So PC World pissed off a geek. He told all his geek buddies. Word got around and now PC World has either changed their mind, or announced their mistake as loud as they can for fear of reprisal from tons of geeks. Why am I not surprised? I'm sure they want to stay in business, and even if that was their policy, i'm sure it changed VERY quickly because the community they target is the same community that's now talking bad about them. Change their policy or risk going out of business?
Slashdot wins!
PC World - 0
Slashdot - 1
So we can't exactly sit down with a cup of coffee and 'read' over the DMCA to understand our own rights. Of course, the big companies can! This works to the advantage of the big corporations because we don't know our own rights!
The world would be a much different place if the users were informed as to their rights. Either the company is required to provide you your rights or some kind of repercussion if the company really is indeed involved in frivolous takedowns. Charge a company $100,000 every time someone catches and successfully prosecutes an invalid claim and companies would be more concerned with their OWN 'right'... to stay in the black!
Anyone notice the date of this coming out? September 11! I'm sorry, but Microsoft is an American company, and whoever thought of September 11 is a really sick f*$(.
Yes, everything is sacred. DUH! Like...
-Net neutrality
-Fair use
-and now GI Joe
Would even THINK of messing with these? They're so sacred! Just ask anyone at slashdot. O wait, you'd better not!
Ive noticed that the number of posts is usually proportional to the topic's possible effect on the slashdot community. I'm VERY interested to see how many posts this actually brings in. It'll be a clear indication of how important(or unimportant) the slashdot community thinks this story was.
Whatever OS you choose to use, it's probably going to be on an x86 based machine. I'd assume you aren't going to have a computer solely for this one purpose so VMWare could work out really well. Set it up exactly how you want it, take a snapshot. If things go sour on it, just hit revert to snapshot. Then you have OS protection so they won't screw up your OS(resulting in having an IT guy come out and fix it) and they can goof it up all the want.
"What? You deleted NTLDR cause you needed the 250kb of space? No prob!"
How did we find out we were hacked into? Is it because we have already hacked into their network and found our own data? This would be an interesting story if that were true. I'm also sure we'd never know that we found out this way either, it would be someone that just 'happened' to read about 100,000 pages of logs and realized that 1 single line that had an IP that was clearly not supposed to be there.
--- The 'other side' is always evil when they hack, but it's always acceptable when 'your side' does it.
You know what I would pay a fee for? My internet connection to actually be what I paid for! I never get the 'theoretical' maximum. In fact sometimes my webpages barely load. The fee I pay to get the 'supreme speed' should guarantee me that speed. Isn't that why I pay the extra $15 a month for the upgraded internet??
If this really takes off we're screwed. The internet was formed on the basis of neutrality. We then argued over having tiered internet. But now we're being offered(or attempting to be offered) internet that is neutral. We now have tiered internet folks. We have the ISP that promises net neutrality, and 'everyone else'. It's just a matter of time before 'everyone else' = 'non-neutral ISP'.
So we've got 2 tiers set up already. How many will we have in the end?
Yes, it's a reply to my own post, but thinking more about it. VMWare would be perfect for this. Take a snapshot, get a coupon, revert to snapshot. Now what? Who is technically violating the DMCA? Me for using it as such, or VMWare because their 'mundane feature' happens to allow circumvention of a broad all encompassing and overly extensive law? If VMWare is technically responsible, why not sue VMWare out of existence? Sure they've got lots of money, and companies seem to be more bent on stealing money from others than earning it legitimately.
There's 10 ways to skin a cat, and I bet there's at least 1000 ways that DMCA could be circumvented in this situation alone without even realizing it(or maybe utilizing it). So clearly all those companies out there that have software that 'circumvents' the DMCA of coupons.com clearly must be shut down immediately, and pay all the other companies left standing for violating the DMCA. So here's a list i'm starting of all the companies that 'break the law' because they can be used to circumvent coupons.com.
1. Microsoft - They provided the delete command, regedit, and even the format command. And someone pray to god that the files don't get corrupted in the MFT(or FAT) and chkdsk removes the 'bad' entries. 2. All Linux distributions- they provided the ability to repartition the hard drive thereby removing the DRM. 3. IBM - They marketed IBM PC-DOS, which again has a delete command, format command, and even fdisk command. 4. Apple - They can delete partitions with their OS installation.
Well, that's about all of the big OSes out of business. Guess the computer industry is set to self destruct.
