HN user
Sure. Some software has to exist to make use of this system, for example something has to create the tag in the first place, and mall ic is a part of that, but the large address space is what makes them possible.
It’s a nice tutorial on base plus index addressing but from the title I expected a tutorial on pointer tags as x86_64 is what makes tags even possible, i.e. we have a 64b address space but not 2^64 memory locations.
https://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2012-07-27-lets-bui...
And for ARM.
https://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2013-09-27-arm64-an...
It used to be fairly straightforward to beat a chess engine... in the 80s. https://www.chess.com/blog/FangBo/how-to-beat-an-80s-chess-c...
Is it like Automator for enterprise applications?
A digital computer is definitely a FSM. In fact, creating the state diagram of a simple calculator, and mapping that to digital logic by hand, and then building it on a breadboard used to be a staple of most introductory computer architecture courses. Now they just simulate everything. :)
This is the technique http://faculty.etsu.edu/tarnoff/ntes2150/statemac/statemac.h...
I waffle on this one too. Institutions that do HFT have a huge capital cost and pay large fees before they even make their first trade. They also employ programmers, traders, etc. Basically, these taxes are going to need to sum to something really big to dissuade them. Too small, they ignore it. Medium, the market will just consolidate. Large, you'll stop HFT, but at what consequence? The probability of unintended consequences is high.
This is when I decide I don't really understand the market as well as I think, and I should stop solving the world's problems, and go back to designing circuits.
Personally I waffle on this myself. My instinct tells me it’s bad but then I try to decide what trading cadence I would limit it to. Assume there is a CEO who wants to do something nefarious to manipulate the stock price. If they make a decision how fast can a company actually act on it? Would or could they make the company act on 1 hour boundaries? Even if we limited trades to once per week is that the long term we want a CEO to consider? At what time frame does a stock stop being a stock and convert to something else? Then I decide even by minute trading is not really something that management can even consider, even if they want to, so there is really no point to artificial limits imposed by law and take a more laissez faire attitude.
Its a ton of random math that (most) of which you don't use again since you use modeling software.
You absolutely need that math because you need to know when the modeling software is giving the wrong answer. You’re supposed to do quick and dirty calc by hand (ok fine I use mathematica) in a simplified system, then you refine with numerical software and compare the two. It’s shockingly easy to get the wrong answer with numerical CAD.
If a researcher can determine that a tweet came from a bot
That condition is the key. Are you sure they can do that? It’s very tough to do with certainty.
First off, I admit I didn’t do my homework so I have no idea what I’m talking about, but couldn’t the Turing machine make a Turing machine interpreter and therefore be a self interpreter? It is universal, no?
"If everyone else is such an idiot, how come I'm not rich?"
Unfortunately the answer to that question is, I spend way too much time on hacker news.
How about a 2 state 3 symbol Turing machine? That’s pretty simple, and universal too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram%27s_2-state_3-symbol...
web browsing, text editing and terminal.
If that’s all you want try an iPad2. I think it would make a better “laptop” than a RPI. RPI doesn’t have a battery.
I used xcircuit, magic and irsim in university to make plenty of ASICs at MOSIS. Many universities still do. One can even get the NCSU PDKs for MOSIS for free. Totally compatible with 0.18u http://opencircuitdesign.com/magic/
The second example is a medical IoT telemetry device. If the parent’s project had antenna in package I totally believe $20M for the project, especially as it includes rf validation, the bringing it to market part. $1M per engineer is a lot, especially for typical VLSI cad stuff, but possible for some “design” tools. I’ve used some specialized field solvers that cost $500k per engineer. Not sure that AiP in 2017 would’ve required that, but maybe.
Am I responsible for the illegal drug sales?
You might not be liable for the sale itself but, depending on the details, you could definitely still have serious legal risk.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/criminal-acts-activi...
What’s a fast AI chip? :)
What process node Google uses for TPU, one possibility for an AI chip, is not in the public domain since v1 but it’s very unlikely this chip is on the bleeding edge. Cost/benefit is likely not there for this use case. But only Google knows for sure since they run the cloud and get to define “benefit”.
https://www.nextplatform.com/2018/05/10/tearing-apart-google...
