It may be a little late, but i was mainly thinking that regular moderators would not be able to see comments as anything besides comments. Regular viewers could see everything associated (poster, score, etc..) Meta moderators, too. Just regular moderators, if they chose to moderate, would have to judge comments on their own merit rather than knowing who said what and what other moderators think
Personally, I'm AC because I don't trust the net not to pick cookies up for spamming (there may well be 10 servers between me and/. some days).
Well, I don't know how many servers reside between me & slashdot, but I can say this: I have yet to revieve a piece of spam to this oft-checked email address (the one above)... That's EVER. PERIOD. Plus I usually sign in from one of two IP addresses... So if you're worried for spam, don't...
No... I really think that moderators should make up their own minds, rather than even having the subtle influence of knowing that someone else already moderated this comment up and that one down to the having of a summary of whatevery one else thinks. This is slashdot, after all... ESPECIALLY if you've gone through the trouble of making an account, you've got a brain... You can think for yourself (at least a little, I hope!:)
That build is long gone. It was basically OpenStep with a cobbled together Mac-like interface that ran on then shipping powerpc's just to give developers a taste of Objective C...
Since then, there've been rumors that apple's been keeping OS-X development syncronized on x86 and PowerPC, but Apple's kept completely mum on the subject. They may have just done it when there was a little more uncertainity of IBM and Motorolla's commitments to the PowerPC...
Now, if that comment was posted because of an article about how Bill Gate's personal wealth had surpassed a trillion dollars, that comment might be moderated as being funny.
If it were posted because Microsoft bought Redhat, then one might call it insightful
If that comment was posted in context of a comparison between IIS and Apache, it could be considered flmebait.
If it were posted in a discussion about Sony's robotic dog, then it'd be a troll...
Basically without having any context to the comment (at least give us a link to the story and the it's parent) this meta-moderation seems rather pointless. We're (or rather Rob is) spinning in circles trying to figure out what to do about trolls... Just like anything else that's bad in life, it'd be hard to be sure to be rid of them without hurting ourselves as well.
How about this: Moderators get 10 points, rather than 5.
They can choose which discussions they wish to moderate: so long as they're a moderator, they cannot change their comment threshold above -2 (or however low it goes). Also have it not show other people's moderations to the moderators (everything, regardless, would appear as being posted by the Anonymous Coward with a score of 1.
They can click a button at anytime that removes their moderations, shows original posters, other peoples moderations, and lets them comment. Kind of how it works now.
Basically, I think moderators were doing a good job thus far with the tools that have been supplied. What we need is more moderators, and more "un-biased" moderators, with unbiased meaning that they HAVE to view every comment, and not know what other people have said about it.
No... MacOS-X has the capability to run on intel, being that it was based on OpenStep, which ran on x86. The OLD apple said that they'ed release a version of OS X for Intel, but the new Apple has held out on commiting thus far.
I really think that Apple has a legitimate chance to get into business markets again, based on their own merits. No one wanted to buy machines from a business that may not be around to support them in a year. With Apple stock trading at an all-time high, it's apparent that they're here to stay.
What really needs for that to happen, is a company like Gartner re-iterating the TCO issues, along with the increased lifespan of Mac's vs. PC's, and to a point, lower training, etc...
You can give some credit to Gil Amelio, for starting the restructuring and setting a new course for Apple... He didn't understand Apple or its customers very well, though - he merely tried to plug the holes of the sinking ship, Apple.
When he brought Steve Jobs back, it was a godsend fo apple, but it also ended his reign. Steve Jobs has the personality to make people interested in and excited about things that Apple is doing. He also has much more perspective on the world than when he was at Apple 10 years ago.
So basically, I'd give some credit to Amelio for saving the company, but I'd give all the credit in the world to Jobs for making it prosperous, again.
Well a decent Intel Mobo with features comparable to an Alpha MB (64-bit PCI, UW SCSI) and SMP support (to keep it's performance comparable to single processor Alpha System) will probably run you $400 - $600 dollars, then you pay x2 or x2.5 for the chip itself, but only one rather than two PIII 600's, and you're pretty much even in terms of cost, but you've got a much faster system in the Alpha - supposing the apps you want to use are available (I know, it's just a recompile, but I swear - plenty of programs exist that are I deem essential that are also commercial, proprietary, closed, whatever you want to call it)
You really get what you pay for. If you don't need it, don't shell out the money. If you need it, then you can probably justify the outlay
FX32 is or will be useless for Win32 apps... remember - MSFT and Compaq pulled the plug on future NT development for the Alpha... Remember?
