Is it just me, or did a large portion of Computer Science & Computer Architecutre die many many years ago but nobody seems to have noticed (or is willing to admit)? I'm starting to think that the vast majority of the problems were solved in the 70s and early 80s... and that the number of open issues is heavily outweighted by the number of 'researchers'. But I hope I'm wrong...
Whereas, look at wireless communications. There is big research in how to use multiple transmit/receive antennas for huge multi-user environments (cell phone, wireless lan, etc)... People are still developing new algorithms and comparing the performance and requirements of each. A huge effort is devoted in how to implement (or approximate) highly complex operations on embedded processors with limited resources...
Well as neuroscience researcher, you probably will be helping bio-med companies make lots of money... But yes, this will trickle down to an important benefit (cures/treatments for diseases) to the public at large...
Regardless of what field you feel you "should be doing", if you don't have a true passion for it, then you will never get very far... No matter how good your intentions.
Consider companies like Symantec that sell software to protect people from viruses.
What would happen if Symantec's software was soo good that it could detect and quarrantine both NEW and OLD viruses (without explicit definitions for them). Would they really want this? Would they stay in business?
Of course not. THEY don't want to get rid of viruses, they only want to SELL you a tool to find them. And somehow, (thousands of?) new viruses manage to keep poping up. (Despite the fact they they don't mutate on their own like the biological kind).
I'm not sure if AOL *really* wants to see spyware eraticated. I think they just want to make extra money from the current situtation. And I wouldn't be surprised if they (secretely?) took steps to ensure the status quo.
Rhetorical question: why can't the benefits of technology be spread more evenly, so that we ALL have 3 day workdays instead of having some of us never work (the idle rich), some of us bust our asses (IT maintaining the machines that do the work) and some of us scrap over what little work is left that machines don't currently do?
I've held a similar belief about the work week. Of a 40-60hr "work week", how many hours do you do honest, actual "work"? Imagine how much of a person's life is spent wasting time in a cubicle...
Yes, there are many ways to "waste time", but it always seems better when you get to pick how you 'waste' it.
Me? I would rather work highly efficiently for 2-3 days a week rather than work slugglishly for 40 hrs/week. (Of course the bean counters would have us work highly efficiently 60hrs a week and just hire someone else upon burnout).
The American government is built on the principle[1] that the government are servants of the people.....
Yes, but as another side note: do the higher-ups in government actually believe this? A frightening scenario exists when the public believes this to be true and those in power do not...
I find a strange parallel exists in the Catholic church. They do not *believe* priests to be superior to the public but rather servants (of God). Thus, by their definition, the Pope should is the most lowly servant in the world... But have you ever been to a mass in which the local Bishop spoke? Ever notice how much changes? Even the Bishop enjoys luxuries and pomp that most regular priests cannot even fathom. Compare that to their founding principles!!
Disclaimer: I'm not trying to start a religious flame war. I'm just trying to illustrate a type of hypocracy the original poster may not have considered...
Yes. I too can image that in the days of 16-bit 'desktop' processors, the idea of 4GB of ram must have been absurd... But its really not when it comes to manipulating hi-resolution photos, multi-user databases, etc...
However,think about how large 2^64 is... Isn't like the same order as the number of atoms in the universe or something like that??
Let's guess that in the near future, there will be 10 billion people in the world (~10^10). Let's say we wanted a single computer that could store something about every person in the world. 2^64/10^10 = 1.7 GB of data per person!!! I think it is safe to say that for most (home/corporate) purposes, 2^64 bytes of RAM will always be extremely absurd. Although TerraByte storage today is becoming more common (and widely used), 2^64bytes = 1.67*10^7 TB!!!! If every person in New York City had 1TB of data, 2^64 byte storage would still have plenty left over... It is scary to imagine reasonable uses for such storage.
I can only think of one entity in the US that might ever be interested in 16 Million TB of storage... And it probably aint pretty...
Hmm... Are there more or less people (as a percentage of population) in clock towers with rifles today or 100 years ago?
Hmm... I bet the population has risen faster than the number of clock towers... Number of rifles likely as risen too...
Do computers save lives?
As much as I would like to believe so, I tend to believe their net effect is either nill or slightly negative...
Did postal workers "go postal" before we had computer-driven mass mailing?
For some reason, they can't read 32-bits from the second, third or fourth byte positions.
Ah, NO. The Intel x86 ISA allows non-aligned memory accesses... (It is probably one of the few commonly used ISAs that do this).
