Yes, but this processor does not run existing aplications faster, like all the other examples you gave. Only new apps written for IA64 will run faster. Merced/McKinley won't have immediate appeal to the public, because after spending an extra $1000 or so to get this hot new chip, it won't run anything faster.
It will be interesting to see how Sledgehammer does. I remember looking at Intel's roadmaps literally years ago, and listening to their pr which positioned Merced and it's successors as being server oriented and not for the desktop. Will Intel try to move it to the desktop faster now that AMD has given them stiff competition in the IA32 market? Anyone know when we will see Merced/McKinley/IA64 in desktop machines?
I don't know, that's a good question. I haven't read all of the court records, but I have read most of two records. My impression is really that most of what is being said here isn't all that accurate. The judge doesn't seem to be out to get any one. The defense doesn't seem all that organized. Also I don't think your example is similar to the case here. The defendants were distributing the code. They were distibuting the windows version, which wasn't created/ported in order to write software for linux.
I am not trying to argue that what is happening is a Good Thing. It sucks. But I think everyone is pointed in the wrong direction. In my opinion the fault is with the DMCA, not the judge.
This isn't even about piracy though, and the judge knows it, even if no one else here at slashdot does.
http://cryptome.org/dvd-mpaa-3-mo.htm
When the plaintiff lawyers are arguing, they are not singling out piracy as the problem. They simple state that DeCSS allows access to the disc. They then go on to say that this means that one could play the movie or trade it/copy it with friends. Piracy isn't even the first use suggested by the plaintiff's lawyer. The argument is simply that DeCSS allows access to the underlying data, which it does.
My impression, and it is only an impression, is that the defense lawyers suck/are unprepared.
Second, even assuming that DeCSS runs under Linux, it concededly runs under Windows---a far more widely used operating system---as well. It therefore cannot reasonably be said that DeCSS was developed "for the sole purpose'' of achieving interoperability between Linux and DVDs.
I doubt it was someone trying to make up for it, because they could have just moderated the original.
However, it is fairly common and easy to assume that as you read farther down the page you are also progressing in time. This is false, and really checking the message number and/or time is the only way to tell. I've seen this pointed out before, but obviously it still needs to be done. Perhaps the moderator thought that more people should see Remote's explanation to prevent it from happening again.
I see your point. But the way the service works is it costs 8 bucks when you have another way to access AOL. If you are dialling into AOL you want the full service. And as someone already pointed out. They warned you that charges were going to apply.
It's not exactly ethical to jump on this lawsuit, doesn't sound like you were affected by the 5.0 upgrade.
I don't understand what you mean. I would argue that Slashdot is in fact biased. The staff itself doesn't really say a whole lot instead leaving commentary to those who submit the story. That doesn't make it unbiased though. The submittors have bias. The staff also picks stories that they think are interesting. It's all bias in some sense. I'm not saying this is bad, just that humans aren't really all that objective.
That's the whole point of it only being 8 dollars, right? You aren't getting the full service. If you were only paying 8 dollars to AOL, I don't understand how you thought you were going to be able to dial in like you were before.
Yes, but did Honda suggest for you to upgrade your new engine so you could get all the latest and greatest benefits of Engine 5.0?
did AOL?
The whole point is a fairly clueless reader following the directions should be able to install AOL. Would AOL be so popular if you needed to take your computer somewhere to install or upgrade AOL? I somehow doubt that AOL gave warnings that only certified technicians should install their product. Even if they did, the technician would not have been able to foresee AOL destroying the other ISPs.
I think that the SAT reflects intelligence. I'm sure it isn't a perfect measure, but I ended up taking the SAT 3 times. Once as a sophomore for the hell of it, and twice as a junior. I would say that it reflects intelligence. I've heard different people bash the SAT for being culturally biased. I was just curious how exactly the SAT is biased. I'm guessing that you and others believe that the SAT is a better indicator of education rather than actually intelligence. I don't mean this to be flamebait.
