Picasso produced over 13 thousand paintings or designs, 100,000 prints and engravings, 34 thousand book illustrations and 300 sculptures, becoming the most prolific artist ever.
I had a Q6600 , then upgraded to a 3770K. There was easily a 10x speed increase in any compute-heavy task.
I'm still using my Q6600, and ended up giving my i3770 to a family member (due to hating Win 8 so much). No idea where you get the "easily 10x speed increase" from. Not a single number here is even 2x.
Typically, a Windows process running in the 2003 operating system environment can access up to 2GB of address space. This memory is split between actual physical memory and virtual memory. Basically, the more processes that are running on the system, the more memory will be committed to reach the full 2GB address space.
When memory consumption approaches the 2GB limit, the paging process increases and performance begins to degrade.
Q: Is there any way around the 2GB file-size limit in Linux? Are there any stable patches to fix it?
A: Short answer: In a practical sense, no. The 2GB limit is deeply embedded in the versions of Linux for 32-bit CPUs:
Even if most hardware and software these days do not have these concerns, why break things for some systems?
Suggestions: plenty of vitamin D (I take about 5000/day), plenty of the best water, breathing to revitalize yourself & recharge your body battery, take care of your elimination, massage(s) from a professional. Personally I never take painkillers, no matter what -- you could try that for a bit. Also, turn off wireless devices/router/cable box at night to help you sleep better.
Hello, Thank you for your email. Please find the requested information attached. Best Regards, Microsoft Privacy
Sounds good so far. Hmm. The attachment is a Word Document which contains screenshots of the type of data they collect but not the data itself. Now keep in mind, I have disabled every single privacy option on this Windows 10 install and the events (1.2 Million of them!) are only for a 6 day period on a minimally used machine.
The article's touted monster gain -- ten times better than chemical rockets -- is the same ten times gain NASA has been using in actually-launched-into-space rockets for years, if not tens of years.
The article talks about a $65M program to try to make even greater gains...and provides zero details. Probably because making "huge" gains in a technology that is over sixty years old ain't easy.
In summary, this article is about as interesting as GM announcing they are working to make fuel injectors ten times better than carburetors.
If everyone gets it, where does it come from? All I see is inflation of the money supply. In other words, more unpayable debt to the fed bankers who loan money to the govt.
Japanese words that are "English sounding" are part of their Katakana syllabary. For example, "ice cream" becomes 'Ai su' 'ku ri mu' or Aisu Kurimu.
Beats the heck out of English where we expect people to remember how to pronounce words like 'rendezvous' even though it only makes sense with French intonation and thus ends up yet another exception.
In thinking a bit further about this, given that we no longer teach syllabic pronunciation in American public schools, and Americans are plummeting down the intelligence curve, whereas Japanese are among the smartest and certainly most well-read in the world, maybe there is merit in insisting that words fit within the "two characters per kana" systems of hiragana and katakana.
In Hamilton's time that would be the government treasury. As in "We the People". Whereas for the past 100 years we have had the 1% of the 1%'s treasury. You can see why Hamilton had to go.
Heh, nice new Slashdot owners, can we increase the nesting of comments? [In case it matters, I'm running Classic view]
Otherwise comments like this AC's show up as orphans to me.
Alternatively, when you choose to stop nesting, you could display an "in reply to blah". Otherwise, you are auto-corrupting threads below a certain depth.
There is an easy solution to discourage people from trying to read all short URLs. Make the algorithm pick one in every thousand, or ten thousand URLs, and have the others automatically serve ads. Large, content-heavy ads. Make sure those pages have every possible type of bandwidth-heavy content -- auto-playing video, Flash, animated GIFs, and tons and tons of individual elements. In other words, redirect them to Huff.
Right. And further to that, the authors talk about a brute force scavenging of the entire database of URLs being possible because the "active bytes" at the end of the short URL are so short. Well, one could add two, or four, bytes to the end of the URL, and only use "one in every hundred numbers, determined randomly" as their algorithm, and then it wouldn't be quite so brute forceable.
