2177 posts • joined Wednesday 10th June 2009 13:26 GMT
Re: nice collection but a bit on the boring side
It's probably almost as fast as a cell phone, and uses only fifty times as much power! Awesome! :D
OK, the Xeons will probably stomp most cell procs per-cycle, but the Quadro won't be able to get out of its own way compared to the GPUs in a modern device. Kinda scary, really.
Attacked as part of the wealthy elite - for taking a bus? Damned if you do...
I'm with the author on the monitor bit - I keep a couple of CRTs around for the same reason. But this?
"What's annoying is that HP stopped supporting it years ago, so my poor wife is stuck with Windows 2000 and the responsibility of acting as a print server."
Seriously, dude? You saddle your wife with that so you can avoid spending, what, like 35 bucks on a new printer that will be about fifty times better? You've found yourself a woman who is either very patient or very gullible.
Or you look like Chris Hemsworth.
Re: Yes, your bitcoins are worthless...
You were going great until 'Chevrolet'... ;)
Re: entrenched industry...
"Currently a bureaucrat can always print more of the crap up, taxing you unawares via money inflation"
Yeah. This could theoretically happen.
But in reality, as I pointed out above, it doesn't, and it's highly unlikely to - at least unless you're living under a tin-pot autocrat like Maduro, in which case you have issues beyond mere monetary policy.
I'm not sure why goldbugs are so obsessed with devaluation and inflation, but their occurrence *as part of a deliberate attempt to drive the value of the currency down* - as opposed to it happening for other economic reasons - is essentially unheard of in the developed world. Any government that significantly devalued its currency would face almost immediate doom, and in most cases, governments can't even do that directly - in the US, at least, the Fed is politically independent. And it would hit the *fan* if a president started tossing out Fed chairmen who didn't toe the line.
The fact is that there are quite a few checks and balances on the way the economic system works, and generally it's worked quite well. Yeah, you get things like what happened 2008, and the Euro zone doing its best to self-destruct, but the fact that something so complicated - politically and technically - works so well is quite remarkable.
There are problems to be solved, certainly - but spittle-flecked invective about fiat currencies and devaluation is little more than a nerdy counterpoint to joining a back-yard militia.
Re: Fearmongering from the Masters
"the whole mercantilist bull of "fixing the interest rate" and "keeping the EUR/USD/YEN/RMB" low relative to other currencies to "help exports""
You say this like it's a bad thing. Controlling interest rates and the strength of currencies is essential; without the option to devalue, you end up with horrid circumstances in countries with different economic situations. Greece comes to mind - being part of the Euro, they couldn't devalue, and in the event that would have been a softer way to handle the situation.
Yeah, there can be issues with countries artificially propping up / pushing down their currencies, but that tends to get dealt with by the international community in a mostly effective way.
Further, the paranoia about devaluation and inflation is pretty much just that - paranoia. Hyperinflation hasn't been a problem for decades, and the fantastic doomsday scenarios of governments going off their rockers and printing bazillions of dollars just aren't going to happen in the developed world - not without a triggering situation that's going to be terrible whether or not there's subsequent devaluation.
At the moment, the bigger problem economically is *lack* of inflation, actually - generally, monetary control has been too tight, not too loose.
Re: This is just about the money
I'm not sure I'd want to have the cable standards people responsible for nuclear nonproliferation, global warming, and world poverty...
It was promising...
...until they got to this:
"if a lawsuit fails they would have to pay the defendant's costs."
Assuming that applies to all cases, it's like handing a free pass to big companies. Suppose a Fortune 100 company infringes on a patent my five-person company holds - suing them would be an insane risk. I'd be forced to defend my patent with my three-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyer, but if I lose, I'll have to pay their team of fifty two-thousand-dollar-an-hour lawyers? You'd have to be crazy to take that risk.
If the law is implemented the way it appears from this article, it's little more than a way to ensure that individuals and small companies no longer have patent protection from large corporations.
