Jeśli uwielbiasz gry komputerowe, a w dodatku spędzasz w związku z tym mało czasu na dworze, to mam dla ciebie idealnego laptopa. Jest nim najnowsze i chyba jak dotąd jedyne) dziecko firmy BFG. Nosi ono dumne imię Deimos X10. Jak już wcześniej wspomniałem maluch nam trochę wyrósł ponad normę. Ma on aż 18,4 cali przekątnej ekranu. Nieźle. Do tego posiada dwie karty graficzne wykorzystujące technologię SLI. W dodatku producent pozwala nam wybrać model karty do zamontowania. Mamy do wyboru GeForce 260M 1GB albo GeForce 280M 1GB. Wybór może być trudny. Jako procesor możemy sobie wybrać dowolny procesor z rodziny Core 2. A więc może to być Core 2 Duo P8700 2,53GHz, Core 2 Quad Q9000 2,0GHz lub nawet Core 2 Extreme QX9300 2,53GHz. Podobnie stoi sprawa z RAMem. Zależy tylko od nas czy będzie go 4 czy 8 giga. W zestawie jeszcze oczywiście kamerka internetowa Bluetooth, WiFi, wyjście HDMI oraz nagrywarka DVD (opcjonalnie napęd Blu-ray). Naprawdę duża zabawka dla dużych chłopców.

Η κατασκευή κόστισε 1700 euro και υλοποιήθηκε στις 15/10/2008

SLI, for those who don’t know, is the process of taking two Nvidia graphics cards and allowing them to work in parallel to render to a single monitor. In theory this doubles the power, getting more FPS for video games. Great right? Except due to encryption, only a limited amount of motherboards can actually support SLI.

That is, until now. Russian hackers at xDevs discovered that the newer encryption is based around string identifiers. This can be modified within the operating system itself, so in theory any motherboard could work. Be wary, this could brick your system; but if successful, you’ll have more power without shelling out for an officially SLI supported motherboard.

Words, roughly speaking, in the psycholinguistic sense of ‘items in the mental lexicon’, consist of a phonological form coupled with semantic content. They mean something, and they have a sound structure, and these two properties can theoretically be analysed and discussed independently of each other. To give a phonological description of a particular word, for example, you would want to discuss what kind of consonants and vowels it was composed of, how many syllables, the structure of the syllables, the stress pattern, and so on; what the word actually means in the language can be treated as a separate question altogether.

You can also manipulate certain characteristics of the phonological properties of the words of a given language. You could, for example, observe that English allows the sequence “pr” at the start of words (prince, press) and “nd” at the end of words (wind, sand), and so construct the sequence “prend”. It sounds a bit like “friend”, and “pretend”, but it isn’t really related to either, and it doesn’t actually mean anything. It’s a pseudo-word, or a non-word – a phonological form which is legitimate according to the rules governing English sound sequences, but which has no meaning associated with it.

This would be just so much abstruse blether, except that non-words have been put to use in practical real-life contexts, with intriguing consequences. There exists a particular kind of language impairment in which, out of all a child’s cognitive abilities, only their language development seems to be impaired (in the absence of factors such as brain damage, hearing impairment, and so on). This is called Specific Language Impairment, or SLI. It runs in families. It has a genetic component. And geneticists have demonstrated that there is a linkage between particular regions of particular chromosomes, and particular language-related skills – most interestingly, the ability to accurately repeat lists of “nonsense words”, in tests known as nonword repetition tests.

What these tests consist of is, generally, a pre-recorded list of non-words, such as “doppelate” and “ballop”. The child hears these items played one at a time, with enough of a pause in between for them to attempt to repeat what they’ve just heard. Children with SLI not only show less accuracy in producing these items (dokkelate, toppelate, toppate might be the kind of errors you’d elicit), but performance on this kind of test is, as they say, a good marker of a heritable phenotype.

The idea behind using nonword tests was, at least originally, that it would allow us to see what the child had really mastered of the English sound system, or what his or her phonological skills were really like, once divorced from the messiness attached to their production of real words (all sorts of factors affect a child’s acquisition of real-language vocabulary, and it’s quite possible for a particular sound to be mis-pronounced in one word but produced accurately in another word). If we’re interested in “pure phonology”, then seeing how children handle phonological forms which have no semantic, pragmatic, or lexical baggage would seem to be the ideal method.

