Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC from my database design classes in college, isn't table-locking a horribly BAD thing to do? Row-locking is much better, since it allows other items in the table to be accessed and updated while this record is altered.
does it accept the AMD- and Intel-based blades at the same time? That would be interesting, but I wonder why you would want to do that.
Generally sticking with one vendor for a given environment is a good idea. Also, the AMD64 blades do have fundamental differences from Intel's EMT64 architecture, and I wonder how well those would talk to each other.
It's nice that the backplanes and cabinets support both, but I don't think I would want both running at the same time on the same server. I might like to have an Intel blade rack and an AMD blade rack, but not combined.
it's worth pointing out that 45 years is a drastically short period of time in human history. How long did we sail the seas before trans-oceanic travel stopped being experimental and perilous?
True, but also look at the history of powered flight. 1903 the Wright brothers launch in Kittyhawk, within a decade, we have airborne fighters and bombers, 20 years later we have planes flying hundreds of miles with thousands of pounds of cargo, another 20 years and we put people in space. 9 more years and we have somebody on the moon.
Powered flight got to the point it is at now very quickly, especially in comparison to the acceleration of technology before that. The advances came not on their own, however, but in conjunction with better communication, better medicine, better fuel, better materials, better models.
65.5 years to get from 12 seconds to the moon. But in the last 36, we quit going to the moon (apparently since we won the race, we thought we could stop). The shuttle is a neat idea, reusable, etc. However, without exciting goals, it will be hard to get people to embrace the space program. We need people willing to take risk, and who will accept some failure along the way, to reach those exciting goals.
Astronauts in the shuttle are strapping themselve to the outside of the largest fuel-air bomb ever built, and hope like mad that it doesn't break. We've only had one break going up. One got damaged and broke coming down. I just wish people would 'get over' the danger and risk, and try to hit something impressive. Let's colonize the moon. Explore Mars. Heck, even the moons of mars would be cool.
with the Texas Instruments story posted to Slashdot.
If we can actually get cheap phones with decent battery life, and moderate (or even great) graphics, maybe we'll get more competition. Probably we won't, but it's worth a shot.
Also, what prevents me from setting up my own personal cell service on a business campus? I'm not familiar with FCC regulations on this topic.
(Out of curiousity, and not entirely related, what would happen if every country decided to stop all trade with the U.S. They are a net-importing economy, right?)
Yes, overall the US is a net importing country. We import a butt load of stuff every minute of every day, and buy and buy and buy. If everybody stopped trading with us, they'd need to find outlets really fast for their goods, since the US has about the largest buying power per capita in the world. We have ~4% of the world's population, but ~21% of the world's money (US - here World - here).
Not trading with the United States is just as bad as us deciding not to trade with another country, except it would take 6 billion people (and their governments) to decide to not trade with us, compared with 300 million people (through our government and pocketbooks) to not trade with somebody else.
Coming into effect in 2007, as the article states...does anyone actually think that that's enough time to update everything that depends on human time? I'm all in favor of changing things around, sure...but in under a year? More like 8 months?
Ummmm... 2007 is over a year away, more than 16 months, even. So, 8 months might be a little quick, but 16 (plus the couple months ni the beginning of the new year, and the reamining weeks of August this year) is quick, but doable, at least for 'simply' updated things like network time servers.
It's too bad you posted AC on this one. I would've enjoyed talking to to you about this. I'm not confused as to the meanings of uncertainty, belief, and religious faith.
I also don't have a "comic-book depiction of science". Observations of the origins of life are not repeatable, since there weren't any made to start with. Biologists can study how life works now, as astronomers study how stars work now, geologists study mountains now, and forensics studies murders now. The last example is weak, since enough murders have been witnessed that the observations are repeatable, and the 'experiements' have been done thousands of times.
Any scientist (or philospher, farmer, or aboriginee) can speculate about the origins of things for which he has no observation. Anything supposed about the origins of life is a speculation. Some speculations fall under humanistic or naturalistic views, while others fall under 'traditional' religious views. The point is that naturalistic speculation is just as much an act of faith as speculation regarding intelligent design and creation.
you're right, they should be taught science. And since science requires observable, repeatable techniques, any discussion of the origins of life must, by definition, be "vacuous garbage designed to get past the ban on teaching religion in schools". That includes any discussion of the origins of life: evolution, creation, intelligent design, whatever. Since it all has to be accepted upon faith (as we weren't there to observe it), it's all religion.
