Assault is not always a felony. The differences between misdemeanor assault and felony assault vary between localities, but generally if you get into a bar fight or something and nobody gets really hurt, they're just going to give you misdemeanor assault. Of course, IANAL, but generally if it's not a felony and the cops don't see you doing it, they don't care because you're not going to jail anyway.
Shit, they don't even really care if your car gets stolen because the chances of you ever seeing it again are slim to none. But again, it comes down to the delicate balance between freedom and safety. If police departments had the resources to deal with petty crime like this we'd be living in a police state. No, it's not fair. Carry a gun if you don't want someone else to fuck you over.
Very, very few kids have a grasp of the math necessary to understand microprocessor design. The ones who do probably have no need to be inspired to learn, they probably enjoy it enough as it is. I don't know how complex this CPU is, but somehow I doubt it would be a whole lot more instructional than learning assembly on an LC2. Which would also take significantly less time and be more practical. I associate this with something along the lines of say, the CPU geek version of civil war re-enactments.
Yes, but also keep in mind that blizzard can nerf items that people who sell them for real world cash will farm by making them more common. They have no real world economic value because Blizzard can at any time make that +50 sword of asskicking that you paid $50 on ebay for attainable through an easy quest or make it commonly drop from monsters. The value of the item is wholly dependent on how hard Blizzard makes it to get, and they can (and do) arbitrarily change this. It has value, but that value may be much, much less tomorrow, without increasing the work anyone has done.
Except customers don't care. Sure, high end graphics shops that need the power might switch, but most computing-intensive applications already use macs. For the home consumer user, they don't give a fuck if their OS is 32 bit and the CPU is 64 bit. They don't know the difference. Anyone who does and who cares is probably using a mac already. If you've ever used one of those dual G5s, you know what I mean.
As with any investment, however, the payoff relies on anyone wanting to buy a piece of what you bought. If nobody wants to buy his stuff, then he loses.
Uh, dude, at this level of racing the drivers are already masters of the skills of the trade. That's what developmental leagues (NASCAR truck, regional driving leagues, etc.) are for; to become a good racer with vehicles that aren't quite so meticulously tuned. Every F1 or NASCAR racer out there has been driving cars very fast for at least 10 years. You don't just hop in to a Formula 1 car and drive; I honestly doubt most of us would be able to operate an F1 car at all. You have to keep the engine revved above 6000 RPM or it will get too cold and die. You have to regulate the fuel mixture or it won't get enough of either air or gas and die. Simple story is that they're not going to trust a $10 million car to someone who doesn't know how to drive it very very well. I think this says that most of the drivers have reached a skill level where the only deciding factor in a race is the car. If you're a fatass or if you don't know how to drive, well, you're not going to last in F1.
I think what he means by this is that the general consensus is "15 years from now, we'll have the technology to do such-and-such" and 15 years later people are saying the exact same thing. 15 years ago, everyone thought we'd have fusion down by now. Obviously not the case. I'd bet we figure it out during our lifetimes, however, anyone reading this might end up old and gray before it happens. I'm not gonna argue with this guy though, cause he either knows a lot more about this than me or is a much better bullshitter than I, so I'll buck the trend on slashdot and not make a fool of myself.
NetMD was decently cool for a little while. I had one and used it like an MP3 player, as you could fit 4 albums on a single MD with the LP4 option. They sounded like crap, but I was using shitty headphones anyway and I listened to it at the gym and on the bus and stuff so there was background noise. Definitely not for audiophiles, but for cheap music on the go it beat the hell out of MP3 players.
Oh, and the fact that you got ~120 hrs battery life off a single AA battery... that was sweet.:)
Hero is also a contextual (and very subjective) word. In a loose sense, a hero is a person who exemplifies the ideal. Also, in different circumstances the same act can be either heroic or cowardly. What open source developers do may not be seen as heroic by Americans, but it may be the case among Tibetans as allowing them to organize against violent oppression. Perspective drives reality; that sounds strangely neo-con but it really is the way of the world (neo-liberals would do well to figure this out before 2008.) The same man may be viewed as both a tyrant and a national hero depending on the perspective. And there's almost always going to be SOMEONE on either side of that divide (opinion on someone like Bush is a great example.)
Many people around the world (probably the majority, actually) see the advancement of multinational corporate interests as a threat. Those who go against the grain, be it coffee cooperatives in Chiapas, Islamist insurgents or "rogue" open source developers will always be seen as heroes by someone. True freedom from information censorship may be this generation's greatest gift to the world. Of course, my perspective is probably skewed as well, so as with anything on slashdot, grain of salt provided.
