The EU is just fining Microsoft like they fine all successful American companies, like: Microsoft Visa American Express Coca-Cola Chrysler Delta Airlines Oracle Texas Instruments Qualcomm Intel Apple
Except VPNs are often hardened dedicated devices. Even if you could break through the VPN (Lets assume a software bug), your servers are still then safe with SSH. You can then change the VPN once it's detected. Breaking into your server(s) would require a simultaneous break in of both the VPN and SSH.
I've never seen SSH that uses things like biometrics, and key fobs. Personally I find they key fobs excellent. Coupled with a username, password, and restricting accounts via IPs (or range of IPs) makes a very formidable defense.
That logic is flawed because kids don't stop writing reports in the 3rd grade. They write them non-stop until they graduate. What he uses in his last year of school is likely what he'll use to write his resume. And what he'll be using in his first post-school job (Or perhaps while he's still in school). And at that time, he'll have years of experience working with that suite. It makes sense, doesn't it?
$89 for the entire office suite? His books are many times more expensive and the other school supplies are many times that. I suppose if you expect your kids to be flipping burgers, and think knowing how to write documents, etc is useless for them...
And other office suites can't read or write in MS compatible formats? Come on. We are all techs here. We know the score.
Open Office, Abiword etc.. You will be hard pressed to find a word processor that doesn't have an option to save as a word compatible document. I just checked, and Abiword even has an OOXML save option. And unless reports of teaching standards are greatly underestimated, and teachers are without exception, power users all of a sudden, the teacher will not be using complex change tracking and embedding corrections and marking in the document before saving and handing it back.
So your suggesting that we should all use open software so that he can spend his time learning that instead of writing his report? Did you miss the part where I said that is what they use at school? He already knows ms word. Sometimes he has to bring his reports to/from school where he works on them. Sorry, but we did try OpenOffice already. It was a pain in the butt to be honest. Besides the issue of user interface and how you actually go about doing things being different, we had an import issue from a report he did at school and just needed to make a few final edits. OoO couldn't import it correctly, and I landed up having to open the report in a plain text editor, copying and pasting the text itself out of the file so that it could be editted at home. I spent a couple hours trying to import, correct, then ultimately just ripping the text out. That one incident alone, cost me more than twice the money than just buying the whole office suite, so I that's exactly what I did the next day. No more problems ever since. You can debate about it all you want about how great and open software suites are "just as good", and I tried. I can say first hand, they may be just as good, but the headaches and time wasted isn't worth it. The comparison isn't even close.
You can also stream movies from netflix. They use silverlight as the client for the PC, so I'd say a huge number of people already have it, and it's been pretty well tested.
Yup, I've had that same problem, and I've fixed other peoples computers with the same issue. Adobe knows about the problem, and they have for a while, they just haven't fixed it apparently. You can find messages about it dating all the way back to flash 7.
Look in your registry for the keys that begin with: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\ShockwaveFlash
There should be 8 or 9 of them, go through each one of them, and give the Everyone user full rights to them. Then re-install flash 10, and the problem will go away.
Apparently this isn't a standard piracy bust. They are going after the owners of the data center for something. Possible they thought that the company was using the other machines to do something illegal with or without the owners permission (That assumes they allow you to bring in your own hardware, and they aren't just renting).
That should have read "and the 802.11 standard does [not] meet all the requirements of the patent". a/b/g doesn't fall withing the spectrum specified in the patents. 802.11n CAN I believe.
"In 2007 the adoption of the 802.11n wireless networking standard was held up when CSIRO refused to provide IEEE a Letter of Assurance to not sue over patent violations.[22]. In late November 2007, CSIRO won a lawsuit against Buffalo Technology, with an injunction that Buffalo must stop supplying AirStation products that infringe on the 802.11 patent.
On September 19, 2008, the Federal Circuit ruled in Buffalo's favour and has remanded this case to the district court ruling that the district court's Summary Judgement was insufficient on the merits of obviousness of CSIRO's patent. Therefore, this case will be tried again before the district court. In this connection Buffalo is hopeful that it will shortly be permitted to, once again, sell IEEE 802.11a and 802.11g compliant products in the United States."
