"or wanting the newer GPU 5-10 years down the road"
At the current pace of technology, it is very likely that 5-10 years down the road your system won't even support/have the new bus slot the newer GPUs will require. That's including the current-gen of processor we are now discussing. PCI express is going to go away with direct processor interconnects on an interposer. Soon we will be at the point I predicted in my teenage years, where we have a closely-linked multi-socket motherboard, and all we do is replace the primary processors. RAM, Audio, Networking, all will be self-contained. CPU with 128GB RAM on-die? GPU with access to the same memory on the same interposer? Multiple sockets on a single motherboard (which is in and of itself just a large-scale interposer...)
And likely 5 years after that, my little dream will die out to someone with a better idea.
" this CPU is able to beat last generation dedicated GPUs"
To boot, no, bullshit, and I proved this in the AMD spreadsheet performance comments from yesterday/day before. This new i7 processor can't even match a 9800GTX+ in single-precision FLOPs.
So, no, it isn't even beating GPUs from SEVEN GENERATIONS ago.
" The output from the NVIDIA chip gets piped through the Intel chip, as the Intel chip is the only one attached to the display."
"There's also a mild performance reduction with the Optimus solution."
So, here I sit on a desktop system with both discrete GPU (GTX 260 Core 216) and an Intel IGP, triple-monitor setup.
I absolutely fucking hate when the system renders on the GTX yet insists on displaying through the monitor attached to the Intel IGP. We're talking a no-shit measured 50% drop in framerate - FOR DOOM I/II ON THE ZANDRONUM PORT.
I can only imagine the shit performance Optimus provides, and that is why I've explicitly avoided buying laptop systems using Intel/nVidia with Optimus.
BTW, Mr. Anon coward, that password in plain text - 8 nonillion years to crack. Done up with numbers and symbols like I posted, it's 252 undecillion years.
So, yes, adding numbers DOES significantly increase bitwise entropy. By a few orders of magnitude.
"Why does it need numbers in it? This does not significantly increase bitwise entropy, but forcing me to think of a phrase that has numbers in it has suddenly reduced my space of possible phrases from hundreds to a handful"
Purpose-specific passwords. E-mail gets one long and secure password. Forums/discussion sites get another password that's nowhere related to my e-mail password. Games sites and services get another password. And then my own anime site which uses a picture/caption/password combo for all users (Not captcha, caption, as in you type your caption to match the image you chose for security, hit confirm, and if those match you're prompted to enter your password on the next screen. My bank has this for login as well.)
"I agree with the article - blocking password managers lowers security."
Password managers suck. You want to know what works better? Image/phrase/password verification like my bank is using (and I've been using on my anime forum for at least a decade.)
Let's see your password manager work worth a shit when your system hard drive takes a dump and you don't have a backup.
"A GPU is not 500 times faster than a CPU, more like 2 or 3 times"
Just on FLOPs alone you're dead wrong. The latest and greatest E-series Xeons (V3) have barely enough power to match the 9800GTX+ - about 800 GigaFLOPs. The 980 GTX Ti is roughly 5.6 TeraFLOPs.
"You don't shoot airborne targets with slugs, you use shot"
Only if you're a shit shot that can't lead a target (or in your case, likely using the wrong type of metal slug - you use bismuth for distance shooting, not steel or lead.)
" If you are hitting ducks with slugs at 150 yards (heck if you can hit them with SHOT at that distance), you need to drop this Slashdot gig and do some professional shooting."
The pros have been doing 200+ yard competitions for years. My last try at one was 2010 in the southern Mojave.
"The pros generally shoot at under 60 yards in competition"
Using buckshot, or buckshot in a wax slug, maybe, yes. MINIMUM safe fault distance from a metal target being engaged in an officially-constructed range, using metal slugs, is 61 yards (60 yard minimum target distance, one yard fault line allocation minimum.) My 1984 Mossberg M500 is scary accurate with a 26" barrel and just the pip on the end of the barrel, no rear dovetail. Men do distance competition all the time. We've got 12-gauge sabot rounds that are ungodly accurate 200 yards out with proper construction.