My personal belief is that the SAT reflects intelligence pretty well, but intelligence may not be as important as is generally accepted and doesn't reflect success in college or in the real world.
I hope every reader, moderator, and meta-moderator look at what a link actually goes to before clicking on it, or making an assumption to it's value.
This loser has been posting this stupid link everywhere under the guise of being informative or ontopic. The best part is when he replies to himself and thanks/congratulates himself.
Wrong set of standards. The typical Win2k user is not going to care that they have have to reboot after installing the patch. That is the status quo with Microsoft operating systems. Hell, over half the software I install in Windows 98 suggests/requires a reboot after installation.
I agree with you pretty much completely. It would be ridiculous to sue a light bulb company because the bulb was hot. There are some differences here with the coffee and the woman who was burned. She was not sueing for punitive damages. She sued for medical expenses to cover skin grafts. In my opinion it was appropriate to sue for the costs of skin grafts and medical expenses.
It might be stupid, but someone sometime is going to spill coffee on themselves. I have spilled drinks before in my life. Have you? I've been lucky enough to never need hospitalization and skin grafts after spilling a drink. In fact, I took that for granted.
Maybe they should assume that once in a while a customer is going to spill a drink, and take measures so that the customer is not hospitalized. This could be selling it cooler or maybe a different container could be used.
The world is not perfect. It won't become perfect tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. How much do you honestly know about what's "been going on in the courts right now?" I'll admit that I don't know much. I can see that the system is not perfect.
You are bitching about lawyers being the problem. Lawyers are just a reflection of what you are bitching about, not the root.
People believe in their rights. If your grandma got scalded severely from coffee and had to have 40,000 dollars worth of skin grafts and medical treatment... Would you call her stupid for not knowing that the coffee was hot? Or would you think that McDonald's should pay for her medical bills. That is what she sued for, her medical bills. The jury believed McDonalds was acting negligently and awarded the punitive damage because of that.
The DMV selling information is a world of difference from some company doing it. We have to do business with the DMV. We have to give them our address. If you want to drive it is as simple as that. It is indeed wrong for the DMV to be able to sell off personal information for a few bucks, when the "customers" (everyone who wants to drive) have no say over the matter.
It should not be illegal for a company to sell information about it's clients. You may not like it, I don't. Let's not do business with them. Let's find another company that is sensitive to our privacy needs. There is no need to get the government involved to force the "one true way" that we believe is right.
What would be useful is legislation that would force disclosure of whether or not companies sold the information. We could make a little privacy ribbon.jpg that could be on sites that swore to not release privacy information. Maybe some sort of overseeing body that would revoke the "privacy friendly" status of a company if they acted stupid.
My point is that we are not totally helpless here. We can solve the problem. No need to legislate.
When you accept a cookie from a site it is analogous to someone coming up to you and writing on your forehead 19876523. Does 19876523 mean anything in itself? No. But now lets say that the you go to the store and they see 19876523 on your forehead and write it down. Now you go to another store, and they write it down. These stores also write down everything you buy.
Now let's say you go to another store and order something they are going to ship to you. They write down 19876523 as well as what you bought as well as your home address and name. Now a company knows what you ate at tacobell, bought at the supermarket, and what you bought at wal mart.
Cookies in theory are limited in scope moreso than my example was, because only the company that wrote on your forehead could read the number. Only slashdot can read the cookies it sends to your browser. But, what ends up happening is that web pages use a 3rd party to serve up the banner ads. This 3rd party is the one that sends you the cookie. When you go to another site that this 3rd party is also serving up ads to, they instantly identify you from the old web site. If one of the websites you go to gets your shipping information and they have an agreement with the banner ad company, it's all over.
After going to french and back your last paragraph becomes:
The ampèreheure, recreation with the babelfish, it never becomes tiring. For those of you who did not test it, test a modern version of day of " telephone ". Write a simple paragraph within the framework, translate-the with German, translate it with English again, translate-the with French, translate it with English again, and so on until you did the whole the languages... then compare your initial paragraph with the translation.
