a) Why would I need to carry a USB for every individual dollar bill? one would be enough. actually zero would be enough as they already have unique serial numbers
b) You talk about unique items and then think there is some kind of magical issue with what is really just another item?
c) WTF are you talking about? You do understand the difference between reality and online gaming, right? A completely digital environment makes this trivial.
Please do not shoot up your high school when summer break is over.
ok, that last comment was totally uncalled for, you obviously are a good speller, therefore not a product of the US educational system.. plus you used smiley's which I purposefully ignored. Flame first, ask questions later and all that. ..
if that were the case, then you would definitely care about the architecture, because you'd be punching everything into your computer in hexidecimal.
what, you already got a hexidecimal to binary converter?!?? If I bring over a couple floppies, can I copy it? I can use this hole puncher so I can go double sided. ..
Your point is valid and is understood by BMW/Mercedes/Lexus owners everywhere.
Can you find an instance of Apple ever giving MP3's to play in the iPod?
Your reply:
Buy an iPod and you'll get a set of ten free downloads to go with it.
I think a new promotion is out where if you buy an AirPort Express from them you'll get 30 free itunes.
Now, nobody asked your specific opinion, but you went ahead and jumped in, so you get the brunt, deal with it like a man..
The reason that the MP3/AAC distinction is important was that the original question was in reply to this specific wording: That would be like saying that Apple gave away free MP3s that work in the Ipod but that crash other music players. amidst ranting about Microsoft breaking HTMl, Adobe breaking PDF. The importance is that MP3 is a STANDARD, like PDF or HTMl, and if Apple were to take the standard and BREAK it, then that would be as bad as the other citations.. However, as you know, AAC with or without Fairplay is NOT MP3.
The original question was posing the thought that "look, Apple didn't take a standard and fuck it up, they used their own proprietary format, so the complaint doesn't apply." When you MISSED that point of the question, and focused instead on whether Apple ever gave away free music.
That's why you got so much grief and why you got so defensive.. you didn't realize that you were pushing the point that Apple took a standard and then broke it for their own benefit like MS and Adobe when they merely made a new format and ran with it.
So yeah, those are the exact quotes and more importantly WHY everyone thinks you are wrong.
If what you are measuring is how far the ball will go, will it go over the wall, does NOT need to know anything about the pitcher's mound or release hight, how fast it was pitched.. all that is made moot by the bat.. you track the trajectory after that point. Similarly, the tool they are creating is a model that takes current conditions and can be run forward or backwards, but I think that as you move further along the timeline, you will by nature of the tool have a more and more vague corellation with reality. Kinda like you say, that baseball millions of years future isn't really enough to tell you about the type of bat used.
Though I hadn't RTFA prior, just looked at pretty pictures, we can look at this exerpt:
The Millennium Run followed the evolution of the virtual universe from a few hundred thousand years after the Big Bang, when it was still a nearly-uniform soup of hot matter, up to the present day, billions of years later. This fast-forwarding of the universe was achieved using "the N-body simulation technique," Evrard explained.
That the early universe was only nearly uniform is of principal interest. Scientists believe that it was the few tiny imperfections, perhaps from the quirks of quantum physics, way back then that served as the seeds from which all later structure arose. Otherwise, our universe would still be a completely uniform one where matter couldn't accrete -- a boring cosmic soup.
This tool isn't the endall be-all of the universe, it is a rough guess, and I had said you came across whiney only because I felt you had too much expectation that it would answer all the questions of origin that are as of yet unresolved, and deals specifically with macro objects and how matter is distributed.
I couldn't RTFA, but I wonder how far back they went.
Well, since any good fundmentalist knows that the heavens and Earth are only like 6000 years old, they couldn't go back further than that.
Seriously, though, you can certainly predict the path of a baseball thrown into the air without knowing which factory made it and what kind of cow was used for the leather. To accurately predict, you need to know where something is NOW, and where it is some delta time from now, and understand all forces to some degree (obviously things like Hiesenberg's Uncertainty Principal come into play when you try and get too much detail, but that doesn't invalidate the whole thing)
Interestingly, you say we have not understood the full reverse of the Universe, yet later implicitly accept the Big Bang theory. Scientific theory throughout history has been mostly looking at a tiny little series of events (position of stars each year, path of a proton through a vapor cloud, measuring the voltage on a lightning strike), so when you say I mean our scientist still cannot come up with a model of the universe, and cannot link the quantum world with the every-day world we live in. it comes across as really very very whiney. This model is just another of the tools scientists have created in our short time humans have been concious on this planet.. don't disparage their achievements.
Not the users, but the moderation system. But then, can you not fault yourself for asking a vague potentially religious question? Were you to be more specific as to WHAT you wanted comparison on, then it would not have appeared so.
If I were to toss out "which is better, a motorcycle or a minivan?" without qualification such as in terms of seating capacity, miles per gallon, top speed, acceleration, safety / accident ratings, then yes, I would expect to me marked a troll.
Let me ask a question in reply to your original question: For what?
However, routers and switches outside the computer would become immensely confused when a single NIC and a single MAC address belong to two IP addresses, since most routers/switches only have a one-to-one correlation between MAC addresses and IP addresses.
yeah, you're talking out of your ass on this one. Lookup tables, specifically arp tables don't have a problem at all. You can use empirical examples of the simplicity of dual homing single nic cards in windows, or running additional IPs in VMWare, both of which have multiple IPs associated with MAC addresses.
The other way, single IPs to multiple MAC addresses even works as is made apparent with Microsoft server clustering technology for web farms. Neither of these has any problem with any hardware (expensive or cheap) that I have used.
Divx is on the track to sign up with major film studios and have 20 million devices shipped yada yada, but it doesn't *yet*. You won't see "The Incredibles" on divx anytime soon (legally). You can still buy movies on VHS, but they are no longer mainstream. Ogg is not mainstream either... wow.
wow, look at the number one result for "divx osx" when searching via google, which is the default for safari...
besides, the only purposed for Divx is to view porn or copies of DVD's or downloaded copies of shows, etc. If they are trying to view a Divx, they certainly will know enought to use the google search bar. I bet even you could figure that out.
Point is, Divx is NOT mainstream, so not having support for it shouldn't be a big surprise.
please continue to reply, both your lack of basic linear thought and your low expectations of people around you are quite amusing. What, the average OS X user is a hayseed/idiot that paid more for a computer by accident?
hey fucktard, I was agreeing with you that you like to work the same way you used to. I am saying you can choose any goddamn way you WANT to work, but if you are going to choose OSX, then it has limitations. Just don't bitch and complain that it is broken because certain programs don't work. OS X REQUIRES a change in how you work, so it obviously isn't for you.
hey, and in regards to your comment about using mplayer for DivX, it is easy to google and find it as a solution for OS X, and tell me if it was really all that hard to install? Drag and drop from a dmg.. that's soooo haaarrrd. The app installation model is heads and shoulders about everying else. Ok, maybe dependencies aren't handled that well, but the vast majority of installs don't have specific dependency needs as they were designed for OS X in the first place.
If you know a better way of writing code, compiling, and watching the output easily, let me know.
If you run Xcode, you only switch to one app. If you run in terminal windows, again, switching to "term" (click on the icon on the dock) displays all placed term windows pretty simply and they are exactly where you left them. If there are other apps you use to program and compile, I'll be more than happy to make suggestions.
Fantastic. However, you didn't read all that well. I know it works, I know it works well. But how can I tell it to not have my computer go to sleep if I'm not actually using it but it is doing processing in the background. Such as, maybe, downloading files.
yeah, please don't miss the point that there is a *never* go to sleep option. It takes all of five seconds to get to and setup for when you have background processing going on? Turn off monitor, sleep disks if possible, but don't sleep is a perfectly valid option and you are picking a fight, not being reasonable.
