What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- AynRandfan, on 11/19/2008, -2/+21praise man and his ability to harness nature
- GawtMilk, on 11/19/2008, -0/+3I thought cloud computing was the future? Processing with Folding@Home has been over the Petaflop barrier for months now.
- oxthemoron, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2Didn't we already cover this a few days ago?
http://digg.com/programming/The_Bandwidth_of_Ejacu ...
I guess that's "harnessing nature"...
- collegekidd, on 11/19/2008, -16/+47But can they run Crysis?
- jimi1337, on 11/19/2008, -13/+5No, nor Windows 7.
- Dylson, on 11/19/2008, -1/+7Fail. Lol.
- Unzorn, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1nor? NOR?
- Pardis, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nor
Nor
1—used as a function word to introduce the second or last member or the second and each following member of a series of items each of which is negated
2—used as a function word to introduce and negate a following clause or phrase
3 chiefly British : neither - jimi1337, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2What I meant was, "it won't, nor will it run Windows 7". Excuse me. Besides, old joke is old.
- josepablos, on 11/19/2008, -12/+13***** YOU .. two of my friend died trying to run Crysis @ PETAFLOP Speed.
- TheFoshizzler, on 11/19/2008, -1/+10The joke is tired and has been for a long time.
- FuckTheRlAA, on 11/19/2008, -1/+4To TheFoshizzler:
That's what she said. - TheFoshizzler, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1Guess that would explain why she left me a few weeks ago...
- PaulOwen, on 11/19/2008, -0/+3RIKEN MDGRAPE-3 broke the petaflop barrier nearly three years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIKEN_MDGRAPE-3
Oh but that's not from America, so it doesn't count ... - Unzorn, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1@ Paul Owen
The last sentence in that article you posted is
'Because it's not a general-purpose machine capable of running the LINPACK benchmark, MDGRAPE-3 does not qualify for the TOP500 list.'
Its like saying you invented a car that's the fastest in the world, but is unable to turn. - PaulOwen, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1@Unzorn
I know the point you're trying to make, but I'm not so sure. Supercomputers are almost never designed to be generic in purpose. These are souped-up dragsters, not family saloons.
The analogy is more like saying you invented an ultra-fast car than runs on LPG, but the benchmarks require diesel. - callmejordy265, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1@ TheFoshizzler
So is the Crysis Joke :[
- ghee, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6Not even Crysis can run Crysis.
- n8o8, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3Enough with the Crysis thing! So predictable and therefore not so funny, if you need it explained.
- misterAsshole, on 11/19/2008, -0/+9Even the apple mac book can run Crysis.....at 15fps.
- jimi1337, on 11/19/2008, -13/+5No, nor Windows 7.
- Unriggable, on 11/19/2008, -0/+10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petaflop
- kevlar21, on 11/19/2008, -2/+10How long until we can just simulate everything in the universe? and speed it up to see the future…
I only wonder if the simulation would have trouble simulating itself recursively…- shaherazad, on 11/19/2008, -1/+11you know how many bits it would take to simulate every atom in the universe? you know how many atoms it takes to store a bit? not gonna happen.
- Spirckle, on 11/19/2008, -2/+0Why would you have to simulate every atom in the universe? Wouldn't you just have to simulate the atoms that were being observed? And since you would also be simulating the observers, that would be an easy task right?
- NanoStuff, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1
- 1ncu3us, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Maybe we are all just programs running in a seemingly advanced simulation.. AI
- misterAsshole, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0But what OS is being used?
- 1ncu3us, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2RealLife® v1.0 .. duhhh :P
- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1I'm waiting for Service Pack 1...
- GeorgeStone2, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2Psh, it's likely we are.
There will come a point when the human race can simulate a universe and everything in it in a single supercomputer.
There will come a point where the humans in that universe build a computer that can simulate a whole universe.
There will come a point where the humans in that universe build a computer that can simulate a whole universe.
There will come a point where the humans in that universe build a computer that can simulate a whole universe.
There will come a point where the humans in that universe build a computer that can simulate a whole universe.
Statistically, we're living in a computer simulation.
- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1i read a book once...can't remember what it was called, some kinda physics, maybe pseudo-physics. i'm too dumb to know the difference. anyway, it said something along the lines of "it would be necessary for every ounce of matter in the universe to possess intelligence in order to simulate a universe"...therefore every ounce of matter in the universe IS intelligent, or some *****...i dunno.
