I would think the direction to go for a "high performance" line is adding more flash to the controller. After all, if you can get 32GB or 64GB in a microSD card, you can put it on the IDE board.
Not as smart as a smartphone, but it had looked like it would do enough for us; but even what was on there didn't work right. And in particular, basic Bluetooth didn't work right, which was the deal-killer. So my wife broke down and got an iPhone, like her sister's whole family and her brother's whole family, and every feature she tried just worked, and now she's a happy little Appleist like the rest of them. Happy being the important part.
I work in embedded systems, with over 10 years in telecom protocols. The fact that Samsung could get something as core as Bluetooth wrong, this long after it's been a standard, is simply an embarrassment.
Dude - I *agree* with you. I think the lying bastards are just DOING THEIR JOBS defined by the conservative congressmen who WROTE the Patriot Act and pooh-poohed the worries and objections at the time, and who are now claiming to be offended since the president is of the other party.
I realize those are movies and TV shows and books. My title did include the word "fiction", right? Then the idea creeps closer with search engines, until finally someone is reading my diary over my shoulder. It's frighteningly easy for this stuff to go from "1984" fiction to current fiction to reality.
Easy to say discard compatibility; except that means EVERYTHING has to become compatible with this NEW system. All you're doing is trading one compatibility for another. Plus people already have older PCs with an installed ecosystem of programs.
Batman listened to everything through everyone's cellphones. Barrayaran Imperial Security monitors everything. BBC-America's MI5 (or Spooks, for original BBC wachers) seemed to be able to access every webcam ever made. Jack Ryan survives through signal intercepts.
Google and Bing and Yahoo are scanning all your base all your time. How else can they find whatever you want whenever you want it?
This is one of those things that seems like a good idea when applied to OTHER things and OTHER people. Search engines on the web? Of course, anybody putting something online *wants* it to be found. Fictional security agents hunting the bad guys hiding among the solid citizens? Of course, that's what we fictionally pay them for.
For arguments' sake: How do you debug a problem? Probably trace everything and look for anomalies, right? So why be surprised that the NSA thought any different?
... which really means the late '60s into the '70s. Isaac Newton said that he saw far because he stood on the shoulders of giants. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were *proud* of knowing nothing about the industry they were trying to overturn. The same free, open, do-your-own-thing attitude (partly based on the new abundance helped along by technological advancement) that permitted startups to overtake established manufacturers, also encouraged tossing out anything "established" as "outdated" whether it was useful or not.
25 years ago you couldn't transmit the data in a matter of seconds. You *could* execute BASIC bytecode, though. Dynamic link libraries were invented for MULTICS in the 1960s. IBM assembler macros in the 70s could do more than a C++ template function. (OTOOH IBM deliberately crippled the small computer world by choosing an overlapped 24-bit address space instead of a 32-bit linear one (on the Motorola chips) because their mainframes were still linear 24-bit.)
I don't remember that code running cross platform on varying architectures.
Yes. No code runs cross platform on varying architectures - INCLUDING the stuff that supposedly does, like Java and Javascript and all of the web distributed stuff. All of it DEPENDS on an interpretation level that, at some point, has to connect to the native environment.
Which is what BASIC was all about. And FORTRAN. Expressing the algorithm in a slightly more abstract form that could be compiled to the native environment, and then in the case of BASIC turned into interpreted code (Oh, you thought Java invented the virtual machine?)
I think you were trolling, but there's a point under there. In the 70s you had to have a clue to get anything done. As more infrastructure and support system has been built, in the interest of not having to reinvent the wheel every project, you *can* have people produce things - or appear to produce things - while remaining clueless. Flash and sizzle have been replacing the steak.
You know, I was all ready to go start looking things up . . . and you had to end off with an insult for no particular reason. This suggests to me that your position comes from equally (if opposite) bias. I didn't claim *either* person was an angel; I said: This ENTIRE INCIDENT should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Zimmerman started out in a car, which by itself is a position of power and a weapon; he CHOSE to get out of the car and chase someone down to confront on foot; I maintain that such action caused a confrontation that need not have happened at all.