At least according to the courts, the patent was an obvious patent. If my understanding of the patent is correct, the 802.11 standard doesn't even use the patents in question. The patents are very specific (Which they have to be), and the 802.11 standard does meet all the requirements of the patent, although it is very similiar. 802.11n COULD in some cases meet all the requirements of the patent, which is what probably spurred on this latest round of lawsuits. I think the companies are just waiting for it to finally be invalidated.
On a side note, I take offense that you have turned a legal battle into some sort of nationalistic fight. This is nothing to do with the countries in which the companies HQ is in. Further, quite a few of the "American" companies involved aren't even American. I see Taiwanese/Chinese, Japanese, and some American. Might as well say it's Australia vs the rest of the world. That would be more accurate, if you want to continue making it a national thing.
I refrain from taking any side. I'm not informed enough on the patents to make a serious opinion on the matter. Even if I were, I'm not well versed enough in patent law. I'll leave that to the courts and lawyers involved.
"Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company that enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention."
I would say CSIRO meets many of those criteria. "enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers" - Check "manner unduly aggressive or opportunistic" - Check "no intention to manufacture" - Check "no intention to market" - Check
How is CSIRO not a patent troll? I understand, it's a government funded research division. Are you saying that because it's government funded it automatically is not a patent troll? Or because it's a research facility that it can't be a patent troll? How exactly is this different than all the other patent troll who "discover" something, then lay in wait for someone to use it and then sue them for patent infringement?
There is a large difference between not forcing the public to attach their name to everything (publishing anonymously - like the MacIntyre/Tally cases), and the ability for a court to demand the identity of an anonymous poster (protecting anonymity - like the two cases I provided). These are not the same argument. There is a difference between PUBLISHING and PROTECTING, and I don't think that is lawyer-speak.
For example, a state can not make it illegal for forums to have an anonymous type posting. That would be covered under the MacIntyre decision. However, that does not make it illegal for a judge to order that forum to disclose a users identity simply because they wanted to post anonymously. Those are two separate issues, the later of which is definately not covered by either the Tally or MacIntyre cases. This is exactly what was discussed in the link I provided, and a brief relevant portion of which I quoted for you.
Not only did I cite examples, but I quoted relevant pieces of the discussion. Nowhere in my quote is it discussing libelous statements. It (and the many examples of prior discussion) on the subject goes into great detail from the perspective of a district court judge faced with these questions.
It is apparent that you are not a lawyer, so I am done discussing this point with you because you have failed to prove anything other than when you are proven incorrect, you fall back to ignoring facts and name calling as your only defense.
The MacIntyre case does indeed protect publishing anonymously, but that is far cry from what is being discussed. That is the first amendment overriding a ability of a court to order the identify of an anonymous poster to be revealed.
And atleast a district Judge agrees with me that there has been no such ruling by SCOTUS on the matter that prevents it in more than just the few instances you've outlined, and I quote "In the context of a civil subpoena issued pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45, this Court must determine when and under what circumstances *1094 a civil litigant will be permitted to obtain the identity of persons who have exercised their First Amendment right to speak anonymously. There is little in the way of persuasive authority to assist this Court. However, courts that have addressed related issues have used balancing tests to decide when to protect an individual's First Amendment rights."
That came from John Doe v. 2themart.com, however the case was found lacking, the finding and thinking of the judge is clear that there is no ruling by SCOTUS by which he can follow. You may find the entire case here, and you will find discussion part of useful, as it details exactly what must happen for a court to be able to override the first/fourteenth amendments and be able to force the identity of an anonymous poster.
Well you always have to have your mind on the size of the data set that you are expected to be able to work with, that's always a given. It's apparent that the size of the data set you are trying to work with is exponentially larger than the typical program needs to, and that should be apparent before you actually start working on it.
That said given your assumptions (Which I'd fault somewhat, but I'll go with them for now). Using a data set where n=1e6 and m=1e9 then: You need 12TB of RAM, 32PB of files, 900000 hours of disk time, and 277,777,777 hours CPU time.
Ok first, let's knock out the easy ones. 12TB of ram -- You aren't going to get that in a PC. So either you need to change your approach so that you no longer need to store your entire data set in RAM by using a smarter function that does stuff while its running (Summation), or store your temporary results somewhere else (disk). Considering that your code had sum-something function at the end, I would assume you can sum while running.
