All tests for the top 500 supercomputers are done solving a problem using Linpack, not some trivially parallel code such as raytracing 100,000 frames of a movie.
Message passing is the biggest issue with such solvers, and in a way, cray was absolutely right about Linux, although misleading. There are some tests going on now with a modified Linux kernel for doing true HPC, and it's been done in the past (I know, I've used it). Things like disk swapping pretty much immediately disqualifies you for high performance computing. It has its place of course, such as trivially parallelizable codes is one example (Pixar).
Myrinet was out before Gbit ethernet was really available, and also has some nifty routing capabilities. And since the bottleneck for HPC is usually message passing, high performance computing will better realize its theoretical performance as the communication speed catches up to the processor speed.
But, to Cray's discredit, making a blanket statement that Linux can't do HPC is like saying Macintoshes can't do HPC.
There are several responses about the divx problem of "buying" a disk and discovering you're only "renting the content" for a limited time, and have to repurchase it just to watch it again. They attribute the failure of divx to that, but others say there were other availability issues.
History does repeat itself but some folks actually learn not to throw good money after bad. I believe the right of first purchase being undermined does play a huge role in what consumers will tolerate. If I buy a book, I am damn well going to read it again if I want without having to pay for it a second time. Or sell it, or give it away (depriving myself of the use).
SecureID cards, GPS's, and tons of other devices have very accurate clocks. The accuracy of the chonograph is not really an issue. If they're doing what I think they're doing, it doesn't even need to be very accurate... they could have it work if the clocks were synchronized within an arbitrary time, like 5 minutes.
Interesting angle, but where are you supposed to go? You spent your $40 on a single-player game, played it for 100+ hours, hell maybe 200+. How much would you pay for 100 hours of entertainment if it were, say, MOVIES? Average of $8.50/movie, 100 minutes per movie... that's $510. Looks to me like Blizzard saved you at least $470.
Now there's a huge difference between single-player games and MMO games. The distributor and publisher gets most of the money for the $40 cost, but the developer and infrastructure gets the monthly fee. That means they aren't going to write a game that gets "solved" after 20 or 100 hours of play. Rather, they want to foster continued play, where there really is no end of the game. Sony is particularly nasty/clever with this, developing "hooks" to keep people paying, even if they aren't playing, for fear of losing their house/loot/guild/etc.
So, you would not like ANY mmorpg out there, because they are written to have no "post-game" (except for pk-based games, where you level up, then fight others -- e.g. shadowbane and swg).
Learn to stick a fork in it and call it "done," and stop whining about how you only got 100 hours worth of entertainment for $40 instead of a lifetime. The post-game for single player games is called Real Life. Time for you to stop crying and join it.
When I was in school, we used clay tablets for cards. We had to use a cuneiform stylus, and if we ever messed up, the instructor would show us the meaning of "punch" card. And we didn't have a card sorter; we'd wake up before we went to sleep to sort cards for the NSA, and if we ever got one out of order, they'd dequeue all our batch jobs!
Free speech on security vulnerabilities is protected, you just can't be distributing code to bypass copy protection.
It's not just copy protection, but encryption schemes, which you can easily claim steganography is, since it shares many qualities. Remember that Adobe used the DMCA to prosecute someone for "breaking" their ROT13 encryption. And IIRC, 2600 lost their appeal for publishing links.
This law is being cited to enable all sorts of abuses by corporations that have roomfuls of attorneys, and has been used to leverage threats to a researcher from disclosing weaknesses at a convention. It was initially cited to threaten the guy that disclosed the "shift-key" exploit on CD protection. No sane researcher would rule it out in the USA -- you still would have to answer to it being abused.
This theory could be true, or it could equally not be true.
Wrong. Simply because there are two choices between true/not-true, does not give it 50% chance of either.
There are theories you bet your life on, every day. If they all had an equal chance of being true or false, you would be dead now. Try flipping a fair coin 100 times and getting all heads. Is there a chance you can do it? Yes, but is it likely? No.
