Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Too early for criticism. (Score 1) 238

>New York's job count is at an all-time high.

Depends how you look at the numbers.

I see New York finally recovered from 2008 after 7 long years of failure.

I see New York's growth (1.7%) lagging significantly behind the national average (2.4%) in the very reference you linked to.

I see New York as a top state that people are fleeing from (

Comment: Re:Too early for criticism. (Score 3, Insightful) 238

Well, it's two things, really.

1) Yeah, they want to get a tech nucleus thing going (which does actually work in some places, if done right) and are going about it in a really awkward fashion

2) They realize that the absurdly high taxes in New York are driving businesses away, and so they're giving a temporary tax break to out of town corporations to move in. The trouble is, the turkeys can see the farmer with the shotgun at the end of the line, and aren't buying it. Who would want to grow a business when you know you'll be taxed heavily after becoming successful? You might as well live here in the People's Republic of California where the weather is nicer.

Comment: Re:20 years (Score 1) 74

>The point is, it's a chip company, not a supercomputer company, that got the contract. All of your examples are of computer companies (IBM, Cray, Digital, etc.) getting the contract. In this case it's a chip company (Intel) that doesn't usually build the actual computers.

Re-read my list. Intel built one of the ASCI Machines. IBM is also a chip manufacturer (they did, in fact, create the chips for some of their supercomputers). Cray and Digital were also chip makers, though IIRC Cray was out of the business at this point in time.

Comment: 20 years (Score 4, Informative) 74

>>For the first time in over twenty years of supercomputing history, a chipmaker [Intel] has been awarded the contract to build a leading-edge national computing resource.

That's bullshit. Multiple supercomputers were built for nuclear security that were constructed after 1995.

I worked at the San Diego Super Computer Center during this time period, and could get access to them to run computations occasionally. Kinda neat.

ASCI Red (1.3 teraflops) was built by Intel in 1997 at Sandia, upgraded to 2.4tf in 1999:

ASCI Blue Pacific (3.9 teraflops) was built by IBM in 1998 at LLNL:

ASCI Blue Mountain (3.1 teraflops) was built by SGI in 1998 at Los Alamos:

ASCI Q (7.7 teraflops) replaced it in 2003:

ASCI White (12 teraflops) was an IBM box built in 2001 at LLNL:

ASCI Purple / ASC Purple (100 teraflops) replaced it in 2005:

Red Storm (36 teraflops in 2005, 101 teraflops in 2006, 204 teraflops in 2008) was built by Cray at Sandia in 2005:

Blue Gene (which are a whole line of supercomputers since the 90s continuing to the present day) have been built in different places, including Argonne and have hit 17 pflops and hold half the top10 list of supercomputers:

I did some of my Master's thesis on the SDSC Blue Gene supercomputer. Good times.

But yeah, anyway, the article is factually wrong.

Comment: Re:Yeah good luck with that... (Score 2) 587

by ShakaUVM (#49415985) Attached to: Hugo Awards Turn (Even More) Political

I follow Scalzi's Whatever. This is his most recent post on the topic:

He's leading the drive to vote NO AWARD against the conservatives who dominated the slate this year/ Even though he doesn't come out and say it explicitly, it's blindingly obvious what he's talking about. He did something similar last year when this stupid "controversy" emerged.

I don't recall him ever saying "VOTE FOR X", but the implied message is very clear.

Comment: Re:Or maybe... (Score 1) 417

by ShakaUVM (#49315293) Attached to: How 'Virtual Water' Can Help Ease California's Drought

>... don't plant water-intensive crops in a drought zone? Naaa, that would require actual understanding of the situation. As it is, the only thing that will help is all those water-wasters going bankrupt. Reality is merciless.

I know several almond farmers here in the Central Valley.

Contrary to what you and TFA think, they've been engaging in very significant water cutbacks on their crops for years now, testing to see how little water they can get by with needing. I think they're currently at about 10% of the water that they were using a decade ago. How? They have water sensors in the soil, making sure they don't overwater below the root line, that wirelessly report back their findings to the farmer, who can then turn on a very small amount of water as needed to trees that are bone dry. They've also found the trees are a lot more drought tolerant than anyone thought, and can get by with less water than is recommended.

Overall, their water efficiency is about 90% currently, with the remaining 10% waste being hard to get rid of, as its used for things like backwashing dirt out of filters and the like.

