Firstly, The US (Eisenhower) highway system was created in 1956 because Ike was impressed by the Autobahn, and because the roads at that time were absolute crap. The Tokaido Shinkansen began construction in 1959, and opened October 1, 1964. So there wasn't even a choice between highway or bullet train.
Secondly, the US has a much lower population density than Japan, making running enough train lines to get people where they want to go less profitable, so it would pretty much only be useful in a highly populated area like BosWash, which may or may not have a sufficient number a passengers to make it profitable.
Thirdly, as someone pointed out, Amtrak can't upgrade, because it doesn't own the rails, not to mention it doesn't have the money.
And finally, a simple solution to avoiding gridlock is: avoid it. Holidays are peak travel times, a bullet train isn't gonna magically teleport you there no hassle.
Be obstinate and ask to talk to someone higher up, eg manager if you're just dealing with a cashier. Store policy at OfficeMax was regular: must be in box, receipt for cash otherwise store credit, but I'd end up taking back a printer there was a rebate for (UPC needed) without the box or some such every week.
OxyContin is not a cheap drug to make (cheap being aspirin or even hydrocodone). For starters, you have to go though a few steps to convert morphine to oxycodone. The reason OxyContin is prescribed instead of morphine is because morphine will more probably cause nausea, and OxyContin has a sophisticated time release thingie - which makes you claim about lawsuits from ODs complete nonsense. The street price for a tablet may be >$20, but as another poster pointed out, it's about a buck/10mg tab.
This doesn't really invalid your post at all, but the GP's point about darkness being hours (as you point out 2 hours for non-BosWash) still stands, and it's disappointing that there's so much light pollution in North America and most of the first world countries from energy, astronomy, and crimals standpoint.
Finally! You have an actual fact in your post! Though I can't help but feel a little disappoined, for though you are a fool, it does not concern your claims.
If my questions and claims are so absurd, then it should be a simple matter for you to rip them to shreds. However, in lieu of doing so, you elect to make ad homiem attacks, pitifully attempt to twist facts to fit your worldview that the G5 isn't crap, and supply extraneous facts that have little to do with the G5s speed, for example, how many ops/cycle it can perform, or its inclusion in game consules.
Might wanna look up absurd, nonsense, and unteachable in the dictionary, and look though your posts for actual facts supporting your (de)conclusions, and think (for once in your life) whether those adjectives describe you instead. BTW, I'm still waiting for answers to my 7 questions.
He meant time as experience by those in the spacecraft - hence subjective time, since, according to SR, traveling at relativistic speeds means time slows down for the occupants. t_occupants = t_"rest"/gamma, where gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2), and t_"rest" = x/v.
Solving the equations for t and v, you'd get t_"rest" = 3153600000000.0000000051369863012s or 100000.00000000000000016289276704 years, and v = 0.99999999999999999999837107232964c.
The energy of a ship would then be E = sqrt(p^2*c^2+m_0^2*c^4), where p = the relativistic momentum p = gamma*m_0*v. The equation simplifies to E = sqrt(17519999997^2*m_0^2*c^4) = 17519999997*m_0*c^2, a somewhat large amount that might prove difficult for us to realistically achieve.
The abundance of posts such as the aformentioned indicate that inexorably the criticisms of the sequals are generated by those who did not focus assidously on understanding the precise nature of the Matrix.
Ergo some of my answers you will understand, and some of them you will not.
The clarification for the mansifestion for Neo's power outside of the matrix is dependent on the Architect's commentary on the function of "The One". Fundamentally Neo's power derives from the machines themselves, "The Source" as it were, whose raison d'etre is to also administer the sentinals, harvesters, etc... Thus, Neo has the qualifications to dispatch the sentinals, ironically using his conduit though "The Source" against the machines themselves.
Admittedly, minor anomalities exist that inevitabily must be elucidated, particularly, the localization of Neo's ascendancy, thus the adjacent sentials could be extirpated yet remote sentinals were not correspondingly affected, and his brain possessing the capability of connecting to the Matrix without "jacking-in". I assert the film contains within itself explications for these as well as the various other inquiries proposed by those skeptical of the profound nature of this trilogy.
My aspiration is that people will allot a moderate interval of time to analyze the implications and connotations though their interpretations, and castigate the sequals concerning the subpar elements: inadequate acting and confabulation and an overemphasis on CGI paraphernalia, which diminishes the quality of the film and must ergo, be denunciated. Apropos the transcendent DVD boxset, it contains penetrating divinations regarding the aformentioned questions.
