Why should people who have to shop at WallyWorld pay more than their fair share of taxes, so that IT consultants can pay none? I'm not sure that programming services deserve to be exempt from taxes, but this plan is likely to backfire. All the IT consulting services will simply move out of Maryland since their bids will be 6% higher than everyone else's. It's a bad idea to be the only state to tax a highly mobile industry like programming services. Someone else said that the IT service industry can't move out of state, but that's not true at all. The NYC company I worked for a few years ago did IT consulting for some D.C. companies. If they need someone on site for long periods of time, then the out of state firm will simply hire a local support tech. But since he works for an out of state firm, no 6% tax will apply even though he and the local firm are in Maryland.
And it's not like state or local governments operate with any sense of fairness when it comes to taxes. Often people building an industrial plant will shop around to find the state or locale that gives them the largest tax breaks--there's no way that can be fair to the smaller businesses that don't have that kind of clout.
And while you're all at it, better get used to it. There's trillions of dollars in debt that has to be paid back, with interest. Taxes have only one way to go - up! The federal government is trillions of dollars in debt. State taxes, which this article is about, make no difference to the national deficit.
Once you've got a decent system together..., then you've got to ask yourself if you'd rather pay the $200-400 for a console, or for a video card to turn your computer into a better gaming system than said console. As there's a lot of non-gaming applications that you'll want a decent speed processor for, this is a situation that quite a lot of people are in. This is pretty much what I was going to say. A $200+ video card added to a decent system is going to look and perform much better than any console. In addition, the PC platform is more open. Last I checked, user created mods and maps didn't work too well with consoles.
No, the OP's criticism is fair. From the article
He also wondered if the problem of Linux device drivers has been overstated: "I don't currently know of any common piece of hardware in use today that is not supported on Linux. And since these vendors do not know, and I don't, I'm asking the world to help out," he said.
Kroah-Hartman asked the Linux Foundation, which has made improved driver support No. 3 on its Linux to-do list, "Specifically what devices did they see in common use that are not supported by Linux (the obvious two video cards [ATI and Nvidia] being a known exception.) Despite this being such a high priority for this group, they had no examples to provide." I'm sure they had examples to provide, but he kept saying, "Sorry, that's a userspace issue." But to a user, when the printer doesn't print or the scanner doesn't scan that's a driver issue. Maybe there's a technical distinction between userspace and kernel drivers, but all the user is going to see is that his printer doesn't work. Hartman can't say driver support is an overstated issue if he's pushed all the work to userspace. That's why the OP's criticism is dead on.
Also, there are plenty of cards that work, but still have problems. My Audigy NX operates at the wrong frequency when playing UT2004. Everything sounds higher pitched than it should.
Also, sound cards that support Dolby Digital Live hardware encoding. For that matter, it'd be nice if AC3 encoding worked well with alsa. Pretty gimpy last I tried it.
Based on the summary, I thought his ISP had shut him down. Rather, it seems he just caved. Since Canada is not part of the EU, what weight could such a C&D have?
Well it's a short step between what you propose and things like aim-bots. The advantage I see for this type of research is not improving my play, but improving bot play. I haven't played recent games, but in UT2004 the bots can hit you with a hit-scan weapon from across the map (assuming their difficulty is high enough), but they are tactically stupid. But even besides this, there are very short term predictions of human movement that the bots don't pick up on. An opponent that has been hit a few times will try to maneuver his way to a health pack during a strafe battle, and so often I will blindly fire where the health pack is if the opponent is bunny hopping all over. There are also feints you can perform, such as firing a shock ball that can be subsequently exploded for a massive blast. An opponent seeing such a shock ball will often dodge one way or the other, and by forcing their movement, you can use your second shot not to explode the shock ball, but to hit where they will dodge to. Bots utterly fail at these types of strategies. By using neural networks to make their short term strategies more "human", practicing against bots will be a better play experience and better preparation for online play.
According to the abstract anyway, "Our proposed neuro-reckoning framework exhibits low computational resource overhead for real-time use..."
Twelve years ago I had a Pentium 60Mhz that could barely play MP3s without skipping. CPU architecture improvement and especially multi-core processing would probably leave plenty of room for short scale neural network movement prediction.
Because unlike the real world, the key is in your head and the safe is quite unbreakable. If you refused to give the combination to your safety deposit box, the government would still be able to get into it. But there's no way to get into an encrypted drive (assuming a strong password) without beating the owner with a rubber hose.
That's a lot of text, maybe you could spell out the exact text that regarding passwords for encrypted information. I'm not seeing any difference between (a) compelling a murder suspect to disclose the body's location, and (b) compelling a pedophile to disclose his encryption keys. Not any difference, that is, in terms of self-incrimination. So where in the rules does (b) hold true but (a) is exempted?
