You can take a page from the pirates and have two versions of the textures... highly compressed low res versions with artifacts, shrinking the game to 5% of its original size.
It should probably also be noted that context is very important in data compression, and it doesnt seem unreasonable that brains have evolved to store information efficiently using some of the strategies that we have found successful in compsci.
I hope I'm not the only one who finds it odd that the state lotteries they sold the public by claiming "The funds will benefit education" would put themselves out of business if people were actually learning math.;)
You do know that lotteries (and in fact and game that includes a progressive jackpot) can be wagered with positive expectation, right?
Just asking, because you go on about gambling being an expectation of loss and investing being an expectation of gain..
Then there is card-counting at Poker which simply involves keeping track of the ratio of high-cards and low-cards which have been dealt.
Nobody "card counts" in poker, which means that you have no clue what you are talking about. The closest thing in poker to card counting is when 7-card stud players memorize what cards have been discarded by other players.. the key term here is MEMORIZE.
Now I have to ask you.. why are you talking about this subject when both you and I know that you dont know what you are talking about? (hint: Blackjack players count cards, Poker players laugh at you.)
Casinos do have blackjack machines. There are a group of popular machines that pack in a dozen games onto a single machine and the user selects which game they want to play. The video blackjack is usually accompanied by a selection of various video poker games.
The best SSDs (in terms of power consumption) use about 0.1W idle and 0.6W under load.
The DDR3 just can't compete. It might score favorably against specific SSDs, but that would be cherry picking bad SSDs in order to make stacking up DDR3 look better. Your proposition was that "after a day all read operations are resolved instantly from the OS disk cache" which means you've been burning 7W all day long on your cache. Its simply not possible in the propositional case for DDR3 to win on power consumption.
DDR3 is a lot faster tho, and that has value. You buy that value from your local power company.
Except with SSD write lifetimes falling with every generation
Except this isnt true. Flash lifetimes are dropping due to process shrinks, but SSD lifetimes are remaining steady due to increasing capacity made possible by those process shrinks.
This is the problem with you SSD critics. You get that one nugget of information and then gleefully go on spitting bullshit at everyone on forums like this one. To be quite clear, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Why do you volunteer to talk about a subject that we both know that you are poorly informed about? You dont see me talking about JAVA performance because... guess what... even though I know a couple things about JAVA, I refuse to make declarative statements about topics where I know that I only know a couple of things about.
If you are an expert in something... wait for that topic before you act like an expert.
Google doesnt profit? What a fucking asshole liar you are.
First you claim (A) Its only a few pages, then we find out its dozens.
Then you claim (B) Its legal, but we find out that it isn't.
Now you claim (C) There is no profit, which is obviously fucking bullshit.
Take Googles cock out of your mouth and wake the fuck up.
Are you an author or publisher and don't want your books on Google? Remove them:
Why do I have to remove them, and how easy do you think that really is?
Ah lets see.. the first step is removing the book, for which I have a copyright, from Google Books is to contact a publisher, rather than Google. In other words, I must contact a party that does not even have the authority nor technical ability to remove the book. right?
Google does not offer an opt out. Now, stop claiming that they do, because they clearly don't. What Google wants you to do is convince some publisher to contact them about it. That is most definitely not fucking opt out.
Hey, I bet Google scanned more than a few law books. This should be easy.
Give a fucking law citation, asshole. Stop making baseless claims. You've already shot yourself in the foot in another comment when you claimed that only a few pages could be viewed and then linked to one of these books where clearly dozens upon dozens of pages were viewable.
You can read a few pages [snip] Try it out on this book [google.com].
This must be some new definition of the word "few" that authors werent previously aware of. So many pages in fact that I cant be bothers to fucking count them. Thats at least a few dozen pages, asshole.
It almost seems reasonable in the case of fiction (the spin you were going for by linking to a fiction book... thats why you are an asshole) but it just doesnt fucking fly for technical works, and yes technical works are covered just as egregiously.
that is expanding away from the center of the big bang explosion
There is no such thing as the center of the big bang. Until you at least understand that, perhaps you shouldn't waste your time coming up with cosmology theories.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure why this would have the headline as "Busted!" outside of the fact that they were seen downloading a movie that was already theirs.
If they were downloading these movies, then they were also uploading them.
Have you considered just using www.youporn.com?
You can take a page from the pirates and have two versions of the textures ... highly compressed low res versions with artifacts, shrinking the game to 5% of its original size.
Then just lazily stream in the regular textures.
It should probably also be noted that context is very important in data compression, and it doesnt seem unreasonable that brains have evolved to store information efficiently using some of the strategies that we have found successful in compsci.
In America, Math is hard.. so lets go shopping.
All programming languages encourage people to make a mess.
FTFY
How can you lose when you're legally entitled to not pay any winnings - ever?
Tell that to all the casinos that have gone bankrupt. You think I'm kidding? Even Donald Trump has had multiple casinos of his go bankrupt.