You're probably also using low-res textures, which take less time to load into memory, and you're probably not writing them to swap, because they're smaller. Hard drive are still the bottleneck in any computer, and they don't get much faster. Load times will only get longer unless we find a faster way to store permanent data.
Re:Storage for that would be...
on
The Music Man
·
· Score: 1
This is just a sign that the internet revolution hasn't really happened yet. The real effects of the internet won't be noticed for another 10 years, but it's going to mean the rennovation or demolition of many economic systems. The information wants to be free, after all...
I could be wrong, but I remember there always being source versions of Netscape for some more exotic OSes. I had an IRIX box at work and remember having to compile it myself, and needing all sorts of nasty proprietary libraries and compilers to do so. This was circa early IRIX 6.4. Not that it was open source, because of the required proprietary libs, but I do remember there being source code.
Ah, but that ignores the psychological side of addiction, which is at least as relevant as the physiological side. We can't know what was going through the mind of the monkey. Humans, on the other hand, can at least express their thought process. We also know before we try cocaine exactly what it is and what it can do (or we should, anyway; I don't think I know many people who would snort a random white powder without knowing what it is and that it is supposed to make them feel good,) and we also know the consequences (monetary, social, psychological) of continuing to do it. All the experiment above proves is yes, cocaine is chemically addictive, but we already knew that. So is cocaine, so is alcohol, christ, so is caffeine. I'm not calling anyone a troll here, but sometimes scientific evidence alone is not enough, especially when dealing with anything related to humans. Psychology plays a factor in *every* decision we make, drug usage included.
To me, this just reinforces the fundamental problem with the war on drugs: government cannot control the supply. It mystifies me how, after 20 years and hundreds of billions of dollars, we have not figured that out yet. Rhetoric about being "tough on drugs" is all fine and good, but being tough on drugs does two things: overcrowds jails with middleman pushers and addicts and makes drug dealers rich. It does nothing to the problem of drug use.
When you attack the supply of drugs, it makes them more scarce. But since they cost almost nothing to make in the first place, the cartels will just make more and triple the price because of all the legal risk involved. This means that if you can catch half of the drugs entering the country, they will just make twice as much and you still have the same amount available, but at a much higher cost (because as the legal risks increase, the reward for breaking the law rises.) Higher cost for end users means that addicts needing a fix are more likely to resort to drastic measures (prostitution, armed robbery, etc.) AND that those taking the risk and selling the drugs are better funded and have a better incentive to keep doing it.
Pesticide resistant crops are just one way the cartels will figure out ways around current anti-drug techniques. But the reality is that much of the mountains of Columbia are untouchable by US and Columbian anti-drug forces. It's dense jungle, and if you fly over it and try to kill the crops, there's a good chance there's a guy in the top of a tree with an RPG waiting for you. And quite often, the ones growing coca (FARC as an example here, but there are others too) are using the profits to fight a guerilla war against the same forces anyway.
So what's the point? The war on drugs could possibly be worse than doing nothing. Drug use has increased dramatically since it started during the Reagan era, and so have profits for the drug dealers and expenses for the US government. I'm not saying that legalization is the answer; there are better ways, at least for some drugs; but that programs which treat the demand side of the problem (rehab, social outreach programs, methadone clinics, etc.) are going to have more of an impact on drug use than attacking the supply.
Nah, Jon Stuart is more in the "Anyone but Bush" camp. You can tell he's not a huge Kerry fan either; they make fun of Kerry almost as much as Bush. But he does hate Bush and want him out of office. He's also one of the best fucking interviewers I've ever seen. Because he pretends to be an idiot, he sometimes catches people off guard. He really knows what he's talking about though, unlike most loudmouthed politically active comedians, and so he can sometimes embarass people, as he did with Bush's campaign manager. He's also the most watched news show amond viewers 18-25, which is pretty amazing considering the whole show is pretty much fake.
The people the RIAA is suing don't have the money to pay for the legal paperwork. Lawyers don't work for free, and it's a lot harder to collect on a $250,000 settlement than it is a $5000 one. Granted, I just pulled that number out of my ass, but if the defendant can't pay the settlement, the lawyers come out of the RIAA's pocket.
