Re: Could be a lot worse
I would consider it to be the Anti-bacon
Would you eat it with Anti-pasta, then?
1348 posts • joined 8 Nov 2007
I would consider it to be the Anti-bacon
Would you eat it with Anti-pasta, then?
What's wrong with polenta?
It's got pretty poor nutritional value (eg "While polenta contains numerous vitamins and minerals, it is not classified as a good source for any of them"). It was basically peasant food, the Italian equivalent of potatoes in 1800's Ireland.
Personally, I can't see why people eat it. Buttermilk cornbread (also made from maize), on the other hand ... delicious.
Maybe all these sites reporting on it should change the headline to fit: "Nobody notices MS viral video for six months (slow news day brouhaha)"
I do, however, have "O Fortuna" from Carmina Burana (AKA "the Old Spice music") played on a banjo. Now THAT'S good.
Hey! I've got that one too (off Uncut: Strange Currencies). It's pretty good.
Toy Doll's Beethoven Song is good too.
Iceland - Democracy, member of NATO, not overly friendly with the US (offered asylum to Snowden ...,
and Bobby Fischer before him. Based only on those two facts and the film 101 Reykjavik, it seems like a good place.
No offense meant but using the word "grok" makes you sound like an utter bellend.
I downvoted you because it's not the word "grok" that's the problem. jake does a fine job of making himself sound like an utter bellend all by himself.
Enough said ... oops! too much.
The "sic" could be OK if he meant that he didn't consider UK society as civilised. Like when Gandhi was asked what he thought of western civilization: "I think it would be a good idea."
A big Monolith for the sitting room. What could be cooler than that? Oh, I'm not allowed to stand it vertically? Bummer :(
Really? I just don't know, but I'd guess that it should, in theory, be quieter than the PS4 due to not having an internal PSU to heat things up. I guess I'll wait until both boxes are released and make a decision based on actual reviews rather than AC hearsay, TYVM.
In the future with more cloud storage this data will be duplicated enough that it cannot be taken down.
There are plenty of places you can buy fake social networking profiles. These days they're used by PR companies to give their sock-puppet comments some sense of verisimilitude. If things get that bad, I'm sure that companies will step in to fill a gap in the market to provide fake profiles for people who want to protect their privacy. You might not be able to take down all the shit that mentions or shows you, but you can splatter enough fake stuff that you cast doubts about whether that dodgy page you'd rather not have people see is real or whether it's even you. As Lou Reed (channelling Poe) put it, "don't believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear". Facebook? "Stick a fork in it--it's done"
I've read bits and pieces about Delia Derbyshire's amazing work in the BBC and on the Who theme around the place, and it's nice to see her front and centre in this article, and getting some well-deserved recognition.
I've been listening to various versions of the theme as I read the article, from the original to Orbital, to Coldcut to Bill Bailey. It probably sounds a bit sacrilegious to mention the Bill Bailey "version", but it always makes me smile :) I also thought of him when I was reading the "Tape your time" section, as he explains what U2 would sound like without the delay effect on the guitars.
Good point! And good I'm not a hack ;-)
Starting a sentence with "And"? Tut tut!
(Is there no grammar Nazi icon?)
I nominate a screen grab of the Roman centurion giving Brian a good telling off for his "Romanus aeunt domus" graffiti in TLoB.
What use is a curved wall of graphics output linked to a supercomputer?
Why, a brainwashing room, of course. Like in The Ipcress File (with Michael Caine) and lots of other films from around the same time.
Sony in the sex-change market?
I read it as XXY, so I can totally see the confusion.
Go play Dishono(u)red with a no kill run.
Now that is an achievement
Pah. Go play Nethack as a Samurai, wear a blindfold right from the start and ascend without eating any food for the entire game. Now that's an achievement :)
If anything this could make the situation worse for NVidia. Before this, when the programmer had to do their own data transfers, the latency was explicitly there in the source code
I got the same feeling on reading the article. The latencies are still there, but now they're just hidden behind a software translation layer. I'll agree that doing explicit DMA or other main memory <-> device memory transfers is annoying, but we already have a technique for hiding DMA latencies(*), namely double (multi) buffering.
Multi-buffering can, for many problems, not only "hide" the latencies, but effectively eliminate them for all but the first block to be transferred. If this new feature does automatic loop unrolling and transparently adds multi-buffering (or even just double-buffering) when it detects it should be used, then that would be pretty nifty. Unfortunately, judging by the description in the article, this isn't what it's doing, and all we get is blocking, full-latency access to the "shared" memory, with "shared" in quotes because it's only a software abstraction, not a hardware feature. I could be pleasantly surprised, but from the article, it seems like it's only a sop to lazy programmers, and not real shared memory at all.
(*) I'm not actually up to speed on CUDA, so I'm assuming it uses DMA to do data transfers?
The newer versions are still Java on top of Linux. Trying to keep that secure is like trying to secure water with a sieve and a cheese grater....
So, you're saying it's easy, then? (hint: freeze the water first)
prosecute someone with solar panels on their roof
Just goes to show what a scam electricity generation is. You know those electrons the electric companies supply on one wire? They suck them back to their plant on the other wire! (then sell them back to you again--the cheek!)
You'd be better off with a coil of wire around your hat generating power as you move through earth's magnetic field.
