But, the person signing the contract *said* they *were* the rights holder.
So?
I hire a demolition company to demolish my neighbors house while they are away on vacation. I explain to them that its my house and that I wish to knock it down so that I can build a bigger house. I sign contract after contract stipulating that its my home and that I will pay a certain amount for the service, etc.. etc..
Do you really think that the demolition company walks away from this matter without penalty?
4 x Opteron 6168 : 23,784 Passmarks.
8 x Opteron 8435 : 22,745 Passmarks.
4 x Xeon X7460 : 18,304 Passmarks.
2 x Xeon X5680 : 17,910 Passmarks.
That $200 AMD chip that everyone is raving about, the Phenom II 1055T, scores 5,661 Passmarks. If AMD keeps that up, Intel might be in some trouble soon even in the high end market unless Intel can cut prices dramatically. Intel doesnt offer anything comparable for the money.
Because it pretty much already is. Yes there are plenty of instructions that generate many uops, but there are also plenty of single uop instructions. I am more familiar with AMD's architecture than Intels, and there I cant think of a single vector path instruction that cant also be described by fast path instructions.
The many-uop model isnt a bad one, either. It makes sense that if there are common pairs of uops, that shorthand be used to encode them. This improve code density, among other things.
While there are many uncommon pairs and triplets of uops that have shorthands, their existence only has an very minor effect on efficiency (just don't use them.) This is why RISC doesnt beat CISC.
Is the x86 instruction set optimal? Nope. In spite of it not being optimal, Intel mass produces the fastest CPU's on the planet.
If its not apples responsibility for what they host on their servers, then isnt it also not the pirate bays (or napster, or imesh, etc..) responsibility for what is hosted on theirs?
Do you really think that they should be able to get away with copyright infringement via a contract that does not involving the rights holder?
Well then I have a contract with John Cantbefound who has been installing software and media on my computer for years. In the contract he specifies that he will not put material that I do not have rights to use onto my computer.
Apple may insist that developers use native C or Objective C for device programming but that is
exactly the reason that IPhone apps smoke any other platform when it comes to performance.
Did you know that C isnt some magical language that makes compiling easier or more efficient?
This oil leak wont destroy "a large part of [the earths] ecosystem" tho.
I am amazed by the alarmism. 210,000 gallons per day isnt unprecedented. It will take 50 days to equal the amount spilled by Exxon's Valdez (over 10 million gallons) and while that had an environmental impact, it didn't destroy a large part of the earths ecosystem. In fact its effects were more or less localized and didnt destroy anything. Some animal populations in the area took a big hit, but we are not aware of even a single extinction caused by the disaster.
Yes it sucks that theres all that oil flooding into the gulf, but don't let emotions cloud your judgment. The chance of this destroying a large part of the ecosystem is very close to 0, so you are being intellectually dishonest with yourself and others when you make the claim.
Its possible to believe that flash sucks while simultaneously believing that users have the right to choose to use it.
In the case of Apple, it is very clear that Apple is not against Flash out of the goodness of their heart. They are against Flash because if it were on iPortables it would immediately screw over their media market control. iPortable users could run Hulu (for example) without Hulu having to make any deals ($$$) with Apple.
HTML5 doesnt theaten this market control because the Hulu's of the world only exist because of the DRM facade, which HTML5 doesnt offer.
When the discussion turns to Apple vs Adobe, it is a no-brainer that most people would be against Apple. Most people like choice. iPortables run a BSD-based OS's that you have to 'break' in order to obtain actual freedom. Even the GPL fans realize how fucked up that is.
Submitter of this story wants to change some stuff, which is his right under GPL but cannot because the company ignores it. Clearly it needs defending in this case.
There is a big reply button at the top for replying to the article.
You know, just grow up
You know, just wise up. When you reply to a persons comments (qhich were even quoted), it is expected that you have something relevant to what that person said, more specifically, to what was quoted.
People who take their OS way too seriously leave their logic at the door. They will reply to anything that seems even remotelty negative with whatever they have that, regardless of how topical it is.
The bad press comment was not a bash against linux. Stop treating everything linux like a religion. Its not a fucking religion.
If you think that practical application benchmarks like FutureMark are lies
Actually, he is pointing out that he *KNOWS* that in this case, the TFA "conclusion" is lying. Thats a bit different than "thinking" that its a lie.
Now, what happens when a real shitbag fuckhead like you replies all the time to people they didnt even bother to read, in the defense of things that are obviously wrong?
No, thats not all you said. You went on about excuses vs explanations...
If you wish to retract some of the things that you have said in order to make my points no longer relevant to your remaining argument, do so. However, since you havent, my points are relevant.
I dont think you have a personal interest in MDNS, so I must conclude that you have a personal interest in not looking like you commonly make incorrect statements and assumptions. If thats the case, just dont reply.