To German and back:
The ampèreheure, recovery with babelfish, becomes it never fatiguing. For of you, which did not check it, check a modern version of the daily " of the telephone ". write a simple paragraph within the framework, translating with German, translate it with English again, translating with Frenchmen, translate it with English again, and so on, until you did the whole, the languages compare... then your output paragraph with the translation.
->Italian->English->Portugese->English
Ampèreheure, backup with babelfish, transform into it that never ** is not gotten tired teams-out ** end v if est you, of whom t not control, into control a modern daily version paper " telephone ". escrev a simple paragraph picture, translate with German, still translates with English, translates with Frenchman, still translates there with English and and consequently through, until that one you t not faç all, language to follow to compar... its paragraph have escaped translation.
And the last one: to Spanish and back:
** Time-out ** Amp2ereheure, safeguard with babelfish, to transform into him whom never ** to be not to obtain outside tired equipment-towards ** extreme v if est you, who t noncontrol, in control one modern newspaper version paper " telephone ". escrev one simple paragraph panel, to translate with German, still to translate with English, to translate with French, still to translate there with English and and consequence to traverse, until that one you t not fa1c everything, language to follow to compar... its paragraph to have to save translation.
Let's say 25% of the drivers have cell phones (and use them). My point is that these 25% are not just roll-the-die-random one in four. They are people who share certain traits in common. People who may mostly live in one area or another. It's not just who is using the phones but also when they are using them. If it's mostly commuters using phones while going back and forth to work, you are going to get statistics about people driving back and forth to work who use their phones at those times. I don't really see how you could get a good overall picture of what is going on across the board.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but this processor does not run existing aplications faster, like all the other examples you gave. Only new apps written for IA64 will run faster. Merced/McKinley won't have immediate appeal to the public, because after spending an extra $1000 or so to get this hot new chip, it won't run anything faster.
It will be interesting to see how Sledgehammer does. I remember looking at Intel's roadmaps literally years ago, and listening to their pr which positioned Merced and it's successors as being server oriented and not for the desktop. Will Intel try to move it to the desktop faster now that AMD has given them stiff competition in the IA32 market? Anyone know when we will see Merced/McKinley/IA64 in desktop machines?
I don't know, that's a good question. I haven't read all of the court records, but I have read most of two records. My impression is really that most of what is being said here isn't all that accurate. The judge doesn't seem to be out to get any one. The defense doesn't seem all that organized. Also I don't think your example is similar to the case here. The defendants were distributing the code. They were distibuting the windows version, which wasn't created/ported in order to write software for linux.
I am not trying to argue that what is happening is a Good Thing. It sucks. But I think everyone is pointed in the wrong direction. In my opinion the fault is with the DMCA, not the judge.
This isn't even about piracy though, and the judge knows it, even if no one else here at slashdot does.
http://cryptome.org/dvd-mpaa-3-mo.htm
When the plaintiff lawyers are arguing, they are not singling out piracy as the problem. They simple state that DeCSS allows access to the disc. They then go on to say that this means that one could play the movie or trade it/copy it with friends. Piracy isn't even the first use suggested by the plaintiff's lawyer. The argument is simply that DeCSS allows access to the underlying data, which it does.
My impression, and it is only an impression, is that the defense lawyers suck/are unprepared.
Here is the quote:
Second, even assuming that DeCSS runs under Linux, it concededly runs under Windows---a far more widely used operating system---as well. It therefore cannot reasonably be said that DeCSS was developed "for the sole purpose'' of achieving interoperability between Linux and DVDs.
I doubt it was someone trying to make up for it, because they could have just moderated the original.
