but when the cost of production is vastly outweighed by the sale price sooner or later the market will force it down.
This is tht force. For too long we have been asked to pay too much for too little.
Over and over again consumer groups have tried to pressure the price of CD's down and the record companies resisted.
Well guess what? The people have decided otherwise. If they'd brought their prices down by half things would be very different now.
CD's in my local store are $20. Screw that. I struggle to get the cash to buy any and some dumb fuck loser struts around on MTV bragging about all the money they are making from their music. They blatantly take the piss. What the fsk do they expect to happen. We've been waiting for a chance like this for years and years. The tables are turning and pockets will be emptied. .oO0Oo.
but if while I'm debugging i want to turn the exception handling off to see what exceptions are thrown :
#try : code #except : print "error"
generates a syntax error
this was really bugging. I came up with a workaround
#try : if 1: code #except : print "error"
but you can see where that could lead me if I missed taking one back out again.
I've only been doing python for a few weeks so forgive if there's a proper way (and tell me what it is 8-)
I like the language so far. I got it decoding jpegs from newsgroups automatically in the first few days and project 2 uses wxWindows(GTk & Windows Widget Abstraction - www.wxpython.org) to separate my Everquest message text across six windows (auction, guild, group, tell/say, shout & the rest)
I hope the move to BeOpen is a positive one.
If the guys can relax a bit I'm sure it's propell the whole thing forward (into a bloated feature rich bloody mess;-)
Well ok what I probably meant was that proprietry memory design may be bad for us all price wise. Intel have already had negative experiences trying to compete with the far east to shift memory. I think the consortium is trying to box people in and I just don't like that feeling.
All institutions eventually fall but while they exists the can cause as much harm as good, but heck - what technology doesn't? (in a broad sense so no nit picking what about X or Y comments !-) .oO0Oo.
Well, if people "clearly" were able to see AMD's processors as "superior", then they would buy them, no?
I've always seen AMD's pursuit of the x86 market as a personal crusade of Larry Sanders.
I think that it might be a good idea for AMD to make an Pentium beater with an INCOMPATIBLE instruction set not compatible. (maybe they already are, send tell).
Making a super chip and porting something like Linux, or *BSD or BeOS or anOtherOS to it might be a winner.
the Pentium series may have started life as a traffic light controller but Grove and Moore demanded a lot from their engineering team and got it.
Their relationship with M$ did get pretty cosy but it was never a perfect marriage that the word Wintel would suggest (see Inside Intel http://www.webreviews.com/9711/inside_intel.html here).
However as the company grew they seem to have inevitably lost touch with their engineering roots. Pressure from other manufacturers has always hurt them bad.
The Register has a good take on it here - http://www.theregister.co.uk/000525-000009.html
Rambus is a brain dead attempt at fencing people in to non-commodity memory. Especially ironic as Intel have been burned by memory production once already (when the market went commodity). I'm sure everybody (except Rambus Inc.) is pleased that it looks like it's heading towards a spectacular failure as it would drive the price of memory up for no good engineering reason.
It's an expensive foray for Intel and co. probably one that we'll end up paying for in the end one way or another.
I hope they learn a good lesson and go back to chasing Mhz.
ok the highest images quality differences are only 10% but it's the possibilty of different degrees of compression of the same images at runtime that makes it interesting .oO0Oo.
It is only really since people became estranged from each other that this sort of thing became important.
As justice evolved the accused and accusers would often be known to each other. This, like everything, was both good and bad and the legacy of that system still lives with us.
A defence and prosecution try to establish either the good character or evil nature of an accused person in order to colour the jury's or judge's opinion of the accused. Indeed these days "a man of good character" is one who has no previous criminal convictions.
In times gone by your actual reputation would follow you in to the courtroom. Revenge might be taken for your previous behaviour in the community or you might be let off for being an otherwise good person who just let off steam or behave out of character due to external pressure.
Nowadays because people are estranged from each other, the mitigating circumstances are written in to our statute. The law decides in advance why you might be let off for something and it is up to you to prove it, if that is your course of action.
This case seems to highlight a flaw in human nature. Negativity seems to linger longer than positivity (is that a word?). It's hard to imagine a way of balancing. How does someone with a previous killing under their belt gain any sort of positive reputation? Nothing in the world seems as positive as murder is negative so such revelations obviously bias opinion. There is no GoodDeedNet where a list of people who have made positive contributions can be searched.
To attempt to be fair society must err on the side of caution. That is why trials can be dismissed in this way. Information might want to be free but some information manages to get publicity for itself too. .oO0Oo.
in our statute a trial by jury has the power to disregard the law if they decide it is unjust.
Of course first you need to get a jury trial but if you get one and they decide you acted resonably even though you broke the letter of the law you can walk. (or the say not guilty for the hell of it). That is why you are "judged by your peers, 12 goo d men and true".
Juries are rarely reminded that the decide the moral case of guilt rather than the factual basis of the incident.
IANAL
.oO0Oo.
Re:Cool... is this the modernized Amiga?
on
AtheOS
·
· Score: 1
hehe I should've kept my mouth shut about BeOS knowing only a little about it.