Now, I wonder if Compaq will (if it's their's to do so with) release FX32 source? That'd make the idea of an Alpha or PowerPC box running linux much more palatable.
How does the source of news affect whether a computer is a tool or not? They seem to be two completely debatable yet unrelated subjects.
I'm a big fan of the register, and in my experience, they seem to hit the nail on the head so much more often than just about any other news site. Problem is, they generally speculate about events that haven't been announced, so it sometimes takes 3 or 6 months for stories they've reported on to actually make sense. Which they do, 75 or 80% of the time.
So far as Alpha goes, ESPECIALLY if they're reporting it, I'll believe it to be a distinct possibility. If MSFT had said the same thing, I'd say it's marketing schpeel... But they're (MSFT) aren't exactly un-biased... (guess the register isn't either, though they're biased against liars and spin-meisters)
The FBI wants capacity to be able to tap 1% of domestic calls simultaneously.
European gov't complains about (and reveals the existance of) Echelon - a keyword scanning station.
In marrying those two, you end up with very impressive domestic surveilance capabilities. Agents no longer need to actually "listen" in on phonecalls that may or may not be deemed suspicious, as Echelon can monitor telephone, fax, email, etc... Probably merge all those results together and give a very detailed account of people, based on their insecure communications.
Except barely anyone bothers with a password that long... Mine's somewhere between 70 and 100 characters, and I often find myself typing it in over and over and over and over, because I'm not the best of typists when I can't see what I'm typing.
Rather, if we were a socialist country, it would be an idea that could be achieved more easily. Just issue everyone state computer, to ensure that citizens all have equal access... But then, we're not a democracy anymore, are we?
Face it, we can't conduct elections over the internet, because it slants the playing field too much towards one end of the economic spectrum. Everyone needs to have equal access to the voting booths. You can't have the voting booths for white people in the center of the city, and require minorities to drive 50 miles to a separate booth, which is what in effect you'd create, only across economic lines rather than ethnic (which, sadly, seem to segement the population nearly identically)
We already complain about the slowness of the government in reacting to certain issues (dare I say it?).
We'd go nowhere as a country if they had to get a majority vote on any of the issues you pointed out. But we elected the people that make those decisions for us.
Maybe you don't like it? You can always run to "try and change things" (that's always the reason people state they're running... they rarely seem to succeed, however).
While I'm not sure about the internet as a voting mechanism for a number of reasons: #1 - Less than 1/2 American households have computers. Their vote is just as important as any other. #2 - Fraud. How about writing a script that automatically resubmits your vote, over and over. Or they could counter that and use PGP for authentication... That'd be an such an incredible amount of overhead, that most of the people with the means would probably go to the ballot booths. #3 - Security. Rather than trying to break into gov't computers, you'd face hackers & foreign countries potentially trying to disrupt the elective process. How about 50,000 distinct IP addresses DOSing the voting sites? 100,000? 500,000. There's no way to ensure that people could vote under such conditions.
#4 - Basically, a lot of other variations on #1 and #2 and #3 that can occur. Yes, you can order stuff via the internet, and if a site flakes on you, that's regrettable, but okay. No matter what you think of the gov't as it stands today, having elections conducted over the internet is not going to change things one iota, but could stand to disrupt things in many unfavorable ways.
I'd love to see the internet used as a campaign platform: Set up a website with all the info anyone could possibly want, splatter the everywhere with banners and buttons and what have you, and you could probably save a fortune over traditional campaign costs.. but that leads us back to the fact that the only people that'd hear much of your campaign would be people with computers.
Nubus Power Mac's (6100, 7100, and 8100) were 1st generation (601's) PCI Power Macs (7200, 7300, 7500, 7600, 8500, 8600, 9500, 9600) were the 2nd Generation (603, 603e, 604, 604e, except the 7200 which still used a 601) (quite a lot of model numbers! I'm glad they've pruned them selves down to a basic model/speed G3 Power Macs used the PPC 750 chip G4 Power Macs will use the PPC 7400 chip
Part of what makes Slashdot Slashdot is that it's a community. Once you have Andover (no matter how cool or smart they are) behaving as full time moderators, you've taken the power from the community and placed it outside of our hands.