Unfortunately, large numbers of practical difficulties very quickly emerged as soon as researchers started using nonword repetition tests. One is that you need to control exactly how similar a non-word is to real words: it matters that the nonword “ballop” is really quite reminiscent of both “gallop” and “ballot”. You also need to control what combinations of sound-segments appear in your nonwords: the sequence /mf/ is legal in English (“triumph”), but much rarer than the sequence /st/, and so much harder to repeat accurately. Longer nonwords are of course more difficult to remember and repeat than shorter ones, so if your set of nonwords includes many three-syllable items with rare sound sequences and many four-syllable items which are highly reminiscent of real words, it becomes much more difficult to pin down whether a child’s poor performance is due to specifically phonological issues (such as the rarity of the sound-sequence), versus more general memory-related issues such as the number of syllables they have to remember.

This, I think, feeds into a further problem which needs to be addressed, especially in the context of trying to design new sets of nonwords which would steer clear of these early problems and allow hypotheses to be tested to distinguish between what is “phonological” and what is general “memory” (or whatever). That is the question of what, precisely, are the aspects of phonology which are of most interest to researchers investigating language impairments with a genetic component. Taking an overview of the lexicon of, say, a typically developing 7-year-old, what are the specifically phonological properties of the lexical items which we can use to test the phonological competence of language-impaired children and their family members? Or, from the other direction, what are the properties, or hypothesised properties, of the putatively phonological impairments in SLI which would allow nonwords to be designed so as to elicit, or elucidate, error patterns of theoretical importance?

In other words, for example, should a good set of nonwords rely on CVCV structures only to the extent that these exist in the two-syllable words in the lexicon? Is it useful to include presumably articulatorily complex sequences such as triconsonantal clusters, or rare consonant sequences across syllable boundaries? What is the relationship between the relative frequency of particular consonants (eg dh) and their being late-acquired?
And what exactly would a specifically phonological impairment look like? Should errors be predicted mainly in one natural class, such as fricatives (but how would you differentiate a phonological difficulty with a natural class from an articulatory or perceptual difficulty with fricative production or perception?), or mainly in syllable structure, or stress assignment? Would you predict that a nonword where all the consonants were voiceless stops would be easier or harder than one where all the consonants were nasals, and if so, why? would it be useful to have multisyllabic items with all front vowels, or all back vowels, rather than a mixture?

This matters because presumably, the usefulness of nonword repetition tests is the light which they are supposed to shed on phonology – but of course speech sounds can only be described as phonological to the extent that they mirror the properties of real words as really used in a real language. (You can’t use nonword minimal pairs to demonstrate a phonemic difference, for example: minimal pairs can only be drawn from the lexicon.) So nonwords have to reflect in some way the actual characteristics of the items in a person’s or a population’s actual lexicon. Phonology can’t exist without a lexicon, but while on the one hand nonwords that are too similar to real words undermine the rationale behind using non-words in the first place, on the other hand nonwords that are too dissimilar from the lexicon make the task into one of attempting to pronounce non-native sound sequences, rather than plausible-but-non-existent native word. Erring in either of these directions will no doubt leave us better off than with stimuli which are poorly controlled for phonological properties, but there are still plenty questions which need an answer.

Ya se han conocido los resultados de la nueva serie de ATI, cuanto menos son interesantes, puesto que superan en rendimiento a la lider nVidia GTX 295, y por un precio más económico.

Las pruebas han sido realizadas con un i7 920 y 6GB DDR3.

Como vemos una ÚNICA tarjeta 5870 tiene un rendimiento cercano a DOS 4870 en crossfire, por lo que el rendimiento está asegurado.
Ahora veamos una comparativa de FPS (frames por segundos) en rendimiento de un crossfire de 5870 vs un sli de 295. (30 fps = juego decentemente) (Resolución nativa de un monitor de 22″ = 1680×1050)

Claramente el Crossfire de ATI da un rendimiento muchísimo mayor por un precio más asequible (319€ el modelo de 1GB).

Ahora veamos otra comparativa: 5850 vs 5870.

Como podéis observar claramente la ATI 5850 también es una buena optativa, asequible y con un rendimiento sobresaliente, ahora toca la respuesta de nVidia ante esta relacion calidad/precio.