I did find this though
http://www.other-space.com/be/faq2.8.html#2.8.12
Because BeOS has no multi-user support, the implied threat is *greater* than that on other systems, not less. Should somebody gain access to your BeOS system over the internet, they have free reign with it.
just like MS said the whole world would when they launched OLE .oO0Oo.
Re:Cool... is this the modernized Amiga?
on
AtheOS
·
· Score: 1
er ok
but what I'm saying is that multi-user capability shouldn't be added later it should be in there from the start.
OS's that have done this end up having plenty of losing strategies
Unix, Linux, Windows all suffer from being single user systems with multi user capabilites tagged on as a "we could make it multi-user" idea.
NT has a better concept of this even though using it fools you into thinking it doesn't sometimes. I think that came from shooting themselves in the foot code wise by releasing a stopgap OS (Windows) that was more popular than their DOS replacement, OS/2. (MS were so innovative that they release their Windows cash cow almost by accident!)
BeOS will also suffer from this fate.
btw. Good luck to the AtheOS people I'm not dissing them. .oO0Oo.
Re:Whassa matter, the new kid scare you?
on
AtheOS
·
· Score: 1
eating grass is the healthiest way of getting stoned .oO0Oo.
If you can't stand the heat
on
AtheOS
·
· Score: 1
I think many people get scared when presented with something new.
The mind set says that whichever OS I'm using right now is the best one because I like it and it's popular.
It seems whenever a piece of software is mentioned here that is similar to another piece of software plenty of people shout "what do we need that for, we've already got XXX why don't you work on that instead".
I think these people only see the world in terms of what they get out of it. If I had the time I think I would like to embark on the challenge of a full OS too because for me it's almost the pinnacle of pure programming. I respect anyone that's done it, whatever the results.
it's like saying "Hello World!" what did you write that for. .oO0Oo.
Slashdot Mirror
music, we all need it.
.oO0Oo.
but when the cost of production is vastly outweighed by the sale price sooner or later the market will force it down.
This is tht force. For too long we have been asked to pay too much for too little.
Over and over again consumer groups have tried to pressure the price of CD's down and the record companies resisted.
Well guess what? The people have decided otherwise. If they'd brought their prices down by half things would be very different now.
CD's in my local store are $20.
Screw that. I struggle to get the cash to buy any and some dumb fuck loser struts around on MTV bragging about all the money they are making from their music. They blatantly take the piss. What the fsk do they expect to happen. We've been waiting for a chance like this for years and years. The tables are turning and pockets will be emptied.
thanks
.oO0Oo.
that's just the advice I was looking for.
the more I use it the more I like it
and routes around it
.oO0Oo.
try :
;-)
.oO0Oo.
code
except :
print "error"
but if while I'm debugging i want to turn the exception handling off to see what exceptions are thrown :
#try :
code
#except :
print "error"
generates a syntax error
this was really bugging. I came up with a workaround
#try :
if 1:
code
#except :
print "error"
but you can see where that could lead me if I missed taking one back out again.
I've only been doing python for a few weeks so forgive if there's a proper way (and tell me what it is 8-)
I like the language so far.
I got it decoding jpegs from newsgroups automatically in the first few days
and project 2 uses wxWindows(GTk & Windows Widget Abstraction - www.wxpython.org) to separate my Everquest message text across six windows (auction, guild, group, tell/say, shout & the rest)
I hope the move to BeOpen is a positive one.
If the guys can relax a bit I'm sure it's propell the whole thing forward (into a bloated feature rich bloody mess
hehe
.oO0Oo.
so many people, so little brain
duh
I wasn't enitirely serious but ....
.oO0Oo.
The alpha isn't priced for domestic use.
and the G4 dunno they don't sell them at my local supplier.
A non x86 AMD chip that ran Linux might be a nice product and earn AMD some respect from techies.
They've obviously got some skilled people.
You think a bit of pride might make them do such a thing for the cavalier hell of it!
Well ok what I probably meant was that proprietry memory design may be bad for us all price wise. Intel have already had negative experiences trying to compete with the far east to shift memory. I think the consortium is trying to box people in and I just don't like that feeling.
.oO0Oo.
All institutions eventually fall but while they exists the can cause as much harm as good, but heck - what technology doesn't? (in a broad sense so no nit picking what about X or Y comments !-)
Well, if people "clearly" were able to see AMD's processors as "superior", then they would buy them, no?
.oO0Oo.
I've always seen AMD's pursuit of the x86 market as a personal crusade of Larry Sanders.
I think that it might be a good idea for AMD to make an Pentium beater with an INCOMPATIBLE instruction set not compatible. (maybe they already are, send tell).
Making a super chip and porting something like Linux, or *BSD or BeOS or anOtherOS to it might be a winner.
Go on Larry - roll the dice
Once upon a time Intel tried to innovate.
.oO0Oo.
the Pentium series may have started life as a traffic light controller but Grove and Moore demanded a lot from their engineering team and got it.
