The term supercomputer is relative to what is in the top tier of all computation intensive platforms, relative to current standards. It is a supercomputer by yesterday's standards, but not todays. It's important not to discredit yesterday's standards, but it shouldn't be done at the expense of todays by leaving out one sentence that could have avoided this thread line. That sentence would haven't just been one that included, by yesterday's standards. But of course, there wouldn't be as many hits on the site if it were kept in perspective like that. One's and zeros have no bias. The fastest, is still, the fastest. And that will always be relative. You can't blame Steve Jobs for this breach. We all do this. We are all biased. One's and zeros don't have emotions, or reality distortion fields. Every RDF, is the responsibility of the person who let it out, no matter who did it first. If I believe in something that is false, that's my responsibility. If I put it out there further, after it came from someone else, that's my responsibility as well, not the responsibility of the person before me, even if I was duped or didn't have all the facts. I guess the only remaining question would be, or questions, are: How long ago is yesterday? When are standards considered current? Future shock is not considered by computers, but we have to consider it, considering how fast things compound with regard to technological evolution, in order to keep our definitions abreast with that evolution.
I'm in charge of my perspective and my reality. I haven't been in an accident since 1988. You through out events that claim victim before they even happen in hypothesis! Well, so fricken what if someone hits me in an accident, or I'm going to die in one. I'm not going to look for things or pay attention to things that bring me down. They just don't matter that much. I'll be taking my own advice on this thread with that. Bye bye. You're a worry wort dude.
I agree totally with this. And what's more, even with litigation, and then further damages, even jail time, it's still not enough to turn them around. It takes a fundamental shift within the person for them to be legit, and that can sometimes come from the outside, but that is rare. Mostly, what we really can do is just protect ourselves as best we can. If they steal an mp3, we should shoot them, like old days, the wild west days, like we did with horse thieves on our ranches. I'd never shoot someone for borrowing my horse though, if I gave them permission to enjoy the experience...the IP of riding it. Oh wait, maybe I could rent it to them. Then I'd shoot them if they didn't pay for that. I may wind up being the only one left on earth to ride that horse, but at least I'd have my horse! Glad I picked a philly...them lonely AZ nights.:P
And, frankly, I don't consider being realistic about society as living in a hell. I consider turning your back on what people actually do and painting a rosy picture of what's left to be dishonest.
It's always about the perspective one chooses, that makes the difference.
There's quite a few that steal. There's even more that don't...way more. For every time I have been dishonest, I can count, well, I've never actually done it, but I know, I've done many more acts of good, than bad...and I've done much to clean up those bad things as well, as most people do. Not all, but most. I think you've been reading too much negative commentary. There are people being honest all over the place, but it doesn't get too much press. You even chided me for my "oh-so-high" standards. I was merely trying to get through to you...there are honest people in the world, and even though, the internet is quite anonymous, our words and how we communicate should reflect that we know another person is on the other side of the tcp. I didn't take it personally at all. I'm a bit older than that. I was just making a point. The fear that people have wanted us to live in, only works, if it changes how we think about others, and the world, if we believe we need to live in fear. It is then that we lose our freedom, to enjoy how beautiful the people around us are. I remember a friend of mine going off on drivers while he was in the passenger seat when I was driving. I was calm and enjoying the drive. Most of the drivers were driving just fine, but he choose to focus and get bent out of shape by one or two of the drivers that we encountered along our 30 minute drive that were behaving "badly." I enjoyed the other 300 that weren't. That's realism my friend.
Wow. Well, as for me, I pay for my music. I know how to get it for free, very easily. I don't though. All of the music I have, was either purchased, or offered freely in podcast format, or the like. As far as what you say, I can't speak for the track records, or the hypothetical or even cynical view of what others do as far as keeping their integrity intact with their beliefs. Truly, this isn't just about thumbing something at the RIAA, not for the long haul as far as the business model goes. Just buying something out of spite, doesn't really win anything other than spite. That's why I think I stuck with paying only the $10, not to mention more I can't afford. I would pay the next band to come along, that I liked, the same. However, I am tired of the RIAA, and despite what you think about the up and coming bands that get helped by the RIAA, are at the mercy of those contracts. It's up to them to decide, but I for one have enough integrity to do what right. That's all I can say. I can only be the change I want to see in the world. That's all I've been doing for a few years now. And, yes, this is a thrill right now, and I'm sure going to enjoy it, no matter what anyone else says to counter that thrill, or be cynical about it. Apparently, you disagree with some of my views. That's fine.
