You really do have to consider that the performance per watt in the era since the P4 has been stellar from Intel, while AMD hasn't quite been up to par in that department. The roles really have reversed in the past few years in regards to wattage, with Intel also keeping the raw performance crown on the high end.
On the other hand, for the price of the highest-end Intel chip (and a motherboard to run it on) (also note: board and chip ONLY; no OS, no drives, no case, no nothing), I can practically build twohigh-end AMD systems (If Newegg will sell me a pre-built system for just under a grand, I'm willing to bet I can build it myself for $800 or less - especially without the MSFT tax).
With no PCI Express support, I can just skip anything from Intel, since I won't be able to use any decent video card in their rig.
Thanks, Intel, for throwing away any chance you had at selling stuff to the gaming market.
Wait... does this mean Intel is going to be the next big corporation screaming about piracy hurting their profits? I mean, obviously, if no one is buying their crap anymore, it's the fault of the pirates...
Is that for each individual piece of crap, or all of it together? If it's each individual piece, then feel free to send me your bank account and routing info, I'll just take it as you make it. If it's for all of it collectively, then no sale.
Absolutely beautiful solution. There are a few problems with it, of course, in that this will simply result in the fines getting even more ridiculous, but if we can manage to set the bar at something simple and easy to understand, then I think this would be just fine.
For instance, in the case we are all currently chomping at the bit for, there were 24 songs admitted as evidence. Let's use the current market value of those songs, which appears to be $1 each on iTunes or Amazon.com. Now, if we multiply that by the number of times each was shared (let's go crazy and arbitrarily decide that each was uploaded to 1,000 individuals), we have $24,000.00.
It would take the recording industry approximately 3 minutes to acquire that amount of money on a bad day in the current economy, so they wouldn't even finish booking her before sending her home, sentence complete. Yes, I pulled that number out of thin air. I also suspect it might be a bit on the low side of reality.
In my country, compensation in a civil case is limited to three times the amount of actual damages.
Ridiculous and arbitrary laws like that is why your third world hell hole doesn't have any wonderful profitable ventures like the RIAA.
Actually, the poster you responded to may live in the USA... I'm sincerely hoping you were either trying to be funny, or trying to be a troll, and not just spouting idiocy.
for audio material you could surgically remove their eardrums and cilia or any other procedure that would make them permanently deaf. For sharing visual media you could also remove their eyes with a fork and make them eat them. You wouldn't have to imprison them. Once they are blind and deaf they are unlikely to be repeat offenders. Although if you then catch them singing a copyrighted song you may be forced to remove their vocal cords and cut out their tongues.
Here is a short story by Orson Scott Card that has a very similar punishment system - interesting reading. I first found it in Maps in a Mirror, but this book has it as its title piece.
10% of your current worth is not the same as 10% of your income, so it kinda depends on what exactly they're basing the 10% on.
This guy got a million dollar speeding ticket for doing 180 in a 75 zone. It appears that Switzerland fines you based on your income. Oops.
On the other hand, if he was fined 10% of his personal assets, instead of his income, the ticket might have been even larger. My personal take on this concept is that it would be highly effective, especially if the percentage per violation increased if you continued to perform illegal acts... If the first time, they took one million dollars because you had ten million, and then the second time, they took another million, even though you only had nine million remaining...
Your effort to learn how to do something and how to convey that information and the time and expense actually to convey the information is worth nothing to you? No matter how much it's worth at retail?
That's fine.
Print this out and sign it:
I, (insert your real name here), hereby donate all prior, current, and future works created by me to the public domain in perpetuity. Signed, ___________ Dated _____________
Then have it notarized and mail it to the US Copyright office.
Go ahead. You said copyright meant nothing, make it legal as well as practical.
That is a phenomenal idea! Would that actually do anything, or would you just be wasting paper, ink, envelope, and stamp?
"...you as a professional should know that the article we used written by you was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally."
For something like a recipe, authorship matters to the end user.
So bald plagarism is ultimately less valuable to the person reading the recipe or whatever other BS comes along with it.
