Canada's shift to the right. Follow the money.

[QUOTE BY= jesse] I see that super-computers are still your answer to everything. The world is not so simple that it can all be explained by a single list, especially one as irrelevant to pretty much everything as super-computers. In 5 years, I can have that much computing power on my desktop. [/QUOTE] bullshit? Here comes the 'SuperComputers are stupid' argument, that only a Dipshit Canuck can muster up. [QUOTE BY= jesse]Yes, they are useful, but only for a tiny percentage of problems in the world right now (and, of course, rendering 3d elves!). Have you ever considered that, just *maybe*, the rest of the world has other priorities than building really expensive computers? [/QUOTE] Before I (of course) tear a new asshole (of many) out of Jesse, I want to make something clear: Building a SuperComputer is progressively becoming cheaper, from 3-5 million dollars you can build a fairly powerful system nowadays. Why has Canada neglected this? Simple: Why should they? Canadians would rather *WAIT* For the Americans to figure it out. I get it: VIVELECANADA (And please Hurry up Uncle Sam for more breakthroughs!) Out of the TOP TEN SuperComputers in the World, The U.S. of A has SEVEN of them. Do any of them do '3d Elves'? Nope. What do they do then? (Here's just the top five alone). The #1 Fastest Computer is the IBM 'Blue Gene', what does it do? 'Protein Folding'. http://www.research.ibm.com/bluegene/ Y'know...simple stuff, like trying to figure out cures for cancer/HIV/gene therapy. The same kind of technology that Canada's 'Marvelous Healthcare system' is standing by idly waiting for AMERICAN R&D to come up with answers/solutions for. #2 is also another IBM 'Blue Gene Solution', again...SuperComputers designed to find ways to make our lives better. #3 The Livermore Research facility, Here's one of their recent breakthroughs http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060114232738.htm Basically, with this "controlled light", this will mean more accurate/effective diagnostic tools, data storage and faster CPU's. (See how fucking stupid Jesse's claim of these computers simply being use for '3d Elves' are?) #4 Nasa's 'Columbia' Supercomputer. The same computer that GOOGLE.COM spent billions in a 'merger of the minds' with NASA to gain access to. http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Projects/Columbia/columbia.html #5 Sandia SuperComputer. again, from nuclear weapons to Lithium Ion batteries. Conclusion: America is easily THE MOST PRO-ACTIVE NATION ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH. Whereas Canada is wasting countless BILLIONS on failed Social programs...Americans are bettering the lives OF THE WORLD thanks to their relentless pursuit for ANSWERS. And as I've often said: Don't believe me...do the research yourself. To simply write this data off...is well: CANADIAN to do so.

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] Canadians would rather *WAIT* For the Americans to figure it out. [/QUOTE] Or, as I said, perhaps we have better things to build with that 3-5 million dollars. Personally, I would much rather see that money go towards improving conditions on native reserves, or reducing emissions, or building roads, or purchasing MRI machines, or any number of other things instead of supercomputers. I've tried (in vain) to explain that science is collaborative, not a race. Canadian researchers are doing just fine discovering *other* things, without having 7 of the top 10 supercomputers in the world. I've sent you links; dig up my old emails if you want to actually read them this time.

[QUOTE BY= jesse] [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch]Or, as I said, perhaps we have better things to build with that 3-5 million dollars. Personally, I would much rather see that money go towards improving conditions on native reserves, or reducing emissions, or building roads, or purchasing MRI machines, or any number of other things instead of supercomputers. [/QUOTE] Hm, the MRI...*another AMERICAN INVENTION* Basically, you'd rather flush the bucks down the toilet, rather than invest in the long-term R&D growth of Canada. Short-term, not long term, that's your mandate. [QUOTE BY= jesse] I've tried (in vain) to explain that science is collaborative, not a race. Canadian researchers are doing just fine discovering *other* things, without having 7 of the top 10 supercomputers in the world. I've sent you links; dig up my old emails if you want to actually read them this time. [/QUOTE] I'd like to see other people chime in and agree tha Canada is contributing to the world of science/health/technology with virtually no R&D. And lemme ask you a few questions: Question #1) How can we improve life on Native Reserves? Would technology have anything to do with it? Computers to monitor/gauge the quality of water there? American technology? Question #2) Reducing Emissions. Even your butt-buddy Layton had to bring it up. Kyoto simply doesn't work. Question #3) What major/minor invention has Canada contributed to the world as of late? What 'iPod' has Canada offered to the world?