Who knew that such a useful tool like 'delete' would really be breaking the law? I'm sorry, but if I want to 'delete *.*' on my computer, that's my damn right and not some other company that wants to control my computer. Otherwise, they'd better start paying ME for the storage they take over. Yes, they ARE "taking over" if I'm not allowed to delete crap on my computer. This smells SO much like Vista. Vista controls your PC, and it will decide what you can and can't do. If I wanted to rent out my hardware to other companies, I'd put out an ad. I haven't put out an ad, so my hardware is well... uhh... MINE.
What I want to see is a catch 22. Where some malware breaks the law and legally must be removed, but removing it breaks the law too!
All this proves beyond a doubt is that the world is getting much too complex to write laws to cover every single itty bitty possible situation that could arise now or in the future for as long as there is a future, or the law gets changed. It seems like more laws should be written explaining the 'spirit of the law' and allowing some kind of 'judge' or maybe a group of people, I'll call them a 'jury' to decide if something is illegal or not. Because maybe then moral values might have an effect on society. I know, moral values is a very hard thing to grasp. Especially from large money hungry corporations. I just see people(and companies) doing more and more acts that I think of as 'immoral' and getting away with it. Society needs to start looking at what they feel is moral and immoral(Within limits of course. I might WANT to kill my ex, but that doesn't mean I should get to) and then maybe companies will have no choice but to actually play nice with the customers.
At my work, my job is to help a customer. In this case the customer is a new computer user. What's the contract officially say? Set up the computer, give them the password and walk away. Some people have questions, and I always answer them as best as I can. Can I get fired for trying to answer a question as simple as "Will a USB printer work on this computer?"? Yes, I could get fired. I've been told by my boss that I got 'caught' helping the customer beyond the contract and that I can get terminated for it. SHOULD I get fired for such an act? I think not. I see it as me doing good for the customer, and hoping
What if I got a coupon first using a virtual machine, then got a second one by using my actual host? What do they do then? Sure it seems like he did it deliberately, but what if I accidentally get a coupon from a guest OS, then the host OS thinking that I accidentally threw out the first coupon, but then use it? I can see that this kind of thing could happen on accident. I've never used coupons.com, and have no intention of going there and risk random crap getting installed on my computer.
Apple tries to sell devices for their 'simplicity'.
AT&T bills you in terms of 'complexity'.
Come to think of it, if I were AT&T and I knew that the iPhone was a device for 'simplicity', maybe I could hide lots of charges in an overly extravagant, yet useless 100 page bill. If I like my life simple, am I going to be able to handle the 100 page phone bill? Maybe AT&T is expecting simple me to see a 100 page bill, think to myself 'oh my god I wanna cry' and pay it without trying to find the bajillion hidden charges. I've heard the iPhone bills aren't cheap at all. Is this a coincidence that this is happening?
All my ex girlfriends told me size DIDN'T matter. Of course, they'd dump me the same day... So this is news because size really does matter now? I'm in trouble cause i'm not 10cm x 10cm.
I think this is a great idea in the fact that it's a new idea. But, I'd prefer the business model be reversed.
If "Mr. Super-Cool" sells 1000 tracks a day at 0.98 then the artist makes some good money, but what about "Mr. Not-So-Cool"? His track sells for free, or very little, and the artist gets nothing, mostly because he's not popular. What if it was revered, AND you provided a library that was practically every song known to man? I'd gladly pay 98 cents for a song that I just can't find anywhere, legally or illegally. With a reversed model, maybe that poor Not-So-Cool guy could make a living even though he's not on one of the 'big' recording labels.
Or as an alternative, have it set up so the more tracks you buy, the cheaper they get? Buy x tracks a month and get y% off. Why not let the customers "buy in bulk" and save? Isn't that what our economy is all about? Buy a gallon of Mayo and save some $$$ instead of buying 10 smaller bottles?
You are 100% right! MS does it in China and here in the US prices go up. MS has to recoup the money lost selling their software at a major discount in China, so jack it up even higher in the US to make up for the losses. We Americans will buy it anyway. We'll flock to the stores and buy it up regardless. After all, think about all the features it has that are SO important we just GOTTA get Vista. I'll start the list...o wait. I can't think of any. Let me call up my buddy Bill and ask him. I'm sure he'll have the list all typed up for me too!
Unfortunately too many people think newer = better, and buy it. I'll admit I was sold about 90% of the time that newer was better, until Vista. Now the light bulb has come on and I'm really having to rethink my thoughts on new software and if it REALLY is better.
