ok, to finnish this off in a sane matter(yet you may post the last word if you so desire), let agree to disagree.
to balance some statements.
i do not believe and cannot compute the idea that marijuana or any drug can avoid problems with children, born or not. any drug that physically affects a person will do the same to a child and more(fragile,developing body) and i ask you to consider this thought a bit. chronic use will definately be more harmfull than occasional use and use during a pregnancy will of course have more severe effects than pre-pregnant use.
without googling up 10gigs of data know that i do not need to prove marijuana has a detrimental effect on childrens brain chemistry. for that matter asprin has an effect and i urg people not to take any kind of drug during pregnancy for the sake of their child. you could be creating a 140 I.Q. baby and then dialing that down to 105 I.Q. with drugs(though many more severe).
my feeling on rights is as simple as this:
one may act freely in any way desired so long as acts and consequences of one's actions do not harm and injur any other creatures rights or impede their ability to act freely.
and then to show what rights creatures have, humans for instance:
to live, to enjoy the safest, healthiest life possible without interference by another. to live free so long as one does not take anothers right to be.
BTW, i will admit to being an extremist. my priorities on human rights are life, then health, THEN freedom, the possession. freedom cannot override life or health, and one's health cannot override anothers life. an no one may posses if that possesion takes life, impedes freedom, or injurs.
and freedom of speach should not be a right alone, but a side effect of freedom. no statement should be made to ensure this as LIFE,HEALTH,FREEDOM, and POSSESION pretty much says it all.
Re:tobacco still sucks - canabis
on
Safe Cigarettes?
·
· Score: 0
in fact i am not ill-informed and marijuana is in fact very bad for your body. 1 joint has as much tar and cancer causing agents as a pack of cigarettes. also, the mental effects of pot are much MORE SEVERE and more damaging to OTHER PEOPLE that are exposed. pot has been PROVEN to cause mental deficiencies in children born to pot smoking parents and/or exposed to marijuana.
at what point is one person's freedom more important than another's? i interpret your last comment as valueing freedom more than human rights?(and no they are not one in the same) the right to live and enjoy a healthy environment overrides any level of freedom allowing drug use.
each person has a basic right to not be harmed by others but you say freedom to do drugs as one pleases overrides this?
and you call me a fascist? you who seems willing to argue for the use of drugs and consequence to others, most likely only because of your own personal agent to do drugs as you please?
what happens when you have become intoxicate with some person(of opposite sex!) and produce a child? are you not responsible for that child's possible and probible mental difficencies? what right do you have to damage this persons mind in such a way? or do you prefer to abort such a child?
oh, and btw, people whom commit suicide by jumping of high places would like to eliminate the cold air between them and the ground because of the harmfull effects of frostbite. they would like to eliminate this as they don't like the idea of this harmfull and painfull situation during their relatively painless splat on the sidewalk.(analogy!)
a comment on "*you* should have every available means at your disposal to do so"
i believe that distribution and public consumption is the core issue, if you want to smoke in private that is great, have fun.
i would also like to expand on 'private' please read 'private' as all people in the group are participating members and are theirfore in a private group. if anyone present is not a member of said smokers group, then the 'private group' theory is gone and so is the ability to smoke. i am considering children here, and public places where one does not have the right to monopolize on the space and theirfore cannot have a private group of smokers.
three people sitting in a room, two adults & one child, no smoking as child is not and cannot be a smoker. and btw, if you do this you are HURTING THE CHILD you prick! grow a brain. asthma! emphasema! etc.
Re:tobacco still sucks - canabis
on
Safe Cigarettes?
·
· Score: -1, Troll
you are a damned idiot!
a nicotine free joint cause im against drugs.
drugs have an adverse effect on the people around the drug use, that is the point of drug laws. if drugs only effected the person doing them they would be legal!
canabis is a drug and effects all around. it increases crime rates and impacts childrens health. and if you are one of those pricks that says your hurting no-one, how about smoking around children, or smoking and then 'supervising' children. how about driving intoxicated. yeah, canabis IMPAIRS driving ability and cause many accidents! the fact that alcohol shadows canabis in the number of intoxicant related deaths does not mean it is safe.
find a drug that does not effect the people around the user and I will agree that it should be legal.
now, im going to charge every customer that walks through the door for my product(as it should be) BUT im also going to charge the farmer for the priviledge of GIVING me BEEF to sell to my customers.