Though I sometimes don't agree with what moderators do to posts, I usually feel comfortable enough to browse at 0... the -1's usually trully are flame bait and such... I find it amusing when I post something, put clearly in the subject field that "This is Flamebait", ramble about something stupid, and then see the comment moderated up and spawning a whole new discussion thread!
My two cents are that:
1 - Moderators should get more points - I often don't moderate comments down because I feel my points would be better served highlighting the more insiteful comments than by filtering out people... With more points, I would feel more tempted to help point out the trolls.
2 - Posters of comments should be allowed (at least registered ones) to moderate themselves (just so you can see what they're thinking - I could moderate myself as offtopic, just so people would know that's what they're getting into). Don't have that posters moderation change the point total, just use it for a "mood"
3 - we need more categories for moderation
4 - allow more people to moderate at a time... Again, I tend to hold onto my points for a couple of days, hoping an interesting article gets posted, rather than getting drawn into an Apple vs Linux, or Redhat vs. Debian, or everyone vs. microsoft discussion. Having more active moderators with more points would definitely weed out the trolls and polish the gems.
5 - People who are consistently moderated down probably should start at 0... Don't make them go any lower than that, but rather send an automatic email to their account as a warning, and then discontinue their account... They can then sign up again with the same login, just make it a tad bit more difficult for people who abuse the system.
Surely... 512 Bit RSA is the functional equivilant to 40 or maybe 64 bit crypto using a symmetric cypher. It in no way approaches the strength of a 128 bit symetric cipher, so long as the keys are exchanged securely (using 768, 1024, or greater RSA)
Since 512bit RSA was cracked recently with not too much effort, I am pretty sure the NSA can break any public key crytography in real time. Check out their webpage and see the kinds of people they want (eg maths wizards)
Why? 512 bit RSA had been theoretically breakable for quite some time... For over a year now, it has been voiced that everyone abandon 512-bit for either 768 or 1024 (or more...). Just because someone finally got around to showing the world that 512 is breakable, that shouldn't overly alarm you if you're using keys much longer than that. And if they could break public key crypto in real time, there'd be no point to their posturing against it. They'ed let it spread, knowing it was futile.
Well, first they'ed laugh at them for creating such inefficient software... 5 megabyte keys, sure they're a whole lot more secure than 128 bit keys... but 128 bits are more than strong enough according to available public knowledge on encryption...
The NSA harped on Phil Zimmerman because he released his software for free, in source code, on the internet, enabling it to spead across the national boundaries. They don't seem to make a big deal about domestic strength crypto, though...
SORRY - I posted this the other day, but it seems appropriate to repost: ------------------------------------------------ --
PREFACE THIS WHOLE STATMENT WITH: "If the key does belong to the NSA..."
It is probably due to laziness on Microsofts part, or due to their marketing drones... I seem to recall the same thing occuring a few years back with Lotus Notes... The domestic version used 64-bit keys, while the "for export" version used 40-bit keys plus a 24-bit NSA key... The end result being that anyone interested in the data would face a 64-bit key (probably considered unbreakable a few years ago) while the NSA would only need to crack a 40 bit key (been breakable for quite a while)... This only applied to the exported versions, though.
Microsoft, in their marketing wisdom, probably chose not to have a domestic version and an exportable version, so as not to taint buyers of the exportable version with notion that it had easily defeated security. Therefore, they kept quiet about it, and did what Lotus did, but for their entire product line rather than just the part that was destined for sale outside the US...
I'd be much more angry with MSFT than the NSA... It's their (NSA's) job to collect information and spy, it's up to the people, businesses, and our gov't reps to try to
It actually seems to be above 100% scalability... the jump from 8 to 6 CPU's slightly more than doubles it's throughput... Higher up the scale, it seems to peter of a little, though
The PowerPC 750 lacks something that I think is called "cache coherence" circuitry, due to it's heritage from the PowerPC 603 & 603e... Apple has in the past said that providers could still create G3 Multi-Processing cards if they created a software patch to accomodate the lack of circuitry... It's proven that it's possible by the existance of the BeBox, a 603 based multiprocessing machine...
That sounds so cool! I'm going to go download a demo of that touch screen monitor right now! How do I get it out of the computer so I can test it out? Or does it just turn my existing monitor into a touch screen for a limited time?
