a 3% per year failure rate would be an order-of-magnitude better than platter drives. Hell, even 3% in the first 3 months would be on par with platters.
Before getting excited and rushing off to buy a SATAIII SSD, bear in mind that there are currently some serious stability issues in some of the drives.
Many of the reports for OCZ that I have seen all end with "I put the machine to sleep/hibernate, and now it doesnt see the drive at all."
Since other manufacturers also have some similar reports, the issue is almost certainly whatever is in common with all of them. A straight component failure, and didn't Intel start using someone elses controller and arent they also experiencing issues now?
The ONLY reason to use the FAT method is for compatibility.
ah, so its just like in the auto business then.. if you want to make compatible parts.. YOU NEED A LICENSE!
Get it yet? Thats the entire point of patents, and furthermore monopolies do not invalidate them.. in fact.. patents create monopolies by their definition, in all industries.
They need to copy Microsoft's crappy filesystem in order to remain in business. There was an antitrust ruling about that.
There was absolutely no anti-trust ruling dealing with either FAT or VFAT. Why are you making shit up?
sounds like you do not know how to admin a system.
Windows is fine for those that know how to admin, as well as those that know that they don't know how to admin. The people that think that they know how to admin, but really don't.. they are the ones that mess up their own system voluntarily (but then blame Windows when they do.)
Every time you see someone complain about their messed up windows system where really strange stuff is broken.. they did it themselves almost every time, by either removing things willy-nilly or installing things willy-nilly.
If a programmer invented it and another programmer invented the same exact thing and never ever saw the patent filed for it. The the process is trival and obvious to anyone in the field. There is nothing you can program that won't occure to another program as a way to solve a problem. It just isn't possible because of the way that computer languages have been created and taught.Someone will end up making the exact same method and code very close to what the patent claims was innovative.
How is this different than other industries? If you come up with the exact same transmission system innovation for an automobile as one already patented, than any minor differences dont matter.
Lets take Microsoft's long filename feature for legacy FAT.. its the method of doing it that is patented and you are free to do it another way (better ways.. worse ways..) You are not prevented from providing long filename support by the patent.
The only argument is that those other ways that arent covered wont be compatible with Microsoft's method, but thats exactly what patents are meant to protect! It is the INTENTION of patents to prevent you from providing a knock-off for the term of the patent. Thats exactly what they do in other industries and there is no reason for them not to also do them in this one. You may not like the fact that you cannot provide a Microsoft-compatible long filename system for legacy FAT, but do you also not like the fact that Joes Rusty Machinist Shop cannot just start making drop-in replicas of the latest Toyota hybrid transmission system?
Its the same fucking thing.. the only difference being that you arent a machinist.. that you are a software geek. I'm sure Joe would love to knock-off Toyota's shit too.
Here is the thing. China gets buttloads of U.S. Currency from Americans, and there are only so many things that can be done with it and those things are not without their downsides.
Lets suppose you buy a Wide Screen LCD made in China for $100 before local markup. You purchase it from China instead of from a US manufacturer because the labor cost ratio is something like 10:1 right now. So now someone in China has your $100, but what can they do with it?
They normally dont want to buy US goods because the labor cost ratio is still 10:1 (ie, its cheaper to make the thing in China.) In some cases they buy from the US because they either dont make it, dont have the expertise (yet) to make it at the required quality, or the good is fad-driven. The trade deficit indicates quite clearly that they simply cannot offload all the money back to the US as simple mercantile trade. So they still probably have $
So they still have a large fraction of that $100 you gave them. They can lend it to the US government and figure out what to do with it later, but the US government isnt borrowing limitlessly either. All-told they only have about 1 trillion in US treasuries, a very far cry from the entire trade deficit compounded over decades.
They could buy up their own currency in foreign hands using US dollars, but the scale at which they would have to do it would inevitably drive up the value of their own currency and drive down the value of the US currency.. something that would eradicate that 10:1 labor cost ratio which they depend on to sell their goods and keep their own economy moving.
They could buy deeds to property in the US, but the US property market has crashed hard in recent years.. so prior investments they have made arent looking so hot now...
