With the ignorant masses, I don't know if there really is another way to prevent people from swindling maxed out processors and pretending they're running like out of the box.
A CPUID utility would be sufficient. Intel & AMD could strike a deal with microsoft to include their CPUID programs in the next rev of windoze. Before someone jumps down my throuat about how not everyone uses windows, it was YOU who limited the scope of this to "the ignorant masses". Those ARE the people who will be using only Windows.
When one of these people hits a stability problem, what is the first thing that they do? Re-Install Windows. A fresh install of Windows will insure that the CPUID util hasn't been tampered with.
If you're running linux,*BSD, BeOS or whatever else you should have the ability to compile the source yourself provided that they make it freely available.
May'be if you had read the article before posting you would know at least some of them.
I did read the article. I know what IAM claims, but I don't know if it's true.
Again, if you had read the article you would know that Razorfish did not meet the terms of the contract by missing deadlines and delivering an unusable interface.
I know that IAM claims that Razorfish didn't meet the conditions of the contract, I don't know if that's accurate.
Maybe I've dealt with too many unrealistic asshole clients to be impartial. I want to know the WHOLE story before I bah Razorfish.
I don't know the particulars of this case, I used to do work as a graphic artist. I remember customers demanding outrageous concessions as a condition of giving us the work. From people who walk in with a shoebox full of slides that needed scanning and expected to pick them back up in two hours to people who wanted custom 10 minute 3D animation sequences done(from concpetualization to final rendering) over a weekend.
If Razorfish met the conditions of the contract, they should be able to counter sue. People need to know that content designers will give you WHAT YOU ASK FOR and not necessarily what you want.
Basically, the car companies are in bed with the gas companies and no one really gives a damn about the environment.
How would it benefit the car companies to be "in bed with" the oil companies? What is the benefit? GM makes the same money if you buy a gasoline powered car, electric car, fuel cell powered car, or an LNG car.
Electric cars don't really make the environment any better. They simply transfer where all of the pollution resides. Instead of being spread out over millions of miles of roads, all of the pollution would be concentrated in the urban areas that surround power plants, if we switched completely to electric cars. The eco whackos would never stand for us making a complete switch to a truly cleaner power source like nuclear.
Menage a trois.(I didn't feel like adding the accent marks)
Point 1. SUVs ARE TRUCKS. My truck for example, the GMC Jimmy is the same as the S15 pickup. The Chevy Blazer is the same as the S10 pickup. The bed of the truck is converted into passenger space, but it's the same frame and engine.
Just because SUVs have become so popular doesn't change that. In fact it was the eco whackos who caused the popularity of the SUVs to surge. In the late 70s when the clean air act was passed the exemption for light trucks was a part of it. Passenger cars got lighter and weaker. Smaller engines and less steel were used to improve gas mileage. People percieve these little roller skate cars as being less safe than the big trucks.
Mant of today's weak little cars have barely enough power to haul 4 average sized men up a not very steep hill. That's why pickups and SUVs have become so popular these days. People don't want roller skates, they want to feel safe. No matter how you cook the numbers, aside from rollovers you ARE safer in a pickup or SUV than you are in a metro or beetle.
Point 2. Our wonderful president, earlier this year, enacted regulations that WILL force light trucks (SUVs included) to meet the same emissions requirements as regular cars.
Sport Utility Vehicles, on the other hand, should be kept to the same pollution restrictions as cars. I think that they are contributing all too much to the pollution problem. I was kind of hoping the rise in gas prices would deter people from buying these behemoths.:(
Jelous or what? My SUV gets better gas mileage than my car ever did. It has a fuel injected Vortec V6. That is far more fuel efficient, than the 4 barrel carburator on my car's V8 engine could ever hope to be. Even though my SUV is a bigger heavier vehicle, it gets better gas mileage.