He calls it a theory rightly, and it does weaken the probability of it being true.
You know nothing about probability. He could call it a yellow elephant with handlebars, but that doesn't affect the probability of it being true or not. But he would want you to believe that.
It is a theory, rightly, but he does not call it a theory rightly. He calls it a theory as if that somehow makes it less likely to be true. They're all theories and all scientists know this, but he was simply using misleading rhetoric and calling it a theory wrongly.
Stop calling everything "theories" as if that word weakens the probability of it being true. That is the same lame tactic used by Creationists.
Theories are developed hypotheses, that have withstood scientific examination. Some theories are stronger than others, such as evolution, which has extremely compelling and a wealth of strong evidence. Examining genes and doing the statistics on them is also extremely compelling. Everything you do with technology including the computer you're using now is supported completely by theories. Does that mean it's not true? Kind of like disproving Zeno's Paradox -- please stand in front of the arrow.
So, sure, it's a theory as opposed to a proof. But you can probably bet your life on it.
Considering that the article said nVidia drivers were great, I'm with ya here.
It also said that ATI's were lacking horribly.
Hardware manufacturers are often in bed with MS to put out binary drivers, and the knee-jerk OSS devs that try to pry source out of them doesn't help garner much support for GNU/Linux.
Over time you get a nice database full of IP addresses and the speeds at which their users surf.... and their db-monkey will be pulling his hair out when he examines 192.168.0.x
Great points, and I personally don't support the implications. But we've seen drug-trafficers tried for creating "weapons of mass destruction" so I really can't anticipate WHAT abuses of law will be made. No, a DA won't try your grandma, but he very well might try your rebellious kid brother for the same thing. If nothing else, an FBI or SS visit is not very fun and you better hope you don't have anything illegal in your house.
One other note of relevance: Having an open, unencrypted WiFi network means it is virtually sans the $1.50 padlock. If attacks or spam come from your network, you're setting yourself up, IMHO for some meritless attack.
Gross negligence is prosecutable, both criminally and civilly. If you show that your house was locked, or the weapon was stored properly, then you're unlikely to be prosecuted criminally. But if you leave it outside in your front yard, you might be looking at all sorts of charges, like reckless endangerment. I know there are laws where I live, and I'd be very surprised if there weren't where you live, no matter where that is (in the USA).
It's possible to argue that connecting to the internet with an outdated and buggy OS could be negligence... what if that buggy computer is used to break into a hospital where the perpetrator changes something that results in a death? It's a good question, but not a cut & dry as "you didn't pull the trigger, therefore you are not guilty."
Also, keep in mind the fact that insects and rodents can't seem to resist those tasty tasty wire casings. There may come a time when some segments fail inexplicably.
Do you think it's viable to use the American Home Recording act as a defense for sharing music over the Internet, if each party, e.g., burns the shared music onto "music" media (which has a tax paid to music artists). Is there anything a music-sharing individual can do to force the AHRA to apply?
(RIAA doesn't agree, but they label computers as non-music devices. This is no surprise of course)
The answer is "yes, that's covered under copyright law". There is a good question about whether linking constitutes a violation, but I believe simply displaying another's image (even if it's linked to their site) would technically be a violation. It likely does not satisfy fair use, and could hurt the value of the work AND cost them money directly through bandwidth.
I don't know that "theft of bandwidth" has been tested in court, but it would almost certainly stand up.
Service Temporarily Unavailable The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Slashdot Mirror
No... you're thinking of the new language, DOBOL.
Lintimidated
All tests for the top 500 supercomputers are done solving a problem using Linpack, not some trivially parallel code such as raytracing 100,000 frames of a movie.