32PB of files. Ok, you aren't going to put that on a (single) seagate drive -- 100MB/s is fine for a today's single drive, but since you can't get a single drive capable of storing that amount of data... Even using 1TB drives, you'd need 32 million of them. From tape, you'd be looking at something like 32 fully filled T680's, which would have a throughput of about 92GB/s (not that any PC could ever take it that fast). In any case, you are talking about an insane about of throughput you'd have -- assuming that you actually had 32PB of data you needed to process, much more than the 100MB/s you quoted. Additionally, this is one of the few aspects that isn't an exponential problem. As such, this isn't likely to the cause of a bottleneck, so I'm going to drop this from further analysis is pointless.
As for the CPU time, it's apparent that your disk throughput will greatly exceed your capacity to actually process the data in you CPU at your "goal". As such, you will be CPU limited, and very very much so. You would (assuming this would actually become a funded project) be wise to look into massive clusters to process the data, I would suggest starting with something like looking at doing the processing on video cards where you can pack 6+ processors (3 nvidia 295 gtx's) into a single machine, each having 240 cores. You should be able to process in excess of 6.0 teraflops using that, which is about 6,000 times faster than your quote. Even with that, you are likely to need a significant number of machines in a cluster to be able to process that amount of data.
An interesting exercise I suppose, but I would like to point out something you said that could possibly be wrong (possibly, I'm not sure, but you said it, and it assumes something I don't know to be true): [quote]In one scenario above, with 2 GB of RAM/computer, we were both CPU and RAM limited, so adding more cores and more threads wouldn't help.[/quote] That is only true if you make the assumption that adding more threads would increase the demand on RAM, which isn't necessarily true if you can coordinate multiple threads to all work on the ram that is currently loaded. Then adding more cores actually helps immensely, as you can then likely use virtual memory to hold many parts of the problem, paging in parts then letting multiple threads work on that "piece", and when all the threads have finished, load another piece. Just something to think about. That would also greatly reduce the "hours disk time" as well, since it's read once, and used multiple times internally (1200+ times if you have 1200+ threads all using it).
[quote]Some programmers are shocked to discover that a single-threaded algorithm can out perform a multi-threaded algorithm by a large margin. Sometimes statically allocated variables outperform code using new and/or malloc by a large margin, because new and malloc are expensive calls and zero-initialized static memory is cheap.[/quote] I think you are trying to make a statement that says that all mu
You are wrong. SCOTUS has made no such ruling. The closest it has come was in a case that overturned an Ohio law requiring people to put their name on campaign pamphlets (Talley v. California).
If they had made such a case then lower courts would not be finding the opposite as recently as last month. See the Topix has in Texas: [quote]A Texas judge has ordered an online news site to unveil identifying details about 178 anonymous commenters on the site. The order came after a couple, Mark and Rhonda Lesher, sued the numerous anonymous commenters posting to Topix.com for making what they considered to be "perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations" about them. [/quote]
There are similiar cases currently in Maryland, California, and Delaware. Some are in the state supreme court, some have just had verdits made. I would not be suprised if SCOTUS hears an appeal from one of these soon.
You are wrong. SCOTUS has made no such ruling. The closest it has come was in a case that overturned an Ohio law requiring people to put their name on campaign pamphlets.
If they had made such a case then lower courts would not be finding the opposite as recently as last month. See the Topix has in Texas: [quote]A Texas judge has ordered an online news site to unveil identifying details about 178 anonymous commenters on the site. The order came after a couple, Mark and Rhonda Lesher, sued the numerous anonymous commenters posting to Topix.com for making what they considered to be "perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations" about them. [/quote]
There are similiar cases currently in Maryland, California, and Delaware. Some are in the state supreme court, some have just had verdits made. I would not be suprised if SCOTUS hears an appeal from one of these.
As I said, there is no UK version of Windows. There are regional setting for the UK in the English version of Windows, but that doesn't make it a separate version.
I'm afraid it's been a few years since I've needed to calculate things like Covariances, so this is going to be a very generic answer.
