Wouldn't it be just great if there was a rerun of the Halloween memo, involving a list of 235 patents that linux allegedly involves, which suddenly "dropped" into an appropriate inbox?
Wishful thinking, I know. But it's happened before....
If the card performed similarly to an 8800 GTX I would agree with you, but it loses nearly all the benchmarks to the GTX, consequently, they should compare it with the GTS too, show where it lies in the larger scheme of things.
It seems odd to me that they don't compare the 2900XT to the 8800 GTS 640MB. Comparing it with the top-end 8800 GTX means comparing to a much more expensive card. This review isn't really a fair comparison. If they wanted to include the 8800 GTX for info, fair enough, but they should be comparing the card to its intended competitor. You can't draw fair comparisons when comparing to a much more expensive card.
I never ceased to be amazed at the sheer number of "Global Warming's a Myth / Good for Us" stories in American Newspapers and on American websites.
A few thoughts:
How many times have you heard of scientists complaining because an government won't let them spread bullshit?
How many companies have a vested interest in ignoring/delaying/otherwise interfering in the result of genuine science when it doesn't suit their policies?
There will always be "scientists" who are willing to say what someone pays them to say. But when you get significant numbers of experts complaining about science being repressed, large scale international focus on the issue and dissenting countries with an administrations that have long standing and close connections to the oil industry, shouldn't anyone in their right minds be suspicious of such stories?
Total cost of living in the UK is higher than the US, average wage in the UK is lower than the US, and petrol is much more expensive. And still people don't drive any better.
Perhaps when gas costs more, people will choose to drive more efficiently.
In the UK, "gas" as you call it ("petrol" as we call it") costs £0.95 to £1.00 a litre - which is over $7 a US gallon. Despite this, people still don't drive intelligently
Well, the US convicted Microsoft of being a monopolist, then did nothing about it. There's clearly a problem (I don't think we need to argue about that on Slashdot.) So, is it just the idea that the great all powerful US isn't doing it that some people find annoying? Or would you rather some other "superpower" like China, India or Russia ends up having to do it (in 15 or 20 years time).
Reality needs to be faced. Your government can't deal with the wayward MS business, the EU wants to deal with your problem for you. Isn't that nice of them?
I'm glad they're time-like dimentions! I'd hate to find out they're orthogonal directions, and suddenly have to worry about all my organs spilling out into the v and w dimensions.
You may not have to worry about peculiar spatial distortions from these extra dimensions, but what about strange temporal distortions?
Perhaps now you can find a way to go back in time, kill your father before your mum got pregnant, then father yourself, before going on to attend your own funeral. Find a few more impossible things to do, then you can have breakfast at the restaurant at end of the universe!
"Dude, what are you smoking? That's average population density, a meaningless number. What matters is the local population density, which varies enormously over the US."
I'm aware of this, but you've still reinforced my point. The US population density varies enormously compared to the UK density, which is ALWAYS going to be higher for an similar type of population - higher density in UK cities, higher density in UK suburbs and higher density in UK rural areas. And yet the US is still affected more and sooner. This would be unlikely to be the case if mobile phone signals were the cause, because the UK has a much higher density of signals. If mobile phones are the cause, the UK should have been effected first.
Density of mobile 'phone signals is still a key point - if it begins to happen in an area of lower density, then spreads to others, it still seems unlikely that the mobile 'phone signals are the cause.
Also, as I stated, the US works on different frequencies. Plus, mobile 'phones have been growing gradually over a large number of years, and had already hit the level where networks are no longer targeting new customers, they're targeting people transferring providers. It seems odd that the bee population would suddenly collapse at this point, rather than years previously.
Finally, if mobile 'phone signals are the cause, how come species that normally take ANY excuse to invade an unguarded hive are leaving the abandoned ones alone?
The UK had 3G long before the US. But 3G mainly covers metropolitan areas. I believe bees are more rural and they don't currently benefit from 3G connections.
I for one am extremely suspicious about claims that bees are being wiped out by mobile 'phones. Here's an example of why:
US = 301,505,000 people in 2,718,695 sq miles = 111 people per sq mile
UK = 60,609,153 people in 94,526 sq miles = 641 people per sq mile
So, why is it that the US is suffering this major disappearance of bees when the UK isn't? Seeing as the density of mobile phone signals is going to be FAR higher in the UK? Ok, i accept that mobile phones in the UK work on different frequencies, but from what I've heard, the same thing is happening in Poland and Spain , which both have far lower population densities than the UK, and the same mobile phone frequencies. Of course, Poland and Spain import far more US Genetically Modified crops than the UK does.
