2131 posts • joined Tuesday 24th April 2007 14:31 GMT
If you run truly parallel, shared-memory code (as we do on gigapixel-range satellite image analysis), an SMP box which is just a set of 4-core or 8-core blades held together by fast switches to appear as a single shared memory box, is pathetically slow, and scales horribly, compared to a 12 core or 24 core box sitting beside it. On the latter I get a speed up of 17.5 on 24 cores, which is kind of neat. On the 64 core SMP I get a speed-up of 1 to 3 on 8 cores, and just dismal results (0.2x "speed up" on 32 cores).
what a load of excitement over a fairly boring looking font. Maybe it will look better or be easy to read on a small screen. If so, very nice.
what I really do not get is why this is supposed to be about fluid seamless motion given that the font is very angular. what was the guy smoking?
This is interesting information
Could you give a link to articles or reports on that?
As a scientist I would be most willing to change my opinion (based on other reports, not gut feeling) given good evidence. What your arguments do suggest is that the culling would be directed to those sets clearly suspected as being infected, not just blanket killing of all badgers, which is not always made clear.
Indeed, and if farmers new more about epidemiology
there would be fewer epidemics, better controls on transportation, fewer animals kept packed too close together, and fewer knee-jerk reactions to any wild animal that happens to share their land.
R is great
It's like MatLab but for statisticians. SPSS, Systat (I am that old) and SAS are a straitjacket compared to the freedom of R. I used to do statistics in C (just wrote my own code for any methods needed), since R is around, I do not do this anymore.
Maybe Bletchley Park
should sell them an app that simulates the Enigma machine. Then we can put a remade Colossus or Turing bomb to good use again. ;-)
You really have to laugh at their stupidity. I new how to decrypt single letter replacement schemes as a kid (10 or 12 y/o).
If you REALLY want to be secure, use a (sufficiently random) one time pad. This is provably uncrackable. Truly random bits can be obtained can be obtained in many ways (including the use of various quantum devices, and radioactivity (no bad Fukushima jokes please)).
Calling the Lisa affordable
is stretching credulity to breaking point. The Lisa flopped not because of the features and performance, but because of the price (USD 9,995 in 1983!!). The Mac was much more affordable.
Is it just me?
Or does "Limited Extended Edition" sound ridiculous? I get annoyed by any "limited editions" anyway, as a production run of 15,000,000,000 is also limited, albeit to 2.5 per person on Earth (give or take 0.1).
Will they have an "Extended Extended Edition" later (and get into trademark trouble with Asus (Eee-PC))?
Will this EEE be on the future Ultra-Violet-Ray disc? Will an EVEN MORE EXTENDED EXTENDED EDITION be available on the even more future Xray-Disc format (sounds better dunnit?)?
Mines the one with the battered 3 volume LotR BOOK in the pocket.
@ Captain TickTock
Quite right, but as a parallel programming guy (C++ with libpthread and some MPI and OpenMP), I find there are often problems when processing order is data driven. Functional programming is not necessarily a boon then. One might argue that you are trying to shift the burden to the compiler designers. In effect we have the same problems when coding for GPUs. Having said that, even if we improve our parallel programming skills, memory-bandwidth bottlenecks are a key problem to be solved.
@ BristolBachelor: Wirth's law
"Software is getting slower faster than hardware is getting faster"
The fact that the minimum specs for Office 2007 equaled those of a Cray Y-MP performance and memory wise is telling
One problem with light is the wavelength
Even blue light is at 450 nm (in vacuum, about 300 in glass), MUCH larger than the components used today. Therefore, within a chip, you have to use near-field calculations, and interference is more complicated. This gets messy quite quickly. Besides, if both transmitter and receiver have dimensions much smaller than the wavelength, it is difficult to impossible to get any directional sensitivity. Optical interconnects between chips seem more feasible.
Frankenstein or Euler Fractur
are also nice
I thought someone had
i) spilled coffee
ii) fallen asleep
on the keyboard
I could not resists following the tag
However, unsurprisingly the response was
Sorry, there are no articles for this tag.
Try searching for all relevant articles.
It still leaves me wondering, what does
Amanfrommars, where are you?
The patent system in Europe works much better, because there is a proper evaluation of novelty BEFORE granting a patent. Only (comparatively) rarely are court battles needed. By penalizing the USPTO for granting idiotic patents (a method to LOSSLESSLY compress ANY bit string (including its own output) is probably my favourite) we may get rid of a lot of junk. In this instance the US should take a close look at the European system of patents.
new keyboard please!!
No mathematical equation can be patented
This is an exception written down in most if not all patent laws. As any algorithm can be expressed as a (sufficiently complex) lambda-calculus expression, no algorithm should be patentable, by this logic.
This is not my argument, by the way, but one put forward in an editorial in IEEE Computer Magazine. It does have logical merit, but I do see the point tat some algorithms might be patentable, because they are sufficiently innovative. The problem is that far too many obvious ones slip through (making a cursor blink by performing repeated XORs with the content of video memory is one). I also found that when implementing LZW efficiently, several optimizations I cooked up in a single afternoon violated patents (7 in all). Now I might be a brilliant programmer, if I can think of 7 patentable things in a single afternoon, but it may also be that some of these patents are indeed obvious.
But he lied.
He lied about the fact that it was not his work when handing it in, he then lied that there were only one or two "accidental copies". What he did was very serious, in terms of scientific behaviour, simple ethics, and certainly leadership.
Fetid dingo's kidneys
"Endangering or getting operatives killed is a very serious crime and Manning is being held accountable for his actions."
So why did some members of a previous US administration not face similar charges? A Pfc is easier to bully than a member of the administration?
In the case I refer to the name of an operative was maliciously leaked. The "revelations" so far in Wikileaks seem humdrum (though they may do damage).
but with Putin
if you make a noise, some thing BAD will happen to you
Anybody in science knows
that correct attribution of ideas is essential. Creating new ideas is what us scientists are about. You cannot touch them, but you can certainly steal them. (Almost) NOTHING makes scientists madder than others walking away or taking the credit for other peoples' ideas.
Budget cuts also make them mad of course.
but a lot of people
buy all sorts of kit for no better reason than that it is the newest. Whilst a more rational approach is better for your wallet, people wanting the latest do keep the economy ticking over, and lead to a supply of good s/h stuff which us cheapskates can snap up ;-)
It's on elephants, standing on the back of a turtle.
After that, it's turtles all the way down!!
This is anthropomorphism at its best. A very human trait: interpreting actions of machines in human emotional terms (which is why I call my windows system a complete bastard (and much, much worse)).
- Xmas Round-up Ten top tech toys to interface with a techie’s Christmas stocking
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Review Hey Linux newbie: If you've never had a taste, try perfect Petra ... mmm, smells like Mint 16
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- NSFW Oz couple get jiggy in pharmacy in 'banned' condom ad