It seems that hard drives [...] would use the majority of power
The average 3"5 (desktop) hard drive (aka 7200RPM SATA/ATA133) runs around 7W idle and about 10W in seeking, high-perfs being a bit higher (12W seeking for 72Gb 10000RPM Raptor drive)
Notebook 2"5 5400RPM drives run around 1W idle (0.8W for a Samsung M40 MP0402H) and around 3W seeking.
It seems that [...] fans would use the majority of power
The fans I can check right now all fall between 0.15 and 0.30A, 12V.
This means that running them at max tension (12V) you're looking at 1.8W to 3.6W. Undervolt them at 7V and you fall between 1 and 2W.
And these are specs for 80mm to 120mm fans
So no, hard drives and fan often ain't the worst offenders as far as power consumption goes.
Because, to quote Dow (buyers of Union Carbide and inheritors of the Bhopal Disaster legacy)
we have responsibilities to our shareholders and our industry colleagues that make action on Bhopal impossible.
Dow does not and cannot acknowledge responsibility. If we did, not only would we be required to expend many billions of dollars on cleanup and compensation--much worse, the public could then point to Dow as a precedent in other big cases. 'They took responsibility; why can't you?' Amoco, BP, Shell, and Exxon all have ongoing problems that would just get much worse.
And I doubt their shareholders will support you (nor will the US govt) since one of the answers to this Dow statement (by a Dow shareholder) was
I'm happy that Dow is being clear about its aims," said Panaline Boneril, who owns 10,000 shares, "because Bhopal is a recurrent problem that's clogging our value chain and ultimately keeping the share price from expressing its full potential".
Remember that we're talking about tens of thousands of deaths, still ongoing...
Oh, you mean the US is the only one who bothered to make one? Even though China and other countries have been dealing with outbreaks of cross species flu for at least 3 decades?
Take away competetive pressure and companies grow fat and inefficient, just like state-run monopolies.
State monopolies are not about efficiency my good sir, they're about high-quality service and providing said service to everyone, even when it's completely inefficient to provide said service.
State monopolies are about making service available to the most people with the best QoS, they're about reaching 100% or as close as possible, not about reaching the 20% that lead to viable service economically and leaving 80% in the dust because you consider it costs too much to provide them said service.
State monopolies are about long-term vision, 10+ years when not 50+ years, when most private structures' "long term" is barely 5 years.
This is why most european rail service actually work at the moment even if they don't bring in much money, while UK rail service blows and is overpriced.
Now I don't mean that govt/state monopolies shouldn't try to be efficient, it's in fact one of their duties as users of public tax money, they owe it to the whole population of the country (said population more or less being their shareholders), but it's not and should never be their first goals. The first and most important goals of state monopolies should always be quality and reach.
One interesting question related to this seems to be, at what point does it become ethical for a country to ignore patent laws to save its citizenry? How many people have to be threatened to make it acceptable?
In my opinion, 1. Fuck big business, governments are supposed to be here for the citizens, not for the businesses and corps (unless you're living inthe USA)
Yup, power consumption figures are for the whole system.
But using roughtly equivalent systems (same power supply, an Antec TruePower so you're looking at an "at or above" 75% efficiency power supply when drawing 200+W from it, a single Raptor 74Gb and a Plextor DVD-RW drive), AMD's Opteron system top at 235W idle (for the 2.8GHz Opteron box) without using PowerNow's power management system (GamePC reports that the total power consumption @idle fell to around 170W using PowerNow) while Intel's 2.8GHz Xeon system chews through 390W idle...
Right. The APL folks realized that a compiler knows the type of each variable, and can easily ffigure out whether the args of, say, A+B are scalars or arrays. If they are arrays with compatible shapes, the compiler just does the obvious loop, and produces a result that is also an array (which may be assigned, used in another operation, passed to a function, whatever).
Not doable that way in dynamic languages that consider arrays (or lists, or dictionaries, or whatever) as perfectly normal first-class objects, since they could be manipulated themselves in the function as objects, not as object-holding entities.
Which is why Python for example has functions such as map() or filter() that take an array-like object and a function and apply said function to each element of the array automagically (map outputs an array holding the return of the function for each element of the initial array, filter returns an array with the elements for which the function passed returned true). Seems to do the same, but not as easily... There is the list comprehension thingie too, that works fairly well (once again doesn't work as easily, but works fine with Python's concepts)
Mmmm wikipedia tells me that they (APL, but also J and Fortran) generalized operations and functions to work over arrays as well as scalars. Is that it?
So basically the ability to do every operation on a whole array (and have it extended to each element of the array) instead of having it done manually via looping?
And why do we have to keep coding loops to run through arrays? The APL folks showed us how easy it is for your language to do that for you, and they did it decades ago. This would eliminate zillions of off-by-one bugs, and half the code in a lot of routines.
Do you mean by using iterators?
If so, quite a lot of languages now do it that way (and I'm not talking about explicit creation of iterators the Java way, or the use of specific statements such as perl's for_each)
Not enough yet, though...
If it's not via iterators, how was it done in APL?
Either Ruby (and RoR) or Python (and Django, Zope, the terrific TurboGears or any other framework) would probably be much more interresting and enjoyable.
Do remember, though, that none of them are Java, you have to forget the Java way and "get" the philosophy of those languages or you'll end up frustrated with very slow apps and bloated code.
