Architecturally speaking, it's definitely not more of an improvement than K6 over K5, since that example constituted a complete redesign. The two architectures were completely different.
Yes.
The Athlon64 is not a new core design, it's heavily based on the original Athlon core. Of course improvement were made to the core, but it's not a total redesign like when they switched from the K5 to the K6, or the K6 to the K7 (Athlon).
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/amd-ham mer-1.ars"Given the Athlon's continuous performance scaling, it came as no surprise that when AMD hatched the idea of bringing x86 into the 64-bit realm, they decided to build on the K7 architecture instead of creating an entirely new design from scratch. With a few signficigant changes and an untold number of tweaks, Hammer brings both the K7 architecture and the x86 instruction set into the future."
Barcelona is not a new architecture. It's an incremental upgrade to the Athlon64 core, which itself was an incremental upgrade to the Athlon core. The Athlon was the last major architecture upgrade by AMD.
AMD itself has said that you'll have to wait a while for a completely new architecture.
When they say that the average lifespan was 36 year back then, it doesn't mean that adults died when they were around 36. It means that they had a very high infant mortality rate.
Lots of old people lived to be the same age they do now, but you had a hell of a lot of infants and otherwise young people who died because there wasn't any good health care.
It's good to see that my health concerns about nanotechnology have been put to rest... by the ancient use of nontech lead compounds that poisened the ancients.
Astrologers will just keep on as before. The Astrological usage of the word "planet" includes the traditional planets as well as the Sun, the Moon, the planetoid 2060 Chiron, and really whatever else one desires to keep track of in their system of astrology.
I practice an extremely advanced form of astrology that also takes into account all the satellites in orbit around the earth.
Good luck will shine upon you from 3:25-4:03 pm today as Echostar 9 eclipses the moon and crosses the path of Iridium 26.
On the other hand, I do not like the fact that a planet should orbit to Sun to be called a planet. On this point, I preferred the original proposal in orbit around a star. I don't see why our solar system should be any different, why planet-like celestial bodies orbitting other stars are not called planets.
They were only defining planets in our solar system.
My kids have been raising frogs this summer in a fish tank. By the #1 criteria I can use for intelligence, survival and avoiding death from dangerous situations, these things are among the most stupid things I have ever dealt with.
It's funny you mention that. I remember going camping when I was younger, and we were sitting around a campfire. Occasionally a moth would be attracted by the light and fly right into the flames. As we're sitting there, a big frog jumps up on the rocks surrounding the fire. I (erroneously) thought it was quite clever that the fog would hang around the fire that's attracting the moths. Just then, a moth flies into the fire and burns up. The frog jumped right in after it.
Back on topic, did you know that as far as we know, only three animals understand the concept of 'pointing at something'? These three are humans, chimpanzees and dolphins. Try it with your cat or dog. It will continue to look at your hand, not where you want it look, until the cows come home. Understanding symbols that stand for vectors in space require a greal deal of abstract thinking.
I don't think this is true. I had a springer spaniel that would look where you point. In fact, it would point.
Junk science is when Slashdot shines best. It usually only takes a few hours for some clever grad student slashdot readers to shred crazy claims to pieces and it's fricking hilarious to watch.
But it's saddening watching the hordes of idiots who call themselves "nerds" falling for this stuff. Seriously, look around on Slashdot, and you'll see a wide array of quacks preaching ideas that can't possibly work.
They share the loser/unathletic/no social skills aspect with the real nerds, but they lack the brain.
I think this study is pushing their own political/philosophical viewpoint.
Hasn't anyone known someone who just seemed to be better at certain things, even without training? You've never had friends as a kid who were able to outperform you with less effort and training? Or on the flipside, haven't you known someone who just can't get to be good at something no matter how hard they try? They might naturally lack coordination for example.
To suggest that there's no difference in talent or IQ is ridiculous. That's just like saying that everyone can run the same speed, it's the ones with the most training who win. Of course in this example, we all know that's ridiculous because you can actually see the results easily. But with mental tasks, it's harder to see but we can still measure the results. But when people don't want to believe the results, they'll never believe them and will continuously find excuses for why reality didn't play out the way they thought it should.
Even people's favorite Democratic candidates were frat jocks.
I don't think it's surprising, considering that the same personality that made them popular in school makes them popular with voters. Being an awkward recluse was never, and will never be a desirable feature.
You know who you are- you know that there's someone out there that will spout technobabble for 5 pages and fight viciously to keep Pluto a planet... all because Pluto is your favorite planet.
The jews have contributed disproportionately to science and our understanding and betterment of the world. Think Feynman, Bohr, Feigenbaum, Gell-Mann, von Neumann, Minsky, Von Braun, are just a few that come to mind.