Honestly? If I'm looking up (for instance) a method of creating an edible lasagna from a pile of ingredients, I don't care who the "author" is - I just want the instructions (what to mix together, how long and how hot to put it in the oven, etc).
Now, if I were wanting to make a lasagna exactly like Chef Jamie Oliver... then I might care who the author is. Unfortunately, I lean less towards "gourmet", and more towards "I like food" or "I'm hungry".
As a side note, who knows if it's really a majority? Over half of the people espousing views in favor of complete abolishment of all IP post AC, so those could all be one guy.
... or they post AC to avoid being tracked down by the lawyers - it's ok to be anti-copyright, right up to the point where someone raids your house for stating your views, and you get burned for several gigabytes of "illegally obtained" music, movies, and other digital media.
As for being filtered out, some of us read slashdot at -1 so we see everything.
I appear to have lost the ability to do that - at some point in the last few weeks, everything moved around again, and I can't find the button anymore.
So Slashdot is opposed to the GPL and all its previous versions?
The GPL is a hack to get around the problems inherent in distributing something completely freely in a system that has rules based on the idea that nothing should be free.
The problem it was designed to counteract (as far as I can tell, at least) is that if you release something with no license whatsoever, then the next person to receive a copy might just "take" it, license it under a more restrictive license, release it as a closed source project, and even patent it themselves*... thus giving them the power to sue the original creator, or prevent the distribution of a project that is supposed to be "free".
*No, I don't believe software patents should exist... but they do.
...it's not unfair for an author to demand an apology and that the company donate a pittance to a charity to show their repentance for their activity.
I would actually like to see more cases settled in this fashion. Not only do we get to "punish" the offenders, but we get to do some societal good with the "proceeds", rather than filling up some government coffers.
GPL advocates don't see why I can buy a table or chair and refinish it, reupholster it, cut it in half and add a leaf, etc. but you can't remix/modify legally acquired software.
In other words, "GPL advocates ask, 'Why is it ok for me to refinish a piece of furniture and resell it, but not ok for me to change something about a piece of software?'"
Mastering reading comprehension will help you look more intelligent in the future.
Yes, your latency will be higher, but not noticeably so for most applications. I will also point out that I was talking about home-based storage solutions, not enterprise. For home-use applications, are you seriously going to tell me you'll notice the difference between 0.2ms (average ping to local network) and 0.01ms (average latency of an SSD) when you want to stream a movie? Many of us couldn't tell the difference between 100ms and 120ms (twitch gamers aside), let alone a couple orders of magnitude smaller difference. Of course, if you're running a high-speed database on external storage (the only case I can think of off the top of my head where latency would be an issue), you're just being silly... but again, I was talking about home use, not enterprise.
Also, while SATA has a maximum theoretical throughput of 6Gbps (750MB/s), and a Gigabit Ethernet connection has a maximum theoretical throughput of 1Gbps (125MB/s), a typical hard drive's realistic throughput is closer to 80MB/s in actual use. Higher-speed (read:more expensive) drives run more like 105-110MB/s (Again, I'm talking home-use; consumer-grade hardware). Oh, and please note that the data rates I'm quoting are for sustained data transfer, not burst. Burst can go much higher, but I hardly think that dumping your drive's cache should count in a speed test.
To further explain my point, I was able to play Quake III from another machine's hard drive, while that machine was also playing Quake III, both with playable (and then some) frame rates and latency, on "only" a 100Mb LAN nearly a decade ago.
Your typical home user doesn't need to push gobs of data across the network, or isn't too concerned about latency even if they are pushing gobs of data around. Admittedly, streaming video and/or audio to other home machines is an exception, but 720p with 5.1 audio comes over even 100Mb ethernet faster than you can watch it (thank goodness for compression), and if you need uncompressed 1080p (3Gbps!) then you're out of the realm of "home user" anyway (ballpark "starting costs" for the setup required for that is in the neighborhood of $100,000 US Dollars - and that's a single system).
My whole point was simply that if you're a home user who just wants a machine that runs faster than your neighbor's, then there are options available that still only use three digits' worth of currency for the whole system, instead of jumping up to the land of 4+ digits per component.
