ARM is a threat to Intel in the near future and indirectly. People are gravitating towards tablets and smartphones instead of buying deaktops. However, those of us that actually need desktops today have only Intel and AMD to turn to, and Intel's margins are too high and their products are too artificially crippled for my tastes, which is why I sincerely root for AMD's success.
Android TV sticks seem to be a much better proposal than Chromecasts, anyway, especially at the same price. And some of them run Linux. Which is a godsend, because after this, I'm finally starting to get truly wary about Android.
Well, it's both very badly written and seems to exist for the sole purpose of informing about a browser feature that is already very well-known and can be accessed via the always intuitive context menu, which will also provide the shortcut information. So I'm going to go with B, even though I feel a fellow/.ter will prove me wrong by linking to an even more stupid story.
That'd be the most depressing job ever. A clone of someone. Pretty much a second chance to live, but with a completely clean slate. And he'd be mooching off his previous self's talent, always wondering why he couldn't ascend to the same level of recognition nor fully comprehend this figure that people expected him to be. And every song he'd ever compose would be measured against Imagine, setting him up for failure. In time, he'd grow to hate Lennon. It would start subtly, with him only agreeing to play Revolution #9 at concerts, but pretty soon he'd hatch a plan to clone Yoko Ono MY GOD SOMEONE MAKE THIS MOVIE NOW!
That seems to be the case. Non-Google Android sticks that plug into TVs are sort of desktops, though, and have been around for some time. The newer ones, based on RK3188, are quite powerful. It's gaining ground faster than Android x86 and, as soon as some company makes an ARM processor that focuses on speed over power consumption, perhaps with active cooling, we'll have proper desktop Android, regardless of Google's plans.
Again the tired old debate about "which is more free", GPL2 vs GPL3, GPL vs MIT etc. I'm amazed at how people keep falling for linguistic traps. "Freedom" isn't subject to gradation on a linear scale, necessarily marred by increased regulation nor evenly distributed. As a concept, it's as ill-defined as "love", so arguing about what license is "more free" doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you also fall for the cultural trap that "freedom" is the main moral goal in everything and a necessary attribute/buzzword for garnering support regardless of the issue at hand.
Having said that, I believe the GPL is better because it guarantees the possibility of forking.
Yes, the rights and privacy of citizens have to be considered, but people demand security, but also want to have privacy.
You know what accomplishes that pretty well? A history of foreign policy that doesn't rape other countries. Look at the number of successful terorrist attacks on argentinian people since the 1920s. And I can assure you Argentina isn't a tenth as vigilant or prepared as the US.
When it comes to things like groupon, yes. Racing prices to the bottom is bad for any sort of market or enterprise. Well, not to the bottom - in this case, past the bottom, in the hopes of converting into regular customers people who are very keen on pursuing advantageous offers, which is a hard proposal. However, when he gets to comparing things like airbnb to being locusts, that's where he makes the very weird mistake of thinking we shouldn't get rid of things we don't need anymore because that would be change. Yes, airbnb, home production and local, smaller trading economies can impact negatively lots of companies that can't compete on cost because of their overhead. However, if they do, that's because those costs are demonstrably unneeded, at least in their current levels, and we have transitioned accordingly, to a more efficient and diversified market (or non-market). Economic growth isn't infinitely sustainable anyway. It will either halt or plummet eventually and there are still people clamoring for us to do everything we can to make more money flow around faster, for no real benefit.
It's an occupational hazard, the sort that is greatly amplified by stupid management. In your case, it seems a bit idiotic to send one man, alone, to investigate a "massive" marijuana grow. As idiotic as sending a dozen officers wielding submachine guns to get an unarmed optometrist who used to bet $50 with his friends.
As long as he doesn't dabble in hypocrisy, by complaining when someone is rude to him (and I have not heard of that kind of behavior, so I assume he doesn't mind), and as long as he has a point, I think it's both effective and entertaining. What's not to like?
Cell phones were just an example. Companies have been getting more for their workers, in terms of productivity per hypothethical non-inflated unit of value. However, they still have to sell their products/services, to an increasingly impoverished consumer market. As they are getting more productive, however, they can set their prices relatively lower and still make the sales they need to increase their profits. Which means trinkets, like cell phones, are getting cheaper, more accessible and, thus, more prevalent, and are then included as a staple of our daily lives. Cars are now also very much this in most cities/states/countries where they weren't up until the 70s. In most cities, the continuing trend to verticalize outsources home maintenance costs, like cleaning of the common areas and elevator maintenance. The internet exists. So, while it's relatively more expensive to be a middle class citizen today, we also have access to a whole host of things and services that the middle class of yore didn't even know. Meaning we spend more, yes, but we also get more shit for it. Property, however, probably for having a knack for being finite, hasn't been going down in price with our advances in productivity, which is part of why debt has been steadily on the rise. YMMV, though, depending on where you live. Emerging economies have felt this rise in purchasing power coupled with a marked difficulty to maintain decent living standards quite strongly.
