I really don't understand why there's not more resistance to "net-neutrality legislation" here- it's like you're all snowed by the terminology.
Why should net-neutrality be mandated? Don't you enjoy having a variety of TV providers to choose from, each offering several different channel packages for you to choose from? What about your cell phone? Do you like being able to choose a performance (minutes) plan that suits your needs, versus having to pay for far more than you need? Would you like it if all cars were mandated to have the same looks, horsepower, and mileage? There's a thing that solves this, and it's called "the market" - DIVX should be all you need to see to understand what happens to unpopular consumer offerings.
Service providers have been shaping your traffic for *years*, prioritizing this type over that type etc- they have a business to run, and consumer demands to be met. My dad and mom don't know/care in the slightest if thier bittorrent traffic is blocked, all they know is they're paying half price. My grandma doesn't need more than a dialup-speed connection, and if that could be provided to her fixed-income-self in a totally-free ad-subsidized way that would simply be great.
The push towards legislation mandating "net neutrality" here and in other tech forums is one I just don't understand- I thought we all understood that forcing everyone to be the same simply stifles innovation and removes competition, both of which ultimately hurt the consumer.
Thin clients remotely accessing large centralized applications?
This sounds familiar- and until connectivity is literally constant and ubiquitous, it will fail again, and again, and again, and again. The current model of "my access terminal has it's own local storage, and runs apps locally" evolved for a reason. People want access to their data. For banking information, it's not my data- it's someone else's data that's relevant to me, so the client->server model works fine here. But for my documents? My own creations? I want access to them, whenever I need it. Until connectivity is at a point where that need can be fulfilled, this is all just a big load of ajax in your face.
But is it right for the US govt to say who Yahoo and Google can do business with?
Yes. Yes it is.
Agreed- but think about that for a second- we're talking about placing servers in China, not blocking access to American websites for all Chinese users. I'm not sure it should be legislated as such, but there are very valid concerns when placing devices in to a place like China. One outfit I'm aware of uses sealed cases with self-destruct capabilities that trigger upon tampering. The Chinese have a long history of stealing, and then duplicating technology.
(yes, I know what the name stands for. That does not change the fact that Granny Average User would never in a million years click on something called a "gimp" looking for a way to take the redeye out of her pictures.)
LOL CHAT ME LOLITA78
haha yeah- i think it's a lost cause though... i don't use the OS, i use X11 OSX is the greatest HW/OS platform in which to run X11 ever- linux will have to do a LOT to match that- i consider it insumountable... linux on desktop = dead linux on server = still kicking...
Have you actually read about the "packaging system"?
It's not "Yet Another" either... it's the appdir system that ROX invented- Hell it's not even a system-
In fact, it functions almost exactly like you have described OSX! Copy a folder and you've installed the app! Delte the app? Delete the folder! Copy to a friend? Make a copy of the folder and give it to him!
They state that the simple flops.c is designed specifically to isolate and test the FPU-
Ok- then they go on and do this:
The really funny thing is that the new Xeon Irwindale performed better when we disabled support for the SSE-2, and used the "- mfpmath=387" option. It seems that the GCC compiler makes a real mess when it tries to optimise for the SSE-2 instructions. One can, of course, use the Intel compiler, which produces code that is up to twice as fast. But the use of the special Intel compiler isn't widespread in the real world.
Well- so WTF is really being tested here? "twice as fast"? This then becomes more a test of gcc's optimization for a particular proc does it not?
Does Apple have their auto-vectorizing modded gcc out yet? What's AMD's compiler technology looking like?
Comparing 3 different CPUs in such a rudimentary manner with only a single compiler, without taking in to account the compiler's own strengths and weaknesses is kinda pointless IMO...
I guess the next step would be to hand-optimize a short FPU routine for each differnt CPU...
Correct. The grandparent poster should read the article and notice that nowhere did it say that the sweat irrigation was to be derived from buried pipes. It even went so far as to describe one of his PVC cold water pipe sweat condensers in detail, noting that it was out in the open.
"Irrigation: Pipes carrying cold water run beneath fields of crops, sweating freshwater to irrigate plants and chilling their roots, promoting faster crop cycles."
> Yes, you certainly are. The fact of the matter is that Firefox is free and doesn't have built-in ads.
I never claimed otherwise- and actually find it fairly hilarious seeing someone have some big moral issue about the audacity of Opera forcing ads upon you unless you pay to get rid of them... while posting on Slashdot... which has the exact same policy and model... hahahaha the cluephone rings for thee...
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't understand why there's not more resistance to "net-neutrality legislation" here- it's like you're all snowed by the terminology.
Why should net-neutrality be mandated?
Don't you enjoy having a variety of TV providers to choose from, each offering several different channel packages for you to choose from?
What about your cell phone? Do you like being able to choose a performance (minutes) plan that suits your needs, versus having to pay for far more than you need?
Would you like it if all cars were mandated to have the same looks, horsepower, and mileage?
There's a thing that solves this, and it's called "the market" - DIVX should be all you need to see to understand what happens to unpopular consumer offerings.
Service providers have been shaping your traffic for *years*, prioritizing this type over that type etc- they have a business to run, and consumer demands to be met.
My dad and mom don't know/care in the slightest if thier bittorrent traffic is blocked, all they know is they're paying half price.
My grandma doesn't need more than a dialup-speed connection, and if that could be provided to her fixed-income-self in a totally-free ad-subsidized way that would simply be great.
The push towards legislation mandating "net neutrality" here and in other tech forums is one I just don't understand- I thought we all understood that forcing everyone to be the same simply stifles innovation and removes competition, both of which ultimately hurt the consumer.