So then there is the reality. A lot of Chinese business globally and locally conducted is using US currency, for they have no other choice. Year after year, China becomes more and more reliant on the US dollar and they can't do a damn thing about it without destroying their economy.
"I only hope that when Generation Xers are finally running things, they'll have the courage to kill all these boomers, one by one, in their hospital beds and their nursing homes. Kill them and loot their pensions and estates, and throw them out into the streets with nothing. If they don't, the boomers will take everything they can and keep it for themselves. They're trying now to arrange for the next two generations to pay off their debts, having already put young people deeply in hock. Boomers are living off their grandchildren's money and will try to steal everything else before they're gone.
If you young people want to know who to kill, I'll tell you. There are two schools of thought on this: Some say the baby boomers were born between 1946 and 1964. Others will tell you 1942 through 1960. Just to be on the safe side, I'd say kill everyone between the ages of thirty and fifty-five. The boomers used to say, "Don't trust anyone over thirty." Well, the stakes are a little higher now. So ask to see a driver's license and then strangle a boomer. Thats by advice. I always like to have something uplifting to offer along with all the gloomy shit."
This was penned by George Carlin in 1997 for his book Brain Droppings, but may have been part of his insightful comedy act prior to then.
I think defaulting is retarded, but I voted for Obama because democrats are more fiscally responsible than republicans.
They claim to be, thats for sure. But the evidence suggests otherwise, and I am not just talking about the last few years.
See, the Democrats tell you all about the President even though it is the House and Senate that spend money. I am sure you have heard the regaling for President Clinton and his balanced budget by the Democrats. The people actually in control were the Republican majorities in both House and Senate. So those good years you heard about weren't to the Democrats credit, even though they will continue to claim it is.
The problem is that the Democrats continually say one thing (something you want to hear) while actually doing something completely different. I am sure you heard that it was those damn Republicans that ruined ObamaCare (another deception.. it was PelosiCare) but the reality is that combined in both House and Senate, only 1 Republican voted for it. They never needed Republican votes, even though they constantly claimed that they needed them and thats why they were making all those "concessions." They said one thing but reality was starkly different.. they sold everyone out to the insurance companies all by themselves.
The Democrats controlled both House and Senate for 12 of the past 30 years. Whenever they were in control, they never raised taxes on the rich. They however constantly claim that taxes need to be raised on the rich but on more than one occasion they lowered them. They say one thing but do something completely different. For 10 years they had split/joint control with Republicans, and only 8 years were the Republicans in exclusive control.
7.9 trillion of our debt was run up in those 12 years of Democrats control. 3.6 trillion was run up while control was split for 10 years. Only 1.7 trillion of our debt was run up while Republicans had control for 8 years.
You claim that the Democrats are fiscally responsible, but the facts say different. Democrats certainly claim that they are, and if all you do is listen to them (instead of watching what they actually do) then I guess your excuse is that you have been lied to but are too fucking lazy to do anything other than "feel" their words.
If your retort to this relies on an appeal to who was President, then you are just lying to yourself in order to justify all these years of believing the other lies. The President doesnt draft the budget, the House does. The President doesnt raise or lower taxes, the House does. From House to Senate to The President. Thats the order of operations on these matters. If things are going really well, then the House gets most of the credit, the senate gets some (but less) credit, and the President gets almost no credit at all (oh.. he didn't veto it.. what an accomplishment.) The same is true when things go badly.. and thats to the tune of 7.9 trillion dollars in deficit spending exclusively owned by the Democrats.
The Democrats will never fix the budget. They are absolutely not fiscally responsible by any measure when you actually look at what they do, rather than listen to what they say.
Since 1981, the debt ceiling has been raised by 13.2 trillion dollars.
7.9 trillion was under Democrat controlled House and Senate.
1.7 trillion was under Republican controlled House and Senate.
3.6 trillion was under a split of House and Senate.
Yes. Clearly the Democrats see no problem at all with raising the debt ceiling, but those damn tea-baggers refuse to do it without serious spending cuts.
(that period where we nearly balanced the budget? The one you give major gushing credit to Clinton for? Republican's controlled both House and Senate and accomplished it as part of their Contract With America.)
I doubt that. You can use the webcam on them to take photos (using Photo booth, etc.), but to suggest that a customer is implicitly allowed to install software that surreptitiously photographs other customers and then displays them in public is ridiculous.
