The complaint is not the store exists. It's that Apple goes out of their way to prevent you from getting software from any other source, and claims that you're a criminal if you try.
What do you mean, do you think people are incapable of
Most consumers want the closed store. The store is not just a place where goods are sold, but a vision of what the owners of that store hold to be ideal. To say that you should have the right to trump what Apple decides should or should not be in the store is the same sort of artistic infringement that says you should be able to change the ending of star wars. If you don't like Apple's vision, make your own store, with your vision.
It might be your values that keep you against air bursting to get a 10,000 ton space ship from the ground to Mars in a couple of weeks, but other countries will, and they will dominate the west by learning how to do something we are too big of pussies to do.
The ultimate point is that even if you believed that nonproliferation could work, and it can't, even the genuinely peaceful uses of nuclear technology will bestow adopting nations tremendous advantages.
We're just being stupid by not adopting this technology first.
You know I have 10 mod points, but I already posted this thread, so I can't mod you up. But let me say to others with points that you should not be modded down for what you wrote. This is not flamebait.
Am I? The potential wealth in space is damn near infinite. Based on all available evidence, we have at least our solar system and likely hundreds of solar systems in our immediate vicinity at our disposal. If we did starve a generation, cut the federal budget for both the military and welfare and half, and spent it all on developing space technologies, sure, a hell of a lot of people would starve, but future generations would have unimaginable wealth and opportunity.
You know, I'm actually pretty happy with my z8pe-d12 so far. The only thing minor things with it are:
a) I didn't research the number of pins on fans - the mobo takes three or four pin fans, but I got all threes and I could have gone with the four (as if there is some advantage with it)
b) It has onboard video but no sound. I'd rather have the sound, than the video.
c) For some reason, lm-sensors doesn't pick up any sensors.
All in all, if you've got a few extra bucks, the Tyan 7025 is probably your better board, but, for its price, I'd say the ASUS Z8PE-D12 is a-ok.
We're part neanderthal? Kinda hard to convince the world we are the master race when we alone are half breeds with a non-verbal dumbass species...shit... we're the INFERIOR race!!!
It seems like loading up a motherboard with loads of PCI Express slots coupled with the 5520 chipset just makes for trouble. I actually almost bought the motherboard upon which this computer is based, P6T-WS-Professional, but the problem is that it got some fairly mixed reviews as far as stability goes. Tyan has a similar product, the S7025, but let yous you use two CPUs. In both cases, people are reporting issues with.the boards.
It's rather unlike ASUS, for sure, as I trust the brand of motherboard. So I stepped down to a less exotic asus z8pe-d12, which, has the added bonus of letting me run dual xeons, rather than just the single. I probably could have gone with the Tyan, but it was more expensive, and honestly, GPU computing isn't something I'm doing.
Incidentally, not having PCI Express lanes like this is probably killing AMD more than anything else right now. I looked at building an Opteron board based on Shanghai / Istanbul instead of Nehalem but the difference was PCI Express x16. There's not much out there at all for AMD that supports it and dual CPU. It's a shame because I had an Opteron previously and I like the brand a lot.
Next time I saw the doctor she changed the prescription to PaxilCR, which was newly patented -- and didn't work for me at all, while the old generic paroxitine did.
In fairness to your doctor, many people actually don't do well with generic substitutions, particularly for psych meds. He/She might have been trying to do you a favor and keep your medication consistent. Generics - are not the same -.
Everyone has it in their heads that drug companies should get a special monopoly because drugs are so expensive. Maybe we need to knock off the special breaks and accept what our pricing signals are telling us. A lot of this stuff is simply too expensive and we need to figure out ways to make drug research less expensive.
Unfortunately, the entire world of genetics will turn itself upside down in the next 30-100 years as we gain the ability to understand genes and modify them at will, so we'll at most have 2 more generations where that sort of thing matters
I would bet too, that conservatives would be quicker to adopt this technology. Americans are just weird that way.
This is not meant to discourage you — while this recent immigrant finds both of the main sides of America's culture-wars unpleasant, I'd rather the conservatives win — but to point out, that taking back the schools and the popular culture should be the primary target, rather than a mere afterthought.
