How to Build a Computer Part 1: Pricing and Purchasing

This post will be a two parter. Expect the second part, dealing with actually assembling the computer, in the coming weeks.  There are a few important parts of the computer and they are all pretty standardized now, so finding the correct parts that will work together is actually pretty painless. To build a computer from scratch, you need:

Computer Case

Power Supply (PSU)

Motherboard Processor (CPU)

Memory (RAM)

Optical Disc Drive Hard Drive

Graphics Card (GPU)
A great resource for purchasing parts is the computer build lists at The Tech Report. Here is a link to their just updated guide for Fall '10. They have the builds laid out by component in Processor, Motherboard, Memory, Graphics, Storage, Audio, Enclosure and Power supply with links to Newegg (a computer supplier).  If you look at their "cheapest" system, you can see it is usually a lot cheaper to build your own system than to buy one already built.  Their system at $539.88 has a quad-core AMD processor, two gigabytes of RAM, a one terabyte (1024 gigabyte) hard drive and decent graphics card.  This would be a very capable work or gaming machine.  Another benefit of building your own system is that you can easily upgrade it as you go.  Adding more RAM or swapping the CPU for a faster one in a year or so is very easy and cost effective way to get more out of an aging system.

If you want to build your own system without the help of TechReport, I would suggest going to Newegg and looking at each individual component from their menu under Computer Hardware.  A couple of things to note; when you pick out a case make sure to get one that is large enough to fit everything that you want to put into the system, especially the motherboard.  Go to the details tab and check Motherboard Compatibility, to make sure that it matches up with the motherboard you choose.  ATX is the standard size.  Also, some cases come with power supplies included.  Make sure it will supply enough wattage for your system.  Antec (a manufacturer of high quality cases and power supplies) has a calculator, however if you only have one hard drive, optical drive and graphics card you should be fine with a PSU in the 300-400W range.  You want to have some excess capability because most power supplies don't work as efficiently when they are at the top of their output.  Lastly, for motherboards and processors, make sure to get a processor that fits the same socket as your motherboard.  Current AMD sockets are all the AM3 socket and Intel processors are either LGA 775 or LGA1156 (also with the high performance LGA1366).  When you select a processor and motherboard, it should be displayed prominently which you are looking at.  Also, if you have any questions feel free to ask someone knowledgeable about your build before you purchase.  The Tech Report forums are a great resource, for instance.

Global Warming

I am not going to get into the evidence for (or against) the existence of global warming (or recently labelled climate change in an attempt to make the term more politically correct, I guess?).  The atmosphere of the Earth is getting warmer over time.  Humans are dumping billions of tons of carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) into the atmosphere every year (31.8 billion tons).  It shouldn't take a mountain of evidence, which there is, to connect the dots.
I can understand why people, at a visceral level, have a hard time with global warming.  People just see their local weather which makes it easy to dismiss (or even welcome, depending on how cold the weather) a global warming trend.  People also have a hard time understanding how driving their car to work every morning can make the temperature warmer on the other side of the planet.

I don't sympathize, however, with people that outright deny the fact that humans are making Earth warmer, to say nothing of the those that deny it is warming at all (regardless of the cause).  In my mind, this is even worse than the 16th century Church denying the Copernican model of the solar system (in favor of the Ptolemaic model).  The modern socio-scientific literacy of the population in exponentially higher.  This is why I have to think that those who deny the existence of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, have some motivation for remaining ignorant.  It particularly relevant (infuriatingly so) for policy makers.  Many of them are very intelligent people, who should know better.
One possible motivation is short-term monetary gain.  Burning fossil fuels to power our lives is incredibly cheap, without taking into account long term consequences.  The up-front costs are a fraction of what power from "green technologies" costs, in a purely monetary sense.  For example, as Earth's atmosphere warms and glacial/polar ice melts, the sea levels will rise.  It will be incredibly expensive when lower Manhattan is below sea level (only a few meter rise), to say nothing of nearly all other major cities in the world (which lie close to sea level).

