I have never understood how these insecure online banking systems I hear about now and then are even legal in (some) 1st world countries - this would simply not do in Finland. In my bank (Nordea) you need login ID (long string of numbers) and 4 digit single use "pin code" (the bank sends you a new sheet when your close to end) - and even if you get my login codes (by tricking me to fake bank website?) you can use them only once - and then you cant get past when it asks for a random number from a set of 4 digit "confirmation codes".
So, yeah, one more caracteristics that will be artificially price-tired through a pure software setting!
Yes that's exactly how the market works today, not some new thing. I know geeks get offended by this reality, but objects are sold for what the market will bear, and the cost of creating them is only a secondary concern.
Yeah, this has always offended me, but that just means it's a separate issue from pros and cons of CPU technology discussed here.
So medical applications on tablets and phones give wrong answers. Okay?
That would mean that some idiot is using this CPU in wrong way and for wrong purpose - if you did not read the article then you are an ignorant ass for making these comments and if you did then I really see no way I could explain it clearly enough so that you would understand that I'm not an idiot - so feel free to call me one, I wont care.
So if it turns ou that they do want to resuce drug use and the the most cost effective way to acheive that is indeed to send all users to prison that would be ok?
Maybe if "reducing drug use" in itself would have a proven value of it's own - however putting users in prison is often supported regardless of what it will result in, and often by people who don't count alcohol and tobacco as drugs for no other reasons than them being legal.
Done that, seen evidence (factual) that proves your statement false, have not seen facts to support that prohibition reduces (or does not increase) any problems commonly attributed to drug use.
Something has become clear to me - and it's NOT what you seem to believe. One thing clear to me now is that it's useless to argue with prohibitionists - it's clearly a moral issue for them.
I don't agree with your definition of what can or can't be a "right".
However more importantly I want to say that while the right for healthcare is almost never as simple as people for or against it make it be, but still more importantly that right seems currently very much proven to be possible - it works just great here in Finland and on number of EU countries as well. There is proof that this is a "good thing" - is this not part of the issue(s) on TFA / comments?
You are the douchebag here - what the hell is wrong with some people? It's not like it's your problem - and seems that you are wrong about whatever you think would happen too.
Because. This is the kind of thing where only justifications you need are you liking the idea and there being no serious risks involved - besides that I'm sure there are many people who think it's stupid (I don't, I'm just uninterested to get this myself), but hey, nobody has to do this to themselves so they should just shut up:)
Which means we will never get anything to solve them?
Flying cars did not even get this far - google cars are already tested on the read and it seems realistic that they will succeed on market. Whether it leads to "traffic utopia" or not remains to be seen, but "because flying cars, da-a!" is no argument at all
It's not just about the number of cars on the road. It's about traffic lights, trouble merging, lag in following the car in front, etc, and self-driving cars would address all of this. Cars could drive around at high speed without the need for traffic lights, like a choreographed stunt driving routine, vastly improving traffic flow.
Unfortunately that would scare passengers so it will never happen.
"Never" is a word often thrown too easy on similar discussions - I see large number of reasons to expect that it may very well happen, but it won't happen in one over-night step but in small continuing advance on driver-less cars, thus also not scaring passengers as they get used to it one change at a time.
We have "vouchers" in Sweden in the form that anyone can send their kids to any school, private or public, free of charge. The only thing it has brought us is segregating the kids who do well into separate schools from everyone else. The kids who performed well didn't perform any better (though the private schools like to inflate grades in order to look more attractive to parents) and the kids who did poorly now perform worse than they did before.
And Finland we have the same system too, it works great:) I'm damn lucky I was born here - could be much worse, like USA for example.
The way to improve schools IMHO is to reduce class sizes to 10-15 kids so that teachers have time to help every kid who needs help, but that costs money...
...costs money in the short run, many people seem to be unable to see any further, which is sad
Indeed - we have a public school systems and it's not just K-12, it's all the way up until universities and even then the costs come mostly from expensive books & such material - and you get (even though it's really too small) monthly support to pay for living while you are studying. We all know that this system works great - and we know that where it has shortcomings the solution is NOT decreasing public funding and letting "free" market deal with it.