WTF?
are consumers going to get free internet access? and google have to pay for it?
if i were google i would just buy my own 'pipes' and flip SBC the bird. oh wait, they are. so essintial SBC is going to push themselves out of the mainstream market and try to fracture the internet into 'the SBC zone' and 'the real internet'
bottom line: consumers pay a fee for their access to the web, SBC profits from this arrangement and so do consumers(hense the great growth in broadband internet). they have to right to collect fees for the content provided so that they can sell bandwidth.
another analogy: exxon sells fuel and makes good money at this, but they have decided that auto companies must pay exxon for the ability to have their vehicles burn exxon gas.. now what happens to exxon? and more importantly, what happens to conoco? conoco's fuel runs on any car. how many cars does general motors, ford, honda, etc.. make for exxon's fuel? zero
this is/was/will be posted a number of times, please dont count the 'facts' as a dup, but the opinion as the post..thanks
#1 - the patent is on the method of 'useing' or 'detecting' the genes for research and development purposes.
#2 - 'prior art' by god(if you believe) or by nature(if you dont) MATTERS. creating in some way not only made these genes but also can read and manipulate them!
#3 - under #2, i believe that the attempt to decrypt the gene code to study or modify said genes is a direct violation of the DMCA. just because we cannot read nature's/god's patent, does not mean it doesn't apply. although the 'supreme patent' may have expired, and in that case the gene code is public domain.
#4 - if their is no hell or god, then a god will spontaneously form and create hell specifically for these people who patent genes. hell will be occupied by genetic patenters, car salesmen, and prosecuting attourneys.
#5 - i guess this may make cloneing illegal via patent violation!
i think that calculating system clock from a central machine and adjusting based on average latency will be 'good enough'.
interesting thought about soundcards skewing playback. possibly different clock values on sound chips could do this. 1 or 2 ms is 'ok' but humans have sensitive enough ears to pick up much more, especially on multichannel output.
i think 'smart' programming should be able to anticipate starts/stops on playback to be reasonably acurate, but the song could quite litterally drift out of sync...
anyone have a more technical idea of how these latencies and clock skews could effect output?
another thought: i suppose you could have the playback program do a "play this packet at this time" as apposed to "start playing stream now" so if the playback were at a different pace on different machines it would be for single packets of audio data. i know this may add an unreasonable amount of overhead OR even cause audio quality to suffer if the playback progam/sound chip had a significantly different playrate than the source.
firstly, latency sucks but can simply be ignored. for instance, if all devices on a network have a reatime clock, they can sync this clock with a central machine and calculate scew from latency to be very very precise. now the player can be told to play this stream starting at this second. now every device will cache a small amount of data and play the file based on realtime instead of play-as-streamed. now if a song should be playing @ 12:35pm(@23.638 seconds) it will be on all devices and latency will not be an issue.
next, wired devices can of course be used as wireless devices with a cheap access point in client mode(think WRT54g). this way you can link your x-box/ps2/network media player on the same client mode router!
maybe your the idiot that can't read? did you read the part where owning something should matter? and the idea of taking what is owned by others is wrong? the whole comment was about right and wrong, not what wikipedia says. and if you think my comment was 'running of the mouth with no idea' then what was yours?
BTW wikipedia is in no way how the work 'IS' for instance 'No one in the world really "owns" a....' is rarely accepted as 'law'
"Cybersquatting is a derogatory term used to describe the practice of registering and claiming rights over brand names which are, arguably, not for the taking." as in one person gets a domain without claiming rights to a pre-owned brand name. At the time of domain was registration, no such brand name existed=no squatting.
'law does not = justice' 'wright and wrong' 'law = we say you can't do this'
also note, some(possibly many) laws do provide justice. i am not an anarchist.
at what point did the right to own and keep what is yours get voided? if someone ownes something, and then you use the same name(i'm not implying bad intentions), what makes you think you deserve to have something they own? they did own that domain before you had the company name right? you thinking that you have a right or some claim is complete crap and an attempt to take it should be considered attempted theft. the domain is owned and the owner did not violate your trade name or copyright when purchased, that means they OWN THE DOMAIN and you are STUPID and part of the PROBLEM with the american way.
go ahead, mod me down. good karma in the real world is worth bad karma on slashdot
so....would a descent polarizing filter work against this? i mean, the light is comming from one direction right? so if a filter blocked light from that specific direction then no light would blind the camera right? how about a decoy IR light(s)? who if you had an IR light and you focused it right on the censor, would the projector try to blind the whole world?