No question, a game is not real life and real lives on the line. That being said, the technology to support this exists. A GAME SERVER had to be slowed to 10% to handle 4,070 spacecraft firing missiles and/or energy weapons. That suggests that 10x the horsepower could have handled the job. If we can do this for a game, using normal technology, why can't we scale it up to upgrade ATC? Is the game industry that much more lucrative, or is it that the downside risk (crashing a game server vs. crashing a plane) is so much higher that nobody wants to take a chance?
You pissed me off. Then you left. I came after you because you pissed me off and attacked you. You then shot me.
Or maybe like . . . I hid while you were looking for me with a gun in your hand. Then when you turned to look the other way, I took strategic advantage and tried to knock you out before you shot me (because I was in fear for my life that you were hunting me).
"Stand your ground" makes sense when you're in your home and it's invaded, or you're in a store and a robber comes in. Not when both people are out on open land, and not when one has been following the other in a manner that would cause suspicion in the one followed. This ENTIRE INCIDENT should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED, and the one who made it happen was Zimmerman.
At no time did George chase the guy. Second point, George did not start the fight, he was jumped.
We don't know the first, or especially what it looked like from the other perspective. And we don't know the second, either. As for the third, well, no, I was taught by large men in green uniforms to hide first until I could find a strategic advantage. It was a long time ago, but it's the sort of training that comes back on you, sometimes as nightmares.
Sorry, no. The whole attitude that it's OK to threaten and berate people online because you're anonymous, in a manner that one would never dare do in person, is a problem. Free speech doesn't mean you can walk up to a guy in a bar and insult his mother; or, rather, you *can*, but it says nothing about the possible consequences.
"I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire. Though maybe if he had met someone as stupid as Palin . . .
Sorry, have to argue with this part. I'm a white male. If somebody were following me at night in a pickup truck, and then got out of his pickup truck and chased me, I'd consider that I was being "hunted down" . . . and react accordingly. Especially if I believed that he/she was carrying a gun.
Suppose I walk into a bar and start a fight with the biggest baddest biker I see. And he starts winning. Am I now allowed to shoot him because at this instant I'm afraid for my life? Never mind that I started the fight?
What if adding iodine to salt to cure one problem had *lowered* the average IQ? How would we know? Was anyone keeping track of *anything*?
What if some other "generally recognized as safe" food/packaging/thing has been lowering the average IQ? Or raising the rates of autism? Or doing some other harm? In the name of making a food package a fraction of a penny cheaper, have we been poisoning ourselves and our children? Again, how would we know?
We regularly perform random experiments on major segments of our own population with NO tracking, NO experimental protocols, and NO analysis. If someone were doing this to animals, there would be an uproar; if aliens were doing it to us, we'd attempt to revolt; but we allow the "invisible hand of the market" to do it to OURSELVES without a thought.
Yes, light speed hasn't changed; switching speed, however, has changed dramatically, and it's switching that gives you data rate. I think we were using 6 Mhz Z80s - the latest and greatest at the time (1979). Slip your decimal point 3 places to the left.:-)
Back in 1979, when fiber was brand-new (and we were experimenting with speeds you wouldn't even bother with for TOSlink today), we hooked up a 5km spool of fiber to both sides of the same optical "modem". Using a Z80, we got an interrupt on the receive side apparently simultaneous (in the same clock cycle) to putting a byte in the transmit port - which sort of makes your DMA controller unhappy. Everyone figured there was a short or a cross-connection, because nobody could believe the speed. And that was a snail's pace in comparison to *each* laser of this system.
... rather than accepting the US is behind and we should import more H1B visa people.
Of course, we all know that educating our own people, or paying them the going rate, is a waste of money; they'll just change jobs. Not like the people who are changing countries.
Slashdot Mirror
I would think the direction to go for a "high performance" line is adding more flash to the controller. After all, if you can get 32GB or 64GB in a microSD card, you can put it on the IDE board.