Their relationship with M$ did get pretty cosy but it was never a perfect marriage that the word Wintel would suggest (see Inside Intel http://www.webreviews.com/9711/inside_intel.html here).
However as the company grew they seem to have inevitably lost touch with their engineering roots. Pressure from other manufacturers has always hurt them bad.
The Register has a good take on it here - http://www.theregister.co.uk/000525-000009.html
Rambus is a brain dead attempt at fencing people in to non-commodity memory. Especially ironic as Intel have been burned by memory production once already (when the market went commodity). I'm sure everybody (except Rambus Inc.) is pleased that it looks like it's heading towards a spectacular failure as it would drive the price of memory up for no good engineering reason.
It's an expensive foray for Intel and co. probably one that we'll end up paying for in the end one way or another.
I hope they learn a good lesson and go back to chasing Mhz.
ok the highest images quality differences are only 10% but it's the possibilty of different degrees of compression of the same images at runtime that makes it interesting
.oO0Oo.
ha ha ah ha agghhhh
.oO0Oo.
I showed my girlfriend and explained to her how it all worked
she's laughing at me right now
this is so new it's not even announced on news.gnome.org yet!!
.oO0Oo.
IANAL and my experience is UK based.
.oO0Oo.
It is only really since people became estranged from each other that this sort of thing became important.
As justice evolved the accused and accusers would often be known to each other. This, like everything, was both good and bad and the legacy of that system still lives with us.
A defence and prosecution try to establish either the good character or evil nature of an accused person in order to colour the jury's or judge's opinion of the accused. Indeed these days "a man of good character" is one who has no previous criminal convictions.
In times gone by your actual reputation would follow you in to the courtroom. Revenge might be taken for your previous behaviour in the community or you might be let off for being an otherwise good person who just let off steam or behave out of character due to external pressure.
Nowadays because people are estranged from each other, the mitigating circumstances are written in to our statute. The law decides in advance why you might be let off for something and it is up to you to prove it, if that is your course of action.
This case seems to highlight a flaw in human nature. Negativity seems to linger longer than positivity (is that a word?). It's hard to imagine a way of balancing. How does someone with a previous killing under their belt gain any sort of positive reputation? Nothing in the world seems as positive as murder is negative so such revelations obviously bias opinion. There is no GoodDeedNet where a list of people who have made positive contributions can be searched.
To attempt to be fair society must err on the side of caution. That is why trials can be dismissed in this way. Information might want to be free but some information manages to get publicity for itself too.
in our statute a trial by jury has the power to disregard the law if they decide it is unjust.
.oO0Oo.
Of course first you need to get a jury trial
but if you get one and they decide you acted resonably even though you broke the letter of the law you can walk. (or the say not guilty for the hell of it).
That is why you are "judged by your peers, 12 goo d men and true".
Juries are rarely reminded that the decide the moral case of guilt rather than the factual basis of the incident.
IANAL
hehe I should've kept my mouth shut about BeOS knowing only a little about it.
2
.oO0Oo.
I did find this though
http://www.other-space.com/be/faq2.8.html#2.8.1
Because BeOS has no multi-user support, the implied threat is *greater* than that on other systems, not less. Should somebody gain access to your BeOS system over the internet, they have free reign with it.
don't they understand
.oO0Oo.
IE is just a shell to dish out hWnds.
I supposed they'll make and sell COM objects
just like MS said the whole world would when they launched OLE
er ok
.oO0Oo.
but what I'm saying is that multi-user capability shouldn't be added later it should be in there from the start.
OS's that have done this end up having plenty of losing strategies
Unix, Linux, Windows all suffer from being single user systems with multi user capabilites tagged on as a "we could make it multi-user" idea.
NT has a better concept of this even though using it fools you into thinking it doesn't sometimes. I think that came from shooting themselves in the foot code wise by releasing a stopgap OS (Windows) that was more popular than their DOS replacement, OS/2. (MS were so innovative that they release their Windows cash cow almost by accident!)
BeOS will also suffer from this fate.
btw. Good luck to the AtheOS people I'm not dissing them.
eating grass is the healthiest way of getting stoned
.oO0Oo.
stay out of the GPL kitchen
.oO0Oo.
maybe it's MMX or Screaming Sindy
.oO0Oo.
yeah right.
.oO0Oo.
I like your new sig Chad
I think many people get scared when presented with something new.
.oO0Oo.
The mind set says that whichever OS I'm using right now is the best one because I like it and it's popular.
It seems whenever a piece of software is mentioned here that is similar to another piece of software plenty of people shout "what do we need that for, we've already got XXX why don't you work on that instead".
I think these people only see the world in terms of what they get out of it. If I had the time I think I would like to embark on the challenge of a full OS too because for me it's almost the pinnacle of pure programming. I respect anyone that's done it, whatever the results.
it's like saying "Hello World!" what did you write that for.
huh
.oO0Oo.
Oh dear,
.oO0Oo.
bolting multi user on as a development goal is bound to be a losing strategy IMHO.
Unless the kernel was made that way and the front end has just not been implemented.
Just look at Windows multi user capabilities.
Truly awful model.
it's a big difference
.oO0Oo.