The "price" is the price at which the last trade was executed. When most of the volume is due to computer trading, they can at least temporarily manipulate the price (for whatever purposes the trading algorithm designers want to... they are getting more and more complex).
Volume is not liquidity. If you have two computers trading a stock back and forth (in order to manipulate its price) that increases volume a lot but the liquidity is basically unchanged.
Then there are things like flash orders or whatever they're called which are neither about volume or liquidity but simply about giving an edge to those with a fast connection to the stock exchange... Essentially they can find out bid information which is supposed to be secret.
(42 million kilometers) / the speed of light = 2.33494867 minutes
That's just around 4 times closer to the sun than the Earth is, although I guess the radiation intensity probably increases with the square of the distance or something like that?
At least they should be able to power it with solar panels...
There's no evidence to indicate that AMD's "mainline" $200 CPU will be much better than the existing "mainline" $200 2500K that's out right now
There is some, depending on your application of course. If computer chess analysis is your thing, you would see benchmarks results like these, where the $189 Phenom II X6 1100T beats the $219 Intel 2500k.
So AMD already has CPUs which are price-performance competitive, surely Bulldozer shouldn't be worse in terms of price-performance.
The price per patent is an absolute steal compared to the money Apple and Microsoft were tricked into spending for the less valuable Nortel patents.
Do you have any article supporting the claim that Motorola's patents are more valuable than Nortel's? I'm not doubting you, just want to know more about it.
I hear this a lot, but it's not true. They are faster at highly parallel tasks (like mining Bitcoins I guess), slower at highly serial tasks. They're simply tuned differently.
For example, CPUs have a lot of transistors dedicated to cache memory. This is because they can't know in advance what data they'll need, the instruction which computes an array index may be right before the access to the array.
On the other hand, GPUs rely on highly predictable code, where threads in the same group are all doing the same thing at the same moment. Memory operations always have a very high latency on GPUs, but they hide these latencies by switching the core to running another thread while the memory operation is pending. Latency doesn't matter much for GPU operations, there are thousands of threads waiting to run to cover the latency. This is definitely not the case on a CPU, instruction latency is very important there and this takes extra hardware.
GPUs are not inherently faster, they're simply oriented towards different tasks.
I think I'll be canceling my Citi card (when I pay it off...).
You should do that even if it wasn't for this security breach. Big banks like Citi have been defrauding everyone including sucking money off the taxpayer teat courtesy of its puppet politicians.
Why anyone knowing that would want to continue being their customer is beyond me. Use a local credit union instead.
I know someone who was developing a medium-sized program in D and decided to start over in C++ due to compiler bugs and general lack of compiler maturity.
How would the community host copy authentication servers? Currently, Valve hosts those as part of the Steam service.
You're mixing up two different issues here. If Valve stops hosting TF2 servers, people will still be able to play TF2.
Steam is another thing... If Steam is no longer supported, this will affect all Steam games including single-player. This would be an issue with a gaming platform and not with ceasing support for a specific game, so it's not what was being discussed here.
Slashdot Mirror
The "price" is the price at which the last trade was executed. When most of the volume is due to computer trading, they can at least temporarily manipulate the price (for whatever purposes the trading algorithm designers want to... they are getting more and more complex).
Volume is not liquidity. If you have two computers trading a stock back and forth (in order to manipulate its price) that increases volume a lot but the liquidity is basically unchanged.
Then there are things like flash orders or whatever they're called which are neither about volume or liquidity but simply about giving an edge to those with a fast connection to the stock exchange... Essentially they can find out bid information which is supposed to be secret.
Your defense of HFT is weak.
eom
(42 million kilometers) / the speed of light = 2.33494867 minutes
That's just around 4 times closer to the sun than the Earth is, although I guess the radiation intensity probably increases with the square of the distance or something like that?
At least they should be able to power it with solar panels...
Well, it is much better than admitting everyone is trying to get their money out due to the new debit card fees.
If someone acts indistinguishably from a human, I don't think there's any difference.
I don't remember hearing about this part... what significant chunk of instructions was removed?
On what applications? Post benchmarks...
There is some, depending on your application of course. If computer chess analysis is your thing, you would see benchmarks results like these, where the $189 Phenom II X6 1100T beats the $219 Intel 2500k.
So AMD already has CPUs which are price-performance competitive, surely Bulldozer shouldn't be worse in terms of price-performance.
Do you have any article supporting the claim that Motorola's patents are more valuable than Nortel's? I'm not doubting you, just want to know more about it.
I doubt their infrastructure costs are proportional to the number of users.
I hear this a lot, but it's not true. They are faster at highly parallel tasks (like mining Bitcoins I guess), slower at highly serial tasks. They're simply tuned differently.
For example, CPUs have a lot of transistors dedicated to cache memory. This is because they can't know in advance what data they'll need, the instruction which computes an array index may be right before the access to the array.
On the other hand, GPUs rely on highly predictable code, where threads in the same group are all doing the same thing at the same moment. Memory operations always have a very high latency on GPUs, but they hide these latencies by switching the core to running another thread while the memory operation is pending. Latency doesn't matter much for GPU operations, there are thousands of threads waiting to run to cover the latency. This is definitely not the case on a CPU, instruction latency is very important there and this takes extra hardware.
GPUs are not inherently faster, they're simply oriented towards different tasks.
This is probably false. If the government seized all your income but then gave you food, shelter and entertainment I'm sure many people would work.
So you're suggesting that people get a "computer license" like a driving license?
Read my post again, I wasn't criticizing credit cards.
You should do that even if it wasn't for this security breach. Big banks like Citi have been defrauding everyone including sucking money off the taxpayer teat courtesy of its puppet politicians.
Why anyone knowing that would want to continue being their customer is beyond me. Use a local credit union instead.
It's not that simple according to this page.
I know someone who was developing a medium-sized program in D and decided to start over in C++ due to compiler bugs and general lack of compiler maturity.
Does it have a 64-bit compiler yet?
You're mixing up two different issues here. If Valve stops hosting TF2 servers, people will still be able to play TF2.
Steam is another thing... If Steam is no longer supported, this will affect all Steam games including single-player. This would be an issue with a gaming platform and not with ceasing support for a specific game, so it's not what was being discussed here.
They're training a specific kind of vulture which doesn't like rotting meat.
I saw it at an interview with Reggie linked here:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=433004
Either they didn't bother or it might have some compatibility problems with certain games.
Nintendo said it won't render Wii games at higher resolutions.
No, it's quite a lot more likely that Sony has a bunch of easy vulnerabilities that no one cared to probe for before.
Now it's a pile on where Sony's crappy security gets exposed every day...
Season 2 is already in production.
Many people do not build their open source software from source.