The caveat to this, in my opinion, is the recent debacle with the bugged Phenom chips. Sure, they didn't lie about it (at least, not after it came out), but they did (AFAIK, please do correct me if I'm in fact wrong) keep selling the things at the same prices and without specifically mentioning the fact that they'd need a bios fix that would drop their effective speeds by a significant percentage. So I wouldn't say AMD is entirely beyond criticism either.
I don't see how 'more' equals 'innovative'. If they're doing something funky with the interconnects, sure, but if it's just a case of using brute force to solve a problem, that's not innovation, it's just incremental improvement. Not saying it's not impressive, just that innovation it ain't.
I don't have experience in the corporate world, but I do have personal experience, and I believe you're quite right when it comes to people not having heard about dirac. I personally did hear about it a few years ago, but had no clue that there was an actual implementation out by now, and didn't even remember the name. And, while no pro or even much of an ethusiast, I am generally reasonably well-informed about new codecs and such. While not a representative sample by any means, I'd belive that it'd be fair, based on that fact, to make the assumption that Dirac simply doesn't have much public awareness going for it. Just my two cents.
Not necessarily true, there are several pre-packaged easy to use programs for breaking WEP. A script kiddie's ability to use one of those doesn't mean they have any actual technical savvy.
I'm no expert on this matter, but as I've understood it data providers do not have common carrier status as such, but they do have very similar protection under the law. Depending on country and such of course.
Exactly. There's no such thing as random in the macroscopic world. There is, however, such a thing as chaotic, ie. something that is influenced by initial conditions in such a complex manner that the result is impossible for us to predict. This, I would argue, is exactly what the brain is, deterministic but impossible to predict.
The very notion that you need a term to describe a black person that isn't just 'black' is ridiculous. The only reason the word carries a racist connotation is because people to this day continue to (perhaps subconsciously) think it *should*. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a physical description, like you might say someone is a blonde, brunette, redhead, pale, short, tall, skinny, overweight, whatever. The solution to systemic racism is to never bring race into it in the first place. The ancestry of a person shouldn't matter at all, ever. You judge a person by their own merits alone.
The way I see it, the only reason there is still racism of any kind in the world, beyond a few deranged individuals, is that people are told that race is significant in some way. For example, every time you do a study of racial discrimination of any kind, you inadvertently perpetuate the notion that race does or might actually matter in some way. It doesn't. The challenge now is to get people to stop even *thinking* about what race a person is.
First off, I don't support the Iraq war in any way, shape or form. Regardless, you can't have a war without costs, time spent and casualties. Saying that a war isn't going well because it costs money and people have died and it takes time is incredibly naive. Altho you could make the point that no war can, by definition, go well.
Solution one: Don't convert entirely to solar. Use nuclear, wind and water for base-load at night-time. Power consumption is higher at day anyhow. Burn coal or oil or biomass on cloudy days if you absolutely must, but work to replace this with renewable sources as well.
Solution two: Power storage. Flywheels, capacitors, pressurized air, pumped water, hydrogen and what have you. Obviously some loss will occur, so you'll need more solar capacity, but you *can* in fact go all solar if you want to. Costly infrastructure tho, but not entirely unviable.
Of course you don't need it, in fact I'd assume that's the very reason they can actually offer it, but that's not the point. The point is you have essentially unlimited storage for the foreseeable future, meaning you never have to worry about deleting mail you might just miss at some point to save space.
In terms of logic, he's saying that atheism means you're a member of the group 'does not believe in god' ie. atheism (of course, the precise definition of the term is just, well, semantics). Those who believe that there is no god are members of the group 'believes in non-existence of god'. Any member of the latter is automatically a member of the former, but a member of the former is not necessarily a member of the latter. Thus, anyone that is a member of group 1 is an atheist, and all members of group 2 are also members of group 1.
Technically, that'd be pantheism. An atheistic religion would be one that believes in the spiritual nature of existence, but not in a god or a 'creation force' or whatever in neither a personified nor abstract sense. For example, you might believe in reincarnation without believing that there's a god who decides what you will reincarnate as.
I can't really speak about this worm specifically, but I'd like to affirm that NOD32 is indeed quite fantastic. Practically no false positives, great detection rate in every independent test I've seen, quiet and unintrusive, doesn't mess with your system like Norton etc., and blazing fast.