Hence we are back to, as Tegmark says, "I hate it" as the main objection to the theory. Since that's not really a good argument, it can be said that the MWI should be considered the most compelling candidate for an interpretation of QM.
You should know that's a terrible argument. "Some people hate this theory. Hating a theory is a bad reason for not supporting it. Therefore, this is the best theory out there?"
The problem with MWI is in its extravagant ontology. A better no-collapse interpretation is Price's advanced action view. Basically, the local variables are _not_ independent of future measuring devices. The only objection against this view is that it is incompatible with "free will". But this is ridiculous, as it can be no more incompatible with free will than any other block view of the universe. And most physicists already agree with a block view of the universe. One may think the measurements can be bilked, leading to causal paradoxes, but the problematic experiments in QM are precisely those in which measurements cannot be bilked.
You shouldn't have to, and if you're doing this on principle, then maybe you don't want to. But it would probably make things easier for you next time. I imagine a default drive image doesn't take much space and compresses fairly well.
I understand "should of" and "less/fewer", but I don't understand what's wrong with the word "drapes". It's in the dictionary and not marked as "slang".
Or, to use as analogous a real-world situation to that advocated by the destroy-all-IP crowd, what if I lived in your house while you were on vacation
Well that's a border line case. Why do we eat animals and not humans? Some may say that it's because most animals that we eat are far from sentient. Well, that's not a universal criteria because we don't eat retarded or brain-dead humans. And it's not simply that "meat" animals are of different species because most agree that if we came into contact with sentient life, we should have a mutual understanding not to eat each other. There are few, if any, "pure" natural kinds, and certainly no "pure" natural kinds. But the division between "intellectual" and "physical" property is much more clear cut than that between, say, "desire" and "intent", and the law can distinguish these latter two well enough.
Back to the case at hand. Can you really use my home while I'm on vacation without making it impossible for others to use? There's only one house. If you think it's OK to use while I'm on vacation what about the next guy that wanders in? With intellectual property there's no collision of space and time. So there's still a fundamental metaphysical difference between using my house when I'm away and copying something I wrote or made.
The metaphysics of copyright does eventually break down. I can't copy something infinitely without having infinite matter to store it on, for example. And there doesn't seem to be an infinite amount of matter. But it's pretty damn close to infinitely copyable. About as close as anything ever will be.
Copyrights are basically a government granted monopoly. Given the century long copyrights successfully lobbied for by the movie industry, the traditional rules of capitalism have long meant little when it comes to movies and directly supporting technologies.
Part of the reason for posting things like this is to see if there is a genuine issue or if it's just a biased set of anecdotes. Those with knowledge of the area can relay their own experiences and offer expertise relevant to determining exactly this. In this way slashdot can do it's own bit of "investigative journalism".
If slashdot could only publish what was already published by "reliable sources", then it would be even more derivative than it already is. Those who want to read things help up to wikipedia standards should probably stick to reading wikipedia.
When Intel doesn't have to even compete with the latest offerings, business logic rules and technical improvements play second fiddle. Here we have "Why should we release this chip now? The old chips are cheaper to produce and since AMD can't even compete with our current lineup we can keep selling them at the same price, ensuring more profit for us."
1) Migration to a totally different platform costs money, lots of money. 2) If it works, why fuck with it?
This will put the onus on your manager to explain why he wants to use so much money to move to windows. Any reasons he can give at that point should be easy to shoot down.
Hard drives are very easy to cool. The water block plates don't fit snuggly against the uneven surface of the hard drives' sides. But it doesn't matter. The whole drive is still cool to the touch, much cooler than decent air cooling can manage. In short, there really isn't a need for "the most efficient plate ever". And it won't do you much good besides, as last I checked, hard drives are not very flat on the sides or bottom.
It seems like the government is just doing data mining on information it already had access to. I don't see why the government should be prevented from putting together information it already has, assuming it should have the information in the first place. Besides, you can't convict someone on the output of some data mining algorithm. It just generates leads.
I'm much more worried about AT&T tapping into the internet backbone and sending a copy of the packets to the NSA.
Professor Orin Kerr questions whether the decision is about getting this information from an ISP or whether it was from a device installed on a computer surreptitiously. He suggests the latter should require a higher standard, but I'm not sure why? Perhaps it's because that might require law enforcement to enter a person's house? Because to install surreptitious monitoring you have to enter a person's home. Then everything in plain sight can be used as evidence against that person, such as paraphernalia on the coffee table. Normally the police would require a warrant to enter someone's home without their permission. This would allow warrantless walkthrus of peoples homes by the police.