So there are _two_ implementation problems (in the case of Microsoft's 1drv.ms, and arguably one problem with the other shorteners -- no authentication being a problem at 1drv.ms where people store their private stuff, and too-short or too-efficient of an algorithm being a potential problem with the rest of the URL shorteners.
Hmmm, wasn't this problem solved by, ah, pretty much every other system that uses a short series of numbers, like credit cards, D/L, SSN, etc.?
The Andy Warhol estate is getting staggering amounts of free publicity from this. Probably worth way more than any $25k reward fee. Maybe they are putting it up.
Reminds me of the Starbucks christmas cups that were just a solid color "to avoid controversy". Thus creating it and getting oodles and oodles of free press from it.
I'm definitely getting crankier as I get older but I blame it on the additional war wounds. Pulled the extensor tendon out of my right middle finger this year...trying to liberate the roots of a root-bound new tree. But I digress.
As to Einstein, that is a complicated question.
If Einstein borrowed stuff that others had thought of, but never gave them credit, is that ok with you? For me personally I am not overly bothered by the fact that Einstein wasn't the first to conceive of e=mc^2, but some are.
What I am definitely anti about are bad theories. Which physics today is studded with. Check out Alexander Unzicker's definitive Bankrupting Physics for a very thorough, quite humorous and yet surprisingly polite dressing down of most of the big names behind most of the modern nonsense that passes for physics today. FWIW, Unzicker was/is a huge Einstein fan.
Getting back to bad theories, Einstein's time marked a transition in physics -- from intuition and common sense things like there must be an ether, to the math-dominated and particle-smashing dark ages we have been in for decades. Like Unzicker, I think particle smashing is worse than futile. He ably chronicles why as well, if you would prefer his perspective to my own.
Regarding Einstein, I think he is, at a minimum, overrated. Worse, I think that special relativity is valueless, being limited to a no-gravity/no-acceleration system. You can't have two protons in such a system, for example, as their gravitational interactions would not compute. Does that meet your definition of "anti"?
Then, more tragically and questionably, ten years later Einstein releases general relativity that is built directly on top of special relativity. We don't build wells on top of latrines, except in physics.
Regarding Einstein's highly disappointing later years, it is most interesting to watch him play with words. He came up with countless words for the ether. They all were attempts to describe the same thing but, incredibly, Einstein actually thought that by playing word games, he would be advancing physics.
tldr; ? I prefer to begin with a model that includes/resolves the biggest problems in physics. And then to expand it to explain things other theories don't. Like gravity, and neutrinos. And ultimately,
inmorethanonemajorarea, to be predictive. Oh, BTW, I think my theory is not only a theory of everything but the simplest possible theory of everything.
Summary: I am not so much anti-Einstein -- I actually greatly admire his philosophical side, his humor, his way of living and how he lived his life his way -- as I am pro-my theory. I think my theory makes all others theories look awful.
But heh, it will be a lot easier to down-mod me and shout vicious responses (that get up-modded), as normally happens in the comfy confines of/.
People think black holes are giant vacuum cleaners because that is what conventional physics says they are -- things come too close (cross the event horizon) and become imprisoned in the SMBH.
So you are authoritatively saying this doesn't happen? No, well then we are only talking degree -- newbs think SMBH's suck a lot, and you think they suck a little.
FWIW, "you" (i.e. conventional physics) have your work cut out for you to explain why things don't get sucked in. I imagine you will trot out something to do with "curved space orbits" but implicit in that must be that every single thing orbiting the SMBH manages to stay outside the event horizon. My question #1 (given that SMBH size (diameter) is related to their SMass) is how does everything know exactly where that event horizon is? And question #2 when the SMBH grows in size, how do the objects orbiting the closest not end up now inside the event horizon?
Slashdot Mirror
Here we have definitive proof of how slow pot smokers move.