what im saying is that 'technology' like this HELPS the pirates. It helps by giving false confidence to theaters or companies and pirates can easily circumvent the system.
things must be 100% secure, or not secure at all. if something is 98% secure, pirates learn and it makes it so much harder to GET TOO 100% because the pirates are smarter, they have evolved with your copy protection.
the solution is to have a sensor for detecting the chemicals in battery acids to find cameras, and then confiscating and smashing the camera to tiny bits in front of everyone before calling the police and pressing charges(after taking the media like memorycard or videotape).
beos did not handle media well because of low latencies, it handled media well because of thoughtful media system design. beos actually has poor latencies and response times in a number of areas, it just accelled at scheduling and prioritisation
{
He argues that developing space weapons is a surefire way to launch a new space weapon race. }
and not developing space weapons is a surefire way to avoid a space weapon race so if just one country develops space weapons they rule the world.
weapons races create checks and balances. superweapon A is great, but if everone has superweapon A it is just another gadget. look at nukes. what would the world be like if only russia has developed nukes? or if only the US had? why would one fear using nukes? their would be no fear so nukes would have been used in vietnam and korea, and iraq and afghanistan.
all people should be treated as innocent until proven otherwise. a guilty man is a guilty man, but to punish the man you have to prove without a reasonable doubt that he is guilty.
if the guy put links to sites that he knew contained illegal content then he should be guilty.
if a person shows another person where they can but illegal guns, then they are a party to the crime when that person buys guns, in fact they are commiting a crime by directing someone to buy the illegal guns even if no purchase is made!
now if he posts a link to a site with no intent to deliver illegal software or media, and did now know that illegalities exsisted at the end of the link then i don't see how he commited a crime.
the fact is that helping other people to commit crimes with full knowledge of the illegal activities they are promoting or allowing with full knowledge of providing the means is illegal.
the disk IS the limiting factor. the reason boot times dont scale down with drive speed increases equally is because of device initialization! if no devices needed to be initialize, the full potential of the disk can be realized.
to initialize devices, the disk needs to be read(modules, configs, etc) so increasing disk speed or better yet disk access times will improve but not perfect device initialization.
during boot, the cpu has very little to process. reading a config file depends more on disk access speed than cpu speed. device initialization is simply telling the device to be ON and waiting for it to say OK. the cpu is not stressed.
if the cpu were stressed, it would produce more heat, notice that a cpu does not get very hot during boot.
try running prime 95 for as long as your machine takes to boot. in that time prime 95 will warm up your processor significantly more than the boot process as the boot process only needs a 500Mhz cpu to be fast.
your boot process is slowed by i/o bottlenecks and slow disk access. a 50Ghz CPU will not improve your boot speed if you use one of todays hard disks.
please, if you would like to continue this chat, explain to me and slashdot how the cpu could be a bottle neck and how you think the hard disk is NOT the bottleneck.
----
to extend this point, look to the way beos boots. it has a device dependancy list and initializes as many devices in parallel as posible. it also loads the OS in a 'ready' state and doesn't bother configuring the OS on every boot during boot, but gets the OS loaded and then loads what has changed. doing this it loads the OS from disk in a smooth, sequential read, no-waiting fasion. BeOS boots FAST! because it avoids the weeknesses of modern hard drives and makes i/o waits all happen in parellel instead of sequential order.
the beos boot PROVES that i/o waits from device initialization and hard disk performance are the leading issues with slow boot speeds.
ideally, the OS would modularize all drivers not required for bootup. then be able to load and unload them at will. then the computer could boot to a 'core clean' state very quickly, and then drivers could be initialized and then user loggin.
currently windows(or linux) does not load a 'ready os image' on boot, but initialized all of the kernel code on each boot. linux would be well suited to fixing this and i think i will try!