Science should stick to things it can handle: physics, chemistry, genetics, biology (without origins of life). We can reproduce certain actions based on certain inputs, so it can be classed 'scientific'.
Since the origins of life cannot be reproduced, it's not science. It's philosophy, world view, or theology.
I think many of you missed my point, so let me clarify. GPL-ing something because we can is all well and good. However, I'm trying to determine a legitimate reason for this to be GPL'd. I understand GPL-ing new things, and even some recent items. However, for something old (and apparently out of date), public domain, BSD, MIT, or similar releases would have been far more interesting.
The only use I can really see for this would be to compile old code. Considering the 386 was developed in the mid-80's, I assume this compiler can produce 32-bit code. Citing the release notice: "There are other, smaller options like TCC that is a complete C compiler, but it's too geared to 386+ and Linux to be a good playground. Other open-source C compilers tend to be variations of Small C that, while understandable, don't implement the entire language."
What's wrong with newer compilers being geared for 386+? If this compiler supports 16-bit applications, that's all well and good, but outside of embedded development using 16-bit CPUs, we don't compile for 16-bit anymore. An for embedded development, each of the manufacturers has tuned compilers for their processor, and there's normally no reason to use a different one.
I'm excited that Watcom, GCC, TCC, and others are all open-source. I'm disappointed that Watcom doesn't support the namespace stuff from C++, so I don't use it, but it is a really good C compiler. GCC is enormous, and has front-ends for almost every language imaginable. That's great. TCC is nice and small and for straight-up C programming, is a decent tool.
I'm not trolling, flamebaiting, offtopicing, or redundanting. I'm trying to ask a non-emotional question and get a reasonable response (which happens as often as not here on Slashdot).
I really enjoy internet radio. Winamp, iTunes, Windows Media Player, Real, et al, all have several nice feeds. Most, if not all, are FREE, too. Winamp also has internet TV with 'real' tv shows (CSI, Futurama, etc).
There are other options to buying music, especially if you just want to listen to stuff while you work/surf/etc.
Intelligent Design is not a science in any sense, but a theology, and as such, its place is in the church/mosque/synagogue/whatever, not in the classroom.
Yeah, and neither is the theology of evolution and humanism.
Now, with your follow-on statement, praise God you are a Christian. I'd love to talk with you. Really, origins of life can't be taught in any classroom, but should be left to religious organizations.
Results of the origins of life, and observable, repeatable experiments and results should be taught, as that is what science is.
show's how little we really see as humans. Viewing things under 'alternative' or filtered spectrums helps find all sorts of stuff (think forensics, and not just CSI). It's used to find cracks in materials. In fact, isn't mass spectroscopy used to determine what you're actually looking at based on light wavelength that is absorbed/reflected/diffracted?
How much of a difference will this actually make in classification, though, since we classify based on sensed differences, size, colors, etc. If we can't see the differences because of limitations in our eyesight, it doesn't necessarily mean that the groupings are incorrect.
There's an awful lot of 'old tech' out there. And it runs great. Or at least well enough. Think of all the copper running phone lines right now. Sure, it's been married to new technology like fiber optics and VoIP, but you can just as easily plug in an old rotary phone and start clicking away.
Puting the vehicle on top of the launch stack makes a great deal of sense. As does carrying the vehicle aboard a parent ship and then launching (SpaceShipOne, the X-15, etc).
can be easily called into question. If you're writing a 'big scoop', you want to be sure you're reporting correctly (well, maybe not for some papers). The accuracy of information coming from someone who is willing to be identified is generally higher than that of the guy who remains anonymous.
Think of the/. feature of posting AC. In general, AC posts aren't worth as much as a post associated with a known user. I certainly give more interest to someone who bothered to register than I do to an AC posting.
That being stated, anonymity can be a Good Thing (tm), especially if you're worried about repurcussions from the entity you're informing upon.
Anonymous transactions happen every day when we use cash to pay for common items. It's why people don't remember who bought the giant Butterfinger bar at 1547 on Tuesday afternoon: it's only a buck. You also can't verify that you bought it, or when without a receipt, which takes away from the anonymity. However, if you're asked about where you were between 1530 and 1600 on Tuesday, and you paid with a credit/debit card, the time and location of the transaction can be verified to a much higher degree of confidence.
The use of anonymous sources isn't a bad thing per se, but the credibility of someone who refuses to be identified is generally viewed lower (sometimes a lot lower) than the credibility of a source with a name.
PHP is a joke and can be dismissed without further discussion.