That aside, my criticism of the matrix is not that, like me, the Wachowski brothers used a thesaurus like it was going out of style, the vague pseudo mysticism (as opposed to nonvague nonpseudo mystacism), or any of the other minor botched details. The major problem is that the trilogy is incoherent. The first film is complete, the second and third are just a poor excuse to draw out the series. It's parallel to Star Wars, except Lucas got someone good to write ESB.
As a side note, I'm pretty sure I misspelled a few words. Show how "1337" you are by finding them!
I assume this means you've run out of excuses for the G5's crappiness and accept the spec benchmark as valid. I'm disappointed that you don't want to continue, it was most amusing to see someone try to rationalize some religious devotion to a processor. However, this doesn't work well in subjects with cold hard facts. Might I suggest being a rabid liberal, it seems to be quite common on this site, though don't let that steer you away from the religious right. If these choices are too tame, try joining a cult, or fundamentalist islam is riding a surge of popularity, though it would require relocation. I thank you for your kindly insinuation that I have not grown old, bitter, and pigheaded.
Where is this audience you speak of? I highly doubt anyone is still reading this story.
Might wanna back up that I don't read, don't learn, and don't know what I'm talking about. It's true I don't develop software, I'm in CS. I study computers, from algorithms to PROCESSOR DESIGN, which you seem to know nothing about, and I assume that you're just some codemonkey by your comment on developing software. Thanks, btw, for the compilement about me sounding old and bitter.
Also might wanna read before responding yourself, as in reading this "Hand coding - let's see, one example from over 4 years ago, one quote that ignores "Modern compilers (particularly those designed for large supercomputing machines) will automatically identify parallelizable blocks and run them independently.", a suggestion that it may be better to hand code, and some more evidence of the G5's crappy design. I didn't realize that the defn of frequently changed to include suggestions of something happening, and one case in the past 5 years."
Ah, so you're from the school of polictally correct processor design, where diversity triumphs merit. If altivec was better designed, then it'd be used more often than SSE. As it isn't (used), once must conclude it isn't better designed.
So the linpack results from top500 aren't measuring supercomputers? That still leaves it being one TYPE of test to specs 26 types.
I seem to be the only one that does understand what I'm talking about, having taken Comp Arch grad level with Hennessy and Patterson. It seems that you don't understand anything that's been said, and are intent on being a dumbass fanatic for a dead processor.
Meanwhie, for the 5th time, I'm still waiting for evidence of "SPEC is subject to all kinds of problems.", why Apple doesn't use your "benchmark" to advertise their products, these supposed Intel optimizations (in stock GCC mind you), evidence of why spec isn't accountable, why I am "blinded by marketing", why I "have no idea how compilers, CPU architectures, system architectures are designed", and "people are still smarter than compilers (the fact that compilers miss some things doesn't count)".
I had no idea that Toronto was now in America. I choose studies from North America because that's what was available, and we are in a story about the American military. As for "where there are studies [online] to prove anything.", prove it, and then disprove the studies from The Archives of Sexual Behavior, the FBI, Air Force, and Toronto PD. Then provide proof for your claim of rape and domestic violence.
You say you choose these subjects because you wrote an essay. Fine. Let's see the studies that you drew those conclusions from. Until then, the point stands that you have an axe to grind with the military by choosing emotional subjects.
Go look up the defn of grandstanding, you stupid moron.
You do realize that the compiler and OS are not "variables", they should be made to have as little influence as possible, the system architecture is highly CPU dependent, and spec removes the effects of the time and expertise of the tester by allowing as many tests for say, an Opteron, as anyone cares to submit.
>QED less well than intels compiler in the previous sentence Are you really that stupid? If "Secondly, the compiler used by VeriTest, GCC, is said to generate code that less well optimised for x86." was refering to Intel's compiler, why do they use x86?
So now you're trying to use spec to show the G5 isn't crap, yet you seem to have missed the freakin disclaimer
Standardizing of compilers would be a scientific method IF the goal was to test the performance of a machine running GCC code, instead of the maximum performance possible. Firstly, Linpack is one type of test compared to spec's 26, and secondly, it's a test of SUPERCOMPUTERS, not CPUs - get that through your thick skull.
And now with Altivec is a "more capable vector unit" delusions. If it was superior, why isn't the G5 faster? Oh yes, because no compiler auto-vectorizes. That would seem to have been a crappy design choice, thereby making it less capable, in effect, crippling itself.
