Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Extrapolate? (Score 1) 88

by Kjella (#49636007) Attached to: AMD Outlines Plans For Zen-Based Processors, First Due In 2016

Uhhhh...just FYI but Intel has come right out and admitted it rigged the benchmarks so you can trust them about as much as the infamous FX5900 benches with its "quack.exe" back in the day.

Yes yes, you spam that to every thread. That's exactly why I compared Intel with Intel. Unless you think they're creating benchmarks that's increasingly inaccurate for each new generation, the point was that AMDs "jump" isn't actually more than Intel has improved through yearly releases since. Do you think the benchmarks are more "rigged" for the 4790k than the 3770k? Is the lack of new FX processors not real? By the way, even Phoronix's conclusion says:

From the initial testing of the brand new AMD FX-8350 "Vishera", the performance was admirable, especially compared to last year's bit of a troubled start with the AMD FX Bulldozer processors.
  In other words, the AMD FX-8350 is offered at a rather competitive value for fairly high-end desktops and workstations against Intel's latest Ivy Bridge offerings -- if you're commonly engaging in a workload where AMD CPUs do well.

In not all of the Linux CPU benchmarks did the Piledriver-based FX-8350 do well. For some Linux programs, AMD CPUs simply don't perform well and the 2012 FX CPU was even beaten out by older Core i5 and i7 CPUs.

I guess "bit of troubled" was the most pro-AMD way he could describe the FX-8150. And the FX-8350 is a mixed bag. And there's been zero improvement since. I realize your anger but Bulldozer was a disaster, the number of AMD fanboys that swear to their AMD Phenom II X6s should be a clue. When you can't even sell it to the ones drinking the kool-aid, good luck selling it to everybody else.

Comment: Re:Just in time for the End of the Line (Score 1) 88

by Kjella (#49634317) Attached to: AMD Outlines Plans For Zen-Based Processors, First Due In 2016

None of those other nodes pitches involved dimensions of which quantum mechanical tunneling was the dominant effect, nor of gate thickness being one atom. But that's what 10nm is.

Not even close. They have on the research stage made functional 3nm FinFET transistors, if they can be produced in the billions is unlikely as it requires every atom to be in the right place but 10nm still has some margin of error. The end of the road is in sight though...

Comment: Re:Extrapolate? (Score 4, Interesting) 88

by Kjella (#49634193) Attached to: AMD Outlines Plans For Zen-Based Processors, First Due In 2016

Anyone care to extrapolate from current benchmarks as to how this new processor will compare to Intel's desktop offerings? I would like to see Intel have some competition there.

FX-8350: 2012
"Zen": 2016

The 40% jump is more like 0%, 0%, 0%, 40%.

If you compare a 3770K (best of 2012) to a 4790K (best of today) you get a ~15% frequency boost and another ~10% IPC improvements. If the leaked roadmaps are to believed Skylake for the desktop is imminent which will bring a new 14nm process and a refined micro-architecture at the same time as Broadwell missed their tick for the desktop, so in the same timeframe Intel will have improved 30-40% too.

Anyway you asked about AMD and I answered with Intel but it's a lot easier to get a meaningful answer without getting into the AMD vs Intel flame war. In short, even if AMD comes through on that roadmap they're only back to 2012 levels of competitiveness and honestly speaking it wasn't exactly great and AMD wasn't exactly profitable. They're so far behind that you honestly couldn't expect less if they weren't giving up on that market completely, which honestly thinking I thought they had. And I wonder how credible this roadmap is, I remember an equally impressive upwards curve for Bulldozer...

Comment: Re:Snowball effect (Score 1) 313

by Kjella (#49633767) Attached to: Why Was Linux the Kernel That Succeeded?

It's not a big mystery. Linus released a primitive kernel that worked, at the right time, with the right license, and then diligently kept rolling up contributions and releasing the result.
  These days he writes very little code himself; almost all he does is manage patches. I'm not sure how much code he wrote in the early days, but I think his diligent application of patches sent to him helped Linux to become stable and useful.

He wrote huge parts of it himself and in 2006 about 2% was still written by himself. I can't find how many LOCs it had then, but it was 5 million in 2003 and 11 million in 2009 so 8 million-ish. That means in the ballpark of 160.000 lines of code over 15 years, along with managing the whole project. And when that's not enough, he bootstraps what's possibly the most widely used source control management system today.

Now I've met people who are absolutely brilliant, they're rare. I've met people who truly excels at making everybody pull in the same direction, they're rare too. But I've never met one that's both, he could have been overly possessive and not let anyone else work on his pet project. It's one thing to say you want contributions, it's another thing to mean it in practice. Or he could have been the one pointing out a direction with nobody to do the heavy lifting.

Most of us don't even want to do both, the more I have to rely on others to get something done the more I realize how much I'd hate it if everything I did was manage other people. Those who want to run the business/organization/project get out of the doer role quickly, those who don't avoid management and get into some kind of technical guru role, to use a military analogy more like the special forces than a general. If you find one that both can do both and want to do both, you've hit the jackpot.