It seems the problem is that you are having a hard time coming up with an way to do your calculations that isn't serial. In order to parallelize things you need to be able to break things down into smaller pieces that can run currently, while your for-loop in a for-loop in a for-each loop is designed to run things serially. Like:
for each FileName in BigListOfFileNames { OpenFile{FileName); Dim eventhandles As New List(Of EventWaitHandle) for i = 1 to NumberOfElementsInFile { Dim ewh As New EventWaitHandle(False, EventResetMode.ManualReset) eventhandles.Add(ewh) Dim param As New ThreadData(ewh, i) Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(AddressOf CalculateCovariance, param) } For each ewh as EventWaitHandle in eventhandles { ewh.join } }
CalculateCovariance(args as ThreadData) {
DoSomeStuff
args.ewh.Signal() }
This would in effect run multiple threads trying to calculate the Covariance running multiple i's at once, of course that assumes that the DoSomeStuff for CalculateCovariance doesn't depend on prior calculations to be able to do it's work. I thought that Covariance would require you to calculate the mean first before you could do any variance/covariance calculations, which would be another way of parallelizing the process, by having the system calculate the mean on one file while calculating the variance/covariance on different file. I suppose you could also use the unit of work for each thread to be a separate file if you wanted to (instead of each value of "i") and you didn't run into memory constraints trying to process two (or more) files at once.
Lastly, you are correct. A compiler can't compete with hand tuned assembly code -- if you are good at it, and you optimizing a very small portion of your code. You seem to want to hand code the stuff yourself (since you specifically mention MMX optimizations, which are processor dependent and not something you "pick" in higher level languages, other than to allow/disallow them), which is fine if you need to wring out the very last bit of performance you can from your machine(s). Just make sure that the methods you chose are the best ones for the job, and there isn't a more efficient method that is available to you that could reduce the amount of calculations required, etc.
No, being able to create a nice looking UI for it does however. A 320x240 LCD is not hard to come by these days. I would prefer something even higher resolution than that if possible.
Slashdot Mirror
The EU is just fining Microsoft like they fine all successful American companies, like:
Microsoft
Visa
American Express
Coca-Cola
Chrysler
Delta Airlines
Oracle
Texas Instruments
Qualcomm
Intel
Apple
Except VPNs are often hardened dedicated devices. Even if you could break through the VPN (Lets assume a software bug), your servers are still then safe with SSH. You can then change the VPN once it's detected. Breaking into your server(s) would require a simultaneous break in of both the VPN and SSH.
I've never seen SSH that uses things like biometrics, and key fobs. Personally I find they key fobs excellent. Coupled with a username, password, and restricting accounts via IPs (or range of IPs) makes a very formidable defense.
That logic is flawed because kids don't stop writing reports in the 3rd grade. They write them non-stop until they graduate. What he uses in his last year of school is likely what he'll use to write his resume. And what he'll be using in his first post-school job (Or perhaps while he's still in school). And at that time, he'll have years of experience working with that suite. It makes sense, doesn't it?
$89 for the entire office suite? His books are many times more expensive and the other school supplies are many times that. I suppose if you expect your kids to be flipping burgers, and think knowing how to write documents, etc is useless for them...
That is what they use at their elementary school.
And other office suites can't read or write in MS compatible formats? Come on. We are all techs here. We know the score.
Open Office, Abiword etc.. You will be hard pressed to find a word processor that doesn't have an option to save as a word compatible document. I just checked, and Abiword even has an OOXML save option. And unless reports of teaching standards are greatly underestimated, and teachers are without exception, power users all of a sudden, the teacher will not be using complex change tracking and embedding corrections and marking in the document before saving and handing it back.
So your suggesting that we should all use open software so that he can spend his time learning that instead of writing his report? Did you miss the part where I said that is what they use at school? He already knows ms word. Sometimes he has to bring his reports to/from school where he works on them. Sorry, but we did try OpenOffice already. It was a pain in the butt to be honest. Besides the issue of user interface and how you actually go about doing things being different, we had an import issue from a report he did at school and just needed to make a few final edits. OoO couldn't import it correctly, and I landed up having to open the report in a plain text editor, copying and pasting the text itself out of the file so that it could be editted at home. I spent a couple hours trying to import, correct, then ultimately just ripping the text out. That one incident alone, cost me more than twice the money than just buying the whole office suite, so I that's exactly what I did the next day. No more problems ever since. You can debate about it all you want about how great and open software suites are "just as good", and I tried. I can say first hand, they may be just as good, but the headaches and time wasted isn't worth it. The comparison isn't even close.