On another note I tried out Linux last month, and so far it's pretty damn cool!;). Thanks Microsoft!
I never implied we are acting ethically in the Middle East. I was only stating that we are held more responsible than the terrorists are. The terrorists killed how many people on 9-11? What if we dropped one of our MOAB bombs right in the middle of an Iraq mall killing just as many or more? We'd SO be condemned for our actions. But the terrorists doing it wouldn't get nearly as significant of a result. Sure the shock factor was there, but how many countries are with us now? If we wiped out an Iraq mall, it would be a bad mark that would haunt us for a VERY long time. The point i was trying to make was that as an entity that can be pointed at, we are held to a much higher standard than the terrorists. The line is easy to draw in the sand for the U.S. We have definite borders, we have a definite leader and so on. The terrorists on the other hand live in secrecy. They hide in the shadows like ninjas waiting for the best time to strike.
I don't see them as inhumane monsters. I will say that quite a few are. But I'd say that the majority think they are fighting for a good cause, and that's a big problem we have to face. Being ex-military myself, I think I fought for a good cause. But who is 'right'?
-There is no right or wrong in war. Only those left standing and those that are dead. -Me
Are we supposed to be shocked? The less 'real' information that is in the video, the less 'real' information that we can gather about them. Because now we're having to figure out which information is real and which information is fake. What about when the fake information isn't caught, and then taken as being real? We go on a wild goose chase wasting time and resources while they laugh at us. If they could CGI the whole thing and air it and it look realistic, they'd do it in a second. Next thing you know the CIA is looking for an imaginary mountain that only exists in the land of make believe.
It is the entire goal of the terrorists to wear us down to the point where we can no longer maintain ourselves. That's all this game is about now. Just like how communism was defeated in the 80s. We wore down their resources till they couldn't keep up. They are using cheap and easy methods of doing things that costs us ALOT more money just to stay 1/2 a step ahead. Because we are a country and are bound by the ethics of war and Geneva conventions, we are totally screwed. The terrorists are an invisible enemy where they aren't accountable by any ethics. Can you really hold an invisible person accountable for their actions?
Until the terrorists screw up BIGTIME(ie, nuclear bomb or VERY SIGNIFICANT DISASTER) this is gonna keep going. If the terrorists dropped a nuclear bomb or even a dirty bomb, the world would begin to unite against them alot more. At least, if the elected officials wanted to stay in office they'd have to take a proactive stance against this 'force' that just used a nuclear weapon. The public outcry from it alone would force this effect out of many countries.
You know what scares me? Not the V-Chip. The fact that the parent threat to this post is labeled funny! That's what scares me and reminds me that the world is on a 1 way trip to hell.
Back in the 50s, the TV was for the most part clean. Kids could watch most of what was on TV with very little considered to be 'unacceptable for a child to watch'.
Today it seems like kids are very limited in terms of what would be 'acceptable'. Now maybe I'm just crazy or too tired to think straight, but WHY are we watching/listening to this 'crap' on TV? If it's so bad for our kids, is it really that good for us adults? Sure, there's definite limits. Can't exactly show the evening news on Iraq on Nickelodeon, but it seems like TV is just getting more and more into the realm of 'not really worth anything'. Maybe Mr. Roger's had it right when
With using the 'N' word in music and the crap-tastic "reality shows", if it's not good for my kids, is it really good for adults? Is your point conveyed that much better adding the F-bomb to your sentence?
Sometimes I swear we're really all a bunch of teenagers rebelling against our parents and listening to the F-bomb and N-word just to rebel(are we trying to prove we're really adults?). Why don't we grow up and realize that crap isn't really doing us any good, and just quit allowing that junk on TV/Radio? Maybe I should enable this new Super V-Chip just to block out the garbage I shouldn't be watching anyway?
Disclaimer: I'm in my late 20's, so maybe my concept of what was on TV in the 50's is totally hosed.
So they couldn't come to a resolution on who to make happy, so they decided to make both people happy. If only Microsoft offered 2 versions, 1 for those hardcore performance nazi's(myself included) that has no extras, just the OS and that's all, or a slow performance sapping, DRM loaded, 'feature' full version! Microsoft should take notes from these guys.
So 40 Gbps or 100 Gpbs? I'll settle for just the 40Gbps internet connection for now.
