus. Ask Europeans to cross a buggy footbridge and they'll balk, quail, and consult the 80,000 regulatory pages of the EU's acquis communautaire. Tell them it's art, and they'll flock to it in droves, sit on it, and drink Beaujolais nouveau.
And when it collapses under the weight of that flock...
Slashdot Mirror
So they're not exactly lying about the compression ratios, they're just redefining the term to describe compression not of data-sets but of data-sets-over-time.
That's kind of like the spot on the Colbert Report last night where they've redefined marshlands to include golf course water traps, and as a result our overall marshland has actually increased!
Firstly, graduating with a decent GPA from the U of A (I'm assuming University of Arizona) isn't that big of a deal depending upon your class sequencing as they've pretty much lobotomized the CS program...
:)
Yes, I know... that's sad. I graduated in 1998, when we still learned on UNIX machines programming C and C++. It was actually a really good (and hard) program back then... shortly thereafter (the next year or two), they changed everything to Java (which isn't good when you're trying to teach about memory and pointers) and WinNT. Not sure what they're doing now, but I know that it's gone downhill.
Thirdly, if you actually take the time to do the activies you've enumerated above then you're highly unlikely to qualify as "geek" in many circles as you're not spending enough time behind the keyboard.
Yeah, maybe. Maybe I'm just not as much of a geek as I thought. Why won't everyone stop calling me that, then?
I believe you missed the point, or rather the analogy. The single task issue was more related to "why geeks can't handle certain tasks" such as meetings. The exercise was the analogy. Just as you cannot go out and do physical tasks you are not conditioned to do, so too with mental tasks. Apparently reading comprehension is a task you are not well conditioned at doing if you could not seperate the analogy of exercise from the point about the differences between multitasking and focusing on single specific task. The comments made by the doctor made it rather clear he encouraged people to meeting with physical therapists or personal trainers to get exercise.
I actually just like to take out my Jump to Conclusions Mat (patent pending) every once and awhile. It's part of my physical fitness regimen.
Actually, the article is not flawed. Just that line of logic. And, no it's not flawed due to my anecdotal evidence. It's actually specious logic.
This guy is a quack.
I'm sorry, but putting up an excuse for not being physically active because your brain can't deal with only handling a single task is specious at best.
There are plenty of us programmers, geeks, and nerds who still engage in sports and athletic activities. I have my degree in Computer Science from the U of A, graduated with a > 3.5 GPA, work as a software engineer, and yet I still play soccer, go to the gym, mountain bike, snowboard and can run a mile no sweat.
Just cause this guy can't is no reason to stereotype the rest of us.
Lucas was quoted as saying, "They got it all wrong... now the fans will really get to see what I meant when I told the editors that Greedo should shoot first."
As opposed to Distributed Denial of Service, DDoS, which is when all the girls you know conspire not to give you any.
You mean like this guy?
Does this definition make it impossible to move along the y axis because then the slope of our movement would be dy/dy? No. but it does say that if you move along the y axis your slope will be a constant.
No, because the slope is still dx/dy where dx is 0, and therefore your slope is 0. Which, yes, is a constant, but so is your slope over a straight line where you are moving constantly up x at the same rate as you go up y.
But still, yes, the logic based on that equation is stupid. A velocity of time change makes no sense, and says nothing about moving about in time.
Let's hope that they run better than the W2100z workstations.
They should... they are entirely different boxes. The new ones are from the acquisition of Kealia (Andy Bechtolsheim's startup).
The biggest problem I foresee for Sun in competing with Dell is simple, Suns don't run Windows and they don't run Linux
are you on crack?
The Galaxy boxes run Solaris, Linux, or Windoze.
The current Opterons do as well.
RTFA.
why is gross misinformation being modded up as Interesting???
Sun are really tooting their horn on this one. They paid for (presumably) a aircraft-towed banner to fly around the SF Bay today.
:)
Haven't seen one of those in ages
Yeah... not since the Solaris 10 launch when RedHat had one flying over San Jose that said "Just Another Day at Red Hat".
Don't get me wrong; knowing how computers work from the metal up is very handy and quite fulfilling (in the same ways that Physics is), but unless you're good enough (and want) to work for Intel, AMD, nVidia or some other major designer, architecture (as typified by novel designs) seems dead.