Hand coding - let's see, one example from over 4 years ago, one quote that ignores "Modern compilers (particularly those designed for large supercomputing machines) will automatically identify parallelizable blocks and run them independently.", a suggestion that it may be better to hand code, and some more evidence of the G5's crappy design. I didn't realize that the defn of frequently changed to include suggestions of something happening, and one case in the past 5 years.
And now, for the 4th time, I'm still waiting for evidence of "SPEC is subject to all kinds of problems.", why Apple doesn't use your "benchmark" to advertise their products, these supposed Intel optimizations (in stock GCC mind you), evidence of why spec isn't accountable, why I am "blinded by marketing", why I "have no idea how compilers, CPU architectures, system architectures are designed", and "people are still smarter than compilers (the fact that compilers miss some things doesn't count)".
If you're gonna libel the entire Army, at least do it with a crime that's not as falsely reported as rape. And give links to actual websites, it's not my job to provide evidence for your claims, I'm quite capable of typing in Army rape in google.
The fact that you choose the emotionally charged crimes of rape and domestic violence to back up your claim, instead of, oh, say, violent crime in the army, lends credence to the conclusion that for whatever reason you have some axe to grind with the military.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, The US (Eisenhower) highway system was created in 1956 because Ike was impressed by the Autobahn, and because the roads at that time were absolute crap. The Tokaido Shinkansen began construction in 1959, and opened October 1, 1964. So there wasn't even a choice between highway or bullet train.
Secondly, the US has a much lower population density than Japan, making running enough train lines to get people where they want to go less profitable, so it would pretty much only be useful in a highly populated area like BosWash, which may or may not have a sufficient number a passengers to make it profitable.
Thirdly, as someone pointed out, Amtrak can't upgrade, because it doesn't own the rails, not to mention it doesn't have the money.
And finally, a simple solution to avoiding gridlock is: avoid it. Holidays are peak travel times, a bullet train isn't gonna magically teleport you there no hassle.
Well, going by your handle, then you'd be a commie muslim, and thus there is no problem.
Be obstinate and ask to talk to someone higher up, eg manager if you're just dealing with a cashier. Store policy at OfficeMax was regular: must be in box, receipt for cash otherwise store credit, but I'd end up taking back a printer there was a rebate for (UPC needed) without the box or some such every week.
The only problem is, that when some historian from 2425 comes up slashdot and goatse, there'll be an immediate call to delete it all.
Obviously you can't be a med student, because you have free time to post on slashdot. Nice try buddy.
OxyContin is not a cheap drug to make (cheap being aspirin or even hydrocodone). For starters, you have to go though a few steps to convert morphine to oxycodone. The reason OxyContin is prescribed instead of morphine is because morphine will more probably cause nausea, and OxyContin has a sophisticated time release thingie - which makes you claim about lawsuits from ODs complete nonsense. The street price for a tablet may be >$20, but as another poster pointed out, it's about a buck/10mg tab.
>- Safety of the people and equipment that will come into contact with the infected blood during the procedure.
Well, then let's just not operate at all, for any reason, on anyone HIV-positive.
- There's more than one strain of HIV. Having two of them is worse than having one.
If you need a lung/liver/kidney, are you really gonna be worrying overmuch about having 2 strains of HIV?
But changing it to devices might inspire more people to do this.
Could it be impossible for humans (ie mathematically, or beyond the capacity of the brain) as well?
Man, I never thought of that. That's genius.
Yup. Thos damn Amer... hey wait... I'm American. Oohh, if I ever find out where you live Mr. AC, I'm gonna, aw hell, lets just say you're French.
This doesn't really invalid your post at all, but the GP's point about darkness being hours (as you point out 2 hours for non-BosWash) still stands, and it's disappointing that there's so much light pollution in North America and most of the first world countries from energy, astronomy, and crimals standpoint.
Damn straight. And what's all this rubbish about a non-flat earth? I mean, where do people come up with this stuff!
Finally! You have an actual fact in your post! Though I can't help but feel a little disappoined, for though you are a fool, it does not concern your claims.
If my questions and claims are so absurd, then it should be a simple matter for you to rip them to shreds. However, in lieu of doing so, you elect to make ad homiem attacks, pitifully attempt to twist facts to fit your worldview that the G5 isn't crap, and supply extraneous facts that have little to do with the G5s speed, for example, how many ops/cycle it can perform, or its inclusion in game consules.