It doesn't make P2P copyrighted music stealing legal, but it's going to make it a lot harder to scare settlements out of people. Before, if they wanted to scare a file-swapper by litigation, all they had to do was subpoena the ISP, then send a nasty letter off to the user and wait for them to settle. Now they have to actually have lawyers file cases with the court before they can send out these subpoenas.
There's a lot more paperwork (and legal fees) if you have to do everything inside the legal framework instead of being able to say "Pay us $5000 or we'll sue you and your lawyer's bills will be more than $5000." Now they can't use that tactic, and people are more likely to fight back and force a court battle over copyright laws (which the RIAA does not want, as they currently control the copyright situation in congress so any loss of this control to the courts is undesirable.)
They are well aware that one of these cases making it to court could be more damaging than the alternative. It may not make downloading music legal, but this ruling does make it a lot harder for the RIAA to play the role of "enforcer." I'm sure they'll figure out something else, but I doubt they'll be sending out any more mass-subpoenas.
No, pro cyclists average much more than 35 km/h:) The average for the Tour de France is right around 38 km/h, but also keep in mind the tour is a mountain race. The fastest average for a single stage ever clocked (a better measure of flat out speed) is around 50 km/h. If you've ever gone that fast (about 30 mph) on a bike, you'd know this is really, really fast. Most non-professional, somewhat in-shape cyclists with a decent road bike can average about 35 km/h over a 70 km ride. Commuters will probably average less though, simply because of traffic.
This summer I went on a 4500 mile road ride (see sig for details/pictures) and one of the guys I went with had the ingenious idea to duct tape some cheap speakers to his handlebars and plug his iPod into them. It actually worked pretty well, and you'd be surprised how well a little music can lift peoples' moods when you can see for 50 miles and not see any cars (think middle of Nevada, right around Area 51. Middle of nowhere, literally.)
Uhm, fuck that.:) Just use vmware on a speedy PC to simulate a network of linux/windows machines. It's pretty much designed with that purpose in mind. I think a competent windows admin (the guy is obviously a techie) could figure it out.
Didn't we learn anything from Pi? Mathematicians shouldn't play the market. It makes them put a drill through their skull. Please, help save a mathematician today.
Slashdot Mirror
Assault is not always a felony. The differences between misdemeanor assault and felony assault vary between localities, but generally if you get into a bar fight or something and nobody gets really hurt, they're just going to give you misdemeanor assault. Of course, IANAL, but generally if it's not a felony and the cops don't see you doing it, they don't care because you're not going to jail anyway.
Shit, they don't even really care if your car gets stolen because the chances of you ever seeing it again are slim to none. But again, it comes down to the delicate balance between freedom and safety. If police departments had the resources to deal with petty crime like this we'd be living in a police state. No, it's not fair. Carry a gun if you don't want someone else to fuck you over.
Very, very few kids have a grasp of the math necessary to understand microprocessor design. The ones who do probably have no need to be inspired to learn, they probably enjoy it enough as it is. I don't know how complex this CPU is, but somehow I doubt it would be a whole lot more instructional than learning assembly on an LC2. Which would also take significantly less time and be more practical. I associate this with something along the lines of say, the CPU geek version of civil war re-enactments.
Yes, but also keep in mind that blizzard can nerf items that people who sell them for real world cash will farm by making them more common. They have no real world economic value because Blizzard can at any time make that +50 sword of asskicking that you paid $50 on ebay for attainable through an easy quest or make it commonly drop from monsters. The value of the item is wholly dependent on how hard Blizzard makes it to get, and they can (and do) arbitrarily change this. It has value, but that value may be much, much less tomorrow, without increasing the work anyone has done.
Except customers don't care. Sure, high end graphics shops that need the power might switch, but most computing-intensive applications already use macs. For the home consumer user, they don't give a fuck if their OS is 32 bit and the CPU is 64 bit. They don't know the difference. Anyone who does and who cares is probably using a mac already. If you've ever used one of those dual G5s, you know what I mean.
Yes, because when you live in your parents basement and play Asheron's Call with the lights out 24/7, white IS a little bright. ;)
As with any investment, however, the payoff relies on anyone wanting to buy a piece of what you bought. If nobody wants to buy his stuff, then he loses.