16-bit addresses means smaller code. Smaller code means less flushes to disk, more calcs per read, and less calcs per instruction.
That may be, but are you still refering to the Intel x86 ISA???? It uses variable-length instructions. These are a nightmare decode (for hardware) but are fairly efficient in terms of memory storage... Many instructions are only 1 or 2 bytes long... In terms of designing an x86 processor, this aspect makes the "fetch" and "decode" stages extremely complex (as compared to "trival" for many RISC ISAs)
Dihydrogen Monoxide has been found in *every* cancerous cell, has been attributed to thousands of deaths per year, and is now also causing global warming. Obviously this harmful substance must be eraticated!
Does "hackwrench" even know how to program? Does he know anything about Computer Architecture? "Hennesy" or "Patterson" ring a bell? Sounds like "Cliff" likes to feed trolls. Maybe "hackwrench" will choke while digesting this one:
What is the inherent "slowness" of "16 bit code" WTF is "16 bit code" anyway? Sounds like has been duped by the marketing droids...
So-called "32-bit" processors are typically designed to perform (up to) 32-bit arithmetic efficiently. For integer operations, 8bit, 16bit and 32bit arithemetic usually each take the same amount of time (8bit add = 16bit add != 16 bit multiply) .
Because "32-bit" processors can do "32-bit" arithemtic efficiently, it makes sense for them to use (up to) 32 bits for addressing. Arithmetic involving addresses comes up more often than you would think... (Branch/Jump instructions, memory operations, and even the basic updating of the program counter). Since these processors data paths are (typically) 32-bits wide, instructions are typically coded using up to 32-bits. (In a 32-bit RISC processor, most of the instruction bits are reserved to allow large immediate operands for memory offsets, jump targets, and arithmetic/logic operations).
The only thing a "32 bit" processor typically isn't good for is "64 bit" arithemtic. (And any arithmetic over 32 bits for that matter). Which means on these, a "64 bit" addition could be performed using 3 "32-bit" additions and a branch. "64-bit" multiplications get even worse...
But if a program doesn't access much memory ( packed arithmetic whereby it can treat a 32-bit integers as a pair of 16 bit integers and a single operation can calculate both results... But this by itself is hardly justification alone for using such a processor.
So guess what folks: There will likely never be a "1024bit" processor. (At least not for general purpose computing). I'm not trying to sound like Bill Gates with his "640k is enough" quote, but I don't see why processors will ever use much more than 64 or 128bit addressing. (Keep in mind that EACH BIT *doubles* the range of integer numbers/addresses the procesor can handle efficiently).
Yes we now can have 2^32 bytes of memory in computers (4GB). But WTF is anyone going to do with 2^64 bytes of ram? Thats probably many orders of magnitude greater than the total capacity of all electronic devices ever produced from the 1950s until now...
Gee... The player spents real money to get some virtual "items", tries to "use" these "items" in a way that generates more of them, and then converts these "items" back into cash.
Well, replace "items" with "chips" and "use" with "gamble".
Project Entropia sounds a lot like a casino now...
Careful when talking about GDP.... It is not necessarily a sign of a more "propserous" society.
Scenario:
Country X espouses a culture that over-works itself (~60hrs/week). Large percentages of the public use services of psychatrists, etc. Heard Disease and Cancer occur at young ages. Litigous mindset keeps laywers busy. Doctors, lawyers, etc use spending money to buy latest cars, etc... "Middle Class" public spends exorbitant amounts of money on SUVs, boats, etc. High pollution causes environments to successfully clamor for pollution-reducing measures. These measures employ engineers.
Country Y consists of sparely populated rural villeages. People grow their own food and make their own clothes. Money is rarely used or obtained. Motor vehicles are rarely used, if even existant in "Y". Families enjoy spending time together in a communal environment. Days are not tightly scheduled, stress is low. Technology isn't advanced, but the residents still enjoy happy lives. Per-capita GDP is $100 USD.
Which country would you want to live in? What does GDP tell you about lifestyles?
Even more surprising: Country Y exists all over the world, with billions of people living in it....
The true enemy to portability is reall laziness
How many people write C programs where "main" returns "0". AHEM! We should be returning EXIT_SUCCESS or something like that.
Same thing with libraries. Take sockets in Linux. People don't seem to define a "standard" set of includes for doing socket functions. Or programmers just start including headers until the compiler errors go away. Change the platform and all of the sudden the header files have different names or different ones need to be included. Is this following POSIX standards? (Dont' know)
If someone would just get everyone to agree on function names and header file structures, a whole lot of portability programs could be solved.