Might wanna look up absurd, nonsense, and unteachable in the dictionary, and look though your posts for actual facts supporting your (de)conclusions, and think (for once in your life) whether those adjectives describe you instead. BTW, I'm still waiting for answers to my 7 questions.
He meant time as experience by those in the spacecraft - hence subjective time, since, according to SR, traveling at relativistic speeds means time slows down for the occupants.
t_occupants = t_"rest"/gamma, where gamma = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2), and t_"rest" = x/v.
Solving the equations for t and v, you'd get t_"rest" = 3153600000000.0000000051369863012s or 100000.00000000000000016289276704 years, and v = 0.99999999999999999999837107232964c.
The energy of a ship would then be E = sqrt(p^2*c^2+m_0^2*c^4), where p = the relativistic momentum p = gamma*m_0*v. The equation simplifies to E = sqrt(17519999997^2*m_0^2*c^4) = 17519999997*m_0*c^2, a somewhat large amount that might prove difficult for us to realistically achieve.
The abundance of posts such as the aformentioned indicate that inexorably the criticisms of the sequals are generated by those who did not focus assidously on understanding the precise nature of the Matrix.
Ergo some of my answers you will understand, and some of them you will not.
The clarification for the mansifestion for Neo's power outside of the matrix is dependent on the Architect's commentary on the function of "The One". Fundamentally Neo's power derives from the machines themselves, "The Source" as it were, whose raison d'etre is to also administer the sentinals, harvesters, etc... Thus, Neo has the qualifications to dispatch the sentinals, ironically using his conduit though "The Source" against the machines themselves.
Admittedly, minor anomalities exist that inevitabily must be elucidated, particularly, the localization of Neo's ascendancy, thus the adjacent sentials could be extirpated yet remote sentinals were not correspondingly affected, and his brain possessing the capability of connecting to the Matrix without "jacking-in". I assert the film contains within itself explications for these as well as the various other inquiries proposed by those skeptical of the profound nature of this trilogy.
My aspiration is that people will allot a moderate interval of time to analyze the implications and connotations though their interpretations, and castigate the sequals concerning the subpar elements: inadequate acting and confabulation and an overemphasis on CGI paraphernalia, which diminishes the quality of the film and must ergo, be denunciated. Apropos the transcendent DVD boxset, it contains penetrating divinations regarding the aformentioned questions.
That aside, my criticism of the matrix is not that, like me, the Wachowski brothers used a thesaurus like it was going out of style, the vague pseudo mysticism (as opposed to nonvague nonpseudo mystacism), or any of the other minor botched details. The major problem is that the trilogy is incoherent. The first film is complete, the second and third are just a poor excuse to draw out the series. It's parallel to Star Wars, except Lucas got someone good to write ESB.
As a side note, I'm pretty sure I misspelled a few words. Show how "1337" you are by finding them!
Genius I say.
I assume this means you've run out of excuses for the G5's crappiness and accept the spec benchmark as valid. I'm disappointed that you don't want to continue, it was most amusing to see someone try to rationalize some religious devotion to a processor. However, this doesn't work well in subjects with cold hard facts. Might I suggest being a rabid liberal, it seems to be quite common on this site, though don't let that steer you away from the religious right. If these choices are too tame, try joining a cult, or fundamentalist islam is riding a surge of popularity, though it would require relocation. I thank you for your kindly insinuation that I have not grown old, bitter, and pigheaded.
Hilarious! Let's see how long we can keep the nautical theme going as applied to software/music and movies.
It's pretty sad that good satire such as this is modded down, even with freakin psuedohtml sarcasm tags.
Where is this audience you speak of? I highly doubt anyone is still reading this story.
Might wanna back up that I don't read, don't learn, and don't know what I'm talking about. It's true I don't develop software, I'm in CS. I study computers, from algorithms to PROCESSOR DESIGN, which you seem to know nothing about, and I assume that you're just some codemonkey by your comment on developing software. Thanks, btw, for the compilement about me sounding old and bitter.
Also might wanna read before responding yourself, as in reading this "Hand coding - let's see, one example from over 4 years ago, one quote that ignores "Modern compilers (particularly those designed for large supercomputing machines) will automatically identify parallelizable blocks and run them independently.", a suggestion that it may be better to hand code, and some more evidence of the G5's crappy design. I didn't realize that the defn of frequently changed to include suggestions of something happening, and one case in the past 5 years."
Ah, so you're from the school of polictally correct processor design, where diversity triumphs merit. If altivec was better designed, then it'd be used more often than SSE. As it isn't (used), once must conclude it isn't better designed.