Tablets and many modern computers don't even have optical drives, so the software would be dead weight. Given the cost-imposed storage limitations of SSD's, I'd prefer to trim out all of the superfluous legacy software.
You believe that removing stuff like DVD decoding keys/codec driver will do anything to trim down Windows? We're talking of an OS which install files don't fit on CD and has really insane HD space requirements, considering they are only for the OS and a little amount of mostly inferior bundled software.
Debian, Ubuntu and most other linux distributions can be installed from single CD (though some, ie. Debian, provide also extra CD's and/or DVD's for more additional programs) and I don't understand what in the world justifies the enormous size and space requirements of Windows. Even though Windows has features missing from default installation of most distros, they can't take up that much, they could not even if we forget that most distros also have stuff windows does not by default. And really, any distro targeted for common modern computers needs only a fragment of space from CD for Linux OS environment (kernel, user space, desktop and software like those which are bundled in Windows), but usually still use the rest for "some extra", which usually includes the top FOSS alternatives for full office suit, image manipulation, media playback and management, etc.
To give an example of my experience that might explain why I can't accept the bloat of Windows space needs as anything close to reasonable, or even "sane for maybe B-class SW company", I had this quite modern HW setup I assembled myself (and kept upgrading like I've done for ages) from '08 to last summer. The only major part that was same during that time was a hard disk, which was an old 10GB one my school threw/gave away which I picked up year before building this system. I originally took it for use in some older hardware I have, but knowing my tools I chose to have it to host OS & programs on a new system. Of course I had a fileserver already in place to host my work, media and such files, with just my audio collection having several times of it, I never imagined to have all my files on this 10GB piece that would have made me jealous in late 90's - but I had all the software, except few Win/DOS apps I still ran with DosBox (DETH, my favorite DooM level editor, and fork for ZDooM engine, ZETH) & wine (WinTex for DooM WAD-file access for other resources like graphics), and bunch of non-pc games, mostly C-64 floppy/tape images. To be fair, Wine, DosBox and the emulators to run them, as well as later installed windows programs were on that 10GB too.
I did not have the full disk available for all this either - I partitioned it with 2GB swap partition.
I never ditched that system. In matter for this example the machine is gone but in matter for what I use as one of two main desktops it's still in use, but has a 30GB disk I installed debian freshly - though, unless you count the casing, everything else has been replaced which makes it physically a different system. I did copy most configuration files from the old installation though, and run the same software.
To be fair, I started with Debian minimal installation and started with only basic Linux/GNU environment plus Debian packet management software (only the basic CLI tools) and started installing whatever I needed by hand until I had a simple desktop setup with nothing extra and missing even some basic features and after that only installed/configured something when I needed new tools or a feature I had not needed before. I could have started with debian default install, but I would have eventually ran out of space - when I changed HD I chose to reinstall, not because I was not happy with the OS in large, but because minor stuff I had not bothered to configure, like automatic adding/removing mount points for removable media, etc. - I figured that I would sooner get them by running default install with all regular stuff in pla
Your link did not work for me as I recently changed my ISP for the only one in Finland DNS-blocking piratebay.se, so I used their alt. address for finns, piraattilahti.org, chose to search only games and entered "linux" - there is a reason why I almost believed (only almost, which is why I tried) there might be less linux games for linux on piratebay, though I never believed your exact number. Found myself checking titles I did not know existing for linux or at all. Take your BS elsewhere, even though odds are this is just a joke (can't be certain with internet).
But a PC can remain perfectly usable to most average people way longer than a warranty for one lasts - in fact, this is the case most of the time. The software is usually even sold many times longer than a warranty of a PC is, and the cost of plain install media is next to nothing to make. Finally, on this day of internet, a software manufacturer could (and should) offer a download for it at least as long they are selling it - and IMHO, MS should keep available even W2K install ISO's available for download... one old laptop I rescued might still run MS software instead of linux if the support line had offered such choice instead of trying to get me buy a newer version of Windows (that would not even install, let alone "run" without quotes, on it).
...hell, even drivers for this pre 21st century hardware and for year 2k OS are still available, but I could not get my hands on legal copy of the OS - using pirated install media when having a license for it would probably even be legal in Finland (downloading it would not, though it's not punishable) but not being able to legally restore the system I own a license for just pissed me off so that I chose to take another way.
