There are very few things in this world more regulated than the BBC, and yet it has managed to create demand for a service that is pretty deregulated, and that service is complaining. I don't see their point and I don't see yours.
Open Market != solution to all problems
The notion of "every function being threaded by default" is odd from the beginning
yes it is.
compilers are usually terrible at knowing what is safe
yes they are. that's where the hard work comes in, built it is NOT impossible or magical. Just difficult. But as the payoff is potentially big, the investment is possibly profitable.
not necessarily [my emph] the case
Which is why i said 'well flagged'. Breeding is what finds the good cases, and loses the bad. Partitioning the data set is often very problematic, and is the wall most in the field have been banging their heads against for some time now... Its useful, when, like you say, its possible.
It's clear to me you've not really tried your ideas out
good, that means you're not a moron, as I intentionally make that pretty clear. Although I have played with and professionally worked with the component concepts of the whole idea.
Here's a very quick thought on the possibilities: What if every procedure/function is threaded by default. The compiler then figures out which can possibly lead to race conditions, and adds flagging systems to avoid such issues to those functions only. A multi threaed, well flagged [synclocked] 'reley race' is still faster than a linear solution.
Now your compiler attributes priorities to each threaded process. Those priority permutations are the 'genes' that get evolved. Higher priority here, lower there... Possibly also the flag positions (within the determined, logicaly safe, race free boundries). Make sense?
If you think 2 cores is tricky, then how about 4. And if you're really going to make the most of the multiple cores, and you start to use them for complex permutations of solution finding, the complexity gets silly fast! 8 cores in total is already fairly common. This will have to more than double every 18 months to keep up with Moore's 'Law', which they have to do, to keep the mechanics of their capitalist framework ticking smoothly.
In ten years, efficient programming won't be difficult, it will be impossible unless we evolve our engeneering concepts dramatically to adapt to this paradigm shift (sorry for the cliche phrase but its apt). I believe the only way, will be to use genetic algorithms (suited to multiprocessors them selves) to adaptively compile code. Effectively evolving it until its optimized.
However, its not the impression I got when I was there. In and interview i was told that "we don't use IDEs here" and "we use EMACS or bla...". My fondness for VS was definitely frowned upon!
"Phorm has said its system offers security benefits which will warn users about potential phishing sites - websites which attempt to con users into handing over personal data. "
They just turn EVERY SITE YOU VISIT into a phishing site! Sorted.
Exactly my thoughts. I keep hoping that one day I'll awake to "DARPA funds advanced algorithmic conflic resolution research" or "New DARPA challenge is to probe causes of aggression towards the US"....
We have more way to watch and destroy each other than we can ever possibly use effectively (more than once).
I went to the US recently (from the UK) on an interview. One of the things I was worried about was IP. Do I have any? If I get my hard-drive copied and/or viewed, what are my right re patents etc on anything viewed/copied?
Nearly five years ago I used to help a guy who had no useful movement in his limbs. He could use a mouth stick to type and control the cursor. However he also used Dragon Dictate. His machine was old 7 years ago, and here's the amazing bit (to me at least) his speech was pretty garbled from his condition. Most humans found it very hard understanding him, yet the dictation software did a pretty good job. He wrote an entire screen play (later comitioned by the BBC) and was a lawyer with his own practice (it may sound like it but I'm not making this up). His success with this tech was probably what got me into assitive tech (now my job).
So depends who you are on how much it improves you productivity.
While I like your reply, and I'm in favour of watermarking for similar reasons to the reasons you state, one of us is missing a point (it may be me, but here goes..).
It would be trivial for say, a p2p client, to remove watermarks systematically. The argument could be made that it is a legitermate and valid service/feature to provide, to homogenise the media of a user automatically - say to Ogg or a medium bitrate mp3.
Now your RIAA now have no flag to trigger their friendly letter...
To remove almost any watermark simply convert to a different format... You will lose some quality in most cases, but the watermark will be gone. So about as secure as a doorless prison with no guards.
14 millions readers per week apear to disagree with you. IMO this is exactly why noscripts is as silly as Norton or almost any other addon security tool. Its like breaking your toy so the bully doesn't play with it. Its your browser's job to make your browsing safe. And yours of course.
Sorry. That was pretty grouchy. But the fact remains, I'm just not sure why so many people seem to think X is good/healthy, is and argument. Saying competion is good/healthy, is about as accurate as saying cooperation is good/healthy. Sometimes it is, sometimes it realy isn't! "Because competition is healthy" is as useful a contribution to a debate as "because the bible says so", or "It's good enough for Microsoft".
here's two reasons: 1) such a mind could be backed up and replicated. Redundant storage would mean effective immortality, meaning vast experience (wisdom) could be gained by such machine intelligences. 2) I believe its the only way we'll ever get good bablefish tech. Real-time translation software requires contextual understanding to be really good. For that you need a mind.
Imagine the change it could make to be able to talk and listen to anyone. I'm not saying it would end war, but my guess is it could help a lot.
|But then imagine what medical, energy tech, space colinizasion breakthroughs such a brain could make...
Slashdot Mirror
There are very few things in this world more regulated than the BBC, and yet it has managed to create demand for a service that is pretty deregulated, and that service is complaining. I don't see their point and I don't see yours.
Open Market != solution to all problems
Marxism != solution to all problems
idealism != solution to all problems
tee heee.. would mod funny if could.
and don't say "yes"
"not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed"
Do you think thats an inclusive or an exclusive or?
