Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Really bad explanation of the evolution. (Score 1) 133

by dmbasso (#47375287) Attached to: Tibetans Inherited High-Altitude Gene From Ancient Human

Because you said that thousands of years ago specific genes were transplanted

No, I didn't say that. The example I gave was only to elucidate that a single gene (or even a bunch of them) doesn't define a population. I read my post again and the message still seems clear. But ok, I'll make it fucking transparent: suppose I write a book and copy an entire paragraph of Shakespeare's Hamlet, then proceed to burn every single copy of the aforementioned play. It doesn't matter that a paragraph continues to exist in another book, Hamlet went extinct.

Comment: Re:Really bad explanation of the evolution. (Score 1) 133

by dmbasso (#47374811) Attached to: Tibetans Inherited High-Altitude Gene From Ancient Human

I haven't said Denisovans were a different species... you are aware that the word "extinction" is not limited to species right? If all Caucasians | Africans | Mongolians died, their population would be extinct. Their genes would still survive in other humans, and that doesn't make any difference to the fact they would be extinct.

And how the fuck did you read religious connotations in my post? I'm an atheist.

Comment: Re:Really bad explanation of the evolution. (Score 2) 133

by dmbasso (#47374119) Attached to: Tibetans Inherited High-Altitude Gene From Ancient Human

The explanation of the evolution is terrible. If the gene was inherited from a "Denisovans" then that Denisovan didn't go extinct. His descendents are still among us. The gene did not spread through the population; the people who had the gene survived and people without the gene disappeared leaving more space for those survivors.

Yes, the "people with the gene" were called Denisovans, they "disappeared", therefore they did go extinct. It seems you don't follow the logic of your own statements.

And just to make it even more clear: suppose I make dog with the tomato gene for photosynthesis (a solar powered dog, how cool is that), then kill every single tomato plant in the world with some Monsanto shit. It doesn't matter that my glorious green power efficient dog would carry the tomato gene... tomatos would still have gone extinct.

Comment: Re:what? (Score 1) 80

by dmbasso (#47276163) Attached to: Intel To Offer Custom Xeons With Embedded FPGAs For the Data Center

I would assume the FPGA part of the CPU would be programmed in VHDL.

Yes, that's the obvious reasoning. And that's certainly interesting enough on its own. But the summary said

[...]for critical functions without translating the majority of their code[...]

Somebody has to do the translation, agree?

Comment: Re:what? (Score 1) 80

by dmbasso (#47275291) Attached to: Intel To Offer Custom Xeons With Embedded FPGAs For the Data Center

I agree it is a good thing. IIRC, Altera even made a tool for synthesis from OpenCL (great for me, as I don't know VHDL and Verilog).

I'm in particular interested in that Parallella board (http://www.parallella.org/), but they're out of stock, and I've been the queue for months without a response.

Comment: what? (Score 2) 80

by dmbasso (#47273797) Attached to: Intel To Offer Custom Xeons With Embedded FPGAs For the Data Center

By using FPGAs to accelerate certain specific types of workloads, Intel Xeon customers can reap higher performance for critical functions without translating the majority of their code to OpenCL or bothering to update it for GPGPU.

What? This doesn't make sense. Unless Intel invented a way to automatically generate parallel code (in which case it could also be used in GPUs), somebody would have to rewrite the relevant parts of the program in VHDL, Verilog, OpenCL, or whatever.

Comment: Re:simulator? (Score 1) 167

by dmbasso (#47263155) Attached to: Android Needs a Simulator, Not an Emulator

According to Wikipedia and vocabulary.com:

Simulation
Simulation is the imitation of the operation of a real-world process or system over time.

Emulation
In computing, emulation is the technique used so one machine gets the same results as another.

So I stand by everything I've said, including that you're wrong.

Comment: Re:simulator? (Score 1) 167

by dmbasso (#47262373) Attached to: Android Needs a Simulator, Not an Emulator

You have it exactly back asswards.
A simulator simulates how and emulator emulates what.
If I develop an exact description of the hardware down to the individual registers and control paths, that is called a simulator.

Ah, I see, when I control a virtual airplane the program is behind the scenes calculating all the mechanical, electrical, and {aero,hydro}dynamical forces, from the engine, from the control cables, from the landing gear, from everything, all the time, so we can call it a flight simulator. Oh wait, it doesn't! It just makes a rough estimate of the aerodynamical forces, to what you would expect it to behave. Then according to your (wrong) definition, we should call it a flight emulator.

Comment: Re:simulator? (Score 2) 167

by dmbasso (#47261341) Attached to: Android Needs a Simulator, Not an Emulator

Did you read the article? He defines simulator as a layer between the application and the OS.

I didn't RTFA, but let me point out that his definition is one way to implement a simulator. Let me summarize it for you:
Simulator: functionality, what it does.
Emulator: function, how it does.

A simulator mimics the real thing but isn't.

Both do it, only the objectives are different.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Working...