Linus Torvalds is a god damn thief!!! When I installed Linux it asked me for my credit card number. Two days later I got a call from Wachovia asking me if I had purchased $400 worth of Totino's pizza rolls and Mountain Dew (I hadn't). Let this be a warning to all of you out there on the Internet.
Actually, I did. I opened up my network monitor and opened up a video. Amazingly hard task apparently.
Heh. 256 meg machine, full-quality Hulu video.
Yeah, and? The video played back choppy but that didn't mean much since that was due to the CPU. All I cared about was network throughput which was just as much as on the other machine at 512. I'm sorry, but XP handles just fine with either amount of memory on the network traffic.
Introducing Road Runner Turbo with PowerBoost. All the features and functionality of Road Runner super-charged with up to 22 Mbps of download speed and up to 2 Mbps of upload speed.
Comcast has 25mbps+ cable speeds in some cities as well.
And why do your parents need that kind of bandwidth? Email? Web Browsing? YouTube? Torrent Seeding?
Downloading and all sorts of things. Why wouldn't they need that speed? My parents aren't computer illiterate dumbasses so they can do with it whatever they please I guess.
And if the extra 256MB keeps XP from paging, it may get you close to 2x.
Possibly, but you are hardly going to get a ton of paging going on at 512 megs that is going to make that big of a difference. If my parents computer can max out at 22mbps with all the crap that is running on it, then you'd have to be doing some seriously memory hogging to get it to get as bad as the stupid stats in the article.
Yes, it really doesn't take that long to open up a network monitor, go to the site and then open up a file to play. Was it supposed to take me an hour to do such an extraordinarily simple set of tasks? This test in the article is seriously stupid, but so are the claims that XP somehow can't use the full speed of someone's connection at 512 megs of RAM. Especially when all the people claiming it have as much evidence to back up their claims as the person in the article does for theirs (none).
And just to further add, I've already stated this whole test is full of shit. My parents have a XP box with 512 megs of RAM that is running all sorts of bullshit crap all the time (cause they think they need all manor of crap running on the systray) and they max out their 22mbps cable connection. It's just hilarious to see all the stupid "BUT IT HAD MORE MEMORY!!" comebacks to try to invalidate this idiotic "test" from the article.
The blacklist MUST be public. If it isn't then yes political speech can be restricted. Frankly it all ready is in much of the EU anyway.
What exact good is it going to do to have a public blacklist when it's illegal for any citizen in the country to verify that the site is legitimately blocked? Do you even think through the shit you type?
Yeah people keep claiming this with no real data to prove it up so it's about as worthless as the shit that the article claims. My parents have an XP box with only 512 megs of RAM and it easily maxes out at the 22mbps that they have. And that's with a half dozen apps open and at least 8 things running in the background on the systray. Seriously, the extra 256 megs of RAM isn't going to give you magically 2x the bandwidth.
Yes, because the only major difference, the 256 megs of more RAM, really is what gave them double internet speeds on the test. Hahahahaha, yeah right. I guess I'm going to have to go stick another gig of RAM in my box so I can get 4x the internet bandwidth of what I have now!
No, more like rulings handed down by a judge that you violate put you in extreme risks of getting your ass sued for tons of money. Seriously, your scheme is about the stupidest thing a company could do especially in light of how obvious it would to see that you were violating relevant copyright and other IP laws. Only someone completely brain dead, apparently someone like you, would do this.
I've been writing software for 14 years and I too had to search Google for information on supported wi-fi chipsets and what appropriate tools to use. According to your logic I'm a hack.
Nope, unless you were trying to use your title of software engineer as some sort of boasting about how much knowledge you have.
Yeah because I'm sure there will be no NDA agreements or some legal ruling in place to stop you from using this as an excuse to steal people's source code. Are you really that stupid?
Yeah it's utterly horrible that people would actually have to make sure that the evidence they are using against people is actually accurate and not being tainted by flaws in the equipment used or their methodologies. Oh the horrors of that!
Since when does the ability to use something that someone else thought was clever or clear, but didn't document exhaustively, have anything to do with the ability to write various forms of software?
When the person, as the parent did, uses their job title as a badge to try to claim that they have some high degree of knowledge which the parent clearly lacks if they are unable to install Ubuntu properly (a task a good number only semi-literate computer users can do with only minor prompting from others). They were the ones throwing that out there as if it was supposed to mean something and frankly it's nothing impressive if they are as computer illiterate as they come off.
That doesn't seem to mean much anymore these days. If you're too dumb to get Ubuntu working, I can't imagine the disasters you chunk out and call software.
The correct advisory for this kind of deadline is to have unaffiliated academics weigh in on the proposal and take this from a strictly neutral perspective.
And when these mythical people never appear out of thin air, do we get back to reality?
I admit that KDE isn't perfect, far from it, but KDE4+ is streets ahead of Gnome now and the big hurdle to widespread use by companies has now vanished.
Hahahahaha KDE4+ is total disaster. That was a good joke.
Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds is a god damn thief!!! When I installed Linux it asked me for my credit card number. Two days later I got a call from Wachovia asking me if I had purchased $400 worth of Totino's pizza rolls and Mountain Dew (I hadn't). Let this be a warning to all of you out there on the Internet.
An hour? No. But you didn't do what I asked.
Actually, I did. I opened up my network monitor and opened up a video. Amazingly hard task apparently.
Heh. 256 meg machine, full-quality Hulu video.