Re:Non lethal, more dangerous to liberty
on
Set PHASRs On Stun
·
· Score: 1
I understand where you're coming from but be careful...
I thought (most) cops don't like to use guns unless absolutely necessary. But given a "non-lethal" weapson, it may be used copiously without regret.
The only check I can see to such copious use is the legal ramifications it may present. Perhaps there is good aspect of our twisted legal system...
Capitol Hill, takes a patriotic stance and disconnects the French
Ahem. There little the US can to do prevent the French from accessing our DNS records.... Let's say the US erects a China-line firewall to prevent all of France from connecting to *ANY* US-based DNS server.
Guess what? Large ISPs in France can just sync to a neighboring country's DNS servers, (which eventually have connectivity to the US root servers). Or Neighboring countries could setup a mirror of a US root server and allow anyone to use it.
Or without government cooperation, somebody in france can just buy a Virtual-Private-Host account located somewhere in the US for $20/month to tunnel and/or replicate a US root server...
The internet was designed to handle link failures... Disconnecting a country (without physically taking our their equipment) is not that easy.
And I should also add don't eat at mcdonalds, don't drink budwiser, don't listen to americna music, don't watch american tv.
LOL. Careful now.... Your recommended actions fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (not engaging in commerce is inter-state commerce) and have consequences in terms of our national security (e.g. the economy). Thus, by the powers under the Patroit act, you may wake up and find yourself sitting nude in a concrete cell on a certain tropical island....
But 5 years ago (or so), you might have been safe with the 1st amendment...
Ditto. I once owned a (cheap) combination padlock that jammed on me. The shackle was made of solid 1/4" steel (or something like that). It was securing a heavy steel cable that was (extremely difficult) to cut...
Unfortunately, the side opposite the combination dial was just a very thin aluminum backing (while the rest of the lock case was much thicker/stronger). I easily pried the back out of the lock with a jeweler's screwdriver . Of course, opening the lock (by taking it apart) was quite easy then.
Parent poster makes a very good point about locks and security.
- The Bible is not a text book on where we came from and how everything works.... It is a guide/law to how you live your life.
Right on! Unfortunately, the vast majority of the world seems to think that various "religious" texts such as the Bible are commands from God/etc on how to live life.
Modern civilization has overlooked the glaring possibility that these texts are little more than a "Boy Scout Handbook" on life. (i.e. don't eat Pork, since you will likely get sick). Since the authors of these texts were aiming for a large audience who didn't know them personally (multitudes, generations to come,etc ), they wrote as if "God" told them what to write. This gives a powerful (but false) legitamacy to their writings.
Stories of creation, such as Genesis were probably written more as "folk lore"/"bedtime story" for entertainment. Hundreds of years time plus misguided beliefs caused "religions" based on these texts. The consequences of which include an externalization of responsibility and over-reliance on "God".
Science has also suffered similar perils (Possibily due to political motovation). ["God didn't create evolution", "God wouldn't allow the world to be flat", "Recombining DNA in a lab is 'playing God'"].
Look up "cult" in a dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cult. Then ask yourself how (insert religion here) cannot fit all definitions of "cult". I seem to recall a charismatic leader (The Pope) giving orders for us to live in an unconventional manner (no eating meat during Fridays on Lent).
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me, or did a large portion of Computer Science & Computer Architecutre die many many years ago but nobody seems to have noticed (or is willing to admit)? I'm starting to think that the vast majority of the problems were solved in the 70s and early 80s... and that the number of open issues is heavily outweighted by the number of 'researchers'. But I hope I'm wrong...
Whereas, look at wireless communications. There is big research in how to use multiple transmit/receive antennas for huge multi-user environments (cell phone, wireless lan, etc)... People are still developing new algorithms and comparing the performance and requirements of each. A huge effort is devoted in how to implement (or approximate) highly complex operations on embedded processors with limited resources...
Well as neuroscience researcher, you probably will be helping bio-med companies make lots of money... But yes, this will trickle down to an important benefit (cures/treatments for diseases) to the public at large...
Regardless of what field you feel you "should be doing", if you don't have a true passion for it, then you will never get very far... No matter how good your intentions.
Consider companies like Symantec that sell software to protect people from viruses.
What would happen if Symantec's software was soo good that it could detect and quarrantine both NEW and OLD viruses (without explicit definitions for them). Would they really want this? Would they stay in business?