To clarify a bit, day one was pre-installed software and remote exploits with no user interaction only. The OS X box was compromised on day two, when you could only use pre-installed software like on day one, but could also have the 'user' click on links and open e-mail (not attachments tho). Vista got cracked on day three, when some specific third-party programs (Flash, in this case) were also allowed.
Not entirely true, you can pay via your bank's online payment service in virtually every Finnish online store, and most of them accept wire transfers as well. Also, COD is always a 3e extra (which is what the postal service charges for it), not what I'd call "quite high".
Unlimited (of course, I don't know if it's really unlimited or just advertised as such, but our ISPs have a good track record with that) data on 3G in Finland = 10e per month.
They pay for their bandwidth, same as you. If the ISP sells them an X megabit connection, they damn well should have the right to use X megabit. If your downloads slow down as a result, blame the ISP for not having enough capacity to supply all their users, not the users who are simply using what they paid for. The problem is simply that US ISPs haven't used their profits to invest in infrastructure as they should have, and you're suffering as a result.
You might as well, sure, but people don't. Like it or not, someone came up with a term, and it stuck. Doesn't matter if it's accurate or whether you approve or not. That's pretty much how language works. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a word like any other.
Because they have to. They don't have the market share to force non-adoption, and not supporting it would mean lost customers to MS when someone who doesn't know better inevitably does use it for something important.
I would. Spam is a problem, but ISP level filtering is not the right solution to that problem. If they're allowed to filter content, *any* content, it inevitably escalates into them being able to shut you off or restrict your bandwidth for near-arbitrary reasons, or no reason at all. As it is, you usually can't even run a very low-bandwidth personal mail server on your own bloody connection. Your only options at that point are moving to another ISP (assuming there's one in your area, if not you're fucked) or a very costly lawsuit. Blatant abuse that hurts other people (running a spam server or whatever) should be a criminal matter, ie. require actual evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
The caveat to this, in my opinion, is the recent debacle with the bugged Phenom chips. Sure, they didn't lie about it (at least, not after it came out), but they did (AFAIK, please do correct me if I'm in fact wrong) keep selling the things at the same prices and without specifically mentioning the fact that they'd need a bios fix that would drop their effective speeds by a significant percentage. So I wouldn't say AMD is entirely beyond criticism either.
I don't see how 'more' equals 'innovative'. If they're doing something funky with the interconnects, sure, but if it's just a case of using brute force to solve a problem, that's not innovation, it's just incremental improvement. Not saying it's not impressive, just that innovation it ain't.
Actually, storing energy is exactly as difficult as storing water. Pumped-storage hydroelectricity.
I don't have experience in the corporate world, but I do have personal experience, and I believe you're quite right when it comes to people not having heard about dirac. I personally did hear about it a few years ago, but had no clue that there was an actual implementation out by now, and didn't even remember the name. And, while no pro or even much of an ethusiast, I am generally reasonably well-informed about new codecs and such. While not a representative sample by any means, I'd belive that it'd be fair, based on that fact, to make the assumption that Dirac simply doesn't have much public awareness going for it. Just my two cents.
Not necessarily true, there are several pre-packaged easy to use programs for breaking WEP. A script kiddie's ability to use one of those doesn't mean they have any actual technical savvy.
I'm no expert on this matter, but as I've understood it data providers do not have common carrier status as such, but they do have very similar protection under the law. Depending on country and such of course.
Dammit, this was meant to be a reply to "Dice are not random" in this thread. Sorry 'bout that.
Exactly. There's no such thing as random in the macroscopic world. There is, however, such a thing as chaotic, ie. something that is influenced by initial conditions in such a complex manner that the result is impossible for us to predict. This, I would argue, is exactly what the brain is, deterministic but impossible to predict.
The very notion that you need a term to describe a black person that isn't just 'black' is ridiculous. The only reason the word carries a racist connotation is because people to this day continue to (perhaps subconsciously) think it *should*. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a physical description, like you might say someone is a blonde, brunette, redhead, pale, short, tall, skinny, overweight, whatever. The solution to systemic racism is to never bring race into it in the first place. The ancestry of a person shouldn't matter at all, ever. You judge a person by their own merits alone.
