Just try to get numbers like that in the real world, and the Itanium is going to be way slower then an x86 chip when it comes out.
The fact of the matter is that Doom3 runs faster on a PC then a g4. Mac zealots can rant all they want, but it isn't going to change anything. And anyone who believes apple's ludicrous numbers is a certifiable moron.
Megahertz don't matter, thats how fast the swith flicks on and off. the G4 processers have at least 4 times the AMOUNT of switches that a PIII has, making a 500 megahertz G4 processer equal to a 2 gigahertz pentium in speed.
You might be trying to dumb things down, but you only make yourself look dumb, That sentence makes absolutely no sense on its own with regards anything relating to CPU design.
Not to mention juggling all those files is just NOT something I want to do in Windows with its atrocious and botched file system in which you step one inch out of Microsoft's predesigned method and you're screwed.
What the hell are you talking about? "step one inch out of microsofts..." The only thing I can think from that sentance is that if you drag the files into the wrong window or something (one ince off). Windows Explorer has a lot more ways to move files around then Finder does. (cut+paste, drag/drop, commandline, etc)
And how is Perl better on a mac then a PC? if anything, I'd say it would be better on a Unix machine.
Nintendo was *so* paranoid about this stuff that they released a cartridge system and further crippled their games and their development--and people still dumped the ROMs
Actualy, it had a lot more to do with the fact that their hardware was still pretty exspensive at the time compared to sony or sega's. They didn't want to spend the money on whole mechanical system for a CD-ROM
does anyone remember this ESR post? How he pompously declared that, now that VA Linux had gone IPO at a huge value he was absurdly rich. At least about 30 million dollars. While that isn't absurd in the traditional sense, it's a ludicrous amount of money for such a pompous, talent less, wanker. ESR isn't a 'hacker' he's a hack. Of course, based on his inane randite ideology the more money you had the more 'valuable' of a person you are. Look here:
Besides, it wouldn't be fair to dissemble. I serve a community. I'm wealthy today because my efforts to spread the idea of open source on behalf of that community helped galvanize the business world, and earned the respect and the trust of a lot of hackers. Larry thought that respect was an asset worth shelling out 150,000 shares of VA for.
Right, and now that 150,000 shares is worth just a tiny bit over a million, and hopefully going less. Assuming he didn't flip the stocks at the fist opportunity. Which I guess was June. But oh well. The sooner that idiot leaves the public eye, the better.
It looks like TI had a habit of Patenting Intel's stuff, at least according to this guy. A lot of their design specs on the 8008 ended up showing up in Ti's patents.
Another interesting note is that Intel didn't even bother to patent the 4004 because they thought the idea of putting a computer on a chip was 'obvious', and their patent guy thought it would be a pain in the ass
BlushButton: Unpressed, the button appears pale beige. When the user presses it, it slowly turns pink. The rate at which it turns pink is controllable via the blushAcceleration parameter.
These boomers were raised to believe that their opinions and feelings were more important than anyone elses, and society would have to bend to their will, rather than them bending to the will of society.
Reminds me of a quote....
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying
to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." George Bernard Shaw
. If I hack into my bank account and "update" the balance, I haven't "taken anything" from anyone, it doesn't "cost anything" according to you
No, according to me you would have stolen money from the bank, duh. They might not know where it went, but they certainly wouldn't have it anymore.
IS a cost associated with stealing that software, in that it diminishes the value of others' work as well as the capital and educational bla, bla, bla, bla....
You use a lot of words here, and say nothing. My using Photoshop without paying for it doesn't diminish the value of the work done by Adobe in anyway unless I was going to pay for it. Whether I use the software or not has no effect on the value, the compensation, whatever.
A better solution would be to spesify that the new limits only apply to *new* copyrights. After that, no one would ever extend them again, since no one really cares what happens 75 years after their death...
It doesn't matter anyway, what I mean to ask is what would happen if a Linux company created an Open Source project, and made the code free, but trademarked the name? In the world of brand names and so on, that could give them quite an advantage. It would also be an affront to the spirit of Open Source and Free Software.
Yeh, that would be terrible, It would be Linus trade marking "Linux" or something. Oh wait, he did...
We can own a physical object forever, I do not see why we cannot own an idea, like a Disney film or character, forever too.
You can't own anything forever. Sooner or later, you'll die.
Ownership is not an intrinsic property of a physical object, its something humans associate with it. Communism didn't 'fail' on its own merits so much as it did because of inept and twisted leaders in Russia. And when the USSR fell, it took the rest of the "Communist world" with it. However, if you look at china today, their economy is doing fine, despite they're 'communist' nature, but this is beside the point.
Capitalist systems are more 'intuitive' to humans, and they do work better then communist systems. The idea of property is just that, an idea, and nothing more. Having it, and believing in it makes our society run more smoothly then not having it.
Where is the evidence that society can't function well without a tight copyright/patent system? As far as I can see there are two fundamental differences between physical property and intellectual 'property'
+Instances of intellectual property can't be taken, only copied.
If I have an audio recording, and someone makes a copy, I'll still have my copy, I haven't lost anything, yeh maybe I had to work for it and they didn't, but I'm not a selfish person, It doesn't bother me. And there's always the issue that that particular person might not ever have even heard of the product, much less purchased it. When I pirate a copy of Adobe Photoshop, It isn't costing Adobe any money, because I couldn't have afforded it. Either way, none of my money would have ended up in their pockets.
+Most intellectual property isn't really needed
I'm pretty sure that most of here wouldn't be adversely affected by a lack of new Hollywood blockbusters, or the latest crap custom made for the glowing box. We don't really have a problem, here, we aren't really going to have a huge problem if the production of intellectual property slows down, and warnings of economic down don't make sense if you figure that people would just spend their money elsewhere. Teens might spend more money on clothes, or cars, or computer hardware, whatever. The money is still going to be spent. It will just be spent elsewhere.
And lets not forget that a lot of intellectual property is created for fun. Maybe without the commercial intent, it wouldn't be as high quality, but then again, commercial interests often pander to the lowest common denominator, and create pure garbage just because it sells. Without the motivator to sell, perhaps the quality will go up as people produce things they want to produce. I'd imagine that things like music and writing, which don't require a huge overhead would be just as prevalent now as ever.
What they could prove is that you transmited copyrigted material, regardles of wether or not you actualy stored it on your machine or not. And thats the problem. You can't get in trouble for downloading or storing files, its the uploading that get's ya.
First of all, no one patented anything. If you don't know the diffrence between patents, trademarks and copyrights, please be quiet.
My question is if the word is now used to label something that is implemented in public domain and is avaiable from a standards comittee such as IETF, how the hell can you still use it in a trademark?
From my understanding, The Protocol Specs *did* include a trademark note when talking about SSH, and the Protocol itself is called SECSH, not ssh.
Slashdot Mirror
if(client.type != "BigBronapster"){
kill(connection);
}
or, something like that
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Yeh, right...
Just try to get numbers like that in the real world, and the Itanium is going to be way slower then an x86 chip when it comes out.
The fact of the matter is that Doom3 runs faster on a PC then a g4. Mac zealots can rant all they want, but it isn't going to change anything. And anyone who believes apple's ludicrous numbers is a certifiable moron.
Megahertz don't matter, thats how fast the swith flicks on and off. the G4 processers have at least 4 times the AMOUNT of switches that a PIII has, making a 500 megahertz G4 processer equal to a 2 gigahertz pentium in speed.
You might be trying to dumb things down, but you only make yourself look dumb, That sentence makes absolutely no sense on its own with regards anything relating to CPU design.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Not to mention juggling all those files is just NOT something I want to do in Windows with its atrocious and botched file system in which you step one inch out of Microsoft's predesigned method and you're screwed.
What the hell are you talking about? "step one inch out of microsofts..." The only thing I can think from that sentance is that if you drag the files into the wrong window or something (one ince off). Windows Explorer has a lot more ways to move files around then Finder does. (cut+paste, drag/drop, commandline, etc)
And how is Perl better on a mac then a PC? if anything, I'd say it would be better on a Unix machine.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Doom3 has a totaly diffrent codebase then quake3, q3's code may get a bigger boost then d3s.
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Approximately two million copies, I doubt the developer gets more than 10%, that's $200,000.
If the games were being sold for $1...
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Right here
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
in the 1980's: IBM figured they could make billions by making better hardware (i.e. PS2)
:P
Do you mean the IBM PS/2, or the Sony PS2? Your sentance really aplies equaly well to both
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
Nintendo was *so* paranoid about this stuff that they released a cartridge system and further crippled their games and their development--and people still dumped the ROMs
Actualy, it had a lot more to do with the fact that their hardware was still pretty exspensive at the time compared to sony or sega's. They didn't want to spend the money on whole mechanical system for a CD-ROM
Rate me on Picture-rate.com
...so that VA can sell more systems.
The problem is, anyone can sell those systems, including Dell and Micron. Red-hat really seems to have a better bussness model after all.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
does anyone remember this ESR post? How he pompously declared that, now that VA Linux had gone IPO at a huge value he was absurdly rich. At least about 30 million dollars. While that isn't absurd in the traditional sense, it's a ludicrous amount of money for such a pompous, talent less, wanker. ESR isn't a 'hacker' he's a hack. Of course, based on his inane randite ideology the more money you had the more 'valuable' of a person you are. Look here:
Besides, it wouldn't be fair to dissemble. I serve a community. I'm wealthy today because my efforts to spread the idea of open source on behalf of that community helped galvanize the business world, and earned the respect and the trust of a lot of hackers. Larry thought that respect was an asset worth shelling out 150,000 shares of VA for.
Right, and now that 150,000 shares is worth just a tiny bit over a million, and hopefully going less. Assuming he didn't flip the stocks at the fist opportunity. Which I guess was June. But oh well. The sooner that idiot leaves the public eye, the better.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
and who, exactly, are you?
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
It was never patented
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
It looks like TI had a habit of Patenting Intel's stuff, at least according to this guy. A lot of their design specs on the 8008 ended up showing up in Ti's patents.
Another interesting note is that Intel didn't even bother to patent the 4004 because they thought the idea of putting a computer on a chip was 'obvious', and their patent guy thought it would be a pain in the ass
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
In general, a 'few' means 3 or more. You've presented a 'pair', and thus do not refute the claim.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
Tell me you had more technology then this...
BlushButton: Unpressed, the button appears pale beige. When the user presses it, it slowly turns pink. The rate at which it turns pink is controllable via the blushAcceleration parameter.
Please
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
Nitrozac?!?!
Oh, god no. I most certanly am not.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
Then either you or your frend is an idiot, or was informed by one.
What this law would do would be to require your frend to let online stores to buy from her (at a government set price), then resell her music.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
These boomers were raised to believe that their opinions and feelings were more important than anyone elses, and society would have to bend to their will, rather than them bending to the will of society.
Reminds me of a quote.... "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." George Bernard Shaw
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
. If I hack into my bank account and "update" the balance, I haven't "taken anything" from anyone, it doesn't "cost anything" according to you
No, according to me you would have stolen money from the bank, duh. They might not know where it went, but they certainly wouldn't have it anymore.
IS a cost associated with stealing that software, in that it diminishes the value of others' work as well as the capital and educational bla, bla, bla, bla....
You use a lot of words here, and say nothing. My using Photoshop without paying for it doesn't diminish the value of the work done by Adobe in anyway unless I was going to pay for it. Whether I use the software or not has no effect on the value, the compensation, whatever.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
A better solution would be to spesify that the new limits only apply to *new* copyrights. After that, no one would ever extend them again, since no one really cares what happens 75 years after their death...
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
That seems to be the approach taken by the Gnu's HURD kernel. It sounds like a combination of "Hurl" and "Turd"
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
It doesn't matter anyway, what I mean to ask is what would happen if a Linux company created an Open Source project, and made the code free, but trademarked the name? In the world of brand names and so on, that could give them quite an advantage. It would also be an affront to the spirit of Open Source and Free Software.
Yeh, that would be terrible, It would be Linus trade marking "Linux" or something. Oh wait, he did...
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
We can own a physical object forever, I do not see why we cannot own an idea, like a Disney film or character, forever too.
You can't own anything forever. Sooner or later, you'll die.
Ownership is not an intrinsic property of a physical object, its something humans associate with it. Communism didn't 'fail' on its own merits so much as it did because of inept and twisted leaders in Russia. And when the USSR fell, it took the rest of the "Communist world" with it. However, if you look at china today, their economy is doing fine, despite they're 'communist' nature, but this is beside the point.
Capitalist systems are more 'intuitive' to humans, and they do work better then communist systems. The idea of property is just that, an idea, and nothing more. Having it, and believing in it makes our society run more smoothly then not having it.
Where is the evidence that society can't function well without a tight copyright/patent system? As far as I can see there are two fundamental differences between physical property and intellectual 'property'
+Instances of intellectual property can't be taken, only copied.
If I have an audio recording, and someone makes a copy, I'll still have my copy, I haven't lost anything, yeh maybe I had to work for it and they didn't, but I'm not a selfish person, It doesn't bother me. And there's always the issue that that particular person might not ever have even heard of the product, much less purchased it. When I pirate a copy of Adobe Photoshop, It isn't costing Adobe any money, because I couldn't have afforded it. Either way, none of my money would have ended up in their pockets.
+Most intellectual property isn't really needed
I'm pretty sure that most of here wouldn't be adversely affected by a lack of new Hollywood blockbusters, or the latest crap custom made for the glowing box. We don't really have a problem, here, we aren't really going to have a huge problem if the production of intellectual property slows down, and warnings of economic down don't make sense if you figure that people would just spend their money elsewhere. Teens might spend more money on clothes, or cars, or computer hardware, whatever. The money is still going to be spent. It will just be spent elsewhere.
And lets not forget that a lot of intellectual property is created for fun. Maybe without the commercial intent, it wouldn't be as high quality, but then again, commercial interests often pander to the lowest common denominator, and create pure garbage just because it sells. Without the motivator to sell, perhaps the quality will go up as people produce things they want to produce. I'd imagine that things like music and writing, which don't require a huge overhead would be just as prevalent now as ever.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
What they could prove is that you transmited copyrigted material, regardles of wether or not you actualy stored it on your machine or not. And thats the problem. You can't get in trouble for downloading or storing files, its the uploading that get's ya.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
First of all, no one patented anything. If you don't know the diffrence between patents, trademarks and copyrights, please be quiet. My question is if the word is now used to label something that is implemented in public domain and is avaiable from a standards comittee such as IETF, how the hell can you still use it in a trademark?
From my understanding, The Protocol Specs *did* include a trademark note when talking about SSH, and the Protocol itself is called SECSH, not ssh.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D