Of course not. THEY don't want to get rid of viruses, they only want to SELL you a tool to find them. And somehow, (thousands of?) new viruses manage to keep poping up. (Despite the fact they they don't mutate on their own like the biological kind).
I'm not sure if AOL *really* wants to see spyware eraticated. I think they just want to make extra money from the current situtation. And I wouldn't be surprised if they (secretely?) took steps to ensure the status quo.
I thought you meant the truck driver as the sole source of methane...
Bean burrito == +5MPG!
Yes, but as another side note: do the higher-ups in government actually believe this? A frightening scenario exists when the public believes this to be true and those in power do not...
I find a strange parallel exists in the Catholic church. They do not *believe* priests to be superior to the public but rather servants (of God). Thus, by their definition, the Pope should is the most lowly servant in the world... But have you ever been to a mass in which the local Bishop spoke? Ever notice how much changes? Even the Bishop enjoys luxuries and pomp that most regular priests cannot even fathom. Compare that to their founding principles!!
Disclaimer: I'm not trying to start a religious flame war. I'm just trying to illustrate a type of hypocracy the original poster may not have considered...
Yes. I too can image that in the days of 16-bit 'desktop' processors, the idea of 4GB of ram must have been absurd... But its really not when it comes to manipulating hi-resolution photos, multi-user databases, etc...
However,think about how large 2^64 is... Isn't like the same order as the number of atoms in the universe or something like that??
Let's guess that in the near future, there will be 10 billion people in the world (~10^10). Let's say we wanted a single computer that could store something about every person in the world. 2^64/10^10 = 1.7 GB of data per person!!! I think it is safe to say that for most (home/corporate) purposes, 2^64 bytes of RAM will always be extremely absurd. Although TerraByte storage today is becoming more common (and widely used), 2^64bytes = 1.67*10^7 TB!!!! If every person in New York City had 1TB of data, 2^64 byte storage would still have plenty left over... It is scary to imagine reasonable uses for such storage.
I can only think of one entity in the US that might ever be interested in 16 Million TB of storage... And it probably aint pretty...
Damn, I'm starting to think that those jokes about "pr0n driving technology" were more truthful than funny...
I guess with MIMO OFDM, wireless streaming of hi-definition adult videos will soon be a reality!
Dihydrogen Monoxide has been found in *every* cancerous cell, has been attributed to thousands of deaths per year, and is now also causing global warming. Obviously this harmful substance must be eraticated!
a candy bar?
Before you laugh, it goes amazingly far where I work....
Does "hackwrench" even know how to program? Does he know anything about Computer Architecture? "Hennesy" or "Patterson" ring a bell? Sounds like "Cliff" likes to feed trolls. Maybe "hackwrench" will choke while digesting this one:
What is the inherent "slowness" of "16 bit code" WTF is "16 bit code" anyway? Sounds like has been duped by the marketing droids...
So-called "32-bit" processors are typically designed to perform (up to) 32-bit arithmetic efficiently. For integer operations, 8bit, 16bit and 32bit arithemetic usually each take the same amount of time (8bit add = 16bit add != 16 bit multiply) .
Because "32-bit" processors can do "32-bit" arithemtic efficiently, it makes sense for them to use (up to) 32 bits for addressing. Arithmetic involving addresses comes up more often than you would think... (Branch/Jump instructions, memory operations, and even the basic updating of the program counter). Since these processors data paths are (typically) 32-bits wide, instructions are typically coded using up to 32-bits. (In a 32-bit RISC processor, most of the instruction bits are reserved to allow large immediate operands for memory offsets, jump targets, and arithmetic/logic operations).
The only thing a "32 bit" processor typically isn't good for is "64 bit" arithemtic. (And any arithmetic over 32 bits for that matter). Which means on these, a "64 bit" addition could be performed using 3 "32-bit" additions and a branch. "64-bit" multiplications get even worse...
But if a program doesn't access much memory ( packed arithmetic whereby it can treat a 32-bit integers as a pair of 16 bit integers and a single operation can calculate both results... But this by itself is hardly justification alone for using such a processor.
So guess what folks: There will likely never be a "1024bit" processor. (At least not for general purpose computing). I'm not trying to sound like Bill Gates with his "640k is enough" quote, but I don't see why processors will ever use much more than 64 or 128bit addressing. (Keep in mind that EACH BIT *doubles* the range of integer numbers/addresses the procesor can handle efficiently).
Yes we now can have 2^32 bytes of memory in computers (4GB). But WTF is anyone going to do with 2^64 bytes of ram? Thats probably many orders of magnitude greater than the total capacity of all electronic devices ever produced from the 1950s until now...
