no part at all. i sequence too. truth be told, i'm probably an addict. it simply annoys me when music sounds like someone just took three random samples everyone already knows, put a "beat" under it and called it a song. especially when that abomination gets popular.
people who work for the art are usually passionate about making everything absolutely perfect, or as close to it as they can. people who work for the money usually improve until the benefits of improving it some more stop outweighing the cost of taking more time for it. that's the major difference.
of course, there's a difference between actually have some skill on whatever you use to make that sound (like playing a midi keyboard isn't the same as playing a piano, but you'll find it hard to call either a fake), and just pressing a button to play the music. which is something i and the grandparent poster agree on: any music that only takes a single button press is hardly music.
then again, i despise most modern abstract visual art as well. i suppose some techno is simply the aural version of that.
some people don't consider drinking fountain water to be as pure and healthy as bottled water, which is why bottled water does have a higher value to them than normal water.
no nerve cells and no brain cells for any would-be nerve cells to connect to. it's grown purely from meat cells, and cells don't usually revert back to stem cells without some odd treatment or so. Not sure how oxygen and such would get transported without veins though... IANAB.
Alright all, let's not be too hasty. I, for one, will wait for the next step: a filter made of carbon nanotubes, woven together! It'll stop EVERYTHING!
i'm barely resisting the urge to speak of your mom here. the words "metric assload" (or "metric ass-ton", for that matter) get thrown around so much lately that they almost deserve some form of recognition though. if only to clarify things to others.
of course, we still don't know exactly how much of what exactly, a metric assload is. a cubic meter of.. asses? *shrug*
i'm afraid douchebag against douchebag just means there's more of them to get rid of. but they'll be too distracted to bother anyone you or i care about, so sure. they "cancel out" in a way.
alright! i've heard people saying "fuck the world", but actually fucking the tarmac? ouch... forgive me if i don't think too much about the how and why of that one.
i think you win this thread. or article. or whatever. most interesting suggestion so far.
the chemistry-lab-on-a-chip thing could make people far healthier than they are now. they'd know exactly what they need, which could probably tone down food cravings. also, the alcohol monitor function would be great for bartenders and police, although it might be tampered with pretty quickly for any real alcoholics.
and combining this with the nerve-end transistors we had here a while ago, you could make something pretty sweet. it couldn't use a lot of power, but you still wouldn't need batteries. i, for one, welcome our new semi-cyborg allies. as long as i get to be one too.
ouch. good points. i can provide a counterpoint to one of them though.
two calculations won't tell you which is the correct one. the odds of both results from different processing units, both being wrong is much smaller than the odds of a single unit being wrong though. maybe not 95% smaller, but still a lot. if they differ, you know that one must be wrong and you recalculate a few times. even if you do the same calculation ten times this way (and a 2x overhead for having to wait a few nanoseconds between the calculations.. don't want to have exactly the same circumstances), it's still really fast compared to conventional stuff.
in many applications, error rates of 5% aren't that bad for one simple reason: you can repeat the computation, maybe on other nodes (if it's one molecule, building in three or so for comparison wouldn't be a problem), and compare the answers. if the chance for one computation is 5%, it'll be 0.25% for two and 0.0125% for three. if it truly calculates things thousands of times faster, you won't mind if it slows down to 1/3 of "Thousands" to error-check most calculations. if the comparison gets built into the state testing hardware, it'll still be damned fast. perhaps there could even be an alternate circuit that just takes the average of the results, for some applications.
also, plenty of calculations done on a computer don't NEED to be exact. who cares if your pixels' colours are 0.25% off? or if your wow character accidently moves 5 pixels per frame instead of 4? rendering won't be much of a problem, but neither will programming or other exact things. you just repeat your calculations until you have a 0.05^n * 100% error rate that you're satisfied with. 10 would end in 9,76 * 10^-14 * 100% and you'd still be calculating things roughly Hundreds of Times Faster Than a PC
Slashdot Mirror
My dear fellow, every Brit knows that it is "Kiss my arse"
I have no desire to be near a donkey
You do have a desire to be near an arse, then?
no part at all. i sequence too. truth be told, i'm probably an addict. it simply annoys me when music sounds like someone just took three random samples everyone already knows, put a "beat" under it and called it a song. especially when that abomination gets popular.
people who work for the art are usually passionate about making everything absolutely perfect, or as close to it as they can. people who work for the money usually improve until the benefits of improving it some more stop outweighing the cost of taking more time for it. that's the major difference.