It's relatively cheap. Even at $2.00(US) per gallon, gasoline is a very economical way to get around. The amount of energy per cubic liter is great enough to offset the inefficient engines that we use to burn it. At least for now.
It's easy to use. To harness the force of a small explosion is easy. Even in 3rd world countries a simple machine shop can build an engine.
Even though it's VERY explosive, losing a gas station isn't nearly as bad as what can happen if we lose a reactor to an accident.
Gasoline will be with us for a good while to come.
It's something that's different, that you may not understand, but that doesn't make it WRONG.
Have you seen me state that it is wrong? As I've said, live your life as yo see fit. If you're happy, I'm happy for you.
And there are no homosexuals who have ever been 'cured'.
I've seen several on TV who claim otherwise.
All that has happened is confused bisexuals have learned to go back in the closet because they're so screwed up by their religious beliefs and societal pressure.
So, now you're doing what you accuse me of doing. You don't know their hearts. If they say that they were homosexuals and now they're not you have no choice but to accept that.
You however, have very little knowlege (or even interest) in this area.
I have virtually no interest in what makes someone a homosexual. To study it presumes that there is something that can be done about it. I neither think that there is, nor care that there isn't.
You deserve to be able to live without being murdered, beaten up, fired, or evicted because of who you are. If you want anything beyond that, tough.
You do not have the right to never be offended. None of us do. Deal with it.
Excuse me, but now you're comparing homosexuality to SMOKING?!?
No. You're saying that I'm comparing homosexuality to smoking.
It's not catching.
True enough.
It's not a mental illness.
Until relatively recently, homosexuality was treated as a psycho-sexual disorder. Political pressure made the APA stop doing so.
It's not a disease that needs to be 'cured'.
There are former homosexuals who have been.
pink Gestapo? Excuse me? Someone who tries to imply correct an invalid/erronious belief with some facts is now equated with the horrific Nazi secret police?
By invalid you mean "different from my own". So yes.
Aparently Johnny has a 'problem' if he doesn't look, act, behave, or believe like you?
None of that has anything to do with it. For example; I am struggling to quit smoking, it's a stupid habit. I think it's stupid when a kid starts to smoke. Even though I did.
If he's gay, then having a crush is perfectly normal for him, just like some girl going to the game just because she has a crush on the QB is perfectly normal for her.
Ed Gein's behavios was perfectly normal "for him" as well.
Again, your OPINION here is unfounded and erronious.
Yes, my OPINION. It may be erronious. But I have the right to my opinion whether or not the pink Gestapo likes it.
These animals are NOT our brothers and sisters. They're not our cousins and members of the family of space ship earth.
They're OUR FOOD! I don't know where you get the idea that the death that cows face is so unbearibly gruesome.
They get a nail through the brain and it's over.
If you choose to be a Vegan, that's cool. If that works for you, I have nothing bad to say about that or you. Though I've never worked in a slaughterhouse, I know what happens. Just because one of you whines and crys about it doesn't mean that I'm going to stop eating meat. Beef is especially great because it's cheap and easy to produce. All you need is a cow, space, food, and time. Hell, traditional farms just let them roam all day and they took pretty good care of themselves.
We know that the meat used to be a whole animal. Yes, we know that it's dead. At least meat had a chance to run. Those vegetables that you murder are stuck in one place. At least meat is dead and can't feel anything when we cook and eat it. You cook and eat vegetables while they're still alive.
Live your life as you see fit. I'll live my life as I see fit. We can get along and I can kick your ass at Soldier Of Fortune.
That was never an issue. At issue is your 'belief' that you know the root cause for my sexual orientation being different than yours, when it's plain that you know no such thing.
I've never proclaimed to know why homosexual people are that way. I don't even care if they're homosexual. It's, quite frankly, none of my business.
I am, however, of the opinion that if littly Johnny goes to his high school football game because he has a crush on the QB instead of one of the cheerleaders, little Johnny has a problem.