Just to add a bit to your point, "comfortable standard of living" has also gone way up since the 70s. We have/buy a lot more crap, now, said crap is amazingly better and it doesn't matter at all in the end, just makes life a lot more expensive. I'm thinking of thngs like cell phones: we didn't have them and so they didn't matter. Now we have to have them, because if you don't, then you're condifered unreachable. Our expectations of time and availability for communications have shifted, and we are expected to maintain a whole new system just so we can remain just as adequate as before.
Russell called it a long time ago, and look at where we are now. Sometimes I wonder if we'll really transition to a post-consumerist, post-scarcity society, like Paul Fernhout often describes here, or if we'll keep endlessly inventing jobs and functions that do not add to our lives but are infinitely scalable as long as at least two parts are fueling the market in opposite ways, like advertising, laywering, pateting, lobbying etc.
I think the problem is that unless you're very familiar with Mars and its satellites it's a little bit of a let down to see a group of pixels move across the screen
What are you talking about? When I first saw Phobos being rendered before my eyes, even if at a shoddier pixel count than one would like, I was instantly amazed. The sense of wonder took whole weeks to dissipate, and got a second wind when I reached the Cyberdemon. And I knew absolutely jack about Mars back then.
Well, there are those who are functional adults that don't leave their rooms unless they have to. I think those extreme cases mentioned in TFA are more visible representations of a prevalent behaviour related to profound changes in ways of interacting with society (or not needing to anymore).
The basis of laws surrounding it is that the production of child porn harms a child
Citation needed. No doubt that's one reason, but what about the effects of conditioning people (or leaving the legal door open for them to condition themselves, if you prefer) to respond sexually to minors? There are some very good reasons not to encourage or allow child pornography which doesn't directly involve children.
Surely you must realize we have already failed at curbing such conditioning. Watch an hour of random TV or leaf through a few magazines to see how incredibly youth-driven sexuality is generally portrayed and how sexually teens are usually presented. Aspects of youth are painstakingly emulated through makeup or surgery, and the norm is the younger, the better.
Actually, the NSA thought about recording all the Kardashians' conversations. Then if the secret police ever needed to "break" a prisoner, they could just make them listen to the recordings.
However, the idea was rejected, because even the US government wasn't willing to go that far.
The idea was rejected?
Well, we do have standards for torture for anyone with an IQ over 70, so makes sense I guess.
Also explains why they are still relevant in any way.
Once again, 1% of the population getting special treatment...
Its almost like the discussion about having DRM support in HTML 5 was for real-world practical reasons, rather than just killing puppies and taking your freedom.
Its better than flash and silverlight because this could become standard if everyone takes their head out of the sand and accepts that HTML5 video needs DRM support to be attractive to the people renting video.
I can tell why political correctness is the best choice even for the purely pragmatic: if you persecute or ostracize a particular group of people, you will be creating rancor. While profiling makes sense when you think about immediate prevention of hate crimes, on the long run it's self-defeating. Why do you think religion in the middle east hasn't "grown the fuck up" like a few others, given they were all equally violent a couple of centuries ago? Because it still fits their mindset, because they live still in an environment greatly conductive to that mindset. The why can be found in plenty of history books.
Let's get something out of the way first: that 5GHz chip will suck. Incredibly. However,
The Bulldozer architecture is fundamentally broken
is not exactly prudent phrasing. Bulldozer sucked. Period. It was obviously half-baked. Trinity is much better. If AMD can repeat their predicted 15% performance improvement on their next BD iteration, then they will have a truly good product. Yes, Intel is still better. An i3 is better than an FX-4300 and an i5 is better than an FX-8350 for most workloads. However, Intel jumped way ahead of AMD with Sandy Bridge and, since then, they have been mostly stagnant on the CPU front. Compare SB, IB and Haswell and you'll see mostly low single-digit increases in performance, while increasingly worsening heat dissipation. Currently, Intel has a big process node advantage (22nm vs 32nm) and they still aren't that far ahead. AMD launched a crappy product way before it was ready, but that doesn't mean the architecture sucks.
Furthermore, the reduced number of FP units is to be offset by their HSA, only to be seen in their next product, coupled with GCN iGPUs. So, while I wouldn't buy AMD either right now (except for the FX-6300, perhaps), it's not exactly smart to condemn a move before it's throughly played out.
Regarding your "Android tablet with bigger screen", you might want to look into those tiny Androids on sticks. There are a few powerful quad-cores now. With a TV and bluetooth keyboard/mouse combo, you'd be set.
Though I actually liked their performances, those last doctors have been too manic in their enthusiasm, too emotional over minor things, considering their enormous life span and the breathtaking breadth of their previous experiences. I seriously think the show would benefit tremendously from having a more brainy lead. Stewart could make a fantastic doctor, annoyed by mostly everyone and bored almost all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that LEOs are always looking for "magic bullets" that will make it as easy as "its that guy"
True, they are exactly like that. Which is why we should have level-headed GEMINIs and AQUARIANs sorting the true sciences from the mythical stuff.
ARM is a threat to Intel in the near future and indirectly. People are gravitating towards tablets and smartphones instead of buying deaktops. However, those of us that actually need desktops today have only Intel and AMD to turn to, and Intel's margins are too high and their products are too artificially crippled for my tastes, which is why I sincerely root for AMD's success.