- Ramble, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Never. For one our understanding is not that great, secondly quantum physics doesn't allow you to simulate things that accurately.
- NanoStuff, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1"Wouldn't you just have to simulate the atoms that were being observed?"
Even simulating a single atom at planck resolution is a hard to fathom. Perhaps future computing paradigms will transform what we think we know about information processing, but as far as anyone can see so far, computing and simulation can't reach that far.
Also, particles don't disappear when you stop observing them. Everything outside your view must continue to be processed so that when your view is re-oriented, the system will be in the proper state.
Processing power necessary for a world simulation adequate for human perception is perfectly attainable and inevitable. There's no physical barrier to virtual reality with a suitable resolution as far as anyone within it could reasonably care for. However nobody could tell you we won't have four dimensional quantum pico-comptronium 100 years from now.
- NanoStuff, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1"Wouldn't you just have to simulate the atoms that were being observed?"
- AntithesisVI, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1http://xkcd.com/505/
- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2We're going to need to start computing with components of atoms in order to do this, but there are people working on the fundamental science to do so. Picotechnology is a hell of a long way off at this point though. Also, Ramble's point above: so far as we know, QM will be one of many flies in the ointment.
- zealotbleeds, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Impossible, the computer would have to be the size of the universe it's simulating.
- shaherazad, on 11/19/2008, -1/+11you know how many bits it would take to simulate every atom in the universe? you know how many atoms it takes to store a bit? not gonna happen.
- tawnos, on 11/19/2008, -9/+3Can i go on myspace on it?
- eco57, on 11/19/2008, -1/+43No, it can't run Crysis, but it can create the Matrix.
Thus, you'll finally be able to get a girlfriend.- madrigaelic, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Oh, snap!
- rmeddy, on 11/19/2008, -0/+19Hopefully one in a red dress.
- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -1/+2You mean a male agent disguised as a girl... Gross :)
- ohcoaster, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1@^ what is reality? if i think she's real, that's good enough for me.
- Dylson, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Epic comment.
- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2Forget the girl in the red dress--what about Persephone, the Merovingian's wife (played by Monica Bellucci)?
- damack, on 11/19/2008, -6/+21It only has 362 terabytes of memory, surely Windows 7 will struggle with such a meager amount.
- Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -4/+14so the cool new thing is to bash a microsoft product that isn't even out yet.
oh wait that's not new- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -3/+11Microsoft - Where preemptive slander becomes reality...
At least they're consistent... - Pardis, on 11/19/2008, -7/+1no its not the cool new thing, its the linux fanboy thing.
- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -3/+11Microsoft - Where preemptive slander becomes reality...
- Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -4/+14so the cool new thing is to bash a microsoft product that isn't even out yet.
- eecue, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Imagine a cluster of... oh nevermind.
- hoodmonkey, on 11/19/2008, -4/+4I was going to bitch about the meaningless Crysis comments that were posted, but then it hit me that this computer might unveil that life is actually a video game, and I wouldn't want to piss off the lazy, unmotivated players who are controlling my character.
- Jack8274, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1You think that they would play a ***** game like Crysis? The AI was terrible considering that they have replicated life.
- RicktheBrick, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1We are all gods. We assume the life of each baby that is born. We live that life until death than we get in line to assume the next life. The game is to build a perfect world. After this is accomplished and life becomes too boring we than restart everything and go back to the time when the first human was born. We have done this many times in the past and will do it again many of times in the future. This life is nothing more than a way to amuse ourselves for a eternity of time. If we gave ourselves the power of gods the game would go to the end too quickly so we limit our abilities and our memory of being a god and of our past existence. It is just like a role playing computer game where one becomes all mighty. After that it becomes boring and the only way is too restart the game.
- HOMEsplice, on 11/19/2008, -4/+3How many USB ports does it have?
- DougUpndown, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1Not enough.
- Dylson, on 11/19/2008, -0/+14
- Dotcommer, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1wrong. 5!
- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1yeah but, it doesn't even have USB 3.0, so it'll be obsolete in by next year.
- vertigo32, on 11/19/2008, -0/+14, but they were too cheap to include Firewire.
- Spoomeister, on 11/19/2008, -1/+10Galileo had a computer?