IMHO MS should enforce OEM's to provide good old fashioned install media, in one form or another, like they used to do by default back in the good old days in case the OS fsck's itself - I would accept a service for reinstalling OS and other initial software shipped with the system by retailer as alternative.
It may not be legally their fault, but when my mothers system gets messed beyond repair any other way but reinstalling and she has to pay extra because the system did not come with installation media and she has no backup that could help, I do blame the fault to MS.
1st, I don't know if her Vista (yuff) system asked if she wanted to create a recovery media when she first started it, but she did not get an empty DVD with the system nor would she understand what purpose would it serve to do it. It's perfectly reasonable that when asked by system if she wanted to do something she does not understand and is optional that she would chose not to do it - and in case of my mother this is also among the most important ground rules I myself taught to my mother: if in doubt, don't.
2nd, burned DVD's last only so long, and are way more prone to damage than pressed disks. I have a bunch of home burn CD's, unscratched and stored properly, from early 2000's, specially before autumn '02 when I still had tiny 3.6GB HD - the ones with music I did/could not buy vary from perfect to having errors that even cdparanoia can't rip without audible skips on all tracks. The disks with data are mostly worthless - most unreadable and this includes all but one disc from of backups of the 3.6GB drive, and even that one is not fully readable. Home burned DVD's last even shorter time - a lot - than CD's. While I would, how on earth would my mother - who could not figure how to burn VHS's (serious collector) to DVD with special VHS&DVD recorder combo she bought to preserve them - had known that the discs age and stop working? Well, she does now, I told her that, but had her son not known this, she would not either. 3rd: Does MS seriously expect people to make recovery disk on 1st boot AND know, remember and understand that a backup must be re-burnt in time... now, hand up everyone whose mom & pop would know where to start if you assign them to make a new recovery disk?
No, MS expects no such thing - they know perfectly well that even in case of having to pay large for getting their system fixed or replaced the number of customers lost is insignificant and new systems sold, resulting in more profit, are considerable, and they see no reason to change anything - on contrary.
Recovery media for OS the user has license for should have nominal only price.
Finally, as not doing so does not serve any purpose, as things are this day not even limiting pirated Windows, they should just offer free no-questions-asked download of ISO image files for install media of all Windows versions since XP (not including not-sold-to-public, such as Win for Nuclear Submarines, never-should-have-been-made versions) for those with the know-how of how to use them. Seriously, no reason for not just providing them on simple FTP server exists.
Btw, I have not made a recovery disk for my mom - I know that she does nothing that she could not do with 100% FOSS system, I know it would be easier for her and if she ever needs re-installing of OS, I will do it and it will not be the same OS.
I dislike both a lot but with all other reasons I hate Microsoft and the fact they are member of consortium holding H264 patent, which I loathe at least as much as MPEGLA, I add up to disliking MS more - but I have to admit that your point is one good thing this results into.
...and in the end, this would be almost a non-issue for me if MS had not chosen to lie about this being beneficial for end users in any way whatsoever when the fact is that nothing will cost less for end user anyway, but in some cases the exact opposite is perfectly realistic chance. Even though I don't see this affecting MS much for one or the other direction, not counting saved license fees, this kind off BS ticks me off.
I could not care less about this issue, it's just the BS about end-users benefiting anything about this, wethever their PC comes with optical drive or not - MS is saving money, end users end up paying the same, or in some cases, due to lack of knowledge, extra.
They are turning a money saving business decision a common user does not even need to understand into advertising end users about how great this is for them - this pisses me off, as does false advertising in general.
Indeed - I'm OK with paying for it though... that is I pay for the hardware (be it home stereo or PC components) needed for playback and I should be able to then use that hardware without extra pay, unless I specifically choose to use commercial 3rd party software for it.
Aye, Win95 and even early 98 came without pre-installed browser (W98 was later branded and sold as "Windows 98 Internet Explorer" edition, or something like that, with IE's name actually under Windows 98 text on boot screen) and ISP's gave end users CD's (or even floppies?) with a browser - usually NS or IE, though you could have downloaded one via FTP'ing from command prompt to your preferred FTP software archive...