Slashdot Mirror
It may be a little late, but i was mainly thinking that regular moderators would not be able to see comments as anything besides comments. Regular viewers could see everything associated (poster, score, etc..) Meta moderators, too. Just regular moderators, if they chose to moderate, would have to judge comments on their own merit rather than knowing who said what and what other moderators think
lucas
Personally, I'm AC because I don't trust the net not to pick cookies up for spamming (there may well be 10 servers between me and /. some days).
Well, I don't know how many servers reside between me & slashdot, but I can say this: I have yet to revieve a piece of spam to this oft-checked email address (the one above)... That's EVER. PERIOD. Plus I usually sign in from one of two IP addresses... So if you're worried for spam, don't...
No... I really think that moderators should make up their own minds, rather than even having the subtle influence of knowing that someone else already moderated this comment up and that one down to the having of a summary of whatevery one else thinks. This is slashdot, after all... ESPECIALLY if you've gone through the trouble of making an account, you've got a brain... You can think for yourself (at least a little, I hope! :)
That build is long gone. It was basically OpenStep with a cobbled together Mac-like interface that ran on then shipping powerpc's just to give developers a taste of Objective C...
Since then, there've been rumors that apple's been keeping OS-X development syncronized on x86 and PowerPC, but Apple's kept completely mum on the subject. They may have just done it when there was a little more uncertainity of IBM and Motorolla's commitments to the PowerPC...
Now, if that comment was posted because of an article about how Bill Gate's personal wealth had surpassed a trillion dollars, that comment might be moderated as being funny.
If it were posted because Microsoft bought Redhat, then one might call it insightful
If that comment was posted in context of a comparison between IIS and Apache, it could be considered flmebait.
If it were posted in a discussion about Sony's robotic dog, then it'd be a troll...
Basically without having any context to the comment (at least give us a link to the story and the it's parent) this meta-moderation seems rather pointless. We're (or rather Rob is) spinning in circles trying to figure out what to do about trolls... Just like anything else that's bad in life, it'd be hard to be sure to be rid of them without hurting ourselves as well.
How about this:
Moderators get 10 points, rather than 5.
They can choose which discussions they wish to moderate: so long as they're a moderator, they cannot change their comment threshold above -2 (or however low it goes). Also have it not show other people's moderations to the moderators (everything, regardless, would appear as being posted by the Anonymous Coward with a score of 1.
They can click a button at anytime that removes their moderations, shows original posters, other peoples moderations, and lets them comment. Kind of how it works now.
Basically, I think moderators were doing a good job thus far with the tools that have been supplied. What we need is more moderators, and more "un-biased" moderators, with unbiased meaning that they HAVE to view every comment, and not know what other people have said about it.
No... MacOS-X has the capability to run on intel, being that it was based on OpenStep, which ran on x86. The OLD apple said that they'ed release a version of OS X for Intel, but the new Apple has held out on commiting thus far.
I really think that Apple has a legitimate chance to get into business markets again, based on their own merits. No one wanted to buy machines from a business that may not be around to support them in a year. With Apple stock trading at an all-time high, it's apparent that they're here to stay.
What really needs for that to happen, is a company like Gartner re-iterating the TCO issues, along with the increased lifespan of Mac's vs. PC's, and to a point, lower training, etc...
You can give some credit to Gil Amelio, for starting the restructuring and setting a new course for Apple... He didn't understand Apple or its customers very well, though - he merely tried to plug the holes of the sinking ship, Apple.
When he brought Steve Jobs back, it was a godsend fo apple, but it also ended his reign. Steve Jobs has the personality to make people interested in and excited about things that Apple is doing. He also has much more perspective on the world than when he was at Apple 10 years ago.
So basically, I'd give some credit to Amelio for saving the company, but I'd give all the credit in the world to Jobs for making it prosperous, again.
Well a decent Intel Mobo with features comparable to an Alpha MB (64-bit PCI, UW SCSI) and SMP support (to keep it's performance comparable to single processor Alpha System) will probably run you $400 - $600 dollars, then you pay x2 or x2.5 for the chip itself, but only one rather than two PIII 600's, and you're pretty much even in terms of cost, but you've got a much faster system in the Alpha - supposing the apps you want to use are available (I know, it's just a recompile, but I swear - plenty of programs exist that are I deem essential that are also commercial, proprietary, closed, whatever you want to call it)
You really get what you pay for. If you don't need it, don't shell out the money. If you need it, then you can probably justify the outlay
FX32 is or will be useless for Win32 apps... remember - MSFT and Compaq pulled the plug on future NT development for the Alpha... Remember?