Your characterization is baseless and incorrect. Usually intelligent people prefer being corrected so that they don't appear to be a fool in front of others... they enjoy learning new things and getting new perspectives.
I don't see how you expect to convince me what my opinion is wrong. It's no different than the differences between vegans, ovo-lacto vegetarians and omnivores.
You feel the way you feel and I respect that. I just want the same in return.
To say that someone who is gay automatically has a sexual identity problem, has no basis in reality.
I suppose that's true if your definition of "sexual identity problem" is different enough from mine.
The only possible source of that is either gross ignorance, or listening to one to[SIC] many redneck preachers.
I don't have first hand experience at what a homosexual kid goes through. So I suppose that you could call that ignorance. That doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is an abnormal behavior.
I don't think that it's immoral, or wrong, or anything like that. In fact, as it relates to women, I find it rather erotic.
Why is it that the thought police don't want people to be able to form opinions that differ from the politically correct ones of the day?
Just because a movie might be an allegory for homosexuality does not mean it's only directed at 2 to 10 percent of the population.
I don't believe that the movie or the comic book is in any way about homosexuals. I see it more as being about special people with special needs and special abilities who are persecuted simply because they're different.
Sure that may describe many homosexuals, but it describes many other different types of people.
BTW, please refrain from such idiotic remarks implying homosexuals have sexual identity problems. I have no such problem.
It is idiotic to hold an opinion which differs from yours?
You're picking a fight with the wrong person. I don't care what you do with your life, or how you live your life, or with whom you choose to spend your life. As long as it doesn't affect me, I don't care.
It's not me that you should be worried about. I'm not the one who'd beat you to death if I saw you walking down the street holding your SO's hand.
Perhaps I'm wrong in my thinking as it relates to homosexuals and homosexuality; perhaps I'm not, but that's what I believe.
I'm not going stop saying the things that I believe just because you don't like it.
However, I completely disagree that we're only "2-10% of the population"
That's fine. That is one issue that will not be resolved any time soon. Even homosexual advocacy groups use the 10% figure. The anti homosexual groups use the 2-3% figure. I don't particularly care if it's 0.01% or 99.99%, that isn't what the X-Men is about.
I have no problem at all with my sexual identity, thanks.
All the better for you.
If you have a problem with my sexual identity, tough...I don't give a shit.
Aside from the Fred Phelps crowd, most of us don't give a good god damn about what happens in other people's bedrooms.
What you're doing is akin to when handicapped people get irate about being called handicapped.
The author seems to overlook the fact that you can't build something like the X-Man simply because you directly market 2-10% of the population.
The X-Men aren't so great because of any thinly veiled homosexual persecution metaphors. They are so big because they're entertaining. They appeal to many types of kids (and adults), not just ones with a sexual identity problem.
At one point or another ALL people have been on the wrong end of persecution. I think that is a part of the appeal.
Given time, technology will supersede any reasonable fears e-voting may evoke...
Technology has not yet advanced to the point where all reasonable fears can be laid to rest. Security is not yet easy enough to be idiot proof.
Hell, even with automobiles, if you were to add a feature to automatically lock the doors after a specified number of minutes, there would be a legion of morons who'd left their keys inside in just a few weeks.
I don't know what the answer is, everything that I can think of is "too easy" of a fix. We'll have to wait to see where the technology goes.
Slashdot Mirror
With the ignorant masses, I don't know if there really is another way to prevent people from swindling maxed out processors and pretending they're running like out of the box.
A CPUID utility would be sufficient. Intel & AMD could strike a deal with microsoft to include their CPUID programs in the next rev of windoze. Before someone jumps down my throuat about how not everyone uses windows, it was YOU who limited the scope of this to "the ignorant masses". Those ARE the people who will be using only Windows.
When one of these people hits a stability problem, what is the first thing that they do? Re-Install Windows. A fresh install of Windows will insure that the CPUID util hasn't been tampered with.