Message passing is the biggest issue with such solvers, and in a way, cray was absolutely right about Linux, although misleading. There are some tests going on now with a modified Linux kernel for doing true HPC, and it's been done in the past (I know, I've used it). Things like disk swapping pretty much immediately disqualifies you for high performance computing. It has its place of course, such as trivially parallelizable codes is one example (Pixar).
Myrinet was out before Gbit ethernet was really available, and also has some nifty routing capabilities. And since the bottleneck for HPC is usually message passing, high performance computing will better realize its theoretical performance as the communication speed catches up to the processor speed.
But, to Cray's discredit, making a blanket statement that Linux can't do HPC is like saying Macintoshes can't do HPC.
There are several responses about the divx problem of "buying" a disk and discovering you're only "renting the content" for a limited time, and have to repurchase it just to watch it again. They attribute the failure of divx to that, but others say there were other availability issues.
History does repeat itself but some folks actually learn not to throw good money after bad. I believe the right of first purchase being undermined does play a huge role in what consumers will tolerate. If I buy a book, I am damn well going to read it again if I want without having to pay for it a second time. Or sell it, or give it away (depriving myself of the use).
SecureID cards, GPS's, and tons of other devices have very accurate clocks. The accuracy of the chonograph is not really an issue. If they're doing what I think they're doing, it doesn't even need to be very accurate... they could have it work if the clocks were synchronized within an arbitrary time, like 5 minutes.
Q: What do you get when you cross a Sun with a Microsoft?
A: Microsoft.
Interesting angle, but where are you supposed to go? You spent your $40 on a single-player game, played it for 100+ hours, hell maybe 200+. How much would you pay for 100 hours of entertainment if it were, say, MOVIES? Average of $8.50/movie, 100 minutes per movie... that's $510. Looks to me like Blizzard saved you at least $470.
Now there's a huge difference between single-player games and MMO games. The distributor and publisher gets most of the money for the $40 cost, but the developer and infrastructure gets the monthly fee. That means they aren't going to write a game that gets "solved" after 20 or 100 hours of play. Rather, they want to foster continued play, where there really is no end of the game. Sony is particularly nasty/clever with this, developing "hooks" to keep people paying, even if they aren't playing, for fear of losing their house/loot/guild/etc.
So, you would not like ANY mmorpg out there, because they are written to have no "post-game" (except for pk-based games, where you level up, then fight others -- e.g. shadowbane and swg).
Learn to stick a fork in it and call it "done," and stop whining about how you only got 100 hours worth of entertainment for $40 instead of a lifetime. The post-game for single player games is called Real Life. Time for you to stop crying and join it.
LUXURY!
When I was in school, we used clay tablets for cards. We had to use a cuneiform stylus, and if we ever messed up, the instructor would show us the meaning of "punch" card. And we didn't have a card sorter; we'd wake up before we went to sleep to sort cards for the NSA, and if we ever got one out of order, they'd dequeue all our batch jobs!
This is exactly how Kirk and Spock killed all those evil computers like Nomad and Landrew.
Free speech on security vulnerabilities is protected, you just can't be distributing code to bypass copy protection.
It's not just copy protection, but encryption schemes, which you can easily claim steganography is, since it shares many qualities. Remember that Adobe used the DMCA to prosecute someone for "breaking" their ROT13 encryption. And IIRC, 2600 lost their appeal for publishing links.
This law is being cited to enable all sorts of abuses by corporations that have roomfuls of attorneys, and has been used to leverage threats to a researcher from disclosing weaknesses at a convention. It was initially cited to threaten the guy that disclosed the "shift-key" exploit on CD protection. No sane researcher would rule it out in the USA -- you still would have to answer to it being abused.
No, his sarcasm is lost on you.
Why not GIS for "DMCA" and you'll see that this law DOES have a chilling effect on speech regarding security and security research.
This theory could be true, or it could equally not be true.
Wrong. Simply because there are two choices between true/not-true, does not give it 50% chance of either.