IMDB:
I'm still using my Q6600, and ended up giving my i3770 to a family member (due to hating Win 8 so much). No idea where you get the "easily 10x speed increase" from. Not a single number here is even 2x.
Please elaborate.
Once you click black, you never click back.
I wanted to use iPlayer but instead just waited until the next day for all the Snooker to make it onto YouTube.
YouTube is / will be the ultimate winner here, not Netflix.
Our kids figured this out years ago...
Overcoming the Windows 2GB Caching Limit
Linux:
2GB Filesize limit
Even if most hardware and software these days do not have these concerns, why break things for some systems?
Monsters!
As is my regular clocked Q6600 with 3GB of ram and no SSD.
Browsing is only crippled by must-consume-all-ram browsers like Chrome.
Suggestions: plenty of vitamin D (I take about 5000/day), plenty of the best water, breathing to revitalize yourself & recharge your body battery, take care of your elimination, massage(s) from a professional. Personally I never take painkillers, no matter what -- you could try that for a bit. Also, turn off wireless devices/router/cable box at night to help you sleep better.
Hello,
Thank you for your email. Please find the requested information attached.
Best Regards,
Microsoft Privacy
Sounds good so far. Hmm. The attachment is a Word Document which contains screenshots of the type of data they collect but not the data itself. Now keep in mind, I have disabled every single privacy option on this Windows 10 install and the events (1.2 Million of them!) are only for a 6 day period on a minimally used machine.
Clickbait article is clickbait.
Xenon drive has been around since the 1950s
The article's touted monster gain -- ten times better than chemical rockets -- is the same ten times gain NASA has been using in actually-launched-into-space rockets for years, if not tens of years.
The article talks about a $65M program to try to make even greater gains...and provides zero details. Probably because making "huge" gains in a technology that is over sixty years old ain't easy.
In summary, this article is about as interesting as GM announcing they are working to make fuel injectors ten times better than carburetors.
If everyone gets it, where does it come from? All I see is inflation of the money supply. In other words, more unpayable debt to the fed bankers who loan money to the govt.
Japanese words that are "English sounding" are part of their Katakana syllabary. For example, "ice cream" becomes 'Ai su' 'ku ri mu' or Aisu Kurimu.
Beats the heck out of English where we expect people to remember how to pronounce words like 'rendezvous' even though it only makes sense with French intonation and thus ends up yet another exception.
In thinking a bit further about this, given that we no longer teach syllabic pronunciation in American public schools, and Americans are plummeting down the intelligence curve, whereas Japanese are among the smartest and certainly most well-read in the world, maybe there is merit in insisting that words fit within the "two characters per kana" systems of hiragana and katakana.
In Hamilton's time that would be the government treasury. As in "We the People". Whereas for the past 100 years we have had the 1% of the 1%'s treasury. You can see why Hamilton had to go.
Heh, nice new Slashdot owners, can we increase the nesting of comments? [In case it matters, I'm running Classic view]
Otherwise comments like this AC's show up as orphans to me.
Alternatively, when you choose to stop nesting, you could display an "in reply to blah". Otherwise, you are auto-corrupting threads below a certain depth.
You could also generate random content on the misdirecting links. I smell an arms race...
There is an easy solution to discourage people from trying to read all short URLs. Make the algorithm pick one in every thousand, or ten thousand URLs, and have the others automatically serve ads. Large, content-heavy ads. Make sure those pages have every possible type of bandwidth-heavy content -- auto-playing video, Flash, animated GIFs, and tons and tons of individual elements. In other words, redirect them to Huff.
Right. And further to that, the authors talk about a brute force scavenging of the entire database of URLs being possible because the "active bytes" at the end of the short URL are so short. Well, one could add two, or four, bytes to the end of the URL, and only use "one in every hundred numbers, determined randomly" as their algorithm, and then it wouldn't be quite so brute forceable.
So there are _two_ implementation problems (in the case of Microsoft's 1drv.ms, and arguably one problem with the other shorteners -- no authentication being a problem at 1drv.ms where people store their private stuff, and too-short or too-efficient of an algorithm being a potential problem with the rest of the URL shorteners.
