That blur used to automatically exist on phosphorus backed TV set. Now we have LCD screens that are pretty quick on the frame, and people want the blur back (go figure). So now, there are LCD screens that have smart chips inside to smooth the transition between two frames. Surely, the renderer does not need to do this if the LCD screen can do it.
If a modern ray tracer spents hours on a frame, it would be so realistic that there is no current GPU that could even match the quality. You, sir, have surely exaggerated. Only thing ray-tracers have advantage over GPU is fast dynamic scenes. The GPU has been a remains a major memory bottleneck. A quadcore does very nicely to render fast frames rates with a ray tracer.
If one wants to argue that people won't spend any extra money for it, go look at the tons of people that multi-box on WoW and how much money they spend for 6 or more computers!
That is not how social security numbers work. It is not a one-to-one relationship between a name and a number. The SSN acts as a numeric name. It is added in the system to tell the difference between Joe Schmoe 12345 and Joe Schmoe 54321. There could also be Jane Schmoe 12345 and Jane Schmoe 54321. It's a number that has rolled over a couple times now. Any program that uses SSN as a single ID is wrong and should be trashed. Such buggy programs have only added to the problem of 'identity theft' in a different way.
The scientist claim a gain in the metallic property. That is exactly what is needed in order to set of the reaction of a fuel cell. If a fullerene with H inside is metallic, then just the addition of oxygen on the outside is surely to produce energy.
As the energy is released (and H2O), the metallic property fades. There will still be hydrogen left inside the fullerene at that point.
Something to model, how much hydrogen is left inside? If 8% is maximum before breakage, then what is minimum after the fuel-cell process (the gained/faded metallic catalyst) is applied to the fullerene with H? (We don't want them to implode either -- we want the fullerene to be 100% re-usable even if there is leftover H inside due to the faded metallic property).
What we need to know is a graph of the metallic property compared to percent weight of H inside the fullerene. Then we can use that to graph the percent weight to potential catalytic properties.
When hydrogen gains a metallic property, then the fullerene become a ready fuel cell itself. The metallic property will create the needed catalyst (while it lasts as a metal) in order for the fuel-cell process to react and produce energy.
The fixated, detailed, thorough, and highly logical thinker may try to read the General's posts and study them for non-"content free" clauses. Such clauses, being said by someone in a powerful command, could be looked upon as an intent, will or even a wish. Even would good faith and good cause, the reader could decide to follow such action to fulfill whatever cause that found in such clauses. While maybe innocent and even seemingly patriotic actions, there may be more of a need to prevent any such illusion of a command given. Anotherwords, when your word may be taken as a command, you have to work harder to make sure it is not a command and that there is no way possible for it to be taken as a command.
The related laws states "the age of majority" not at "the age of 18." Yes, is can be used relative to another "majority" aspect, but is that something you really want to leave open?
If they believe a certain percentage of the people will break that law, then they have clearly admitted and truly believe that a certain percentage of them will break the same law. I'd say if this new law is based on anything like that, then it is an ungrateful inhumane act. One might want to study evidence law if they wish to battle that new law.
Then again, one may wish to build a better home computer that the cops can't just come in and take away so easily -- at least not the storage part. For some reason, I feel there will be a boom in home storage systems that aren't easily found or opened.. like a safe.
The article only focused on video decode/encode speeds, but that is not where most of the SSE4 instruction help in speed. The newer SSE4 instructions help more in vectorization to parallelization. If the encoder/decoder does not run in parallel, then most of the new SSE4 instructions won't help. If you look at Intel's TBB, you'll see exactly where most of the newer SSE4 instructions can be used!
If that is how you like to view it, I won't obstruct that view. Why attempt to prove something wrong when it can not even be proven right? My original point remains solid. You are free to make any rough consensus you like, as others are free to challenge it. =)
What's made up is the assumption about infinity as presented in the fallacy. What you just simply said is that if infinity already has a set and you add the same set again to it then it still equals *the same* infinity, and that is illogical. No mysticism involved there.
I've proved it many times that math alone can not describe a universal machine. You still need a machine to start "the tape", or you still need the machine in order to create that machine. =)
If math alone could describe a universal machine, there is an end. You say a notion of convergence, but I say a notion of the N=NP divergence.