“A río revuelto, ganancia de pescadores”

Conclusions
Considering the heterogeneity of the SLI group, P1 peak amplitude and peak latency may be valuable to follow up the maturation of the auditory system on individual basis rather than for differential diagnosis of SLI patient from normal. P1 does not show dramatic developmental change in the age range 5–10 years to be used clinically. Further researches are needed to standardize statistical method for analyzing P1 waveform.

from the International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

In an effort to clarify whether semantic integration is impaired in verbal and nonverbal auditory domains in children with developmental language impairment (a.k.a., LI and SLI), the present study obtained behavioral and neural responses to words and environmental sounds in children with language impairment and their typically developing age-matched controls (ages 7-15 years). Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded while children performed a forced-choice matching task on semantically matching and mismatching visual-auditory picture-word and picture-environmental sound pairs. Behavioral accuracy and reaction time measures were similar for both groups of children, with environmental sounds eliciting more accurate responses than words. In picture-environmental sound trials, behavioral performance and the brain’s response to semantic incongruency (i.e., the N400 effect) of the children with language impairment were comparable to those of their typically developing peers. However, in picture-word trials, children with LI tended to be less accurate than their controls and their N400 effect was significantly delayed in latency. Thus, the children with LI demonstrated a semantic integration deficit that was somewhat specific to the verbal domain. The particular finding of a delayed N400 effect is consistent with the storage deficit hypothesis of language impairment (Kail & Leonard, 1986) suggesting weakened and/or less efficient connections within the language networks of children with LI.

from Neuropsychologia

In an effort to clarify whether semantic integration is impaired in verbal and nonverbal auditory domains in children with developmental language impairment (a.k.a., LI and SLI), the present study obtained behavioral and neural responses to words and environmental sounds in children with language impairment and their typically developing age-matched controls (ages 7-15 years). Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded while children performed a forced-choice matching task on semantically matching and mismatching visual-auditory picture-word and picture-environmental sound pairs. Behavioral accuracy and reaction time measures were similar for both groups of children, with environmental sounds eliciting more accurate responses than words. In picture-environmental sound trials, behavioral performance and the brain’s response to semantic incongruency (i.e., the N400 effect) of the children with language impairment were comparable to those of their typically developing peers. However, in picture-word trials, children with LI tended to be less accurate than their controls and their N400 effect was significantly delayed in latency. Thus, the children with LI demonstrated a semantic integration deficit that was somewhat specific to the verbal domain. The particular finding of a delayed N400 effect is consistent with the storage deficit hypothesis of language impairment (Kail & Leonard, 1986) suggesting weakened and/or less efficient connections within the language networks of children with LI.

from Neuropsychology

16 sierpnia w klubie Fuzon miala odbyc sie wystawa moich oraz Bartka zdjęć. Niniejszym ogłaszam, iż się nie odbędzie. Jeszcze nie teraz. O nowym terminie poinformuje jak tylko coś już będę wiedział. Pozdro dla wszystkich zainteresowanych!

NVIDIA teatas, et protsessorivalmistaja Intel on litsenseerinud SLI tehnoloogia kasutamiseks koos uute Core i7 ja i5 protsessoritega. P55 kiibistik, mis ohjab LGA 1156 protsessoripesaga emaplaate, võib seega hakata kasutama kahe ja nelja NVIDIA graafikaprotsessori jõudu.

Täpsemalt kirjutab Slashdot.

Die Gamer wird’s freuen: Nvidia hat mitgeteilt, dass Intel und die wichtigsten Motherboard-Hersteller wie Asus, Gigabyte und MSI die SLI (Scalable Link Interface)-Technologie des Grafikchips-Produzentenlienziert haben.

Was wiederum bedeutet, dass sie in den P55-Motherboards zum Einsatz kommen wird, die für die angekündigten Core i7- und i5-Prozessoren von Intel verwendet werden.

Das nach Ansicht von Nvidia wirklich Neue dabei ist, dass Intel das Lizenzabkommen abgeschlossen hat, bevor seine neuen Chips überhaupt erhältlich sind – das dürfte es den PC-Herstellern erleichtern, neue Produkte mit dieser Technologie an den Start zu bringen (im Herbst soll es soweit sein).