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] The #1 Fastest Computer is the IBM 'Blue Gene', what does it do? 'Protein Folding'. http://www.research.ibm.com/bluegene/ [/QUOTE] And if you go <a href='http://www-306.ibm.com/e-business/ondemand/us/index.html?P_Site=S500'>here</a> , anyone can rent time on BlueGene. So why buy a really big heater, when you can rent time on it whenever you need it? Of course, the irony to that page is the video "Is Innovation still America's Birthright?" [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] The same kind of technology that Canada's 'Marvelous Healthcare system' is standing by idly waiting for AMERICAN R&D to come up with answers/solutions for. [/QUOTE] We all know, there is <a href='http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/newsroom/news/2003/nint03_e.html'>no</a> <a href='http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/randd/areas/nanotechnology_e.html'>R&D</a> In Canada <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/12/15/silver.dart/index.html'>whatsoever</a>. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'>

*yawn* http://www.top500.org/ doesn't lie, no matter how you spin it. America is the best, Canada isn't even a distant 10th. It's pathetic. Re: Links to Canada/Nanotech. You're kidding right? From the Canada Nanotech website: "$120 M will be invested in this new institute over the next 5 years alone." 120 Million over FIVE YEARS! $24 million a year? That's not R&D, that's a TERM PAPER. TOKENISM ANYONE? C'mon...you're not GOOGLING enough to win your arguments. Google.com, what an amazing AMERICAN SEARCH ENGINE.

[QUOTE BY= jesse] [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] Canadians would rather *WAIT* For the Americans to figure it out. [/QUOTE] Or, as I said, perhaps we have better things to build with that 3-5 million dollars. Personally, I would much rather see that money go towards improving conditions on native reserves, or reducing emissions, or building roads, or purchasing MRI machines, or any number of other things instead of supercomputers. [/QUOTE] Hm. MRI, another AMERICAN INVENTION.

My point had nothing to do with who invented it, and everything to do with what 3-5 million dolalrs could do to improve our health care system. And, as Dr Caleb pointed out, Canadian firms can quite easily rent computer time on many of those supercomputers, so why not cut your research budget in half by *using* a supercomputer without *building* one?

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] http://www.top500.org/ doesn't lie, no matter how you spin it. [/QUOTE] And it doesn't matter ethier, no matter how much you want it to. [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] America is the best, Canada isn't even a distant 10th. It's pathetic. [/QUOTE] So, you'll be giving up your citizenship then? [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] Re: Links to Canada/Nanotech. You're kidding right? That's not R&D, that's a TERM PAPER. [/QUOTE] See, Canadians don't us the US military style budgets. Hammers don't cost $24k, toilet seats don't cost $600. When we build stuff from single molecules of carbon, we're only paying for that single molecule, dammit! $150 million buys a lot of carbon. You'll be laughing when we perfect the nano-fibres needed for a tethered space station. [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] C'mon...you're not GOOGLING enough to win your arguments.[/QUOTE] It's not my argument. It's your's and you're way behind on points.

[QUOTE BY= jesse] My point had nothing to do with who invented it, and everything to do with what 3-5 million dolalrs could do to improve our health care system. And, as Dr Caleb pointed out, Canadian firms can quite easily rent computer time on many of those supercomputers, so why not cut your research budget in half by *using* a supercomputer without *building* one? [/QUOTE] Well, you obviously haven't a clue over how mainframes work, and how computer time is always at a premium especially when it comes to major undertakings. I like how on one hand you're eternally bitching that we should invest more money into nurses and bedpans...but you *really* want to do it *on the cheap* when it comes to looking for cures/breakthroughs. So let's just agree to disagree. I'll agree that you don't know what you're talking about. And you'll disagree that you know what you're taking about.

[QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb]See, Canadians don't us the US military style budgets. Hammers don't cost $24k, toilet seats don't cost $600. When we build stuff from single molecules of carbon, we're only paying for that single molecule, dammit! $150 million buys a lot of carbon.[/QUOTE] idiocy.

