GT breaks the speed record (w/ IBM)....

law_bee

law_bee

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
6,402
http://drudgereport.com/flash3.htm

[ QUOTE ]
RESEARCHERS SAY NEW CHIP BREAKS SPEED RECORD
Mon Jun 19 2006 22:57:25 ET

Researchers at IBM and the Georgia Institute of Technology are set to announce Tuesday that they have broken the speed record for silicon-based chips with a semiconductor that operates 250 times faster than chips commonly used now.

The NEW YORK TIMES reports: The achievement is a major step in the evolution of computer semiconductor technology that could eventually lead to faster networks and more powerful electronics at lower prices, said Bernard Meyerson, vice president and chief technologist in IBM 's systems and technology group. He said developments like this one typically find their way into commercial products in 12 to 24 months.



[/ QUOTE ]
 
You would think that if we could do this, we could figure out a way to get better at playing pitch and catch with a football. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/pat.gif
 
Ah, man, I thought we had a new wide receiver who just happened to be into computers...

But, seriously, any idea what group/professors worked on this? I worked with a couple of the groups in the MIRC when I was an undergrad.
 
You and me both, brother...and I'd throw in the IE school's vaunted number one ranking and Pres. Clough as well...enough with technology and academics, it's time for the football program to rise again...
 
[ QUOTE ]
But, seriously, any idea what group/professors worked on this? I worked with a couple of the groups in the MIRC when I was an undergrad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dr. Cressler in ECE/GEDC. I work with him on some of my projects. GREAT guy.
 
I'd trade it for a QB that doesn't throw off his back foot.

D'oh...gonna hear about that one.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You and me both, brother...and I'd throw in the IE school's vaunted number one ranking and Pres. Clough as well...enough with technology and academics, it's time for the football program to rise again...

[/ QUOTE ]sounds like something a gagger would say
 
Right, pal, I'm a UGAGer...I only have two degrees from ma Tech and have attended every GT home game for the last 49 years...please compare your credentials...
 
i didn't ask for your credentials and i don't need need to provide mine. i just now know that i'm heck a lot younger than you. i'm just saying that your comment sounded like something a gagger would say. defend your comment not your fandom.
 
This oughta be a good one. Something this place needs now that next to nothing is going on for a while.

I am with wig on this one 100%. Reason being is that every TECH graduate knows that the quality of the school is not in question.
As long as Tech is around, it will be BCS quality, academically.

I may have wig's intent way off base, but I take it as we need to get off our ass football wise, and get back in the game on a national level.
It's hard to sell tickets to chem lab, no matter how good it is.
 
I totally agree PW but as long as we have as many Polly Anna's as we have, may not happen unless Radman forces it.
 
I truly think or hope that is exactly what Rad has in mind. Now that we have passed the ncaa gallstone, it's time.
I don't think Rad takes this job if the same level of duress was in place as the time of the CG hiring.

Dave Braine is ill, and like everyone else I wish him the best, period.
However, it is now time for the GTAA to make its presence known again on the Hill. Somehow, I believe that Dan will make sure that we comply with the ncaa using 2006 standards.
If we add a football friendly major, and I hope we do, coaches will be held to a higher standard. That is an effective measure to get Tech football back to where it should be. Go Jackets!
 
[ QUOTE ]

If we add a football friendly major,

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is a key in our future football success. If we add a major in the business school along the lines of Sports Marketing and Management....it's gonna really help in recruiting. We won't have to sacrifice anything::wink wink:: and the entrance requirements can be the same as other schools that we compete against. We are at a competitive disadvantage with our current status. We're supposed to be the intelligent school but when it comes to one of our major revenue streams we're being knuckleheads.
 
Keep some important things in mind.........

(1) YES!!...adding a major that's more attractive to PSA's would be a HUGE help in recruiting! However, just like a hospital corp has to show the state a need for an add'l X number of beds and ancillary services to get a new facility approved, we would have to get the BoR to agree that the "need" for Tech to offer this new major(s) is in line with the state/regional needs for the program and in line with GT's mission (and, no, making football recruiting easier isn't part of the equation). What's GOOD, though, is that Clough (for all the grief he gets from many of our dimmer fans) has made statements in the recent past aluding to possible majors being added that could be seen as overlapping with some of the programs of the 'pool. He sees it as a "quid pro quo" issue with the BoR related to the recent additions of some engineering-related programs at ugag.

(2) Adding majors notwithstanding, getting PSA's ADMITTED will still be an impediment and competitive disadvantage we are going to have to overcome. Almost every school we recruit against can and does admit any PSA that meets the NCAA initial eligibility req's...period. Even after those req's (related to core HS classes) go up in August 2008, GT's req's....as they are now.... will STILL be higher. I can see some flexibility getting negotiated as far as 'exceptions' goes, but the req's are NOT going to be reduced, imo.
 
PW, thanks for exactly explicating my tongue in cheek comment. I had no idea it would go over the head of still wet behind the ears whippersnappers.

As you say, our academic credentials are excellent and will always be excellent; let's put more emphasis on the areas where we need to improve.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You and me both, brother...and I'd throw in the IE school's vaunted number one ranking and Pres. Clough as well...enough with technology and academics, it's time for the football program to rise again...

[/ QUOTE ]No doubt - the ~$14MM that a BCS bowl would provide to the ACC to be spread amongst the conference far exceeds any $$$ value of developing new technology that benefits basically every facet of life.

How about we just continue to excel academically & offering benefits for the greater good + excelling in all sports (incl. football) without trading one for the other? Not that us idiots have any control over that anyway.

Credentials? Why don't you just lay 'em out there on the table?
 
Depends on what we consider an "athlete friendly major". If it's a BS program designed to let any idiot stay eligible it will never fly at Tech. Even if the BOR allowed it, Tech's faculty never would. Now if we added programs that were athletically related but were still legitimate courses of study it could work. But I question how much that would help.

Just because a program has athletics in the title doesn't mean it's easy. Many of the athletes we can't recruit want a cake course load that won't interfere with their partying and playing. Those guys we will never get. But if a more broad curriculum helps I'm all for it as long as it' legitimate.
 
[ QUOTE ]
But if a more broad curriculum helps I'm all for it as long as it' legitimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

NC, that is exactly what I am talking about. And..., I don't think that TECH should or will ever need to have a "broad" curriculum in order to be/stay successful in athletics. I have no doubt that we will forever offer and demand academic excellence from our students.
We, however can and should offer new more liberal disciplines that involve today's more user friendly technology.
That will not only help us recruit more excellent student-athletes; it will help us recruit more domestic excellent students, period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top