Und AMD? Da hat man SLI bereits für den Phenom II lizenziert … [dieter]

[via DigiTimes und CNET USA]

Full article at http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10306571-64.html

Nvidia said Monday that Intel and a bevy of circuit board makers have licensed Nvidia graphics technology for future Intel chips.

The leading graphics chip supplier for game PCs has licensed its Scalable Link Interface (SLI) technology to Intel and makers of PC motherboards, including Asus, Gigabyte, and MSI for future Intel chips. SLI is a technology for linking two or more graphics boards and used typically in high-end gaming boxes.

The licensing deal will allow Intel and others to offer SLI technology in “P55″ motherboards that are used with Intel Core i7 and i5 processors. The latter series of processors have yet to ship. A motherboard is the main circuit board in a PC.

Nvidia said this is significant because Intel is licensing the technology before it rolls out new chips, a departure from how SLI licensing was worked out earlier this year between the two companies.

“What’s exciting is that Intel signed on before the launch (of new chips). Before, they came on after the launch,” said Nvidia spokesman Brian Del Rizzo. “This makes it easier for system builders and OEMs (PC makers),” he said.

This is an excerpt of an article on Cnet by Brook Crothers

Have you just purchased SLI?

Are you getting weird artifacts appearing on the screen, or is something else random happening?

Make sure you’ve completed the list below, to ensure your SLI is happy…

1) Make sure your PSU is powerful enough to run both cards. If you’re trying to run SLI on a cheap 400W PSU, you’re going to have issues. Grab yourself a decent 600-700W Thermaltake one. UK people click here.

2) Make sure you’ve connected all the required power cables to your two cards.

3) Ensure the SLI bridge is connected OK.

4) Use the latest Nvidia drivers (not the ones that are on the CD).

5) Certain motherboards require you to actually enable SLI on the board. My old ASUS board required me to invert a little board on the motherboard, otherwise SLI simply wouldn’t work.

6) If you’re still getting problems, flash your BIOS to the latest version. This can usually be downloaded from the website of your motherboard manufacturer.

*WARNING* BIOS FLASHING CAN BE RISKY, IF IN ANY DOUBT PLEASE SPEAK TO A COMPUTER DUDE/DUDETTE. *END WARNING*

7) If you are STILL having issues after the above, you’ve probably got either an issue with heat OR your motherboard is doing something stupid. Either way, you’ll probably need more help than the t’internet can provide. Good luck.

Ciao for now.

- James | July 2009

P.S. Most of the above will work for ATI’s Crossfire too, just change anything that says “Nvidia” or “SLI” for “ATI” or “Crossfire”.

Poi cè quel curioso fenomeno, detto Sli, che quando passi di sera sotto un lampione, si spegne subito. A volte ci hai fatto caso e altre volte no. Ma i tuoi amici sicuramente. Mi è capitato anche a me più volte quando ero un ragazzino.

Continuo a pensare che cè qualcosa che non và. Noto solo io che cè una specie di legge universale che collega bellezza fisica e bellezza intellettuale ? Mi spiego meglio: più uno è affascinante fisicamente più ha una mentalità banale o poco ricca. Più uno è brutto più ha un tipo di intelletto molto elevato, ricco di idee astratte e artistiche. Mah…. sarà una mia paranoia.

Il guaio è che il tutto influisce sull’ambiente, sulla situazione del momento a prima vista. E si perde drasticamente quando si deve conoscere una donna. E’ un vero schifo. Ma non si può negare che per supportare una mente elevata cè bisogno di un’altra mente elevata. Lo stimolo è fondamentale. Una mente superiore ha bisogno di essere stuzzicata da un’altra uguale. Le famose lunghezze d’onda. Nessun rapporto tra mente 1 e mente 0 potrà mai sopravvivere.  O 1-1 o 0-0. Perchè 1-0 è impossibile. Magari qualche speranza con 1-0,7 oppure 1-0,8 a salire.

Invece ci sono coppie 0-1 a non finire….. Grazie al cazzo che ci sono divorzi a valanga. Ma al cuore non si comanda.

Il cuore annulla il cervello, e il cervello annulla il cuore. Se rimarrebbero attivi entrambi, non saremmo umani.