of course, there's a difference between actually have some skill on whatever you use to make that sound (like playing a midi keyboard isn't the same as playing a piano, but you'll find it hard to call either a fake), and just pressing a button to play the music. which is something i and the grandparent poster agree on: any music that only takes a single button press is hardly music.
then again, i despise most modern abstract visual art as well. i suppose some techno is simply the aural version of that.
some people don't consider drinking fountain water to be as pure and healthy as bottled water, which is why bottled water does have a higher value to them than normal water.
that's a pretty evil idea. of course, which court would give a brainless, spineless being the same rights as ordinary humans? ... don't answer that.
no nerve cells and no brain cells for any would-be nerve cells to connect to. it's grown purely from meat cells, and cells don't usually revert back to stem cells without some odd treatment or so. Not sure how oxygen and such would get transported without veins though... IANAB.
Be afraid of the infinite loops. "Post Humously" indeed.
How about a flying armor that folds up into a briefcase?
(Yes I've been watching Iron Man)
You could try a kettle.
Regards,
A. Pragmatist
Alright all, let's not be too hasty. I, for one, will wait for the next step: a filter made of carbon nanotubes, woven together! It'll stop EVERYTHING!
i'm barely resisting the urge to speak of your mom here. the words "metric assload" (or "metric ass-ton", for that matter) get thrown around so much lately that they almost deserve some form of recognition though. if only to clarify things to others.
of course, we still don't know exactly how much of what exactly, a metric assload is. a cubic meter of.. asses? *shrug*
the only fluid available to emit is acidic. eww.
also alkaline, i think. don't ask.
it's not travelling, it's in two places at once. no speed involved since it's already there. moron. ;)
only while there's some event going on somewhere in the country, apparently. so hey, it's perfectly legal on those other two days of the year!
i'm afraid douchebag against douchebag just means there's more of them to get rid of. but they'll be too distracted to bother anyone you or i care about, so sure. they "cancel out" in a way.
you don't want things like goatse, tubgirl or microsoft in your porn, do you?
alright! i've heard people saying "fuck the world", but actually fucking the tarmac? ouch... forgive me if i don't think too much about the how and why of that one.
i think you win this thread. or article. or whatever. most interesting suggestion so far.
the chemistry-lab-on-a-chip thing could make people far healthier than they are now. they'd know exactly what they need, which could probably tone down food cravings. also, the alcohol monitor function would be great for bartenders and police, although it might be tampered with pretty quickly for any real alcoholics.
and combining this with the nerve-end transistors we had here a while ago, you could make something pretty sweet. it couldn't use a lot of power, but you still wouldn't need batteries. i, for one, welcome our new semi-cyborg allies. as long as i get to be one too.
that's wise. anything from beneath the waist tends to not be food. at least not for it's own species.
i forgot about graphene. good point.
ouch. good points. i can provide a counterpoint to one of them though.
two calculations won't tell you which is the correct one. the odds of both results from different processing units, both being wrong is much smaller than the odds of a single unit being wrong though. maybe not 95% smaller, but still a lot. if they differ, you know that one must be wrong and you recalculate a few times. even if you do the same calculation ten times this way (and a 2x overhead for having to wait a few nanoseconds between the calculations.. don't want to have exactly the same circumstances), it's still really fast compared to conventional stuff.
uh.. this was meant as a reply to the GP. nothing to see here, move along.
in many applications, error rates of 5% aren't that bad for one simple reason: you can repeat the computation, maybe on other nodes (if it's one molecule, building in three or so for comparison wouldn't be a problem), and compare the answers. if the chance for one computation is 5%, it'll be 0.25% for two and 0.0125% for three. if it truly calculates things thousands of times faster, you won't mind if it slows down to 1/3 of "Thousands" to error-check most calculations. if the comparison gets built into the state testing hardware, it'll still be damned fast. perhaps there could even be an alternate circuit that just takes the average of the results, for some applications.
also, plenty of calculations done on a computer don't NEED to be exact. who cares if your pixels' colours are 0.25% off? or if your wow character accidently moves 5 pixels per frame instead of 4? rendering won't be much of a problem, but neither will programming or other exact things. you just repeat your calculations until you have a 0.05^n * 100% error rate that you're satisfied with. 10 would end in 9,76 * 10^-14 * 100% and you'd still be calculating things roughly Hundreds of Times Faster Than a PC