However, I doubt, as you say, you have held up to your own beliefs about how you would like to live your life, and been successful in all those areas completely, or perfectly. That is also true of many people, myself included. But to judge others, as to judge people involved in Greenpeace, saying one thing, and then doing another, when we ourselves as humans do very often (haven't met one who has been hypocritical as least once in their life, including me), does not offer an argument, but a lack of faith in people for being able to good and honest. Perhaps you side with those who would jail the world before crimes were committed. I don't know. That's what it sounds like though. You have a low opinion of humanity. For myself, when I felt like that, I looked deeply, and found it was my own humanity, my own actions that I didn't have faith in, because I was failing in my own ideals. Because others have failed, or that I have failed in the past, is no reason to give up. It is cowardice to give up on integrity, and very disrespectful to give up on the integrity of others, and class me in with others who have failed, and call them, and myself by association of your argument, a hypocrite. Well, if you want to live in a world of corruption, and blame others for things they haven't done yet, that is your hell to live in. I have more faith in humanity, and myself, than that. Namyohorengekyo to you my friend.
I bought and downloaded the new release from Radiohead just now. The album I must say is very good, but that could be entirely a matter of my own taste. I enjoy Radiohead, having listened to them from the old days of "The Bends" and on up until now..."Kid A" is probably my favorite. But, I usually listen to anything I buy, before I buy it. iTunes has the preview, and sometimes, I'll sift the net a bit to see if the CD or download is worthy of purchase in some way...sometimes it via the KCRW Top Tune of the day podcast...check that out if you'd like something very cool.:)
So, I paid 11.08 US $ for the new release. I thought around $10 was a fair price, especially considering it all goes to the band, and perhaps a few admins of course... The RIAA? No where in site on this deal. I bought without preview, for 1., I love Radiohead, and 2., I want the RIAA, and anyone else involved with DRM stuff to get the message. I would love to see the $220,000 court case verdict be eclipsed by what Radiohead is doing, as it's a high profile band, and I'd love to send a message that we don't want what the RIAA is selling us. So lets buy this one, and make a stink by doing so. If I had more money, I'd pay $100, just to vote in $, which is what the RIAA understands, that they are losing because they are too concerned with $, and have completely lost touch with what we want to buy. If I paid that $100, I'd consider it a vote, to send a message, paying for a freedom we all want, and sending further, a message that we want the artists to get paid fairly, and that we want real artists, not Britney Spears. But, at least, I got in $10, and did it while having to spend some time learning about currency conversion, which was also kinda cool, in the process.
Imagine what type of message it would send to the RIAA, as well as every other musician, if 1,000,000 people paid $10 to download the new Radiohead release. This is how change occurs, how a revolution that's underway, can be furthered.
Bye bye, RIAA. We don't need you...nor do the artists. I won't steal what you have to offer. And, I won't be buying as much as I did when I was younger. I still do, but I don't as much as I'd like. I just don't like the feeling of distrust that the RIAA puts out when I'm buying something. They are prejudging our character, which is disrespectful. Sure, there are people who steal. There always will be. Jailing all of the music, which restricts the freedom of musicians and listeners, of course, is like building a prison, one without bars perhaps, but still feels much the same. And I'm not inclined to harm, but to give, where credit is due.
Initially, as I made my purchase, I thought, maybe I'll give 'em $5 bucks. Nah. $10 sounded better. Conversion and a small fee of $.45 brought it to a bit more, which I'm more than happy to pay. Then I thought of all this other stuff.:)
Now I'm waiting for the next NIN album. What other artist is going to join? If we send a message to them with Radiohead, perhaps we'll see more than small independent bands, that while very good at times, often don't have what we've been accustomed to for years. But then again, that clearly has been controlled by the RIAA distribution channels for decades, and now they are completely falling on their own face. The bands are leaving them behind now.
I'm sick of the RIAA!!! I just paid $11.08 total to download the new Radiohead...CD, no, it's not CD anymore.:P But yes, the whole album. Well, whatever it's called these days. I'm a bit old school...I listened to LP's and even had an 8-track back in the day...Queen, News of the World...on 8 track...yuck, but oh the memories.