So... what do you do if you have a machine with no OS on it to download anything from? Install from USB? I've seen some Linux distros that might be able to accomplish that, but they're not for the novice.
I carry around USB stick that among containing various Linux & Windows software works as Ubuntu "Live stick" - you can install from the live session, but yeah, Ubuntu sure ain't for novice;)
Slashdot Mirror
I have never understood how these insecure online banking systems I hear about now and then are even legal in (some) 1st world countries - this would simply not do in Finland. In my bank (Nordea) you need login ID (long string of numbers) and 4 digit single use "pin code" (the bank sends you a new sheet when your close to end) - and even if you get my login codes (by tricking me to fake bank website?) you can use them only once - and then you cant get past when it asks for a random number from a set of 4 digit "confirmation codes".
So, yeah, one more caracteristics that will be artificially price-tired through a pure software setting!
Yes that's exactly how the market works today, not some new thing. I know geeks get offended by this reality, but objects are sold for what the market will bear, and the cost of creating them is only a secondary concern.
Yeah, this has always offended me, but that just means it's a separate issue from pros and cons of CPU technology discussed here.
So medical applications on tablets and phones give wrong answers. Okay?
That would mean that some idiot is using this CPU in wrong way and for wrong purpose - if you did not read the article then you are an ignorant ass for making these comments and if you did then I really see no way I could explain it clearly enough so that you would understand that I'm not an idiot - so feel free to call me one, I wont care.
So if it turns ou that they do want to resuce drug use and the the most cost effective way to acheive that is indeed to send all users to prison that would be ok?
Maybe if "reducing drug use" in itself would have a proven value of it's own - however putting users in prison is often supported regardless of what it will result in, and often by people who don't count alcohol and tobacco as drugs for no other reasons than them being legal.
Done that, seen evidence (factual) that proves your statement false, have not seen facts to support that prohibition reduces (or does not increase) any problems commonly attributed to drug use.
Something has become clear to me - and it's NOT what you seem to believe. One thing clear to me now is that it's useless to argue with prohibitionists - it's clearly a moral issue for them.
I don't agree with your definition of what can or can't be a "right".
However more importantly I want to say that while the right for healthcare is almost never as simple as people for or against it make it be, but still more importantly that right seems currently very much proven to be possible - it works just great here in Finland and on number of EU countries as well. There is proof that this is a "good thing" - is this not part of the issue(s) on TFA / comments?
Yeah, so? Yes, people do that.
You are the douchebag here - what the hell is wrong with some people? It's not like it's your problem - and seems that you are wrong about whatever you think would happen too.
Because. This is the kind of thing where only justifications you need are you liking the idea and there being no serious risks involved - besides that I'm sure there are many people who think it's stupid (I don't, I'm just uninterested to get this myself), but hey, nobody has to do this to themselves so they should just shut up :)
Which means we will never get anything to solve them?
Flying cars did not even get this far - google cars are already tested on the read and it seems realistic that they will succeed on market. Whether it leads to "traffic utopia" or not remains to be seen, but "because flying cars, da-a!" is no argument at all
It's not just about the number of cars on the road. It's about traffic lights, trouble merging, lag in following the car in front, etc, and self-driving cars would address all of this. Cars could drive around at high speed without the need for traffic lights, like a choreographed stunt driving routine, vastly improving traffic flow.
Unfortunately that would scare passengers so it will never happen.
"Never" is a word often thrown too easy on similar discussions - I see large number of reasons to expect that it may very well happen, but it won't happen in one over-night step but in small continuing advance on driver-less cars, thus also not scaring passengers as they get used to it one change at a time.
We have "vouchers" in Sweden in the form that anyone can send their kids to any school, private or public, free of charge. The only thing it has brought us is segregating the kids who do well into separate schools from everyone else. The kids who performed well didn't perform any better (though the private schools like to inflate grades in order to look more attractive to parents) and the kids who did poorly now perform worse than they did before.
And Finland we have the same system too, it works great :) I'm damn lucky I was born here - could be much worse, like USA for example.
The way to improve schools IMHO is to reduce class sizes to 10-15 kids so that teachers have time to help every kid who needs help, but that costs money...