First off, welcome to America. The biggest problem with conservatism is that it does not recognize it is a world wide movement the same way the left recognizes it does. Conservative writers have piss poor coordination with other nations whereas such as national autonomy, preservation of culture, are all something everyone would want in any country. I mean, conservatives in America might be more sympathetic to the French when they decry mcdonalds overtaking local restaurants, or when writers in the eastern bloc protest how globalization threatens long standing traditions.
However, it's interesting that in such a devoutly "Christian" country like the USA, a majority of the population favors legal abortions (though regulated)
I think the national consensus is before the 1st trimester, its ok. All the 3d ultrasound makes later terms than that, when it actually looks like a baby, to be different.
This is an odd stance for a conservative to take. Why don't you think people should be supporting themselves by planning ahead? Why is it up to the rest of us to crank out enough kids at our expense to support you in your old age?
I'm just being factual. It costs way too much money to live as an old person. It simply does. I mean, the last year of a person's life can run up hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical and other bills. Nursing homes are expensive. People simply cannot pay for themselves when they get old.
Besides, look at how the country's finances are with the prospect of massive asset sales as baby boomers retire. you think there's a housing glut and crappy stock market now, but wait a few years until all those mcmansions and 401k plans start getting cashed in.
Take a look at the world sir. The richest countries in the world also tend to have the lowest birth rates
No, the richest countries in the world are that way because the west has abundant natural resources, a rich tradition of the rule of law, and other things. The poorest countries of the world, particularly Africa, are screwed up not because of their birth rate, but because, the west's interaction with africa, slavery, countless civil wars and coups, have made the rule of law of joke. The idea of the third world lowering its birth rate is because the west does not want to be outpaced in population.
We experienced a surge in population because of a surge in wealth. Having kids you can't afford is a bad idea.
Put the kids to work for you, kill two birds with one stone.
Loads of kids growing up in broken homes with inadequate attention, education, and nutrition aren't going to be supporting anyone
Today's bottom tier Americans are richer, in terms of energy per capita, transportation, heat, shelter, and clothing, than all but the richest people of 200 years ago. How much wealth do you need?
BTW, whatever happened to planning for your own retirement? Raising a child costs $125,000 to $250,000. That could go a long way if you invested it instead.
Invest in what? Overall, economically, national economic growth is tied to hmmm, population growth. Besides, the cost of putting up an old person in a nursing home could, in the space of two years, put a kid through college. You either have to cut old people off, or have more kids to share the costs to support them. It's simple math.
You're focusing on genetic evolution but ignoring memetic evolution.
Hmm, I'm really not. The two go hand in hand and you have to see that cultural and physical evolution ultimately go hand in hand. If anything, the biggest values that a kid can get come from the family.
because people saw how much squalor and human suffering comes from crapping out kids willy-nilly.
Except that, this is not true. The USA experienced a huge surge in population and really only ran into fiscal problems when our population growth rate dropped. Old people are expensive to take care of, and the cheapest way to do that is have loads of kids so as to share the costs.
Your observation does not reflect anyones desire, only the will forced upon them by their government
I don't buy that at all, and our collective national experience in our two wars is our best evidence. The fact is, and we're learning this in the countries that we invade, is that the policies you describe actually have a large measure of POPULAR support. If Democracy cannot be imposed by a barrel of a gun, as liberals are fond of saying, than I would argue nothing else can, either.
Oh, the great irony of politics is that Darwin is firmly on the right wing side. In the end, the earth belongs to those who have the most babies, and, all those things you advocate, undermine your own culture as much as they undermine your genes. A quick spin of the globe shows that religious societies are the ones producing the most children - and secular societies the least. You can condemn Islam's male domination, or the quaint traditions of American Christianity, but, the fact is, they are the ones having the babies while secular people are not.
So sure, please, believe it: marriage and having a person stay at home is quaint.... if you get your girlfriend pregnant, its better to get rid of the child than to ruin your lives, believe all of it. If we can then privatize schools and do the other things so that your input to our culture can be blocked, we can exterminate liberalism all the more quickly, simply by out-breeding it. But, at the end of the day, your way of life is doomed, simply because, for better or for worse, our religious culture has been evolved by hundreds of generations of human cultural evolution, and your culture will fall by the wayside as much as your genes will perish forever in the dust.
I think that the misuse of "your" shows that this post was entirely made up. If this slashdotter is a real MSFT employee, then it doesn't sound like someone from client performance team of the core product group.
Uh, check his posting history. I think he's the real deal.
Look, I'm no bleeding heart... but, you've got two things wrong:
a) First off, I think your figures might well be understated, particularly if energy costs rise in real terms. If anything, any power that your computer uses during the summer time costs you more because, first you pay to buy the energy, then, you pay to get rid of its heat.
b) Secondly, you falsely assume that the sole reason for the upgrade is solely due to power efficiency. This is a technical web site, and one can expect that people here tend to be in a mode of continual upgrades and investments. We can then assume, more likely, that the person is going to upgrade anyway, and is simply using energy as a selection of what to upgrade to, rather than just upgrade.
For example, I upgraded my prized Opteron to a new Nehalem Xeon box. Was energy efficiency the sole reason that I did it? No. I did it because I wanted a new computer. But it was certainly worth knowing what some of the different energy options are, and yeah, I probably will wind up saving, under Delaware rates, enough money to at least buy myself a decent bottle of whiskey (knob creek, or, laphroig), simply because the new box uses a lot less power than my old dual Opt 270 did.
But, yeah, I'll give you one thing... if you really want to save power on your computer, turn it off.
The key really is, how do create a social mechanism to prevent excessive concentrations of wealth, without creating a defacto concentration of wealth?
It's almost like you need to have the social rules set up so that its easy come, easy go... once you reach a certain point in wealth, it should be easier to blow it and lose it all.
Slashdot Mirror
The complaint is not the store exists. It's that Apple goes out of their way to prevent you from getting software from any other source, and claims that you're a criminal if you try.
What do you mean, do you think people are incapable of
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=mac+software
Most consumers want the closed store. The store is not just a place where goods are sold, but a vision of what the owners of that store hold to be ideal. To say that you should have the right to trump what Apple decides should or should not be in the store is the same sort of artistic infringement that says you should be able to change the ending of star wars. If you don't like Apple's vision, make your own store, with your vision.
I was like, this is -really- getting fast now!
It might be your values that keep you against air bursting to get a 10,000 ton space ship from the ground to Mars in a couple of weeks, but other countries will, and they will dominate the west by learning how to do something we are too big of pussies to do.
I've predicted this a long time ago:
http://www.treatyist.com/issue1/everyonegetsthebomb.aspx
The ultimate point is that even if you believed that nonproliferation could work, and it can't, even the genuinely peaceful uses of nuclear technology will bestow adopting nations tremendous advantages.
We're just being stupid by not adopting this technology first.
You know I have 10 mod points, but I already posted this thread, so I can't mod you up. But let me say to others with points that you should not be modded down for what you wrote. This is not flamebait.
Sorry, but you're a heartless bastard.
Am I? The potential wealth in space is damn near infinite. Based on all available evidence, we have at least our solar system and likely hundreds of solar systems in our immediate vicinity at our disposal. If we did starve a generation, cut the federal budget for both the military and welfare and half, and spent it all on developing space technologies, sure, a hell of a lot of people would starve, but future generations would have unimaginable wealth and opportunity.
Suuuure, its whites who basicly had sex with apes.
Where did AIDS come from again? hummmm
LOL. White people, we the inferior race told the world we were better, then we invented AIDS.
Woops. Guess we gotta lay low for a while!
ASUS motherboard?
You know, I'm actually pretty happy with my z8pe-d12 so far. The only thing minor things with it are:
a) I didn't research the number of pins on fans - the mobo takes three or four pin fans, but I got all threes and I could have gone with the four (as if there is some advantage with it)
b) It has onboard video but no sound. I'd rather have the sound, than the video.
c) For some reason, lm-sensors doesn't pick up any sensors.
All in all, if you've got a few extra bucks, the Tyan 7025 is probably your better board, but, for its price, I'd say the ASUS Z8PE-D12 is a-ok.