The notion of "every function being threaded by default" is odd from the beginning
yes it is.
compilers are usually terrible at knowing what is safe
yes they are. that's where the hard work comes in, built it is NOT impossible or magical. Just difficult. But as the payoff is potentially big, the investment is possibly profitable.
not necessarily [my emph] the case
Which is why i said 'well flagged'. Breeding is what finds the good cases, and loses the bad. Partitioning the data set is often very problematic, and is the wall most in the field have been banging their heads against for some time now... Its useful, when, like you say, its possible.
It's clear to me you've not really tried your ideas out
good, that means you're not a moron, as I intentionally make that pretty clear. Although I have played with and professionally worked with the component concepts of the whole idea.
Not as magic wand, no.
Here's a very quick thought on the possibilities: What if every procedure/function is threaded by default. The compiler then figures out which can possibly lead to race conditions, and adds flagging systems to avoid such issues to those functions only. A multi threaed, well flagged [synclocked] 'reley race' is still faster than a linear solution.
Now your compiler attributes priorities to each threaded process. Those priority permutations are the 'genes' that get evolved. Higher priority here, lower there... Possibly also the flag positions (within the determined, logicaly safe, race free boundries). Make sense?
but just wait...
If you think 2 cores is tricky, then how about 4. And if you're really going to make the most of the multiple cores, and you start to use them for complex permutations of solution finding, the complexity gets silly fast! 8 cores in total is already fairly common. This will have to more than double every 18 months to keep up with Moore's 'Law', which they have to do, to keep the mechanics of their capitalist framework ticking smoothly.
In ten years, efficient programming won't be difficult, it will be impossible unless we evolve our engeneering concepts dramatically to adapt to this paradigm shift (sorry for the cliche phrase but its apt). I believe the only way, will be to use genetic algorithms (suited to multiprocessors them selves) to adaptively compile code. Effectively evolving it until its optimized.
... and my own experiments with ferrofluid muscles... my blog post
Mass is the property of a thing, and it is equivolent to kinetic energy.
However, its not the impression I got when I was there. In and interview i was told that "we don't use IDEs here" and "we use EMACS or bla...". My fondness for VS was definitely frowned upon!
Why - did they insert that gigantic advert I had to click passed?
"Phorm has said its system offers security benefits which will warn users about potential phishing sites - websites which attempt to con users into handing over personal data. "
They just turn EVERY SITE YOU VISIT into a phishing site! Sorted.
That should be Tyrell not Terril
Why not make the phone a VR headset too...
Strap it on your noggin and immerse... or pick it up and dial.
Exactly my thoughts. I keep hoping that one day I'll awake to "DARPA funds advanced algorithmic conflic resolution research" or "New DARPA challenge is to probe causes of aggression towards the US"....
We have more way to watch and destroy each other than we can ever possibly use effectively (more than once).
You do in the UK :)
I went to the US recently (from the UK) on an interview. One of the things I was worried about was IP. Do I have any? If I get my hard-drive copied and/or viewed, what are my right re patents etc on anything viewed/copied?
that should read nearly 7 years ago. And no I'm not using speech rec. Just typing quickly and badly ;P
Nearly five years ago I used to help a guy who had no useful movement in his limbs. He could use a mouth stick to type and control the cursor. However he also used Dragon Dictate. His machine was old 7 years ago, and here's the amazing bit (to me at least) his speech was pretty garbled from his condition. Most humans found it very hard understanding him, yet the dictation software did a pretty good job. He wrote an entire screen play (later comitioned by the BBC) and was a lawyer with his own practice (it may sound like it but I'm not making this up). His success with this tech was probably what got me into assitive tech (now my job).
So depends who you are on how much it improves you productivity.
While I like your reply, and I'm in favour of watermarking for similar reasons to the reasons you state, one of us is missing a point (it may be me, but here goes..). It would be trivial for say, a p2p client, to remove watermarks systematically. The argument could be made that it is a legitermate and valid service/feature to provide, to homogenise the media of a user automatically - say to Ogg or a medium bitrate mp3. Now your RIAA now have no flag to trigger their friendly letter...
To remove almost any watermark simply convert to a different format... You will lose some quality in most cases, but the watermark will be gone. So about as secure as a doorless prison with no guards.
14 millions readers per week apear to disagree with you. IMO this is exactly why noscripts is as silly as Norton or almost any other addon security tool. Its like breaking your toy so the bully doesn't play with it. Its your browser's job to make your browsing safe. And yours of course.
Sorry. That was pretty grouchy. But the fact remains, I'm just not sure why so many people seem to think X is good/healthy, is and argument. Saying competion is good/healthy, is about as accurate as saying cooperation is good/healthy. Sometimes it is, sometimes it realy isn't! "Because competition is healthy" is as useful a contribution to a debate as "because the bible says so", or "It's good enough for Microsoft".
Not all competition is healthy. Grow up.
Because fame is such a big deterrent. Especially in the States
here's two reasons: 1) such a mind could be backed up and replicated. Redundant storage would mean effective immortality, meaning vast experience (wisdom) could be gained by such machine intelligences. 2) I believe its the only way we'll ever get good bablefish tech. Real-time translation software requires contextual understanding to be really good. For that you need a mind.
Imagine the change it could make to be able to talk and listen to anyone. I'm not saying it would end war, but my guess is it could help a lot.
|But then imagine what medical, energy tech, space colinizasion breakthroughs such a brain could make...