Scottish scientists have built a 1,000-core processor, claiming it will run 20 times faster than today’s chips while using less power.
Dr. Wim Vanderbauwhede led a research team at the University of Glasgow to create the futuristic processor using a programmable chip called a field programmable gate array (FPGA).
Instead of the built-in circuitry of conventional desktop computer chips, these processors can be customized. So with some extremely clever programming, the research team was able to divide the processor into 1,000 cores, each capable of its own computation.
To give you some perspective, the fastest consumer processors such as Intel’s Core i7 top out at six cores. According to the Daily Mail, the 1,000-core processor processes 5 gigabytes data per second, and that’s “20 times faster than modern computers.”
The researchers gave each one of the cores its own dedicated memory, speeding it up even more. Remarkably, they were able to leverage all this extra speed and power without using more energy. Because they’re using those more energy-efficient FPGAs, Dr. Vanderbauwhede calls them “a greener option.”
Will we be seeing these processors in our laptops anytime soon? Not exactly. The team will present their research at a symposium next March, but according to Vanderbauwhede, “I believe these kinds of processors will only become more common and help to speed up computers even further over the next few years.”
Remember Envy 13? It was HP’s answer to Apple’s Macbook Air – a stylish and capable yet ultrathin and
ultraportable laptop. Now HP has slashed its price to only $999, after a $450 instant rebate.
The real news here is the possibility that HP is trying to get rid of its remaining inventory and make room for a new ultrathin laptop, and it wouldn’t be too far fetched to assume it might show it next week at CES. The Envy 13 has been around quite a while now, and it currently isn’t even featured on HP’s official Envy page, which is now populated by 14-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch models.
Now, the Envy 13 is a decent pick for the price, with an aluminum chassis, a 13.1-inch, 1366×768 screen, an 1.6GHz Intel Core2 Duo CPU, 3GB of DDR3 RAM, a 250 GB, 5400RPM hard drive and 2 USB ports.
A new survey from Rasmussen Reports reveals that just one in five American voters want the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet, placing their faith instead in free market competition to protect the Internet’s U.S. users.
Rasmussen asked 1,000 likely U.S. voters, “Should the Federal Communications Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?” Only 21% of those polled responded affirmatively, while a whopping 54% stated that they opposed FCC regulation of the Internet. One in four said they were not sure.
According to Rasmussen, the Republicans and independent voters surveyed, “overwhelmingly opposed FCC regulation of the Internet,” while Democrats were more evenly divided on the issue.
When asked whether government regulation or free market competition was a better mechanism to protect Internet users, 52% chose free market competition, while only 27% said government regulation was the best option. Again, Republicans and independents chose free market competition by a wide margin, but a plurality of Democrats said regulation was the answer (46%). Part of the reason for their choice was because the majority of likely U.S. voters polled (56%) say the FCC would use its authority to promote a political agenda, while only 28% disagree with that assertion.
We Need to Find the Net Neutrality Balance
We’re not surprised by the results of the Rasmussen poll, but here’s one reason why we believe they’re opposed to FCC regulation:
“The issue has attracted little public notice. Just 20% are following news of the net neutrality regulations Very Closely. Another 35% say they’re following it Somewhat Closely.”
Net neutrality is a complicated subject filled with many factions and lots of nuances that can only be found in the detailed government paperwork the FCC and the courts have been generating for the last few years. Last year, the FCC stepped in to mandate net neutrality for the web. Internet activists cheered the move, but U.S. courts ruled that the FCC doesn’t have the authority to make such mandates.
The FCC wasn’t happy with Google and Verizon for essentially going over its head, but eventually the FCCapproved an Open Internet Order that included many of Google and Verizon’s proposed rules. Now the FCC’s authority to regulate the web is being questioned by Congress and the issue could easily make its way back to court.
No wonder the vast majority of the American public aren’t paying attention; how can anybody be expected to follow all of these developments when they have a work and family life to manage? It’s a classic case of rational choice theory.
As we’ve written before, without net neutrality regulations, Internet service providers (ISPs) could have free reign to discriminate against the transmission of certain types of data, like video. Here are some of the potential worse case scenarios just to get started.
Excessive government regulation can stifle innovation, but a lack of intervention could turn the Internet into a wild west where Comcast, Verizon and other ISPs create fast tracks for some content while making it impossible for Internet users to access other websites. We need to find the right balance of net neutrality regulation that keeps the web open but doesn’t restrict the impressive innovations that have contributed to the rise of Facebook, Google and thousands of web startups.