- KingBroseph, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1Galileo didn't even invent the telescope. And if you're only talking about weather simulations becoming more accurate how will this revolutionize science more so than anything for hundreds of years? Seriously
- RoyaleCheese, on 11/19/2008, -7/+5Petaflop > my flipflop.
- qaz0101, on 11/19/2008, -7/+1No Crysis no care.
- ratles, on 11/19/2008, -13/+0
- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -0/+6and i'm sure you know allllll about microprocessors
- breadfred, on 11/19/2008, -0/+5Go ahead. Try it. Or are you even more stupid than a retard?
- jeffiek, on 11/19/2008, -7/+1"Raymond Kurzweil believes the human brain has a power of 10 petaflops."
He doesn't get outside very often. From what I see, a few teraflops is more like it.- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1***** ray kurzweil. that guy has been preaching how voice recognition was gonna be the wave of the future for the past 20 years, and when is the last time you heard of anyone buying a copy of "naturally speaking"?
- tnoy, on 11/19/2008, -0/+4I use voice searching with my phone frequently. Maybe you just need get with the times, grandpa.
- Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -0/+4voice recognition is actually pretty good with training, the problem is talking clearly to your computer is just not as convenient (or private) as typing.
it also takes up significant resources and requires a decent microphone, costs not everyone is willing to incur - lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2@tnoy: murdata's got it right. using voice commands on a bluetooth is one thing, using voice to replace a keyboard is something totally different altogether, and that is what kurzweil has been preaching about. not knocking his technology, i'm just knocking the prediction.
- DamnMan, on 11/19/2008, -0/+7Just because our brains "software" is quite happy to divide by zero or return the wrong answers doesn't really change the fact that it does so with incredible speed.
Complex image processing at over 60 FPS while interpreting spoken language, receiving information about trace particles in the atmosphere (smell) and utilizing fine motor coordination and spacial awareness to walk, all of which happens together and in real time. And that's just when you get off your ass and walk to the fridge for a soda.
- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1***** ray kurzweil. that guy has been preaching how voice recognition was gonna be the wave of the future for the past 20 years, and when is the last time you heard of anyone buying a copy of "naturally speaking"?
- Enderplayer1, on 11/19/2008, -6/+6Petaflop > PETA
- tnoy, on 11/19/2008, -1/+13NSA responds: Thats all?
- maloventevil, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1thats funny because it is actually true :(
- Acqua206, on 11/19/2008, -9/+2Can someone please tell me what the big deal is? So something that took a supercomputer of two months ago 10 seconds to process now takes 1 second. Does the 9 second difference in computing time somehow make miraculous discoveries possible? Serious question coming from a business major who doesn't know too much about programming.
- Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -1/+6it means that when you buy CPU time you now need to buy less, peoples work will get done faster allowing more work to get done, you know all the advantages of something being done faster.
it is a milestone, not a revolutionary advancement.- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -0/+5The quantity of memory is equally as important. The ability to store and quickly access vast amounts of dependent information.
That's a good part of the reason they can increase 'resolution'. They have the memory to store that extra information, and the processor power to churn it.
- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -0/+5The quantity of memory is equally as important. The ability to store and quickly access vast amounts of dependent information.
- tnoy, on 11/19/2008, -0/+9You might want to try a new major. If you can't see the benefits of degrease in time that is an order of magnitude, then you're hopeless. To even think about "9 seconds" is short sighted.
There are a few ways to look at this, but a few stick out the most.
First, supercomputers like this are typically not used 100% by the institution that owns it. They'll often rent out time to use it. (We're going to pretend all tasks are the same for the math here) Say you're renting out the usage of the supercomputer to another institution for a fixed amount of processor ussage. If the machine is faster by a factor of 10, you're now able to rent out that time slot to 10 people. The fixed costs of CPU time would likely be the same if its one or ten, but setup costs and other fees would be bumped by a factor of 10. However, this assumes a rather universal configurations, which is not too typical for the top 10 supercomputers.
Next, there is the costs of the institution running its own tasks. If there are really big jobs that require special configurations of the hardware and software that effectively tie it to one project, this is costly due to what it CANT do during that time. If that project would be expected to take 10 months using the old system, it can now be done in 1. "Downtime" can be significantly minimized.