You need to learn how to read. You begin with doubting what I said, and then explain why something I didnt say is not implicit.
The devices on display are set up explicitly so that the public will have access to (and in fact are encouraged to explore) their features, which includes the webcam on them.
This to me sounds like implicit permission to use the cameras, as well as implicit permission to install software. Any legal line this man may have crossed is beyond the act of simply using the camera, or installing software. He had implicit permission to do those two things.
You really cant fully trust the CD either, and then on top of that there is the far worse firmware issue (both disk and bios firmware can be targeted) which really puts you up shits creek with regards to that whole trust thing.
..the incentive is that if company A doesnt market the cure, then they run the risk of company B doing so first. Unless you presume unilateral collusion (either consciously or unconsciously) then you must presume that no company will hold back a cure (for very long) if they have one.
This is the prisoners dilemma. All parties win the most as long as there is no known cure, but if someone defects and reveals the cure then only the defector wins.
One genre of gaming that has been almost exclusively PC is turn based strategy (the empire games like Civilization) but I don't think that its much of a stretch to presume that these touch devices (phones and tablets) will completely take them over.
For this genre a mouse is better than a console controller, but touch is even better than a mouse.
Please name the solar cell manufacturer that powers its factories with solar power. These people get the solar cells at cost, and if THEY wont use it.. then what the fuck?
This is the same government people want to invest regulatory power in to enforce "net neutrality" - even though nothing that the government has proposed actually fits with what they themselves would actually call "net neutrality"
Stop listening and start watching, folks. They are telling you one thing but doing another.
Slashdot Mirror
a 3% per year failure rate would be an order-of-magnitude better than platter drives. Hell, even 3% in the first 3 months would be on par with platters.
Before getting excited and rushing off to buy a SATAIII SSD, bear in mind that there are currently some serious stability issues in some of the drives.
Many of the reports for OCZ that I have seen all end with "I put the machine to sleep/hibernate, and now it doesnt see the drive at all."
Since other manufacturers also have some similar reports, the issue is almost certainly whatever is in common with all of them. A straight component failure, and didn't Intel start using someone elses controller and arent they also experiencing issues now?
The ONLY reason to use the FAT method is for compatibility.
ah, so its just like in the auto business then.. if you want to make compatible parts.. YOU NEED A LICENSE!
Get it yet? Thats the entire point of patents, and furthermore monopolies do not invalidate them.. in fact.. patents create monopolies by their definition, in all industries.
They need to copy Microsoft's crappy filesystem in order to remain in business. There was an antitrust ruling about that.
There was absolutely no anti-trust ruling dealing with either FAT or VFAT. Why are you making shit up?
I'm not sure that the increase in licensing costs for netflix streaming is really the key issue.
I think its the DVD services that arent pulling their weight, and my evidence is that its the DVD services that went up in price.
sounds like you do not know how to admin a system.
Windows is fine for those that know how to admin, as well as those that know that they don't know how to admin. The people that think that they know how to admin, but really don't.. they are the ones that mess up their own system voluntarily (but then blame Windows when they do.)
Every time you see someone complain about their messed up windows system where really strange stuff is broken.. they did it themselves almost every time, by either removing things willy-nilly or installing things willy-nilly.
If a programmer invented it and another programmer invented the same exact thing and never ever saw the patent filed for it. The the process is trival and obvious to anyone in the field. There is nothing you can program that won't occure to another program as a way to solve a problem. It just isn't possible because of the way that computer languages have been created and taught.Someone will end up making the exact same method and code very close to what the patent claims was innovative.
How is this different than other industries? If you come up with the exact same transmission system innovation for an automobile as one already patented, than any minor differences dont matter.
.. its the method of doing it that is patented and you are free to do it another way (better ways.. worse ways..) You are not prevented from providing long filename support by the patent.
Lets take Microsoft's long filename feature for legacy FAT
The only argument is that those other ways that arent covered wont be compatible with Microsoft's method, but thats exactly what patents are meant to protect! It is the INTENTION of patents to prevent you from providing a knock-off for the term of the patent. Thats exactly what they do in other industries and there is no reason for them not to also do them in this one. You may not like the fact that you cannot provide a Microsoft-compatible long filename system for legacy FAT, but do you also not like the fact that Joes Rusty Machinist Shop cannot just start making drop-in replicas of the latest Toyota hybrid transmission system?