If you're running linux,*BSD, BeOS or whatever else you should have the ability to compile the source yourself provided that they make it freely available.
LK
I don't like the fact that AMD tried to use chipzilla-like tactics and render overclocking impossible.
Though, my next chip will most likely be AMD.
LK
I did see Apt pupil, it was over rated. It's not a bad film, but it's not as horribly disturbing as it was made out to be.
LK
The Arkansas Gazette is the source.
May'be if you had read the article before posting you would know at least some of them.
I did read the article. I know what IAM claims, but I don't know if it's true.
Again, if you had read the article you would know that Razorfish did not meet the terms of the contract by missing deadlines and delivering an unusable interface.
I know that IAM claims that Razorfish didn't meet the conditions of the contract, I don't know if that's accurate.
Maybe I've dealt with too many unrealistic asshole clients to be impartial. I want to know the WHOLE story before I bah Razorfish.
LK
I don't know the particulars of this case, I used to do work as a graphic artist. I remember customers demanding outrageous concessions as a condition of giving us the work. From people who walk in with a shoebox full of slides that needed scanning and expected to pick them back up in two hours to people who wanted custom 10 minute 3D animation sequences done(from concpetualization to final rendering) over a weekend.
If Razorfish met the conditions of the contract, they should be able to counter sue. People need to know that content designers will give you WHAT YOU ASK FOR and not necessarily what you want.
LK
Basically, the car companies are in bed with the gas companies and no one really gives a damn about the environment.
How would it benefit the car companies to be "in bed with" the oil companies? What is the benefit? GM makes the same money if you buy a gasoline powered car, electric car, fuel cell powered car, or an LNG car.
Electric cars don't really make the environment any better. They simply transfer where all of the pollution resides. Instead of being spread out over millions of miles of roads, all of the pollution would be concentrated in the urban areas that surround power plants, if we switched completely to electric cars. The eco whackos would never stand for us making a complete switch to a truly cleaner power source like nuclear.
Menage a trois.(I didn't feel like adding the accent marks)
LK
Point 1. SUVs ARE TRUCKS. My truck for example, the GMC Jimmy is the same as the S15 pickup. The Chevy Blazer is the same as the S10 pickup. The bed of the truck is converted into passenger space, but it's the same frame and engine.
Just because SUVs have become so popular doesn't change that. In fact it was the eco whackos who caused the popularity of the SUVs to surge. In the late 70s when the clean air act was passed the exemption for light trucks was a part of it. Passenger cars got lighter and weaker. Smaller engines and less steel were used to improve gas mileage. People percieve these little roller skate cars as being less safe than the big trucks.
Mant of today's weak little cars have barely enough power to haul 4 average sized men up a not very steep hill. That's why pickups and SUVs have become so popular these days. People don't want roller skates, they want to feel safe. No matter how you cook the numbers, aside from rollovers you ARE safer in a pickup or SUV than you are in a metro or beetle.
Point 2. Our wonderful president, earlier this year, enacted regulations that WILL force light trucks (SUVs included) to meet the same emissions requirements as regular cars.
LK
Sport Utility Vehicles, on the other hand, should be kept to the same pollution restrictions as cars. I think that they are contributing all too much to the pollution problem. I was kind of hoping the rise in gas prices would deter people from buying these behemoths. :(
Jelous or what? My SUV gets better gas mileage than my car ever did. It has a fuel injected Vortec V6. That is far more fuel efficient, than the 4 barrel carburator on my car's V8 engine could ever hope to be. Even though my SUV is a bigger heavier vehicle, it gets better gas mileage.
LK
It's relatively cheap. Even at $2.00(US) per gallon, gasoline is a very economical way to get around. The amount of energy per cubic liter is great enough to offset the inefficient engines that we use to burn it. At least for now.
It's easy to use. To harness the force of a small explosion is easy. Even in 3rd world countries a simple machine shop can build an engine.