No, they teach printing in grade 1, cursive in grade 2, and grades 3+ do their reports on the computer.
My experience is the opposite, and is current. My son must turn in his reports in ms word format. That is what they use at their elementary school.
You can also stream movies from netflix. They use silverlight as the client for the PC, so I'd say a huge number of people already have it, and it's been pretty well tested.
Yup, I've had that same problem, and I've fixed other peoples computers with the same issue. Adobe knows about the problem, and they have for a while, they just haven't fixed it apparently. You can find messages about it dating all the way back to flash 7.
Look in your registry for the keys that begin with:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\ShockwaveFlash
There should be 8 or 9 of them, go through each one of them, and give the Everyone user full rights to them. Then re-install flash 10, and the problem will go away.
I suppose since your extensive group of friends all live in their parents basements, that would explain why they have never used netflix.
Apparently this isn't a standard piracy bust. They are going after the owners of the data center for something. Possible they thought that the company was using the other machines to do something illegal with or without the owners permission (That assumes they allow you to bring in your own hardware, and they aren't just renting).
That should have read "and the 802.11 standard does [not] meet all the requirements of the patent". a/b/g doesn't fall withing the spectrum specified in the patents. 802.11n CAN I believe.
"In 2007 the adoption of the 802.11n wireless networking standard was held up when CSIRO refused to provide IEEE a Letter of Assurance to not sue over patent violations.[22]. In late November 2007, CSIRO won a lawsuit against Buffalo Technology, with an injunction that Buffalo must stop supplying AirStation products that infringe on the 802.11 patent.
On September 19, 2008, the Federal Circuit ruled in Buffalo's favour and has remanded this case to the district court ruling that the district court's Summary Judgement was insufficient on the merits of obviousness of CSIRO's patent. Therefore, this case will be tried again before the district court. In this connection Buffalo is hopeful that it will shortly be permitted to, once again, sell IEEE 802.11a and 802.11g compliant products in the United States."
At least according to the courts, the patent was an obvious patent. If my understanding of the patent is correct, the 802.11 standard doesn't even use the patents in question. The patents are very specific (Which they have to be), and the 802.11 standard does meet all the requirements of the patent, although it is very similiar. 802.11n COULD in some cases meet all the requirements of the patent, which is what probably spurred on this latest round of lawsuits. I think the companies are just waiting for it to finally be invalidated.
On a side note, I take offense that you have turned a legal battle into some sort of nationalistic fight. This is nothing to do with the countries in which the companies HQ is in. Further, quite a few of the "American" companies involved aren't even American. I see Taiwanese/Chinese, Japanese, and some American. Might as well say it's Australia vs the rest of the world. That would be more accurate, if you want to continue making it a national thing.
I refrain from taking any side. I'm not informed enough on the patents to make a serious opinion on the matter. Even if I were, I'm not well versed enough in patent law. I'll leave that to the courts and lawyers involved.
"Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company that enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to manufacture or market the patented invention."
I would say CSIRO meets many of those criteria.
"enforces its patents against one or more alleged infringers" - Check
"manner unduly aggressive or opportunistic" - Check
"no intention to manufacture" - Check
"no intention to market" - Check
How is CSIRO not a patent troll? I understand, it's a government funded research division. Are you saying that because it's government funded it automatically is not a patent troll? Or because it's a research facility that it can't be a patent troll? How exactly is this different than all the other patent troll who "discover" something, then lay in wait for someone to use it and then sue them for patent infringement?
There is a large difference between not forcing the public to attach their name to everything (publishing anonymously - like the MacIntyre/Tally cases), and the ability for a court to demand the identity of an anonymous poster (protecting anonymity - like the two cases I provided). These are not the same argument. There is a difference between PUBLISHING and PROTECTING, and I don't think that is lawyer-speak.
For example, a state can not make it illegal for forums to have an anonymous type posting. That would be covered under the MacIntyre decision. However, that does not make it illegal for a judge to order that forum to disclose a users identity simply because they wanted to post anonymously. Those are two separate issues, the later of which is definately not covered by either the Tally or MacIntyre cases. This is exactly what was discussed in the link I provided, and a brief relevant portion of which I quoted for you.