Also, with a typical Remington Express ELR shotgun shell, 1300 FPS muzzle velocity, you won't be losing any real accuracy until about the half second mark, when gravity starts making itself profoundly known to the projectile and it begins to drop like a rock. 750 feet, 250 yards maximum safe bet for better than 50% hit rate. I don't see 300 yards just yet, though. Just a tip up of the barrel to compensate, or use a longer barrel that's rifled. I've seen smooth-bore hits at ~225 before.
There's the Hornady SST rounds that get 2,000 FPS muzzle velocity with only a 6.75" drop at 200 yards. That's dead-easy to compensate for.
I've been shooting rifles and handguns of all sorts since I was 6 years old. Spring-piston dart pistols to single-pump breech-load Benjamin.22 pellet rifles (that were just as good as firing an actual.22LR) to 9mm to.40cal to AR-15 to M-16 to.308 crew-served to shotguns (20, 16, 12, and 10 gauge, and the ever-loved venerable.410 as I had a fairly rural life growing up in Texas, Tennessee, and South Carolina with an occasional Louisiana stint.)
BTW, current shotgun record on a 100 yard grouping is 0.787 inch for 5 shots - zero magnification, red dot sight only. 200's a breeze, you just need to think about your ammunition, and possible crosswinds.
You do not believe, because you cannot conceive. Go spend some time on youtube. This guy nailed a slightly larger-than-human target with a 9mm at 1,000 yards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Here's a guy (not the one mentioned above) doing slugs 200+ with decent accuracy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I do have mine. Started with the (now gone) "You Can Fly" program from the Huntsville, AL Aviation Challenge adult camp. My first 20 instructed hours were there.
"and stack machines are notorious for having HORRIBLE support for languages like C."
Because C isn't a fucking stack-manipulation language like FORTH. Next stupid as shit statement, please./been doing stack manipulation longer than you've been alive
"You are not going to hit a small moving airborne target with slugs at 150 yards using a shot gun without making an extremely lucky shot."
Wanna know how I know you've never been skeet shooting or actual duck hunting?
Protip: Lead your target.
"I'm not so sure you know what you are talking about, but I wouldn't want to take bets on how much experience you have with firearms.... "
My grandfather is a retired Lt. Col. USMC. I spent my summers on Parris Island (He lived on Datau.) I obviously know how to effectively and accurately operate a weapon. You, on the other hand...
"Yeah brain surgeon did you read that the pilots last job should be trying to see an 18in square thing while trying to line up a run on a fire?"
Well, as I sit here and look at my pilot's license (which I started working on 17 years ago) I'm just going to go with you're absolutely fucking clueless on the subject at hand and should not be talking.
She should open her eyes and look at the companies that are using sites like Jobrivet to get around age discrimination laws, and band together to sue all those fuckers as well.
You're an engineer, not a physicist, shut the fuck up.
Metamaterials are theorized to be able to resolve detail past the diffraction limit. Practical application? Project the fucking image of the virus on the wall and watch shit happen in real-time. No more need for a fucking sample-killing electron microscope.
Do you even have a B.S. in optical physics, asshole? I don't and even I knew about the theorized capabilities of metamaterials as lenses.
Slashdot Mirror
"or wanting the newer GPU 5-10 years down the road"
At the current pace of technology, it is very likely that 5-10 years down the road your system won't even support/have the new bus slot the newer GPUs will require. That's including the current-gen of processor we are now discussing. PCI express is going to go away with direct processor interconnects on an interposer. Soon we will be at the point I predicted in my teenage years, where we have a closely-linked multi-socket motherboard, and all we do is replace the primary processors. RAM, Audio, Networking, all will be self-contained. CPU with 128GB RAM on-die? GPU with access to the same memory on the same interposer? Multiple sockets on a single motherboard (which is in and of itself just a large-scale interposer...)
And likely 5 years after that, my little dream will die out to someone with a better idea.