When something hurts, it usually means something isn't right. If my back hurts, I probably injured it. When I smash my finger in the car door, my body is telling my brain that my finger isn't in the best of health. Pain is nature's mechanism to tell us when we are/have done something that isn't good for the body.
There's a medical disorder that causes certain people to feel no pain, and they are having to constantly check to make sure they aren't bleeding to death, missing a finger, and so on. Some of these people have rubbed their eye so much they blinded themselves because they couldn't 'tell' they were doing any harm.
If these people are feeling like crap when exposed to cell phone towers, and I'm confident they are exposed to it close to 24x7, shouldn't they start keeling over and dying because they are doing 'damaging' things to the body?
Why does it even matter if they ship a 32 bit version? How many of us will have 'only 2GB' of RAM in 3 years? Isn't the biggest reason to go to 64-bit for the extra memory allocation that's available? I know I have 2GB of RAM today, so in 3 years I'd expect to have at least 4GB. If Microsoft is having so many problems with getting products out the door, why don't they work on products that people will actually use? I don't own Vista at home, but at work I hate seeing it run with only 1GB of RAM. God help Microsoft with running their 'next' OS with 'only 1GB' of RAM. I don't see the OS becoming more system friendly in 3 years. It's always gotten more bloated, so it's not gonna suddenly outperform XP in 3 years.
There are so many questions to answer for this question that the real and true answer will never be known.
AMD runs better with no load, where Intel runs better with full load. So in this particular instance, do you have a server that's gonna idle 99% of the time(If so why are you not using a VMWare setup?) I'd expect a nice new server to be cranking out 100% usage for as long as I can keep it there.
You are correct that for every 1 watt of heat, it takes 1.5 watts(or sometimes even more) to remove the heat.... BUT the power supply is also relevant for 3 reasons:
1 The power supply does 'expend' energy that is basically lost(as heat). 2. This heat must be factored into the heat generation if you are taking into account the cooling. 3. Every power supply has it's own power efficiency curve. And size does matter(ladies?). I'll use 2 Seasonic's as examples because I own one myself:
Notice the most efficient curve peaks at roughly 50%. That means that if you are looking for pure efficiency, you need to know how much power your machine uses(at the outlet of the power supply) to determine how to make your system as efficient as possible. The 15-20% loss is mostly I(squared)R losses(heat loss). So you see size does matter. It may matter for 13% heat at 250W or 19% heat at 600W, but it DOES matter. The only true way to compare is to show watts consumed at the output of your power supply, not the input. If I were building a system for efficiency, I'll match my own power supply to my loading requirements.
The other thing to check out is performance and component cost. If your server is gonna be run at 100%(ideally your IT budget prefers this because you're maximizing your $), the Intel may be able to service more 'customers' at the same time than AMD.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I'm setting up project D. Project D will have to supply 10,000 customers simultaneously 24x7. I'm a big company and those server will actually have 10,000 customers serviced 24x7(this is only to provide static loading).
If I buy Intel servers I'll need 100 machines. If I buy AMD servers I'll need 200 machines.
So if my Intel servers use 80W more power than AMD:
Intel Watts Total = 100 machines x watts used AMD Watts Total = 200 machines x watts used
You could also say: Intel Watts Total = 100 machines x (AMD watts for 1 machine + 80W)
So if you need 100 Intel servers that draw an extra 80W of power each to service your 10,000 customers, but you need 200 AMD servers to service the same customers, which becomes more efficient? Suddenly your buying twice as many machines(so posibly higher startup costs for AMD), and I'm sure each of those AMD machines will draw more than 80W for each machine(remember the different between the AMD and Intel in my scenario is Intel is 2x more powerful for only 80W, so 2 AMD machines should be able to do the same work for cost of 1xAMD Watts + 80W to stay even with Intel for efficiency). But now you have twice as many systems that can fail, they are all highly loaded(which leans in intel's favor), more IT support will be required for those machines, more cooling for those extra machines, more space in a building somewhere(assuming you have the actual space), etc...
So, which setup was more efficient? In this case, Intel was. But if AMD's machines only drew 5 watts of power at full load, and their machines were 1/2 the cost, then maybe they'd be a better bet. I don't know about other people, but space in my building is at a premium. You can theoretically buy an infinite number of computers,
Slashdot Mirror
So PC World pissed off a geek. He told all his geek buddies. Word got around and now PC World has either changed their mind, or announced their mistake as loud as they can for fear of reprisal from tons of geeks. Why am I not surprised? I'm sure they want to stay in business, and even if that was their policy, i'm sure it changed VERY quickly because the community they target is the same community that's now talking bad about them. Change their policy or risk going out of business? Slashdot wins! PC World - 0 Slashdot - 1
So we can't exactly sit down with a cup of coffee and 'read' over the DMCA to understand our own rights. Of course, the big companies can! This works to the advantage of the big corporations because we don't know our own rights!