Sounds good from a business perspective, except those heavy downloaders are often "tech experts" for their friends and family. And when those friends and family try to get advice from the tech experts, they won't be recommended broadband that does traffic shaping. Word of mouth can really make or break a business, and when flip the bird to 10% of your customers, you'll probably end up regretting it.
"Hard work" isn't something that can be stolen except through slavery or fraud. You're probably talking about the fruits of hard work, in which case there would be plenty of exceptions to your statement. Modern science and mathematics were built on the labors of many, and yet the fruits of these labors cannot be owned.
Hard work, by itself, guarantees nothing. I can spend thousands of hours building model planes, grinding through MMPORGS, or trying to woo a crush, only to be left with little or nothing to show for my efforts.
Slashdot Mirror
And it's not like state or local governments operate with any sense of fairness when it comes to taxes. Often people building an industrial plant will shop around to find the state or locale that gives them the largest tax breaks--there's no way that can be fair to the smaller businesses that don't have that kind of clout. And while you're all at it, better get used to it. There's trillions of dollars in debt that has to be paid back, with interest. Taxes have only one way to go - up! The federal government is trillions of dollars in debt. State taxes, which this article is about, make no difference to the national deficit.
Power draw is part of the price. Compare to buying a car that's half the price of the previous model and has twice the mpg.
Kroah-Hartman asked the Linux Foundation, which has made improved driver support No. 3 on its Linux to-do list, "Specifically what devices did they see in common use that are not supported by Linux (the obvious two video cards [ATI and Nvidia] being a known exception.) Despite this being such a high priority for this group, they had no examples to provide." I'm sure they had examples to provide, but he kept saying, "Sorry, that's a userspace issue." But to a user, when the printer doesn't print or the scanner doesn't scan that's a driver issue. Maybe there's a technical distinction between userspace and kernel drivers, but all the user is going to see is that his printer doesn't work. Hartman can't say driver support is an overstated issue if he's pushed all the work to userspace. That's why the OP's criticism is dead on.
Also, there are plenty of cards that work, but still have problems. My Audigy NX operates at the wrong frequency when playing UT2004. Everything sounds higher pitched than it should.
Also, sound cards that support Dolby Digital Live hardware encoding. For that matter, it'd be nice if AC3 encoding worked well with alsa. Pretty gimpy last I tried it.
Based on the summary, I thought his ISP had shut him down. Rather, it seems he just caved. Since Canada is not part of the EU, what weight could such a C&D have?
Well it's a short step between what you propose and things like aim-bots. The advantage I see for this type of research is not improving my play, but improving bot play. I haven't played recent games, but in UT2004 the bots can hit you with a hit-scan weapon from across the map (assuming their difficulty is high enough), but they are tactically stupid. But even besides this, there are very short term predictions of human movement that the bots don't pick up on. An opponent that has been hit a few times will try to maneuver his way to a health pack during a strafe battle, and so often I will blindly fire where the health pack is if the opponent is bunny hopping all over. There are also feints you can perform, such as firing a shock ball that can be subsequently exploded for a massive blast. An opponent seeing such a shock ball will often dodge one way or the other, and by forcing their movement, you can use your second shot not to explode the shock ball, but to hit where they will dodge to. Bots utterly fail at these types of strategies. By using neural networks to make their short term strategies more "human", practicing against bots will be a better play experience and better preparation for online play.
According to the abstract anyway, "Our proposed neuro-reckoning framework exhibits low computational resource overhead for real-time use..."
Twelve years ago I had a Pentium 60Mhz that could barely play MP3s without skipping. CPU architecture improvement and especially multi-core processing would probably leave plenty of room for short scale neural network movement prediction.
Because unlike the real world, the key is in your head and the safe is quite unbreakable. If you refused to give the combination to your safety deposit box, the government would still be able to get into it. But there's no way to get into an encrypted drive (assuming a strong password) without beating the owner with a rubber hose.
That's a lot of text, maybe you could spell out the exact text that regarding passwords for encrypted information. I'm not seeing any difference between (a) compelling a murder suspect to disclose the body's location, and (b) compelling a pedophile to disclose his encryption keys. Not any difference, that is, in terms of self-incrimination. So where in the rules does (b) hold true but (a) is exempted?
Hence we are back to, as Tegmark says, "I hate it" as the main objection to the theory. Since that's not really a good argument, it can be said that the MWI should be considered the most compelling candidate for an interpretation of QM.
You should know that's a terrible argument. "Some people hate this theory. Hating a theory is a bad reason for not supporting it. Therefore, this is the best theory out there?"