Ok, I'm not responding just because I use PHP in my day-to-day job and for my personal web programming. PHP is not an application development language, it's a scripting language!
PHP, Python, C++, Ruby, etc. They all have their place and their function. Citing Ruby as superior to Python (or vice versa) is kind of like saying my kid is better than your kid because he can juggle and yours can't. To which you respond, 'yeah, well mine can ride a unicycle'.
hehe, no. I don't work for any software or hardware company.
I do still think it's a viable route towards pushing SMP, though. It's most likely how Apple would've handled dual-core processors in their product lines had they stayed with PowerPC, and will handle it with the switch away from IBM CPUs.
In most US states, about 50% would go towards various federal state and local taxes.
Outside of places like New York City, San Francisco, Miami and some of the surrounding areas, I can't think of any where in the US where 50% of my income goes to federal state and local taxes (at the $6300/mo number, at least). Sure, if I'm in a top-tier income level I might be paying 40% to state and federal (and in Yonkers of NYC an additional city income tax), but even $6300/mo gross doesn't push me to that point.
would be to ONLY offer dual-core CPUs. If my only choice is a dual-core, I'll definitely buy one. In fact, you don't even need to advertise heavily it is a dual-core chip. And if you more or less stop making single-core processors, the average consumer won't know the difference. This would give a true mandate to the technology and accelerate development of applications that take advantage of SMP.
Yes, actually I would be interested in a dialogue about the topic. Let me clarify a small point that I made that was unclear, "I don't need to spend time reading 'real textbooks'." I wasn't implying that I am averse to the idea of reading the textbooks you are inetrested in, but that the majority of evolutionists I have ever encountered, will not listen to any alternative views, and attack them quite rabidly. However, I may have come off as seeming to be as rabid in the other direction.
I have read, while not an enormous mountain, a fair number of science texts that approach science from the worldview of evolution, and throw out any discussion of creation and creationism (like the intelligent design thinkers) as being merely religion and has no basis in science. I would also like to take a moment to define the term 'Christian' as I use it, in being someone who claims a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, as opposed to the mainstream 'religious right' and broad chistendom (which would include roman catholics, baptists, episcopalians, anglicans, lutherans, pentacostals, etc).
I don't think there is any more of a vast conspiracy to throw god out of society because of evolution than I would of other, more vehemently anti-god, ideologies.
I also would like to preface the rest of our discussion with the fact that I have a relatively literal understanding of the Bible, and more often than not lean towards the simple, unadorned, non-symbolic understanding of most passages, except when there is no reasonable way to understand the text without extensively studying the symbolism that is in the text. That being said, I don't believe in a "malicious deceiving god". I believe that the God who created us, made the world in a perfect state, with the vast majority of current plants and animals in place, waiting for his supreme creation, man, to "be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." [Gen 1:28ff]. The current state of the world, following this initial background, then, is the state which we descended into after Adam's disobedience to God's order to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
With this background of my beliefs, I'm more than happy to engage in a discussion of the topic. You will notice from my earlier comments that I believe in microevolution. I don't think a God who was able to speak the world into existence would have created a process whereby every current species would have needed to descend from the 'original mammal'. Breeding, and minor speciation (such as your distinction between panthers and pumas) do acceptably line up with my beliefs in an all-powerful, wise, generous, and kind God.
I look forward to hearing from you again. If you wish, we can continue this off-site. You can reach me via email from my URL link.
What the heck is this guy spending money on? Ok, I don't live in switzerland, but I manage to get by on $1000 US per month here in the US. I work, go to school, commute, and have bills like the rest of the world.
I want to know what he's spending that much money on.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC from my database design classes in college, isn't table-locking a horribly BAD thing to do? Row-locking is much better, since it allows other items in the table to be accessed and updated while this record is altered.
Generally sticking with one vendor for a given environment is a good idea. Also, the AMD64 blades do have fundamental differences from Intel's EMT64 architecture, and I wonder how well those would talk to each other.
It's nice that the backplanes and cabinets support both, but I don't think I would want both running at the same time on the same server. I might like to have an Intel blade rack and an AMD blade rack, but not combined.
True, but also look at the history of powered flight. 1903 the Wright brothers launch in Kittyhawk, within a decade, we have airborne fighters and bombers, 20 years later we have planes flying hundreds of miles with thousands of pounds of cargo, another 20 years and we put people in space. 9 more years and we have somebody on the moon.
