Perhaps as in the "Ghost in the Shell" fiction series each function of a robot or cyborg's abilities will be linked to specialized software tailor made for that application. The power users will combine and tweak their control software, hackers could inject viruses, or feedback in cybernetic systems could drive users mad.
It's all been predicted... now we just need to show that the alternative (AI) is possible and test if it is more desirable.
Dell & Alienware use a proprietary formfactor which is not generally available elsewhere.
I already paid 300% of what I should have on a GPU upgrade from Dell. Not only was the process thoroughly frustrating and overpriced, but my laptop just barely gets by with the approved Dell upgrade.
I was looking in this thread for vendor recommendations, but sadly I don't see any. So here are mine: (DISCLAIMER: I currently own a Dell. I am not a professional tech writer and do not have resources available to actually try out these products)
Sager Notebook - http://www.sagernotebook.com/default.php Clevo is the first name I see tossed around most often and Sager seems to be a good reseller. They let slip some 8800M talk a while back, but haven't had an 8800M laptop ready to go yet. I think they might make a good platform for an SLI laptop gaming rig.
"We (that is, computer companies) want to sell hardware. To do that, we need software."
of course... efficiency doesn't matter, it's even sometimes detested by those selling bigger CPUs.
Parallel programming frameworks are not an assortment of jams with a coupon. In addition to a qualitative (like / dislike) evalutaion of the code style and API there are quantitative measurements of how these frameworks handle different tasks and the results that they produce when applied to various problems.
Now... I'm no big python user, but Stackless python is at least interesting and I would do myself a disservice by not evaluating it. I need to know why it is or isn't quantitatively better.
The only problem that exists with too many choices in computing is supporting and not forcing the deprecation of legacy APIs (something like Java Collections Vector vs ArrayList, extensive use of String vs CharSequence, etc).
Truly fine promotional work. I joined the WSU LUG my freshman year after playing willing victim with my Windows 95 box to a few exploits a member showed me. My passion for computer security and quality operating systems has never waned. Since I left WSU in 2001 I've kept in contact and Ford has been one of the remaining members who has put in a great deal of personal effort into sustaining the group. Congratulations and I hope you have a fabulous year.
The Eclipse 3.3 RCP does not allow developers to build correct Mac application bundles. It forces the developer to place resources outside the bundle in the parent directory. The reason given for this was to avoid "user confusion" for troubleshooting settings and plugins.
First, since experienced Mac OS X users know that you can right click on bundles to open them this justification only applies to the Eclipse authors involved. Second, troubleshooting Eclipse framework settings and plugins is NOT something which needs to be easily accessible to end-users of an RCP application!
After having my own issues deploying an RCP update site and discovering this limitation in OSX bundles I am avoiding the Eclipse RCP for any of my own projects.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps as in the "Ghost in the Shell" fiction series each function of a robot or cyborg's abilities will be linked to specialized software tailor made for that application. The power users will combine and tweak their control software, hackers could inject viruses, or feedback in cybernetic systems could drive users mad.
It's all been predicted... now we just need to show that the alternative (AI) is possible and test if it is more desirable.
err, I see - existing Clevo user. Check out other resellers ;)
Yea, the Clevo-based Alienwares are the exception, but you're not exactly going back to Dell for their support, eh?
Yes, but not for Dell/Alienware laptops.
Dell & Alienware use a proprietary formfactor which is not generally available elsewhere.
I already paid 300% of what I should have on a GPU upgrade from Dell. Not only was the process thoroughly frustrating and overpriced, but my laptop just barely gets by with the approved Dell upgrade.
I was looking in this thread for vendor recommendations, but sadly I don't see any. So here are mine: (DISCLAIMER: I currently own a Dell. I am not a professional tech writer and do not have resources available to actually try out these products)
Sager Notebook - http://www.sagernotebook.com/default.php
Clevo is the first name I see tossed around most often and Sager seems to be a good reseller. They let slip some 8800M talk a while back, but haven't had an 8800M laptop ready to go yet. I think they might make a good platform for an SLI laptop gaming rig.
VoodooPC - http://www.voodoopc.com/system/Notebook.aspx
I read some celebrity interview and this is what they used. Checking out the specs they look good, if overpriced.
"We (that is, computer companies) want to sell hardware. To do that, we need software."
of course... efficiency doesn't matter, it's even sometimes detested by those selling bigger CPUs.
Parallel programming frameworks are not an assortment of jams with a coupon. In addition to a qualitative (like / dislike) evalutaion of the code style and API there are quantitative measurements of how these frameworks handle different tasks and the results that they produce when applied to various problems.
Now... I'm no big python user, but Stackless python is at least interesting and I would do myself a disservice by not evaluating it. I need to know why it is or isn't quantitatively better.
The only problem that exists with too many choices in computing is supporting and not forcing the deprecation of legacy APIs (something like Java Collections Vector vs ArrayList, extensive use of String vs CharSequence, etc).
Mod parent... yea you know.
:)
Grats again
Truly fine promotional work. I joined the WSU LUG my freshman year after playing willing victim with my Windows 95 box to a few exploits a member showed me. My passion for computer security and quality operating systems has never waned. Since I left WSU in 2001 I've kept in contact and Ford has been one of the remaining members who has put in a great deal of personal effort into sustaining the group. Congratulations and I hope you have a fabulous year.
The Eclipse 3.3 RCP does not allow developers to build correct Mac application bundles. It forces the developer to place resources outside the bundle in the parent directory. The reason given for this was to avoid "user confusion" for troubleshooting settings and plugins. First, since experienced Mac OS X users know that you can right click on bundles to open them this justification only applies to the Eclipse authors involved. Second, troubleshooting Eclipse framework settings and plugins is NOT something which needs to be easily accessible to end-users of an RCP application! After having my own issues deploying an RCP update site and discovering this limitation in OSX bundles I am avoiding the Eclipse RCP for any of my own projects.
My thoughts exactly:f /bios/ajue ls/publications/blocker/blocker_slides.pdf
http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/staf