Now NIN?!! Yes. I hadn't even heard any music off of the new Radiohead, but I love 'em. I didn't care if I didn't like the music, but I wanted to make a point to the RIAA, and perhaps even the MPAA or anyone else interested in DRM or IP. I will pay, but I don't want to pay for something that's restricted because you're afraid I will steal, and what DRM entails, or EULA's may or may not entail. Restrict all you want xxAA or whoever, if I don't want it, I won't buy. And no, I'm not going to steal it either. Simple economics. Radiohead and their current musical or financial allies, not the RIAA anymore, will get my money, because I don't want to buy what the RIAA has to offer. I still do though, but I don't like it. I bought Radioheads new release though, with passion...freedom! And it's their music to do with what they want now, how they want to sell it. And, since I like their music, and it's DRM free, and doesn't have the usual EULA stuff that goes with other sites like Amazon, I'm more than happy to even to pains with currency conversion stuff. What a breath of fresh air this is!!! I love this!
And, I'm listening to the new release...it's good, BTW.:)
Namyohorengekyo.
What is a CD worth to me if I can't copy it without breaking the law? Nothing. I own an iPod, that's what I use. My CD's have been paid for, ripped and put away in the closet. DRM? It's annoying. I still pay online a bit for now though, but I don't do it as much as they would like me too. I consider my purchases carefully because of the DRM protection, and don't buy that much online. If I can't use it the way I want to, I simply don't buy it. Period. Sales in the U.S. are down, because they aren't giving us what we want to buy, and the includes DRM. We don't want it. Protect themselves all the want, I won't do anything illegal. But that doesn't mean I'm going to buy it either. Their self preservation deflates the value of their product for me. It's no longer worth what it used to be. When things like this become law, then it becomes even harder for economic or trade models to be changed on the fly, to save their floundering business model.
I don't buy as much music as I used to back in the '80s or '90s, before DRM issues. Every time I do buy music, I feel like I'm buying and putting money into the pocket of someone I'd rather not do any business with...the RIAA. So, I don't do as much business with them anymore. It hurts their artists too, who I'd like to support and listen to, but that's also their choice for signing with the RIAA. Live and learn. For consumerism, the best way to vote, is to say no, by not buying, and saying yes, by buying. They only understand the bottom line. Their a little dumb though when it comes to understanding their consumers or what's really going on though. They (RIAA cartel) think we still like Britney Spears. I didn't like her before.
Lack of clipart is at least as of now, no longer an issue. There is an "extras" CD you can download for free, that has more clipart, in various formats including SVG (sweet!), than MS does.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I doubt Apple will have to copy the OS rollback program MS had to initiate due to unsatisfied, no, frustrated Vista users.
The term supercomputer is relative to what is in the top tier of all computation intensive platforms, relative to current standards. It is a supercomputer by yesterday's standards, but not todays. It's important not to discredit yesterday's standards, but it shouldn't be done at the expense of todays by leaving out one sentence that could have avoided this thread line. That sentence would haven't just been one that included, by yesterday's standards. But of course, there wouldn't be as many hits on the site if it were kept in perspective like that. One's and zeros have no bias. The fastest, is still, the fastest. And that will always be relative. You can't blame Steve Jobs for this breach. We all do this. We are all biased. One's and zeros don't have emotions, or reality distortion fields. Every RDF, is the responsibility of the person who let it out, no matter who did it first. If I believe in something that is false, that's my responsibility. If I put it out there further, after it came from someone else, that's my responsibility as well, not the responsibility of the person before me, even if I was duped or didn't have all the facts. I guess the only remaining question would be, or questions, are: How long ago is yesterday? When are standards considered current? Future shock is not considered by computers, but we have to consider it, considering how fast things compound with regard to technological evolution, in order to keep our definitions abreast with that evolution.
I'm in charge of my perspective and my reality. I haven't been in an accident since 1988. You through out events that claim victim before they even happen in hypothesis! Well, so fricken what if someone hits me in an accident, or I'm going to die in one. I'm not going to look for things or pay attention to things that bring me down. They just don't matter that much. I'll be taking my own advice on this thread with that. Bye bye. You're a worry wort dude.
I agree totally with this. And what's more, even with litigation, and then further damages, even jail time, it's still not enough to turn them around. It takes a fundamental shift within the person for them to be legit, and that can sometimes come from the outside, but that is rare. Mostly, what we really can do is just protect ourselves as best we can. If they steal an mp3, we should shoot them, like old days, the wild west days, like we did with horse thieves on our ranches. I'd never shoot someone for borrowing my horse though, if I gave them permission to enjoy the experience...the IP of riding it. Oh wait, maybe I could rent it to them. Then I'd shoot them if they didn't pay for that. I may wind up being the only one left on earth to ride that horse, but at least I'd have my horse! Glad I picked a philly...them lonely AZ nights.:P
LOL!!! How did you know?