If you're looking for an enterprise-grade solution, then use enterprise-grade components (and indulge yourself with that enterprise-level support while you're at it, you're certainly paying enough for it).
-- The difference between "in theory" and "in practice" is that "In theory, there isn't one".
> How can there be any ambiguity about this? Either it's 4th Generation, or it's not.
Er, no it's not, In Sprint's universe, at least (where international standards in general, and GSM in particular, are largely irrelevant), WiMax IS unambiguously their fourth major leap forward, and arguably their fourth major modulation change.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm failing at reading comprehension; are you arguing for or against this being 4G?
Failing that, since you seem to be arguing both sides... are you sure you're replying to the correct post?
What are some of the benefits that we could see with it? Well: -Bare metal hypervisors. Imagine being able to boot up linux and windows side-by-side and not have to worry about setting up any sort of virtual machine. You could switch between the two using a keyboard combo. Or even being able to setup a COW copy of windows so cleaning up your mom's copy of windows is as easy as hitting a few keys and setting it back to a known clean state...
-Improved device support. Devices could use a standardised interface on the "bios" level so that windows/linux/osx would just need a simple driver layer to talk to the device. Device manufacturers could provide what basically amounts to a shim to load into the UEFI which provides the mapping between the actual device and the standardised hardware interface. Of course this may run into issues such as non-standard or extended features but this could be taken care of with extensible interfaces.
In short, either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're simply unaware that what you're describing is already in existence (and, indeed, is the way it already works).
Then again not likely anyone "needs" a >2TB boot drive. Still most computers sold only have a single drive and eventually dell, hp, and the like will want to sell 2.1TB drives. Booting from >2TB drive requires UEFI.
Actually, your boot drive should be as small as you can get it, for performance reasons.
Best (home-brew) scenario is several small drives in multiple RAID1 configuration... boot from a pair, use programs from another pair, and use anything else for storage. Gigabit Ethernet makes anything on your network as quick as if it came from a drive in the local machine unless you're running an array of Raptors for storage.
At least Acer and Sony seem to be using this kind of setup for all of their recent laptops for a few years now, and I'm pretty sure quite a few other manufacturers are doing the same.
That's all I needed to hear... Sony: The same people who have no qualms about adding a rootkit to your windows-based PC if you have the audacity to put an audio CD in your drive. The same people that make the VAIO, which is one of the most ridiculous machines to have to work on if any of the hardware fails (and it does, repeatedly and often). The same people who sold a product, then removed half the features in the name of anti-piracy... causing the pirates to start hacking the DRM on their games, instead of playing with OtherOS.
and
Acer: The guys who make laptops with an average life expectancy of about 30 days past the warranty period. The guys who make laptops that you can't work on without a complete tear-down in order to access anything more than the RAM.
Both of these shining beacons of industry say this is good tech? That's a fantastic recommendation (in my eyes, at least), for why we should avoid it like the plague. Who knows what kind of nasty bugs it will add to your system? What's to stop them from logging everything your system does, and/or phoning home constantly?
Seriously, you people should read more Shadowrun and Cyberpunk rulebooks, there's "history" in there that seems to be coming true in the real world.
-- Disclaimer: I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Its interesting that 24 songs can get you millions in fines and other legal problems. But infecting thousands of computers with viruses, stealing financial information, spamming the crap out of everyone usually results in a slap on the wrist and probation. Sounds like the system works.
Slashdot Mirror
You really do have to consider that the performance per watt in the era since the P4 has been stellar from Intel, while AMD hasn't quite been up to par in that department. The roles really have reversed in the past few years in regards to wattage, with Intel also keeping the raw performance crown on the high end.
On the other hand, for the price of the highest-end Intel chip (and a motherboard to run it on) (also note: board and chip ONLY; no OS, no drives, no case, no nothing), I can practically build two high-end AMD systems (If Newegg will sell me a pre-built system for just under a grand, I'm willing to bet I can build it myself for $800 or less - especially without the MSFT tax).