The world would be a much different place if the users were informed as to their rights. Either the company is required to provide you your rights or some kind of repercussion if the company really is indeed involved in frivolous takedowns. Charge a company $100,000 every time someone catches and successfully prosecutes an invalid claim and companies would be more concerned with their OWN 'right'... to stay in the black!
Anyone notice the date of this coming out? September 11! I'm sorry, but Microsoft is an American company, and whoever thought of September 11 is a really sick f*$(.
Yes, everything is sacred. DUH! Like... -Net neutrality -Fair use -and now GI Joe Would even THINK of messing with these? They're so sacred! Just ask anyone at slashdot. O wait, you'd better not!
Ive noticed that the number of posts is usually proportional to the topic's possible effect on the slashdot community. I'm VERY interested to see how many posts this actually brings in. It'll be a clear indication of how important(or unimportant) the slashdot community thinks this story was.
Whatever OS you choose to use, it's probably going to be on an x86 based machine. I'd assume you aren't going to have a computer solely for this one purpose so VMWare could work out really well. Set it up exactly how you want it, take a snapshot. If things go sour on it, just hit revert to snapshot. Then you have OS protection so they won't screw up your OS(resulting in having an IT guy come out and fix it) and they can goof it up all the want.
"What? You deleted NTLDR cause you needed the 250kb of space? No prob!"
How did we find out we were hacked into? Is it because we have already hacked into their network and found our own data? This would be an interesting story if that were true. I'm also sure we'd never know that we found out this way either, it would be someone that just 'happened' to read about 100,000 pages of logs and realized that 1 single line that had an IP that was clearly not supposed to be there.
---
The 'other side' is always evil when they hack, but it's always acceptable when 'your side' does it.
You know what I would pay a fee for? My internet connection to actually be what I paid for! I never get the 'theoretical' maximum. In fact sometimes my webpages barely load. The fee I pay to get the 'supreme speed' should guarantee me that speed. Isn't that why I pay the extra $15 a month for the upgraded internet??
If this really takes off we're screwed. The internet was formed on the basis of neutrality. We then argued over having tiered internet. But now we're being offered(or attempting to be offered) internet that is neutral. We now have tiered internet folks. We have the ISP that promises net neutrality, and 'everyone else'. It's just a matter of time before 'everyone else' = 'non-neutral ISP'.
So we've got 2 tiers set up already. How many will we have in the end?
Yes, it's a reply to my own post, but thinking more about it. VMWare would be perfect for this. Take a snapshot, get a coupon, revert to snapshot. Now what? Who is technically violating the DMCA? Me for using it as such, or VMWare because their 'mundane feature' happens to allow circumvention of a broad all encompassing and overly extensive law? If VMWare is technically responsible, why not sue VMWare out of existence? Sure they've got lots of money, and companies seem to be more bent on stealing money from others than earning it legitimately.
There's 10 ways to skin a cat, and I bet there's at least 1000 ways that DMCA could be circumvented in this situation alone without even realizing it(or maybe utilizing it). So clearly all those companies out there that have software that 'circumvents' the DMCA of coupons.com clearly must be shut down immediately, and pay all the other companies left standing for violating the DMCA. So here's a list i'm starting of all the companies that 'break the law' because they can be used to circumvent coupons.com.
1. Microsoft - They provided the delete command, regedit, and even the format command. And someone pray to god that the files don't get corrupted in the MFT(or FAT) and chkdsk removes the 'bad' entries.
2. All Linux distributions- they provided the ability to repartition the hard drive thereby removing the DRM.
3. IBM - They marketed IBM PC-DOS, which again has a delete command, format command, and even fdisk command.
4. Apple - They can delete partitions with their OS installation.
Well, that's about all of the big OSes out of business. Guess the computer industry is set to self destruct.