Then there is just the fact that it can do more complex tasks in a now reasonable amount of time. If a computation to a degree of accuracy was previously expected to take years, it can now take months. Something that would've taken 10 years, can be done in 1. On the simple basis of scientific advancement, the faster the supercomputer the better.- Acqua206, on 11/19/2008, -4/+1I think its pretentious of you to go around telling people to go and change their majors. I'm a business major with an accounting option. Debits and credits, valuation, depreciation, TVM, simple stuff.
I don't think getting ***** done faster is revolutionary. Yes, yes, you decrease costs, I get that. So what is that "something" that takes 10 years will now take 1? Big deal man. You can now get to the 10^1000th digit of pie that much faster, woopdie doo. I am not impressed. All these godly floating point operations and what do you get out of it? Can it predict our volatile stock markets with any degree of accuracy 1 month into the future? Have all these protein folding operations yielded any substantial results?
So you add half again the number of processors to this new computer so it can be the new best. Does it really do anything that the older computer could have? Maybe the company that rented the computer time could have done so with the slower super computer at a lower cost? Another couple months isn't going to make or break the aids vaccine or the cancer cure.
Now if programs were built to take advantage of all this processing power then I would be impressed. If it enabled me to chat with the Super computer without being able to tell whether it was human or machine, I'd be impressed, if it could learn and better itself without the aid of humans, I'd be impressed.
Crunching a few numbers faster because you have a few more processors running in parallel doesn't really impress me at all. 10,000 Pentium Quad Core extremes in parallel, wow. Real ***** innovative. Stay tuned next week for 12,000 i7 processors. Can't wait.
***** you. - Ramble, on 11/19/2008, -0/+5How about computing fluid dynamics over a car to make it more fuel efficient? What about analysing the results from something like the LHC so new medical scanning technology can be developed?
Stick to the business because you clearly have no idea about science. - financedude2, on 11/19/2008, -0/+5Perhaps you should read the article. These computers are meant to run highly detailed simulations such as mapping human synapses and climate change models where resolution plays a huge role in terms of accuracy. The advance in computing power will allow for an exponential more amount of resolution and therefore accuracy and increased modeling capabilities.
It's rather surprising that you mention tvm and then go on to boast about not being impressed about a ten fold reduction in time.
I'd agree with Ramble but it's clear you have no idea about business either. - Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1these computers can't do much more then the old ones could, but they can do it more feasibly.
no one is claiming these computers are magic, but they are much, much better, and you also have to realise that science gets next to no money so now they have the resources they need to do some of what they want, that is why it is good.
as I stated before this is more of a milestone, no one is saying this computer is going to jump up and start dancing down the street, but its more powerful, allowing us to do more with less, and as time is money, with less money. - tnoy, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1@Acqua206
You fail to understand the benefits of doing things faster. The simple fact that you can do 10 different things in the time it took to do 1 is massive. There are costs in not being able to do something. I only have to manage 150 or so hours of weekly staff, and a few services running on a couple dozen computers. Even I've had huge benefits in output and costs by only increasing our computing power by ~2.5x. A factor of 10 would be a godsend.
A real-world example, could be. Ford could run crash simulations using high-end instead of building a few slightly different cars. They could simulate differences in the size and angle of a structural support several times in software. You could simulate different thicknesses, alloys, angles, etc, instead of having to physically test it.
The whole point of supercomputing is the overall power. The faster, the cheaper the tasks are. Most of the time when computing tasks are rented out they're done so on the basis of CPU time. If it takes five million processor core hours, you're billed on that. If you have a speedup of a factor of 10, the decrease in cost for someone to buy the time is reflective of it. There will likely be a readjustment of costs to pay for the expansion, but it will not be a factor of 10. Renting time would definately be cheaper if they allowed it.
Things like protein folding is not a matter of a couple months. We're talking about complex models than can take tens or hundreds of millions of cpu core hours to complete. If it were as simple of a couple months on this, then the Folding@Home project would already be over given that the total 'power' in the FAH project is in the 4.2 PFLOP range.
Oh, and benefits of the FAH project:
http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Papers
- Acqua206, on 11/19/2008, -4/+1I think its pretentious of you to go around telling people to go and change their majors. I'm a business major with an accounting option. Debits and credits, valuation, depreciation, TVM, simple stuff.
