Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Pretty good idea if it is your computer (Score 1) 78

by Crashmarik (#48456041) Attached to: Slack Now Letting Employers Tap Workers' Private Chats

Nobody talked about "secure" computers. If you are not using your OWN computer and your OWN network, youd better assume it can be tampered with (and even so, lets not get started on ISPes or malware for espionage). More so when using computers at work. The computers and the network belong to your employer.


Comment: Dark Star comes to mind (Score 1) 104

by Crashmarik (#48450787) Attached to: Nuclear Weapons Create Their Own Security Codes With Radiation

And as the bomb thinks things through

Bomb#20: In the beginning, there was darkness. And the darkness was without form, and void.

Boiler: What the hell is he talking about?

Bomb#20: And in addition to the darkness there was also me. And I moved upon the face of the darkness. And I saw that I was alone. Let there be light.

Comment: Re:The power of modeling ? (Score 1) 184

by Crashmarik (#48447107) Attached to: How the World's Agricultural Boom Has Changed CO2 Cycles

Why don't you give yourself a goldstar for being able to count while you are at it.
Here's some other things you can do to "Show the power of modeling"

Drop dye into water to show it causes it to be colored.

Verify that matter is neither created nor destroyed by combining substances in a container.

Show that adding two and two actually gives a result of 4.

Comment: Probably the future of online RPGs (Score 3, Interesting) 33

Game companies and developers are there own worst enemies these days. It's hard to find anything that doesn't have horrible flaws put in so the game company can charge you to avoid them. At least with player run worlds the people playing will have a connection and ownership interest in seeing that their experience stays a good one.

Comment: Re:I am sure there will be a challenge (Score 0) 137

by Crashmarik (#48410709) Attached to: Court Rules Google's Search Results Qualify As Free Speech

Obviously, if the company does something illegal the people behind it will be prosecuted, too.

Umm, no. Hence the Limited Liability Corporation.

Note that anyone who owns stock is one of the "people behind it ("it" being the corporation)", so your view of the way corporate law words would make YOU liable for the actions of any corporation whose stock is part of your 401k....

Fortunately, the rest of us live in a world of Limited Liability Corporations, where the owners are not held liable for the actions of the managers....

Reading is god damn fundamental. How in gods name did you jump from his obvious premise that the people carrying out the act wouldn't be shielded to shareholders who had no operational involvement would be held responsible ?

I eagerly await your overly complicated justification of why your premise is reasonable.

Comment: Re:Ehhh Meh (Score 1) 127

by Crashmarik (#48410539) Attached to: US DOE Sets Sights On 300 Petaflop Supercomputer

Just because a language has a feature doesn't mean you have to use it, especially when there are performance tradeoffs. And there are still performance advantages to having a static dimension within a multidimensional array, even if other dimensions are dynamic.

Hmm I must have missed where Fortran is the only language with statically dimensioned arrays, or where it is better to have a compiler decide what is safe to parallelize based on compile time analysis vs having the programmer decide what should be parallelized based on his understanding of the problem vs dynamically making that decision at run time.

Oh just an aside that is one of the many reasons it's damn near impossible to make blanket statements about how things perform on massively parallel systems.

Comment: Re:Of the individuals who died in 1965 (Score 4, Informative) 55

by Crashmarik (#48410493) Attached to: Machine-Learning Algorithm Ranks the World's Most Notable Authors

It's only authors who died in 1965. From the SUMMARY:


Starts at authors who died in 1900. If you going to completely misunderstand the meaning of the point and nitpick on petty details at least get them right.

Comment: Re:Ehhh Meh (Score 1) 127

by Crashmarik (#48410445) Attached to: US DOE Sets Sights On 300 Petaflop Supercomputer

And guess what, when the government orders new a hammer for a project, they probably are not going to do anything to advance the design of hammers

And they aren't going to spend 300 million dollars on it saying it's to maintain U.S. leadership in hammers.

It would be a waste of money if it was being built to just study supercomputers,

Shame the people making the law don't look at it the way you do

"will ensure the United States retains global leadership in supercomputing."

And lastly

but that isn't the point, as in these things are intended to be used to further other research, and nothing you've said suggests it is unable to do so.

If the other research goals can justify the cost let them just don't go around saying its goal is to advance supercomputing.

Maybe Computer Science should be in the College of Theology. -- R. S. Barton