Well, the old scifi series such as Star Trek were utopian instead of dystopian. I think it's more like a sign of the times that everything on the future is dystopian these days. Not even suspension of disbelief can help people imagine a future where things turn out good for everyone, anymore.
I completely agree!
It wouldn't be only bad for some of the users, but also for google itself. Due to the Long Tail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tail) phenomenon, all the fringe groups added together, even if each individual group is relatively small, is an amazingly large amount of people.
If these were to go with another search engine then they would lose a lot of users...
You don't get it do you? Of course you can't make a product like Intel, AMD, ARM in less time with only 1 person and a normal electronics toolset. It's an interesting pastime, and an incredible learning process, if he had expected to make a P4 clone he'd be quite crazy:)
USA, the country where all people are allowed to have GUNS that can blow your head off at the push of a button, but not chemistry sets. Where is this world coming to...:(
I suppose your government needs soldiers, not chemists and physicists. Keeping people dumb helps.
At least in online crime, noone is pointing guns. No bank personnel or police officers are killed. Noone is taken hostage, noone is tortured. So in a way it's much less harsh.
Unless you're lucky, and you are in a university, and your university has an electronic subscription to that journal. Otherwise you end up paying crazily high amounts of money per article.
The problem with "windows" is that they suffer from blind spots, especially when you take the mirrors into account. With trucks and other vehicles that don't even have rear windows it's even worse. Such a system would allow for complete awareness of what happens around the vehicle.
With more cameras you could get an even better picture of the environment, perhaps even give a 3D view of the happenings around you car. Sure, that would be even better, but this is an start:)
They're effectively spying on allies and admitting it publicly as well. There have been times that something like this would have sparked a major diplomatic incident. I wonder for how long the USA keep this kind of anti-social behavior to other countries up.
No, that's not the reasoning. I mean that you can't use it directly, but you can use it to get an idea of the subject and point you to further sources...
OK, you have a point, if it's the built in graphics card or you got it with the PC you can just as well use it. But those are generally cards with very little memory, or even of the 'hypercache' brand that costs you main memory to use. And generally, that 16MB of fast swap space extra won't really make a performance gain that is worth all the trouble.
Yes, but this is true wether you find the link to the information on wikipedia, or just google, or even if you look for a book on the subject in your library. In books you will also find colored or false information. No source will confirm of themselves if they are trustable or not, to do real research you will have to find a few sources and compare. Or look at what other people think of a certain source, etc. Wikipedia just happens to be a convenient starting point in some cases.
Video card memory is much more expensive than normal RAM for a reason, as it has to support crazy throughputs for things like alpha blending. This throughput advantage does not apply when the host (CPU) accesses the memory. PCI Express is a lot faster than AGP, but it's still a bottleneck that makes it much slower than native RAM.
Like the person above me already states, you're much better off just buying some extra RAM.
You can use wikipedia to look up information, but sure, you cannot quote it as source in a debate. That'd be crazy. Which is why wikipedia requires contributors to source statements, so you can quote the real source if you find a piece you want to mention.
I will build mine on the bottom of the sea, a data center where the artist would not fear the censor, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality, and the great will be unconstrained by the small!
I'm used to reading bad things about the American law system, but generally I don't comment on it, but this is extremely shocking to me. Yes, she was doing illegal things, but so is, for example, someone that drives through a red light. In that case someone gets away with a fine, even though endangering other road users with their life.
At the reasonable limit, I'd expect something in the $100-$1000 dollar range for sharing copyrighted files for an individual.
But $220,000... sheesh, that is so far out of proportion that I don't have words for it. There is no way in which she could have caused that big a damage, it's quite a part of the total earnings on that 24 songs I assume.
How can a jury of 'normal' people, that you'd expect to have some empathy, as the same could happen to them or some kid or family member of them, decide on something like this? It just completely eludes me. It makes me think of the Milgram experiment somehow, those people were convinced of acting on some ideological ground, entirely disregarding any human aspect. They ruined the rest of her life, and for what? To set an example? This is crazy, it completely spun out of control...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the old scifi series such as Star Trek were utopian instead of dystopian. I think it's more like a sign of the times that everything on the future is dystopian these days. Not even suspension of disbelief can help people imagine a future where things turn out good for everyone, anymore.