Nokia E7, the business-oriented brother of Nokia's high-end N8 mobile phone, is expected to make an appearance on the market in the United States come January 13th, some of the latest news on the matter suggest. The handset was originally said to be on its way to the market before the end of the ongoing year, but the launch date slipped to January for most countries, including the United States. However, January is shaping up to be the month that would bring the new mobile phone to the market in various countries, and January 13th is said to be the arrival day in the US.
According to a recent article on The Nokia Blog, this is the date when a major US retailer would receive the Symbian^3 phone, which is a little over two weeks from now.
The news site offers some info on the price tag for this device as well, suggesting that it would be released on the local market for around $599, though the suggested retail price is USD $679.
“To ensure the best possible user experience on the Nokia E7, we have decided to begin shipping it in early 2011,” is what Nokia had to say on the shipping date for this device.
All in all, it appears that it should not be too long before we have the possibility to enjoy a brand new Symbian^3-based device from Nokia, following the launch of Nokia N8, Nokia C7 or Nokia C6-01.
For those who might have not encountered this device before, we should note that it sports similar looks with the N8, to which it adds a sliding QWERTY keyboard, to offer more functionality to users.
Nokia unveiled this mobile phone back in September this year, when it announced the other Symbian^3 devices too, all of which are already shipping top end users. Hopefully, the Nokia E7 would start arriving on shelves in mid-January too, or soon after.
Complaint accuses Apple and others of using apps to breach users' privacy, and says Google could also face actionApple CEO Steve Jobs with the iPad. Apple has been accused of allowing apps on the iPhone and iPad to transmit users’ personal data to advertising networks. Photograph: Ryan Anson/AFP/Getty Images
Apple and five other companies have been accused of allowing applications on the iPhone and iPad to transmit users' personal information to advertising networks without consent, in a legal complaint filed in the US.
The firm filing the complaint on behalf of two groups of Apple users says it could also be levelled against Google over its Android mobile operating system for the same reasons.
The complaint is seeking "class action" status. It was filed on 23 December in the US federal court in San Jose, California, according to Bloomberg.
The lawsuit notes that iPhones and iPads contain unique identifying elements – known as the Unique Device Identifier, or "UDID" – which let advertising networks to track what applications users download, how frequently they're used and for how long. Users cannot block the transmission of the UDID, a 40-character string that uniquely identifies each device.
"Some apps are also selling additional information to ad networks, including users' location, age, gender, income, ethnicity, sexual orientation and political views," the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Jonathan Lalo of Los Angeles County, alleges.
The issue of how much data about individual users is leaked to the creators of apps has become a hot topic in recent months following investigations which suggested that some gather more data than they strictly require to operate without notifying the user or providing any way to monitor what is sent.
Apple has come under the spotlight, but a number of applications for Google's Android have also been identified as potentially infringing on privacy.
Apple's iOS – for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad – and Google's Android are used in millions of mobile devices around the world. Iin the third quarter of 2010, Apple had about 17% of the global smartphone market, and Android roughly 25%, according to the research group Gartner.
Lalo's suit identifies applications such as Pandora, Paper Toss, the Weather Channel and Dictionary.com, and names them as defendants along with Apple. Lalo is represented by Scott Kamber and Avi Kreitenberg of KamberLaw LLC in New York.
A similar suit filed by four people on the same day calls Apple's actions "an intrusive tracking scheme" and calls Apple's failure to keep the apps out of the store and realise that they breach privacy as "aiding and abetting" their privacy invasion.
Apple claims it reviews all applications on its App Store and doesn't allow them to transmit user data without customer permission, according to Lalo's complaint. Apple's rules for applications says: "Apps cannot transmit data about a user without obtaining the user's prior permission and providing the user with access to information about how and where the data will be used."
The lawsuit claims that the transmission of personal information is a violation of federal computer fraud and privacy laws, and seeks class-action status for Apple customers who downloaded an application on their iPhone or iPad between 1 December 2008, and last week.
However, analysts were unfazed. Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry told Reuters the lawsuits would have little impact on investors.
"If this were a major issue, all web browsers would have to shut down and there would not be any advertising on the internet," Chowdhry said.
Scottish scientists have built a 1,000-core processor, claiming it will run 20 times faster than today’s chips while using less power.
