Because we should all bow down to simplification and opinions of common people. Really? Go f*** yourself and then jump of a cliff.

Myself and other sane people will keep calling a computer a computer and not a "CPU".

Yet another load of bullshit linked to an ADHD article...

People that can juggle a lot of things in their head simultaneously can multitask. Most people can't and for those trying to multitask will strongly reduce work performance.

People that can't concentrate on things _may_ have ADHD. Or some other conditions or just bad genetics.

There's a huge difference between those things. Having ADHD doesn't give one a multi-tasking enhancement.

Sure we do, just look at a history book. Who are listed? How many of those directly or indirectly killed a lot of people?

Nope. All standard OoO mechanisms is one of pushing - that is pushing of operations to execute from the scheduler to the execution units. The execution units are dumb and only consume data, operation information giving a set of results.
In most OoO designs the amount of operations actually capable of flowing through the execution units are less that the theoretical width, limited either by the scheduler or the retirement logic.

A VLIW can scale to greater actual execution throughput however it is hard to make them perform good on many types of code. Compilers is one example of a hard type of program for VLIWs.

Out of order execution can only do one thing actually: cope with varying latency of operations. For most normal instructions a LIW/VLIW/explicit scheduled processor (yes there are some that aren't a *LIW type) can in most case do better than the dynamic scheduler. Where OoO execution really shines is hiding L1 cache misses and in some cases even L2 cache misses and there static scheduled code have a hard time adapting to hit/miss patterns.
The standard technique for statically scheduled architectures is to move loads up as far as possible so that L1 misses can at least partially be hidden by executing independent code, often using specialized non-faulting load instructions that can fail "softly" and be handled by special code paths. The problem doing things like that is that fine grain handling isn't really possible due to code explosion.

But it is fully possible to do partial OoO execution just for memory operations and maybe that's what Nvidia is doing. Maybe not.

...or one could just look it up on wikipedia.

Chemo is used for that. Hopefully we'll soon have drugs with better targeting of the tumor cells but hey, chemo have cured many people.

Idiotic drivel.
My mother have had 3 types of cancer (that is: of separate types not related to each other) and been cured of them all using different kinds of treatments.

My father have a friend that had bone cancer in the cheek which was successfully removed surgically with chemo therapy afterwards to avoid spreading.

A relative was diagnosed with throat cancer (she was a life-long smoker) and the first treatment planned was an operation to remove the main tumors, after opening her up it was discovered that the cancer had spread more than expected and later examinations showed the tumors had spread throughout most internal organs. Then the care shifted to make her death as comfortable as possible.

I could list more examples but the fact is that oncologists are medical doctors just as any in the field and yes they are treated by the same methods as anybody else if they get cancer. This strange paranoid fixation on oncologists is strangely often linked to antisemitism for some reason, like all oncologists would be Jews...

That isn't an argument?!?

If Intel bought the company and the product why wouldn't they keep using the name it already has and that still is associated with anti-virus programs? That would be ridiculous and potentially revenue loosing

If they would stop using the name of a drugged-out criminal, pedophile, probably murderer it would be for PR reasons. But the public mass doesn't really follow the "adventures" of this idiot like we /. readers are forced to.

Not really - learning the Von Neumann model is enough IMHO. The rest of architecture is optimization of small factors...

You work with RTOS development and don't know the difference between speed and reliable response times?!? Me thinks you are a bloody liar...

Example: The TLSF (Two Level Segregated Fit) memory allocation algorithm isn't used for RTOS because it is the fastest one - it isn't. But one can do analysis of the execution time and therefore determine the worst case execution time for all operations. _That's_ why it's used!

Right. Ever looked on some benchmarks for server applications? Java is often faster than C languages...

But it isn't unsupported! The amount of bugs caused directly or indirectly by bad memory management in insecure languages are pretty well documented if you'd be bothered to look.
That one can _badly_ do garbage collection in C/C++ isn't news and not surprising. One can do it in assembly for heavens sake!

Much C++ code uses reference counted garbage collection, some uses this combined with regions - allocating things on the stack and just letting them drop are region based memory management.

But reference counting _does_ have GC overheads, often considerably more than scanning type "traditional" GC algorithm. That includes pauses for GC.

I can't be bothered to read the article but the blurb above just say that 40% have no known connection with terrorist groups - not that they aren't potential terrorists.

Timothy McVeigh didn't have connections with terrorist groups - but he was a terrorist.
Ted Kaczyski was yet another terrorist without terrorist connections.

Which Fascist government did that? What you are doing is similar of what you complain about, you conflate Fascism with the related but different National socialist a.k.a. nazi ideology.
There are important differences and the similarities are mostly from 1) the fact that both were a reaction against decadence and the perceived weaknesses of the democratic system 2) that Adolf Hitler admired Mussolini and in many ways were inspired by the political foundations of the Fascist movement.