Comment: Re:All medical bills are mysterious. (Score 1) 468

by Kjella (#49630933) Attached to: The Medical Bill Mystery

It is just not these indecipherable codes on the bills. I typically get explanation-of-benefits that runs like, "X-Ray radiology 800$, Paid by insurance company 100$, discount to insurance 685$, you owe them 15$". Any one without an insurance will be billed 800$. No body would pay such an insane bill. They will sell it to some debt collector at some 20 cents a dollar. The bill collector would hound the patient, add all sorts of fees and penalties and dun payments. About two thirds of the bankruptcies in USA are due to medical costs. If the lab billed honestly and charged 150$ for uninsured, 100$+15$ copay for insured, things will not spin out of control this badly.

The price out to the collection agency reflects the likelihood that an uninsured person - a pretty good indicator that he can't pay - will pay a huge bill, not what the costs are. Now the US system is fucked but proper medical care is expensive, here in Norway we have universal healthcare and it's 11% of the national budget. It is three times the size of our defense budget, for example.

In large parts of your life, particularly until you finish college or you plan to take the money to your grave you don't have a chance at footing the bill for a major medical emergency. And if your parents don't have the money the first part is easily 25 years of your life. Particularly the final years are nothing but rolling the dice, some people drop dead with hardly any cost to the healthcare system while others have long-winded slides into terminal care.

Only 50 years ago you'd need a small army of people to do my job, simply because we have computers to do 99% of the legwork. One doctor is still treating one patient and the standard of adequate care has actually gone significantly up as we gain more knowledge, tests and treatments. And the narrower the scope, usually the more expensive the care.

In my country it's been hotly debated whether we should spend $100.000+ per patient per year to prolong the life of certain very rare diseases with extraordinarily expensive medication. I know we've sent children with brain tumors to the US for proton therapy many hundred thousands of dollars per patient, because the estimated cost of establishing our own is 200 million dollars to treat 200 patients/year.

And we want the best care, it's real hard to hear there's treatment that can help but we're not going to that because it's too expensive. Yet that is increasingly the case, it's not that the treatment doesn't exist it's that if everyone gets everything the system chokes. P.S. A modern medical X-ray machine is not cheap at all.

Comment: Re:This seems batshit crazy. (Score 1) 209

by Kjella (#49627173) Attached to: Police Can Obtain Cellphone Location Records Without a Warrant

Would the government need a warrant to compel your mother to turn over all the letters she's sent to you over the years, so they can retro-actively track your location in an attempt to link you to crimes?

Not sure the analogy is good as the content, yes obviously. If you're a fugitive from the law but they suspect your mom is secretly sending you letters do they need a warrant to read the mailing address? Probably not, a court order will probably do since it's information that the post office obviously must have in order to deliver it, just like the number you dialed.

Comment: Re:This seems batshit crazy. (Score 1) 209

by Kjella (#49627151) Attached to: Police Can Obtain Cellphone Location Records Without a Warrant

It is still a BS ruling. If I am in my own home making a phone call (I don't have a land line) I definitely have an expectation of privacy; location, content, and otherwise. Existing law already says that.

The "privacy of your own home" only extends as far as you keep your actions private, if you post home videos on YouTube they don't get the same protection as you have against the police planting a spy camera in your house. When you make a call, you're volunteering information to the phone company about where you are and who you'd like to call, you don't get any extra expectation of privacy from doing it from your own home.

Comment: Re:...eventually put people on butt (Score 1) 134

by Kjella (#49624715) Attached to: Opportunity Rover Reaches Martian Day 4,000 of Its 90-Day Mission

I can understand why you say we won't colonize Mars the way we don't colonize Antarctica, but going there? We've already had people travel through the vacuum of space exposed to cosmic rays to land on a barren rock and take off again. The latest estimates is that a Mars round trip will give you about 5% lifetime risk of dying from cancer, it's far from a deadly dose. We've had people living in zero-g for 437 days straight, we have people isolated in Antarctica for several months of solid darkness and cold. There's really nothing to indicate Mars is so inhospitable that we can't go, if we want to. It might not make sense to go because of the billions we'll need without much tangible returns but in practice we probably could.

Comment: Re:The /. groupthink is strongly against manned mi (Score 4, Insightful) 134

by Kjella (#49624507) Attached to: Opportunity Rover Reaches Martian Day 4,000 of Its 90-Day Mission

Still, I have to point out that this amount of research could have been done by a motorized human in half a day. For a rough estimate, look at the path the rover traveled in these 4000 days:

And the entire project with two rovers and five extensions has cost $944 million. The SLS program will cost tens of billions to develop and even then a launch would eat over half the budget, before you actually have any crew capsule, lander, habitat, return craft or scientific equipment. If you really did an apples-to-apples comparison on the same budget, you'd realize we're getting a very good bang for the buck.

Comment: Re:The 30 and 40-somethings wrote the code... (Score 1) 541

by Kjella (#49614525) Attached to: Recruiters Use 'Digital Native' As Code For 'No Old Folks'

I find it most ironic when I watch people chase technology like phones. They have a smartphone. It has X features and does Y things. They only use it for 10%X and 15%Y, but immediately upgrade to the new phone that has 150%X and 140%Y capabilities when they're still only going to use ten to fifteen percent of the capabilities.