Yoink. I'm off to the patent office to register my new "power-generating cycle helmet". Ta muchly.
Whaddya mean, "digital" fingers? Fingers are digits, you numpty :)
Thunderbolt and lightning---very, very frightening!
Is this publicly available so that sysadmins can run preventative measures?
You don't need it. Just put a few junk bytes at the end of your files. Should work. Unless they do block-level hashing, of course.
Or is that what THEY want us to think?
Wanes? Glad to hear someone's thinking of them.
Is it time for the thigh pocket ('sadlebag') to escape
I think they're called "cargo pants".
I'll chip in with a previous poster and mention that my Nexus 7 fits in my front jeans pocket just fine.
Since we seem to have a lot of number-loving commentards (numeritards?) today
Or, as Moss from the IT crowd put it in the Countdown episode: "overnumerousness".
Has prime number dates all the time: Since π(x) ~= x / ln x, just plug in Unix time (seconds since 1 Jan 1970) for midnight today and midnight tomorrow and subtract the two π(x) values. There are thousands of prime times each day.
What integer is it divisible by, other than one, and itself?
To use the lingo, being divisible by no other number except 1 and itself is necessary but not sufficient to describe what a prime number is.
I can haz golem now?
maybe anyone with tea leaves
If it's so efficient to upload by physically shifting disks around from place to place, why not go the whole hog and implement this "cloud" thing like a mobile library? I'm sure customers would appreciate the extra bandwidth, and if the disks are large enough, any latency issues (waiting for the van to arrive) can be ignored because it'll still get to you before a full download would finish.
I think these tech companies are doing things wrong.
re:... a proto-platypus with a Koala in its mouth!
Or perhaps a drop bear?
It should be fun when it arrives on Mars and finds out where the US bots are located. I'm sure that a 1-tonne, six-armed golden giant of a bot will make quick work of the pathetically puny, trowel-wielding US bots. Any news on whether Craig Charles will be commentating? If he's not available, David Lamb would do in a pinch.
Hmm... now that you mention it, I've got Orbital's "Are We Here?" in my head(*). Not that that's a bad thing :)
(*includes Carl Sagan samples, I think)
That the Spanish for "I see the sea" sounds like a pretty bad curse in Finnish. Maybe I misremembered cos the Internet tells me that the Finnish "Katso merta" means something disgusting in Italian.
Yep, 'smoking a fag' is apparently also a euphemism for performing oral sex on a homosexual man's phallus. Cue red faces all round.
And yet talk about people's fannies is totally socially acceptable over there...
So (IIUC) with this system in place we could prove that all messages supposedly coming from "Frumious Bandersnatch" do come from you, but not who you are?
In a nutshell, yes. The big difference in the paper is that the network provides a decentralised identity system, unlike here, where the "Frumious Bandersnatch" nym is controlled totally by the Register (well, and me).
Is that enough for you?
Let's not confuse anonymity with pseudonimity. The paper describes a method for building the latter upon a network that assume the former as a building block.
There are two routes to proving "identity" (ie, ownership of a particular pseudonym) as outlined/mentioned in the paper. The first is through ZK proofs. Using this, you come up with a secret and then convince some other party (the ZK proof part) that you know the secret or some property of it. When the paper talks about "identity", it's talking about a pseudonym, and when it talks about an "authority" it's talking about something that's acting as your delegate in proving that you own that nym (via a credential that you issue). ZK proofs mean that you can prove that you know the secret key, but never reveal any knowledge that could be used to reconstruct it.
The second kind of identity is group identity. You can prove that you're a member of a group by using one-way accumulators. A CA will generate an accumulator (like a hash table, but more compact and opaque) for each member of the group. Then each member can use that to identify themselves as being part of the group without revealing the other group members. This preserves the essential anonymity of the group (even to other members, though the CA knows the signing keys), while still allowing nym-to-nym self-recognition (and even proving membership to non-members).
It's pretty amazing the things that can be done these days with the crypto primitives we have. It's totally possible to set up an identity (read: pseudonym) system that is totally (well, computationally, to any degree you want) anonymous. That's why I called you out on your initial comment.
But that's just chicken and egg reasoning. It doesn't demonstrate any intrinsic value proposition for non-members. It's like saying, "if you have a fax machine, you can fax other people who have fax machines". If the network isn't there (or is shrinking, as I assume is the case for fax users) then there's no point in joining it. At least Bitcoin does have a clear value proposition (you might convert electricity into cash).
The sole reason that Bitcoin works is that peers have a vested interest (money) in doing one of two things: minting new coins, and proving that the ledger is correct. There's a delicate balance struck between regular users and those with vastly more computational power available to them. Bitcoin is structured in such a way that it's more likely that the latter can gain more virtual currency by playing by the same rules as the regular users rather than trying to subvert the system. This leads to the question of how a distributed identity system like this one is going to convince users that it's in their own interest to be "provers" in this system. For Bitcoin (and similar) the answer is obviously monetary, but the paper makes no mention of compensating peers at all.
The paper describes all the machinery, but completely misses out on the reason why anyone would want to devote their resources (CPU, network, electricity) to implementing it.
"to make assertions about identity in a fully anonymous fashion"
No, please do say more. You do realise how zero-knowledge proofs work? Or algorithms like Dining Cryptographers? Just because people hide behind masks it doesn't mean they can't make true statements (statements about identity included).