In conclusion, WTF? Mod Editor Down!
I suggest the editors get an "editing" karma for the quality of the articles they post.
And a dupe of a dupe should send the editor to "Karma: Horrible" hell -- doomed to reincarnation.
Gee... The player spents real money to get some virtual "items", tries to "use" these "items" in a way that generates more of them, and then converts these "items" back into cash.
Well, replace "items" with "chips" and "use" with "gamble".
Project Entropia sounds a lot like a casino now...
Careful when talking about GDP.... It is not necessarily a sign of a more "propserous" society.
Scenario:
Country X espouses a culture that over-works itself (~60hrs/week). Large percentages of the public use services of psychatrists, etc. Heard Disease and Cancer occur at young ages. Litigous mindset keeps laywers busy. Doctors, lawyers, etc use spending money to buy latest cars, etc... "Middle Class" public spends exorbitant amounts of money on SUVs, boats, etc. High pollution causes environments to successfully clamor for pollution-reducing measures. These measures employ engineers.
Country Y consists of sparely populated rural villeages. People grow their own food and make their own clothes. Money is rarely used or obtained. Motor vehicles are rarely used, if even existant in "Y". Families enjoy spending time together in a communal environment. Days are not tightly scheduled, stress is low. Technology isn't advanced, but the residents still enjoy happy lives. Per-capita GDP is $100 USD.
Which country would you want to live in? What does GDP tell you about lifestyles?
Even more surprising: Country Y exists all over the world, with billions of people living in it....
The true enemy to portability is reall laziness How many people write C programs where "main" returns "0". AHEM! We should be returning EXIT_SUCCESS or something like that. Same thing with libraries. Take sockets in Linux. People don't seem to define a "standard" set of includes for doing socket functions. Or programmers just start including headers until the compiler errors go away. Change the platform and all of the sudden the header files have different names or different ones need to be included. Is this following POSIX standards? (Dont' know) If someone would just get everyone to agree on function names and header file structures, a whole lot of portability programs could be solved.
I understand where you're coming from but be careful...
I thought (most) cops don't like to use guns unless absolutely necessary. But given a "non-lethal" weapson, it may be used copiously without regret.
The only check I can see to such copious use is the legal ramifications it may present. Perhaps there is good aspect of our twisted legal system...
Sounds like the famous Penis Mightier ... (SNL)
LOL. Careful now.... Your recommended actions fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (not engaging in commerce is inter-state commerce) and have consequences in terms of our national security (e.g. the economy). Thus, by the powers under the Patroit act, you may wake up and find yourself sitting nude in a concrete cell on a certain tropical island....
But 5 years ago (or so), you might have been safe with the 1st amendment...
Ingredient: DV %
Serving size: 1 comment
Parody: 50%
Scary Truth: 50%
Ditto. I once owned a (cheap) combination padlock that jammed on me. The shackle was made of solid 1/4" steel (or something like that). It was securing a heavy steel cable that was (extremely difficult) to cut... Unfortunately, the side opposite the combination dial was just a very thin aluminum backing (while the rest of the lock case was much thicker/stronger). I easily pried the back out of the lock with a jeweler's screwdriver . Of course, opening the lock (by taking it apart) was quite easy then. Parent poster makes a very good point about locks and security.
Right on! Unfortunately, the vast majority of the world seems to think that various "religious" texts such as the Bible are commands from God/etc on how to live life.
Modern civilization has overlooked the glaring possibility that these texts are little more than a "Boy Scout Handbook" on life. (i.e. don't eat Pork, since you will likely get sick). Since the authors of these texts were aiming for a large audience who didn't know them personally (multitudes, generations to come,etc ), they wrote as if "God" told them what to write. This gives a powerful (but false) legitamacy to their writings.
Stories of creation, such as Genesis were probably written more as "folk lore"/"bedtime story" for entertainment. Hundreds of years time plus misguided beliefs caused "religions" based on these texts. The consequences of which include an externalization of responsibility and over-reliance on "God".
Science has also suffered similar perils (Possibily due to political motovation). ["God didn't create evolution", "God wouldn't allow the world to be flat", "Recombining DNA in a lab is 'playing God'"].
Look up "cult" in a dictionary http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cult. Then ask yourself how (insert religion here) cannot fit all definitions of "cult". I seem to recall a charismatic leader (The Pope) giving orders for us to live in an unconventional manner (no eating meat during Fridays on Lent).
Well, I for one don't welcome them. They can go back to their own planet!