It's an allusion, affinity. Without the bloated notions, infinity - affinity = finite.
The closest way to compute affinity is similar to the discrete wavelet transform. There is no way to compute an analogous wavelet transform because of the space. We can create the allusion of space with a discrete wavelet transform.
infinity - finite = affinity + finite
This is just a simplified version of the more discrete, patented versions. It's too simple to patent -- like obvious.
If you need more proof, grab a map of ionic fields and periodic references. Look at it, and tell me how many dimensions you see. If you still say "there's nothing wrong", then point it out on the chart.
I like math, but I hate it when people make up crazy polluted math just to earn a buck of dumb patents. Well, they are worth their distraction value. lol
>>> if x + y = infinity and y is finite, then x must be infinity. This is TRUE for numbers. You cannot apply this by analogy to automata and think it is still true. It is not.
My bad, I left SPACE out of the equation! lol
It is not TRUE for numbers.
Both x and y must be infinite for x + y = infinity to be true. Simple as that.
If y is finite x is infinity, then x + y = affinity. Simple as that.
What's fucked up in the fallacy is that affinity is not a single point, so it appeared to be true in the original if the opposite of the truth was a single number. We know we can not apply it like that (singular | infinite), that is why it is not a single number and it is not infinite.
>>> if x + y = infinity and y is finite, then x must be infinity. This is TRUE for numbers. You cannot apply this by analogy to automata and think it is still true. It is not.
It is not TRUE for numbers. Both x and y must be infinite for x + y = infinity to be true. Simple as that.
If y is finite x is infinity, then x + y = affinity. Simple as that.
What's fucked up in the fallacy is that affinity is not a single point, so it appeared to be true in the original if the opposite of the truth was a single number. We know we can not apply it like that (singular | infinite), that is why it is not a single number and it is not infinite.
D'oh!
> Parents today obviously have ZERO interest in spending time with their children and monitoring their activities and habits.
That was f'n stupid to say. Come into my world where you'll find innocent father fighting to be with their kids in court but their rights have been unjustly taken away to be with their family. They would die to be with their family... and some do.
Great. Now all the RIAA needs is these lawyers to join forces and somehow link our memories of music as encoded into our DNA, and then they can can sue anybody who gives lip service to song. Be prepared to remove all those harmonious and melodic tunes out of the Saturday Morning cartoons, or it won't be just teenagers anymore the RIAA is after. And, better forget that last song you just heard.
In other future related news, some of the congressmen decided tried to suggest Red Red Wine over a cigar joke. The RIAA was unforgiving on the use of such harmonic memory. The congressmen, in protest of their fond memories being materially removed, started to support psychedelic remedies for the masses. The congressmen evangelized about holy water derived from grain fungus, one that miraculously grows on rye. Not only did the churches add such holy water to their sacrament, but after a few practiced Sunday rituals, everyone voted in unison, like a referendum, to replace all drinking water with Gatorade.
We've heard the claim many times that your have to have Math in order to know Computer Science. That is simply not true, especially on the empirical level. The argument factors down to the computational level and the fact that math is not needed in order for states to change in the computation. Also, when you get into AI, you'll find there are conscience levels of state changes that pure science alone can not explain but Computer Science can explain and except with AI. In science, the conscience levels are only defined up unto phenomenas. There is no language in Math to explain such phenomenas, but there is in Computer Science. Therefore, Math co-exists with Computer Science very nicely.
One wonders why Intel gets any blame for these designs. Games and graphics cards require one to upgrade those many times more than one has to upgrade the motherboard itself. What is the "preferred solution for entry-/middle- level machines" for what audience?
My old BT2 board still performs as good as current boards on the market.
That preferred solution probably doesn't represent an average between GPU driven and CPU driven markets. Hmm.
For every Microsoft statement about a threat in virtualization, there is a equal and reflective threat in Microsoft's code, which they unfearfully, certainly, and undoubtedly will confirm.
This is new because they intend to use the Powercast technology to charge up the phone. There is even research into spoken words and that they may have power.
Slashdot Mirror
That blur used to automatically exist on phosphorus backed TV set. Now we have LCD screens that are pretty quick on the frame, and people want the blur back (go figure). So now, there are LCD screens that have smart chips inside to smooth the transition between two frames. Surely, the renderer does not need to do this if the LCD screen can do it.