So? I might be a shitty photographer, but I'm going to be less terrible with a better camera and smarter auto modes. I'm sure there's many ways I haven't taken full advantage of my computer, I've still upgraded it every so often. Phones advance at a fairly rapid pace even if users don't.

Comment: Re:EEO bullshit (Score 3, Insightful) 541

by Kjella (#49614305) Attached to: Recruiters Use 'Digital Native' As Code For 'No Old Folks'


This is one of the biggest bullshit laws I've ever seen. Let's say I don't want to hire you because you're old. EEO laws simply mean that I can't say it in your face that you're old. Instead, i send you the standard HR rejection e-mail and we're all good. Sight, I hate seeing my tax $$ going to waste drafting these stupid laws.


This is one of the biggest bullshit laws I've ever seen. Let's say I don't want to hire you because you're [black]. EEO laws simply mean that I can't say it in your face that you're [black]. Instead, i send you the standard HR rejection e-mail and we're all good. Sight, I hate seeing my tax $$ going to waste drafting these stupid laws.

You're right, certain bits hasn't changed much...

Comment: Fluff piece (Score 1) 65

by Kjella (#49614083) Attached to: Accessibility In Linux Is Good (But Could Be Much Better)

GNU/Linux distributions provide great advantages over proprietary alternatives for people with disabilities. All the accessibility tools included in Linux are open source, meaning their code is readily available if you want to examine or improve it, and cost nothing.

Because disabled people are so looking for a DIY solution. I'll give you the one about cost, but aids for the disabled are usually sold or given away far under their actual cost due to ideal organizations, corporate PR, government aid and so on unless you're making a business specifically for the disabled.

Developers who do not depend on assistive technologies tend to forget - or don't know - that a disabled person might want to use their application, read their web page, and so on. ... The problem is not necessarily that developers do not care.

Oh please, the open source community is 95% driven by scratching your own itch. Very few do any real effort to make it easier for other people to use in general, disabled or not. Which of course doesn't mean that we're heartless bastards, we do care that there are children starving in Africa and a blind guy who can't use your app. Just not enough to ever get around to it.

Rather, it's is that accessibility is highly specialized and requires someone with knowledge in the area, regardless of platform.

Yes, but it's usually not rocket surgery if you care enough to explore it. The few times I've dabbled in it I've found that often takes a lot of effort that doesn't benefit anyone but the disabled, the way a wheelchair user needs a ramp where a step works fine for everybody else. Or in other words, even if you know what you're doing it still takes time, that I certainly wouldn't want to spend on a hobby project.

Comment: Re:human overpopulation (Score 1) 146

by Kjella (#49608117) Attached to: Empty Landscape Looms, If Large Herbivores Continue to Die Out

Essentially, we need Africa to become more economically developed as soon as possible, and when that happens, it's almost certain that they'll follow the same trends that we've seen in happen in other developed countries: stabilizing populations and more serious efforts to protect their natural resources and environment. Unfortunately, we can only encourage these countries to protect their natural assets, but there's really nothing we can do short of that.

1. Well large land animals are an important source of tourism. Tourism is a huge source of income for many poor countries in Africa, like for example it's 12% of the GDP in Kenya. Most governments want to protect them and is willing to accept aid, it's individuals that want to poach them for personal gain. Which basically means they'll take funding, equipment, personnel, anything you're willing to give really. Granted, they'll probably not care so much about CO2 emissions or whatever. Then again, neither do Americans.
2. The reason the poachers are being so successful is because they're well funded from abroad, they're not fighting against the poor man in the street but heavy criminals propped up by first world technology. We can do a lot to try cutting off this supply, catch the smuggling, prosecuting the buyers, tear down the organizations and so on. It's organized crime, just not in a shape we see much of in the western world.

Comment: Re:bad statistics (Score 2) 239

by Kjella (#49606387) Attached to: Chrome Passes 25% Market Share, IE and Firefox Slip

Maybe because Net Applications is the only counter that tries to correct for known skewed sampling. Net Applications uses CIA internet usage data (how much of the population in each country has access to the Internet) to estimate absolute numbers for each country based on the measures distribution and the "Internet" population number. Net Applications is perfectly honest and upfront about this.

And yet if I look at StatCounter's map function, showing the leading browser in each country Chrome leads in most of the world. IE only leads in Japan, South Korea, Swaziland (pop. 1.1mio), Greenland (pop. 55000) and Antarctica (5000 visitors). Firefox has a few strongholds like Germany, Indonesia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Iran and a bunch of countries in Africa, but the only place IE is ahead of Chrome in second place is Iran (pop. 78mio). With Chrome winning on walkover in Europe, South America, North America, Africa and Oceania and taking massive wins in China, India and Russia I don't see how any possible weighting of StatCounter's numbers would put IE on top.

If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders. -- Hal Abelson