I said the same thing when they invented the wire. We've gone along just fine without stretching metal into thin strands and electrifying it; now you need to go complicating everything! Every house in the world is obsolete! Think of the expense!
Re: entrenched industry...
"SHOW ME THE METAL!"
Do you have the slightest idea how absurd it would be to try to physically fling huge quantities of metal back and forth across the world for no reason other than getting a fuzzy-wuzzy feeling about the good old days? Even if you *could* do it without the international monetary system collapsing - and you couldn't - the overhead would be ridiculous.
And the moment you said, "Well, OK, we don't really need to move these bits of gold around; as long as we know they're there it's good enough", you're right back where you came from, because somebody can always dig some more of the crap up.
Essentially all it would do is create a system where quantitative easing was performed by mining companies rather than reserve banks, which strikes me as an incredibly bizarre and most likely very dangerous way to do business.
Re: Fearmongering from the Masters
"That is what Seigniorage is about: "the difference between the value of money and the cost to produce and distribute it", aka. "stealing""
So that basically makes any currency which doesn't consist of solid hunks of metal (or any given thing) a form of theft - meaning that somehow you feel that it's different when the market determines some gold is worth depending on how much people are currently managing to dig up (at a profit, of course) vs. the market determining how much a euro or dollar is worth depending on... how many of them people are willing to trade for other currencies... hmm... which can be created (dug up) at will - at a profit.
Interestingly, your take on currency-as-currency rather than currency-as-proxy-for-arbitrary-rare-metal-chunks is about as accurate as "first f*ck rights", which, while much-talked about, were rarely seen in the real world.
Does every school kid make it save to use for someone completely inexperienced, practical to mass produce for a sale price of $10, and work for hours rather than a minute or two?
Re: next step: scale it up a bit
Yes, you appear to have not only solved humanity's most pressing problem, along with all its devastating side effects, but outdone hundreds of thousands of engineers and disproved almost all of modern physics, all in one fell swoop!
And yet here you sit, commenting about it on El Reg.
Let me guess: The oil companies have threatened you, right?
Re: business model wrong? No.
"(Thomas Paine: "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly:")"
That's easy to say when you're already in the upper class, isn't it?
Everybody should just switch to CAN bus and be done with it.
I always figured that 'quirky spotter' was a game you played while people-watching in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.
It's worth mentioning that from the target audience's perspective, that $10 cost is the equivalent of something like $800 or $1000 to most of us reading this. It's a Big F*cking Deal to be able to afford one of these.
That's not to say that they haven't done a good job - but it does put some perspective on how well we live compared to most people in the world. I mean, when I want some extra light in my bedroom, I'll use the flash on my phone - the contract for which would cost more than the entire income of a lot of the people who might use this light. Buying the device outright is pretty much the same for someone in those circumstances as spending $150,000 for one of us; an absurdity.
There isn't any easy solution to any of this, and I'm not writing it to rage against the horrible iniquity of it all - that's been done before - but it's worth remembering once in a while, if for no other reason than to give oneself a sense of perspective about one's own life.
They'll bite Google's kneecaps off.
I recall an amusing EULA for an independent software package - it was the usual box that you had to scroll through fifty pages of in order to get it to let you click 'OK'. If you did this too rapidly, it would pop up a box saying, "You just read that whole EULA in 1.7 seconds. Would you like to go back and have another look?" or something similar.
I didn't go back to have another look, but I had to give the guy credit for hanging a lantern on the absurdity.
Re: half the noise?
"However, it's not clear for what reference power level the dB levels are referring to."
"Decree 174 follows up on Decree 72"
Kinda makes you wonder what was in the intervening 101 decrees...
I was about to reply, "Well, at least this thing won't crash yo--", and then thought, "actually it's not a bad analogy..."
Re: Sad to see ..