...costs money in the short run, many people seem to be unable to see any further, which is sad
Indeed - we have a public school systems and it's not just K-12, it's all the way up until universities and even then the costs come mostly from expensive books & such material - and you get (even though it's really too small) monthly support to pay for living while you are studying. We all know that this system works great - and we know that where it has shortcomings the solution is NOT decreasing public funding and letting "free" market deal with it.
Tablets and many modern computers don't even have optical drives, so the software would be dead weight. Given the cost-imposed storage limitations of SSD's, I'd prefer to trim out all of the superfluous legacy software.
You believe that removing stuff like DVD decoding keys/codec driver will do anything to trim down Windows? We're talking of an OS which install files don't fit on CD and has really insane HD space requirements, considering they are only for the OS and a little amount of mostly inferior bundled software.
Debian, Ubuntu and most other linux distributions can be installed from single CD (though some, ie. Debian, provide also extra CD's and/or DVD's for more additional programs) and I don't understand what in the world justifies the enormous size and space requirements of Windows. Even though Windows has features missing from default installation of most distros, they can't take up that much, they could not even if we forget that most distros also have stuff windows does not by default. And really, any distro targeted for common modern computers needs only a fragment of space from CD for Linux OS environment (kernel, user space, desktop and software like those which are bundled in Windows), but usually still use the rest for "some extra", which usually includes the top FOSS alternatives for full office suit, image manipulation, media playback and management, etc.
To give an example of my experience that might explain why I can't accept the bloat of Windows space needs as anything close to reasonable, or even "sane for maybe B-class SW company", I had this quite modern HW setup I assembled myself (and kept upgrading like I've done for ages) from '08 to last summer. The only major part that was same during that time was a hard disk, which was an old 10GB one my school threw/gave away which I picked up year before building this system. I originally took it for use in some older hardware I have, but knowing my tools I chose to have it to host OS & programs on a new system. Of course I had a fileserver already in place to host my work, media and such files, with just my audio collection having several times of it, I never imagined to have all my files on this 10GB piece that would have made me jealous in late 90's - but I had all the software, except few Win/DOS apps I still ran with DosBox (DETH, my favorite DooM level editor, and fork for ZDooM engine, ZETH) & wine (WinTex for DooM WAD-file access for other resources like graphics), and bunch of non-pc games, mostly C-64 floppy/tape images. To be fair, Wine, DosBox and the emulators to run them, as well as later installed windows programs were on that 10GB too.
I did not have the full disk available for all this either - I partitioned it with 2GB swap partition.
I never ditched that system. In matter for this example the machine is gone but in matter for what I use as one of two main desktops it's still in use, but has a 30GB disk I installed debian freshly - though, unless you count the casing, everything else has been replaced which makes it physically a different system. I did copy most configuration files from the old installation though, and run the same software.
To be fair, I started with Debian minimal installation and started with only basic Linux/GNU environment plus Debian packet management software (only the basic CLI tools) and started installing whatever I needed by hand until I had a simple desktop setup with nothing extra and missing even some basic features and after that only installed/configured something when I needed new tools or a feature I had not needed before. I could have started with debian default install, but I would have eventually ran out of space - when I changed HD I chose to reinstall, not because I was not happy with the OS in large, but because minor stuff I had not bothered to configure, like automatic adding/removing mount points for removable media, etc. - I figured that I would sooner get them by running default install with all regular stuff in pla
Seriously?
Your link did not work for me as I recently changed my ISP for the only one in Finland DNS-blocking piratebay.se, so I used their alt. address for finns, piraattilahti.org, chose to search only games and entered "linux" - there is a reason why I almost believed (only almost, which is why I tried) there might be less linux games for linux on piratebay, though I never believed your exact number. Found myself checking titles I did not know existing for linux or at all. Take your BS elsewhere, even though odds are this is just a joke (can't be certain with internet).