Who knew that such a useful tool like 'delete' would really be breaking the law? I'm sorry, but if I want to 'delete *.*' on my computer, that's my damn right and not some other company that wants to control my computer. Otherwise, they'd better start paying ME for the storage they take over. Yes, they ARE "taking over" if I'm not allowed to delete crap on my computer. This smells SO much like Vista. Vista controls your PC, and it will decide what you can and can't do. If I wanted to rent out my hardware to other companies, I'd put out an ad. I haven't put out an ad, so my hardware is well... uhh... MINE.
What I want to see is a catch 22. Where some malware breaks the law and legally must be removed, but removing it breaks the law too!
All this proves beyond a doubt is that the world is getting much too complex to write laws to cover every single itty bitty possible situation that could arise now or in the future for as long as there is a future, or the law gets changed. It seems like more laws should be written explaining the 'spirit of the law' and allowing some kind of 'judge' or maybe a group of people, I'll call them a 'jury' to decide if something is illegal or not. Because maybe then moral values might have an effect on society. I know, moral values is a very hard thing to grasp. Especially from large money hungry corporations. I just see people(and companies) doing more and more acts that I think of as 'immoral' and getting away with it. Society needs to start looking at what they feel is moral and immoral(Within limits of course. I might WANT to kill my ex, but that doesn't mean I should get to) and then maybe companies will have no choice but to actually play nice with the customers.
At my work, my job is to help a customer. In this case the customer is a new computer user. What's the contract officially say? Set up the computer, give them the password and walk away. Some people have questions, and I always answer them as best as I can. Can I get fired for trying to answer a question as simple as "Will a USB printer work on this computer?"? Yes, I could get fired. I've been told by my boss that I got 'caught' helping the customer beyond the contract and that I can get terminated for it. SHOULD I get fired for such an act? I think not. I see it as me doing good for the customer, and hoping
What if I got a coupon first using a virtual machine, then got a second one by using my actual host? What do they do then? Sure it seems like he did it deliberately, but what if I accidentally get a coupon from a guest OS, then the host OS thinking that I accidentally threw out the first coupon, but then use it? I can see that this kind of thing could happen on accident. I've never used coupons.com, and have no intention of going there and risk random crap getting installed on my computer.
Isn't having 'automatic wiretapping' just as great of an idea as having a firewall with a deliberate backdoor?
Apple tries to sell devices for their 'simplicity'.
AT&T bills you in terms of 'complexity'.
Come to think of it, if I were AT&T and I knew that the iPhone was a device for 'simplicity', maybe I could hide lots of charges in an overly extravagant, yet useless 100 page bill. If I like my life simple, am I going to be able to handle the 100 page phone bill? Maybe AT&T is expecting simple me to see a 100 page bill, think to myself 'oh my god I wanna cry' and pay it without trying to find the bajillion hidden charges. I've heard the iPhone bills aren't cheap at all. Is this a coincidence that this is happening?
All my ex girlfriends told me size DIDN'T matter. Of course, they'd dump me the same day... So this is news because size really does matter now?
I'm in trouble cause i'm not 10cm x 10cm.
I think this is a great idea in the fact that it's a new idea. But, I'd prefer the business model be reversed.
If "Mr. Super-Cool" sells 1000 tracks a day at 0.98 then the artist makes some good money, but what about "Mr. Not-So-Cool"? His track sells for free, or very little, and the artist gets nothing, mostly because he's not popular. What if it was revered, AND you provided a library that was practically every song known to man? I'd gladly pay 98 cents for a song that I just can't find anywhere, legally or illegally. With a reversed model, maybe that poor Not-So-Cool guy could make a living even though he's not on one of the 'big' recording labels.
Or as an alternative, have it set up so the more tracks you buy, the cheaper they get? Buy x tracks a month and get y% off. Why not let the customers "buy in bulk" and save? Isn't that what our economy is all about? Buy a gallon of Mayo and save some $$$ instead of buying 10 smaller bottles?
Yes :)
;). Thanks Microsoft!
You are 100% right! MS does it in China and here in the US prices go up. MS has to recoup the money lost selling their software at a major discount in China, so jack it up even higher in the US to make up for the losses. We Americans will buy it anyway. We'll flock to the stores and buy it up regardless. After all, think about all the features it has that are SO important we just GOTTA get Vista. I'll start the list...o wait. I can't think of any. Let me call up my buddy Bill and ask him. I'm sure he'll have the list all typed up for me too!
Unfortunately too many people think newer = better, and buy it. I'll admit I was sold about 90% of the time that newer was better, until Vista. Now the light bulb has come on and I'm really having to rethink my thoughts on new software and if it REALLY is better.
On another note I tried out Linux last month, and so far it's pretty damn cool!
--
Linux forever!
I never implied we are acting ethically in the Middle East. I was only stating that we are held more responsible than the terrorists are. The terrorists killed how many people on 9-11? What if we dropped one of our MOAB bombs right in the middle of an Iraq mall killing just as many or more? We'd SO be condemned for our actions. But the terrorists doing it wouldn't get nearly as significant of a result. Sure the shock factor was there, but how many countries are with us now? If we wiped out an Iraq mall, it would be a bad mark that would haunt us for a VERY long time. The point i was trying to make was that as an entity that can be pointed at, we are held to a much higher standard than the terrorists. The line is easy to draw in the sand for the U.S. We have definite borders, we have a definite leader and so on. The terrorists on the other hand live in secrecy. They hide in the shadows like ninjas waiting for the best time to strike.
I don't see them as inhumane monsters. I will say that quite a few are. But I'd say that the majority think they are fighting for a good cause, and that's a big problem we have to face. Being ex-military myself, I think I fought for a good cause. But who is 'right'?
-There is no right or wrong in war. Only those left standing and those that are dead. -Me
Are we supposed to be shocked? The less 'real' information that is in the video, the less 'real' information that we can gather about them. Because now we're having to figure out which information is real and which information is fake. What about when the fake information isn't caught, and then taken as being real? We go on a wild goose chase wasting time and resources while they laugh at us. If they could CGI the whole thing and air it and it look realistic, they'd do it in a second. Next thing you know the CIA is looking for an imaginary mountain that only exists in the land of make believe.
It is the entire goal of the terrorists to wear us down to the point where we can no longer maintain ourselves. That's all this game is about now. Just like how communism was defeated in the 80s. We wore down their resources till they couldn't keep up. They are using cheap and easy methods of doing things that costs us ALOT more money just to stay 1/2 a step ahead. Because we are a country and are bound by the ethics of war and Geneva conventions, we are totally screwed. The terrorists are an invisible enemy where they aren't accountable by any ethics. Can you really hold an invisible person accountable for their actions?
Until the terrorists screw up BIGTIME(ie, nuclear bomb or VERY SIGNIFICANT DISASTER) this is gonna keep going. If the terrorists dropped a nuclear bomb or even a dirty bomb, the world would begin to unite against them alot more. At least, if the elected officials wanted to stay in office they'd have to take a proactive stance against this 'force' that just used a nuclear weapon. The public outcry from it alone would force this effect out of many countries.
You know what scares me? Not the V-Chip. The fact that the parent threat to this post is labeled funny! That's what scares me and reminds me that the world is on a 1 way trip to hell.
Back in the 50s, the TV was for the most part clean. Kids could watch most of what was on TV with very little considered to be 'unacceptable for a child to watch'.
Today it seems like kids are very limited in terms of what would be 'acceptable'. Now maybe I'm just crazy or too tired to think straight, but WHY are we watching/listening to this 'crap' on TV? If it's so bad for our kids, is it really that good for us adults? Sure, there's definite limits. Can't exactly show the evening news on Iraq on Nickelodeon, but it seems like TV is just getting more and more into the realm of 'not really worth anything'. Maybe Mr. Roger's had it right when
With using the 'N' word in music and the crap-tastic "reality shows", if it's not good for my kids, is it really good for adults? Is your point conveyed that much better adding the F-bomb to your sentence?
Sometimes I swear we're really all a bunch of teenagers rebelling against our parents and listening to the F-bomb and N-word just to rebel(are we trying to prove we're really adults?). Why don't we grow up and realize that crap isn't really doing us any good, and just quit allowing that junk on TV/Radio? Maybe I should enable this new Super V-Chip just to block out the garbage I shouldn't be watching anyway?
Disclaimer: I'm in my late 20's, so maybe my concept of what was on TV in the 50's is totally hosed.
So they couldn't come to a resolution on who to make happy, so they decided to make both people happy. If only Microsoft offered 2 versions, 1 for those hardcore performance nazi's(myself included) that has no extras, just the OS and that's all, or a slow performance sapping, DRM loaded, 'feature' full version! Microsoft should take notes from these guys. So 40 Gbps or 100 Gpbs? I'll settle for just the 40Gbps internet connection for now.