Lecture? That barely qualifies as a course description. I must say, however, that I appreciated the novelty of your insult very much - I have been called many things online, but 'pseudo liberal tosspot' is a new one. I'm not entirely sure what aspect of my post qualifies me as 'pseudo liberal', though - am I being accused of closet conservatism, or closet socialism? Both? The mind boggles.
"What does business centric storage mean?"
It means that the old buzzwords are getting stale...
Re: Sad to see ..
The article was *about* IT. The fact that the product being sold was porn is occasionally amusing, but not the overriding point. If you can't read about the porn *business* without separating it from the sexuality, I suspect *you* may be more obsessed with it than those you accuse.
Re: A leading Japanese online pr0n distributor is called...
I've got your seasonal fruit injection right here, buddy.
Yeah, they were easy to read between, but the presence of an article that's this subtle raises the distinct possibility of a bunch of copypasta news sites rewriting it without the invisible bits - for audiences that don't know enough to realize how bad these people are. I'm all for subtlety, but these kinds of cockmongers deserve only to be either ignored or shredded. Surely there was an opportunity here for actual journalism to take place, research to be done, and dirty laundry aired; that's what journalism at its best is *for*. I have little doubt that the Reg could gather enough information to utterly tear up these losers, and given that they damage society not only by commiting crimes but by eroding the public's confidence in real science and engineering, I can think of few better targets. A wink-wink-nudge-nudge is, if nothing else, lazy, when The Reg's considerable aresehole tearing skill could easily have been brought to bear.
I fail to understand the credulous surety with which people seem to assume that a string being present in some binary indicates forthcoming corporate policy. I can guarantee that anyone trying to discern my corporate strategy by digging strings out of our binaries is going to be comprehensively misled at best!
Seriously, reg? What's next, a breathless article about these amazing penis enlargement pills you can buy?
These guys are criminals, plain and simple. Approaching them with the softball skepticism you did is, for this venue, tantamount to a flat-out endorsement. Are you so terrified of libel laws that you can't even run article about bald-faced liars and con artists without making them seem potentially credible?
Re: How big are the tanks in Olympic swimming pools?
"Why would one put a tank in a swimming pool?"
Well, the enemy will probably never expect it...
" I once threatened to resign if I wasn't relocated to a location with a window."
Thus marking the only time in history when a worker threatened to quit if he wasn't allowed to start using Windows.
Re: Amazing, but...
"It's very hard to build a machine to emulate a process when nobody knows what that process really is."
This explains why nobody has managed to emulate women, at least.
Re: Just as well it's using visual rather than audio training data.
Hah. I can see it now - "US government defaults on debt after 500 trillion dollar judgment in RIAA lawsuit; RIAA officials declare victory as Google closes doors, economy crumbles".
Unless it responds to my saying "Computer!" with a chirp, and responds in Majel Barret's voice, I'm not interested.
Re: The biggest problem with flying cars
Helicopters have always struck me as one of those design ideas that's only around because of inertia, and only existed in the first place because the standards for performance were different and there weren't other options.
"Hey, I have an idea for this transportation device. It'll fly, but be very very difficult to control, and it won't be able to pick much up at all. And it'll be slow, and extremely loud, and guzzle fuel like no tomorrow. And a lot of people will get killed in them, because they're absurdly complex and drop like rocks when they break. But even so you'll have to rebuild them from the bottom up every hundred hours.
"They'll also be horribly fuel-inefficient.
"We really think that the general public should use them for sight-seeing tours purchased from cash-strapped, low-margin operators, and that it would be a great idea to send them into war zones in general since you can down one with a single bullet, unlike fixed wing aircraft, which often keep going having absorbed enough ordnance to supply every rebel group in a large south american tinpot dictatorship.
"They're going to require lots of high-risk R&D and engineering and be ridiculously expensive, too. So, who wants to sign up?"
Re: The biggest problem with flying cars
"a rolled homogenous steel umbrella"
So, with that, instead of being crushed by an airplane which is travelling at 100 knots, you'll get crushed by a rolled homogeneous steel umbrella which is travelling at 100 knots because it's got an airplane on top of it...
