Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Last Chance - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment "Me too" (Score 1) 220

I don't give a tiny rat's ass either way, I still have an old flip-phone, but it sure seems Apple is turning more and more into a follower every day. I saw an ad on TV the other day: a large tablet being clicked into a very thin looking keyboard, with the person proceeding seamlessly from tablet mode to typing on the said keyboard. I thought, oh no, not another Surface Pro ad. And before I could skip it, the text on the screen (or voice over?) says "Our largest iPad for professionals". Or something to that effect. First time I confused an Apple product with something else, and not the other way around.

Comment ELI5, please help me understand (Score 1) 152

So, one thing I don't understand about quantum entanglement. In the simplest terms, you can have 2 photons generated from a specific process, and if you measure the spin (polarization?) of one of the photons, the other one will always have the opposite spin. And that's what they call quantum entanglement, right? But to me it simply means that the said specific process always generates a pair of photons with opposite spin. Where is the magic of entanglement here? Please help me understand. It's kind of like if we take an apple and slice it in two, and then measure one of the halves, the other will always be facing the other way. Well, yeah, we just sliced an apple in two halves, so no surprise there, they'll always be facing each other. What am I missing?

Comment Re:So AMD called their Hyperthreading a CPU core? (Score 1) 311

> As others have noted, hyperthreading via Intel can have exactly the same impact: the threads share various components, including the FPU.

Well, then AMD should advertise its CPUs the same way Intel does: 4 cores, 8 threads. When I needed a CPU that can run 8 processes in parallel at full speed, I looked at Intel offerings and AMD. Compared the number of cores ( thought they were real cores in case of AMD), and the prices, and concluded that AMD was better, because it offered better "number of cores" * "frequency" / price. So I bought the AMD processor. And now I feel I was mislead, or lied to by AMD. And I liked them up until this point. No, I didn't look at "diagrams of the parts", or consult floating point benchmarks, since my particular need wasn't heavy on the floating point calculations (but it uses them somewhat). It just didn't occur to me, I thought I could trust AMD. I thought when it said "8 cores" on the box, it was a processor capable of running 8 processes in parallel at full speed. Was it so wrong of me?!

Comment Re:Pretty Laughable (Score 1) 311

Really?! I thought the definition of a "core" was a unit that can run a process independently. Not "integer only" process. Then AMD should advertise it's CPUs as "8 integer cores, but only 4 floating point cores". You know, so that when you buy a CPU expecting 8 fully independent cores, as I did, because it says "8 cores" on the box, you won't be unpleasantly surprised that it can't actually run 8 processes in parallel. I liked AMD up until now, but I think it's going to be my last AMD processor. Sad. :(

Comment Re:Why did they buy based on "cores"? (Score 2) 311

Why did *I* buy based on the number of cores?! Because I needed a CPU that can run as many processes in parallel as possible. Why else would you need multiple cores? No, it's not a web server, and not for bitcoin mining. 8 cores means I should be able run 8 processes in parallel, for 8 times speed-up over 1 core.

Yes, doing a testing would've been ideal, but you can't return a CPU, as far as I know. Plus, I thought I can trust AMD to sell an 8-core processor when, you know, it says "8 cores" right on the box. Turned out (after I bought the CPU) I can run 8 processes in parallel, but they were about 30% slower each compared to running just 1. Actually, running 4 processes was still fast, but once you went over 4, it started to slow down. For a while I wondered why, thinking it's probably scaling down the CPU frequency because of threat of overheating (max TDP), but now it all makes sense. My program doesn't use floating point values a lot, but it is used throughout the computations here and there.

I liked AMD over Intel up until now, but I think this is going to be my last AMD processor. Yes, Intel is more expensive, but they don't play shenanigans with redefining what a "core" is.

Comment Abuse?! (Score 1) 330

For crying out loud, why is it *abuse*?! If you are offering something "unlimited" without blinking an eye, why are you so surprised when people try to treat it as such? Unless you are selling a lie and then shocked to discover that people try to stick it to you? Every time I see any offer of something "unlimited", I'm soooo tempted to accept the challenge.

Comment Re: +1 for privacy supporters -1 for gun control (Score 1) 620

Cars have a huge useful purpose. 99.9999% of the time cars are used to perform immensely useful work. Guns, on the other hand, have absolutely no useful purpose in the modern world. 99.9999% of the time guns are used to kill people (animals, etc.). And the other 0.0001% of the time, to shoot down drones, apparently.

Comment Re:I'm all Afrin now (Score 1) 310

I have one simple lifehack to wean yourself off any of the decongestants that have a rebound effect (i.e. your nose gets stuffed up after you stop using them even though you are not sick any more). Just spray only one of your nostrils, and alternate next time. Yeah, you'll be breathing through just one of the nostrils, but it'll give the other one a chance to rest and recover from the rebound effect. Use the redundancy of paired organs that evolution gave us! :)

Comment Re:I'm not normally one to say things like this... (Score 2) 245

Jeebus, what a crock of... more propaganda. Pretty much all countries require a visa if your own country also requires a visa for the citizens of the other country (tsar or no tsar). A lot of countries require a visa for Russians to enter, so Russia does the same. Pretty much the only reason. If US would agree to admit Russians without a visa (haha!), Russia would do the same. There are 38 countries whose citizens don't need a visa to enter Russia:

  Tsars had to personally approve foreigners entering Russia? Really? Personally?! And that's why Russia still requires a visa now? Did you know that it was common for wealthy families in Russia to have live-in French nannies for their children in 19th century? Did tsar also had to *personally* approve every French nanny entering Russia?

Some programming languages manage to absorb change, but withstand progress. -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982