Regarding virtual desktops, that is one of the things you need to learn/unlearn when moving to OS X. A) you don't make applications full screen. That drove me nuts initially, but I finally got used to it. Correllary to that is B) You have different ways of switching between apps be it cmd-tab, expose, or clicking on the dock. I commonly run 15-20 applications concurrently on the same screen because I no longer have the "different desktop, different type of application" mindset. Of course, you would like to work the same way you used to and the current evolution of desktop switching isn't to your standards.. and you have to run mplayer instead of quicktime to run divx files (big whoop, dude, really.. you have a perfectly workable solution..give off on that one)
What were you looking for when you tried OS X? The same thing you saw in Linux? That's a normal mistake that people make.. OS X is more like windows in that it limits you on how far you can customize the interface, but I've found that with some extra like Quicksilver (free) you get a level of efficiency that isn't as easily found on other platforms.
Side note on quicksilver: I use it to launch everything, I use it to search my address book.. it is fast, and it blends in so well with the OS X look and feel that I forget that it isn't native. I had initially thought that Spotlight in Tiger would try and replace it, but no chance.
brains don't give you the ability to compose music, write poetry, climb mountains, play basketball, etc.
Geek: compose music, write poetry
Jock: climb mountains, play basketball
Brains (i.e. intelligence) do indeed factor highly in composing music and writing poetry. Bach wrote extremely complicated works.. he is hailed as a genius. Shakespeare wrote many sonnets.. he is hailed as a genius. These men aren't semi-retarded individuals who happen to be able to run really fast. It is clearly their "brains" that made them what they are.
When I said that someone geeky would have a higher intelligence and thus is more likely to be "better at things we try" I meant that someone who is better able to comprehend a task is better able to perform it. Someone who can read a recipe can learn to be a better cook. Someone who can read a map can navigate. Someone who can read a book about startups and internalize the message is more likely to be successful at running a business.
You're assuming a correlation between intelligence and imagination that's not in evidence -- geeks are no more likely to be artists than anyone else.
What is intelligence BUT imagination? It certainly isn't the ability to recite pi to 500 decimal places. It is more the ability to extrapolate the meaning of pi and why it is useful, and how to integrate it in different situations.
Let's use professional football as an example. Just like anything, people run the gambit on the old intelligence scale. You have uber-morons like Kellen Winslow Jr. who decide to ride motorcycles without a license and get really injured. Then you have guys like Peyton Manning; what he is able to do because of his intelligence and his preparation is amazing.
This is a fine example. Let's run with it. You are saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that in the arena of football, you have a wide variation of intelligence, from the not so smart to the very intelligent. From the examples you gave, are you trying to say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in football, because both the smart and dumb can be successful as natural ability and athleticism dominate. My assertion was simply that there is less of a correlation between intelligence and athletic success (being a jock). WTF are you going "aha" about when you are supporting my position? Are you one of those geeks that are dumb as nails?
I think Payton Manning has definitely enhanced him game by his good preparation and intelligence, but he would not be where he is today if he wasn't a jock from the start. His ability to execute is paramount.
Intelligence plays a more important role in determining a geeks success than a jock's success. That's all I'm saying.
exactly one way to be sure: run a packet sniffer all interfaces.
The simple fact isn't that it is spoofing task man, but that it uses a name that "appears" safe. Malware isn't like a virus where it eats up 80% of your CPU, it takes next to 0%. Task man SHOULD also show you the paths of processes, and it handles non-visible charactors poorly..
Are you still 100% sure? Are you that arrogant? I wouldn't hire you if you used what you just posted in an interview.. shows a lot of inexperience in the real world..
Slashdot Mirror
b) You talk about unique items and then think there is some kind of magical issue with what is really just another item?
c) WTF are you talking about? You do understand the difference between reality and online gaming, right? A completely digital environment makes this trivial.
Please do not shoot up your high school when summer break is over.
ok, that last comment was totally uncalled for, you obviously are a good speller, therefore not a product of the US educational system.. plus you used smiley's which I purposefully ignored. Flame first, ask questions later and all that. . .
Man, and those darn unique IDs are really heavy, too!
what, you already got a hexidecimal to binary converter?!?? If I bring over a couple floppies, can I copy it? I can use this hole puncher so I can go double sided. . .
Your point is valid and is understood by BMW/Mercedes/Lexus owners everywhere.
Your reply:
Now, nobody asked your specific opinion, but you went ahead and jumped in, so you get the brunt, deal with it like a man..
