Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Ken Smith on 19 Feb 2007 13:08 In article <66a0f$45d9e1db$4fe709e$21351(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: [....] >This might be a good point to branch into the question, >"How much of the universe is binary, and how much analog?" While it is obvious that much of quantum physics is because the number of bit are limited, it doesn't mean that the signals involved are not analog. If a signal is either high or low because the photon either reflected or it didn't, the signal is still analog. You would have to have multiple bits involved before the situation can no longer be said to be analog. [....] >One might think particle charges are binary. (<- teaser) ...and polarizations for a given experiment. > >I can't wait to hear MP's reply. LOL > > > > > > > -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: The Ghost In The Machine on 18 Feb 2007 15:18 In sci.physics, nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote on Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:34:33 -0600 <a87fd$45d8aa4d$4fe770f$11866(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>: > The Ghost In The Machine wrote: > >> In sci.physics, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> >> wrote >> on Sun, 18 Feb 07 11:52:37 GMT >> <er9em5$8ss_004(a)s1005.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>: >> >>>In article <cj2ka4-ise.ln1(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net>, >>> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics, MassiveProng >>>><MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> >>>>wrote >>>>on Sat, 17 Feb 2007 09:59:49 -0800 >>>><tiget2h5auga6jl46gn46oisadv8ckr322(a)4ax.com>: >>>> >>>>>On Sat, 17 Feb 07 14:08:30 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>The CPU isn't doing that work. That's what the video card >>>>>>does. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WRONG. The cpu is what the video playback applets run, and THAT is >>>>>100% cpu intensive for EACH AND EVERY FRAME of video PASSED to the >>>>>video card. >>>> >>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc >>>> >>>>is what I used for metrics. CPU utilization appears to be about 50% >>>>according to my CPU monitor. (Athlon XP 1600++, 1.4 MHz. 512 MB. >>>>BT5500 RV250-based video system. OS: Linux 2.6.20 Gentoo 2006.1. >>>>DSL line incoming. No skipping noted on this particular video >>>>during initial stream. Playback was possible without network IO. >>>>Note that this was in "tinyscreen mode". >>>> >>>>(This video is safe for work: "Spiders On Drugs".) >>>> >>>>Another test case >>>> >>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhd2lnCTWQM >>>> >>>>skipped horribly on initial load, but that looks to be >>>>more of a bandwidth problem than a CPU one. CPU utilization was >>>>slightly lower. >>>> >>>>SFW. Its main themes are apparently music, a school >>>>bus, and dancing. Replay was possible without skipping. >>>>Full screen utilized almost 90% of CPU, so that might be >>>>an issue. >>>> >>>>FWIW. >>>> >>> >>>If this becomes a common usage, it sounds like a dedicated >>>processor will be installed. >>> >>>/BAH >> >> >> One already is -- the GPU in the card could probably be expanded to >> include common codecs. This could get quite interesting, from >> a political standpoint, as Microsoft and others may want to >> ensure that DRM is enshrined into law and into one's 'puter. >> >> Fortunately, Microsoft and Sony have so botched it that they'll >> have to be very careful lest the public become even angrier than >> they already are about Vista. :-) >> > > It seemed an unwritten rule that one should only buy > alternate releases of DOS. They've managed to spread > the most significant horrors a little thinner. 95, ME, > NT(x2), Vista(x?). > An interesting observation, though a little strange when one includes items such as 98SE2. ;-) Still, one wonders. Vista was supposed to be The Next Great Thing(tm), and turned out to be a bit of a flop. We'll see what the next one looks like. Personally, I think Linux has a grand opportunity here. -- #191, ewill3(a)earthlink.net People think that libraries are safe. They're wrong. They have ideas. (Also occasionally ectoplasmic slime and cute librarians.) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: The Ghost In The Machine on 19 Feb 2007 10:57 In sci.physics, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:10:12 +0000 <45D9BDD4.B68B994E(a)hotmail.com>: > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: >> > >> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhd2lnCTWQM >> > >> >skipped horribly on initial load, but that looks to be >> >more of a bandwidth problem than a CPU one. CPU utilization was >> >slightly lower. >> > >> >SFW. Its main themes are apparently music, a school >> >bus, and dancing. Replay was possible without skipping. >> >Full screen utilized almost 90% of CPU, so that might be >> >an issue. >> > >> >FWIW. >> > >> If this becomes a common usage, it sounds like a dedicated >> processor will be installed. > > It's called the CPU. > > Graham > The CPU is not a dedicated processor. -- #191, ewill3(a)earthlink.net New Technology? Not There. No Thanks. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Ken Smith on 19 Feb 2007 13:17 In article <ercd3j$8qk_004(a)s942.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >In article <era48m$tvp$7(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: [....] >>The tasker in question was a special purpose bit of code. I could have >>made it so that a variable number of tasks with variable priorities could >>be done but this would have been more of a coding effort. The tasker did >>exactly what was needed. >> >>[....] >>>>Yes, but the two tasker served its purpose quite nicely. I created only >>>>the tool I needed for the purpose not a general OS. >>> >>>Sure. I understand what you did. :-) Now think about all the >>>different kinds of hardware, formats, software, etc. and the >>>fact that each person's individual system are all different from >>>any other system in the world, past and future. >> >>I didn't care about that. The tasker in question was for a single >>purpose. I could write one with all the requirements you suggest but why >>would I bother. I can just install Linux and be done with it. > >Honey, the people who wrote the Linux code did have to care about >that. Just because you don't need to know this knowledge can not >imply that nobody doesn't need to know this knowledge. We are not talking about me writing Linux or some other general purpose multitasker. I explained how a very simple special case one worked to explain a basic concept of doing a multitasker. If I was writing a general purpose multitasker, I would do it. I was explaining about a special purpose one running on a DOS box. [.....] >>>You can't force everybody to code every time they want to do >>>something extra. >> >>I don't want to force others to do something. I didn't care one bit about >>what they did. It didn't and still doesn't matter. The tasking under DOS >>did exactly what I needed done. Everyone else can go fish. > >This attitude will never allow you to do OS type programming. My >POV is from the OS development side; yours is clearly not. >As long as you remember this difference, you might understand >more of what I write :-). You are being insulting again. That combined with the fact that you are also being very stupid, doesn't reflect well on you. As I stated, I was writing a special purpose bit of code. If I had the job of writing a full up OS, I am confident I could do a darn good job of it. I have seen the technical information on how the innards of a few real ones worked. I have modified sections of a real time one. I have used a few of them. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Tony Lance on 19 Feb 2007 13:21
Big Bertha Thing retrenchment Cosmic Ray Series Possible Real World System Constructs http://web.onetel.com/~tonylance/retrench.html Access page to 600K Zip File Astrophysics net ring Access site Newsgroup Reviews including sci.med.nutrition 301 files concluding the two battles of cyberspace. (Third in Battle, Faculty trilogy) Students Research Faculty (SRF conference prefix) First Aid Tent (FAT project prefix on SRF conference) 1. Existence 2. Zero interference 3. Foundation (Students, tutors or funding) 4. Articles (See Armistice terms) 5. Publications (See overview) 6. Projects (Pastures, Moisture, Big Bertha, Strategic Studies) 7. Staff (First Aid Tent, volunteers, moderators) 8. Access None. 9. SRF Classical Astronomy (empty) deleted 10. SRF Net Access Policy (empty) deleted 11. SRF Los Alamos (restricted access.) deleted 12. SRF Big Bertha (Staff entrance) deleted 13. SRF Strategic Studies (FAT Net Access Policy) deleted 14. SRF Specification (FAT Classical Astronomy) deleted 15. SRF Mathematics (FAT CAT) deleted 16. SRF Prototype (FAT Yesterslaggings) deleted 17. SRF Yesterslaggings (Deleted) 18. OUSA Classical Particle (FAT First Aid Tent) deleted 19. OUSA Research (battle, faculty, retrenchment & 20 family jewels) I 45 day expiry mailboxes. (See SRF Yesterslaggings, FAT CAT, FAT Yesterslaggings) II SRF Los Alamos (See retrenchment) III OUSA Classical Particle (See faculty) IV Rest of SRF deleted conferences. (See faculty, retrenchment) V 20 family jewels, poem, battle, faculty, retrenchment. (See OUSA Research 14th Nov.97 to 1st Nov.98) VI 20 family jewels. (See battle, faculty, retrenchment) VII To the victor the spoils of the 1st and 2nd battles of cyberspace; the 20 family jewels and the potential CD Rom triology battle, faculty and retrenchment. VIII OUSA Research now empty. (See http://web.onetel.com/~tonylance/series.html) Big Bertha Thing deleted Now are all men deleted equal, from the high to the low. There is no distinction between newbies, spammers, spam busters, victims and tenure. There is no wrath in the deletion of the dullard, the sound bite or the sounding cymbal. Magna Carta is writ large on a world stage. This truly is the beginning of the end of spam. Tony Lance judemarie(a)bigberthathing.co.uk |