They do. See here, and you'll see a list of URLs that aren't themselves copies of "Avatar", but that are pages that link to a torrent or something similar.
Please count the number of "links" in the phrase "Links to links to links to infringing content", then retract.
The fact is that the google search page ITSELF is a link to a link to a link to infringing content.. yet it hasnt been removed.
Hence, the original claim is bullshit. Google does not remove links to links to links to infringing content, nor (as with the PRIOR claim) is there a legal obligation to do so.
A 700MB file can come through in a day or two, depending on how much bandwidth you allocate to Freenet.
Exactly. Between 4KB/sec and 8KB/sec is called slow. Thats barely better than a 56K modem.
Like torrents, the more popular a file is, the more available it is and the more quickly you can download it.
Torrents are good when the file IS popular because when the seeders CAN'T keep up with demand, the peers can.
Torrents are good when the file ISNT popular because the seeders CAN keep up with demand, with or without peers.
Then you get into the whole FreeNet is a content-finding downgrade, and thats when I have no choice but to label it like the old BBS days.. slow and bad. Even the highly inefficient usenet method is better.
Its "more complex" to decode. More specifically, its more WORK to decode.
Even when you focus on a single area of data compression that is employed, such as Arithmetic Encoding (which both formats use), the patents out arent so much to do with the theory of arithmetic encoding, but rather the patents are on the efficient practice of arithmetic encoding.
That lookup table methodology is patented, and so is that finite state machine methodology. etc. etc. You are really only safe by doing things "normally" which means slowly (an expensive integer division per symbol)
Slashdot Mirror
Whats this crap about fault?
We are talking about responsibility, not fault.
But, the person signing the contract *said* they *were* the rights holder.
So?
I hire a demolition company to demolish my neighbors house while they are away on vacation. I explain to them that its my house and that I wish to knock it down so that I can build a bigger house. I sign contract after contract stipulating that its my home and that I will pay a certain amount for the service, etc.. etc..
Do you really think that the demolition company walks away from this matter without penalty?
Can I be charged by the police with stolen property?
Yes, you can. Welcome to American where you can't plead ignorance. The local authorities might let you off the hook, but they don't have to.
AMD does beat intel on the price curve... but not in performance.
AMD does seem to have an edge in the multiprocessor arena, although I am not sure why.
According to PassMark, the fastest machines clocked using their software is a 4 x Opteron 6168 (4 x 12 cores = 48 cores) system and a 8 x Opteron 8435 (8 x 6 cores = 48 cores)
The actual numbers are:
4 x Opteron 6168 : 23,784 Passmarks.
8 x Opteron 8435 : 22,745 Passmarks.
4 x Xeon X7460 : 18,304 Passmarks.
2 x Xeon X5680 : 17,910 Passmarks.
That $200 AMD chip that everyone is raving about, the Phenom II 1055T, scores 5,661 Passmarks. If AMD keeps that up, Intel might be in some trouble soon even in the high end market unless Intel can cut prices dramatically. Intel doesnt offer anything comparable for the money.
Because it pretty much already is. Yes there are plenty of instructions that generate many uops, but there are also plenty of single uop instructions. I am more familiar with AMD's architecture than Intels, and there I cant think of a single vector path instruction that cant also be described by fast path instructions.
The many-uop model isnt a bad one, either. It makes sense that if there are common pairs of uops, that shorthand be used to encode them. This improve code density, among other things.
While there are many uncommon pairs and triplets of uops that have shorthands, their existence only has an very minor effect on efficiency (just don't use them.) This is why RISC doesnt beat CISC.
Is the x86 instruction set optimal? Nope. In spite of it not being optimal, Intel mass produces the fastest CPU's on the planet.
not Apple's responsibility
If its not apples responsibility for what they host on their servers, then isnt it also not the pirate bays (or napster, or imesh, etc..) responsibility for what is hosted on theirs?
Do you really think that they should be able to get away with copyright infringement via a contract that does not involving the rights holder?
Well then I have a contract with John Cantbefound who has been installing software and media on my computer for years. In the contract he specifies that he will not put material that I do not have rights to use onto my computer.
Apple may insist that developers use native C or Objective C for device programming but that is exactly the reason that IPhone apps smoke any other platform when it comes to performance.
Did you know that C isnt some magical language that makes compiling easier or more efficient?
Your post makes it sound like this oil leak is not worth mentioning.
Then you failed to read it without bringing along your alarmist emotion.
This oil leak wont destroy "a large part of [the earths] ecosystem" tho.
I am amazed by the alarmism. 210,000 gallons per day isnt unprecedented. It will take 50 days to equal the amount spilled by Exxon's Valdez (over 10 million gallons) and while that had an environmental impact, it didn't destroy a large part of the earths ecosystem. In fact its effects were more or less localized and didnt destroy anything. Some animal populations in the area took a big hit, but we are not aware of even a single extinction caused by the disaster.
