EdEarl

@Strange, True, systems may be single thread, single processor, or more complex. A useful computer, with keyboard and display may have three processors: video, CPU and DMA. Thus, they must have the beginning of a complex memory system; although, far simpler than one for a multiple core system.

That religious people think belief plays a part in science seems odd to me. They accept that building a sewing machine or a surveyor measuring the distance to a distant mountain does not require belief. But they get confused when a scientist looking through a telescope, similar to a surveyor looking through a transit, calculates the distance to a star or galaxy. They don't like the distance to a galaxy meaning that light is older than their belief of the age of the world; thus, they blame it on the scientist having a flawed belief. Although, the scientist used only math and measurements, similar to the surveyor. People are funny.

A memory bus transmits addresses plus requests and data in parallel, meaning memory addresses plus requests are transmitted in one clock from processor to bus over multiple wires that connect the memory subsystem. A processor can request various sizes of data from 8-bits to 128-bits, depending on program requirements. Thus, part of the memory subsystem splits wider data that cache and the memory subsystem transfer in a clock cycle into different sizes used by a processor. The cache and memory system may transmit huge words, for example 256 bits at a time. Chip designers try to match memory bandwidth with CPU chip performance, because multiple core chips can use more data than fewer cores. A memory bus has multiple connections to processors, just as your local home network has multiple connections. Each device has an address that the network manages. When a memory request comes from device 1 on the bus, the reply goes to device 1 on the bus. Similarly, device 2, 3, etc. send and receive requests and data.

The Young Turks, Cenk Uygur, predicts Trump will Resign in Disgrace, in a network news broadcast that is on youtube. He says Trump has continually alienated various people and groups, including the oligarchs. He has lost his supporters; thus, he has few options. "It's only a matter of time."

In a modern multi-core, multi-thread computer various Processing Units (PU). A PU may be synchronous simple or asynchronous complex; regardless, they use one memory bus port. The PU access memory by sending an address and request to either read or write the addressed memory. That Address Request (AR) is sent to a memory bus that several PU also use; it's basically a tiny network contained within the CPU. A cache (a small fast memory) receives the AR, if the cache contains data for that address, it satisfies the PU request. If the AR is a read, it sends the data stored in that address to the PU. Additionally, the cache may need to request the data from another memory, in which case, it reads the memory it uses. Often there are several layers of cache, for example the smallest is used by a single CPU core, and a larger ones shared by all the CPU cores. If the AR is a write, it saves the number provided by the PU into its cache and sends an write request to the next level of memory. See: cache, content addressable memory, translation lookaside buffer, CPU fully associative cache controllers.

There is another story about one of the demonstrators, whose family disinherited him. They say they taught him to be tolerant, but somehow he changed. Thus, it seems that not all the nazi demonstrators were the result of bad parenting.

Anger finds an outlet. Perhaps if we remove a source of anger, the corruption, people can be gentler. We must try to break the circle of violence. Once before during the great depression, the people voted resoundingly for a progressive candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt. I'm afraid it will require similar circumstances, and automation is rapidly eliminating jobs. If there are Hoovervilles again, I believe the voters will overthrow the oligarchy.

I think the Cold War is not over, but it has changed; the competition is tougher now. IMO both Asia and Europe are pulling ahead of the US economically, and the US is foolishly spending too much on fancy weapons. Even with current US expenditures, China can build a military stronger than the US if they need to; though, it will take years. Since the powers in the US are resisting some efforts to modernize, especially schools and green energy, the US may fall further behind economically than it is now. Finally, the US government is so corrupt, it has no moral high ground, and it seems to have only bluff or war to offer the world.

