does anyone know why they don't read hard drive platters in parralel? from what I understand they read them one at a time. If the read them in parralel, throughput would increase at a multiple of the number of platters in a drive.
Exactly what I was thinking. I'm taking ECE 101 at college, how cool would those things be to take into a test. And yes I have memorized all the gates.
I went to a very small special ed school where I was doing pre-algebra in 3rd grade. I wasn't again challenged in math until 7th grade, and that was because I was in an advanced track. I think that we could start teaching kids algebra in 5th grade, and by freshman year of highschool have them performing pre-calc or calculus.
I see most of the money being made off of Open Source in exactly the way Stallman envisioned - service. So far as I know Suse and Redhat are publicly available, what you pay for is the service you get when you buy it from them.
I remember that. I'm sure though, with the deterioration of copyright/trademark law they could now patent 586. Its a hard call to figure out if anyone could figure out the hexium is a succesor to the pentium. The suffix is the same. Then again "No one ever went broke underestimating the inteligence of the American people" - HL MENCKEN
I know that Stern pushed for his listeners to complain about Oprah Winfrey (?). Oprah got away with saying things about vaginas and sexual practices that Stern was fined for
A couple actors have done this.
If I were an actor I would have all kinds of fun with tabloids. Get people to leak that I was in the hospital. Then say I died. Then pop up a week later and laugh at them.
Radio promotion is so skewed towards the big labels. They have backdoor payola, fine. In a competitive market, alternative (not music type) stations would form to serve that niche market. That hasn't happened for a couple of reasons, media conglomerates and the crackdown on internet radio. I understand why record companies wouldn't want some internet radio station playing Britney Spears (makes it easy to pirate), but why do they care about artists they don't try to promote to traditional radio. What does a record company lose if an internet radio station is playing Elliot Smith and Ben Folds? God forbid those artists actually attract a following. I think it all comes down to the RIAA wanting to control the exact type of music we hear, and making it very dificult to hear anything else.
I know that there is some internet radio, but it is very obscure thanks to the RIAA
Movies are a different animal than music and it seems reasonable to protect them. Movies require huge investments by the studios compared to music. Movies also are the only product of actors. I can see recorded music serving primarily as an advertisement for musicians live shows. Movies aren't performed live, the movie is the only product (excluding merchandising). If people started sharing video recordings of plays, I would see no problem with that. With plays, the main product is still the performance in the theatre.
Why do musicians go for recording contracts anymore? It is obvious that the vast majority of them recieve no significant ongoing income from record sales. Most small bands seem to make more money touring. For them to have succesful tours, people need to hear their music, record labels don't help with this. Sure there are people who have made vast sums of money from the record industry, but most make very little or worse end up in debt. Its an expected value problem.
I understand why they bought Compaq, but why not spin off Digital. I wish Compaq had never bought Digital. Digital did a lot of cool things, Compaq was able to help them some, but HP has no idea what to do with their stuff.
Blogs are one of the best things about the internet. They give the little guy a voice. Granted many of the may be boring, biased, or stupid, so are many stories posted by maintstream media. I would much rather have the problem of searching through a lot of bad articles hoping to find a good one as opposed to hoping the only articles that are presented to me are good.
With regards to the concurrently running poll - "What will kill the internet?" it's a shame "Blogging" isn't one of the options.
It won't kill the internet just as commercial sites haven't killed the internet. What it will do is add extra noise to the internet. It will make it harder to find useful, interesting sites.
I have a blog and I talk about myself there a lot. I don't expect my blog to be interesting to everyone. If someone finds it interesting, great, if not there are plenty of other sites that people can read on the internet.
The response to the problem of less clinical trials being tried isn't more funding of reserch. The answer is to reduce tho barriers to entry for medical research. The FDA needs to get away from restricting new medicines. More clinical trials would be conducted if they were less expensive. The FDA has a lot to do with that expense.
I mean, maybe you'll be happy with Natalie v1.0, but could you stay in there knowing that the soon to be released v1.5 comes with hot grits? And who knows what v2.0 will bring. Sooner or later you'll want to check out the latest mods and updates.
In later years you would have retro natalie sites. Who would want to play with 50 year old Natalie Portman simulations. "I played with version 3.0"
Once they become ubiqitous (?) they will succede. I guess thats the definition of success though. I think it all has to do with price. Its a bit of a chicken and egg situation. They would be cheap if they were on every computer, but they won't be on every computer until someone writes the killer app. It is much less likely that someone will write the killer app until they are on every computer.
I understand that autonomic computing is really neat. I understand that it is a dificult problem mathematically and programatically. It doesn't help me much or the average end user.
I see the next great advance in computers being a technology that was discovered/invented 20 years ago. It won't be the technology, but how it is presented to the user.