- coderdevo, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2These computers run non-stop doing simulations. A computer that is 10 times faster can complete 10 times as many simulations in a year. The slower computers that are a couple years older cost more or less the same as this new computer in acquisition and operating costs.
Think of it as a new factory that can produce 10 times the output without increasing costs.
- Murdats, on 11/19/2008, -1/+6it means that when you buy CPU time you now need to buy less, peoples work will get done faster allowing more work to get done, you know all the advantages of something being done faster.
- axela, on 11/19/2008, -0/+11Roadrunner (IBM) 1,1 Petaflops 2483.47 KW KW per petaflops= 2257
Jaguar (Cray) 1,06 Petaflops 6960 KW KW per petaflops= 6566
Roadrunner is 3 times more energy efficent than Jaguar!- expo1001, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2It has less memory, though, and is less optimized for current scientific applications according to the article.
- Macintoshreader, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2IBM FTW!
- D3koy, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1How is it fair that those ***** at PETA get a flop and not me? All in favor of the Sethflop?petaflop, exaflop, zettaflop, yottaflop, sethflop.
- Fergawa, on 11/19/2008, -0/+23This article is going to be hilarious in a couple decades.
- FuckTheRlAA, on 11/19/2008, -10/+5………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………….._,,-~’’’¯¯¯’’~-,,…………………………………………………………
………………..,-‘’ ; ; ;_,,---,,_ ; ;’’-,…………………………….._,,,---,,_………………
……………….,’ ; ; ;,-‘ , , , , , ‘-, ; ;’-,,,,---~~’’’’’’~--,,,_…..,,-~’’ ; ; ; ;__;’-,……………
……………….| ; ; ;,’ , , , _,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯’’~’-,,_ ,,-~’’ , , ‘, ;’, …………
……………….’, ; ; ‘-, ,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-, , , , , ,’ ; |…………
…………………’, ; ;,’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-, , ,-‘ ;,-‘…………
………………….,’-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-‘ ;,,-‘…………..
………………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;__ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,’……………..
………………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’¯: : ’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; _ ; ; ; ; ;’,……………..
……………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;| : : : : : :| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’¯: ¯’’-, ; ; ;’,…………….
…………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,_: : _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | : : : : : :| ; ; ; |……………
……………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,,_ : :,-‘ ; ; ; ;|……………
…………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-~’’ , , , , ,,,-~~-, , , , _ ; ; ;¯¯ ; ; ; ; ;|................
…………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ , , , , , , ,( : : : : :) , , , ,’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|................
……….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’, , , , , , , , ,’~---~’’ , , , , , ,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,…………..
…….,-‘’ ; _, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’~-,,,,--~~’’’¯’’’~-,,_ , ,_,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………….
….,-‘’-~’’,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; | . . . . . . ,’; ,’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,_ ; ‘-,………..
……….,’ ; ;,-, ; ;, ; ; ;, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ;’, . "PEDO FLOPS!"
………,’-~’ ,-‘-~’’ ‘, ,-‘ ‘, ,,- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ‘~-,,,-‘’ ; ,’ ; ; ; ; ‘, ;,-‘’ ; ‘, ,-‘,
……….,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ‘’ ; ; ;’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’-,,_ ; ; ; _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ;’-‘’ ; ; ; ‘’ ; ;’-,
……..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯¯’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,
……,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,
…..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|..’-,_ ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’’,-~’ ; ; ; ; ; ,’
…,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’~-,,,,,--~~’’’’’’~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…..,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-
…| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
…’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’….’, ; ; ; ; _,,-‘’
….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’~~’’¯
…..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;_,,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
………’’~-,,_ ; ; ; ; _,,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
………..| ; ; ;¯¯’’’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘
………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
…………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|
…………’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ~-,,___ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,
………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘….’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
………..,’ ‘- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’……….’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
……….,’ ; ;’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-‘…………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,
………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’…………………’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |
……..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘………………………’’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |
……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…………………………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’
……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’………………………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’’
……..| ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
……..’,_ , ; , ;,’……………………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
………’,,’,¯,’,’’|……………………….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘--,,
………….¯…’’………………………..’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~,,
……………………………………………’’-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~-,,
………………………………………………..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ,,_ ; ;’-,’’-,
…………………………………………………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,__,--.