Powered flight got to the point it is at now very quickly, especially in comparison to the acceleration of technology before that. The advances came not on their own, however, but in conjunction with better communication, better medicine, better fuel, better materials, better models.
65.5 years to get from 12 seconds to the moon. But in the last 36, we quit going to the moon (apparently since we won the race, we thought we could stop). The shuttle is a neat idea, reusable, etc. However, without exciting goals, it will be hard to get people to embrace the space program. We need people willing to take risk, and who will accept some failure along the way, to reach those exciting goals.
Astronauts in the shuttle are strapping themselve to the outside of the largest fuel-air bomb ever built, and hope like mad that it doesn't break. We've only had one break going up. One got damaged and broke coming down. I just wish people would 'get over' the danger and risk, and try to hit something impressive. Let's colonize the moon. Explore Mars. Heck, even the moons of mars would be cool.
If we can actually get cheap phones with decent battery life, and moderate (or even great) graphics, maybe we'll get more competition. Probably we won't, but it's worth a shot.
Also, what prevents me from setting up my own personal cell service on a business campus? I'm not familiar with FCC regulations on this topic.
Yes, overall the US is a net importing country. We import a butt load of stuff every minute of every day, and buy and buy and buy. If everybody stopped trading with us, they'd need to find outlets really fast for their goods, since the US has about the largest buying power per capita in the world. We have ~4% of the world's population, but ~21% of the world's money (US - here World - here).
Not trading with the United States is just as bad as us deciding not to trade with another country, except it would take 6 billion people (and their governments) to decide to not trade with us, compared with 300 million people (through our government and pocketbooks) to not trade with somebody else.
Ummmm... 2007 is over a year away, more than 16 months, even. So, 8 months might be a little quick, but 16 (plus the couple months ni the beginning of the new year, and the reamining weeks of August this year) is quick, but doable, at least for 'simply' updated things like network time servers.
I also don't have a "comic-book depiction of science". Observations of the origins of life are not repeatable, since there weren't any made to start with. Biologists can study how life works now, as astronomers study how stars work now, geologists study mountains now, and forensics studies murders now. The last example is weak, since enough murders have been witnessed that the observations are repeatable, and the 'experiements' have been done thousands of times.
Any scientist (or philospher, farmer, or aboriginee) can speculate about the origins of things for which he has no observation. Anything supposed about the origins of life is a speculation. Some speculations fall under humanistic or naturalistic views, while others fall under 'traditional' religious views. The point is that naturalistic speculation is just as much an act of faith as speculation regarding intelligent design and creation.
Science should stick to things it can handle: physics, chemistry, genetics, biology (without origins of life). We can reproduce certain actions based on certain inputs, so it can be classed 'scientific'.
Since the origins of life cannot be reproduced, it's not science. It's philosophy, world view, or theology.
The only use I can really see for this would be to compile old code. Considering the 386 was developed in the mid-80's, I assume this compiler can produce 32-bit code. Citing the release notice: "There are other, smaller options like TCC that is a complete C compiler, but it's too geared to 386+ and Linux to be a good playground. Other open-source C compilers tend to be variations of Small C that, while understandable, don't implement the entire language."
What's wrong with newer compilers being geared for 386+? If this compiler supports 16-bit applications, that's all well and good, but outside of embedded development using 16-bit CPUs, we don't compile for 16-bit anymore. An for embedded development, each of the manufacturers has tuned compilers for their processor, and there's normally no reason to use a different one.
I'm excited that Watcom, GCC, TCC, and others are all open-source. I'm disappointed that Watcom doesn't support the namespace stuff from C++, so I don't use it, but it is a really good C compiler. GCC is enormous, and has front-ends for almost every language imaginable. That's great. TCC is nice and small and for straight-up C programming, is a decent tool.
I'm not trolling, flamebaiting, offtopicing, or redundanting. I'm trying to ask a non-emotional question and get a reasonable response (which happens as often as not here on Slashdot).
There are other options to buying music, especially if you just want to listen to stuff while you work/surf/etc.
Yeah, and neither is the theology of evolution and humanism.
Now, with your follow-on statement, praise God you are a Christian. I'd love to talk with you. Really, origins of life can't be taught in any classroom, but should be left to religious organizations.
Results of the origins of life, and observable, repeatable experiments and results should be taught, as that is what science is.
The primary mantra of Lockheed's Skunk Works. It always works.
How much of a difference will this actually make in classification, though, since we classify based on sensed differences, size, colors, etc. If we can't see the differences because of limitations in our eyesight, it doesn't necessarily mean that the groupings are incorrect.