???
you must have missed the part where i said it is something that i'm not sure should be legislated-
ie: it's google's problem, not the government's...
I don't think you've thought this through all the way.
Oh- right- silly me- Google's proprietary software running on them certainly has no value whatsoever.
Thin clients remotely accessing large centralized applications?
This sounds familiar- and until connectivity is literally constant and ubiquitous, it will fail again, and again, and again, and again.
The current model of "my access terminal has it's own local storage, and runs apps locally" evolved for a reason.
People want access to their data.
For banking information, it's not my data- it's someone else's data that's relevant to me, so the client->server model works fine here.
But for my documents?
My own creations?
I want access to them, whenever I need it.
Until connectivity is at a point where that need can be fulfilled, this is all just a big load of ajax in your face.
"Our device uses two crystals instead of one, which doubles the acceleration potential."
This one goes to 11~!
But is it right for the US govt to say who Yahoo and Google can do business with?
Yes. Yes it is.
Agreed- but think about that for a second- we're talking about placing servers in China, not blocking access to American websites for all Chinese users. I'm not sure it should be legislated as such, but there are very valid concerns when placing devices in to a place like China. One outfit I'm aware of uses sealed cases with self-destruct capabilities that trigger upon tampering. The Chinese have a long history of stealing, and then duplicating technology.
Food for thought is all.
That's exactly what I was thinking- I would *hope* that whomever at Intel thought this was a good idea is quietly dismissed-
This is *not* the behavior of a world-class coporation...
> With Opera, (pre 9.x, even,) you just click back
Hell that's the slow way son... right-click+hold -> left-click
Do the reverse for "forward"-
Between that and alt/option+tab to go back and forth between tabs, I can navigate Opera faster than it can render!
(read: "damn fast")
Paid Opera user since 7.0 (6.x, while a good alternative for unsupported OSes like FreeBSD, was a half-effort- 7.x changed everything)
... is a dog wiping itself on the grass in your yard.
Hmmmmm- I bet Colonel Angus would know-
You're an idiot.
Yes, period.
Lacking tact?
*shock*
> Open source UNIX-alikes already have a larger market share than Macintosh.
on the *desktop*?
doubtful homie...
(yes, I know what the name stands for. That does not change the fact that Granny Average User would never in a million years click on something called a "gimp" looking for a way to take the redeye out of her pictures.)
LOL CHAT ME LOLITA78
haha yeah- i think it's a lost cause though...
i don't use the OS, i use X11
OSX is the greatest HW/OS platform in which to run X11 ever-
linux will have to do a LOT to match that-
i consider it insumountable...
linux on desktop = dead
linux on server = still kicking...
You might get a few good solid apps, but the OS itself is going to be a patchworked hodge-podge.
oh danny boy, the pipes are calling- HAHAHAHAH
put that BSD in your pipe and smoke it!
Hey I've had sex in his club- don't knock it!
Run X11, shut up.
I understand that- the key part is:
:)
i r
"Package Management- Custom Program using AppDirs"
Meaning- a nice interface to the AppDir paradigm, which works exactly as I said-
You're installing it, you'll see
More info on AppDir is here:
http://rox.sourceforge.net/phpwiki/index.php/AppD
Here ya go:
Package Management Custom Program using AppDirs
File Manager Rox-Filer
http://www.symphonyos.com/desktop.html
Have you actually read about the "packaging system"?
It's not "Yet Another" either... it's the appdir system that ROX invented-
Hell it's not even a system-
In fact, it functions almost exactly like you have described OSX!
Copy a folder and you've installed the app!
Delte the app? Delete the folder!
Copy to a friend? Make a copy of the folder and give it to him!
Even the FPU performance is questionable-
They state that the simple flops.c is designed specifically to isolate and test the FPU-
Ok- then they go on and do this:
The really funny thing is that the new Xeon Irwindale performed better when we disabled support for the SSE-2, and used the "- mfpmath=387" option. It seems that the GCC compiler makes a real mess when it tries to optimise for the SSE-2 instructions. One can, of course, use the Intel compiler, which produces code that is up to twice as fast. But the use of the special Intel compiler isn't widespread in the real world.
Well- so WTF is really being tested here?
"twice as fast"?
This then becomes more a test of gcc's optimization for a particular proc does it not?
Does Apple have their auto-vectorizing modded gcc out yet?
What's AMD's compiler technology looking like?
Comparing 3 different CPUs in such a rudimentary manner with only a single compiler, without taking in to account the compiler's own strengths and weaknesses is kinda pointless IMO...
I guess the next step would be to hand-optimize a short FPU routine for each differnt CPU...
I still love my Mac, but c'mon...
but... you knew that already :)
Correct. The grandparent poster should read the article and notice that nowhere did it say that the sweat irrigation was to be derived from buried pipes. It even went so far as to describe one of his PVC cold water pipe sweat condensers in detail, noting that it was out in the open.
t ml?pg=3&topic=craven&topic_set=
"Irrigation:
Pipes carrying cold water run beneath fields of crops, sweating freshwater to irrigate plants and chilling their roots, promoting faster crop cycles."
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.06/craven.h
> Yes, you certainly are. The fact of the matter is that Firefox is free and doesn't have built-in ads.
I never claimed otherwise- and actually find it fairly hilarious seeing someone have some big moral issue about the audacity of Opera forcing ads upon you unless you pay to get rid of them... while posting on Slashdot... which has the exact same policy and model... hahahaha the cluephone rings for thee...
working middle click under OSX?
:D
for fuck's sake