Uh, dude, at this level of racing the drivers are already masters of the skills of the trade. That's what developmental leagues (NASCAR truck, regional driving leagues, etc.) are for; to become a good racer with vehicles that aren't quite so meticulously tuned. Every F1 or NASCAR racer out there has been driving cars very fast for at least 10 years. You don't just hop in to a Formula 1 car and drive; I honestly doubt most of us would be able to operate an F1 car at all. You have to keep the engine revved above 6000 RPM or it will get too cold and die. You have to regulate the fuel mixture or it won't get enough of either air or gas and die. Simple story is that they're not going to trust a $10 million car to someone who doesn't know how to drive it very very well. I think this says that most of the drivers have reached a skill level where the only deciding factor in a race is the car. If you're a fatass or if you don't know how to drive, well, you're not going to last in F1.
I think what he means by this is that the general consensus is "15 years from now, we'll have the technology to do such-and-such" and 15 years later people are saying the exact same thing. 15 years ago, everyone thought we'd have fusion down by now. Obviously not the case. I'd bet we figure it out during our lifetimes, however, anyone reading this might end up old and gray before it happens. I'm not gonna argue with this guy though, cause he either knows a lot more about this than me or is a much better bullshitter than I, so I'll buck the trend on slashdot and not make a fool of myself.
NetMD was decently cool for a little while. I had one and used it like an MP3 player, as you could fit 4 albums on a single MD with the LP4 option. They sounded like crap, but I was using shitty headphones anyway and I listened to it at the gym and on the bus and stuff so there was background noise. Definitely not for audiophiles, but for cheap music on the go it beat the hell out of MP3 players.
:)
Oh, and the fact that you got ~120 hrs battery life off a single AA battery... that was sweet.
Hero is also a contextual (and very subjective) word. In a loose sense, a hero is a person who exemplifies the ideal. Also, in different circumstances the same act can be either heroic or cowardly. What open source developers do may not be seen as heroic by Americans, but it may be the case among Tibetans as allowing them to organize against violent oppression. Perspective drives reality; that sounds strangely neo-con but it really is the way of the world (neo-liberals would do well to figure this out before 2008.) The same man may be viewed as both a tyrant and a national hero depending on the perspective. And there's almost always going to be SOMEONE on either side of that divide (opinion on someone like Bush is a great example.)
Many people around the world (probably the majority, actually) see the advancement of multinational corporate interests as a threat. Those who go against the grain, be it coffee cooperatives in Chiapas, Islamist insurgents or "rogue" open source developers will always be seen as heroes by someone. True freedom from information censorship may be this generation's greatest gift to the world. Of course, my perspective is probably skewed as well, so as with anything on slashdot, grain of salt provided.
You can't tell me an organization that will spend $20,000 for a toilet seat will care about the price difference between macs and PCs. Seriously.
You're probably also using low-res textures, which take less time to load into memory, and you're probably not writing them to swap, because they're smaller. Hard drive are still the bottleneck in any computer, and they don't get much faster. Load times will only get longer unless we find a faster way to store permanent data.
This is just a sign that the internet revolution hasn't really happened yet. The real effects of the internet won't be noticed for another 10 years, but it's going to mean the rennovation or demolition of many economic systems. The information wants to be free, after all...
I could be wrong, but I remember there always being source versions of Netscape for some more exotic OSes. I had an IRIX box at work and remember having to compile it myself, and needing all sorts of nasty proprietary libraries and compilers to do so. This was circa early IRIX 6.4. Not that it was open source, because of the required proprietary libs, but I do remember there being source code.
Ah, but that ignores the psychological side of addiction, which is at least as relevant as the physiological side. We can't know what was going through the mind of the monkey. Humans, on the other hand, can at least express their thought process. We also know before we try cocaine exactly what it is and what it can do (or we should, anyway; I don't think I know many people who would snort a random white powder without knowing what it is and that it is supposed to make them feel good,) and we also know the consequences (monetary, social, psychological) of continuing to do it. All the experiment above proves is yes, cocaine is chemically addictive, but we already knew that. So is cocaine, so is alcohol, christ, so is caffeine. I'm not calling anyone a troll here, but sometimes scientific evidence alone is not enough, especially when dealing with anything related to humans. Psychology plays a factor in *every* decision we make, drug usage included.
To me, this just reinforces the fundamental problem with the war on drugs: government cannot control the supply. It mystifies me how, after 20 years and hundreds of billions of dollars, we have not figured that out yet. Rhetoric about being "tough on drugs" is all fine and good, but being tough on drugs does two things: overcrowds jails with middleman pushers and addicts and makes drug dealers rich. It does nothing to the problem of drug use.