However, it is fairly common and easy to assume that as you read farther down the page you are also progressing in time. This is false, and really checking the message number and/or time is the only way to tell. I've seen this pointed out before, but obviously it still needs to be done. Perhaps the moderator thought that more people should see Remote's explanation to prevent it from happening again.
I see your point. But the way the service works is it costs 8 bucks when you have another way to access AOL. If you are dialling into AOL you want the full service. And as someone already pointed out. They warned you that charges were going to apply.
It's not exactly ethical to jump on this lawsuit, doesn't sound like you were affected by the 5.0 upgrade.
I don't understand what you mean. I would argue that Slashdot is in fact biased. The staff itself doesn't really say a whole lot instead leaving commentary to those who submit the story. That doesn't make it unbiased though. The submittors have bias. The staff also picks stories that they think are interesting. It's all bias in some sense. I'm not saying this is bad, just that humans aren't really all that objective.
Personally I don't count on any source of news to be unbiased. It's not human nature. We are all biased. We all have preconcieved (sp?) notions.
That's the whole point of it only being 8 dollars, right? You aren't getting the full service. If you were only paying 8 dollars to AOL, I don't understand how you thought you were going to be able to dial in like you were before.
Yes, but did Honda suggest for you to upgrade your new engine so you could get all the latest and greatest benefits of Engine 5.0?
did AOL?
The whole point is a fairly clueless reader following the directions should be able to install AOL. Would AOL be so popular if you needed to take your computer somewhere to install or upgrade AOL? I somehow doubt that AOL gave warnings that only certified technicians should install their product. Even if they did, the technician would not have been able to foresee AOL destroying the other ISPs.
I think that the SAT reflects intelligence. I'm sure it isn't a perfect measure, but I ended up taking the SAT 3 times. Once as a sophomore for the hell of it, and twice as a junior. I would say that it reflects intelligence. I've heard different people bash the SAT for being culturally biased. I was just curious how exactly the SAT is biased. I'm guessing that you and others believe that the SAT is a better indicator of education rather than actually intelligence. I don't mean this to be flamebait.
My personal belief is that the SAT reflects intelligence pretty well, but intelligence may not be as important as is generally accepted and doesn't reflect success in college or in the real world.
Don't feed the troll.
I hope every reader, moderator, and meta-moderator look at what a link actually goes to before clicking on it, or making an assumption to it's value.
This loser has been posting this stupid link everywhere under the guise of being informative or ontopic. The best part is when he replies to himself and thanks/congratulates himself.
billion = million*million?
What do you call one thousand million?
Wrong set of standards. The typical Win2k user is not going to care that they have have to reboot after installing the patch. That is the status quo with Microsoft operating systems. Hell, over half the software I install in Windows 98 suggests/requires a reboot after installation.
As opposed to all those other companies that are quick to publicize their shortcomings...
I agree with you pretty much completely. It would be ridiculous to sue a light bulb company because the bulb was hot. There are some differences here with the coffee and the woman who was burned. She was not sueing for punitive damages. She sued for medical expenses to cover skin grafts. In my opinion it was appropriate to sue for the costs of skin grafts and medical expenses.
It might be stupid, but someone sometime is going to spill coffee on themselves. I have spilled drinks before in my life. Have you? I've been lucky enough to never need hospitalization and skin grafts after spilling a drink. In fact, I took that for granted.
Maybe they should assume that once in a while a customer is going to spill a drink, and take measures so that the customer is not hospitalized.
This could be selling it cooler or maybe a different container could be used.
The world is not perfect. It won't become perfect tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. How much do you honestly know about what's "been going on in the courts right now?" I'll admit that I don't know much. I can see that the system is not perfect.
You are bitching about lawyers being the problem. Lawyers are just a reflection of what you are bitching about, not the root.
People believe in their rights. If your grandma got scalded severely from coffee and had to have 40,000 dollars worth of skin grafts and medical treatment... Would you call her stupid for not knowing that the coffee was hot? Or would you think that McDonald's should pay for her medical bills. That is what she sued for, her medical bills. The jury believed McDonalds was acting negligently and awarded the punitive damage because of that.