With no PCI Express support, I can just skip anything from Intel, since I won't be able to use any decent video card in their rig.
Thanks, Intel, for throwing away any chance you had at selling stuff to the gaming market.
Wait... does this mean Intel is going to be the next big corporation screaming about piracy hurting their profits? I mean, obviously, if no one is buying their crap anymore, it's the fault of the pirates...
That's generally not the case. People who steal cars generally sell the parts or they do their drug run and return it.
If by "return it" you mean "light it on fire and leave it in a ditch just outside town"...
Is that for each individual piece of crap, or all of it together?
If it's each individual piece, then feel free to send me your bank account and routing info, I'll just take it as you make it.
If it's for all of it collectively, then no sale.
Jayne: "10 percent of nothing is... let me do the math. Nothing, and nothing, carry the nothing... "
Absolutely beautiful solution. There are a few problems with it, of course, in that this will simply result in the fines getting even more ridiculous, but if we can manage to set the bar at something simple and easy to understand, then I think this would be just fine.
For instance, in the case we are all currently chomping at the bit for, there were 24 songs admitted as evidence. Let's use the current market value of those songs, which appears to be $1 each on iTunes or Amazon.com. Now, if we multiply that by the number of times each was shared (let's go crazy and arbitrarily decide that each was uploaded to 1,000 individuals), we have $24,000.00.
It would take the recording industry approximately 3 minutes to acquire that amount of money on a bad day in the current economy, so they wouldn't even finish booking her before sending her home, sentence complete. Yes, I pulled that number out of thin air. I also suspect it might be a bit on the low side of reality.
In my country, compensation in a civil case is limited to three times the amount of actual damages.
Ridiculous and arbitrary laws like that is why your third world hell hole doesn't have any wonderful profitable ventures like the RIAA.
Actually, the poster you responded to may live in the USA... I'm sincerely hoping you were either trying to be funny, or trying to be a troll, and not just spouting idiocy.
for audio material you could surgically remove their eardrums and cilia or any other procedure that would make them permanently deaf. For sharing visual media you could also remove their eyes with a fork and make them eat them. You wouldn't have to imprison them. Once they are blind and deaf they are unlikely to be repeat offenders. Although if you then catch them singing a copyrighted song you may be forced to remove their vocal cords and cut out their tongues.
Here is a short story by Orson Scott Card that has a very similar punishment system - interesting reading. I first found it in Maps in a Mirror, but this book has it as its title piece.
10% of your current worth is not the same as 10% of your income, so it kinda depends on what exactly they're basing the 10% on.
This guy got a million dollar speeding ticket for doing 180 in a 75 zone. It appears that Switzerland fines you based on your income. Oops.
On the other hand, if he was fined 10% of his personal assets, instead of his income, the ticket might have been even larger. My personal take on this concept is that it would be highly effective, especially if the percentage per violation increased if you continued to perform illegal acts... If the first time, they took one million dollars because you had ten million, and then the second time, they took another million, even though you only had nine million remaining...
Your effort to learn how to do something and how to convey that information and the time and expense actually to convey the information is worth nothing to you? No matter how much it's worth at retail?
That's fine.
Print this out and sign it:
I, (insert your real name here), hereby donate all prior, current, and future works created by me to the public domain in perpetuity.
Signed, ___________
Dated _____________
Then have it notarized and mail it to the US Copyright office.
Go ahead. You said copyright meant nothing, make it legal as well as practical.
That is a phenomenal idea! Would that actually do anything, or would you just be wasting paper, ink, envelope, and stamp?
Huh. So, with all that vitriol and obvious righteous indignation, you're still too chicken to post as a logged-in user?
Way to go, sport. Next time, try the salmon.
"...you as a professional should know that the article we used written by you was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally."
So is it plagiarism, or a derivative work?
For something like a recipe, authorship matters to the end user.
So bald plagarism is ultimately less valuable to the person reading the recipe or whatever other BS comes along with it.
Honestly? If I'm looking up (for instance) a method of creating an edible lasagna from a pile of ingredients, I don't care who the "author" is - I just want the instructions (what to mix together, how long and how hot to put it in the oven, etc).