The way I see it, the only reason there is still racism of any kind in the world, beyond a few deranged individuals, is that people are told that race is significant in some way. For example, every time you do a study of racial discrimination of any kind, you inadvertently perpetuate the notion that race does or might actually matter in some way. It doesn't. The challenge now is to get people to stop even *thinking* about what race a person is.
First off, I don't support the Iraq war in any way, shape or form. Regardless, you can't have a war without costs, time spent and casualties. Saying that a war isn't going well because it costs money and people have died and it takes time is incredibly naive. Altho you could make the point that no war can, by definition, go well.
Solution one: Don't convert entirely to solar. Use nuclear, wind and water for base-load at night-time. Power consumption is higher at day anyhow. Burn coal or oil or biomass on cloudy days if you absolutely must, but work to replace this with renewable sources as well.
Solution two: Power storage. Flywheels, capacitors, pressurized air, pumped water, hydrogen and what have you. Obviously some loss will occur, so you'll need more solar capacity, but you *can* in fact go all solar if you want to. Costly infrastructure tho, but not entirely unviable.
Of course you don't need it, in fact I'd assume that's the very reason they can actually offer it, but that's not the point. The point is you have essentially unlimited storage for the foreseeable future, meaning you never have to worry about deleting mail you might just miss at some point to save space.
Which, as I understood the gp, is exactly the point.
In terms of logic, he's saying that atheism means you're a member of the group 'does not believe in god' ie. atheism (of course, the precise definition of the term is just, well, semantics). Those who believe that there is no god are members of the group 'believes in non-existence of god'. Any member of the latter is automatically a member of the former, but a member of the former is not necessarily a member of the latter. Thus, anyone that is a member of group 1 is an atheist, and all members of group 2 are also members of group 1.
Technically, that'd be pantheism. An atheistic religion would be one that believes in the spiritual nature of existence, but not in a god or a 'creation force' or whatever in neither a personified nor abstract sense. For example, you might believe in reincarnation without believing that there's a god who decides what you will reincarnate as.
I can't really speak about this worm specifically, but I'd like to affirm that NOD32 is indeed quite fantastic. Practically no false positives, great detection rate in every independent test I've seen, quiet and unintrusive, doesn't mess with your system like Norton etc., and blazing fast.
To clarify a bit, day one was pre-installed software and remote exploits with no user interaction only. The OS X box was compromised on day two, when you could only use pre-installed software like on day one, but could also have the 'user' click on links and open e-mail (not attachments tho). Vista got cracked on day three, when some specific third-party programs (Flash, in this case) were also allowed.
Not entirely true, you can pay via your bank's online payment service in virtually every Finnish online store, and most of them accept wire transfers as well. Also, COD is always a 3e extra (which is what the postal service charges for it), not what I'd call "quite high".
Unlimited (of course, I don't know if it's really unlimited or just advertised as such, but our ISPs have a good track record with that) data on 3G in Finland = 10e per month.
They pay for their bandwidth, same as you. If the ISP sells them an X megabit connection, they damn well should have the right to use X megabit. If your downloads slow down as a result, blame the ISP for not having enough capacity to supply all their users, not the users who are simply using what they paid for. The problem is simply that US ISPs haven't used their profits to invest in infrastructure as they should have, and you're suffering as a result.
Move to Europe. 100Mbps for 43e a month, completely unthrottled. Or better yet, South Korea or Japan.
You might as well, sure, but people don't. Like it or not, someone came up with a term, and it stuck. Doesn't matter if it's accurate or whether you approve or not. That's pretty much how language works. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a word like any other.
Er, and by 'customers' I obviously mean 'users' in OO's case.
Because they have to. They don't have the market share to force non-adoption, and not supporting it would mean lost customers to MS when someone who doesn't know better inevitably does use it for something important.
I would. Spam is a problem, but ISP level filtering is not the right solution to that problem. If they're allowed to filter content, *any* content, it inevitably escalates into them being able to shut you off or restrict your bandwidth for near-arbitrary reasons, or no reason at all. As it is, you usually can't even run a very low-bandwidth personal mail server on your own bloody connection. Your only options at that point are moving to another ISP (assuming there's one in your area, if not you're fucked) or a very costly lawsuit. Blatant abuse that hurts other people (running a spam server or whatever) should be a criminal matter, ie. require actual evidence.