It is certainly true that the founders would never have dreamed that anyone could be so two-faced and black-hearted as to suggest that alcohol checkpoints pass constitutional muster. Many of them died to stop that kind of crap.
The drain on society comes from illegalizing the activity, and funnelling all the sales profit into organized crime and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines kill people and communities precisely because they are illegal. Without the incredible mark-up, there would be no organized crime, no gangs, no gang violence. Without artificially high prices, heroin would be pure, clean, safe, and cheap, and addicts would not get AIDS, would be able to pay for it with jobs, and could get medical treatment for addiction on their employer-paid health insurance. If abusing drugs would threaten your ability to take drugs legally, then there would be far less abuse of drugs, and much more responsible use.
I use adderall, but I could just as easily use methamphetamine. I have a license from the gatekeeprs which allows me to use adderall (substitute methamphetamine) but if I did not need a prescription, I would no more abuse the adderall or methamphetamine or heroin or cocaine than I do now, i.e. not at all. Millions of people buy these drugs illegally, because they think it improves their lives. I do it legally, because I have the social standing of a middle-aged white professional, so I can.
It sounds like something from The Atlantic. Seriously, it's the "capitalist" parallel of the Chinese "communist" governments "Great Firewall" (to use the obsolete language of the old Cold War false dichotomy),
That depends a lot on the scale of your operation and the scale of your hosting service. The value of an SLA is that you can sue to recover damages in case of non-compliance. But it may not be possible to recover real damages in court: Your provider may not have pockets that deep, you may not have pockets as deep as your lawyers' thirst for money, and the law may not allow for full recovery in your circumstance.
EC2 is up and stays up. Reliabilty counts for a lot more than legal recourse, in my book. SLAs don't create reliability, they *help* (hopefully) to create legal recourse, which is a very poor substitute.
On the other hand, if MS does this, then competitors can come in and offer the same components/services. Open source will do it very quickly, driving the cost to zero. If MS tries to shut out anyone else, the result is antitrust action.
Selling the OS as on-demand modules could be the first great leap in converting the Windows user base to 100% open source.
Leaving aside the non-responsiveness of your suggestion, do you seriously mean to infer that Leopard usability is inferior to MacOS9? We've matured 7 years since MacOS9 was introduced, and the old dog just don't hunt no more. Perhaps you are suffering from delusive influence of the golden glow of reminiscence?
You'll start to see some benefits with the early fusion products in mid-year, but it won't really kick in until the middle of next year, which is my gross estimate of how long it will take before we see a combination of GPGPU double-precision floating point and CPU integration via HyperTransport at 4Gb/sec. At that point, nVidia's lunch money will be in AMD's pocket, and Intel will have lost a significant high-margin market segment. By the end of 2009, AMD stock will have doubled from today, or I'll give you back every last cent you paid for my advice.
I think your only upgrade on am2+ will be quad core and a speed bump, not an architecture change.
Re:Why did they buy ATI?
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I'm sure you're right about being able to beat AMD to the market -- but would anyone care? A fusion product that did not incorporate competitive 3d graphics and GPGPU capabilities would be about as interesting as SiS graphics on your motherboard -- i.e. it would only be of interest at the low-margin bottom-feeding end of the market. But a fusion product that incorporates quad R600+opteron and lets you run double precision vector kernels over HyperTransport at 4Gb/sec would quickly take over the Top 500 list, as well as eating nVidia's lunch by obsoleting the very concept of a "video card". It's not so much Intel's lunch money that is in danger here as nVidia's. But even so, that's a big chunk of high-end market that Intel will be effectively priced out of, because they have no competitive solution.
The very existence of such a thing as a "video card" is threated by the AMD/ATI merger. Getting high-end graphics without the need for a second computer within the computer represents a lot of cost savings. The real value of the AMD/ATI merger won't be seen until the GPGPU and integrated graphics strategies are both fully deployed in the market, and that won't be for at least another year and a half. I have no idea what Intel will be doing in the meantime, but it had better be damned good, or they will be in a world of hurt.
A *lot* of buyers just can't use closed source drivers. That includes governments around the world, which are a major customer for hardware to run open source software. I've been involved in literally billions of dollars of hardware specification for the US government, and it has all run either open source code or audited code in escrow. nVidia would have to open-source their drivers to sell into that market. Meanwhile, AMD/ATI gets all of it.
Anyhow, when AMD finally gets around to putting out a high-end quad-core with integrated graphics sometime in the middle of next year, there won't be an nVidia/Intel system that can approach the resulting performance/price ratio. AMD has plenty of cash to hold on until then, and long after, so I have no fear for AMD's future.
Re:Shorting AMD stock: NASDAQ figures
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
When a sufficient number of people sell a stock short, then any slight upturn in the stock price will result in a rush to buy to cover their short positions, and a consequent rapid, dramatic rise in stock price. This is called a short squeeze. But AMD stock volumes are large enough so that short squeezes are difficult to derive -- although still possible. Certainly a high percentage of shares held short is considered a very healthy sign for the ultimate price of a stock, on contrarian principles.
If you really want to see massive, blatant stock manipulation, illegal as all get-out, on a grand scale, check out the third friday of December 2006 ticker history for AMD. AMD was riding relatively high, and two market-makers were in a price manipulation war, one trying to make the options expire worthless at the 20.00 strike, and another at the 22.50 strike. I made a big chunk of money riding on the coat tails, in both directions, on that day, but watching the blatant illegality of it occuring on such a grand scale soured me on playing options. What chance does a retail investor ultimately have in such an environment? Essentially, you have to be able to psychoanalyse the market manipulators, estimate their audacity relative to the regulators, and predict their next manipulation, in order to ride piggy-back. It works great when it works, but it's a very dodgy business at best.
Clearly, you don't understand what "Emacs" means. mg is more akin to a version of nano with keybindings that approximate a small subset of the Emacs default keybindings for text mode. If you really wanted fast Emacs start times, you'd be using emacsclient, not emacs -nw. I don't think you should use Emacs, because I don't think you would be well served by Emacs, nor are you likely to ever be able to speak with insight to the meaning, value, or purposes of using Emacs, because frankly, you just don't get it.
VirtualBox is just as good as VMware and it's open source. I prefer it for desktops and laptops and such. VMware is better for centralized server virtualization though.
In operation ivy bells the NSA used cable downtime in location A to install tap devices at location B. It seems likely that someone with a new fleet of submarines is expanding their tapping capabilities to new targets of interest.
Agreed. It's absurd to use agreement on any issue or slate of issues as a litmus test for a Presidential candidate.
I'm supporting Paul because I think he'll genuinely defend human rights and the rule of law, even at the expense of his life. I can't say the same for any other candidate, Republican or Democrat.
McCain, Huckabee, Romney are all warmongering fascists. I can't imagine how anyone could call themselves Christian and vote for these people.
Cayley sedenions are a 16 dimensional field. But zero has divisors in sedenion algebra. Octonion multiplication isn't associative, though. Nor is quaterionion multiplication commutative. It just depends on what characteristics you require for the purpose at hand, really. Froebenius' theorem tells us that only real, complex and quaternionic algebrae are associative division rings over real scalars. But if you only need finite fields (as is often the case in practical applications), an Artinian ring is often iteratively solvable for any given application, of arbitrary dimension.
The issue is not the copyright on the code. The issue is the Microsoft patents which cover the techniques implemented by the code. Only Suse has a license for those patents. If Gnome depends on patented Microsoft technologies, all other distributions are illegal. Contrast this with QT and KDE. To my knowledge, no one claims any patent rights on any technologies implemented in QT or KDE.
Anyhow, to respond to the original question, I would use wxWidgets or SWT for any new GUIs, due to the native l&f with excellent cross-platform portability. I see no reason to tie myself to Gnome, for example, when I can use wxGTK and wxCL or wxPython, and get satisfactory platform compatibility, while remaining portable to Windows and OSX etc.
QT is fair, but is limited to C++ and ECMAscript (QSA). GTK is better than QT, in my opinion, for portability and language interoperability. But wxWidgets is the ne plus ultra of GUI portability heaven.
Slashdot Mirror
It is certainly true that the founders would never have dreamed that anyone could be so two-faced and black-hearted as to suggest that alcohol checkpoints pass constitutional muster. Many of them died to stop that kind of crap.
The drain on society comes from illegalizing the activity, and funnelling all the sales profit into organized crime and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines kill people and communities precisely because they are illegal. Without the incredible mark-up, there would be no organized crime, no gangs, no gang violence. Without artificially high prices, heroin would be pure, clean, safe, and cheap, and addicts would not get AIDS, would be able to pay for it with jobs, and could get medical treatment for addiction on their employer-paid health insurance. If abusing drugs would threaten your ability to take drugs legally, then there would be far less abuse of drugs, and much more responsible use.
I use adderall, but I could just as easily use methamphetamine. I have a license from the gatekeeprs which allows me to use adderall (substitute methamphetamine) but if I did not need a prescription, I would no more abuse the adderall or methamphetamine or heroin or cocaine than I do now, i.e. not at all. Millions of people buy these drugs illegally, because they think it improves their lives. I do it legally, because I have the social standing of a middle-aged white professional, so I can.
The distinction of China as "communist" and, e.g., the US as "captialist" is the obsolete false dichotomy.
It sounds like something from The Atlantic. Seriously, it's the "capitalist" parallel of the Chinese "communist" governments "Great Firewall" (to use the obsolete language of the old Cold War false dichotomy),
Since it emits a "single photon", I guess the resulting photon is always self-identical? What's the difference between a duck?
They're figs, I'm telling you, figs!
Is that a fig in your pants, or are you just dead?
That depends a lot on the scale of your operation and the scale of your hosting service. The value of an SLA is that you can sue to recover damages in case of non-compliance. But it may not be possible to recover real damages in court: Your provider may not have pockets that deep, you may not have pockets as deep as your lawyers' thirst for money, and the law may not allow for full recovery in your circumstance.
EC2 is up and stays up. Reliabilty counts for a lot more than legal recourse, in my book. SLAs don't create reliability, they *help* (hopefully) to create legal recourse, which is a very poor substitute.
On the other hand, if MS does this, then competitors can come in and offer the same components/services. Open source will do it very quickly, driving the cost to zero. If MS tries to shut out anyone else, the result is antitrust action.
Selling the OS as on-demand modules could be the first great leap in converting the Windows user base to 100% open source.
> it would take forever
Is that metric forever, or English?
Leaving aside the non-responsiveness of your suggestion, do you seriously mean to infer that Leopard usability is inferior to MacOS9? We've matured 7 years since MacOS9 was introduced, and the old dog just don't hunt no more. Perhaps you are suffering from delusive influence of the golden glow of reminiscence?
If you mean fabricating persons the old fashioned way, personally I find the participatory sport much more satisfying than the spectator sport.
whackjobs have a right to defend themselves too.
And my answer is this:
You'll start to see some benefits with the early fusion products in mid-year, but it won't really kick in until the middle of next year, which is my gross estimate of how long it will take before we see a combination of GPGPU double-precision floating point and CPU integration via HyperTransport at 4Gb/sec. At that point, nVidia's lunch money will be in AMD's pocket, and Intel will have lost a significant high-margin market segment. By the end of 2009, AMD stock will have doubled from today, or I'll give you back every last cent you paid for my advice.
I think your only upgrade on am2+ will be quad core and a speed bump, not an architecture change.
I'm sure you're right about being able to beat AMD to the market -- but would anyone care? A fusion product that did not incorporate competitive 3d graphics and GPGPU capabilities would be about as interesting as SiS graphics on your motherboard -- i.e. it would only be of interest at the low-margin bottom-feeding end of the market. But a fusion product that incorporates quad R600+opteron and lets you run double precision vector kernels over HyperTransport at 4Gb/sec would quickly take over the Top 500 list, as well as eating nVidia's lunch by obsoleting the very concept of a "video card". It's not so much Intel's lunch money that is in danger here as nVidia's. But even so, that's a big chunk of high-end market that Intel will be effectively priced out of, because they have no competitive solution.
The very existence of such a thing as a "video card" is threated by the AMD/ATI merger. Getting high-end graphics without
the need for a second computer within the computer represents a lot of cost savings. The real value of the AMD/ATI merger won't be seen until the GPGPU and integrated graphics strategies are both fully deployed in the market, and that won't be for at least another year and a half. I have no idea what Intel will be doing in the meantime, but it had better be damned good, or they will be in a world of hurt.
A *lot* of buyers just can't use closed source drivers. That includes governments around the world, which are a major customer for hardware to run open source software. I've been involved in literally billions of dollars of hardware specification for the US government, and it has all run either open source code or audited code in escrow. nVidia would have to open-source their drivers to sell into that market. Meanwhile, AMD/ATI gets all of it.
Anyhow, when AMD finally gets around to putting out a high-end quad-core with integrated graphics sometime in the middle of next year, there won't be an nVidia/Intel system that can approach the resulting performance/price ratio. AMD has plenty of cash to hold on until then, and long after, so I have no fear for AMD's future.
When a sufficient number of people sell a stock short, then any slight upturn in the stock price will result in a rush to buy to cover their short positions, and a consequent rapid, dramatic rise in stock price. This is called a short squeeze. But AMD stock volumes are large enough so that short squeezes are difficult to derive -- although still possible. Certainly a high percentage of shares held short is considered a very healthy sign for the ultimate price of a stock, on contrarian principles.
If you really want to see massive, blatant stock manipulation, illegal as all get-out, on a grand scale, check out the third friday of December 2006 ticker history for AMD. AMD was riding relatively high, and two market-makers were in a price manipulation war, one trying to make the options expire worthless at the 20.00 strike, and another at the 22.50 strike. I made a big chunk of money riding on the coat tails, in both directions, on that day, but watching the blatant illegality of it occuring on such a grand scale soured me on playing options. What chance does a retail investor ultimately have in such an environment? Essentially, you have to be able to psychoanalyse the market manipulators, estimate their audacity relative to the regulators, and predict their next manipulation, in order to ride piggy-back. It works great when it works, but it's a very dodgy business at best.
Clearly, you don't understand what "Emacs" means. mg is more akin to a version of nano with keybindings that approximate a small subset of the Emacs default keybindings for text mode. If you really wanted fast Emacs start times, you'd be using emacsclient, not emacs -nw. I don't think you should use Emacs, because I don't think you would be well served by Emacs, nor are you likely to ever be able to speak with insight to the meaning, value, or purposes of using Emacs, because frankly, you just don't get it.
VirtualBox is just as good as VMware and it's open source. I prefer it for desktops and laptops and such. VMware is better for centralized server virtualization though.
In operation ivy bells the NSA used cable downtime in location A to install tap devices at location B. It seems likely that someone with a new fleet of submarines is expanding their tapping capabilities to new targets of interest.
Agreed. It's absurd to use agreement on any issue or slate of issues as a litmus test for a Presidential candidate.
I'm supporting Paul because I think he'll genuinely defend human rights and the rule of law, even at the expense of his life. I can't say the same for any other candidate, Republican or Democrat.
McCain, Huckabee, Romney are all warmongering fascists. I can't imagine how anyone could call themselves Christian and vote for these people.
Cayley sedenions are a 16 dimensional field. But zero has divisors in sedenion algebra. Octonion multiplication isn't associative, though. Nor is quaterionion multiplication commutative. It just depends on what characteristics you require for the purpose at hand, really. Froebenius' theorem tells us that only real, complex and quaternionic algebrae are associative division rings over real scalars. But if you only need finite fields (as is often the case in practical applications), an Artinian ring is often iteratively solvable for any given application, of arbitrary dimension.
The issue is not the copyright on the code. The issue is the Microsoft patents which cover the techniques implemented by the code. Only Suse has a license for those patents. If Gnome depends on patented Microsoft technologies, all other distributions are illegal. Contrast this with QT and KDE. To my knowledge, no one claims any patent rights on any technologies implemented in QT or KDE.
Anyhow, to respond to the original question, I would use wxWidgets or SWT for any new GUIs, due to the native l&f with excellent cross-platform portability. I see no reason to tie myself to Gnome, for example, when I can use wxGTK and wxCL or wxPython, and get satisfactory platform compatibility, while remaining portable to Windows and OSX etc.
QT is fair, but is limited to C++ and ECMAscript (QSA). GTK is better than QT, in my opinion, for portability and language interoperability. But wxWidgets is the ne plus ultra of GUI portability heaven.