The reason that the MP3/AAC distinction is important was that the original question was in reply to this specific wording: That would be like saying that Apple gave away free MP3s that work in the Ipod but that crash other music players. amidst ranting about Microsoft breaking HTMl, Adobe breaking PDF. The importance is that MP3 is a STANDARD, like PDF or HTMl, and if Apple were to take the standard and BREAK it, then that would be as bad as the other citations.. However, as you know, AAC with or without Fairplay is NOT MP3.
The original question was posing the thought that "look, Apple didn't take a standard and fuck it up, they used their own proprietary format, so the complaint doesn't apply." When you MISSED that point of the question, and focused instead on whether Apple ever gave away free music.
That's why you got so much grief and why you got so defensive.. you didn't realize that you were pushing the point that Apple took a standard and then broke it for their own benefit like MS and Adobe when they merely made a new format and ran with it.
So yeah, those are the exact quotes and more importantly WHY everyone thinks you are wrong.
Though I hadn't RTFA prior, just looked at pretty pictures, we can look at this exerpt:
This tool isn't the endall be-all of the universe, it is a rough guess, and I had said you came across whiney only because I felt you had too much expectation that it would answer all the questions of origin that are as of yet unresolved, and deals specifically with macro objects and how matter is distributed.
Well, since any good fundmentalist knows that the heavens and Earth are only like 6000 years old, they couldn't go back further than that.
Seriously, though, you can certainly predict the path of a baseball thrown into the air without knowing which factory made it and what kind of cow was used for the leather. To accurately predict, you need to know where something is NOW, and where it is some delta time from now, and understand all forces to some degree (obviously things like Hiesenberg's Uncertainty Principal come into play when you try and get too much detail, but that doesn't invalidate the whole thing)
Interestingly, you say we have not understood the full reverse of the Universe, yet later implicitly accept the Big Bang theory. Scientific theory throughout history has been mostly looking at a tiny little series of events (position of stars each year, path of a proton through a vapor cloud, measuring the voltage on a lightning strike), so when you say I mean our scientist still cannot come up with a model of the universe, and cannot link the quantum world with the every-day world we live in. it comes across as really very very whiney. This model is just another of the tools scientists have created in our short time humans have been concious on this planet.. don't disparage their achievements.
He wasn't bragging about how well he did, just telling a bad beat story.
If I were to toss out "which is better, a motorcycle or a minivan?" without qualification such as in terms of seating capacity, miles per gallon, top speed, acceleration, safety / accident ratings, then yes, I would expect to me marked a troll.
Let me ask a question in reply to your original question: For what?
yeah, you're talking out of your ass on this one. Lookup tables, specifically arp tables don't have a problem at all. You can use empirical examples of the simplicity of dual homing single nic cards in windows, or running additional IPs in VMWare, both of which have multiple IPs associated with MAC addresses.
The other way, single IPs to multiple MAC addresses even works as is made apparent with Microsoft server clustering technology for web farms. Neither of these has any problem with any hardware (expensive or cheap) that I have used.
nope, it means you got 256GB/s ;)
Please try again.
Divx is on the track to sign up with major film studios and have 20 million devices shipped yada yada, but it doesn't *yet*. You won't see "The Incredibles" on divx anytime soon (legally). You can still buy movies on VHS, but they are no longer mainstream. Ogg is not mainstream either... wow.
besides, the only purposed for Divx is to view porn or copies of DVD's or downloaded copies of shows, etc. If they are trying to view a Divx, they certainly will know enought to use the google search bar. I bet even you could figure that out.
Point is, Divx is NOT mainstream, so not having support for it shouldn't be a big surprise.
please continue to reply, both your lack of basic linear thought and your low expectations of people around you are quite amusing. What, the average OS X user is a hayseed/idiot that paid more for a computer by accident?
hey, and in regards to your comment about using mplayer for DivX, it is easy to google and find it as a solution for OS X, and tell me if it was really all that hard to install? Drag and drop from a dmg.. that's soooo haaarrrd. The app installation model is heads and shoulders about everying else. Ok, maybe dependencies aren't handled that well, but the vast majority of installs don't have specific dependency needs as they were designed for OS X in the first place.