Yes it sucks that theres all that oil flooding into the gulf, but don't let emotions cloud your judgment. The chance of this destroying a large part of the ecosystem is very close to 0, so you are being intellectually dishonest with yourself and others when you make the claim.
You mean besides the fact that they can't be sued for patent infringement by other members of MPEG-LA?
yeah.. thats not worth anything.
Apple has exactly 1 patent in MPEG-LA? That means they need MPEG-LA more than any other member.
Its possible to believe that flash sucks while simultaneously believing that users have the right to choose to use it.
In the case of Apple, it is very clear that Apple is not against Flash out of the goodness of their heart. They are against Flash because if it were on iPortables it would immediately screw over their media market control. iPortable users could run Hulu (for example) without Hulu having to make any deals ($$$) with Apple.
HTML5 doesnt theaten this market control because the Hulu's of the world only exist because of the DRM facade, which HTML5 doesnt offer.
When the discussion turns to Apple vs Adobe, it is a no-brainer that most people would be against Apple. Most people like choice. iPortables run a BSD-based OS's that you have to 'break' in order to obtain actual freedom. Even the GPL fans realize how fucked up that is.
Agreed.
I've been using 3+ blades razors for quite awhile now and I always get at least a month out of each, shaving 3 times a week (alternating work days)
Submitter of this story wants to change some stuff, which is his right under GPL but cannot because the company ignores it. Clearly it needs defending in this case.
There is a big reply button at the top for replying to the article.
You know, just grow up
You know, just wise up. When you reply to a persons comments (qhich were even quoted), it is expected that you have something relevant to what that person said, more specifically, to what was quoted.
People who take their OS way too seriously leave their logic at the door. They will reply to anything that seems even remotelty negative with whatever they have that, regardless of how topical it is.
The bad press comment was not a bash against linux. Stop treating everything linux like a religion. Its not a fucking religion.
If you think that practical application benchmarks like FutureMark are lies
Actually, he is pointing out that he *KNOWS* that in this case, the TFA "conclusion" is lying. Thats a bit different than "thinking" that its a lie.
Now, what happens when a real shitbag fuckhead like you replies all the time to people they didnt even bother to read, in the defense of things that are obviously wrong?
Cheaper? Are you kidding?
I am amazed that people complain about an SSD's cost per gigabyte, and then haul off and say that memory is cheap.
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
'just sayin
And this is a problem because ... ?
Here comes the linux defenders, who will defend linux even when it doesnt need defending.
.. that may, or may not, be a 'problem' ... it is, however, true.
The point is that its bad 'press'
But that isn't a bad thing as you say.
I didnt say it was a bad 'thing' .. I said it was bad 'press'
Its bad press because
if such a lawsuit lost, then vendors have a clear path to using Linux while also not allowing modification.
if such a lawsuit won, then vendors would never be able to use custom-but-for-hire solutions again which translates into never using linux again.
All I said was
No, thats not all you said. You went on about excuses vs explanations...
If you wish to retract some of the things that you have said in order to make my points no longer relevant to your remaining argument, do so. However, since you havent, my points are relevant.
I dont think you have a personal interest in MDNS, so I must conclude that you have a personal interest in not looking like you commonly make incorrect statements and assumptions. If thats the case, just dont reply.
They do. See here, and you'll see a list of URLs that aren't themselves copies of "Avatar", but that are pages that link to a torrent or something similar.
Please count the number of "links" in the phrase "Links to links to links to infringing content", then retract.
The fact is that the google search page ITSELF is a link to a link to a link to infringing content.. yet it hasnt been removed.
Hence, the original claim is bullshit. Google does not remove links to links to links to infringing content, nor (as with the PRIOR claim) is there a legal obligation to do so.
A 700MB file can come through in a day or two, depending on how much bandwidth you allocate to Freenet.
Exactly. Between 4KB/sec and 8KB/sec is called slow. Thats barely better than a 56K modem.
Like torrents, the more popular a file is, the more available it is and the more quickly you can download it.
Torrents are good when the file IS popular because when the seeders CAN'T keep up with demand, the peers can.
.. slow and bad. Even the highly inefficient usenet method is better.
Torrents are good when the file ISNT popular because the seeders CAN keep up with demand, with or without peers.
Then you get into the whole FreeNet is a content-finding downgrade, and thats when I have no choice but to label it like the old BBS days
Its "more complex" to decode. More specifically, its more WORK to decode.
Even when you focus on a single area of data compression that is employed, such as Arithmetic Encoding (which both formats use), the patents out arent so much to do with the theory of arithmetic encoding, but rather the patents are on the efficient practice of arithmetic encoding.
That lookup table methodology is patented, and so is that finite state machine methodology. etc. etc. You are really only safe by doing things "normally" which means slowly (an expensive integer division per symbol)
I messed around with FreeNet once. What a slow piece of junk. Reminded me of the BBS days, but not the good BBS's.. the bad ones.