If you ask how many can "regularly achieve significant performance through use of multiple threads" then 0.1% is far too high. Add MPI or distributed parallel processing, and I would guess that number drops even lower. This is not a trivial topic, and for many years, just wasn't necessary. During the clock speed wars it was a non issue for most software, but with clock speeds capping out and core counts on the rise, I think we will see a large shift to this way of doing things in years to come. Most programmers follow the way of necessity, and that is what it will become.
Right now, parallel development techniques, education, and tools are all lagging behind the hardware reality That is absolute nonsense. The programming tools, paradigms, and education are all available. The fact is, people simply thought it wouldn't be important in the short term, but the multi-core world came on fast. The supercomputing world has been dealing with parallelism for a long time without issue, and not just simple pthreads. There are easier languages to use for threading (OpenMP), and for large distributed processing, MPI is quite mature. Just because people have chosen not to learn it, does not mean the tools are not available, or that hardware has surpassed software.
The tools are already there. People just have to decide that they're worthwhile to use.
No one wants to put the effort in that would go toward efficiency though. That's not an accurate statement. A LARGE amount of time is spent on the very big sites to maximize efficiency. It is the largest of sites that truly see the benefits of optimization, as it can mean very large savings in fewer servers, bandwidth fees, etc. A better statement might be "People with low traffic sites don't want to put the effort in that would go toward efficiency though."
Or, even easier, buy a Playstation 3. They can peak at between ~25 and ~256 Gigaflops depending on precision, and run far less than the $2500 price tag in the article. Additionally, with the number of Linux distros and toolkits supporting them increasing, they are a fairly cost efficinet "supercomputer" if you can even claim that ~25 Gigaflops is a supercomputer anymore.
Realistically, the one in the article is nothing more than a powerful workstation by modern standards.
Most likely the only reason against this would be to ensure that the fare paid is correct. Since cabs have meters that monitor cost over time and mileage, the only way for the cab company to prove they took you the distance they did would be using a verified and tested meter. Since most consumer cars don't come standard with those, there'd likely be many arguments over just how far they took you, and just how long they waited. It's a good idea at first glance, but once you dig into the details it makes sense why they would want to use the taxi.
The thing I never got about that controversy is why did it really matter? So what if he calls it a series of "pipes" vs. a series of "tubes". Not everyone has to be as computer savvy as your average slashdotter. I imagine there are quite a few slashdotters that lack the social skills to work on capital hill, the mechanical skills to rebuild their car, or the medical skills to perform heart surgery. The problem is, that in the tech community, we project expected knowledge on others. The reason technical specialization exists is because it is good economically, and people have different skill sets. The failure to completely understand another's skill set is not a failure of the person, but rather a difference of abilities and responsibilities, and rarely anything more.
Maybe not for indivudal PC's/Desktops, but there are a couple that are still quite useful for larger systems, such as: http://www.cug.org/
As there is so much information on the net about desktops, the UG has sort of faded. However, for large scale systems, the details are not so common, and you really have to meet up with the people who know to get the answers you need.
Well, think about it. If every UPS delivery person was drop kicking Amazon.com boxes, Amazon would either sue, or start shipping USPS or FedEx. If a single individual mails a box that is damaged, it may be called a "freak accident" by the company, and good luck proving otherwise.
But you could have the same result with them wearing the RFID tag on a neck badge. There is absolutely no need to insert it under their skin to accomplish this goal.
But if they can't sustain themselves, why would you continue paying to produce it? Unless you're doing non-profit, why would you support a company policy that said "Hey, we're just gonna spend a lot of money and go further in debt, just in order to make 0.5% of the population happy." Seriously, not all indy is good either. If something is valued by people, then it should bring in more support than it requires to produce. If it isn't, unless you had money to blow, why would you keep it going?
But you still own the book, and will most likely regain possession. However, if your friends scanned it and saved a copy, that would be different. Otherwise, by your logic, you'd also have to stop letting your friends come over and listen to your music. THAT would be the equivalent.
Perhaps you missed the first couple sentences in the GP's post stating
...religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income. Now, I have no idea as to the accuracy, but if you're responding and trying to trap someone in logic, at least read their post first.
Once the monopolist raises its prices again, what's to stop new competitors from cropping up?
It's called Barriers to Entry. Combined with predatory pricing, which is what the GP referred correctly to, having a strong hold on the market can be a huge deterrent. Any incoming competitor would have to overcome the existing infrastructure, client base, performance expectations, and incompatibilities.
Moral of the story? It's not that simple for a new competitor to jump in.
I am not arguing with most of your post, as it is opinion, and you can't easily argue opinion. However, the portion where you say:
...has refered to the Constitution as "just a piece of paper,"... is factually incorrect. This has been long discounted for a huge lack of evidence or any witnesses of note. This was entirely based on a story written on Capitol Hill Blue, a notoriously fact free source of information.
Please do your research before making bold claims. One factual error leads others to question your entire line of reasoning.
How about closed circuit testing? Private tracks are used for all sorts of testing... why not for this? You could regulate stop frequency to every 1/4, 1/2, or 1 mile, or take it for a 50-100 mile stretch without stops, and without traffic. Sure, you still have the issue of different amounts of wind on different days, but it'd be far closer to reality than sitting on rollers.