--- for those interested read on:
i will try to run softsup2(gen 2 software suspend). i will have it stop the x server before suspending reducing the size of the suspend image. on reboot, i will have it initialize the xdm(gentoo init.d/xdm to start gdm) service. in paralell i will have the modules reloaded, any in use modules will fail to reload which is good(dont need to reload what works).
my theory is that i can avoid the kernel init, while still having all my hardware initialized.
i will still have to wait for X to load but i think the kernel init and sys init are the slowest parts.
actually, i have to point out that the generational jump from 1.7Gb to 13Gb was quite large. drives became significantly faster in that gap. the jump from 13gb to 40 is not so great. just in size the 1.7->13 was nearly 8x, while 13->40 was just 3x. in terms of performance the same holds true. now had you jumped from the 13->200sata you would have seen a big bump.
what i'm saying is that disk i/o is the primary HARDWARE bottleneck and that the CPU is a distant second. their are numerous software issues as well, from device initialization all the way back to the PC Bios being slow and outdated.
actually, disk i/o is the bottleneck while the CPU is quite free. the solution may be too:
hibernate but apply a very stron compression during the memory save phase. during bootup, the drive will have to load less data because of the compression, so the formerly idle CPU can take some of the pressure off of the disk.
consider that 1Gb of ram will not be completely used up at the point where most people would shutdown their computer. that easily turns into 250Mb of actual used memory that needs to be saved. compress that memory down by nearly 50% to 125Mb(try it, do a memory dump and winrar it!). now have the ram image at the edge of the disk platter for more speed. 125MB / 45Mb/s(continuous disk read speed) = 2.8 seconds + post. and even if the full 1Gb was used 11 seconds + post.
my machine takes about 4 seconds to post. so 7 seconds to resume from hibernate.
---
and of your 'clean state' hibernation. what happens if you modify a registry entry? or install a driver? these things would require a FULL reboot. changing your background would require a full reboot for the changes to stick. and to work around these issues, the scripting to make these changes would add to the boot times.
and trippling CPU speed will NOT half boot times, but maybe reduce by 1/3, showing that boot times are more dependent on disk i/o than CPU speed.
in a typical setup, CPU time is a MAJOR bottleneck, only to be matched by device initialization, which has little to do with cpu speed.
in fact, a k6-2 500Mhz machine will boot windows xp nearly as fast as a athlon xp 2500. the athlon xp machine takes about 2/3 the time as the k6-2 500Mhz with the same hard disk
i find the 1st 1/2 of your post completely incorrect, and the second 1/2 quite true.
1)software installs are non-standard and messy -th fix? AppDir or similar, this would be a very good way to solv the issues. 2)hardware config. sure linux CAN support a great variety of hardware, but actually getting it set up and working is another story. 3)software config. more and better software config guis are need across the board. how about a better xorg.cfg editor? have one the has EVERY option available but scans the hardware,driver,or know list of compatible options and only displays those options. also it should tell you how to improve performance of the x server when it detects an option that is not enabled!
{
-There is still no agreed on explaination for why
-the moon appears bigger when it's on the horizon
-than when it's high in the night sky."
}
first, i did not read every post so excuse this if it has been addressed.
is the earth round? is the atmosphere also round? so if a nearly clear object is bent does it not act as a lense? so if the atmosphere is between the viewer and the moon, wouldn't it bend light the same as a lense? so now tilt the top of the lense towards the viewer just like the atmosphere is tilted from the viewers point of view. doesn't it make the image larger? so..
{
-There is still no agreed on explaination for why
-the moon appears bigger when it's on the horizon
-than when it's high in the night sky."
}
im all for piracy, no really!? BUT only in certain circumstances and i think the law should allow for this:
Pirating windows is wrong UNLESS you are installing it in a virtual machine on an OS that has a valid license. so you've paid your license fee and are just extracting more usefullness from that license.
you are using a pruduct for personal education. NOT that schools can pirate software! for instance, if you are typing up a report, or a letter, or a memo, or whatever in a piece of software that is not licensed, that is wrong, BUT if you are teaching someone to use a piece of software or teaching yourself then it is ok.
liesure outside of software's market. pirating games is wrong. pirating 3d studio max to make 3d images and sell or give away is wrong. pirating 3d studio max to experiment with 3d modeling for personal use is ok BECAUSE 3d studio max is a professional product with a market in pruduction to distribution of 3d content, where you would only be producing and not distributing. the moment you sell or give away one of your works you would need to license the product.
and on that line of thought, many companies should allow full, and unrestricted copies to their software be used for free BUT have a visual, un-removable watermark on any output. so your word doc would look good BUT it would have small microsoft "unlicensed copy" text spread on it in random formation.