Its the same fucking thing.. the only difference being that you arent a machinist.. that you are a software geek. I'm sure Joe would love to knock-off Toyota's shit too.
There's a patent on displaying text in a web page prior to downloading the embeddded graphics.
No, there is a patent on a METHOD of doing so.
Do you understand the difference?
~13% per year is *more* than 25%, when its over 2 years.
Are you hiding now?
Here is the thing. China gets buttloads of U.S. Currency from Americans, and there are only so many things that can be done with it and those things are not without their downsides.
.. something that would eradicate that 10:1 labor cost ratio which they depend on to sell their goods and keep their own economy moving.
Lets suppose you buy a Wide Screen LCD made in China for $100 before local markup. You purchase it from China instead of from a US manufacturer because the labor cost ratio is something like 10:1 right now. So now someone in China has your $100, but what can they do with it?
They normally dont want to buy US goods because the labor cost ratio is still 10:1 (ie, its cheaper to make the thing in China.) In some cases they buy from the US because they either dont make it, dont have the expertise (yet) to make it at the required quality, or the good is fad-driven. The trade deficit indicates quite clearly that they simply cannot offload all the money back to the US as simple mercantile trade. So they still probably have $
So they still have a large fraction of that $100 you gave them. They can lend it to the US government and figure out what to do with it later, but the US government isnt borrowing limitlessly either. All-told they only have about 1 trillion in US treasuries, a very far cry from the entire trade deficit compounded over decades.
They could buy up their own currency in foreign hands using US dollars, but the scale at which they would have to do it would inevitably drive up the value of their own currency and drive down the value of the US currency
They could buy deeds to property in the US, but the US property market has crashed hard in recent years.. so prior investments they have made arent looking so hot now...
So then there is the reality. A lot of Chinese business globally and locally conducted is using US currency, for they have no other choice. Year after year, China becomes more and more reliant on the US dollar and they can't do a damn thing about it without destroying their economy.
"I only hope that when Generation Xers are finally running things, they'll have the courage to kill all these boomers, one by one, in their hospital beds and their nursing homes. Kill them and loot their pensions and estates, and throw them out into the streets with nothing. If they don't, the boomers will take everything they can and keep it for themselves. They're trying now to arrange for the next two generations to pay off their debts, having already put young people deeply in hock. Boomers are living off their grandchildren's money and will try to steal everything else before they're gone.
If you young people want to know who to kill, I'll tell you. There are two schools of thought on this: Some say the baby boomers were born between 1946 and 1964. Others will tell you 1942 through 1960. Just to be on the safe side, I'd say kill everyone between the ages of thirty and fifty-five. The boomers used to say, "Don't trust anyone over thirty." Well, the stakes are a little higher now. So ask to see a driver's license and then strangle a boomer. Thats by advice. I always like to have something uplifting to offer along with all the gloomy shit."
This was penned by George Carlin in 1997 for his book Brain Droppings, but may have been part of his insightful comedy act prior to then.
That graph you linked to ends with ~13% growth, and thats adjusted for GDP rather than for Tax Revenue.
Are you stupid?
I think defaulting is retarded, but I voted for Obama because democrats are more fiscally responsible than republicans.
They claim to be, thats for sure. But the evidence suggests otherwise, and I am not just talking about the last few years.
See, the Democrats tell you all about the President even though it is the House and Senate that spend money. I am sure you have heard the regaling for President Clinton and his balanced budget by the Democrats. The people actually in control were the Republican majorities in both House and Senate. So those good years you heard about weren't to the Democrats credit, even though they will continue to claim it is.
The problem is that the Democrats continually say one thing (something you want to hear) while actually doing something completely different. I am sure you heard that it was those damn Republicans that ruined ObamaCare (another deception.. it was PelosiCare) but the reality is that combined in both House and Senate, only 1 Republican voted for it. They never needed Republican votes, even though they constantly claimed that they needed them and thats why they were making all those "concessions." They said one thing but reality was starkly different.. they sold everyone out to the insurance companies all by themselves.