I hope I'm not the only one who finds it odd that the state lotteries they sold the public by claiming "The funds will benefit education" would put themselves out of business if people were actually learning math. ;)
You do know that lotteries (and in fact and game that includes a progressive jackpot) can be wagered with positive expectation, right?
Just asking, because you go on about gambling being an expectation of loss and investing being an expectation of gain..
Then there is card-counting at Poker which simply involves keeping track of the ratio of high-cards and low-cards which have been dealt.
Nobody "card counts" in poker, which means that you have no clue what you are talking about. The closest thing in poker to card counting is when 7-card stud players memorize what cards have been discarded by other players.. the key term here is MEMORIZE.
Now I have to ask you.. why are you talking about this subject when both you and I know that you dont know what you are talking about? (hint: Blackjack players count cards, Poker players laugh at you.)
Casinos do have blackjack machines. There are a group of popular machines that pack in a dozen games onto a single machine and the user selects which game they want to play. The video blackjack is usually accompanied by a selection of various video poker games.
Maybe the Democrats will promise you a job. Then you wont have to worry about competing for one.
Just add utopia... erm, I mean promises from democrats.
Never had a paper route, jackass? Maybe you can steal one from a kid.
Ah yes, because when children get to work thats the exact same thing as when children are forced to work.
Stop being a liberal douche. There are smart liberals but you arent one of them.
... which unfortunately doesn't really tell us anything, since they don't mention how many of the uninfected storage devices were like that.
Yes they did, and then the guy you replied to did also.
It was seven. Were you looking for digits? 7.
The best SSDs (in terms of power consumption) use about 0.1W idle and 0.6W under load.
The DDR3 just can't compete. It might score favorably against specific SSDs, but that would be cherry picking bad SSDs in order to make stacking up DDR3 look better. Your proposition was that "after a day all read operations are resolved instantly from the OS disk cache" which means you've been burning 7W all day long on your cache. Its simply not possible in the propositional case for DDR3 to win on power consumption.
DDR3 is a lot faster tho, and that has value. You buy that value from your local power company.
Except with SSD write lifetimes falling with every generation
Except this isnt true. Flash lifetimes are dropping due to process shrinks, but SSD lifetimes are remaining steady due to increasing capacity made possible by those process shrinks.
This is the problem with you SSD critics. You get that one nugget of information and then gleefully go on spitting bullshit at everyone on forums like this one. To be quite clear, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Why do you volunteer to talk about a subject that we both know that you are poorly informed about? You dont see me talking about JAVA performance because... guess what... even though I know a couple things about JAVA, I refuse to make declarative statements about topics where I know that I only know a couple of things about.
If you are an expert in something... wait for that topic before you act like an expert.
From a performance perspective it might be interesting, but from a power consumption perspective the SSD blows away a handful of DDR3 sticks.
I hear that not having a valid arguing point but mouthing off anyways is worthless. Thats true.
Google doesnt profit? What a fucking asshole liar you are.
First you claim (A) Its only a few pages, then we find out its dozens.
Then you claim (B) Its legal, but we find out that it isn't.
Now you claim (C) There is no profit, which is obviously fucking bullshit.
Take Googles cock out of your mouth and wake the fuck up.
Are you an author or publisher and don't want your books on Google? Remove them:
Why do I have to remove them, and how easy do you think that really is?
Ah lets see.. the first step is removing the book, for which I have a copyright, from Google Books is to contact a publisher, rather than Google. In other words, I must contact a party that does not even have the authority nor technical ability to remove the book. right?
Google does not offer an opt out. Now, stop claiming that they do, because they clearly don't. What Google wants you to do is convince some publisher to contact them about it. That is most definitely not fucking opt out.
its neither opt-in nor opt-out. Its fuck-you.
Hey, I bet Google scanned more than a few law books. This should be easy.
Give a fucking law citation, asshole. Stop making baseless claims. You've already shot yourself in the foot in another comment when you claimed that only a few pages could be viewed and then linked to one of these books where clearly dozens upon dozens of pages were viewable.
You can read a few pages [snip] Try it out on this book [google.com].
This must be some new definition of the word "few" that authors werent previously aware of. So many pages in fact that I cant be bothers to fucking count them. Thats at least a few dozen pages, asshole.
It almost seems reasonable in the case of fiction (the spin you were going for by linking to a fiction book... thats why you are an asshole) but it just doesnt fucking fly for technical works, and yes technical works are covered just as egregiously.
They give excerpts away
I do not consider "the exact pages you needed, in their entirety" to be "excerpts"
Anyone with an existing Firefox installation should have their search engine unchanged upon upgrade.
Are you really this naive?
And here we sit 12 months later with a functioning CMOS chip that stores only one bit per wire instead of actually being racetrack memory.
There, fixed that for you.
that is expanding away from the center of the big bang explosion
There is no such thing as the center of the big bang. Until you at least understand that, perhaps you shouldn't waste your time coming up with cosmology theories.