Farmers here aren't these naive "water wasters" as you so ignorantly put it, and have a much better "understanding of the situation" than you do.

Comment: Re:Sim Sickness (Score 1) 164

>In my experience it's not just a head tracking issue. Just the feeling of seeing your avatar walking around in the virtual world, while your real body is stationary, was enough to cause nausea in a lot of people.

Well. You shouldn't be seeing your own avatar. Other than that, there's nothing inherently sim sickness-causing about moving around a world. You could be a tank or an airplane or a person as far as your inner ear is concerned. What *does* cause a massive amount of nausea is when you are in a FPS and you're constantly snapping your neck around to see if someone is behind you, above you, besides you, etc. But that's not necessarily sim sickness - you'll get nausea in real life if you made the same head movements. You'll also wear our your neck muscles, which is another big issue... once VR headsets weigh past a certain amount, they cause neck problems.

Comment: Re:Sim Sickness (Score 1) 164

>Actually most of what you describe is solved. the head tracking latency is a solved problem, or at least well understood what is required to remove it as a cause for sickness

Well. A problem can be (and is) well understood without necessarily having a good solution for it.

I recall talking to Michael Abrash about how we quasi-solved it back in the day when he asked about it a couple years ago. And he was working on VR for Valve. So maybe, yeah, they solved it. But at the time he thought it was pretty much impossible to do right.

Comment: Re:Sim Sickness (Score 1) 164

>In your experience would you say that people can adapt to sickness caused by VR over time? Does it vary?

For some people, yes. They get used to it.

For me, I actually got more nauseous over time. But we also moved between software products and switched the prediction software, which was also part of it.

The interesting thing is that the people who are most in tune with their bodies get the most sick. My boss had a friend who was a pole vaulter who put it on and got instantly sick. Whereas people who aren't really physical have an easier time with it on average.

Comment: Sim Sickness (Score 5, Informative) 164

by ShakaUVM (#49191347) Attached to: Developers Race To Develop VR Headsets That Won't Make Users Nauseous

Source: I worked in VR 20 years ago for a defense contractor.

Sim Sickness is caused by a disconnect between what your eyes see and what your inner ear is telling you is happening. Your eyes are extremely sensitive to latency. If you snap your head quickly, even a small lag will cause a certain percentage of people to get nauseous. Having a fast and accurate motion tracking system is crucial, but you also need to have an extremely fast rendering engine and a headset capable of updating quickly as well. Motion prediction helps, also, but does not eliminate the problem. As does making sure your program doesn't require you to spin around a lot.

We can only put up with the horribly slow latencies on flat screen displays because they're not attached to our heads.

Comment: Re:Lots of weird crap coming out of Congress latel (Score 1) 517

by ShakaUVM (#49191301) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

>First, there is no reason to believe that list is exhaustive. According to the page itself, it is "a partial list of the chemical constituents in additives that are used or have been used in fracturing operations."

It a comprehensive list provided by the major fracking companies as to the compounds used in the last five years.

> It was only released in 2011 in response to a congressional investigation, having been held secret for 60 years.

Yeah. Four years ago. And yet you're defending people who made these claims:

"Like the fracking example parent mentioned; nobody is able to research their methods and the compounds used, because trade secrets"

"There is no scientific literature on how nasty fracking fluid is (blatantly not just inert chemicals) because the companies using it refuse to disclose what's in it."

My purpose in posting here is to note that these claims are, in fact, factually wrong.

>Perhaps you are willing to have your dinner grown next to a factory that can hold its chemical waste secret for 60 years, and then be unable to regulate that waste for another few years or decades, waiting for someone to bother to measure their health effects.

Clearly, your logic is, "Well, ShakaUVM corrected a factual error in two posters, therefore he must hate the environment and want everyone to get cancer."

Perhaps you should think that through a little more next time.

Comment: Re:Lots of weird crap coming out of Congress latel (Score 1) 517

by ShakaUVM (#49191261) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

>The point is they were widely being used before being scrutinized.

No, the point is you watched Gasland back in 2010, and thought your claim was still true today in 2015.

>Some of the compounds listed in that report (which I don't think claims to be exhaustive) are known or suspected carcinogens.

No kidding. I didn't say they were safe. I said your claim that nobody knows what is in them is wrong.

Theory is gray, but the golden tree of life is green. -- Goethe