Not only did I cite examples, but I quoted relevant pieces of the discussion. Nowhere in my quote is it discussing libelous statements. It (and the many examples of prior discussion) on the subject goes into great detail from the perspective of a district court judge faced with these questions.
It is apparent that you are not a lawyer, so I am done discussing this point with you because you have failed to prove anything other than when you are proven incorrect, you fall back to ignoring facts and name calling as your only defense.
The MacIntyre case does indeed protect publishing anonymously, but that is far cry from what is being discussed. That is the first amendment overriding a ability of a court to order the identify of an anonymous poster to be revealed.
And atleast a district Judge agrees with me that there has been no such ruling by SCOTUS on the matter that prevents it in more than just the few instances you've outlined, and I quote "In the context of a civil subpoena issued pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45, this Court must determine when and under what circumstances *1094 a civil litigant will be permitted to obtain the identity of persons who have exercised their First Amendment right to speak anonymously. There is little in the way of persuasive authority to assist this Court. However, courts that have addressed related issues have used balancing tests to decide when to protect an individual's First Amendment rights."
That came from John Doe v. 2themart.com, however the case was found lacking, the finding and thinking of the judge is clear that there is no ruling by SCOTUS by which he can follow. You may find the entire case here, and you will find discussion part of useful, as it details exactly what must happen for a court to be able to override the first/fourteenth amendments and be able to force the identity of an anonymous poster.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/stjohns/2themart.html
Well you always have to have your mind on the size of the data set that you are expected to be able to work with, that's always a given. It's apparent that the size of the data set you are trying to work with is exponentially larger than the typical program needs to, and that should be apparent before you actually start working on it.
That said given your assumptions (Which I'd fault somewhat, but I'll go with them for now). Using a data set where n=1e6 and m=1e9 then:
You need 12TB of RAM, 32PB of files, 900000 hours of disk time, and 277,777,777 hours CPU time.
Ok first, let's knock out the easy ones. 12TB of ram -- You aren't going to get that in a PC. So either you need to change your approach so that you no longer need to store your entire data set in RAM by using a smarter function that does stuff while its running (Summation), or store your temporary results somewhere else (disk). Considering that your code had sum-something function at the end, I would assume you can sum while running.
32PB of files. Ok, you aren't going to put that on a (single) seagate drive -- 100MB/s is fine for a today's single drive, but since you can't get a single drive capable of storing that amount of data... Even using 1TB drives, you'd need 32 million of them. From tape, you'd be looking at something like 32 fully filled T680's, which would have a throughput of about 92GB/s (not that any PC could ever take it that fast). In any case, you are talking about an insane about of throughput you'd have -- assuming that you actually had 32PB of data you needed to process, much more than the 100MB/s you quoted. Additionally, this is one of the few aspects that isn't an exponential problem. As such, this isn't likely to the cause of a bottleneck, so I'm going to drop this from further analysis is pointless.
As for the CPU time, it's apparent that your disk throughput will greatly exceed your capacity to actually process the data in you CPU at your "goal". As such, you will be CPU limited, and very very much so. You would (assuming this would actually become a funded project) be wise to look into massive clusters to process the data, I would suggest starting with something like looking at doing the processing on video cards where you can pack 6+ processors (3 nvidia 295 gtx's) into a single machine, each having 240 cores. You should be able to process in excess of 6.0 teraflops using that, which is about 6,000 times faster than your quote. Even with that, you are likely to need a significant number of machines in a cluster to be able to process that amount of data.
An interesting exercise I suppose, but I would like to point out something you said that could possibly be wrong (possibly, I'm not sure, but you said it, and it assumes something I don't know to be true):
[quote]In one scenario above, with 2 GB of RAM/computer, we were both CPU and RAM limited, so adding more cores and more threads wouldn't help.[/quote]
That is only true if you make the assumption that adding more threads would increase the demand on RAM, which isn't necessarily true if you can coordinate multiple threads to all work on the ram that is currently loaded. Then adding more cores actually helps immensely, as you can then likely use virtual memory to hold many parts of the problem, paging in parts then letting multiple threads work on that "piece", and when all the threads have finished, load another piece. Just something to think about. That would also greatly reduce the "hours disk time" as well, since it's read once, and used multiple times internally (1200+ times if you have 1200+ threads all using it).