Start to question why do people spend so much dang money on multi-boxing on WoW:
How much money people will spend: 15 grand
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5784541038&sid=1&pageNo=4#66
How many people are doing it: lots
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5781098289&sid=1&pageNo=1
People are surely going beyond the resources of a single computer budget.
If a modern ray tracer spents hours on a frame, it would be so realistic that there is no current GPU that could even match the quality. You, sir, have surely exaggerated. Only thing ray-tracers have advantage over GPU is fast dynamic scenes. The GPU has been a remains a major memory bottleneck. A quadcore does very nicely to render fast frames rates with a ray tracer.
If one wants to argue that people won't spend any extra money for it, go look at the tons of people that multi-box on WoW and how much money they spend for 6 or more computers!
That is not how social security numbers work. It is not a one-to-one relationship between a name and a number. The SSN acts as a numeric name. It is added in the system to tell the difference between Joe Schmoe 12345 and Joe Schmoe 54321. There could also be Jane Schmoe 12345 and Jane Schmoe 54321. It's a number that has rolled over a couple times now. Any program that uses SSN as a single ID is wrong and should be trashed. Such buggy programs have only added to the problem of 'identity theft' in a different way.
The scientist claim a gain in the metallic property. That is exactly what is needed in order to set of the reaction of a fuel cell. If a fullerene with H inside is metallic, then just the addition of oxygen on the outside is surely to produce energy. As the energy is released (and H2O), the metallic property fades. There will still be hydrogen left inside the fullerene at that point. Something to model, how much hydrogen is left inside? If 8% is maximum before breakage, then what is minimum after the fuel-cell process (the gained/faded metallic catalyst) is applied to the fullerene with H? (We don't want them to implode either -- we want the fullerene to be 100% re-usable even if there is leftover H inside due to the faded metallic property). What we need to know is a graph of the metallic property compared to percent weight of H inside the fullerene. Then we can use that to graph the percent weight to potential catalytic properties.
When hydrogen gains a metallic property, then the fullerene become a ready fuel cell itself. The metallic property will create the needed catalyst (while it lasts as a metal) in order for the fuel-cell process to react and produce energy.
The fixated, detailed, thorough, and highly logical thinker may try to read the General's posts and study them for non-"content free" clauses. Such clauses, being said by someone in a powerful command, could be looked upon as an intent, will or even a wish. Even would good faith and good cause, the reader could decide to follow such action to fulfill whatever cause that found in such clauses. While maybe innocent and even seemingly patriotic actions, there may be more of a need to prevent any such illusion of a command given. Anotherwords, when your word may be taken as a command, you have to work harder to make sure it is not a command and that there is no way possible for it to be taken as a command.
The related laws states "the age of majority" not at "the age of 18." Yes, is can be used relative to another "majority" aspect, but is that something you really want to leave open?
If they believe a certain percentage of the people will break that law, then they have clearly admitted and truly believe that a certain percentage of them will break the same law. I'd say if this new law is based on anything like that, then it is an ungrateful inhumane act. One might want to study evidence law if they wish to battle that new law.
Then again, one may wish to build a better home computer that the cops can't just come in and take away so easily -- at least not the storage part. For some reason, I feel there will be a boom in home storage systems that aren't easily found or opened.. like a safe.
The article only focused on video decode/encode speeds, but that is not where most of the SSE4 instruction help in speed. The newer SSE4 instructions help more in vectorization to parallelization. If the encoder/decoder does not run in parallel, then most of the new SSE4 instructions won't help. If you look at Intel's TBB, you'll see exactly where most of the newer SSE4 instructions can be used!
If that is how you like to view it, I won't obstruct that view. Why attempt to prove something wrong when it can not even be proven right? My original point remains solid. You are free to make any rough consensus you like, as others are free to challenge it. =)
Another user here posted a reference to it on the earlier message, did you miss it? I saw it before I posted the last reply.
What's made up is the assumption about infinity as presented in the fallacy. What you just simply said is that if infinity already has a set and you add the same set again to it then it still equals *the same* infinity, and that is illogical. No mysticism involved there.
I've proved it many times that math alone can not describe a universal machine. You still need a machine to start "the tape", or you still need the machine in order to create that machine. =)
If math alone could describe a universal machine, there is an end. You say a notion of convergence, but I say a notion of the N=NP divergence.