Nope, you forgot that PHP still has no namespaces, that PHP is not modular, that PHP5's objects blow, that PHP is weakly typed (please don't mix that with the fact that it's also dynamically typed which I'd consider a good thing), that PHP has braces and that PHP's syntax is pretty ugly.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the Bell Labs are now mostly empty and seen as a cost, not as an asset and provider of future technologies.
Bell Labs are dead, and that's one of the few thing to regret of what came from the AT&T breakup.
Actually no, the uptime bug of windows server can be found under the reference "Windows" in most documentations
Uptime isn't reliable since last time i checked Linux boxes still had an uptime bug (the 497 days reset).
failed, 2007 is the deadline for the single core, dual core will be the first released at Q3 2006.
Flash news, Steve Ballmer has just vowed to Fucking Kill(TM) PWRficient Chip. He will Fucking Bury(TM) them. He has done it before, he'll do it again.
Pentium-M's TDP is 27W, Turion64 MT are ranked for 25W
AMD's Geode LX on the other hand has a 2.4W TDP and 1.6W typical consumption @500MHz
The average 3"5 (desktop) hard drive (aka 7200RPM SATA/ATA133) runs around 7W idle and about 10W in seeking, high-perfs being a bit higher (12W seeking for 72Gb 10000RPM Raptor drive)
Notebook 2"5 5400RPM drives run around 1W idle (0.8W for a Samsung M40 MP0402H) and around 3W seeking.
The fans I can check right now all fall between 0.15 and 0.30A, 12V.
This means that running them at max tension (12V) you're looking at 1.8W to 3.6W. Undervolt them at 7V and you fall between 1 and 2W.
And these are specs for 80mm to 120mm fans
So no, hard drives and fan often ain't the worst offenders as far as power consumption goes.
Ever heard of AMD's Geode chips?
I'm not at the moment, but I lived there for many months
No, and you'd have seen it if you had RTFA.
But you haven't.
I guess you missed the part about "reasonable amount" didn't you?
Because, to quote Dow (buyers of Union Carbide and inheritors of the Bhopal Disaster legacy)
And I doubt their shareholders will support you (nor will the US govt) since one of the answers to this Dow statement (by a Dow shareholder) was
Remember that we're talking about tens of thousands of deaths, still ongoing...
Roche is swiss, you fucking moron
State monopolies are not about efficiency my good sir, they're about high-quality service and providing said service to everyone, even when it's completely inefficient to provide said service.
State monopolies are about making service available to the most people with the best QoS, they're about reaching 100% or as close as possible, not about reaching the 20% that lead to viable service economically and leaving 80% in the dust because you consider it costs too much to provide them said service.
State monopolies are about long-term vision, 10+ years when not 50+ years, when most private structures' "long term" is barely 5 years.
This is why most european rail service actually work at the moment even if they don't bring in much money, while UK rail service blows and is overpriced.
Now I don't mean that govt/state monopolies shouldn't try to be efficient, it's in fact one of their duties as users of public tax money, they owe it to the whole population of the country (said population more or less being their shareholders), but it's not and should never be their first goals. The first and most important goals of state monopolies should always be quality and reach.
In my opinion, 1. Fuck big business, governments are supposed to be here for the citizens, not for the businesses and corps (unless you're living inthe USA)
Real life insect-targetted annihilators?
TA Style !
Quantum dots will be packaged as LEDs for usage.
Yup, power consumption figures are for the whole system.
But using roughtly equivalent systems (same power supply, an Antec TruePower so you're looking at an "at or above" 75% efficiency power supply when drawing 200+W from it, a single Raptor 74Gb and a Plextor DVD-RW drive), AMD's Opteron system top at 235W idle (for the 2.8GHz Opteron box) without using PowerNow's power management system (GamePC reports that the total power consumption @idle fell to around 170W using PowerNow) while Intel's 2.8GHz Xeon system chews through 390W idle...
Not doable that way in dynamic languages that consider arrays (or lists, or dictionaries, or whatever) as perfectly normal first-class objects, since they could be manipulated themselves in the function as objects, not as object-holding entities.
Which is why Python for example has functions such as map() or filter() that take an array-like object and a function and apply said function to each element of the array automagically (map outputs an array holding the return of the function for each element of the initial array, filter returns an array with the elements for which the function passed returned true). Seems to do the same, but not as easily... There is the list comprehension thingie too, that works fairly well (once again doesn't work as easily, but works fine with Python's concepts)
Mmmm wikipedia tells me that they (APL, but also J and Fortran) generalized operations and functions to work over arrays as well as scalars. Is that it?
So basically the ability to do every operation on a whole array (and have it extended to each element of the array) instead of having it done manually via looping?
Do you mean by using iterators?
If so, quite a lot of languages now do it that way (and I'm not talking about explicit creation of iterators the Java way, or the use of specific statements such as perl's for_each)
Not enough yet, though...
If it's not via iterators, how was it done in APL?
Yes, I pretty much believed that ASP was only usable with VBScript. Thanks for these informations.
Yes. It blows. Badly.
Either Ruby (and RoR) or Python (and Django, Zope, the terrific TurboGears or any other framework) would probably be much more interresting and enjoyable.
Do remember, though, that none of them are Java, you have to forget the Java way and "get" the philosophy of those languages or you'll end up frustrated with very slow apps and bloated code.
Nope, you forgot that PHP still has no namespaces, that PHP is not modular, that PHP5's objects blow, that PHP is weakly typed (please don't mix that with the fact that it's also dynamically typed which I'd consider a good thing), that PHP has braces and that PHP's syntax is pretty ugly.