But a PC can remain perfectly usable to most average people way longer than a warranty for one lasts - in fact, this is the case most of the time. The software is usually even sold many times longer than a warranty of a PC is, and the cost of plain install media is next to nothing to make. Finally, on this day of internet, a software manufacturer could (and should) offer a download for it at least as long they are selling it - and IMHO, MS should keep available even W2K install ISO's available for download... one old laptop I rescued might still run MS software instead of linux if the support line had offered such choice instead of trying to get me buy a newer version of Windows (that would not even install, let alone "run" without quotes, on it).
...hell, even drivers for this pre 21st century hardware and for year 2k OS are still available, but I could not get my hands on legal copy of the OS - using pirated install media when having a license for it would probably even be legal in Finland (downloading it would not, though it's not punishable) but not being able to legally restore the system I own a license for just pissed me off so that I chose to take another way.
IMHO MS should enforce OEM's to provide good old fashioned install media, in one form or another, like they used to do by default back in the good old days in case the OS fsck's itself - I would accept a service for reinstalling OS and other initial software shipped with the system by retailer as alternative.
It may not be legally their fault, but when my mothers system gets messed beyond repair any other way but reinstalling and she has to pay extra because the system did not come with installation media and she has no backup that could help, I do blame the fault to MS.
3rd: Does MS seriously expect people to make recovery disk on 1st boot AND know, remember and understand that a backup must be re-burnt in time... now, hand up everyone whose mom & pop would know where to start if you assign them to make a new recovery disk?
No, MS expects no such thing - they know perfectly well that even in case of having to pay large for getting their system fixed or replaced the number of customers lost is insignificant and new systems sold, resulting in more profit, are considerable, and they see no reason to change anything - on contrary.
Recovery media for OS the user has license for should have nominal only price.
Finally, as not doing so does not serve any purpose, as things are this day not even limiting pirated Windows, they should just offer free no-questions-asked download of ISO image files for install media of all Windows versions since XP (not including not-sold-to-public, such as Win for Nuclear Submarines, never-should-have-been-made versions) for those with the know-how of how to use them. Seriously, no reason for not just providing them on simple FTP server exists.
Btw, I have not made a recovery disk for my mom - I know that she does nothing that she could not do with 100% FOSS system, I know it would be easier for her and if she ever needs re-installing of OS, I will do it and it will not be the same OS.
I dislike both a lot but with all other reasons I hate Microsoft and the fact they are member of consortium holding H264 patent, which I loathe at least as much as MPEGLA, I add up to disliking MS more - but I have to admit that your point is one good thing this results into.
...and in the end, this would be almost a non-issue for me if MS had not chosen to lie about this being beneficial for end users in any way whatsoever when the fact is that nothing will cost less for end user anyway, but in some cases the exact opposite is perfectly realistic chance. Even though I don't see this affecting MS much for one or the other direction, not counting saved license fees, this kind off BS ticks me off.
...well, there is MS Paint.
I could not care less about this issue, it's just the BS about end-users benefiting anything about this, wethever their PC comes with optical drive or not - MS is saving money, end users end up paying the same, or in some cases, due to lack of knowledge, extra.
They are turning a money saving business decision a common user does not even need to understand into advertising end users about how great this is for them - this pisses me off, as does false advertising in general.
Indeed - I'm OK with paying for it though... that is I pay for the hardware (be it home stereo or PC components) needed for playback and I should be able to then use that hardware without extra pay, unless I specifically choose to use commercial 3rd party software for it.
Media codecs should be free.
Aye, Win95 and even early 98 came without pre-installed browser (W98 was later branded and sold as "Windows 98 Internet Explorer" edition, or something like that, with IE's name actually under Windows 98 text on boot screen) and ISP's gave end users CD's (or even floppies?) with a browser - usually NS or IE, though you could have downloaded one via FTP'ing from command prompt to your preferred FTP software archive...
1) If you're installing Linux, you're by definition not a novice.
Definition of "novice" varies, but I claim knowing a couple of those who have done just that.
So... what do you do if you have a machine with no OS on it to download anything from? Install from USB? I've seen some Linux distros that might be able to accomplish that, but they're not for the novice.
I carry around USB stick that among containing various Linux & Windows software works as Ubuntu "Live stick" - you can install from the live session, but yeah, Ubuntu sure ain't for novice ;)
Maybe in la'la'land where you live it's not bad for customer and the will see savings. Meanwhile in real world... really?