Whenever I see threads like this on Slashdot, I can't help but think how sorely mislead the average Slashdot user is. The forum is overwhelmingly pro-Apple and pro-Linux, and they let their emotions cloud their vision.
Often, you see trollish headlines that state "will Apple kill Microsoft?", "Will Apple kill Dell?", "is this the iPod killer?", etc. People here seem to be a little on the artsy/emotional side rather than on the purely logical side. They can't seem to grasp the gravity of a situation; instead they get lost in the details and forget the scale of things. For a forum that loves Star Trek, they sure don't think like Spock.
First of all, people underestimate the massive advantage of being the much larger company. Dell has a huge marketshare advantage over Apple. They have $55 billion a year in revenue vs. $14 billion a year. If worst came to worst, Dell could simply buy Apple. Microsoft could also easily buy Apple, but the US Gov wouldn't allow that. Still, if it were a fight to the death, they could afford to take losses to sap away Apple's marketshare.
I think people should stop to think for a moment before they post these unrealistic headlines, because if it came down to it, the larger company would simply gobble up the smaller company. It's business 101.
I'm not trying to troll here, I'm trying to inject a dose of reality into another one of these irrational threads.
Nobody would disagree with you that you can make a shot look different by using different cameras or techniques, but the point to this story is that the guy was outright adding shit to his images with Photoshop.
While a Digital Rebel might take different looking shots than a film camera or a little point and shoot disposable camera, the differences will be in the contrast, sharpness, grain, etc of the picture. None of those cameras are going to add nonexistant buildings to photos, or superimpose extra smoke over a city, or increase the number of flares an F-16 drops from 1 to 3. This guy did just that.
Finger prints, photographs, age, weight, height, eye color, build, race and gender are all legitimate and well established metric the government collects and wisely uses in our collective best interest.
Slashdot Mirror
You're confusing L1 cache with L2 cache.
Architecturally speaking, it's definitely not more of an improvement than K6 over K5, since that example constituted a complete redesign. The two architectures were completely different.
Yes. The Athlon64 is not a new core design, it's heavily based on the original Athlon core. Of course improvement were made to the core, but it's not a total redesign like when they switched from the K5 to the K6, or the K6 to the K7 (Athlon). http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/amd-ham mer-1.ars
"Given the Athlon's continuous performance scaling, it came as no surprise that when AMD hatched the idea of bringing x86 into the 64-bit realm, they decided to build on the K7 architecture instead of creating an entirely new design from scratch. With a few signficigant changes and an untold number of tweaks, Hammer brings both the K7 architecture and the x86 instruction set into the future."
Barcelona is not a new architecture. It's an incremental upgrade to the Athlon64 core, which itself was an incremental upgrade to the Athlon core. The Athlon was the last major architecture upgrade by AMD. AMD itself has said that you'll have to wait a while for a completely new architecture.
When they say that the average lifespan was 36 year back then, it doesn't mean that adults died when they were around 36. It means that they had a very high infant mortality rate.
Lots of old people lived to be the same age they do now, but you had a hell of a lot of infants and otherwise young people who died because there wasn't any good health care.
It's good to see that my health concerns about nanotechnology have been put to rest... by the ancient use of nontech lead compounds that poisened the ancients.
The "i-Shit" will become a global phenomenon.
Astrologers will just keep on as before. The Astrological usage of the word "planet" includes the traditional planets as well as the Sun, the Moon, the planetoid 2060 Chiron, and really whatever else one desires to keep track of in their system of astrology.
I practice an extremely advanced form of astrology that also takes into account all the satellites in orbit around the earth.
Good luck will shine upon you from 3:25-4:03 pm today as Echostar 9 eclipses the moon and crosses the path of Iridium 26.
On the other hand, I do not like the fact that a planet should orbit to Sun to be called a planet. On this point, I preferred the original proposal in orbit around a star. I don't see why our solar system should be any different, why planet-like celestial bodies orbitting other stars are not called planets.
They were only defining planets in our solar system.
I never liked that planet anyway.
My kids have been raising frogs this summer in a fish tank. By the #1 criteria I can use for intelligence, survival and avoiding death from dangerous situations, these things are among the most stupid things I have ever dealt with.
It's funny you mention that. I remember going camping when I was younger, and we were sitting around a campfire. Occasionally a moth would be attracted by the light and fly right into the flames. As we're sitting there, a big frog jumps up on the rocks surrounding the fire. I (erroneously) thought it was quite clever that the fog would hang around the fire that's attracting the moths. Just then, a moth flies into the fire and burns up. The frog jumped right in after it.
It got burned a bit but was able to jump out.