Not as smart as a smartphone, but it had looked like it would do enough for us; but even what was on there didn't work right. And in particular, basic Bluetooth didn't work right, which was the deal-killer. So my wife broke down and got an iPhone, like her sister's whole family and her brother's whole family, and every feature she tried just worked, and now she's a happy little Appleist like the rest of them. Happy being the important part.
I work in embedded systems, with over 10 years in telecom protocols. The fact that Samsung could get something as core as Bluetooth wrong, this long after it's been a standard, is simply an embarrassment.
Dude - I *agree* with you. I think the lying bastards are just DOING THEIR JOBS defined by the conservative congressmen who WROTE the Patriot Act and pooh-poohed the worries and objections at the time, and who are now claiming to be offended since the president is of the other party.
I realize those are movies and TV shows and books. My title did include the word "fiction", right? Then the idea creeps closer with search engines, until finally someone is reading my diary over my shoulder. It's frighteningly easy for this stuff to go from "1984" fiction to current fiction to reality.
I mean, they just read your mail, they don't whip you for it.
Just like one company claiming a trademark on any product starting with lower-case "i'.
Easy to say discard compatibility; except that means EVERYTHING has to become compatible with this NEW system. All you're doing is trading one compatibility for another. Plus people already have older PCs with an installed ecosystem of programs.
Batman listened to everything through everyone's cellphones. Barrayaran Imperial Security monitors everything. BBC-America's MI5 (or Spooks, for original BBC wachers) seemed to be able to access every webcam ever made. Jack Ryan survives through signal intercepts.
Google and Bing and Yahoo are scanning all your base all your time. How else can they find whatever you want whenever you want it?
This is one of those things that seems like a good idea when applied to OTHER things and OTHER people. Search engines on the web? Of course, anybody putting something online *wants* it to be found. Fictional security agents hunting the bad guys hiding among the solid citizens? Of course, that's what we fictionally pay them for.
For arguments' sake: How do you debug a problem? Probably trace everything and look for anomalies, right? So why be surprised that the NSA thought any different?
... which really means the late '60s into the '70s. Isaac Newton said that he saw far because he stood on the shoulders of giants. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were *proud* of knowing nothing about the industry they were trying to overturn. The same free, open, do-your-own-thing attitude (partly based on the new abundance helped along by technological advancement) that permitted startups to overtake established manufacturers, also encouraged tossing out anything "established" as "outdated" whether it was useful or not.
25 years ago you couldn't transmit the data in a matter of seconds. You *could* execute BASIC bytecode, though. Dynamic link libraries were invented for MULTICS in the 1960s. IBM assembler macros in the 70s could do more than a C++ template function. (OTOOH IBM deliberately crippled the small computer world by choosing an overlapped 24-bit address space instead of a 32-bit linear one (on the Motorola chips) because their mainframes were still linear 24-bit.)
I don't remember that code running cross platform on varying architectures.
Yes. No code runs cross platform on varying architectures - INCLUDING the stuff that supposedly does, like Java and Javascript and all of the web distributed stuff. All of it DEPENDS on an interpretation level that, at some point, has to connect to the native environment.
Which is what BASIC was all about. And FORTRAN. Expressing the algorithm in a slightly more abstract form that could be compiled to the native environment, and then in the case of BASIC turned into interpreted code (Oh, you thought Java invented the virtual machine?)
I think you were trolling, but there's a point under there. In the 70s you had to have a clue to get anything done. As more infrastructure and support system has been built, in the interest of not having to reinvent the wheel every project, you *can* have people produce things - or appear to produce things - while remaining clueless. Flash and sizzle have been replacing the steak.
You know, I was all ready to go start looking things up . . . and you had to end off with an insult for no particular reason. This suggests to me that your position comes from equally (if opposite) bias. I didn't claim *either* person was an angel; I said: This ENTIRE INCIDENT should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. Zimmerman started out in a car, which by itself is a position of power and a weapon; he CHOSE to get out of the car and chase someone down to confront on foot; I maintain that such action caused a confrontation that need not have happened at all.