So the linpack results from top500 aren't measuring supercomputers? That still leaves it being one TYPE of test to specs 26 types.
I seem to be the only one that does understand what I'm talking about, having taken Comp Arch grad level with Hennessy and Patterson. It seems that you don't understand anything that's been said, and are intent on being a dumbass fanatic for a dead processor.
Meanwhie, for the 5th time, I'm still waiting for evidence of "SPEC is subject to all kinds of problems.", why Apple doesn't use your "benchmark" to advertise their products, these supposed Intel optimizations (in stock GCC mind you), evidence of why spec isn't accountable, why I am "blinded by marketing", why I "have no idea how compilers, CPU architectures, system architectures are designed", and "people are still smarter than compilers (the fact that compilers miss some things doesn't count)".
The G5 is crap, long live x86!
I had no idea that Toronto was now in America. I choose studies from North America because that's what was available, and we are in a story about the American military. As for "where there are studies [online] to prove anything.", prove it, and then disprove the studies from The Archives of Sexual Behavior, the FBI, Air Force, and Toronto PD. Then provide proof for your claim of rape and domestic violence.
You say you choose these subjects because you wrote an essay. Fine. Let's see the studies that you drew those conclusions from. Until then, the point stands that you have an axe to grind with the military by choosing emotional subjects.
Go look up the defn of grandstanding, you stupid moron.
You do realize that the compiler and OS are not "variables", they should be made to have as little influence as possible, the system architecture is highly CPU dependent, and spec removes the effects of the time and expertise of the tester by allowing as many tests for say, an Opteron, as anyone cares to submit.
>QED less well than intels compiler in the previous sentence
Are you really that stupid? If "Secondly, the compiler used by VeriTest, GCC, is said to generate code that less well optimised for x86." was refering to Intel's compiler, why do they use x86?
So now you're trying to use spec to show the G5 isn't crap, yet you seem to have missed the freakin disclaimer
Standardizing of compilers would be a scientific method IF the goal was to test the performance of a machine running GCC code, instead of the maximum performance possible. Firstly, Linpack is one type of test compared to spec's 26, and secondly, it's a test of SUPERCOMPUTERS, not CPUs - get that through your thick skull.
And now with Altivec is a "more capable vector unit" delusions. If it was superior, why isn't the G5 faster? Oh yes, because no compiler auto-vectorizes. That would seem to have been a crappy design choice, thereby making it less capable, in effect, crippling itself.
Hand coding - let's see, one example from over 4 years ago, one quote that ignores "Modern compilers (particularly those designed for large supercomputing machines) will automatically identify parallelizable blocks and run them independently.", a suggestion that it may be better to hand code, and some more evidence of the G5's crappy design. I didn't realize that the defn of frequently changed to include suggestions of something happening, and one case in the past 5 years.
And now, for the 4th time, I'm still waiting for evidence of "SPEC is subject to all kinds of problems.", why Apple doesn't use your "benchmark" to advertise their products, these supposed Intel optimizations (in stock GCC mind you), evidence of why spec isn't accountable, why I am "blinded by marketing", why I "have no idea how compilers, CPU architectures, system architectures are designed", and "people are still smarter than compilers (the fact that compilers miss some things doesn't count)".
See here, about halfway down the page
If you're gonna libel the entire Army, at least do it with a crime that's not as falsely reported as rape. And give links to actual websites, it's not my job to provide evidence for your claims, I'm quite capable of typing in Army rape in google.
These false rape allegations constitute 41% the total forcible rape cases (n = 109) reported during this period.
Warren Farrell, in his book The Myth of Male Power (1993, p.322), cites an Air Force study that investigated 556 charges of rape by servicewomen. In that investigation, 27% ADMITTED that their accusations had been false either before or after being confronted with lie detector tests.
Unfounded charges of assault, which like rape is often productive of conflicting testimony, comprise only 1.6% of the total compared to the 8.4% recorded for rape.
Province-wide, the system reports that about 5.7 percent of all such allegations are false. Meanwhile, analyses of incidents involving a Toronto police squad that restricts itself to handling major rape cases where the assailant is unknown to the victim, a whopping 30 percent of cases -- 69 out of 232 cases -- turned out to be false.
The fact that you choose the emotionally charged crimes of rape and domestic violence to back up your claim, instead of, oh, say, violent crime in the army, lends credence to the conclusion that for whatever reason you have some axe to grind with the military.