Don't get me wrong, I love good compilers, but with all the changes in the standard, and current, good, optimizing compilers, why would we want this?
Puting the vehicle on top of the launch stack makes a great deal of sense. As does carrying the vehicle aboard a parent ship and then launching (SpaceShipOne, the X-15, etc).
Think of the /. feature of posting AC. In general, AC posts aren't worth as much as a post associated with a known user. I certainly give more interest to someone who bothered to register than I do to an AC posting.
That being stated, anonymity can be a Good Thing (tm), especially if you're worried about repurcussions from the entity you're informing upon.
Anonymous transactions happen every day when we use cash to pay for common items. It's why people don't remember who bought the giant Butterfinger bar at 1547 on Tuesday afternoon: it's only a buck. You also can't verify that you bought it, or when without a receipt, which takes away from the anonymity. However, if you're asked about where you were between 1530 and 1600 on Tuesday, and you paid with a credit/debit card, the time and location of the transaction can be verified to a much higher degree of confidence.
The use of anonymous sources isn't a bad thing per se, but the credibility of someone who refuses to be identified is generally viewed lower (sometimes a lot lower) than the credibility of a source with a name.
and ten times as far...
Ok, I'm not responding just because I use PHP in my day-to-day job and for my personal web programming. PHP is not an application development language, it's a scripting language!
PHP, Python, C++, Ruby, etc. They all have their place and their function. Citing Ruby as superior to Python (or vice versa) is kind of like saying my kid is better than your kid because he can juggle and yours can't. To which you respond, 'yeah, well mine can ride a unicycle'.
Except AMD actually has a decent amount of "marketshare" (a nebulous concept), and are increasing their shipments quarterly.
hehe, no. I don't work for any software or hardware company.
I do still think it's a viable route towards pushing SMP, though. It's most likely how Apple would've handled dual-core processors in their product lines had they stayed with PowerPC, and will handle it with the switch away from IBM CPUs.
Outside of places like New York City, San Francisco, Miami and some of the surrounding areas, I can't think of any where in the US where 50% of my income goes to federal state and local taxes (at the $6300/mo number, at least). Sure, if I'm in a top-tier income level I might be paying 40% to state and federal (and in Yonkers of NYC an additional city income tax), but even $6300/mo gross doesn't push me to that point.
one of the popular live-CD distros, though more aimed at forensic recovery: freshmeat announcement and FCCU homepage
would be to ONLY offer dual-core CPUs. If my only choice is a dual-core, I'll definitely buy one. In fact, you don't even need to advertise heavily it is a dual-core chip. And if you more or less stop making single-core processors, the average consumer won't know the difference. This would give a true mandate to the technology and accelerate development of applications that take advantage of SMP.
I have read, while not an enormous mountain, a fair number of science texts that approach science from the worldview of evolution, and throw out any discussion of creation and creationism (like the intelligent design thinkers) as being merely religion and has no basis in science. I would also like to take a moment to define the term 'Christian' as I use it, in being someone who claims a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, as opposed to the mainstream 'religious right' and broad chistendom (which would include roman catholics, baptists, episcopalians, anglicans, lutherans, pentacostals, etc).
I don't think there is any more of a vast conspiracy to throw god out of society because of evolution than I would of other, more vehemently anti-god, ideologies.
I also would like to preface the rest of our discussion with the fact that I have a relatively literal understanding of the Bible, and more often than not lean towards the simple, unadorned, non-symbolic understanding of most passages, except when there is no reasonable way to understand the text without extensively studying the symbolism that is in the text. That being said, I don't believe in a "malicious deceiving god". I believe that the God who created us, made the world in a perfect state, with the vast majority of current plants and animals in place, waiting for his supreme creation, man, to "be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." [Gen 1:28ff]. The current state of the world, following this initial background, then, is the state which we descended into after Adam's disobedience to God's order to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
With this background of my beliefs, I'm more than happy to engage in a discussion of the topic. You will notice from my earlier comments that I believe in microevolution. I don't think a God who was able to speak the world into existence would have created a process whereby every current species would have needed to descend from the 'original mammal'. Breeding, and minor speciation (such as your distinction between panthers and pumas) do acceptably line up with my beliefs in an all-powerful, wise, generous, and kind God.
I look forward to hearing from you again. If you wish, we can continue this off-site. You can reach me via email from my URL link.
I want to know what he's spending that much money on.