I understand that research for these two projects can occur concurrently. I would just rather see people get excited about using old technology that actually works rather than new tech that hasn't even been invented yet
Slashdot Mirror
does anyone know why they don't read hard drive platters in parralel? from what I understand they read them one at a time. If the read them in parralel, throughput would increase at a multiple of the number of platters in a drive.
bahhh, bahhh, new product, must buy.
Exactly what I was thinking. I'm taking ECE 101 at college, how cool would those things be to take into a test. And yes I have memorized all the gates.
See what happens when you stop saying mass in Latin.
I went to a very small special ed school where I was doing pre-algebra in 3rd grade. I wasn't again challenged in math until 7th grade, and that was because I was in an advanced track. I think that we could start teaching kids algebra in 5th grade, and by freshman year of highschool have them performing pre-calc or calculus.
I see most of the money being made off of Open Source in exactly the way Stallman envisioned - service. So far as I know Suse and Redhat are publicly available, what you pay for is the service you get when you buy it from them.
I remember that. I'm sure though, with the deterioration of copyright/trademark law they could now patent 586. Its a hard call to figure out if anyone could figure out the hexium is a succesor to the pentium. The suffix is the same. Then again "No one ever went broke underestimating the inteligence of the American people" - HL MENCKEN
I remember it was a big deal when intel went from the 486 to Pentium. well they keep on milking the Pentium name 2,3,4. Why not the Octium or Nonium?
I know that Stern pushed for his listeners to complain about Oprah Winfrey (?). Oprah got away with saying things about vaginas and sexual practices that Stern was fined for
A couple actors have done this. If I were an actor I would have all kinds of fun with tabloids. Get people to leak that I was in the hospital. Then say I died. Then pop up a week later and laugh at them.
Radio promotion is so skewed towards the big labels. They have backdoor payola, fine. In a competitive market, alternative (not music type) stations would form to serve that niche market. That hasn't happened for a couple of reasons, media conglomerates and the crackdown on internet radio. I understand why record companies wouldn't want some internet radio station playing Britney Spears (makes it easy to pirate), but why do they care about artists they don't try to promote to traditional radio. What does a record company lose if an internet radio station is playing Elliot Smith and Ben Folds? God forbid those artists actually attract a following. I think it all comes down to the RIAA wanting to control the exact type of music we hear, and making it very dificult to hear anything else. I know that there is some internet radio, but it is very obscure thanks to the RIAA
Movies are a different animal than music and it seems reasonable to protect them. Movies require huge investments by the studios compared to music. Movies also are the only product of actors. I can see recorded music serving primarily as an advertisement for musicians live shows. Movies aren't performed live, the movie is the only product (excluding merchandising). If people started sharing video recordings of plays, I would see no problem with that. With plays, the main product is still the performance in the theatre.
Why do musicians go for recording contracts anymore? It is obvious that the vast majority of them recieve no significant ongoing income from record sales. Most small bands seem to make more money touring. For them to have succesful tours, people need to hear their music, record labels don't help with this. Sure there are people who have made vast sums of money from the record industry, but most make very little or worse end up in debt. Its an expected value problem.
I understand why they bought Compaq, but why not spin off Digital. I wish Compaq had never bought Digital. Digital did a lot of cool things, Compaq was able to help them some, but HP has no idea what to do with their stuff.
Blogs are one of the best things about the internet. They give the little guy a voice. Granted many of the may be boring, biased, or stupid, so are many stories posted by maintstream media. I would much rather have the problem of searching through a lot of bad articles hoping to find a good one as opposed to hoping the only articles that are presented to me are good.
I don't understand what you mean? I didn't write the modern drunkard article.
Here is an interesting story I read about drinking at the south pole. Modern Drunkard South Pole
oops, forgot the IF. (I can't let anyone know that I'm really Micheal Jackson)
The response to the problem of less clinical trials being tried isn't more funding of reserch. The answer is to reduce tho barriers to entry for medical research. The FDA needs to get away from restricting new medicines. More clinical trials would be conducted if they were less expensive. The FDA has a lot to do with that expense.
What would the problem with using fog be? If it works, cool. You could have an extraction hood above the display area.
Once they become ubiqitous (?) they will succede. I guess thats the definition of success though. I think it all has to do with price. Its a bit of a chicken and egg situation. They would be cheap if they were on every computer, but they won't be on every computer until someone writes the killer app. It is much less likely that someone will write the killer app until they are on every computer.
I understand that autonomic computing is really neat. I understand that it is a dificult problem mathematically and programatically. It doesn't help me much or the average end user. I see the next great advance in computers being a technology that was discovered/invented 20 years ago. It won't be the technology, but how it is presented to the user. I understand that research for these two projects can occur concurrently. I would just rather see people get excited about using old technology that actually works rather than new tech that hasn't even been invented yet
The names and number I came up with weren't exact.