The DMV selling information is a world of difference from some company doing it. We have to do business with the DMV. We have to give them our address. If you want to drive it is as simple as that. It is indeed wrong for the DMV to be able to sell off personal information for a few bucks, when the "customers" (everyone who wants to drive) have no say over the matter.
.jpg that could be on sites that swore to not release privacy information. Maybe some sort of overseeing body that would revoke the "privacy friendly" status of a company if they acted stupid.
It should not be illegal for a company to sell information about it's clients. You may not like it, I don't. Let's not do business with them. Let's find another company that is sensitive to our privacy needs. There is no need to get the government involved to force the "one true way" that we believe is right.
What would be useful is legislation that would force disclosure of whether or not companies sold the information. We could make a little privacy ribbon
My point is that we are not totally helpless here. We can solve the problem. No need to legislate.
When you accept a cookie from a site it is analogous to someone coming up to you and writing on your forehead 19876523. Does 19876523 mean anything in itself? No. But now lets say that the you go to the store and they see 19876523 on your forehead and write it down. Now you go to another store, and they write it down. These stores also write down everything you buy.
Now let's say you go to another store and order something they are going to ship to you. They write down 19876523 as well as what you bought as well as your home address and name. Now a company knows what you ate at tacobell, bought at the supermarket, and what you bought at wal mart.
Cookies in theory are limited in scope moreso than my example was, because only the company that wrote on your forehead could read the number. Only slashdot can read the cookies it sends to your browser. But, what ends up happening is that web pages use a 3rd party to serve up the banner ads. This 3rd party is the one that sends you the cookie. When you go to another site that this 3rd party is also serving up ads to, they instantly identify you from the old web site. If one of the websites you go to gets your shipping information and they have an agreement with the banner ad company, it's all over.
It brightens my day just a little to see that NatePWIII posts with a default of zero now. ;)
After going to french and back your last paragraph becomes:
The ampèreheure, recreation with the babelfish, it never becomes tiring. For those of you who did not test it, test a modern version of day of " telephone ". Write a simple paragraph within the framework, translate-the with German, translate it with English again, translate-the with French, translate it with English again, and so on until you did the whole the languages... then compare your initial paragraph with the translation.
To German and back:
The ampèreheure, recovery with babelfish, becomes it never fatiguing. For of you, which did not check it, check a modern version of the daily " of the telephone ". write a simple paragraph within the framework, translating with German, translate it with English again, translating with Frenchmen, translate it with English again, and so on, until you did the whole, the languages compare... then your output paragraph with the translation.
->Italian->English->Portugese->English
Ampèreheure, backup with babelfish, transform into it that never ** is not gotten tired teams-out ** end v if est you, of whom t not control, into control a modern daily version paper " telephone ". escrev a simple paragraph picture, translate with German, still translates with English, translates with Frenchman, still translates there with English and and consequently through, until that one you t not faç all, language to follow to compar... its paragraph have escaped translation.
And the last one: to Spanish and back:
** Time-out ** Amp2ereheure, safeguard with babelfish, to transform into him whom never ** to be not to obtain outside tired equipment-towards ** extreme v if est you, who t noncontrol, in control one modern newspaper version paper " telephone ". escrev one simple paragraph panel, to translate with German, still to translate with English, to translate with French, still to translate there with English and and consequence to traverse, until that one you t not fa1c everything, language to follow to compar... its paragraph to have to save translation.
Let's say 25% of the drivers have cell phones (and use them). My point is that these 25% are not just roll-the-die-random one in four. They are people who share certain traits in common. People who may mostly live in one area or another. It's not just who is using the phones but also when they are using them. If it's mostly commuters using phones while going back and forth to work, you are going to get statistics about people driving back and forth to work who use their phones at those times. I don't really see how you could get a good overall picture of what is going on across the board.