Even though it's VERY explosive, losing a gas station isn't nearly as bad as what can happen if we lose a reactor to an accident.
Gasoline will be with us for a good while to come.
LK
It's something that's different, that you may not understand, but that doesn't make it WRONG.
Have you seen me state that it is wrong? As I've said, live your life as yo see fit. If you're happy, I'm happy for you.
And there are no homosexuals who have ever been 'cured'.
I've seen several on TV who claim otherwise.
All that has happened is confused bisexuals have learned to go back in the closet because they're so screwed up by their religious beliefs and societal pressure.
So, now you're doing what you accuse me of doing. You don't know their hearts. If they say that they were homosexuals and now they're not you have no choice but to accept that.
You however, have very little knowlege (or even interest) in this area.
I have virtually no interest in what makes someone a homosexual. To study it presumes that there is something that can be done about it. I neither think that there is, nor care that there isn't.
You deserve to be able to live without being murdered, beaten up, fired, or evicted because of who you are. If you want anything beyond that, tough.
You do not have the right to never be offended. None of us do. Deal with it.
Excuse me, but now you're comparing homosexuality to SMOKING?!?
No. You're saying that I'm comparing homosexuality to smoking.
It's not catching.
True enough.
It's not a mental illness.
Until relatively recently, homosexuality was treated as a psycho-sexual disorder. Political pressure made the APA stop doing so.
It's not a disease that needs to be 'cured'.
There are former homosexuals who have been.
pink Gestapo? Excuse me? Someone who tries to imply correct an invalid/erronious belief with some facts is now equated with the horrific Nazi secret police?
By invalid you mean "different from my own". So yes.
LK
Aparently Johnny has a 'problem' if he doesn't look, act, behave, or believe like you?
None of that has anything to do with it. For example; I am struggling to quit smoking, it's a stupid habit. I think it's stupid when a kid starts to smoke. Even though I did.
If he's gay, then having a crush is perfectly normal for him, just like some girl going to the game just because she has a crush on the QB is perfectly normal for her.
Ed Gein's behavios was perfectly normal "for him" as well.
Again, your OPINION here is unfounded and erronious.
Yes, my OPINION. It may be erronious. But I have the right to my opinion whether or not the pink Gestapo likes it.
LK
These animals are NOT our brothers and sisters. They're not our cousins and members of the family of space ship earth.
They're OUR FOOD! I don't know where you get the idea that the death that cows face is so unbearibly gruesome.
They get a nail through the brain and it's over.
If you choose to be a Vegan, that's cool. If that works for you, I have nothing bad to say about that or you. Though I've never worked in a slaughterhouse, I know what happens. Just because one of you whines and crys about it doesn't mean that I'm going to stop eating meat. Beef is especially great because it's cheap and easy to produce. All you need is a cow, space, food, and time. Hell, traditional farms just let them roam all day and they took pretty good care of themselves.
We know that the meat used to be a whole animal. Yes, we know that it's dead. At least meat had a chance to run. Those vegetables that you murder are stuck in one place. At least meat is dead and can't feel anything when we cook and eat it. You cook and eat vegetables while they're still alive.
Live your life as you see fit. I'll live my life as I see fit. We can get along and I can kick your ass at Soldier Of Fortune.
LK
That was never an issue. At issue is your 'belief' that you know the root cause for my sexual orientation being different than yours, when it's plain that you know no such thing.
I've never proclaimed to know why homosexual people are that way. I don't even care if they're homosexual. It's, quite frankly, none of my business.
I am, however, of the opinion that if littly Johnny goes to his high school football game because he has a crush on the QB instead of one of the cheerleaders, little Johnny has a problem.
LK
I can see where this is headed. Imagine this URL to get your daily geek fix.
g SlashIndex.html.gnu
http://hteeteepeeColonSlashSlashdot.slashdot.or
LK
Your characterization is baseless and incorrect. Usually intelligent people prefer being corrected so that they don't appear to be a fool in front of others... they enjoy learning new things and getting new perspectives.