This article is about UK politics. Remember that by British standards, American politics is right wing, or far-right. You need to be very careful when just talking "right" and "left" or "Republican" and "Democrat" if you're comparing UK and US politics.
There's a Data Commissioner in the UK. So if Microsoft make such a reply, I refer the case to him. It's free. It would take a while (maybe even a couple of years), but I guess it's highly probable that he and his staff have experience of Microsoft's registration process. It would then be down to Microsoft to prove to him that they DIDN'T hold any such data. After all, this isn't a court of law - the rules of evidence aren't like a court of law and it's a very unusual business that doesn't keep ANY records of its customers.
> "personal data" means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified-
(a) from those data, or
(b) from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller.
I think they would claim that they cannot identify you from the information that they record. Any thoughts?
I seem to remember that Microsoft ask for your first and last name when you register Windows. Assuming that they send this back to their servers, that means anything that is associated with your windows key can personally identify you. Therefore they would have to provide it.
I'd also like to point out that the UK's current definition of personal data is at odds with the EU's stated intention. The EU seems to believe that any mention of your name, or a label that applies to you should be sufficient for you to have rights to get at the data. I don't have a link, but I know the case being taken to the EU courts is under the name of Durrant (sp?). Things may change once that case is settled
Heh, "common sense that companies can't keep what ever records they want - secretly at least."
It may seem common sense to you and me, but that's not how US citizens have it. And yes, we can ask for information to be deleted, but only if it's inaccurate. In the UK, we have to pay a small fee to cover some of the company's admin costs in getting the information and to act as a deterrent against people using this kind of thing for bullying tactics. Of course, since it's so much hassle for the company, you still can use it to bully; I did this to my bank once:
Me: I'd like 3 duplicate bank statements please, for these months...
Bank: That'll be £15 please
Me: What's your fee for a data protection act request? can't I get access to all information you hold on me?
Bank: £10
Me: I may as well get all the information you have then, if that's cheaper
Bank: That's all right sir, we'll do the statements for free
There are other solutions though - in the UK, people who enroll for teacher training courses in the sciences or maths don't have to pay tuition fees, and get a lump sum split 50/50 between starting training and starting their first job. After all, maths and science graduates do tend to have higher earning potential. It's not going as far as higher wages, but it does encourage some people to take the teacher training.
So, I live in the EU. We have rather stronger laws regarding companies holding information on people than you Americans do. I object to this information being collected on me. Whilst I can't stop them collecting it, I CAN force Microsoft to reveal all information they hold about me, after I pay an admin fee of around £10 and it'll cost them far more than that to provide it. One person is nothing, but if a whole bunch of irate people were to start asking for this information - MS would be very unhappy. Now if only EFF Europe or some other organisation would organise a pro-forma, and encourage a mass "ask MS to reveal what they hold on you" - as many people as possible in as small a window as possible. Geurilla consumerism is great fun!
The juicy titbits: get the witness to summarise the difference between a computer, an IP address and a mac address. Then ask him to PROVE that the DEFENDANT downloaded files from Kazaa. Previous definitions have already prevented this witness from achieving this goal.
I seriously doubt the police strolled in to no.10 and took a hard drive fore analysis. That would have been in the media LONG before any news regarding what they'd discovered. You just can't go round taking politicians assets like that. Can you imagine what would happen if the FBI took George Bush's hard drive? (insert image of cruise missile targeting FBI headquarters here)
Whilst it's good that Goverment bodies get the same level of investigation as anyone else would, I believe it to be a bit of a 'flogging a dead horse' situation. Blair is leaving this year, and I very much doubt he'd be under the hammer in this sitation
I find it curious that anyone could ever claim investigating political corruption is "flogging a dead horse". The house of lords is an appointed chamber, and the labour party gets to appoint people. Selling peerages (if it's proved) would be a serious breach of public confidence that would have ramifications for people far beyond Blair: after all it's the labour party that nominates their peers, not necessarily their leader. This could have serious implications for the next labour pm (Probably Gordon Brown).
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't it be just great if there was a rerun of the Halloween memo, involving a list of 235 patents that linux allegedly involves, which suddenly "dropped" into an appropriate inbox?