There are theories you bet your life on, every day. If they all had an equal chance of being true or false, you would be dead now. Try flipping a fair coin 100 times and getting all heads. Is there a chance you can do it? Yes, but is it likely? No.
He calls it a theory rightly, and it does weaken the probability of it being true.
You know nothing about probability. He could call it a yellow elephant with handlebars, but that doesn't affect the probability of it being true or not. But he would want you to believe that.
It is a theory, rightly, but he does not call it a theory rightly. He calls it a theory as if that somehow makes it less likely to be true. They're all theories and all scientists know this, but he was simply using misleading rhetoric and calling it a theory wrongly.
Stop calling everything "theories" as if that word weakens the probability of it being true. That is the same lame tactic used by Creationists.
Theories are developed hypotheses, that have withstood scientific examination. Some theories are stronger than others, such as evolution, which has extremely compelling and a wealth of strong evidence. Examining genes and doing the statistics on them is also extremely compelling. Everything you do with technology including the computer you're using now is supported completely by theories. Does that mean it's not true? Kind of like disproving Zeno's Paradox -- please stand in front of the arrow.
So, sure, it's a theory as opposed to a proof. But you can probably bet your life on it.
Slack-jawed yokels have bigger brains!
It might be more than just sending a URL, but might require actual html anchor tag, aka one-click.
Considering that the article said nVidia drivers were great, I'm with ya here.
It also said that ATI's were lacking horribly.
Hardware manufacturers are often in bed with MS to put out binary drivers, and the knee-jerk OSS devs that try to pry source out of them doesn't help garner much support for GNU/Linux.
Over time you get a nice database full of IP addresses and the speeds at which their users surf. ... and their db-monkey will be pulling his hair out when he examines 192.168.0.x
Great points, and I personally don't support the implications. But we've seen drug-trafficers tried for creating "weapons of mass destruction" so I really can't anticipate WHAT abuses of law will be made. No, a DA won't try your grandma, but he very well might try your rebellious kid brother for the same thing. If nothing else, an FBI or SS visit is not very fun and you better hope you don't have anything illegal in your house.
One other note of relevance: Having an open, unencrypted WiFi network means it is virtually sans the $1.50 padlock. If attacks or spam come from your network, you're setting yourself up, IMHO for some meritless attack.
Gross negligence is prosecutable, both criminally and civilly. If you show that your house was locked, or the weapon was stored properly, then you're unlikely to be prosecuted criminally. But if you leave it outside in your front yard, you might be looking at all sorts of charges, like reckless endangerment. I know there are laws where I live, and I'd be very surprised if there weren't where you live, no matter where that is (in the USA).
It's possible to argue that connecting to the internet with an outdated and buggy OS could be negligence... what if that buggy computer is used to break into a hospital where the perpetrator changes something that results in a death? It's a good question, but not a cut & dry as "you didn't pull the trigger, therefore you are not guilty."
Also, keep in mind the fact that insects and rodents can't seem to resist those tasty tasty wire casings. There may come a time when some segments fail inexplicably.
Good point. You should definitely keep sharks out of your conduits.
Do you think it's viable to use the American Home Recording act as a defense for sharing music over the Internet, if each party, e.g., burns the shared music onto "music" media (which has a tax paid to music artists). Is there anything a music-sharing individual can do to force the AHRA to apply?
(RIAA doesn't agree, but they label computers as non-music devices. This is no surprise of course)
The answer is "yes, that's covered under copyright law". There is a good question about whether linking constitutes a violation, but I believe simply displaying another's image (even if it's linked to their site) would technically be a violation. It likely does not satisfy fair use, and could hurt the value of the work AND cost them money directly through bandwidth.
I don't know that "theft of bandwidth" has been tested in court, but it would almost certainly stand up.
You AE hacker you!
The novation applecat was the most amazing chunk of hardware you could add to an apple in those days.
Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
This is a recording.
Or build a house AROUND your house, with no doors.
I need to build me one of those buildings in "Cube".