Yeah, and? The video played back choppy but that didn't mean much since that was due to the CPU. All I cared about was network throughput which was just as much as on the other machine at 512. I'm sorry, but XP handles just fine with either amount of memory on the network traffic.
Where are people getting 22mbps over cable? Or is it fiber?
No, it's cable. Cable modems support up to 30mbps. For example here a link from what I have with Time Warner: http://www.timewarnercable.com/centraltx/Products/Internet/rrpremium.html
Introducing Road Runner Turbo with PowerBoost. All the features and functionality of Road Runner super-charged with up to 22 Mbps of download speed and up to 2 Mbps of upload speed.
Comcast has 25mbps+ cable speeds in some cities as well.
And why do your parents need that kind of bandwidth? Email? Web Browsing? YouTube? Torrent Seeding?
Downloading and all sorts of things. Why wouldn't they need that speed? My parents aren't computer illiterate dumbasses so they can do with it whatever they please I guess.
And if the extra 256MB keeps XP from paging, it may get you close to 2x.
Possibly, but you are hardly going to get a ton of paging going on at 512 megs that is going to make that big of a difference. If my parents computer can max out at 22mbps with all the crap that is running on it, then you'd have to be doing some seriously memory hogging to get it to get as bad as the stupid stats in the article.
Yes, it really doesn't take that long to open up a network monitor, go to the site and then open up a file to play. Was it supposed to take me an hour to do such an extraordinarily simple set of tasks? This test in the article is seriously stupid, but so are the claims that XP somehow can't use the full speed of someone's connection at 512 megs of RAM. Especially when all the people claiming it have as much evidence to back up their claims as the person in the article does for theirs (none).
And just to further add, I've already stated this whole test is full of shit. My parents have a XP box with 512 megs of RAM that is running all sorts of bullshit crap all the time (cause they think they need all manor of crap running on the systray) and they max out their 22mbps cable connection. It's just hilarious to see all the stupid "BUT IT HAD MORE MEMORY!!" comebacks to try to invalidate this idiotic "test" from the article.
Okay, I just did. Watching the network traffic there was no difference in the internet throughput. Thanks for playing!
The blacklist MUST be public. If it isn't then yes political speech can be restricted. Frankly it all ready is in much of the EU anyway.
What exact good is it going to do to have a public blacklist when it's illegal for any citizen in the country to verify that the site is legitimately blocked? Do you even think through the shit you type?
Yeah people keep claiming this with no real data to prove it up so it's about as worthless as the shit that the article claims. My parents have an XP box with only 512 megs of RAM and it easily maxes out at the 22mbps that they have. And that's with a half dozen apps open and at least 8 things running in the background on the systray. Seriously, the extra 256 megs of RAM isn't going to give you magically 2x the bandwidth.
Yes, because the only major difference, the 256 megs of more RAM, really is what gave them double internet speeds on the test. Hahahahaha, yeah right. I guess I'm going to have to go stick another gig of RAM in my box so I can get 4x the internet bandwidth of what I have now!
Who gets 22mbps from a cable modem?
People who have cable service that gives them 22mbps? Such a thing isn't that extraordinary.
Because we all know that more RAM == more internet bandwidth right? Oh wait...
No, more like rulings handed down by a judge that you violate put you in extreme risks of getting your ass sued for tons of money. Seriously, your scheme is about the stupidest thing a company could do especially in light of how obvious it would to see that you were violating relevant copyright and other IP laws. Only someone completely brain dead, apparently someone like you, would do this.
I've been writing software for 14 years and I too had to search Google for information on supported wi-fi chipsets and what appropriate tools to use. According to your logic I'm a hack.
Nope, unless you were trying to use your title of software engineer as some sort of boasting about how much knowledge you have.
Yeah because I'm sure there will be no NDA agreements or some legal ruling in place to stop you from using this as an excuse to steal people's source code. Are you really that stupid?
Yeah it's utterly horrible that people would actually have to make sure that the evidence they are using against people is actually accurate and not being tainted by flaws in the equipment used or their methodologies. Oh the horrors of that!
Since when does the ability to use something that someone else thought was clever or clear, but didn't document exhaustively, have anything to do with the ability to write various forms of software?
When the person, as the parent did, uses their job title as a badge to try to claim that they have some high degree of knowledge which the parent clearly lacks if they are unable to install Ubuntu properly (a task a good number only semi-literate computer users can do with only minor prompting from others). They were the ones throwing that out there as if it was supposed to mean something and frankly it's nothing impressive if they are as computer illiterate as they come off.
How are you going to be able to verify that what's on the list is truly illegal if you are going to get prosecuted for even going to them?
I'm a software engineer.
That doesn't seem to mean much anymore these days. If you're too dumb to get Ubuntu working, I can't imagine the disasters you chunk out and call software.
The correct advisory for this kind of deadline is to have unaffiliated academics weigh in on the proposal and take this from a strictly neutral perspective.
And when these mythical people never appear out of thin air, do we get back to reality?
No, more like you only do app development in C cause C++ is a crap language.
Exactly. If we are going by true stats like that KDE is the one to be dumped not Gnome.
I admit that KDE isn't perfect, far from it, but KDE4+ is streets ahead of Gnome now and the big hurdle to widespread use by companies has now vanished.
Hahahahaha KDE4+ is total disaster. That was a good joke.
Why would you make a version of the GIMP that doesn't use the GIMP's own toolkit?
How about people who don't want to use that monstrosity of a Frankenstein language known as c++ and prefer to program in c instead?
No, he meant Clarus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogcow