my single point of reference is that SSD's while fast, are actually too fast for some video transcoders. (I have converted tape to DVD and Blu-ray with my computer before) it actually caused a bug that would crash the system when i was using an older, but functional tool to convert video, and for transcoding video IO is a factor as the processor can write out data faster if the CPU can keep up with the transcode (for instance doing 600 FPS of transcoding with simultaneous audio muxing i think it's called, to keep the video and audio in sync with each other) if only i had a video transcoder that uses graphic cards i could probably saturate a SSD when considering that an 8 core cpu is only doing 600 fps and a 2048 stream processing unit gpu should be much much faster.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
The difference between Europe and America: * In America 100 years is considered a long time
I hear this shit all the time from Europeans. Oh your country is only 200 years old. Fucking racist, we had people here 30,000 years ago, just because they're a different colour doesn't mean it's less relevant.
And ultimately we're all 2000th generation African, so we all share a common history. It's not like humans in this part of the world just popped out of thin air 200 years ago. Your 5000 year old relics are equally my 5000 year old relics, since their connection to either you or I is so equally distant.
What kind of legacy did the native americans leave 2000-3000 years ago to civilisation ? The Romans built roads, acquaducts, conquered the known world, invented Roman Law (that underpins most non common law systems even today). The Chinese had similar accomplishments. The Greeks invented Democracy (although Greek democracy was different from modern day democracies), managed to conquer territories up to India , had great philosophers etc... American history starts in the 16 th fucking century with European explorers. Your nation comes into existence in the late 18th century. So yeah you're a young nation.
Apparently you've never heard of tribes such as the Creeks, Alabamas, Natchez, Chitimachas and Choctaws. They left ruins of their civilizations, many older than the Romans, all over the American southeast. All the Southwest states contain countless ancient remains and Native American sites. In the Texas panhandle you can visit the Alibates Flint Quarries National Monument, which contains some ancient flint excavation pits thought to have been used for up to 12,000 years.
Link to Original Source
It's news because it wasn't known before and it tells us a lot about Google that we've only had hints on before. It's also an interesting recap on the early days of Tesla. Tesla wouldn't be the first company that released (despite their best efforts, I'm not blaming them) overpriced underspec'd crap at the beginning that could have severely dented their future business, but it's often hard to remember that.
Remember the original iPhone? EDGE only? Required special SIM cards? Barely supported text messaging, and didn't support MMS messages at all? Didn't run third party apps at all? You don't? Nobody does? It's true!
Yet the iPhone survived all that and nobody remembers how awful the first version was. Turns out Tesla's original sedans were a similar story. I didn't know that. I thought they were always cutting edge.
No that's what the summary says, but is not what Chrome is actually doing.
Spoiler for those not reading TFA: Chrome did do what the summary suggests in current/earlier versions (as do IE and Firefox), but will instead change "http" to "https" behind the scenes in future for internal links on a page fetched using HTTPS.
Is this a good idea? In my view, I'm going to be bold here and answer with a firm, unambigious, "perhaps"...
I'll start asking what I can do for my country instead of what it can do for me when government and industry lead as examples. I'm not your fucking Boxer.
The main difference I'd see is that it's much harder if not impossible to spoof an IP address in a TCP connection, considering that it takes a completed handshake before any meaningful traffic (read: lots of bits) can take place. I could for example see this making upstream filtering of DDoS attacks more difficult.
Hmm... can the phones only receive or also send?
Ok, you are not aware of the "if the headline asks a question, the answer is invariably 'no'" meme.
Then Germany and parts of Poland would now be a smoldering crater of a nuclear death zone with little chance to ever clean it up in this or any of the next generations.
By no later than 1944, the German Luftwaffe was in no position to conduct any offensive action anymore. The air superiority of the allied was total. Including Germany. So even if he had the bomb, he certainly would not have any means to deliver it anywhere beyond the areas that Germany still occupied.
Given his "strategy" (I'll use that term loosely here) of scorched earth, it's likely that he would have had it used to increase the destruction on the retreat, to decrease the useful materials the approaching allies could use (as he did) but also to create a zone of denial that they would either have to avoid (and thus lengthen the supply lines) or cross while accepting the losses (something the Soviets would probably even have done).
In short, Germany having the bomb after 1944 would maybe have lengthened the war (though this is unlikely due to the Allies having it in Summer 1945 and Berlin having actually been the original main target, Germany was just lucky that it surrendered before the bomb was ready for shipment). It would certainly have meant more suffering for Germany due to self inflicted nuclear destruction (Hitler himself considered the Germans "unworthy" at the end of the war because they have "proven to be the weaker people and not worthy of continued existence". Together with his fantasy of a "Götterdämmerung", an epic apocalypse that has to happen to "his" Germany if he himself fails, it's likely that he would have called for the destruction of large cities before they fall into enemy hands. What would have been interesting is to see how many people would actually have been fanatical enough to do it).
Even excerpts of a diary would probably not be covered by "reporting". But hell, just wait. He died on May 1st 1945. Copyright in Europe is, if memory serves me right, life of author + 70 years.
In about 2 weeks it's 70 years that Goebbels died.
You mean, like, both of them?
The combination you describe isn't that common. Especially if you add "good, skilled AND not earning more than thrice the offered sum in the real world".
The main problem is that the "spirit" of hacking is diametrically opposite of what the military is like. Not that that "spirit" mattered much anymore, but it's still why most people get into the area. They usually stay for the money, Which is another thing that works against the military...
So the military is neither attractive to new people who want to get into the field, nor to seasoned veterans who learned just what salaries they can ask for.
Plus, despite money, most "hackers" still have some kind of moral limitations. At least the people I know, and I dare say that, would not easily be convinced that it's ok to blow up some nuclear plant by messing with its computers from afar for the odd chance that some terrorists may be near while killing a few million as collateral damage. Given the international structure of the community, it's very likely you actually know someone in the country that's supposed to be attacked.
It's actually stunning how many people are self proclaimed hacking experts and yet seem to get most of their knowledge about hacking from sensationalist news and Hollywood.