The problem with MWI is in its extravagant ontology. A better no-collapse interpretation is Price's advanced action view. Basically, the local variables are _not_ independent of future measuring devices. The only objection against this view is that it is incompatible with "free will". But this is ridiculous, as it can be no more incompatible with free will than any other block view of the universe. And most physicists already agree with a block view of the universe. One may think the measurements can be bilked, leading to causal paradoxes, but the problematic experiments in QM are precisely those in which measurements cannot be bilked.
This story would be the same if the submitter had installed OS/2 or BeOS. It really doesn't have anything to do with open source.
You shouldn't have to, and if you're doing this on principle, then maybe you don't want to. But it would probably make things easier for you next time. I imagine a default drive image doesn't take much space and compresses fairly well.
I understand "should of" and "less/fewer", but I don't understand what's wrong with the word "drapes". It's in the dictionary and not marked as "slang".
Or, to use as analogous a real-world situation to that advocated by the destroy-all-IP crowd, what if I lived in your house while you were on vacation
Well that's a border line case. Why do we eat animals and not humans? Some may say that it's because most animals that we eat are far from sentient. Well, that's not a universal criteria because we don't eat retarded or brain-dead humans. And it's not simply that "meat" animals are of different species because most agree that if we came into contact with sentient life, we should have a mutual understanding not to eat each other. There are few, if any, "pure" natural kinds, and certainly no "pure" natural kinds. But the division between "intellectual" and "physical" property is much more clear cut than that between, say, "desire" and "intent", and the law can distinguish these latter two well enough.
Back to the case at hand. Can you really use my home while I'm on vacation without making it impossible for others to use? There's only one house. If you think it's OK to use while I'm on vacation what about the next guy that wanders in? With intellectual property there's no collision of space and time. So there's still a fundamental metaphysical difference between using my house when I'm away and copying something I wrote or made.
The metaphysics of copyright does eventually break down. I can't copy something infinitely without having infinite matter to store it on, for example. And there doesn't seem to be an infinite amount of matter. But it's pretty damn close to infinitely copyable. About as close as anything ever will be.
Copyrights are basically a government granted monopoly. Given the century long copyrights successfully lobbied for by the movie industry, the traditional rules of capitalism have long meant little when it comes to movies and directly supporting technologies.
Part of the reason for posting things like this is to see if there is a genuine issue or if it's just a biased set of anecdotes. Those with knowledge of the area can relay their own experiences and offer expertise relevant to determining exactly this. In this way slashdot can do it's own bit of "investigative journalism".
If slashdot could only publish what was already published by "reliable sources", then it would be even more derivative than it already is. Those who want to read things help up to wikipedia standards should probably stick to reading wikipedia.
When Intel doesn't have to even compete with the latest offerings, business logic rules and technical improvements play second fiddle. Here we have "Why should we release this chip now? The old chips are cheaper to produce and since AMD can't even compete with our current lineup we can keep selling them at the same price, ensuring more profit for us."
1) Migration to a totally different platform costs money, lots of money.
2) If it works, why fuck with it?
This will put the onus on your manager to explain why he wants to use so much money to move to windows. Any reasons he can give at that point should be easy to shoot down.
You can get a 500GB SSD for a $100? I'd be shocked to see 500GB of SSD for under a thousand.
Hard drives are very easy to cool. The water block plates don't fit snuggly against the uneven surface of the hard drives' sides. But it doesn't matter. The whole drive is still cool to the touch, much cooler than decent air cooling can manage. In short, there really isn't a need for "the most efficient plate ever". And it won't do you much good besides, as last I checked, hard drives are not very flat on the sides or bottom.
It seems like the government is just doing data mining on information it already had access to. I don't see why the government should be prevented from putting together information it already has, assuming it should have the information in the first place. Besides, you can't convict someone on the output of some data mining algorithm. It just generates leads.
I'm much more worried about AT&T tapping into the internet backbone and sending a copy of the packets to the NSA.
Sounds good from a business perspective, except those heavy downloaders are often "tech experts" for their friends and family. And when those friends and family try to get advice from the tech experts, they won't be recommended broadband that does traffic shaping. Word of mouth can really make or break a business, and when flip the bird to 10% of your customers, you'll probably end up regretting it.
"Hard work" isn't something that can be stolen except through slavery or fraud. You're probably talking about the fruits of hard work, in which case there would be plenty of exceptions to your statement. Modern science and mathematics were built on the labors of many, and yet the fruits of these labors cannot be owned.
Hard work, by itself, guarantees nothing. I can spend thousands of hours building model planes, grinding through MMPORGS, or trying to woo a crush, only to be left with little or nothing to show for my efforts.