Slashdot Mirror
ok, to finnish this off in a sane matter(yet you may post the last word if you so desire), let agree to disagree.
to balance some statements.
i do not believe and cannot compute the idea that marijuana or any drug can avoid problems with children, born or not. any drug that physically affects a person will do the same to a child and more(fragile,developing body) and i ask you to consider this thought a bit. chronic use will definately be more harmfull than occasional use and use during a pregnancy will of course have more severe effects than pre-pregnant use.
without googling up 10gigs of data know that i do not need to prove marijuana has a detrimental effect on childrens brain chemistry. for that matter asprin has an effect and i urg people not to take any kind of drug during pregnancy for the sake of their child. you could be creating a 140 I.Q. baby and then dialing that down to 105 I.Q. with drugs(though many more severe).
my feeling on rights is as simple as this:
one may act freely in any way desired so long as acts and consequences of one's actions do not harm and injur any other creatures rights or impede their ability to act freely.
and then to show what rights creatures have, humans for instance:
to live, to enjoy the safest, healthiest life possible without interference by another. to live free so long as one does not take anothers right to be.
BTW, i will admit to being an extremist. my priorities on human rights are life, then health, THEN freedom, the possession. freedom cannot override life or health, and one's health cannot override anothers life. an no one may posses if that possesion takes life, impedes freedom, or injurs.
and freedom of speach should not be a right alone, but a side effect of freedom. no statement should be made to ensure this as LIFE,HEALTH,FREEDOM, and POSSESION pretty much says it all.
in fact i am not ill-informed and marijuana is in fact very bad for your body. 1 joint has as much tar and cancer causing agents as a pack of cigarettes. also, the mental effects of pot are much MORE SEVERE and more damaging to OTHER PEOPLE that are exposed. pot has been PROVEN to cause mental deficiencies in children born to pot smoking parents and/or exposed to marijuana.
at what point is one person's freedom more important than another's? i interpret your last comment as valueing freedom more than human rights?(and no they are not one in the same) the right to live and enjoy a healthy environment overrides any level of freedom allowing drug use.
each person has a basic right to not be harmed by others but you say freedom to do drugs as one pleases overrides this?
and you call me a fascist? you who seems willing to argue for the use of drugs and consequence to others, most likely only because of your own personal agent to do drugs as you please?
what happens when you have become intoxicate with some person(of opposite sex!) and produce a child? are you not responsible for that child's possible and probible mental difficencies? what right do you have to damage this persons mind in such a way? or do you prefer to abort such a child?
oh, and btw, people whom commit suicide by jumping of high places would like to eliminate the cold air between them and the ground because of the harmfull effects of frostbite. they would like to eliminate this as they don't like the idea of this harmfull and painfull situation during their relatively painless splat on the sidewalk.(analogy!)
as a side note i do vote.
a comment on "*you* should have every available means at your disposal to do so"
i believe that distribution and public consumption is the core issue, if you want to smoke in private that is great, have fun.
i would also like to expand on 'private' please read 'private' as all people in the group are participating members and are theirfore in a private group. if anyone present is not a member of said smokers group, then the 'private group' theory is gone and so is the ability to smoke. i am considering children here, and public places where one does not have the right to monopolize on the space and theirfore cannot have a private group of smokers.
three people sitting in a room, two adults & one child, no smoking as child is not and cannot be a smoker. and btw, if you do this you are HURTING THE CHILD you prick! grow a brain. asthma! emphasema! etc.
you are a damned idiot!
a nicotine free joint cause im against drugs.
drugs have an adverse effect on the people around the drug use, that is the point of drug laws. if drugs only effected the person doing them they would be legal!
canabis is a drug and effects all around. it increases crime rates and impacts childrens health. and if you are one of those pricks that says your hurting no-one, how about smoking around children, or smoking and then 'supervising' children. how about driving intoxicated. yeah, canabis IMPAIRS driving ability and cause many accidents! the fact that alcohol shadows canabis in the number of intoxicant related deaths does not mean it is safe.
find a drug that does not effect the people around the user and I will agree that it should be legal.
here is an analogy for what sbc is saying.
in wendy's(for instance)
now, im going to charge every customer that walks through the door for my product(as it should be)
BUT
im also going to charge the farmer for the priviledge of GIVING me BEEF to sell to my customers.