Hmmm, wasn't this problem solved by, ah, pretty much every other system that uses a short series of numbers, like credit cards, D/L, SSN, etc.?
The Andy Warhol estate is getting staggering amounts of free publicity from this. Probably worth way more than any $25k reward fee. Maybe they are putting it up.
Reminds me of the Starbucks christmas cups that were just a solid color "to avoid controversy". Thus creating it and getting oodles and oodles of free press from it.
It's totally random but look for yourself. The source is in nsa_rand_maybe.cob
I'm definitely getting crankier as I get older but I blame it on the additional war wounds. Pulled the extensor tendon out of my right middle finger this year...trying to liberate the roots of a root-bound new tree. But I digress.
/.
As to Einstein, that is a complicated question.
If Einstein borrowed stuff that others had thought of, but never gave them credit, is that ok with you? For me personally I am not overly bothered by the fact that Einstein wasn't the first to conceive of e=mc^2, but some are.
What I am definitely anti about are bad theories. Which physics today is studded with. Check out Alexander Unzicker's definitive Bankrupting Physics for a very thorough, quite humorous and yet surprisingly polite dressing down of most of the big names behind most of the modern nonsense that passes for physics today. FWIW, Unzicker was/is a huge Einstein fan.
Getting back to bad theories, Einstein's time marked a transition in physics -- from intuition and common sense things like there must be an ether, to the math-dominated and particle-smashing dark ages we have been in for decades. Like Unzicker, I think particle smashing is worse than futile. He ably chronicles why as well, if you would prefer his perspective to my own.
Regarding Einstein, I think he is, at a minimum, overrated. Worse, I think that special relativity is valueless, being limited to a no-gravity/no-acceleration system. You can't have two protons in such a system, for example, as their gravitational interactions would not compute. Does that meet your definition of "anti"?
Then, more tragically and questionably, ten years later Einstein releases general relativity that is built directly on top of special relativity. We don't build wells on top of latrines, except in physics.
Regarding Einstein's highly disappointing later years, it is most interesting to watch him play with words. He came up with countless words for the ether. They all were attempts to describe the same thing but, incredibly, Einstein actually thought that by playing word games, he would be advancing physics.
tldr; ? I prefer to begin with a model that includes/resolves the biggest problems in physics. And then to expand it to explain things other theories don't. Like gravity, and neutrinos. And ultimately, in more than one major area, to be predictive. Oh, BTW, I think my theory is not only a theory of everything but the simplest possible theory of everything.
Summary: I am not so much anti-Einstein -- I actually greatly admire his philosophical side, his humor, his way of living and how he lived his life his way -- as I am pro-my theory. I think my theory makes all others theories look awful.
But heh, it will be a lot easier to down-mod me and shout vicious responses (that get up-modded), as normally happens in the comfy confines of
People think black holes are giant vacuum cleaners because that is what conventional physics says they are -- things come too close (cross the event horizon) and become imprisoned in the SMBH.
So you are authoritatively saying this doesn't happen? No, well then we are only talking degree -- newbs think SMBH's suck a lot, and you think they suck a little.
FWIW, "you" (i.e. conventional physics) have your work cut out for you to explain why things don't get sucked in. I imagine you will trot out something to do with "curved space orbits" but implicit in that must be that every single thing orbiting the SMBH manages to stay outside the event horizon. My question #1 (given that SMBH size (diameter) is related to their SMass) is how does everything know exactly where that event horizon is? And question #2 when the SMBH grows in size, how do the objects orbiting the closest not end up now inside the event horizon?
My own thoughts on black holes.
Please click the Network World link because of course meteors and computer networks are practically the same thing.
Is this how desperate content sites have become?
TWEET!
You can't find your comment because it looks almost exactly like its parent comment.
You added just one sentence, in the middle of the comment. Otherwise the two look very similar.
While you're at it: different pay rates for enabling JS, Flash and whatever else is suspect.