……………………………………………………’-, ; ; ;,,-~’’’ , ,|, |
………………………………………………………’’~-‘’_ , , ,,’,_/--‘- Azsen, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1lol nice
- PhoenixReborn, on 11/19/2008, -1/+10Folding @ Home has pulled more than four times that for awhile.
- plash, on 11/19/2008, -2/+18ah lets see. any lame played out jokes on digg today?
Crysis joke; um.. i see it there.. check..
windows joke.. ..check.
that matrix joke was an obvious one.. but good job including a burn
surprised there is no penis joke.. Petaflop come'on so easy ..
but to finish it off...
will it blend...- lowtolerance, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1penis
- Pardis, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2I was also expecting someone to post the PetaBear
- calmdownppl, on 11/19/2008, -0/+4I like how a Jaguar is on the side of it... it means it can go really fast.
- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1If only they had painted it red, they could have it running faster by an order of magnitude, at least.
(For those following along at home: that's over 9000, I'll have you know.) - MacEnvy, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Didn't work for OS X 10.2, unfortunately.
- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1If only they had painted it red, they could have it running faster by an order of magnitude, at least.
- dawnraid101, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Hmm seems like a rather big "Coincidence" that i7 was just released....
/s - Odiousennui, on 11/19/2008, -1/+8So, 50 years ago, computers this Large were barley as powerful as a hand held calculator is today...
50 years from now will we be holding petaflop computers in our hands?- Ramble, on 11/19/2008, -0/+6No, it'll be sooner than that. Computing speed so far has followed an exponential increase.
- yaosio, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1It should take about 25 years for a regular consumer to be able to buy a petaflop device.
- marc54, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1BFD, so it's 335,000 times faster than the computer I'm using!
- Meocross, on 11/19/2008, -0/+3Broke the Petaflop barrier o_o!? these computers are reaching Alienatic levels man.
- Myztry, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3If Microsoft was willing... to abuse it's install base.
And had some... distributed computing talent.
It'd be only a Windows Update away from the most powerful computing system in the world. - JMellissa, on 11/19/2008, -1/+4If you like using one of those Peta-Flop computers, does that make you a Peta-phile?
- ka1sa, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2serious questian here, what os do they use and how do they bench to find out 1.1 petaflops
- vertigo32, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINPACK
- coderdevo, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1The Cray XT5 runs Linux.
http://www.cray.com/Products/XT.aspx
If you want to play, you can buy a Cray CX1 (deskside Cray) that runs Microsoft's HPC Server 2008. The last time Cray created a departmental supercomputer was back in the 90's with their EL line, which ran Cray UNICOS.
http://www.cray.com/products/CX1.aspx
I paid a nostalgic visit to their Mendota Heights, MN offices recently. The place is low key, but humming - and growing. It was the best company I ever worked for.
Cray is hiring! They are looking for Engineers and Developers in locations across the country.
http://www.cray.com/About/Careers.aspx
- HamstaMan, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Wow, the past predictions about computers being large as a house by now were right, they just got the speed wrong. A quadrillion times wrong.
- marthachelsea, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1it can create the matrix?
- dtele, on 11/19/2008, -0/+7Is the singularity here yet?
- o0joshua0o, on 11/19/2008, -0/+4Hopefully soon. But it won't come as the result of some brilliant programmer(s) writing up a program that then "comes alive". It will come as the result of a complex simulation that simulates the very origins of life. It will start at the microorganism level and set the conditions so that the simulated life can evolve on its own. Eventually, this will end up producing highly intelligent, yet simulated beings. Maybe after they've reached a certain milestone, we can contact them and let them know that their entire universe is an elaborate computer simulation.
If the computer is fast enough, all of this evolution will happen in a time frame that seems very short to us.- HamstaMan, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0Aaah, darwinia :)
- CommanderEFG, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1A serious, thought provoking comment on digg? Glad to see it exists :)
- ohcoaster, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1two questions about the simulated life:
1) will the 'life' become self aware.
2) will the 'life' be capable of free thinking.
actually these questions apply to actual life too, because that's all life really is; complex carbon and dna based machines. nothing actually 'alive' about it. - HamstaMan, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0Wouldn't anything capable of being intelligent enough be self aware, or at least as self aware as their creators allow them to be.