Now, if I were wanting to make a lasagna exactly like Chef Jamie Oliver... then I might care who the author is. Unfortunately, I lean less towards "gourmet", and more towards "I like food" or "I'm hungry".
As a side note, who knows if it's really a majority? Over half of the people espousing views in favor of complete abolishment of all IP post AC, so those could all be one guy.
... or they post AC to avoid being tracked down by the lawyers - it's ok to be anti-copyright, right up to the point where someone raids your house for stating your views, and you get burned for several gigabytes of "illegally obtained" music, movies, and other digital media.
As for being filtered out, some of us read slashdot at -1 so we see everything.
I appear to have lost the ability to do that - at some point in the last few weeks, everything moved around again, and I can't find the button anymore.
Throw a luser a clue?
So Slashdot is opposed to the GPL and all its previous versions?
The GPL is a hack to get around the problems inherent in distributing something completely freely in a system that has rules based on the idea that nothing should be free.
The problem it was designed to counteract (as far as I can tell, at least) is that if you release something with no license whatsoever, then the next person to receive a copy might just "take" it, license it under a more restrictive license, release it as a closed source project, and even patent it themselves*... thus giving them the power to sue the original creator, or prevent the distribution of a project that is supposed to be "free".
*No, I don't believe software patents should exist... but they do.
...it's not unfair for an author to demand an apology and that the company donate a pittance to a charity to show their repentance for their activity.
I would actually like to see more cases settled in this fashion. Not only do we get to "punish" the offenders, but we get to do some societal good with the "proceeds", rather than filling up some government coffers.
GPL advocates don't see why I can buy a table or chair and refinish it, reupholster it, cut it in half and add a leaf, etc. but you can't remix/modify legally acquired software.
In other words, "GPL advocates ask, 'Why is it ok for me to refinish a piece of furniture and resell it, but not ok for me to change something about a piece of software?'"
Mastering reading comprehension will help you look more intelligent in the future.
Yes, your latency will be higher, but not noticeably so for most applications. I will also point out that I was talking about home-based storage solutions, not enterprise. For home-use applications, are you seriously going to tell me you'll notice the difference between 0.2ms (average ping to local network) and 0.01ms (average latency of an SSD) when you want to stream a movie? Many of us couldn't tell the difference between 100ms and 120ms (twitch gamers aside), let alone a couple orders of magnitude smaller difference.
Of course, if you're running a high-speed database on external storage (the only case I can think of off the top of my head where latency would be an issue), you're just being silly... but again, I was talking about home use, not enterprise.
Also, while SATA has a maximum theoretical throughput of 6Gbps (750MB/s), and a Gigabit Ethernet connection has a maximum theoretical throughput of 1Gbps (125MB/s), a typical hard drive's realistic throughput is closer to 80MB/s in actual use. Higher-speed (read:more expensive) drives run more like 105-110MB/s (Again, I'm talking home-use; consumer-grade hardware). Oh, and please note that the data rates I'm quoting are for sustained data transfer, not burst. Burst can go much higher, but I hardly think that dumping your drive's cache should count in a speed test.
To further explain my point, I was able to play Quake III from another machine's hard drive, while that machine was also playing Quake III, both with playable (and then some) frame rates and latency, on "only" a 100Mb LAN nearly a decade ago.
Your typical home user doesn't need to push gobs of data across the network, or isn't too concerned about latency even if they are pushing gobs of data around. Admittedly, streaming video and/or audio to other home machines is an exception, but 720p with 5.1 audio comes over even 100Mb ethernet faster than you can watch it (thank goodness for compression), and if you need uncompressed 1080p (3Gbps!) then you're out of the realm of "home user" anyway (ballpark "starting costs" for the setup required for that is in the neighborhood of $100,000 US Dollars - and that's a single system).
My whole point was simply that if you're a home user who just wants a machine that runs faster than your neighbor's, then there are options available that still only use three digits' worth of currency for the whole system, instead of jumping up to the land of 4+ digits per component.