Here are a couple links, for those that want to educate themselves or others:
How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming

Skeptical Science: Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism

The Movie Game

The "Movie Game" is similar in concept to "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon".  One person starts the game by naming a movie.  The next person names an actor that was in the movie, and the following person in succession  names a different movie that the actor was in.  This continues on until someone cannot name a corresponding actor or movie, and they are "out".  However, if someone would be knocked out of the game because they could not name an actor, the player that named the movie must name another actor from that movie or they are "out" instead.  This rule was developed because broadly known actors tend to appear in esoteric films or in cameo roles.

This game can also be easily be implemented as a "drinking game" by imposing "drink" penalties on those that get knocked out, or other house rules such as whenever one names a M. Night Shyamalan movie, or actor in one of his movies, one has to take a "drink".  Hint: don't name Die Hard.

Definition of Life

The topic for today is part philosophical and part scientific. The philosophy of describing something as alive or not alive is a lot more grey than the scientific definition. Per Wikipedia, the scientific definition is:

"Living organisms undergo metabolism, maintain homeostasis, possess a capacity to grow, respond to stimuli, reproduce and, through natural selection, adapt to their environment in successive generations."

Lets break the definition down into its part to make it a little easy to understand.  "Living organisms undergo metabolism" means that the organism takes in energy in some form, converts it to a form which can be used and produces some sort of by-product, usually a waste.  The second part, "maintain homeostasis", just means that the organism has some sort of internal ecosystem separate from the exterior ecosystem in which the organism lives.  For a bacteria that is its cell membrane.  For humans it is our skin and external membranes (lining of the mouth and sinuses for example).  The third part, "possess a capacity to grow", ties in with the organism's metabolism, in that as it produces and consumes energy it will naturally become larger or more massive over time.  The fourth part, "respond to stimuli", can be given as a negative example, which is a rock.  Rocks do not respond to their environment except in a physical sense(such as water, wind, heat).  Living organisms, even bacteria, tend to move from environments which are unfriendly (that don't have necessary food, or have harmful toxins) to environments that are more friendly.  The last part, "reproduce and, through natural selection, adapt to their environment in successive generations", is necessary to the continuation of life and describes part of the process of evolution.

I believe this is the most controversial part of the definition.  I recently read a discussion relating to computer viruses and how they fit into the definition of life.  Many of the conclusions on assessing whether or not a string of computer code could be considered life got stuck on that last part of the definition.  My problem with using that as the basis to say computer code can never be alive is that the final part doesn't actually describe life itself, but rather a specific behavior.  An analogy would be for part of the definition of life that life always moves in a counter-clockwise fashion.  Anything that tends to move in a clockwise motion cannot be alive.  That is describing a behavior of the organism in the definition.

This is partly where the philosophy of describing life or "un-life" comes into play.  Many consider biological viruses to actually fit outside the definition of life.  On a technical level, digital viruses may not be the best candidate to look at when trying to point to an artificial form of life, however it will not be too long before artificial intelligence code becomes sufficiently advanced that it easily fills many criteria for even the scientific definition of life.  

Challenge

Today is the first day of a challenge to myself.  The challenge is to write 100 straight days on this blog.  There must be at least one post a day of at least 100 words.  The last day of the challenge is Thursday, December 16, 2010.  The topics I will cover in this blog will be a wide-ranging catch all for whatever I want to talk about in a given day, including politics, sports, technology, physics and anything that is interesting to me.  If this challenge goes well, I will likely continue updating the blog on a bi-weekly or tri-weekly basis.
I am starting this challenge because I write quite a bit, however the style was mostly restricted to technical writing.  While I was in school, it was a scientific style, and work after graduation was a technical assistance and business style.  I am recently unemployed (by choice) and want to improve my writing in a more vocal style.  Hopefully some practice through this challenge will help develop my written voice, as well as be a fun outlet for my thoughts on many subjects (and hopefully some discussion from readers).