Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Lifespan of Tech books... (Score 1) 95

Considering the "useful lifespan" of tech books varies from 3 to 5 years, ALL such older books should become free PDF downloads. "Fun with Your Apple ][", "Windows 98 for Dummies" and "Solaris 2.x for Managers" are completely obsolete. Almost all the Python 2 books become antiques with Python 3 growing - ok, maybe not the best example (but better than Perl 6 which has been 20 years in Promiseland). Most often, by now, the hardware to run the examples is dead and the compilers or software very hard to find.

I still need my Apple ][ reference manual to remind me of the memory map in my Apple ][. I remember books that existed back then that seem to have been lost to entropy.

Comment Re:Wasn't the C64 just a BASIC interpreter anyways (Score 1) 95

That is a really good point that I overlooked. When I wrote BASIC on the C64 I didn't go nearly that far (but that says lots about how little I did with BASIC on the C64 and nothing about doing anything clever to not need those features). That said, if these were "programming for kids" type books would they go to that level?

Follow the link and read the book on machine code. Yes it goes to that level.

Comment Re:Wasn't the C64 just a BASIC interpreter anyways (Score 1) 95

Notably, there were no graphics and sound primitives whatsoever in C64 BASIC. If you wanted to take advantage of the (actually quite impressive, for the day) graphics and sound, you had to directly manipulate memory.

Fortunately, you could get excellent books on machine code for 6502 CPUs, written in a style that would appeal to children.
These days you get scratch.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 95

I'd love free copies of The Art of Programming by Knuth, or any of the K, R, or P books. Maybe even Bjorne.

I found TAOP in a bookshop in Seattle last week for two hundred and something dollars. I resisted buying it, because I had other things to spend the money on. Free would have been nice, but I don't think they'll be giving it away any time soon.

Comment Re:Sanders 2016 (Score 1) 176

>Probably has more to do with international trade being halted since December

You know international trade is not halted, yet you said it anyway. That makes you a liar.

LOLZ, as of this moment there is less than 10 cargo ships operating on the entire planet, the rest are moored. You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences, and they are already here. How about them train profits last month huh? No biggy on those 100 wally worlds shut down this week either huh? Your lack of perception does not make me a liar, just makes you fit right in on the bus load of retards.

You should take the pills the psychiatrist prescribes.

You should probably get rid of those rose colored glasses.

Read the Snopes article to which I linked which explains how that website only shows coastal traffic and so it doesn't give any information on shipping out at sea.

Our family business has been importing goods from Europe without interruption. We had a shipment arrive from Ireland yesterday. You are not showing good judgement in what and who you believe.

I take into account a lot of factors and read between the lines as we all know that media sources are doing a lot of BS'ing, profit loss in the train based shipping industry over the last month does appear to support cargo shipping has a serious problem that ultimately reflects on health of the world economy and there have been interviews with people in that industry that capitulate truth to the fact international shipping has fallen just short of halted as they would have to operate at a loss, oil industry has also taken notice and stopped gouging as much but at $20 a barrel the cost of fuel should be lower than it is, Wal-Marts in the hundreds closing is not a good sign at all either. Federal reserve closure of the NYC location and moved over to Chicago could likely be to cut costs to continue to present the illusion of a healthy economy by buying up stock when the NYSE/NASDAC starts to tank. Doctored figures on the actual unemployment rates. Pretty sure by the looks of the over all picture will be shown in the trucking industry next. Being that there is federal law that dictates the money in your account that is in the bank belongs to them in the event of a financial meltdown of the banking industry (again), the money belongs to the bank. Based upon what we saw in Greece, knowing there really isn't anywhere for the federal reserve system to kick the can this time, I myself would not trust the banks with the money. Sure, even the president stated that those who have stated the economy is in bad shape are full of it, but how often have you seen the government be honest about pretty much any situation days. There is too much real data to reference publicly available to support that the president is one that is full of it. It is also understood that it is an election year and the economy does experience an element of uncertainty during this process but this appears to be a bit more than just an element.

You've gone off the deep end. Start swimming the other way.

Comment Re:Power efficiency is good in some places, not al (Score 2) 337

Where I work we have lots of customers that *need* more processing power, and efficiency be damned.

I assume most customers who need extreme processing power have learned over the past 10 years that faster individual processors are not coming. Algorithm design plus parallel processors is going to be the source of perhaps all performance increases in the foreseeable future. Until we move away from silicon that is.

Are there even supercomputers out there which have faster processors than the fastest Xeon processors out there? I may be wrong, but I believe there really hasn't been any non-parallel based performance increases for a long time.

Yes there has, but more through architectural changes - new instructions, new modes, bigger better caches, improved offload models, task specific hardware (like crypto, packet moving etc.). This has been enabled by the increasing number of transistors on die and is driven by the mobile and server markets, which have evolving and quite different needs. Xeons today do more work per second than Xeons in the past and the scaling is greater than the scaling of the individual CPU core performance.

Comment Re:Better transistors? (Score 1) 337

And if they're having a significant reduction in power consumption, then adding more cores gets all the easier.

Its always seemed to me that the best approach to processing is to offer a variety of cores and let the scheduler handle what to put where. You can have one or two extremely fast cores, half a dozen moderate speed cores, and dozens or more low speed cores - why insist that all cores be the same in "general purpose" computing?

If the universe follows the usual scaling rules, I would expect the optimum size distribution of CPUs on a chip for general purpose workloads to be logarithmic.

Slashdot Top Deals

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.