This is probably the perfect dream of the *IAA. By diluting access to the real key, it will make it more difficult to locate. They didn't have to do a thing. We did it to ourselves.
But Greenpeace is a 501c4, not a 501c3. They are not inherently doing anything "good" themselves, but rather spend their money fueling their ships for publicity and lobbying. If Greenpeace really cared about the environment, they'd dock their fleet. In reality, they thrive purely on the controversy they imaginatively create.
Slashdot Mirror
The tools are already there. People just have to decide that they're worthwhile to use.
*Whoooosh*
Number of accounts != Actual Users or People
Or, even easier, buy a Playstation 3. They can peak at between ~25 and ~256 Gigaflops depending on precision, and run far less than the $2500 price tag in the article. Additionally, with the number of Linux distros and toolkits supporting them increasing, they are a fairly cost efficinet "supercomputer" if you can even claim that ~25 Gigaflops is a supercomputer anymore.
Realistically, the one in the article is nothing more than a powerful workstation by modern standards.
Well, good thing you're on
*Ducks*
Most likely the only reason against this would be to ensure that the fare paid is correct. Since cabs have meters that monitor cost over time and mileage, the only way for the cab company to prove they took you the distance they did would be using a verified and tested meter. Since most consumer cars don't come standard with those, there'd likely be many arguments over just how far they took you, and just how long they waited. It's a good idea at first glance, but once you dig into the details it makes sense why they would want to use the taxi.
Because that would be grammatically correct, and proper grammar isn't allowed here.
Reality is not always as deep and meaningful as fairy tales.
The thing I never got about that controversy is why did it really matter? So what if he calls it a series of "pipes" vs. a series of "tubes". Not everyone has to be as computer savvy as your average slashdotter. I imagine there are quite a few slashdotters that lack the social skills to work on capital hill, the mechanical skills to rebuild their car, or the medical skills to perform heart surgery. The problem is, that in the tech community, we project expected knowledge on others. The reason technical specialization exists is because it is good economically, and people have different skill sets. The failure to completely understand another's skill set is not a failure of the person, but rather a difference of abilities and responsibilities, and rarely anything more.
One word: gmail
Maybe not for indivudal PC's/Desktops, but there are a couple that are still quite useful for larger systems, such as: http://www.cug.org/
As there is so much information on the net about desktops, the UG has sort of faded. However, for large scale systems, the details are not so common, and you really have to meet up with the people who know to get the answers you need.
Well, think about it. If every UPS delivery person was drop kicking Amazon.com boxes, Amazon would either sue, or start shipping USPS or FedEx. If a single individual mails a box that is damaged, it may be called a "freak accident" by the company, and good luck proving otherwise.
But you could have the same result with them wearing the RFID tag on a neck badge. There is absolutely no need to insert it under their skin to accomplish this goal.
But if they can't sustain themselves, why would you continue paying to produce it? Unless you're doing non-profit, why would you support a company policy that said "Hey, we're just gonna spend a lot of money and go further in debt, just in order to make 0.5% of the population happy." Seriously, not all indy is good either. If something is valued by people, then it should bring in more support than it requires to produce. If it isn't, unless you had money to blow, why would you keep it going?
But you still own the book, and will most likely regain possession. However, if your friends scanned it and saved a copy, that would be different. Otherwise, by your logic, you'd also have to stop letting your friends come over and listen to your music. THAT would be the equivalent.
...religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income. Now, I have no idea as to the accuracy, but if you're responding and trying to trap someone in logic, at least read their post first.It's called Barriers to Entry. Combined with predatory pricing, which is what the GP referred correctly to, having a strong hold on the market can be a huge deterrent. Any incoming competitor would have to overcome the existing infrastructure, client base, performance expectations, and incompatibilities.
Moral of the story? It's not that simple for a new competitor to jump in.
I didn't realize liberals believed in the right to bear arms.
*ducks*
...has refered to the Constitution as "just a piece of paper,"... is factually incorrect. This has been long discounted for a huge lack of evidence or any witnesses of note. This was entirely based on a story written on Capitol Hill Blue, a notoriously fact free source of information.Please do your research before making bold claims. One factual error leads others to question your entire line of reasoning.
How about closed circuit testing? Private tracks are used for all sorts of testing... why not for this? You could regulate stop frequency to every 1/4, 1/2, or 1 mile, or take it for a 50-100 mile stretch without stops, and without traffic. Sure, you still have the issue of different amounts of wind on different days, but it'd be far closer to reality than sitting on rollers.
This is probably the perfect dream of the *IAA. By diluting access to the real key, it will make it more difficult to locate. They didn't have to do a thing. We did it to ourselves.
But Greenpeace is a 501c4, not a 501c3. They are not inherently doing anything "good" themselves, but rather spend their money fueling their ships for publicity and lobbying. If Greenpeace really cared about the environment, they'd dock their fleet. In reality, they thrive purely on the controversy they imaginatively create.
And what do you propose for the very large population of color blind people?