I don't see how you expect to convince me what my opinion is wrong. It's no different than the differences between vegans, ovo-lacto vegetarians and omnivores.
You feel the way you feel and I respect that. I just want the same in return.
LK
Swell.
To say that someone who is gay automatically has a sexual identity problem, has no basis in reality.
I suppose that's true if your definition of "sexual identity problem" is different enough from mine.
The only possible source of that is either gross ignorance, or listening to one to[SIC] many redneck preachers.
I don't have first hand experience at what a homosexual kid goes through. So I suppose that you could call that ignorance. That doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is an abnormal behavior.
I don't think that it's immoral, or wrong, or anything like that. In fact, as it relates to women, I find it rather erotic.
Why is it that the thought police don't want people to be able to form opinions that differ from the politically correct ones of the day?
LK
Just because a movie might be an allegory for homosexuality does not mean it's only directed at 2 to 10 percent of the population.
I don't believe that the movie or the comic book is in any way about homosexuals. I see it more as being about special people with special needs and special abilities who are persecuted simply because they're different.
Sure that may describe many homosexuals, but it describes many other different types of people.
BTW, please refrain from such idiotic remarks implying homosexuals have sexual identity problems. I have no such problem.
It is idiotic to hold an opinion which differs from yours?
You're picking a fight with the wrong person. I don't care what you do with your life, or how you live your life, or with whom you choose to spend your life. As long as it doesn't affect me, I don't care.
It's not me that you should be worried about. I'm not the one who'd beat you to death if I saw you walking down the street holding your SO's hand.
Perhaps I'm wrong in my thinking as it relates to homosexuals and homosexuality; perhaps I'm not, but that's what I believe.
I'm not going stop saying the things that I believe just because you don't like it.
LK
However, I completely disagree that we're only "2-10% of the population"
That's fine. That is one issue that will not be resolved any time soon. Even homosexual advocacy groups use the 10% figure. The anti homosexual groups use the 2-3% figure. I don't particularly care if it's 0.01% or 99.99%, that isn't what the X-Men is about.
I have no problem at all with my sexual identity, thanks.
All the better for you.
If you have a problem with my sexual identity, tough...I don't give a shit.
Aside from the Fred Phelps crowd, most of us don't give a good god damn about what happens in other people's bedrooms.
What you're doing is akin to when handicapped people get irate about being called handicapped.
LK
The author seems to overlook the fact that you can't build something like the X-Man simply because you directly market 2-10% of the population.
The X-Men aren't so great because of any thinly veiled homosexual persecution metaphors. They are so big because they're entertaining. They appeal to many types of kids (and adults), not just ones with a sexual identity problem.
At one point or another ALL people have been on the wrong end of persecution. I think that is a part of the appeal.
LK
Given time, technology will supersede any reasonable fears e-voting may evoke ...
Technology has not yet advanced to the point where all reasonable fears can be laid to rest. Security is not yet easy enough to be idiot proof.
Hell, even with automobiles, if you were to add a feature to automatically lock the doors after a specified number of minutes, there would be a legion of morons who'd left their keys inside in just a few weeks.
I don't know what the answer is, everything that I can think of is "too easy" of a fix. We'll have to wait to see where the technology goes.
LK
Since wine actually requires you to have a copy of windows installed on your machine, it cannot by definition be an emulator.
Point 1. Although wine CAN use native windows dlls, it doesn't require them.
Point 2. Connectix's Virtual PC (usually) comes with a copy of windows and I don't believe that there is any doubt that it IS an emulator.
Point 3. How do you define emulator?
LK
eulogize (yl-jz)
e ulogizing
v. tr. eulogized, eulogizing, eulogizes.
To praise highly in speech or writing.
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=
Sounds like an accurate enough use of the word to me.
LK