The Democrats controlled both House and Senate for 12 of the past 30 years. Whenever they were in control, they never raised taxes on the rich. They however constantly claim that taxes need to be raised on the rich but on more than one occasion they lowered them. They say one thing but do something completely different. For 10 years they had split/joint control with Republicans, and only 8 years were the Republicans in exclusive control.
7.9 trillion of our debt was run up in those 12 years of Democrats control. 3.6 trillion was run up while control was split for 10 years. Only 1.7 trillion of our debt was run up while Republicans had control for 8 years.
You claim that the Democrats are fiscally responsible, but the facts say different. Democrats certainly claim that they are, and if all you do is listen to them (instead of watching what they actually do) then I guess your excuse is that you have been lied to but are too fucking lazy to do anything other than "feel" their words.
Open your eyes. Its not like the truth is hidden.
If your retort to this relies on an appeal to who was President, then you are just lying to yourself in order to justify all these years of believing the other lies. The President doesnt draft the budget, the House does. The President doesnt raise or lower taxes, the House does. From House to Senate to The President. Thats the order of operations on these matters. If things are going really well, then the House gets most of the credit, the senate gets some (but less) credit, and the President gets almost no credit at all (oh.. he didn't veto it.. what an accomplishment.) The same is true when things go badly.. and thats to the tune of 7.9 trillion dollars in deficit spending exclusively owned by the Democrats.
The Democrats will never fix the budget. They are absolutely not fiscally responsible by any measure when you actually look at what they do, rather than listen to what they say.
The graph clearly shows when and how long. Are you being intentionally blind?
You still need to learn how to read.
Since 1981, the debt ceiling has been raised by 13.2 trillion dollars.
7.9 trillion was under Democrat controlled House and Senate.
1.7 trillion was under Republican controlled House and Senate.
3.6 trillion was under a split of House and Senate.
My source is the New York Times
Yes. Clearly the Democrats see no problem at all with raising the debt ceiling, but those damn tea-baggers refuse to do it without serious spending cuts.
(that period where we nearly balanced the budget? The one you give major gushing credit to Clinton for? Republican's controlled both House and Senate and accomplished it as part of their Contract With America.)
I doubt that. You can use the webcam on them to take photos (using Photo booth, etc.), but to suggest that a customer is implicitly allowed to install software that surreptitiously photographs other customers and then displays them in public is ridiculous.
You need to learn how to read. You begin with doubting what I said, and then explain why something I didnt say is not implicit.
The devices on display are set up explicitly so that the public will have access to (and in fact are encouraged to explore) their features, which includes the webcam on them.
This to me sounds like implicit permission to use the cameras, as well as implicit permission to install software. Any legal line this man may have crossed is beyond the act of simply using the camera, or installing software. He had implicit permission to do those two things.
The copper is already strung up. Someone will find a use for it, and it will most certainly be digital communications of some kind.
You really cant fully trust the CD either, and then on top of that there is the far worse firmware issue (both disk and bios firmware can be targeted) which really puts you up shits creek with regards to that whole trust thing.
..the incentive is that if company A doesnt market the cure, then they run the risk of company B doing so first. Unless you presume unilateral collusion (either consciously or unconsciously) then you must presume that no company will hold back a cure (for very long) if they have one.
This is the prisoners dilemma. All parties win the most as long as there is no known cure, but if someone defects and reveals the cure then only the defector wins.
One genre of gaming that has been almost exclusively PC is turn based strategy (the empire games like Civilization) but I don't think that its much of a stretch to presume that these touch devices (phones and tablets) will completely take them over.
For this genre a mouse is better than a console controller, but touch is even better than a mouse.
In short, you are a complete idiot on this subject of proof, and you have just proven it.
Please name the solar cell manufacturer that powers its factories with solar power. These people get the solar cells at cost, and if THEY wont use it.. then what the fuck?
No he doesn't. Stop making things up.
This is the same government people want to invest regulatory power in to enforce "net neutrality" - even though nothing that the government has proposed actually fits with what they themselves would actually call "net neutrality"
Stop listening and start watching, folks. They are telling you one thing but doing another.