[quote]Some programmers are shocked to discover that a single-threaded algorithm can out perform a multi-threaded algorithm by a large margin. Sometimes statically allocated variables outperform code using new and/or malloc by a large margin, because new and malloc are expensive calls and zero-initialized static memory is cheap.[/quote]
I think you are trying to make a statement that says that all mu
You are wrong. SCOTUS has made no such ruling. The closest it has come was in a case that overturned an Ohio law requiring people to put their name on campaign pamphlets (Talley v. California).
If they had made such a case then lower courts would not be finding the opposite as recently as last month. See the Topix has in Texas:
[quote]A Texas judge has ordered an online news site to unveil identifying details about 178 anonymous commenters on the site. The order came after a couple, Mark and Rhonda Lesher, sued the numerous anonymous commenters posting to Topix.com for making what they considered to be "perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations" about them. [/quote]
There are similiar cases currently in Maryland, California, and Delaware. Some are in the state supreme court, some have just had verdits made. I would not be suprised if SCOTUS hears an appeal from one of these soon.
You are wrong. SCOTUS has made no such ruling. The closest it has come was in a case that overturned an Ohio law requiring people to put their name on campaign pamphlets.
If they had made such a case then lower courts would not be finding the opposite as recently as last month. See the Topix has in Texas:
[quote]A Texas judge has ordered an online news site to unveil identifying details about 178 anonymous commenters on the site. The order came after a couple, Mark and Rhonda Lesher, sued the numerous anonymous commenters posting to Topix.com for making what they considered to be "perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations" about them. [/quote]
There are similiar cases currently in Maryland, California, and Delaware. Some are in the state supreme court, some have just had verdits made. I would not be suprised if SCOTUS hears an appeal from one of these.
And how does hiring ELIZA make you feel?
Can you expand on that?
Are you sure?
As I said, there is no UK version of Windows. There are regional setting for the UK in the English version of Windows, but that doesn't make it a separate version.
There is no "UK" version of Windows, sorry. You use the English version.
I'm afraid it's been a few years since I've needed to calculate things like Covariances, so this is going to be a very generic answer.
It seems the problem is that you are having a hard time coming up with an way to do your calculations that isn't serial. In order to parallelize things you need to be able to break things down into smaller pieces that can run currently, while your for-loop in a for-loop in a for-each loop is designed to run things serially. Like:
for each FileName in BigListOfFileNames {
OpenFile{FileName);
Dim eventhandles As New List(Of EventWaitHandle)
for i = 1 to NumberOfElementsInFile {
Dim ewh As New EventWaitHandle(False, EventResetMode.ManualReset)
eventhandles.Add(ewh)
Dim param As New ThreadData(ewh, i)
Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(AddressOf CalculateCovariance, param)
}
For each ewh as EventWaitHandle in eventhandles {
ewh.join
}
}
CalculateCovariance(args as ThreadData)
{
DoSomeStuff
args.ewh.Signal()
}
This would in effect run multiple threads trying to calculate the Covariance running multiple i's at once, of course that assumes that the DoSomeStuff for CalculateCovariance doesn't depend on prior calculations to be able to do it's work. I thought that Covariance would require you to calculate the mean first before you could do any variance/covariance calculations, which would be another way of parallelizing the process, by having the system calculate the mean on one file while calculating the variance/covariance on different file. I suppose you could also use the unit of work for each thread to be a separate file if you wanted to (instead of each value of "i") and you didn't run into memory constraints trying to process two (or more) files at once.
Lastly, you are correct. A compiler can't compete with hand tuned assembly code -- if you are good at it, and you optimizing a very small portion of your code. You seem to want to hand code the stuff yourself (since you specifically mention MMX optimizations, which are processor dependent and not something you "pick" in higher level languages, other than to allow/disallow them), which is fine if you need to wring out the very last bit of performance you can from your machine(s). Just make sure that the methods you chose are the best ones for the job, and there isn't a more efficient method that is available to you that could reduce the amount of calculations required, etc.
A4 paper is rare in the United States.
No, being able to create a nice looking UI for it does however. A 320x240 LCD is not hard to come by these days. I would prefer something even higher resolution than that if possible.
You can override any javascript function with greasemonkey, so I fail to see the whole point.