When you attack the supply of drugs, it makes them more scarce. But since they cost almost nothing to make in the first place, the cartels will just make more and triple the price because of all the legal risk involved. This means that if you can catch half of the drugs entering the country, they will just make twice as much and you still have the same amount available, but at a much higher cost (because as the legal risks increase, the reward for breaking the law rises.) Higher cost for end users means that addicts needing a fix are more likely to resort to drastic measures (prostitution, armed robbery, etc.) AND that those taking the risk and selling the drugs are better funded and have a better incentive to keep doing it.
Pesticide resistant crops are just one way the cartels will figure out ways around current anti-drug techniques. But the reality is that much of the mountains of Columbia are untouchable by US and Columbian anti-drug forces. It's dense jungle, and if you fly over it and try to kill the crops, there's a good chance there's a guy in the top of a tree with an RPG waiting for you. And quite often, the ones growing coca (FARC as an example here, but there are others too) are using the profits to fight a guerilla war against the same forces anyway.
So what's the point? The war on drugs could possibly be worse than doing nothing. Drug use has increased dramatically since it started during the Reagan era, and so have profits for the drug dealers and expenses for the US government. I'm not saying that legalization is the answer; there are better ways, at least for some drugs; but that programs which treat the demand side of the problem (rehab, social outreach programs, methadone clinics, etc.) are going to have more of an impact on drug use than attacking the supply.
Nah, Jon Stuart is more in the "Anyone but Bush" camp. You can tell he's not a huge Kerry fan either; they make fun of Kerry almost as much as Bush. But he does hate Bush and want him out of office. He's also one of the best fucking interviewers I've ever seen. Because he pretends to be an idiot, he sometimes catches people off guard. He really knows what he's talking about though, unlike most loudmouthed politically active comedians, and so he can sometimes embarass people, as he did with Bush's campaign manager. He's also the most watched news show amond viewers 18-25, which is pretty amazing considering the whole show is pretty much fake.
The people the RIAA is suing don't have the money to pay for the legal paperwork. Lawyers don't work for free, and it's a lot harder to collect on a $250,000 settlement than it is a $5000 one. Granted, I just pulled that number out of my ass, but if the defendant can't pay the settlement, the lawyers come out of the RIAA's pocket.
It doesn't make P2P copyrighted music stealing legal, but it's going to make it a lot harder to scare settlements out of people. Before, if they wanted to scare a file-swapper by litigation, all they had to do was subpoena the ISP, then send a nasty letter off to the user and wait for them to settle. Now they have to actually have lawyers file cases with the court before they can send out these subpoenas.
There's a lot more paperwork (and legal fees) if you have to do everything inside the legal framework instead of being able to say "Pay us $5000 or we'll sue you and your lawyer's bills will be more than $5000." Now they can't use that tactic, and people are more likely to fight back and force a court battle over copyright laws (which the RIAA does not want, as they currently control the copyright situation in congress so any loss of this control to the courts is undesirable.)
They are well aware that one of these cases making it to court could be more damaging than the alternative. It may not make downloading music legal, but this ruling does make it a lot harder for the RIAA to play the role of "enforcer." I'm sure they'll figure out something else, but I doubt they'll be sending out any more mass-subpoenas.
No, pro cyclists average much more than 35 km/h :) The average for the Tour de France is right around 38 km/h, but also keep in mind the tour is a mountain race. The fastest average for a single stage ever clocked (a better measure of flat out speed) is around 50 km/h. If you've ever gone that fast (about 30 mph) on a bike, you'd know this is really, really fast. Most non-professional, somewhat in-shape cyclists with a decent road bike can average about 35 km/h over a 70 km ride. Commuters will probably average less though, simply because of traffic.
This summer I went on a 4500 mile road ride (see sig for details/pictures) and one of the guys I went with had the ingenious idea to duct tape some cheap speakers to his handlebars and plug his iPod into them. It actually worked pretty well, and you'd be surprised how well a little music can lift peoples' moods when you can see for 50 miles and not see any cars (think middle of Nevada, right around Area 51. Middle of nowhere, literally.)
Uhm, fuck that. :) Just use vmware on a speedy PC to simulate a network of linux/windows machines. It's pretty much designed with that purpose in mind. I think a competent windows admin (the guy is obviously a techie) could figure it out.
Didn't we learn anything from Pi? Mathematicians shouldn't play the market. It makes them put a drill through their skull. Please, help save a mathematician today.
We don't need a military. We have nukes. Invade us and we vaporize you. Simple as that. :)
Dude, you just described half the crap that sells out nightly on broadway. Be a bit more specific.