When something hurts, it usually means something isn't right. If my back hurts, I probably injured it. When I smash my finger in the car door, my body is telling my brain that my finger isn't in the best of health. Pain is nature's mechanism to tell us when we are/have done something that isn't good for the body. There's a medical disorder that causes certain people to feel no pain, and they are having to constantly check to make sure they aren't bleeding to death, missing a finger, and so on. Some of these people have rubbed their eye so much they blinded themselves because they couldn't 'tell' they were doing any harm. If these people are feeling like crap when exposed to cell phone towers, and I'm confident they are exposed to it close to 24x7, shouldn't they start keeling over and dying because they are doing 'damaging' things to the body?
Why does it even matter if they ship a 32 bit version? How many of us will have 'only 2GB' of RAM in 3 years? Isn't the biggest reason to go to 64-bit for the extra memory allocation that's available? I know I have 2GB of RAM today, so in 3 years I'd expect to have at least 4GB. If Microsoft is having so many problems with getting products out the door, why don't they work on products that people will actually use? I don't own Vista at home, but at work I hate seeing it run with only 1GB of RAM. God help Microsoft with running their 'next' OS with 'only 1GB' of RAM. I don't see the OS becoming more system friendly in 3 years. It's always gotten more bloated, so it's not gonna suddenly outperform XP in 3 years.
There are so many questions to answer for this question that the real and true answer will never be known.
AMD runs better with no load, where Intel runs better with full load. So in this particular instance, do you have a server that's gonna idle 99% of the time(If so why are you not using a VMWare setup?) I'd expect a nice new server to be cranking out 100% usage for as long as I can keep it there.
You are correct that for every 1 watt of heat, it takes 1.5 watts(or sometimes even more) to remove the heat.... BUT the power supply is also relevant for 3 reasons:
1 The power supply does 'expend' energy that is basically lost(as heat).
2. This heat must be factored into the heat generation if you are taking into account the cooling.
3. Every power supply has it's own power efficiency curve. And size does matter(ladies?). I'll use 2 Seasonic's as examples because I own one myself:
-500W http://www.80plus.org/manu/psu/documents/Seasonic_ SS-500ET_500W_80PLUS_Report.pdf
-650W http://www.80plus.org/manu/psu/documents/Seasonic_ SS-650HT_650W_80PLUS_Report.pdf
Notice the most efficient curve peaks at roughly 50%. That means that if you are looking for pure efficiency, you need to know how much power your machine uses(at the outlet of the power supply) to determine how to make your system as efficient as possible. The 15-20% loss is mostly I(squared)R losses(heat loss). So you see size does matter. It may matter for 13% heat at 250W or 19% heat at 600W, but it DOES matter. The only true way to compare is to show watts consumed at the output of your power supply, not the input. If I were building a system for efficiency, I'll match my own power supply to my loading requirements.
The other thing to check out is performance and component cost. If your server is gonna be run at 100%(ideally your IT budget prefers this because you're maximizing your $), the Intel may be able to service more 'customers' at the same time than AMD.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I'm setting up project D. Project D will have to supply 10,000 customers simultaneously 24x7. I'm a big company and those server will actually have 10,000 customers serviced 24x7(this is only to provide static loading).
If I buy Intel servers I'll need 100 machines.
If I buy AMD servers I'll need 200 machines.
So if my Intel servers use 80W more power than AMD:
Intel Watts Total = 100 machines x watts used
AMD Watts Total = 200 machines x watts used
You could also say: Intel Watts Total = 100 machines x (AMD watts for 1 machine + 80W)
So if you need 100 Intel servers that draw an extra 80W of power each to service your 10,000 customers, but you need 200 AMD servers to service the same customers, which becomes more efficient? Suddenly your buying twice as many machines(so posibly higher startup costs for AMD), and I'm sure each of those AMD machines will draw more than 80W for each machine(remember the different between the AMD and Intel in my scenario is Intel is 2x more powerful for only 80W, so 2 AMD machines should be able to do the same work for cost of 1xAMD Watts + 80W to stay even with Intel for efficiency). But now you have twice as many systems that can fail, they are all highly loaded(which leans in intel's favor), more IT support will be required for those machines, more cooling for those extra machines, more space in a building somewhere(assuming you have the actual space), etc...
So, which setup was more efficient? In this case, Intel was. But if AMD's machines only drew 5 watts of power at full load, and their machines were 1/2 the cost, then maybe they'd be a better bet. I don't know about other people, but space in my building is at a premium. You can theoretically buy an infinite number of computers,