If you're looking for an enterprise-grade solution, then use enterprise-grade components (and indulge yourself with that enterprise-level support while you're at it, you're certainly paying enough for it).
--
The difference between "in theory" and "in practice" is that "In theory, there isn't one".
> How can there be any ambiguity about this? Either it's 4th Generation, or it's not.
Er, no it's not, In Sprint's universe, at least (where international standards in general, and GSM in particular, are largely irrelevant), WiMax IS unambiguously their fourth major leap forward, and arguably their fourth major modulation change.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm failing at reading comprehension; are you arguing for or against this being 4G?
Failing that, since you seem to be arguing both sides... are you sure you're replying to the correct post?
What are some of the benefits that we could see with it? Well:
-Bare metal hypervisors. Imagine being able to boot up linux and windows side-by-side and not have to worry about setting up any sort of virtual machine. You could switch between the two using a keyboard combo. Or even being able to setup a COW copy of windows so cleaning up your mom's copy of windows is as easy as hitting a few keys and setting it back to a known clean state...
Oh, like ESXi? No, wait, you said no virtual machine... wait, what? Hypervisor = Virtual machine control system.
Your "insta-clean" windows can be accomplished with drive imaging, or "freezing".
-Improved device support. Devices could use a standardised interface on the "bios" level so that windows/linux/osx would just need a simple driver layer to talk to the device. Device manufacturers could provide what basically amounts to a shim to load into the UEFI which provides the mapping between the actual device and the standardised hardware interface. Of course this may run into issues such as non-standard or extended features but this could be taken care of with extensible interfaces.
Are you advocating an OS-independent version of DirectX for bare metal? Or are you describing how BIOS already operates?
In short, either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're simply unaware that what you're describing is already in existence (and, indeed, is the way it already works).
Not as a boot drive.
Then again not likely anyone "needs" a >2TB boot drive. Still most computers sold only have a single drive and eventually dell, hp, and the like will want to sell 2.1TB drives. Booting from >2TB drive requires UEFI.
Actually, your boot drive should be as small as you can get it, for performance reasons.
Best (home-brew) scenario is several small drives in multiple RAID1 configuration... boot from a pair, use programs from another pair, and use anything else for storage. Gigabit Ethernet makes anything on your network as quick as if it came from a drive in the local machine unless you're running an array of Raptors for storage.
At least Acer and Sony seem to be using this kind of setup for all of their recent laptops for a few years now, and I'm pretty sure quite a few other manufacturers are doing the same.
That's all I needed to hear...
Sony:
The same people who have no qualms about adding a rootkit to your windows-based PC if you have the audacity to put an audio CD in your drive.
The same people that make the VAIO, which is one of the most ridiculous machines to have to work on if any of the hardware fails (and it does, repeatedly and often).
The same people who sold a product, then removed half the features in the name of anti-piracy... causing the pirates to start hacking the DRM on their games, instead of playing with OtherOS.
and
Acer:
The guys who make laptops with an average life expectancy of about 30 days past the warranty period.
The guys who make laptops that you can't work on without a complete tear-down in order to access anything more than the RAM.
Both of these shining beacons of industry say this is good tech? That's a fantastic recommendation (in my eyes, at least), for why we should avoid it like the plague. Who knows what kind of nasty bugs it will add to your system? What's to stop them from logging everything your system does, and/or phoning home constantly?
Seriously, you people should read more Shadowrun and Cyberpunk rulebooks, there's "history" in there that seems to be coming true in the real world.
--
Disclaimer: I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Its interesting that 24 songs can get you millions in fines and other legal problems. But infecting thousands of computers with viruses, stealing financial information, spamming the crap out of everyone usually results in a slap on the wrist and probation. Sounds like the system works.
Where your argument is flawed:
Jammie isn't Sony.
I have a friend who is wondering if there Is there a statue of limitation on copyright infringement? Anyone know?
According to http://www.alankorn.com/articles/copyright_infringe.html, it is 3 years; they are still allowed to sue afterwards, but are only entitled to 3 years' worth of damages.
As an aside, using google is a better way to get an answer than asking slashdot, in many cases.