WTF?
are consumers going to get free internet access? and google have to pay for it?
if i were google i would just buy my own 'pipes' and flip SBC the bird. oh wait, they are. so essintial SBC is going to push themselves out of the mainstream market and try to fracture the internet into 'the SBC zone' and 'the real internet'
bottom line:
consumers pay a fee for their access to the web, SBC profits from this arrangement and so do consumers(hense the great growth in broadband internet). they have to right to collect fees for the content provided so that they can sell bandwidth.
another analogy:
exxon sells fuel and makes good money at this, but they have decided that auto companies must pay exxon for the ability to have their vehicles burn exxon gas.. now what happens to exxon? and more importantly, what happens to conoco? conoco's fuel runs on any car. how many cars does general motors, ford, honda, etc.. make for exxon's fuel? zero
this is/was/will be posted a number of times, please dont count the 'facts' as a dup, but the opinion as the post..thanks
#1 - the patent is on the method of 'useing' or 'detecting' the genes for research and development purposes.
#2 - 'prior art' by god(if you believe) or by nature(if you dont) MATTERS. creating in some way not only made these genes but also can read and manipulate them!
#3 - under #2, i believe that the attempt to decrypt the gene code to study or modify said genes is a direct violation of the DMCA. just because we cannot read nature's/god's patent, does not mean it doesn't apply. although the 'supreme patent' may have expired, and in that case the gene code is public domain.
#4 - if their is no hell or god, then a god will spontaneously form and create hell specifically for these people who patent genes. hell will be occupied by genetic patenters, car salesmen, and prosecuting attourneys.
#5 - i guess this may make cloneing illegal via patent violation!
i think that calculating system clock from a central machine and adjusting based on average latency will be 'good enough'.
interesting thought about soundcards skewing playback. possibly different clock values on sound chips could do this. 1 or 2 ms is 'ok' but humans have sensitive enough ears to pick up much more, especially on multichannel output.
i think 'smart' programming should be able to anticipate starts/stops on playback to be reasonably acurate, but the song could quite litterally drift out of sync...
anyone have a more technical idea of how these latencies and clock skews could effect output?
another thought:
i suppose you could have the playback program do a "play this packet at this time" as apposed to "start playing stream now" so if the playback were at a different pace on different machines it would be for single packets of audio data. i know this may add an unreasonable amount of overhead OR even cause audio quality to suffer if the playback progam/sound chip had a significantly different playrate than the source.
firstly, latency sucks but can simply be ignored. for instance, if all devices on a network have a reatime clock, they can sync this clock with a central machine and calculate scew from latency to be very very precise. now the player can be told to play this stream starting at this second. now every device will cache a small amount of data and play the file based on realtime instead of play-as-streamed. now if a song should be playing @ 12:35pm(@23.638 seconds) it will be on all devices and latency will not be an issue.
next, wired devices can of course be used as wireless devices with a cheap access point in client mode(think WRT54g). this way you can link your x-box/ps2/network media player on the same client mode router!
maybe your the idiot that can't read? did you read the part where owning something should matter? and the idea of taking what is owned by others is wrong? the whole comment was about right and wrong, not what wikipedia says. and if you think my comment was 'running of the mouth with no idea' then what was yours?
....' is rarely accepted as 'law'
BTW wikipedia is in no way how the work 'IS'
for instance 'No one in the world really "owns" a
and in turn, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting for an example of cybersquatting and how this topic does not apply.
"Cybersquatting is a derogatory term used to describe the practice of registering and claiming rights over brand names which are, arguably, not for the taking."
as in one person gets a domain without claiming rights to a pre-owned brand name. At the time of domain was registration, no such brand name existed=no squatting.
'law does not = justice' 'wright and wrong'
'law = we say you can't do this'
also note, some(possibly many) laws do provide justice. i am not an anarchist.
at what point did the right to own and keep what is yours get voided? if someone ownes something, and then you use the same name(i'm not implying bad intentions), what makes you think you deserve to have something they own? they did own that domain before you had the company name right? you thinking that you have a right or some claim is complete crap and an attempt to take it should be considered attempted theft. the domain is owned and the owner did not violate your trade name or copyright when purchased, that means they OWN THE DOMAIN and you are STUPID and part of the PROBLEM with the american way.
go ahead, mod me down. good karma in the real world is worth bad karma on slashdot
so....would a descent polarizing filter work against this? i mean, the light is comming from one direction right? so if a filter blocked light from that specific direction then no light would blind the camera right? how about a decoy IR light(s)? who if you had an IR light and you focused it right on the censor, would the projector try to blind the whole world?
what im saying is that 'technology' like this HELPS the pirates. It helps by giving false confidence to theaters or companies and pirates can easily circumvent the system.