Count my vote as an affirmative, many times over.:)
And, frankly, I don't consider being realistic about society as living in a hell. I consider turning your back on what people actually do and painting a rosy picture of what's left to be dishonest.
It's always about the perspective one chooses, that makes the difference.
There's quite a few that steal. There's even more that don't...way more. For every time I have been dishonest, I can count, well, I've never actually done it, but I know, I've done many more acts of good, than bad...and I've done much to clean up those bad things as well, as most people do. Not all, but most. I think you've been reading too much negative commentary. There are people being honest all over the place, but it doesn't get too much press. You even chided me for my "oh-so-high" standards. I was merely trying to get through to you...there are honest people in the world, and even though, the internet is quite anonymous, our words and how we communicate should reflect that we know another person is on the other side of the tcp. I didn't take it personally at all. I'm a bit older than that. I was just making a point. The fear that people have wanted us to live in, only works, if it changes how we think about others, and the world, if we believe we need to live in fear. It is then that we lose our freedom, to enjoy how beautiful the people around us are. I remember a friend of mine going off on drivers while he was in the passenger seat when I was driving. I was calm and enjoying the drive. Most of the drivers were driving just fine, but he choose to focus and get bent out of shape by one or two of the drivers that we encountered along our 30 minute drive that were behaving "badly." I enjoyed the other 300 that weren't. That's realism my friend.
Wow. Well, as for me, I pay for my music. I know how to get it for free, very easily. I don't though. All of the music I have, was either purchased, or offered freely in podcast format, or the like. As far as what you say, I can't speak for the track records, or the hypothetical or even cynical view of what others do as far as keeping their integrity intact with their beliefs. Truly, this isn't just about thumbing something at the RIAA, not for the long haul as far as the business model goes. Just buying something out of spite, doesn't really win anything other than spite. That's why I think I stuck with paying only the $10, not to mention more I can't afford. I would pay the next band to come along, that I liked, the same. However, I am tired of the RIAA, and despite what you think about the up and coming bands that get helped by the RIAA, are at the mercy of those contracts. It's up to them to decide, but I for one have enough integrity to do what right. That's all I can say. I can only be the change I want to see in the world. That's all I've been doing for a few years now. And, yes, this is a thrill right now, and I'm sure going to enjoy it, no matter what anyone else says to counter that thrill, or be cynical about it. Apparently, you disagree with some of my views. That's fine.
However, I doubt, as you say, you have held up to your own beliefs about how you would like to live your life, and been successful in all those areas completely, or perfectly. That is also true of many people, myself included. But to judge others, as to judge people involved in Greenpeace, saying one thing, and then doing another, when we ourselves as humans do very often (haven't met one who has been hypocritical as least once in their life, including me), does not offer an argument, but a lack of faith in people for being able to good and honest. Perhaps you side with those who would jail the world before crimes were committed. I don't know. That's what it sounds like though. You have a low opinion of humanity. For myself, when I felt like that, I looked deeply, and found it was my own humanity, my own actions that I didn't have faith in, because I was failing in my own ideals. Because others have failed, or that I have failed in the past, is no reason to give up. It is cowardice to give up on integrity, and very disrespectful to give up on the integrity of others, and class me in with others who have failed, and call them, and myself by association of your argument, a hypocrite. Well, if you want to live in a world of corruption, and blame others for things they haven't done yet, that is your hell to live in. I have more faith in humanity, and myself, than that. Namyohorengekyo to you my friend.