Was 7nm a requirement? I didn’t gather that from the thread.
Small run 22nm is certainly available. These are fabricated in the US, albeit at an Intel site. https://www.mosis.com/pages/intel_sponsored_fab
I don't see how that big investment for relative low volume production would make sense for consumer products.
If the consumer product is a toy then sure. If it’s a medical device then it could make sense. It’s all about margin.
After GlobalFoundries quit the race, US defense contractors have only Intel as supplier for many components.
Maybe. If you want millions of chips a quarter then sure. But if you want 1000s a quarter then there are many options, depending on the node I guess. I’m not going to Google a complete list but one obvious example is Texas Instruments.
On the other hand, everyone reviews the figures in detail. Therefore I’ve always used the text as a way to document the decisions behind the figure, mostly for myself, and to clarify any ambiguity in the figure itself.
Journalism should be funded by institutions. Perhaps - funded by the government, at a loss - for the sake of informing the populace.
state run media... i think that's been tried before. maybe a couple of times.
Just get it to run cobol and you’re golden.
Did you stop developing software altogether? What doesn’t break compatibility from time to time?
What's the test for when two numbers are equal?
I put this in another comment but: For the reals: eliminate a < b and a > b then conclude a = b.
There is an easy way to prove two numbers are equal. Typically in the reals there are three possibilities: a > b, a < b, a = b. If you eliminate a > b and a < b then you are left to conclude a = b. And this is exactly what is done in Apostol's Calculus Vol 1 (IMHO the greatest calc book ever written) chapter 1 when he proves that the area under n^2 is EXACTLY (n^3)/3, with no "calculus". You would be shocked how far into calculus the author gets with just that theorem. Can't recommend that book enough.
I didn’t really see anything wrong in the thread but you use words like “calculus” and I honestly don’t know exactly what you mean. Do you mean the plug and chug methods often taught in high school? Or do you mean the application of a set of theorems derived from the axioms of a given system of numbers? If you mean the former then perhaps we can clear up some misconceptions which are clarified by the latter.
As we have no idea who you are don’t you think it makes sense we try to figure it out? How one answers the question will vary based on background.
I go on to claim, though I'm more unsure of this, that the real numbers are not even the only way to make calculus work.
That claim is certainly true. The proof is that calculus (Analysis) exists for the complex number system too. Although I don’t think that’s what you meant and I doubt the complex number system is “more intuitive.” Just out of curiosity, have you heard of real analysis? How do you define calculus?
My code is perfectly documented. I just choose to write my documentation in c++. :)
Let me digress with a little story about one of my experiences with courts. In the 90s I was a technician at a small computer shop in CA. One day we had a sale for really cheap beige boxes so that we could offload some excesses inventory. A customer came in and want to buy all 10 of them. But I knew he owned a local warehouse and I suspected that he wanted these 10 computers to run proprietary inventory tracking software, and because some of our other clients ran that same software, I asked him if that’s what he wanted them for. He said yes. I told him these boxes won’t work with that software because their chipset is incompatible with it. He will have to buy these other, more expensive, ones. He insisted I was wrong. I showed him some documents we had, as I had ran into this before, he insisted anyway, very rudely. I told him if we sold them I wouldn’t allow a return. He said fine and bought all 10 and I wrote in hand “no refund” on the receipt. I was a teenager then so I thought this was “iron clad” and complimented myself for being so smart. A year later the guy came back and wanted to return all 10. We of course said no. He took us to small claims court and won. We were forced to give a full refund, at the one year old price, even though he admitted to the judge I warned him, showed him documents, and said no refund. His counter argument: he didn’t understand. The judge said this was the best way to make both parties whole again.
I lost but learned a valuable lesson, one just never knows with the law. These things are where one starts argument, it’s not where they stop.
Lawyers will have to decide how comfortable they are with the risk, and balance it against the reward. It’s totally natural that different entities will come to different conclusions in this environment.