Now, I wonder if Compaq will (if it's their's to do so with) release FX32 source? That'd make the idea of an Alpha or PowerPC box running linux much more palatable.
How does the source of news affect whether a computer is a tool or not? They seem to be two completely debatable yet unrelated subjects.
I'm a big fan of the register, and in my experience, they seem to hit the nail on the head so much more often than just about any other news site. Problem is, they generally speculate about events that haven't been announced, so it sometimes takes 3 or 6 months for stories they've reported on to actually make sense. Which they do, 75 or 80% of the time.
So far as Alpha goes, ESPECIALLY if they're reporting it, I'll believe it to be a distinct possibility. If MSFT had said the same thing, I'd say it's marketing schpeel... But they're (MSFT) aren't exactly un-biased... (guess the register isn't either, though they're biased against liars and spin-meisters)
The FBI wants capacity to be able to tap 1% of domestic calls simultaneously.
European gov't complains about (and reveals the existance of) Echelon - a keyword scanning station.
In marrying those two, you end up with very impressive domestic surveilance capabilities. Agents no longer need to actually "listen" in on phonecalls that may or may not be deemed suspicious, as Echelon can monitor telephone, fax, email, etc... Probably merge all those results together and give a very detailed account of people, based on their insecure communications.
Linux? I'd go for OpenBSD anyday of the week over Linux, if only in this one instance!
:)
// Please, don't relegate me to flamebait or troll-dom for that!
Except barely anyone bothers with a password that long... Mine's somewhere between 70 and 100 characters, and I often find myself typing it in over and over and over and over, because I'm not the best of typists when I can't see what I'm typing.
Rather, if we were a socialist country, it would be an idea that could be achieved more easily. Just issue everyone state computer, to ensure that citizens all have equal access... But then, we're not a democracy anymore, are we?
Face it, we can't conduct elections over the internet, because it slants the playing field too much towards one end of the economic spectrum. Everyone needs to have equal access to the voting booths. You can't have the voting booths for white people in the center of the city, and require minorities to drive 50 miles to a separate booth, which is what in effect you'd create, only across economic lines rather than ethnic (which, sadly, seem to segement the population nearly identically)
We already complain about the slowness of the government in reacting to certain issues (dare I say it?).
We'd go nowhere as a country if they had to get a majority vote on any of the issues you pointed out. But we elected the people that make those decisions for us.
Maybe you don't like it? You can always run to "try and change things" (that's always the reason people state they're running... they rarely seem to succeed, however).
While I'm not sure about the internet as a voting mechanism for a number of reasons:
#1 - Less than 1/2 American households have computers. Their vote is just as important as any other.
#2 - Fraud. How about writing a script that automatically resubmits your vote, over and over. Or they could counter that and use PGP for authentication... That'd be an such an incredible amount of overhead, that most of the people with the means would probably go to the ballot booths.
#3 - Security. Rather than trying to break into gov't computers, you'd face hackers & foreign countries potentially trying to disrupt the elective process. How about 50,000 distinct IP addresses DOSing the voting sites? 100,000? 500,000. There's no way to ensure that people could vote under such conditions.
#4 - Basically, a lot of other variations on #1 and #2 and #3 that can occur. Yes, you can order stuff via the internet, and if a site flakes on you, that's regrettable, but okay. No matter what you think of the gov't as it stands today, having elections conducted over the internet is not going to change things one iota, but could stand to disrupt things in many unfavorable ways.
I'd love to see the internet used as a campaign platform: Set up a website with all the info anyone could possibly want, splatter the everywhere with banners and buttons and what have you, and you could probably save a fortune over traditional campaign costs.. but that leads us back to the fact that the only people that'd hear much of your campaign would be people with computers.
They're not counting 68k in that...
Nubus Power Mac's (6100, 7100, and 8100) were 1st generation (601's)
PCI Power Macs (7200, 7300, 7500, 7600, 8500, 8600, 9500, 9600) were the 2nd Generation (603, 603e, 604, 604e, except the 7200 which still used a 601)
(quite a lot of model numbers! I'm glad they've pruned them selves down to a basic model/speed
G3 Power Macs used the PPC 750 chip
G4 Power Macs will use the PPC 7400 chip
Part of what makes Slashdot Slashdot is that it's a community. Once you have Andover (no matter how cool or smart they are) behaving as full time moderators, you've taken the power from the community and placed it outside of our hands.