I bought and downloaded the new release from Radiohead just now. The album I must say is very good, but that could be entirely a matter of my own taste. I enjoy Radiohead, having listened to them from the old days of "The Bends" and on up until now..."Kid A" is probably my favorite. But, I usually listen to anything I buy, before I buy it. iTunes has the preview, and sometimes, I'll sift the net a bit to see if the CD or download is worthy of purchase in some way...sometimes it via the KCRW Top Tune of the day podcast...check that out if you'd like something very cool.:) So, I paid 11.08 US $ for the new release. I thought around $10 was a fair price, especially considering it all goes to the band, and perhaps a few admins of course... The RIAA? No where in site on this deal. I bought without preview, for 1., I love Radiohead, and 2., I want the RIAA, and anyone else involved with DRM stuff to get the message. I would love to see the $220,000 court case verdict be eclipsed by what Radiohead is doing, as it's a high profile band, and I'd love to send a message that we don't want what the RIAA is selling us. So lets buy this one, and make a stink by doing so. If I had more money, I'd pay $100, just to vote in $, which is what the RIAA understands, that they are losing because they are too concerned with $, and have completely lost touch with what we want to buy. If I paid that $100, I'd consider it a vote, to send a message, paying for a freedom we all want, and sending further, a message that we want the artists to get paid fairly, and that we want real artists, not Britney Spears. But, at least, I got in $10, and did it while having to spend some time learning about currency conversion, which was also kinda cool, in the process. Imagine what type of message it would send to the RIAA, as well as every other musician, if 1,000,000 people paid $10 to download the new Radiohead release. This is how change occurs, how a revolution that's underway, can be furthered. Bye bye, RIAA. We don't need you...nor do the artists. I won't steal what you have to offer. And, I won't be buying as much as I did when I was younger. I still do, but I don't as much as I'd like. I just don't like the feeling of distrust that the RIAA puts out when I'm buying something. They are prejudging our character, which is disrespectful. Sure, there are people who steal. There always will be. Jailing all of the music, which restricts the freedom of musicians and listeners, of course, is like building a prison, one without bars perhaps, but still feels much the same. And I'm not inclined to harm, but to give, where credit is due. Initially, as I made my purchase, I thought, maybe I'll give 'em $5 bucks. Nah. $10 sounded better. Conversion and a small fee of $.45 brought it to a bit more, which I'm more than happy to pay. Then I thought of all this other stuff.:) Now I'm waiting for the next NIN album. What other artist is going to join? If we send a message to them with Radiohead, perhaps we'll see more than small independent bands, that while very good at times, often don't have what we've been accustomed to for years. But then again, that clearly has been controlled by the RIAA distribution channels for decades, and now they are completely falling on their own face. The bands are leaving them behind now.
I'm sick of the RIAA!!! I just paid $11.08 total to download the new Radiohead...CD, no, it's not CD anymore.:P But yes, the whole album. Well, whatever it's called these days. I'm a bit old school...I listened to LP's and even had an 8-track back in the day...Queen, News of the World...on 8 track...yuck, but oh the memories. Now NIN?!! Yes. I hadn't even heard any music off of the new Radiohead, but I love 'em. I didn't care if I didn't like the music, but I wanted to make a point to the RIAA, and perhaps even the MPAA or anyone else interested in DRM or IP. I will pay, but I don't want to pay for something that's restricted because you're afraid I will steal, and what DRM entails, or EULA's may or may not entail. Restrict all you want xxAA or whoever, if I don't want it, I won't buy. And no, I'm not going to steal it either. Simple economics. Radiohead and their current musical or financial allies, not the RIAA anymore, will get my money, because I don't want to buy what the RIAA has to offer. I still do though, but I don't like it. I bought Radioheads new release though, with passion...freedom! And it's their music to do with what they want now, how they want to sell it. And, since I like their music, and it's DRM free, and doesn't have the usual EULA stuff that goes with other sites like Amazon, I'm more than happy to even to pains with currency conversion stuff. What a breath of fresh air this is!!! I love this! And, I'm listening to the new release...it's good, BTW.:) Namyohorengekyo.
What is a CD worth to me if I can't copy it without breaking the law? Nothing. I own an iPod, that's what I use. My CD's have been paid for, ripped and put away in the closet. DRM? It's annoying. I still pay online a bit for now though, but I don't do it as much as they would like me too. I consider my purchases carefully because of the DRM protection, and don't buy that much online. If I can't use it the way I want to, I simply don't buy it. Period. Sales in the U.S. are down, because they aren't giving us what we want to buy, and the includes DRM. We don't want it. Protect themselves all the want, I won't do anything illegal. But that doesn't mean I'm going to buy it either. Their self preservation deflates the value of their product for me. It's no longer worth what it used to be. When things like this become law, then it becomes even harder for economic or trade models to be changed on the fly, to save their floundering business model.
I don't buy as much music as I used to back in the '80s or '90s, before DRM issues. Every time I do buy music, I feel like I'm buying and putting money into the pocket of someone I'd rather not do any business with...the RIAA. So, I don't do as much business with them anymore. It hurts their artists too, who I'd like to support and listen to, but that's also their choice for signing with the RIAA. Live and learn. For consumerism, the best way to vote, is to say no, by not buying, and saying yes, by buying. They only understand the bottom line. Their a little dumb though when it comes to understanding their consumers or what's really going on though. They (RIAA cartel) think we still like Britney Spears. I didn't like her before.
Lack of clipart is at least as of now, no longer an issue. There is an "extras" CD you can download for free, that has more clipart, in various formats including SVG (sweet!), than MS does.