If you run Xcode, you only switch to one app. If you run in terminal windows, again, switching to "term" (click on the icon on the dock) displays all placed term windows pretty simply and they are exactly where you left them. If there are other apps you use to program and compile, I'll be more than happy to make suggestions.
yeah, please don't miss the point that there is a *never* go to sleep option. It takes all of five seconds to get to and setup for when you have background processing going on? Turn off monitor, sleep disks if possible, but don't sleep is a perfectly valid option and you are picking a fight, not being reasonable.
Regarding virtual desktops, that is one of the things you need to learn/unlearn when moving to OS X. A) you don't make applications full screen. That drove me nuts initially, but I finally got used to it. Correllary to that is B) You have different ways of switching between apps be it cmd-tab, expose, or clicking on the dock. I commonly run 15-20 applications concurrently on the same screen because I no longer have the "different desktop, different type of application" mindset. Of course, you would like to work the same way you used to and the current evolution of desktop switching isn't to your standards.. and you have to run mplayer instead of quicktime to run divx files (big whoop, dude, really.. you have a perfectly workable solution..give off on that one)
What were you looking for when you tried OS X? The same thing you saw in Linux? That's a normal mistake that people make.. OS X is more like windows in that it limits you on how far you can customize the interface, but I've found that with some extra like Quicksilver (free) you get a level of efficiency that isn't as easily found on other platforms.
Side note on quicksilver: I use it to launch everything, I use it to search my address book.. it is fast, and it blends in so well with the OS X look and feel that I forget that it isn't native. I had initially thought that Spotlight in Tiger would try and replace it, but no chance.
but you can run /usr/bin/games/fortune -o repeatedly...
24 is a much funnier show than that!!! It was a laugh a minute! BEST SITCOM IN *YEARS*. errr. . .
Geek: compose music, write poetry
Jock: climb mountains, play basketball
Brains (i.e. intelligence) do indeed factor highly in composing music and writing poetry. Bach wrote extremely complicated works.. he is hailed as a genius. Shakespeare wrote many sonnets.. he is hailed as a genius. These men aren't semi-retarded individuals who happen to be able to run really fast. It is clearly their "brains" that made them what they are.
When I said that someone geeky would have a higher intelligence and thus is more likely to be "better at things we try" I meant that someone who is better able to comprehend a task is better able to perform it. Someone who can read a recipe can learn to be a better cook. Someone who can read a map can navigate. Someone who can read a book about startups and internalize the message is more likely to be successful at running a business.
What is intelligence BUT imagination? It certainly isn't the ability to recite pi to 500 decimal places. It is more the ability to extrapolate the meaning of pi and why it is useful, and how to integrate it in different situations.
This is a fine example. Let's run with it. You are saying, and correct me if I am wrong, that in the arena of football, you have a wide variation of intelligence, from the not so smart to the very intelligent. From the examples you gave, are you trying to say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in football, because both the smart and dumb can be successful as natural ability and athleticism dominate. My assertion was simply that there is less of a correlation between intelligence and athletic success (being a jock). WTF are you going "aha" about when you are supporting my position? Are you one of those geeks that are dumb as nails?
I think Payton Manning has definitely enhanced him game by his good preparation and intelligence, but he would not be where he is today if he wasn't a jock from the start. His ability to execute is paramount.
Intelligence plays a more important role in determining a geeks success than a jock's success. That's all I'm saying.
This is counter to your arguments on "generally good at things we try" and "we have imagination"
. . . and it is you're, not your . . . how ungeeky.
exactly one way to be sure: run a packet sniffer all interfaces.
The simple fact isn't that it is spoofing task man, but that it uses a name that "appears" safe. Malware isn't like a virus where it eats up 80% of your CPU, it takes next to 0%. Task man SHOULD also show you the paths of processes, and it handles non-visible charactors poorly..
Are you still 100% sure? Are you that arrogant? I wouldn't hire you if you used what you just posted in an interview.. shows a lot of inexperience in the real world..
He's as alive as Kurt Cobain
Holy Crap! Tupac was black?!!?
Holy Crap! Vijay Singh is black?!!?
Wow. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.