No question, a game is not real life and real lives on the line. That being said, the technology to support this exists. A GAME SERVER had to be slowed to 10% to handle 4,070 spacecraft firing missiles and/or energy weapons. That suggests that 10x the horsepower could have handled the job. If we can do this for a game, using normal technology, why can't we scale it up to upgrade ATC? Is the game industry that much more lucrative, or is it that the downside risk (crashing a game server vs. crashing a plane) is so much higher that nobody wants to take a chance?
As I replied to another post: Yes. Hide first. Maybe look for a stick or fencepost to hit with. But on desperate ground, fight.
You story would be more like ...
You pissed me off. Then you left. I came after you because you pissed me off and attacked you. You then shot me.
Or maybe like . . . I hid while you were looking for me with a gun in your hand. Then when you turned to look the other way, I took strategic advantage and tried to knock you out before you shot me (because I was in fear for my life that you were hunting me).
"Stand your ground" makes sense when you're in your home and it's invaded, or you're in a store and a robber comes in. Not when both people are out on open land, and not when one has been following the other in a manner that would cause suspicion in the one followed. This ENTIRE INCIDENT should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED, and the one who made it happen was Zimmerman.
If Zimmerman had brandished his gun and Martin pulled one and shot him, Martin would have been found Not Guilty, too.
I really, truly wish that I believed this.
At no time did George chase the guy. Second point, George did not start the fight, he was jumped.
We don't know the first, or especially what it looked like from the other perspective. And we don't know the second, either. As for the third, well, no, I was taught by large men in green uniforms to hide first until I could find a strategic advantage. It was a long time ago, but it's the sort of training that comes back on you, sometimes as nightmares.
Sorry, no. The whole attitude that it's OK to threaten and berate people online because you're anonymous, in a manner that one would never dare do in person, is a problem. Free speech doesn't mean you can walk up to a guy in a bar and insult his mother; or, rather, you *can*, but it says nothing about the possible consequences.
"I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire. Though maybe if he had met someone as stupid as Palin . . .
hunted down (was attacked by)
Sorry, have to argue with this part. I'm a white male. If somebody were following me at night in a pickup truck, and then got out of his pickup truck and chased me, I'd consider that I was being "hunted down" . . . and react accordingly. Especially if I believed that he/she was carrying a gun.
Suppose I walk into a bar and start a fight with the biggest baddest biker I see. And he starts winning. Am I now allowed to shoot him because at this instant I'm afraid for my life? Never mind that I started the fight?
What if adding iodine to salt to cure one problem had *lowered* the average IQ? How would we know? Was anyone keeping track of *anything*?
What if some other "generally recognized as safe" food/packaging/thing has been lowering the average IQ? Or raising the rates of autism? Or doing some other harm? In the name of making a food package a fraction of a penny cheaper, have we been poisoning ourselves and our children? Again, how would we know?
We regularly perform random experiments on major segments of our own population with NO tracking, NO experimental protocols, and NO analysis. If someone were doing this to animals, there would be an uproar; if aliens were doing it to us, we'd attempt to revolt; but we allow the "invisible hand of the market" to do it to OURSELVES without a thought.
Yes, light speed hasn't changed; switching speed, however, has changed dramatically, and it's switching that gives you data rate. I think we were using 6 Mhz Z80s - the latest and greatest at the time (1979). Slip your decimal point 3 places to the left. :-)
The day they can deliver tablespoons of *anything* through the net, some people will never leave their rooms.
Back in 1979, when fiber was brand-new (and we were experimenting with speeds you wouldn't even bother with for TOSlink today), we hooked up a 5km spool of fiber to both sides of the same optical "modem". Using a Z80, we got an interrupt on the receive side apparently simultaneous (in the same clock cycle) to putting a byte in the transmit port - which sort of makes your DMA controller unhappy. Everyone figured there was a short or a cross-connection, because nobody could believe the speed. And that was a snail's pace in comparison to *each* laser of this system.
... rather than accepting the US is behind and we should import more H1B visa people.
Of course, we all know that educating our own people, or paying them the going rate, is a waste of money; they'll just change jobs. Not like the people who are changing countries.