Though I sometimes don't agree with what moderators do to posts, I usually feel comfortable enough to browse at 0... the -1's usually trully are flame bait and such... I find it amusing when I post something, put clearly in the subject field that "This is Flamebait", ramble about something stupid, and then see the comment moderated up and spawning a whole new discussion thread!
My two cents are that:
1 - Moderators should get more points - I often don't moderate comments down because I feel my points would be better served highlighting the more insiteful comments than by filtering out people... With more points, I would feel more tempted to help point out the trolls.
2 - Posters of comments should be allowed (at least registered ones) to moderate themselves (just so you can see what they're thinking - I could moderate myself as offtopic, just so people would know that's what they're getting into). Don't have that posters moderation change the point total, just use it for a "mood"
3 - we need more categories for moderation
4 - allow more people to moderate at a time... Again, I tend to hold onto my points for a couple of days, hoping an interesting article gets posted, rather than getting drawn into an Apple vs Linux, or Redhat vs. Debian, or everyone vs. microsoft discussion. Having more active moderators with more points would definitely weed out the trolls and polish the gems.
5 - People who are consistently moderated down probably should start at 0... Don't make them go any lower than that, but rather send an automatic email to their account as a warning, and then discontinue their account... They can then sign up again with the same login, just make it a tad bit more difficult for people who abuse the system.
Gore's wife founded the PMRC... So of course he's going to back this effort as well... That news is only 15 years old, so don't act too suprised.
Surely... 512 Bit RSA is the functional equivilant to 40 or maybe 64 bit crypto using a symmetric cypher. It in no way approaches the strength of a 128 bit symetric cipher, so long as the keys are exchanged securely (using 768, 1024, or greater RSA)
Since 512bit RSA was cracked recently with not too much effort, I am pretty sure the NSA can break any public key crytography in real time. Check out their webpage and see the kinds of people they want (eg maths wizards)
Why? 512 bit RSA had been theoretically breakable for quite some time... For over a year now, it has been voiced that everyone abandon 512-bit for either 768 or 1024 (or more...). Just because someone finally got around to showing the world that 512 is breakable, that shouldn't overly alarm you if you're using keys much longer than that. And if they could break public key crypto in real time, there'd be no point to their posturing against it. They'ed let it spread, knowing it was futile.
Well, first they'ed laugh at them for creating such inefficient software... 5 megabyte keys, sure they're a whole lot more secure than 128 bit keys... but 128 bits are more than strong enough according to available public knowledge on encryption...
The NSA harped on Phil Zimmerman because he released his software for free, in source code, on the internet, enabling it to spead across the national boundaries. They don't seem to make a big deal about domestic strength crypto, though...
SORRY - I posted this the other day, but it seems appropriate to repost:- --
-----------------------------------------------
PREFACE THIS WHOLE STATMENT WITH: "If the key does belong to the NSA..."
It is probably due to laziness on Microsofts part, or due to their marketing drones... I seem to recall the same thing occuring a few years back with Lotus Notes... The domestic version used 64-bit keys, while the "for export" version used 40-bit keys plus a 24-bit NSA key... The end result being that anyone interested in the data would face a 64-bit key (probably considered unbreakable a few years ago) while the NSA would only need to crack a 40 bit key (been breakable for quite a while)... This only applied to the exported versions, though.
Microsoft, in their marketing wisdom, probably chose not to have a domestic version and an exportable version, so as not to taint buyers of the exportable version with notion that it had easily defeated security. Therefore, they kept quiet about it, and did what Lotus did, but for their entire product line rather than just the part that was destined for sale outside the US...
I'd be much more angry with MSFT than the NSA... It's their (NSA's) job to collect information and spy, it's up to the people, businesses, and our gov't reps to try to
It actually seems to be above 100% scalability... the jump from 8 to 6 CPU's slightly more than doubles it's throughput... Higher up the scale, it seems to peter of a little, though
The PowerPC 750 lacks something that I think is called "cache coherence" circuitry, due to it's heritage from the PowerPC 603 & 603e... Apple has in the past said that providers could still create G3 Multi-Processing cards if they created a software patch to accomodate the lack of circuitry... It's proven that it's possible by the existance of the BeBox, a 603 based multiprocessing machine...
That sounds so cool! I'm going to go download a demo of that touch screen monitor right now! How do I get it out of the computer so I can test it out? Or does it just turn my existing monitor into a touch screen for a limited time?
:P
(It's friday!)