Re: No shortcuts with AI
"cognitive development may depend on millions of years of inheritance"
Funny, I've been thinking the same thing about my OOP code.
"Needless to say apparently few of the other vans accumulated scraps, bumps and even speeding tickets to meet the demands"
In this case the problem isn't so much with time limits as with time limits being set in an utterly moronic fashion. Requiring someone to make *a specific delivery within a period of time* is as absurd as requiring a photographer to get a picture of a bolt of lightning once every day whether it rains or not, when all you really care about is that he have ten of them by next month.
If the people implementing the system hadn't done it so it required things that would often be physically impossible, it wouldn't be so bad - for instance, if the requirements were for a rolling average, and you had N days to shape up or explain yourself if your average went up too much, etc. But whether or not a tracking system using timing to judge work output, it will break horribly if the people doing the implementing are too blinkered to see reality.
Re: Easy Target
Hell, a Formula One driver can lose his whole career just by being a few seconds late on one day at work.
"doesn't matter what word you put in a search engine there'll be porn on the 1st results page"
I'm not sure I've ever seen this happen. What kind of words are you searching for, anyway? :P
Re: In the States the human genome was patented, so we better watch out otherwise ...
The "human genome" was patented? News to me. I'm aware of *attempts* to patent *utilization* of *specific bits* of it in respect to *certain tests*, but I suppose that doesn't sound quite as dire.
Re: I like the sound of this
You sound like a real blowhard to me.
I hate it when people get in a TIFF over filename pronunciation.
Re: this is getting a bit absurd, don't you think?
That's a bit rich if you're from the country that repeatedly chose Blair to complement him. :P
Welcome to working for a living, buddy - just because this is the only time you've tried doing what 70% of normal people out there do all the time doesn't mean that Amazon are running some kind of unique hellhole. Complaining because a warehouse stock job left no room for decision making and critical thinking? What the fuck did you expect, to be writing a column for The Economist?!
In other news, my phone's autocorrect has started randomly doubling the first letters of words I type and ignoring the next space bar press. Awesome.
What the hell? I know I've said that there isn't anything that Reg readers won't find a way of blaming on the United States, but this is getting a bit absurd, don't you think?
Re: Just one question..
According to the video, the resulting files are smaller.
I can imagine the discussion with the wife when the man of the house decided to put in the wine cellar:
"Look, honey, it's just this one room here. We don't even use it anymore since the new torture chamber opened."
"It's huge! Look at all of this - we probably couldn't finish it in 4000 years!"
"Oh, don't be ridiculous! You women are always exaggerating!"
""You're right that if you want to go online and pwn some n00bs in TF2, the Rift will, by its nature, be a handicap - I think it's hard to beat mouselook for efficiency in aiming."
Dumb comment. No-one is suggesting that OR be used to control aiming, that would clearly be stupid."
On the off chance anyone will see this: The OR *can* be used to control aiming; there are various implementations, in particular with TF2. But no matter how the *aiming itself* is achieved, you're still *looking around* with the OR, which means that if you're not also aiming with it, aiming and looking are decoupled (as in real life). But with mouselook, aiming and looking are the same, so, for practical purposes, mouselook means you've got the movement of the whole screenful of graphics to correlate your aim with. It's much more difficult to aim without the static reference point of the monitor frame, and the static internal reference of your stationary head.
The only way to recouple those things is actually *to* aim with the OR. But that's impractical, because the mouse is necessary to do rapid turns; you can't be spinning around in your chair for obvious reasons.
This shouldn't be construed as a knock on the OR - it's just that it won't be an idea means with which to compete in FPSes as they are currently implemented. Ideally, though, the OR is the kind of device that will, quite literally, be a gamechanger, in that the games themselves - whole genres - are going to be reshaped to match its capabilities and characteristics. It's a completely different world.