Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: It's all about definitions. (Score 1) 177

Grading on a curve was meant to hide the fact that some teachers couldn't teach, some could, some wouldn't, and others would. It protected the professor at the expense of the students' education.

And it ruins grades as a marker of achievement or ability. From a student's perspective, if I pay for a course, the result should be that my grade reflects the degree to which I've mastered the material, not the variations between the quality of the students and the quality of the instruction. Grading on a curve allows a deadbeat professor and a deadbeat class to essentially turn the class into a credential mill without the necessity of education.

Students can safely assume that courses graded on a curve are staffed by incompetent or lazy professors, taken by lazy or incompetent students, or quite possibly both. When I was in university, this type of grading was used most often in the general education electives, where the professors didn't really care about the students, and the students didn't care about the subject. To adopt the same approach for mainline courses is to transform the entire university from a place of learning into a credentials broker or diploma mill.

Comment Re: Well "just" vibe code you a new API, then eh? (Score 3, Informative) 46

The biggest problem with replicating CUDA is not the technical aspects, but finding VC with enough brains to know whom to hire. Most CS grads have the knowledge, but not the drive. Most liberal arts grads have the drive, the creativity, but not the knowledge. You need to find one with both, because creating the next Nvidia killer will require someone who is boring enough to reinvent the wheel, but has enough creativity to find novel solutions to performance problems.

The computer science and hardware engineering behind the hardware and software (Nvidia/CUDA) have been known for decades. The Nvidia hardware could be replicated with FPGAs - notwithstanding any patents Nvidia might have. The software API could be replicated rather easily; parallelism has been known and studied in computer engineering (again) for decades now. What Nvidia did was political - they provided both the hardware and the API to easily use it in one package which could be understood by the C-Suite class. The challenge was never technical, but marketing.

More specifically, you'd need to understand how compilers work, and how to use YACC or bison, or something similar to generate the compiler code for you. You'd have to understand digital logic and how to create logic functions with NAND gates. If you see an FPGA development kit, know what it is, and think to yourself, "What I could do with that..." you're probably a good fit for the job. And you'd need someone willing to bankroll your project until you could demonstrate that you beat Nvidia on something marketable - like floating point performance. Or power consumption.

From an engineering standpoint, what Nvidia has done is trivial - because the solution could be reproduced by an engineer using already known techniques. But what Nvidia did was to combine technical knowledge with an understanding of their market to produce the dominant position they have today. Any computer engineer worth his diploma could produce a design with FPGAs that would beat Nvidia GPUs, but Nvidia did it first.

Comment Re:Well... (Score 5, Insightful) 303

The "new eyes" thing is why the membership rotates on a regular basis.

But now, if you were someone whose opinions might be valuable... why would you bother wasting any time contributing to the board, knowing the rug could get randomly pulled for no reason? So, no actually open "eyes" will end up on whatever might get recreated in its place. Wonder what might be the over/under on the number of Fox news talking heads on the new board?

Comment Re:US, Mexico, and Venezuela ... (Score 1) 364

The rest of the US Navy has drones and fast boats covered. Mines were the main unknown. The US Navy has cleared mines from Hormuz several times in the past.

However, the squadron of USN minesweepers stationed in the Gulf for this purpose were decommissioned shortly before the Special Military Operation started. Talk about good planning...

Comment It's simpler than that. (Score 1) 114

In the military, the mission - and only the mission - matters.

Most of the officers in the position to observe a UFO are not in the position to order an investigation. Even if they were, they'd have to justify the use of taxpayer dollars to support what could easily be characterized as a "curiosity" rather than the fundamental mission of air power. The best most of them can do is record their experience in the debrief, and rely on civilian scientists to investigate it further.

Comment Re:Science forgotten (Score 1) 69

Batteries not included: Please remember, the lunar night lasts 10 Earth days.

Part of the interest in a lunar south pole location for the base is one could put the panels on a ridge which sees the sun the whole time. Of course, then they'd have to be rotating, more things to go wrong: but even just some spifft rotating ones would help a lot with the night-time problem.

Slashdot Top Deals

One good reason why computers can do more work than people is that they never have to stop and answer the phone.

Working...