Back on topic, did you know that as far as we know, only three animals understand the concept of 'pointing at something'? These three are humans, chimpanzees and dolphins. Try it with your cat or dog. It will continue to look at your hand, not where you want it look, until the cows come home. Understanding symbols that stand for vectors in space require a greal deal of abstract thinking.
I don't think this is true. I had a springer spaniel that would look where you point. In fact, it would point.
Junk science is when Slashdot shines best. It usually only takes a few hours for some clever grad student slashdot readers to shred crazy claims to pieces and it's fricking hilarious to watch.
But it's saddening watching the hordes of idiots who call themselves "nerds" falling for this stuff. Seriously, look around on Slashdot, and you'll see a wide array of quacks preaching ideas that can't possibly work.
They share the loser/unathletic/no social skills aspect with the real nerds, but they lack the brain.
I think this study is pushing their own political/philosophical viewpoint.
Hasn't anyone known someone who just seemed to be better at certain things, even without training? You've never had friends as a kid who were able to outperform you with less effort and training? Or on the flipside, haven't you known someone who just can't get to be good at something no matter how hard they try? They might naturally lack coordination for example.
To suggest that there's no difference in talent or IQ is ridiculous. That's just like saying that everyone can run the same speed, it's the ones with the most training who win. Of course in this example, we all know that's ridiculous because you can actually see the results easily. But with mental tasks, it's harder to see but we can still measure the results. But when people don't want to believe the results, they'll never believe them and will continuously find excuses for why reality didn't play out the way they thought it should.
that it tried to get onto my Quake server?
We were trying to fire a game up, and on comes Voyager 1, with its 26 hour ping time. We all laughed and then booted it off.
Even people's favorite Democratic candidates were frat jocks.
I don't think it's surprising, considering that the same personality that made them popular in school makes them popular with voters. Being an awkward recluse was never, and will never be a desirable feature.
You know who you are- you know that there's someone out there that will spout technobabble for 5 pages and fight viciously to keep Pluto a planet... all because Pluto is your favorite planet.
The jews have contributed disproportionately to science and our understanding and betterment of the world. Think Feynman, Bohr, Feigenbaum, Gell-Mann, von Neumann, Minsky, Von Braun, are just a few that come to mind.
Von Braun? He wasn't Jewish, he was a German.
Or do you mean another Von Braun?
I would eat part of the rat, and leave a piece behind. That way, there's a good chance that it will attract more rats, which I will eat.
It's just like when you go fishing... you catch the first fish, then you cut it up and use it as bait to catch bigger fish.
I must say that your reply was well thought out and nicely stated.
Whenever I see threads like this on Slashdot, I can't help but think how sorely mislead the average Slashdot user is. The forum is overwhelmingly pro-Apple and pro-Linux, and they let their emotions cloud their vision.
Often, you see trollish headlines that state "will Apple kill Microsoft?", "Will Apple kill Dell?", "is this the iPod killer?", etc. People here seem to be a little on the artsy/emotional side rather than on the purely logical side. They can't seem to grasp the gravity of a situation; instead they get lost in the details and forget the scale of things. For a forum that loves Star Trek, they sure don't think like Spock.
First of all, people underestimate the massive advantage of being the much larger company. Dell has a huge marketshare advantage over Apple. They have $55 billion a year in revenue vs. $14 billion a year. If worst came to worst, Dell could simply buy Apple. Microsoft could also easily buy Apple, but the US Gov wouldn't allow that. Still, if it were a fight to the death, they could afford to take losses to sap away Apple's marketshare.
I think people should stop to think for a moment before they post these unrealistic headlines, because if it came down to it, the larger company would simply gobble up the smaller company. It's business 101.
I'm not trying to troll here, I'm trying to inject a dose of reality into another one of these irrational threads.
Nobody would disagree with you that you can make a shot look different by using different cameras or techniques, but the point to this story is that the guy was outright adding shit to his images with Photoshop.
While a Digital Rebel might take different looking shots than a film camera or a little point and shoot disposable camera, the differences will be in the contrast, sharpness, grain, etc of the picture. None of those cameras are going to add nonexistant buildings to photos, or superimpose extra smoke over a city, or increase the number of flares an F-16 drops from 1 to 3. This guy did just that.
I think those stories didn't belong either.
Slashdot is a site for technology-oriented news. You can go to any other news site for news on the train bombing.
Yes, it's a shame that lives were lost. But it's not material for this website.
Finger prints, photographs, age, weight, height, eye color, build, race and gender are all legitimate and well established metric the government collects and wisely uses in our collective best interest.
LOL
How do you know? Do you go through their post histories, meticulously reconstructing the details of their sordid past? Because that's just...creepy.
Yes I do, and I masturbate furiously while doing so...giggity-giggity