"Remote shutting down" people that way makes me think of an old story by Harlan Ellison ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Repent,_Harlequin!%22_Said_the_Ticktockman ), it deals with a dictator that can shut off people their heart remotely if they misbehave.
I like this one: http://www.die-offenbachs.de/eric/index.html It's based on Qt4 so it should work on windows as well, though I haven't tried.
I completely agree! It wouldn't be only bad for some of the users, but also for google itself. Due to the Long Tail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_tail) phenomenon, all the fringe groups added together, even if each individual group is relatively small, is an amazingly large amount of people. If these were to go with another search engine then they would lose a lot of users...
You don't get it do you? Of course you can't make a product like Intel, AMD, ARM in less time with only 1 person and a normal electronics toolset. It's an interesting pastime, and an incredible learning process, if he had expected to make a P4 clone he'd be quite crazy :)
USA, the country where all people are allowed to have GUNS that can blow your head off at the push of a button, but not chemistry sets. Where is this world coming to... :(
I suppose your government needs soldiers, not chemists and physicists. Keeping people dumb helps.
Every time you say that might be killing a kitten!
Exactly my thought... yesterdays supercomputer is today's desktop PC. Supercomputers will still be a lot faster than handhelds, even then :)
I'm especially looking forward to using it in the fluently English talking board AI computer of my solar-powered, emission free, flying car.
...so that's where they dispose of used bombs?
At least in online crime, noone is pointing guns. No bank personnel or police officers are killed. Noone is taken hostage, noone is tortured. So in a way it's much less harsh.
Unless you're lucky, and you are in a university, and your university has an electronic subscription to that journal. Otherwise you end up paying crazily high amounts of money per article.
The problem with "windows" is that they suffer from blind spots, especially when you take the mirrors into account. With trucks and other vehicles that don't even have rear windows it's even worse. Such a system would allow for complete awareness of what happens around the vehicle.
With more cameras you could get an even better picture of the environment, perhaps even give a 3D view of the happenings around you car. Sure, that would be even better, but this is an start :)
They're effectively spying on allies and admitting it publicly as well. There have been times that something like this would have sparked a major diplomatic incident. I wonder for how long the USA keep this kind of anti-social behavior to other countries up.
No, that's not the reasoning. I mean that you can't use it directly, but you can use it to get an idea of the subject and point you to further sources...
OK, you have a point, if it's the built in graphics card or you got it with the PC you can just as well use it. But those are generally cards with very little memory, or even of the 'hypercache' brand that costs you main memory to use. And generally, that 16MB of fast swap space extra won't really make a performance gain that is worth all the trouble.
Yes, but this is true wether you find the link to the information on wikipedia, or just google, or even if you look for a book on the subject in your library. In books you will also find colored or false information. No source will confirm of themselves if they are trustable or not, to do real research you will have to find a few sources and compare. Or look at what other people think of a certain source, etc. Wikipedia just happens to be a convenient starting point in some cases.
Video card memory is much more expensive than normal RAM for a reason, as it has to support crazy throughputs for things like alpha blending. This throughput advantage does not apply when the host (CPU) accesses the memory. PCI Express is a lot faster than AGP, but it's still a bottleneck that makes it much slower than native RAM. Like the person above me already states, you're much better off just buying some extra RAM.
You can use wikipedia to look up information, but sure, you cannot quote it as source in a debate. That'd be crazy. Which is why wikipedia requires contributors to source statements, so you can quote the real source if you find a piece you want to mention.
I will build mine on the bottom of the sea, a data center where the artist would not fear the censor, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality, and the great will be unconstrained by the small!
I'm used to reading bad things about the American law system, but generally I don't comment on it, but this is extremely shocking to me. Yes, she was doing illegal things, but so is, for example, someone that drives through a red light. In that case someone gets away with a fine, even though endangering other road users with their life. At the reasonable limit, I'd expect something in the $100-$1000 dollar range for sharing copyrighted files for an individual. But $220,000... sheesh, that is so far out of proportion that I don't have words for it. There is no way in which she could have caused that big a damage, it's quite a part of the total earnings on that 24 songs I assume. How can a jury of 'normal' people, that you'd expect to have some empathy, as the same could happen to them or some kid or family member of them, decide on something like this? It just completely eludes me. It makes me think of the Milgram experiment somehow, those people were convinced of acting on some ideological ground, entirely disregarding any human aspect. They ruined the rest of her life, and for what? To set an example? This is crazy, it completely spun out of control...