We're part neanderthal? Kinda hard to convince the world we are the master race when we alone are half breeds with a non-verbal dumbass species...shit... we're the INFERIOR race!!!
I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disability and have the spaceship, then not, if it comes to that.
It seems like loading up a motherboard with loads of PCI Express slots coupled with the 5520 chipset just makes for trouble. I actually almost bought the motherboard upon which this computer is based, P6T-WS-Professional, but the problem is that it got some fairly mixed reviews as far as stability goes. Tyan has a similar product, the S7025, but let yous you use two CPUs. In both cases, people are reporting issues with.the boards.
It's rather unlike ASUS, for sure, as I trust the brand of motherboard. So I stepped down to a less exotic asus z8pe-d12, which, has the added bonus of letting me run dual xeons, rather than just the single. I probably could have gone with the Tyan, but it was more expensive, and honestly, GPU computing isn't something I'm doing.
Incidentally, not having PCI Express lanes like this is probably killing AMD more than anything else right now. I looked at building an Opteron board based on Shanghai / Istanbul instead of Nehalem but the difference was PCI Express x16. There's not much out there at all for AMD that supports it and dual CPU. It's a shame because I had an Opteron previously and I like the brand a lot.
Next time I saw the doctor she changed the prescription to PaxilCR, which was newly patented -- and didn't work for me at all, while the old generic paroxitine did.
In fairness to your doctor, many people actually don't do well with generic substitutions, particularly for psych meds. He/She might have been trying to do you a favor and keep your medication consistent. Generics - are not the same -.
Everyone has it in their heads that drug companies should get a special monopoly because drugs are so expensive. Maybe we need to knock off the special breaks and accept what our pricing signals are telling us. A lot of this stuff is simply too expensive and we need to figure out ways to make drug research less expensive.
Unfortunately, the entire world of genetics will turn itself upside down in the next 30-100 years as we gain the ability to understand genes and modify them at will, so we'll at most have 2 more generations where that sort of thing matters
I would bet too, that conservatives would be quicker to adopt this technology. Americans are just weird that way.
This is not meant to discourage you — while this recent immigrant finds both of the main sides of America's culture-wars unpleasant, I'd rather the conservatives win — but to point out, that taking back the schools and the popular culture should be the primary target, rather than a mere afterthought.
First off, welcome to America. The biggest problem with conservatism is that it does not recognize it is a world wide movement the same way the left recognizes it does. Conservative writers have piss poor coordination with other nations whereas such as national autonomy, preservation of culture, are all something everyone would want in any country. I mean, conservatives in America might be more sympathetic to the French when they decry mcdonalds overtaking local restaurants, or when writers in the eastern bloc protest how globalization threatens long standing traditions.
However, it's interesting that in such a devoutly "Christian" country like the USA, a majority of the population favors legal abortions (though regulated)
I think the national consensus is before the 1st trimester, its ok. All the 3d ultrasound makes later terms than that, when it actually looks like a baby, to be different.
This is an odd stance for a conservative to take. Why don't you think people should be supporting themselves by planning ahead? Why is it up to the rest of us to crank out enough kids at our expense to support you in your old age?
I'm just being factual. It costs way too much money to live as an old person. It simply does. I mean, the last year of a person's life can run up hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical and other bills. Nursing homes are expensive. People simply cannot pay for themselves when they get old.
Besides, look at how the country's finances are with the prospect of massive asset sales as baby boomers retire. you think there's a housing glut and crappy stock market now, but wait a few years until all those mcmansions and 401k plans start getting cashed in.
Take a look at the world sir. The richest countries in the world also tend to have the lowest birth rates
No, the richest countries in the world are that way because the west has abundant natural resources, a rich tradition of the rule of law, and other things. The poorest countries of the world, particularly Africa, are screwed up not because of their birth rate, but because, the west's interaction with africa, slavery, countless civil wars and coups, have made the rule of law of joke. The idea of the third world lowering its birth rate is because the west does not want to be outpaced in population.
We experienced a surge in population because of a surge in wealth. Having kids you can't afford is a bad idea.
Put the kids to work for you, kill two birds with one stone.
Loads of kids growing up in broken homes with inadequate attention, education, and nutrition aren't going to be supporting anyone
Today's bottom tier Americans are richer, in terms of energy per capita, transportation, heat, shelter, and clothing, than all but the richest people of 200 years ago. How much wealth do you need?
BTW, whatever happened to planning for your own retirement? Raising a child costs $125,000 to $250,000. That could go a long way if you invested it instead.
Invest in what? Overall, economically, national economic growth is tied to hmmm, population growth. Besides, the cost of putting up an old person in a nursing home could, in the space of two years, put a kid through college. You either have to cut old people off, or have more kids to share the costs to support them. It's simple math.
You're focusing on genetic evolution but ignoring memetic evolution.
Hmm, I'm really not. The two go hand in hand and you have to see that cultural and physical evolution ultimately go hand in hand. If anything, the biggest values that a kid can get come from the family.
because people saw how much squalor and human suffering comes from crapping out kids willy-nilly.
Except that, this is not true. The USA experienced a huge surge in population and really only ran into fiscal problems when our population growth rate dropped. Old people are expensive to take care of, and the cheapest way to do that is have loads of kids so as to share the costs.
Your observation does not reflect anyones desire, only the will forced upon them by their government
I don't buy that at all, and our collective national experience in our two wars is our best evidence. The fact is, and we're learning this in the countries that we invade, is that the policies you describe actually have a large measure of POPULAR support. If Democracy cannot be imposed by a barrel of a gun, as liberals are fond of saying, than I would argue nothing else can, either.
And yes, for the anti-abortion readers
Oh, the great irony of politics is that Darwin is firmly on the right wing side. In the end, the earth belongs to those who have the most babies, and, all those things you advocate, undermine your own culture as much as they undermine your genes. A quick spin of the globe shows that religious societies are the ones producing the most children - and secular societies the least. You can condemn Islam's male domination, or the quaint traditions of American Christianity, but, the fact is, they are the ones having the babies while secular people are not.
So sure, please, believe it: marriage and having a person stay at home is quaint.... if you get your girlfriend pregnant, its better to get rid of the child than to ruin your lives, believe all of it. If we can then privatize schools and do the other things so that your input to our culture can be blocked, we can exterminate liberalism all the more quickly, simply by out-breeding it. But, at the end of the day, your way of life is doomed, simply because, for better or for worse, our religious culture has been evolved by hundreds of generations of human cultural evolution, and your culture will fall by the wayside as much as your genes will perish forever in the dust.
I think that the misuse of "your" shows that this post was entirely made up. If this slashdotter is a real MSFT employee, then it doesn't sound like someone from client performance team of the core product group.
Uh, check his posting history. I think he's the real deal.
The savings of 70/yr after 7 years is 490 dollars
Look, I'm no bleeding heart... but, you've got two things wrong:
a) First off, I think your figures might well be understated, particularly if energy costs rise in real terms. If anything, any power that your computer uses during the summer time costs you more because, first you pay to buy the energy, then, you pay to get rid of its heat.
b) Secondly, you falsely assume that the sole reason for the upgrade is solely due to power efficiency. This is a technical web site, and one can expect that people here tend to be in a mode of continual upgrades and investments. We can then assume, more likely, that the person is going to upgrade anyway, and is simply using energy as a selection of what to upgrade to, rather than just upgrade.
For example, I upgraded my prized Opteron to a new Nehalem Xeon box. Was energy efficiency the sole reason that I did it? No. I did it because I wanted a new computer. But it was certainly worth knowing what some of the different energy options are, and yeah, I probably will wind up saving, under Delaware rates, enough money to at least buy myself a decent bottle of whiskey (knob creek, or, laphroig), simply because the new box uses a lot less power than my old dual Opt 270 did.
But, yeah, I'll give you one thing... if you really want to save power on your computer, turn it off.
The key really is, how do create a social mechanism to prevent excessive concentrations of wealth, without creating a defacto concentration of wealth?
It's almost like you need to have the social rules set up so that its easy come, easy go... once you reach a certain point in wealth, it should be easier to blow it and lose it all.