things must be 100% secure, or not secure at all. if something is 98% secure, pirates learn and it makes it so much harder to GET TOO 100% because the pirates are smarter, they have evolved with your copy protection.
the solution is to have a sensor for detecting the chemicals in battery acids to find cameras, and then confiscating and smashing the camera to tiny bits in front of everyone before calling the police and pressing charges(after taking the media like memorycard or videotape).
beos did not handle media well because of low latencies, it handled media well because of thoughtful media system design. beos actually has poor latencies and response times in a number of areas, it just accelled at scheduling and prioritisation
{
He argues that developing space weapons is a surefire way to launch a new space weapon race.
}
and not developing space weapons is a surefire way to avoid a space weapon race so if just one country develops space weapons they rule the world.
weapons races create checks and balances. superweapon A is great, but if everone has superweapon A it is just another gadget. look at nukes. what would the world be like if only russia has developed nukes? or if only the US had? why would one fear using nukes? their would be no fear so nukes would have been used in vietnam and korea, and iraq and afghanistan.
was this man not proven guilty?
all people should be treated as innocent until proven otherwise. a guilty man is a guilty man, but to punish the man you have to prove without a reasonable doubt that he is guilty.
once released, it is now in public circulation. just like a newspaper, it can be stored and brought up at the worst time. fact is, it was release.
please note this line:
CPU time is a MAJOR bottleneck
was meant to read:
disk speed is a MAJOR bottleneck
if the guy put links to sites that he knew contained illegal content then he should be guilty.
if a person shows another person where they can but illegal guns, then they are a party to the crime when that person buys guns, in fact they are commiting a crime by directing someone to buy the illegal guns even if no purchase is made!
now if he posts a link to a site with no intent to deliver illegal software or media, and did now know that illegalities exsisted at the end of the link then i don't see how he commited a crime.
the fact is that helping other people to commit crimes with full knowledge of the illegal activities they are promoting or allowing with full knowledge of providing the means is illegal.
and it should be.
think man, think!
the disk IS the limiting factor. the reason boot times dont scale down with drive speed increases equally is because of device initialization! if no devices needed to be initialize, the full potential of the disk can be realized.
to initialize devices, the disk needs to be read(modules, configs, etc) so increasing disk speed or better yet disk access times will improve but not perfect device initialization.
during boot, the cpu has very little to process. reading a config file depends more on disk access speed than cpu speed. device initialization is simply telling the device to be ON and waiting for it to say OK. the cpu is not stressed.
if the cpu were stressed, it would produce more heat, notice that a cpu does not get very hot during boot.
try running prime 95 for as long as your machine takes to boot. in that time prime 95 will warm up your processor significantly more than the boot process as the boot process only needs a 500Mhz cpu to be fast.
your boot process is slowed by i/o bottlenecks and slow disk access. a 50Ghz CPU will not improve your boot speed if you use one of todays hard disks.
please, if you would like to continue this chat, explain to me and slashdot how the cpu could be a bottle neck and how you think the hard disk is NOT the bottleneck.
----
to extend this point, look to the way beos boots. it has a device dependancy list and initializes as many devices in parallel as posible. it also loads the OS in a 'ready' state and doesn't bother configuring the OS on every boot during boot, but gets the OS loaded and then loads what has changed. doing this it loads the OS from disk in a smooth, sequential read, no-waiting fasion. BeOS boots FAST! because it avoids the weeknesses of modern hard drives and makes i/o waits all happen in parellel instead of sequential order.
the beos boot PROVES that i/o waits from device initialization and hard disk performance are the leading issues with slow boot speeds.
ideally, the OS would modularize all drivers not required for bootup. then be able to load and unload them at will. then the computer could boot to a 'core clean' state very quickly, and then drivers could be initialized and then user loggin.
currently windows(or linux) does not load a 'ready os image' on boot, but initialized all of the kernel code on each boot. linux would be well suited to fixing this and i think i will try!