- o0joshua0o, on 11/19/2008, -0/+4Hopefully soon. But it won't come as the result of some brilliant programmer(s) writing up a program that then "comes alive". It will come as the result of a complex simulation that simulates the very origins of life. It will start at the microorganism level and set the conditions so that the simulated life can evolve on its own. Eventually, this will end up producing highly intelligent, yet simulated beings. Maybe after they've reached a certain milestone, we can contact them and let them know that their entire universe is an elaborate computer simulation.
- dede28, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3can create the matrix? please someone tell us
- DustyinBFE, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Not yet ... wait until 2029 and ask again.
- kinship, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2im curious can we program to its full potential?
- coderdevo, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1You follow standards to program on a Cray XT5. Cray is as much a software company as it is a hardware company. They have been building supercomputers and programming libraries for over 30 years. They definitely will help you optimize your programs to properly utilize the hardware.
From the XT5 brochure:
Parallel programming models supported include MPI, Cray SHMEM™, UPC and OpenMP within the node. The MPI implementation is compliant with the MPI 2.0 standard and is optimized to take advantage of the scalable
interconnect in the Cray XT5 system.
The Cray XT5 system is compatible with a vast quantity of existing compilers and libraries, including optimized C, C++, and Fortran90 compilers, as well as high-performance optimized math libraries of BLAS, FFTs, LAPACK, ScaLAPACK, SuperLU, and Cray Scientifi c Libraries.
Cray Apprentice2™ performance analysis tools allow users to analyze resource utilization throughout their code at scale and eliminate bottlenecks and load-imbalance issues.
- coderdevo, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1You follow standards to program on a Cray XT5. Cray is as much a software company as it is a hardware company. They have been building supercomputers and programming libraries for over 30 years. They definitely will help you optimize your programs to properly utilize the hardware.
- TheImaginator, on 11/19/2008, -0/+3Right - now what you do is you string together all the supercomputers and make a grid made out of supercomputers.
Then you work out how to mass produce quantum computers that run on light instead of electricity, and transmit info between rooms and buildings via white OLED's instead of wireless dongles.
Hopefully before I die of old age. - tao52nyc, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Here's where they lost me: "Climate models will have dramatically higher resolution and accuracy"...
I have to call ***** on that. It's still the same old "garbage in, garbage out". If your "climate model" doesn't account for the biggest, most common greenhouse gas of all - water vapor - or fails to take into account the minor fluctuations of that giant ball of fusing hydrogen gas that's been bathing our world in all kinds of radiation for 4 billion years, you're going to get the same flawed results you've been getting - just 1000 times faster and prettier looking.- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3Climate models do take these into account though, despite what you might have heard from people preying on the public's ignorance, spreading misinformation on behalf of pressure groups. The real issues come into play from things like momentum/salt fluxes from breaking whitecaps, certain mesoscale processes in the ocean and eddies, etc.
Comments like yours just show that you don't know the first thing about these models. I'll demonstrate this: pull out a piece of paper and, off the top of your head (i.e. no Google), explain the western intensification, the Navier-Stokes equation (with a note under each term to define what it means, physically) and then sketch out the details of the thermohaline circulation. If you couldn't do this you should consider why you are running around parroting lies that, to someone who knows at least the first thing about climate science, are completely absurd.
- TheMoniker, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3Climate models do take these into account though, despite what you might have heard from people preying on the public's ignorance, spreading misinformation on behalf of pressure groups. The real issues come into play from things like momentum/salt fluxes from breaking whitecaps, certain mesoscale processes in the ocean and eddies, etc.
- knute5, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2Now if they can just fit all that into the iPhone ... c'mon, I'm waiting!
- takehiro12, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Galileo didn't invent the telescope and it wasn't in 1509 that he used it. How about 1609.
- yujie, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Can it divide by 0?
- zealotbleeds, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1I'd be afraid to try.
- neo991lb, on 11/19/2008, -0/+2I think the computer has taken form of the digg persona coderdevo.. He's like a commercial for Cray whenever he replies to a comment, even if it doesn't really answer or reply to the previous post.
- zealotbleeds, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1How long until we take down the exaflop barrier?
- Yage2006, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Finally a machine you can run crysis on.
- deepleet, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Can it count PI?
- gzmask, on 11/20/2008, -0/+0Nothing can counts an infinity number. It might generate the largest prime.... and tells you that all these numbers are related to 42.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is