" this CPU is able to beat last generation dedicated GPUs"
To boot, no, bullshit, and I proved this in the AMD spreadsheet performance comments from yesterday/day before. This new i7 processor can't even match a 9800GTX+ in single-precision FLOPs.
So, no, it isn't even beating GPUs from SEVEN GENERATIONS ago.
"Horseshit. Video cards are special purpose items these days "
I guess you haven't heard of GPGPU. Well, given your UID, not a surprise.
" The output from the NVIDIA chip gets piped through the Intel chip, as the Intel chip is the only one attached to the display."
"There's also a mild performance reduction with the Optimus solution."
So, here I sit on a desktop system with both discrete GPU (GTX 260 Core 216) and an Intel IGP, triple-monitor setup.
I absolutely fucking hate when the system renders on the GTX yet insists on displaying through the monitor attached to the Intel IGP. We're talking a no-shit measured 50% drop in framerate - FOR DOOM I/II ON THE ZANDRONUM PORT.
I can only imagine the shit performance Optimus provides, and that is why I've explicitly avoided buying laptop systems using Intel/nVidia with Optimus.
"A real "Password Manager" would be even better - if I find one that I trust, and I'm comfortable using. I haven't found it yet . . ."
Ever try a Rolodex?
BTW, Mr. Anon coward, that password in plain text - 8 nonillion years to crack. Done up with numbers and symbols like I posted, it's 252 undecillion years.
So, yes, adding numbers DOES significantly increase bitwise entropy. By a few orders of magnitude.
"Why does it need numbers in it? This does not significantly increase bitwise entropy, but forcing me to think of a phrase that has numbers in it has suddenly reduced my space of possible phrases from hundreds to a handful"
Y0ur br@1n 0bv10u$ly d0e$n't w0rk.
"Do you have a citation for that Mr. Scraps of Bad Security on Paper?"
Every fucking government agency that uses a fucking AIR GAP like a REAL PROFESSIONAL.
Which you are obviously NOT.
"Why the hell don't you have port knocking enabled for SSH?"
Because http://www.giac.org/paper/gsec... maybe.
"The alternative being what?"
Purpose-specific passwords. E-mail gets one long and secure password. Forums/discussion sites get another password that's nowhere related to my e-mail password. Games sites and services get another password. And then my own anime site which uses a picture/caption/password combo for all users (Not captcha, caption, as in you type your caption to match the image you chose for security, hit confirm, and if those match you're prompted to enter your password on the next screen. My bank has this for login as well.)
No problems.
"I agree with the article - blocking password managers lowers security."
Password managers suck. You want to know what works better? Image/phrase/password verification like my bank is using (and I've been using on my anime forum for at least a decade.)
Let's see your password manager work worth a shit when your system hard drive takes a dump and you don't have a backup.
Well, I put in the TOP of the line server hardware versus top of the line GPU hardware.
If we go to the desktop region, then the performance disparity increases!
Example, the latest Core i7 5960X is only 384 GigaFLOPs. It can't even get to half the power of a 9800GTX+.
But that doesn't even begin taking into account the efficiency of algorithms and code utilized.
"A GPU is not 500 times faster than a CPU, more like 2 or 3 times"
Just on FLOPs alone you're dead wrong. The latest and greatest E-series Xeons (V3) have barely enough power to match the 9800GTX+ - about 800 GigaFLOPs. The 980 GTX Ti is roughly 5.6 TeraFLOPs.
"You don't shoot airborne targets with slugs, you use shot"
Only if you're a shit shot that can't lead a target (or in your case, likely using the wrong type of metal slug - you use bismuth for distance shooting, not steel or lead.)
" If you are hitting ducks with slugs at 150 yards (heck if you can hit them with SHOT at that distance), you need to drop this Slashdot gig and do some professional shooting."
The pros have been doing 200+ yard competitions for years. My last try at one was 2010 in the southern Mojave.