---
for those interested read on:
i will try to run softsup2(gen 2 software suspend). i will have it stop the x server before suspending reducing the size of the suspend image. on reboot, i will have it initialize the xdm(gentoo init.d/xdm to start gdm) service. in paralell i will have the modules reloaded, any in use modules will fail to reload which is good(dont need to reload what works).
my theory is that i can avoid the kernel init, while still having all my hardware initialized.
i will still have to wait for X to load but i think the kernel init and sys init are the slowest parts.
actually, i have to point out that the generational jump from 1.7Gb to 13Gb was quite large. drives became significantly faster in that gap. the jump from 13gb to 40 is not so great. just in size the 1.7->13 was nearly 8x, while 13->40 was just 3x. in terms of performance the same holds true. now had you jumped from the 13->200sata you would have seen a big bump.
what i'm saying is that disk i/o is the primary HARDWARE bottleneck and that the CPU is a distant second. their are numerous software issues as well, from device initialization all the way back to the PC Bios being slow and outdated.
actually, disk i/o is the bottleneck while the CPU is quite free. the solution may be too:
hibernate but apply a very stron compression during the memory save phase. during bootup, the drive will have to load less data because of the compression, so the formerly idle CPU can take some of the pressure off of the disk.
consider that 1Gb of ram will not be completely used up at the point where most people would shutdown their computer. that easily turns into 250Mb of actual used memory that needs to be saved. compress that memory down by nearly 50% to 125Mb(try it, do a memory dump and winrar it!). now have the ram image at the edge of the disk platter for more speed. 125MB / 45Mb/s(continuous disk read speed) = 2.8 seconds + post. and even if the full 1Gb was used 11 seconds + post.
my machine takes about 4 seconds to post. so 7 seconds to resume from hibernate.
---
and of your 'clean state' hibernation. what happens if you modify a registry entry? or install a driver? these things would require a FULL reboot. changing your background would require a full reboot for the changes to stick. and to work around these issues, the scripting to make these changes would add to the boot times.
trippling disk i/o will half boot times.
http://overclockers.com/tips00806/
and trippling CPU speed will NOT half boot times, but maybe reduce by 1/3, showing that boot times are more dependent on disk i/o than CPU speed.
in a typical setup, CPU time is a MAJOR bottleneck, only to be matched by device initialization, which has little to do with cpu speed.
in fact, a k6-2 500Mhz machine will boot windows xp nearly as fast as a athlon xp 2500. the athlon xp machine takes about 2/3 the time as the k6-2 500Mhz with the same hard disk
i find the 1st 1/2 of your post completely incorrect, and the second 1/2 quite true.
1)software installs are non-standard and messy
-th fix? AppDir or similar, this would be a very good way to solv the issues.
2)hardware config. sure linux CAN support a great variety of hardware, but actually getting it set up and working is another story.
3)software config. more and better software config guis are need across the board. how about a better xorg.cfg editor? have one the has EVERY option available but scans the hardware,driver,or know list of compatible options and only displays those options. also it should tell you how to improve performance of the x server when it detects an option that is not enabled!
{ -There is still no agreed on explaination for why -the moon appears bigger when it's on the horizon -than when it's high in the night sky." }
..is complete crap? wtf?
first, i did not read every post so excuse this if it has been addressed.
is the earth round? is the atmosphere also round? so if a nearly clear object is bent does it not act as a lense? so if the atmosphere is between the viewer and the moon, wouldn't it bend light the same as a lense? so now tilt the top of the lense towards the viewer just like the atmosphere is tilted from the viewers point of view. doesn't it make the image larger? so..
{ -There is still no agreed on explaination for why -the moon appears bigger when it's on the horizon -than when it's high in the night sky." }
im all for piracy, no really!? BUT only in certain circumstances and i think the law should allow for this:
Pirating windows is wrong UNLESS you are installing it in a virtual machine on an OS that has a valid license. so you've paid your license fee and are just extracting more usefullness from that license.
you are using a pruduct for personal education. NOT that schools can pirate software! for instance, if you are typing up a report, or a letter, or a memo, or whatever in a piece of software that is not licensed, that is wrong, BUT if you are teaching someone to use a piece of software or teaching yourself then it is ok.
liesure outside of software's market. pirating games is wrong. pirating 3d studio max to make 3d images and sell or give away is wrong. pirating 3d studio max to experiment with 3d modeling for personal use is ok BECAUSE 3d studio max is a professional product with a market in pruduction to distribution of 3d content, where you would only be producing and not distributing. the moment you sell or give away one of your works you would need to license the product.
and on that line of thought, many companies should allow full, and unrestricted copies to their software be used for free BUT have a visual, un-removable watermark on any output. so your word doc would look good BUT it would have small microsoft "unlicensed copy" text spread on it in random formation.