It has been true for a couple of thousand years; thus, new logical thoughts about Buddhism seem unlikely. Moreover, I don't think of Buddhism as being true or false; rather, I look at various aspects, for example reincarnation and think, "No, there is nothing rational about reincarnation, unless one considers the natural decay of bodies and their reuse by nature. No energy or spirit can survive." On the other hand, I look at the ethic of peace and kindness, and think, "Yes, it's a great idea." In my opinion the Bible contradicts itself too often to be useful to me, and contains things that are simply impossible, for example Revelation 6:13 (standard English version) says, All stars are far bigger than the Earth, and if one got anywhere near, the Earth would vaporize. Other things in the Bible make sense. So, I could never judge either Buddhism nor Christianity as either true or false. You may as well ask whether they are hot or cold. So, what are you asking?

I agree with many of the previous posts. Many of the people in power in the US at both federal and state levels are corrupted by big money from the super wealthy. These "leaders" are stealing from the general population legally because our laws are perverted by greed. Shit flows downhill, so our culture has become corrupt. If we can pass an amendment to remove big money from politics, the people can take control again and make fair laws, and justice can flow down hill.

I consider myself a Buddhist and agnostic. Buddha may have been a man who lived about 500 years before Jesus, or the Buddha may be a myth passed down by word of mouth until someone started writing about Buddhism. It makes no difference whether man or myth to me. One cannot disprove supernatural things, such as God or gods, but IMO there is little chance of such things being more than imagination. I think Buddhist ethics are excellent and taught in a way that people can easily understand, compared to some Western philosophers (e.g., Kant). Western medicine has studied meditation and found it to be a good tool people can use to improve their lives. Finally,Tibetan Buddhism revers science, according to the Dali Lama, There are many variants of Buddhism, perhaps each person has their own idea about it.

It is a relative new, 1992. Older clergy no doubt had other ideas for a long time, and then had this edict from the Pope; thus, they were compelled to agree with it, but didn't really feel good about it.

In that case, here is the Catholic Church's position on science: Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth. ... Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.

The title seems to include all religions, but posters have posted about Christian beliefs only. Here is another perspective from the Dalai Lama, leader of Tibetan Buddhism. Buddhists don't believe in a god or gods; although, there are supernatural beliefs among some Buddhists.

Someone must be working on an AI app to help with logins, maybe an open source app.

Guilt plays a less important role than you suggest here. For example, I doubt guilt stops any crimes. Good morals/ethics limit some crime. However, moral messages differ slightly from religion to religion, but needs and wants perceived to be needs often overrule morals/ethics. For example, capitalism trumpets the value of making money over all other things, and some people ignore their moral/ethical training to make large amounts of money (a perceived need). On the other side of capitalism, the homeless may aspire to make money and live the capitalist dream, but are blocked somehow, perhaps sickness, drugs, or luck. The homeless may steal food, clothing or shelter because they really need these things, but stealing is neither moral or ethical. I think the issues you mentioned are far more complex to suggest that stronger guilt, shame, morals or ethics will eliminate the crime and malfeasance as you suggested.

ty

"why can you not define a term by that which it is not?" You defined nothing very well. The core of a planet or star exists; though, we cannot see them. However, the image I get of nothing is more like the geometry class "imaginary line."

OK, you believe and I'm agnostic. Can you change my mind with evidence or proof?

Nothing cannot include boundary points; otherwise, it would be something with boundary points. I think the real issue is whether nothing actually exists or is only a figment of our imagination.

Overeating is not restricted to meat eaters, and that meat is unhealthful is not related to overeating.

The distance problem between here an Mars is much worse. There is no way to directly control a rover on Mars. Instead, they have software that can execute a command to go from here to there without giving detailed instructions about every rock to dodge. The software does the detail driving. I expected predators to have something similar, but tuned for use in near real time. Even so, there would be challenges.

The idea of them hiding something does seem odd. There is conversation about when people came to the new world, and some say there were people here before the Asian-North American land bridge. I think many scientists have accepted that people were here and killed off by something, then the new world was repopulated across the land bridge. Populating the world may have occurred earlier than first thought. Time will tell.

I think small doses of lead may kill some of your cells without being fatal.

I'm pretty sure there are real differences between men and women; they are more civilized.