It's an allusion, affinity. Without the bloated notions, infinity - affinity = finite.
The closest way to compute affinity is similar to the discrete wavelet transform. There is no way to compute an analogous wavelet transform because of the space. We can create the allusion of space with a discrete wavelet transform.
infinity - finite = affinity + finite
This is just a simplified version of the more discrete, patented versions. It's too simple to patent -- like obvious.
If you need more proof, grab a map of ionic fields and periodic references. Look at it, and tell me how many dimensions you see. If you still say "there's nothing wrong", then point it out on the chart.
I like math, but I hate it when people make up crazy polluted math just to earn a buck of dumb patents. Well, they are worth their distraction value. lol
>>> if x + y = infinity and y is finite, then x must be infinity. This is TRUE for numbers. You cannot apply this by analogy to automata and think it is still true. It is not.
My bad, I left SPACE out of the equation! lol
It is not TRUE for numbers.
Both x and y must be infinite for x + y = infinity to be true. Simple as that.
If y is finite x is infinity, then x + y = affinity. Simple as that.
What's fucked up in the fallacy is that affinity is not a single point, so it appeared to be true in the original if the opposite of the truth was a single number. We know we can not apply it like that (singular | infinite), that is why it is not a single number and it is not infinite.
D'oh!
>>> if x + y = infinity and y is finite, then x must be infinity. This is TRUE for numbers. You cannot apply this by analogy to automata and think it is still true. It is not. It is not TRUE for numbers. Both x and y must be infinite for x + y = infinity to be true. Simple as that. If y is finite x is infinity, then x + y = affinity. Simple as that. What's fucked up in the fallacy is that affinity is not a single point, so it appeared to be true in the original if the opposite of the truth was a single number. We know we can not apply it like that (singular | infinite), that is why it is not a single number and it is not infinite. D'oh!
I'm going to Wine about it!
It's the the BiggerBang(tm) theory
> Parents today obviously have ZERO interest in spending time with their children and monitoring their activities and habits.
That was f'n stupid to say. Come into my world where you'll find innocent father fighting to be with their kids in court but their rights have been unjustly taken away to be with their family. They would die to be with their family... and some do.
Great. Now all the RIAA needs is these lawyers to join forces and somehow link our memories of music as encoded into our DNA, and then they can can sue anybody who gives lip service to song. Be prepared to remove all those harmonious and melodic tunes out of the Saturday Morning cartoons, or it won't be just teenagers anymore the RIAA is after. And, better forget that last song you just heard.
In other future related news, some of the congressmen decided tried to suggest Red Red Wine over a cigar joke. The RIAA was unforgiving on the use of such harmonic memory. The congressmen, in protest of their fond memories being materially removed, started to support psychedelic remedies for the masses. The congressmen evangelized about holy water derived from grain fungus, one that miraculously grows on rye. Not only did the churches add such holy water to their sacrament, but after a few practiced Sunday rituals, everyone voted in unison, like a referendum, to replace all drinking water with Gatorade.
We've heard the claim many times that your have to have Math in order to know Computer Science. That is simply not true, especially on the empirical level. The argument factors down to the computational level and the fact that math is not needed in order for states to change in the computation. Also, when you get into AI, you'll find there are conscience levels of state changes that pure science alone can not explain but Computer Science can explain and except with AI. In science, the conscience levels are only defined up unto phenomenas. There is no language in Math to explain such phenomenas, but there is in Computer Science. Therefore, Math co-exists with Computer Science very nicely.
One wonders why Intel gets any blame for these designs. Games and graphics cards require one to upgrade those many times more than one has to upgrade the motherboard itself. What is the "preferred solution for entry-/middle- level machines" for what audience?
My old BT2 board still performs as good as current boards on the market.
That preferred solution probably doesn't represent an average between GPU driven and CPU driven markets. Hmm.
For every Microsoft statement about a threat in virtualization, there is a equal and reflective threat in Microsoft's code, which they unfearfully, certainly, and undoubtedly will confirm.
For some reason I read that as girlfriend role playing game.
This is new because they intend to use the Powercast technology to charge up the phone. There is even research into spoken words and that they may have power.