Wishful thinking, I know. But it's happened before....
This article seems to be trying to rewrite history:
Amazing that, a 10 year lead on dual core parts!
If the card performed similarly to an 8800 GTX I would agree with you, but it loses nearly all the benchmarks to the GTX, consequently, they should compare it with the GTS too, show where it lies in the larger scheme of things.
It seems odd to me that they don't compare the 2900XT to the 8800 GTS 640MB. Comparing it with the top-end 8800 GTX means comparing to a much more expensive card. This review isn't really a fair comparison. If they wanted to include the 8800 GTX for info, fair enough, but they should be comparing the card to its intended competitor. You can't draw fair comparisons when comparing to a much more expensive card.
Think Bush will get that Veto out again? He really doesn't seem to like things that get in the way of his goals.
And Slashdot is an American Site. I know for sure I've heard of such stories being run in foreign countries to make them seam less biased
I never ceased to be amazed at the sheer number of "Global Warming's a Myth / Good for Us" stories in American Newspapers and on American websites.
A few thoughts:
How many times have you heard of scientists complaining because an government won't let them spread bullshit?
How many companies have a vested interest in ignoring/delaying/otherwise interfering in the result of genuine science when it doesn't suit their policies?
There will always be "scientists" who are willing to say what someone pays them to say. But when you get significant numbers of experts complaining about science being repressed, large scale international focus on the issue and dissenting countries with an administrations that have long standing and close connections to the oil industry, shouldn't anyone in their right minds be suspicious of such stories?
Ok, if you insist:
Total cost of living in the UK is higher than the US, average wage in the UK is lower than the US, and petrol is much more expensive. And still people don't drive any better.
Happy Now?
In the UK, "gas" as you call it ("petrol" as we call it") costs £0.95 to £1.00 a litre - which is over $7 a US gallon. Despite this, people still don't drive intelligently
The EU is many things, but one thing it is definitely NOT is a government. Maybe wikipedia has this one right:
Well, the US convicted Microsoft of being a monopolist, then did nothing about it. There's clearly a problem (I don't think we need to argue about that on Slashdot.) So, is it just the idea that the great all powerful US isn't doing it that some people find annoying? Or would you rather some other "superpower" like China, India or Russia ends up having to do it (in 15 or 20 years time).
Reality needs to be faced. Your government can't deal with the wayward MS business, the EU wants to deal with your problem for you. Isn't that nice of them?
You may not have to worry about peculiar spatial distortions from these extra dimensions, but what about strange temporal distortions?
Perhaps now you can find a way to go back in time, kill your father before your mum got pregnant, then father yourself, before going on to attend your own funeral. Find a few more impossible things to do, then you can have breakfast at the restaurant at end of the universe!
"Dude, what are you smoking? That's average population density, a meaningless number. What matters is the local population density, which varies enormously over the US."
I'm aware of this, but you've still reinforced my point. The US population density varies enormously compared to the UK density, which is ALWAYS going to be higher for an similar type of population - higher density in UK cities, higher density in UK suburbs and higher density in UK rural areas. And yet the US is still affected more and sooner. This would be unlikely to be the case if mobile phone signals were the cause, because the UK has a much higher density of signals. If mobile phones are the cause, the UK should have been effected first.
Hmmm, not really.
Density of mobile 'phone signals is still a key point - if it begins to happen in an area of lower density, then spreads to others, it still seems unlikely that the mobile 'phone signals are the cause.
Also, as I stated, the US works on different frequencies. Plus, mobile 'phones have been growing gradually over a large number of years, and had already hit the level where networks are no longer targeting new customers, they're targeting people transferring providers. It seems odd that the bee population would suddenly collapse at this point, rather than years previously.
Finally, if mobile 'phone signals are the cause, how come species that normally take ANY excuse to invade an unguarded hive are leaving the abandoned ones alone?
The UK had 3G long before the US. But 3G mainly covers metropolitan areas. I believe bees are more rural and they don't currently benefit from 3G connections.
I for one am extremely suspicious about claims that bees are being wiped out by mobile 'phones. Here's an example of why:
US = 301,505,000 people in 2,718,695 sq miles = 111 people per sq mile
UK = 60,609,153 people in 94,526 sq miles = 641 people per sq mile
So, why is it that the US is suffering this major disappearance of bees when the UK isn't? Seeing as the density of mobile phone signals is going to be FAR higher in the UK? Ok, i accept that mobile phones in the UK work on different frequencies, but from what I've heard, the same thing is happening in Poland and Spain , which both have far lower population densities than the UK, and the same mobile phone frequencies. Of course, Poland and Spain import far more US Genetically Modified crops than the UK does.