I don't understand how you can say this. Chip architecture is alive and well in not just the major companies but many startups and smaller firms as well. x86 architecture doesn't scale well still (although this is attempting to be remedied). There are a number of companies who are creating chips that solve memory and execution scale problems for requied devices (e.g. edge network devices like load balancers, content processors, IDS/IPS, firewalls, etc). these markets may not be the desktop PC market in size, but they are still many millions of dollars of business.
And... the best embedded systems software engineers know how the hardware works from the metal up.
Oh, those poor poor porn stars!
For example - how much faster do you think it would be to use the SSE2 16 byte registers to memcpy() instead of the C stdlib way of doing it byte by byte? A *LOT* faster.
My answer would be 16 times faster.
Which is only constant time faster, so in a linearly scaling problem, it quickly becomes *not a lot* faster.
but I may be missing something.
mmmm... prehistoric prions
Somehow, viewing these pics on a 15" laptop monitor left me underawed.
This whole thread is so offtopic, but whatever...
All this talk about gun control not solving the problem is mostly correct, if misguided. It is true that as long as you have a large supply of guns out in the market that can be legally or illegally bought, no amount of control is going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
So get rid of the huge fucking supply. As long as you incent gun manufacturers to make as many guns and sell as many guns as possible (because it's just another product in a profit driven society), you will have lots of guns on the street, in the hands of both law abiding, and non-law abiding citizens.
Now, this is not a black and white issue. There are certain guns that have useful (i.e. hunting) purposes. There are other guns that are used primarily to shoot people (your rattlesnake hunting friend is in the minority... sorry). You can't have massive sweeping gun control laws (all guns taken away from all people), nor can you have fast and loose gun ownership (everyone should be allowed to own an UZI). It is a matter of degree.
The crux of the matter, or at least the point I'm trying to make, is that gun control (as it stands now) is going after the wrong problem... trying to pass laws inhibiting gun owners. The laws should be passed to keep manufacturers in check. The assault weapons ban, while flawed, was the only step I've seen in the right direction. It's quite sad to see that it was left to die the way it was.
Last thing... IMHO, the gun lobby should be illegal. Something like guns and gun laws should not be profit driven that way.
a gun isn't just for shooting people with
god... I want that to be a gun manufacturer motto...
"Guns! Not just for shooting people anymore."
Seiously How are they even going to try to enforce this? Unless They have an army of trained web-content filtering monkeys, it's going to be next to impossible.
I, for one, welcome our new trained web-content filtering monkey overlords.
sorry, overplayed, but... just sounded funny to me.
T-Mobile Anyone Minutes
The framework established for the Cold War is not suited to the current realities. But knowint that is different than moving the huge icebergs that government agencies become as they expand and atrophy.
I watched the panel discussion at the RSA conference with he and Jamie Gorelick (one of the 9/11 commissioners). Ms. Gorelick told the following story (this is my recollection of the story, not verbatim):
On 9/11, when the first plane disappeared off the radar, they wondered what happened, but since this had happened before because of technical glitches, they didn't concern themselves. When the second plane dropped off the radar, they knew they had a problem. They bypassed normal protocol and called whoever it was to scramble the two F-16s that are chartered to protect the NE portion of the U.S. The fighter pilots weren't told what they were looking for however. Later, when they were interviewed, they were asked what they thought they were looking for, and they both replied that they thought the Russians had sneaked past. The fact is that the Russians had not been considered a serious threat for the past 10 years.
Her point was that our defense infrastructure was still operating with a Cold War mentality.
All in all, that discussion is probably the best I've seen so far at the conference.
I'm here at the RSA Conference and just watched this announcement (plus most of the rest of the keynote). I honestly can't say I was particularly impressed. Bill and friends seemed to be hyping new security enhancments in IE and Windows as if these were new innovations instead of stuff that's been around in other browsers/OSs for a while now. Although I did think SpyNet had some promise.
Bah... the name is QwiVeringLargesse.
This tactic allows him to avoid hidebound European safety regulations when he proposes, for instance, a steel footbridge whose design, sketched using industry-standard CAD software, has been radically distorted by a computer virus. Ask Europeans to cross a buggy footbridge and they'll balk, quail, and consult the 80,000 regulatory pages of the EU's acquis communautaire. Tell them it's art, and they'll flock to it in droves, sit on it, and drink Beaujolais nouveau.
And when it collapses under the weight of that flock...
wtf... this dude is nuts.
But I still found that article as boring as hell!
If you had an EE degree, you might find it more interesting... but then likely everyone else would find *you* boring as hell.