"The pros generally shoot at under 60 yards in competition"
Using buckshot, or buckshot in a wax slug, maybe, yes. MINIMUM safe fault distance from a metal target being engaged in an officially-constructed range, using metal slugs, is 61 yards (60 yard minimum target distance, one yard fault line allocation minimum.) My 1984 Mossberg M500 is scary accurate with a 26" barrel and just the pip on the end of the barrel, no rear dovetail. Men do distance competition all the time. We've got 12-gauge sabot rounds that are ungodly accurate 200 yards out with proper construction.
Also, with a typical Remington Express ELR shotgun shell, 1300 FPS muzzle velocity, you won't be losing any real accuracy until about the half second mark, when gravity starts making itself profoundly known to the projectile and it begins to drop like a rock. 750 feet, 250 yards maximum safe bet for better than 50% hit rate. I don't see 300 yards just yet, though. Just a tip up of the barrel to compensate, or use a longer barrel that's rifled. I've seen smooth-bore hits at ~225 before.
There's the Hornady SST rounds that get 2,000 FPS muzzle velocity with only a 6.75" drop at 200 yards. That's dead-easy to compensate for.
I've been shooting rifles and handguns of all sorts since I was 6 years old. Spring-piston dart pistols to single-pump breech-load Benjamin .22 pellet rifles (that were just as good as firing an actual .22LR) to 9mm to .40cal to AR-15 to M-16 to .308 crew-served to shotguns (20, 16, 12, and 10 gauge, and the ever-loved venerable .410 as I had a fairly rural life growing up in Texas, Tennessee, and South Carolina with an occasional Louisiana stint.)
http://firearmspedia.com/scatt... Yes, that is a sniper shotgun.
BTW, current shotgun record on a 100 yard grouping is 0.787 inch for 5 shots - zero magnification, red dot sight only. 200's a breeze, you just need to think about your ammunition, and possible crosswinds.
You do not believe, because you cannot conceive. Go spend some time on youtube. This guy nailed a slightly larger-than-human target with a 9mm at 1,000 yards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Here's a guy (not the one mentioned above) doing slugs 200+ with decent accuracy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I do have mine. Started with the (now gone) "You Can Fly" program from the Huntsville, AL Aviation Challenge adult camp. My first 20 instructed hours were there.
"and stack machines are notorious for having HORRIBLE support for languages like C."
Because C isn't a fucking stack-manipulation language like FORTH. Next stupid as shit statement, please. /been doing stack manipulation longer than you've been alive
"You are not going to hit a small moving airborne target with slugs at 150 yards using a shot gun without making an extremely lucky shot."
Wanna know how I know you've never been skeet shooting or actual duck hunting?
Protip: Lead your target.
"I'm not so sure you know what you are talking about, but I wouldn't want to take bets on how much experience you have with firearms.... "
My grandfather is a retired Lt. Col. USMC. I spent my summers on Parris Island (He lived on Datau.) I obviously know how to effectively and accurately operate a weapon. You, on the other hand...
"Yeah brain surgeon did you read that the pilots last job should be trying to see an 18in square thing while trying to line up a run on a fire?"
Well, as I sit here and look at my pilot's license (which I started working on 17 years ago) I'm just going to go with you're absolutely fucking clueless on the subject at hand and should not be talking.
She should open her eyes and look at the companies that are using sites like Jobrivet to get around age discrimination laws, and band together to sue all those fuckers as well.
Want to know how I know you've never fired a real gun before?
Magnum slugs alone on an unchoked barrel can be accurate up to 150 yards.
" So drone is above flight path gets sucked down."
Except the original idea poster said fly ABOVE the drone.
It reeked of cow shit during my trip to San Francisco last year. Give me a break.
You're an engineer, not a physicist, shut the fuck up.
Metamaterials are theorized to be able to resolve detail past the diffraction limit. Practical application? Project the fucking image of the virus on the wall and watch shit happen in real-time. No more need for a fucking sample-killing electron microscope.
Do you even have a B.S. in optical physics, asshole? I don't and even I knew about the theorized capabilities of metamaterials as lenses.
Because the principle fucking applies the same way. Do you not know how per-application driver settings works?
Same principle applies. Jesus it's like you don't know how per-application driver settings work.