I think you're forgetting something.
This article is about UK politics. Remember that by British standards, American politics is right wing, or far-right. You need to be very careful when just talking "right" and "left" or "Republican" and "Democrat" if you're comparing UK and US politics.
There's a Data Commissioner in the UK. So if Microsoft make such a reply, I refer the case to him. It's free. It would take a while (maybe even a couple of years), but I guess it's highly probable that he and his staff have experience of Microsoft's registration process. It would then be down to Microsoft to prove to him that they DIDN'T hold any such data. After all, this isn't a court of law - the rules of evidence aren't like a court of law and it's a very unusual business that doesn't keep ANY records of its customers.
(a) from those data, or
(b) from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller.
I think they would claim that they cannot identify you from the information that they record. Any thoughts?
I seem to remember that Microsoft ask for your first and last name when you register Windows. Assuming that they send this back to their servers, that means anything that is associated with your windows key can personally identify you. Therefore they would have to provide it.
I'd also like to point out that the UK's current definition of personal data is at odds with the EU's stated intention. The EU seems to believe that any mention of your name, or a label that applies to you should be sufficient for you to have rights to get at the data. I don't have a link, but I know the case being taken to the EU courts is under the name of Durrant (sp?). Things may change once that case is settled
Heh, "common sense that companies can't keep what ever records they want - secretly at least."
It may seem common sense to you and me, but that's not how US citizens have it. And yes, we can ask for information to be deleted, but only if it's inaccurate. In the UK, we have to pay a small fee to cover some of the company's admin costs in getting the information and to act as a deterrent against people using this kind of thing for bullying tactics. Of course, since it's so much hassle for the company, you still can use it to bully; I did this to my bank once:
Me: I'd like 3 duplicate bank statements please, for these months...
Bank: That'll be £15 please
Me: What's your fee for a data protection act request? can't I get access to all information you hold on me?
Bank: £10
Me: I may as well get all the information you have then, if that's cheaper
Bank: That's all right sir, we'll do the statements for free
Wasn't that nice of them :)
There are other solutions though - in the UK, people who enroll for teacher training courses in the sciences or maths don't have to pay tuition fees, and get a lump sum split 50/50 between starting training and starting their first job. After all, maths and science graduates do tend to have higher earning potential. It's not going as far as higher wages, but it does encourage some people to take the teacher training.
So, I live in the EU. We have rather stronger laws regarding companies holding information on people than you Americans do. I object to this information being collected on me. Whilst I can't stop them collecting it, I CAN force Microsoft to reveal all information they hold about me, after I pay an admin fee of around £10 and it'll cost them far more than that to provide it. One person is nothing, but if a whole bunch of irate people were to start asking for this information - MS would be very unhappy. Now if only EFF Europe or some other organisation would organise a pro-forma, and encourage a mass "ask MS to reveal what they hold on you" - as many people as possible in as small a window as possible. Geurilla consumerism is great fun!
The juicy titbits: get the witness to summarise the difference between a computer, an IP address and a mac address. Then ask him to PROVE that the DEFENDANT downloaded files from Kazaa. Previous definitions have already prevented this witness from achieving this goal.
I seriously doubt the police strolled in to no.10 and took a hard drive fore analysis. That would have been in the media LONG before any news regarding what they'd discovered. You just can't go round taking politicians assets like that. Can you imagine what would happen if the FBI took George Bush's hard drive? (insert image of cruise missile targeting FBI headquarters here)
Whilst it's good that Goverment bodies get the same level of investigation as anyone else would, I believe it to be a bit of a 'flogging a dead horse' situation. Blair is leaving this year, and I very much doubt he'd be under the hammer in this sitation
I find it curious that anyone could ever claim investigating political corruption is "flogging a dead horse". The house of lords is an appointed chamber, and the labour party gets to appoint people. Selling peerages (if it's proved) would be a serious breach of public confidence that would have ramifications for people far beyond Blair: after all it's the labour party that nominates their peers, not necessarily their leader. This could have serious implications for the next labour pm (Probably Gordon Brown).