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] Well, you obviously haven't a clue over how mainframes work, and how computer time is always at a premium especially when it comes to major undertakings. [/QUOTE] Actually, I do have a clue, because I READ THE LINKS that Dr Caleb provided about renting supercomputer time. Can you say the same? [QUOTE] I like how on one hand you're eternally bitching that we should invest more money into nurses and bedpans... [/QUOTE] Actually, it's your argument that our health care system sucks, I'm just pointing out that 5 million dollars will buy a hell of a lot of bedpans, or rent a lot of supercomputer cycles. I applaud anyone who spends millions to building the 97th largest supercomputer in the world and then does medical research on it. But the smart businesses are the ones NOT building a supercomputer and still renting enough time to do that same research, for a fraction of the cost. [QUOTE] So let's just agree to disagree. I'll agree that you don't know what you're talking about. And you'll disagree that you know what you're taking about. [/QUOTE] How incredibly droll! <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb]See, Canadians don't us the US military style budgets. Hammers don't cost $24k, toilet seats don't cost $600. When we build stuff from single molecules of carbon, we're only paying for that single molecule, dammit! $150 million buys a lot of carbon.[/QUOTE] idiocy. [/QUOTE] Translation into RabbleWatchese: "I have no sense of ha-ha, and my comments about supercomputers have nothing whatsoever to do with 'Cananda's shift to the Right, follow the money', Alberta being a conservative oil rich province or the state of technological development in Canada. I am just bitter because no one visits my <strike>porn</strike> opinion blog. I will now give up, and start calling everyone names."

[QUOTE BY= jesse]I applaud anyone who spends millions to building the 97th largest supercomputer in the world and then does medical research on it. But the smart businesses are the ones NOT building a supercomputer and still renting enough time to do that same research, for a fraction of the cost.[/QUOTE] This 'doing it on the cheap' is basically treating scientists like second class citizens. You'd rather throw money at bedpans instead what scientists want which is research grants and Mainframes. This type of half-assedness is already is happening in Canada, and many scientists are leaving in droves to a place where they don't have to say 'please' when it comes to using mainframe time. When a doctor is researching a cure for Cancer, he can say 'fuck you' to anyone. We should all step out of the guy's way and give him every single tool possible to get the results. You have a profound lack of understanding over R&D, and I suggest you refrain from further comment.

[QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] This 'doing it on the cheap' is basically treating scientists like second class citizens. You'd rather throw money at bedpans instead what scientists want which is research grants and Mainframes. [/quote] Rabble, Rabble, Rabble. Why put words in his mouth that we can clearly read are not said nor implied? Research grants are clearly needed, but odds are the scientists already have access to a mainframe. But, they are not asking for supercomputers. <a href='http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/search/0,3221,3172___langId-en,00.html?fpQuery=supercomputer'>Supercomputer query on Cancer.ca</a> IBM also runs a Grid computer, utilizing millions of PC's, which it will provide to cancer researchers. You can help by installing the client on your PC. <a href='http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=1410682&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312'>Link</a> <a href='http://medicineworld.org/cancer/blog/permalinks/Dec-2005/cure-cancer-with-your-personal-computer.html'>Link</a> <a href='http://folding.stanford.edu/'>Folding@home client</a> [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] This type of half-assedness is already is happening in Canada, and many scientists are leaving in droves to a place where they don't have to say 'please' when it comes to using mainframe time. [/quote] Again, see above links. [QUOTE BY= Rabblewatch] You have a profound lack of understanding over R&D, and I suggest you refrain from further comment. [/QUOTE] You have a profound lack of understanding of the difference between a mainframe and supercomputer. I suggest you refrain from embarassing yourself further.

[QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] Research grants are clearly needed, but odds are the scientists already have access to a mainframe. But, they are not asking for supercomputers.[/QUOTE] *ahem* WHAT MAINFRAME? PLEASE TELL ME WHAT SUPERCOMPUTERS ARE IN CANADA? NONE! And yeah, for the record, my gripe over lack of SuperComputers wasn't my own idea, it was from several of my friends in the field whom constantly had to deal with the politics of underfunding. Many of them have since decided to move to the U.S. of A, where along with lofty signing bonuses, they actually HAVE ACCESS to all the tools/equipment they could ever imagine needing. Finding a cure for cancer isn't just test-tubes and microscopes, you need a TON of research tools, and a 10,000 processor computer can help give you results back in days instead of months/years. Again, you're sold on 'doing it on the cheap'. I can't convince you otherwise, you really believe that R&D is something that should be bottom-listed and cut-funded. The whole concept of 'more beds' is one of the biggest farces of the 21st century. Beds don't cure people...CURE'S CURE PEOPLE.