Android TV sticks seem to be a much better proposal than Chromecasts, anyway, especially at the same price. And some of them run Linux. Which is a godsend, because after this, I'm finally starting to get truly wary about Android.
Well, it's both very badly written and seems to exist for the sole purpose of informing about a browser feature that is already very well-known and can be accessed via the always intuitive context menu, which will also provide the shortcut information. So I'm going to go with B, even though I feel a fellow /.ter will prove me wrong by linking to an even more stupid story.
That'd be the most depressing job ever. A clone of someone. Pretty much a second chance to live, but with a completely clean slate. And he'd be mooching off his previous self's talent, always wondering why he couldn't ascend to the same level of recognition nor fully comprehend this figure that people expected him to be. And every song he'd ever compose would be measured against Imagine, setting him up for failure. In time, he'd grow to hate Lennon. It would start subtly, with him only agreeing to play Revolution #9 at concerts, but pretty soon he'd hatch a plan to clone Yoko Ono MY GOD SOMEONE MAKE THIS MOVIE NOW!
Porn "stars" probably should not be cloned because a lot of the value in a porn star is the novelty factor.
"First dick-sucking clone ever!"
That seems to be the case. Non-Google Android sticks that plug into TVs are sort of desktops, though, and have been around for some time. The newer ones, based on RK3188, are quite powerful. It's gaining ground faster than Android x86 and, as soon as some company makes an ARM processor that focuses on speed over power consumption, perhaps with active cooling, we'll have proper desktop Android, regardless of Google's plans.
Again the tired old debate about "which is more free", GPL2 vs GPL3, GPL vs MIT etc. I'm amazed at how people keep falling for linguistic traps. "Freedom" isn't subject to gradation on a linear scale, necessarily marred by increased regulation nor evenly distributed. As a concept, it's as ill-defined as "love", so arguing about what license is "more free" doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you also fall for the cultural trap that "freedom" is the main moral goal in everything and a necessary attribute/buzzword for garnering support regardless of the issue at hand.
Having said that, I believe the GPL is better because it guarantees the possibility of forking.
Because all of that has to do with the ability to buy and use a gun...
Keith Alexander is a terrorist and deserves the fate of a terrorist.
72 virgins?
Yes, the rights and privacy of citizens have to be considered, but people demand security, but also want to have privacy.
You know what accomplishes that pretty well? A history of foreign policy that doesn't rape other countries. Look at the number of successful terorrist attacks on argentinian people since the 1920s. And I can assure you Argentina isn't a tenth as vigilant or prepared as the US.
When it comes to things like groupon, yes. Racing prices to the bottom is bad for any sort of market or enterprise. Well, not to the bottom - in this case, past the bottom, in the hopes of converting into regular customers people who are very keen on pursuing advantageous offers, which is a hard proposal. However, when he gets to comparing things like airbnb to being locusts, that's where he makes the very weird mistake of thinking we shouldn't get rid of things we don't need anymore because that would be change. Yes, airbnb, home production and local, smaller trading economies can impact negatively lots of companies that can't compete on cost because of their overhead. However, if they do, that's because those costs are demonstrably unneeded, at least in their current levels, and we have transitioned accordingly, to a more efficient and diversified market (or non-market). Economic growth isn't infinitely sustainable anyway. It will either halt or plummet eventually and there are still people clamoring for us to do everything we can to make more money flow around faster, for no real benefit.
It's an occupational hazard, the sort that is greatly amplified by stupid management. In your case, it seems a bit idiotic to send one man, alone, to investigate a "massive" marijuana grow. As idiotic as sending a dozen officers wielding submachine guns to get an unarmed optometrist who used to bet $50 with his friends.
As long as he doesn't dabble in hypocrisy, by complaining when someone is rude to him (and I have not heard of that kind of behavior, so I assume he doesn't mind), and as long as he has a point, I think it's both effective and entertaining. What's not to like?
Cell phones were just an example. Companies have been getting more for their workers, in terms of productivity per hypothethical non-inflated unit of value. However, they still have to sell their products/services, to an increasingly impoverished consumer market. As they are getting more productive, however, they can set their prices relatively lower and still make the sales they need to increase their profits. Which means trinkets, like cell phones, are getting cheaper, more accessible and, thus, more prevalent, and are then included as a staple of our daily lives. Cars are now also very much this in most cities/states/countries where they weren't up until the 70s. In most cities, the continuing trend to verticalize outsources home maintenance costs, like cleaning of the common areas and elevator maintenance. The internet exists. So, while it's relatively more expensive to be a middle class citizen today, we also have access to a whole host of things and services that the middle class of yore didn't even know. Meaning we spend more, yes, but we also get more shit for it. Property, however, probably for having a knack for being finite, hasn't been going down in price with our advances in productivity, which is part of why debt has been steadily on the rise. YMMV, though, depending on where you live. Emerging economies have felt this rise in purchasing power coupled with a marked difficulty to maintain decent living standards quite strongly.
Just to add a bit to your point, "comfortable standard of living" has also gone way up since the 70s. We have/buy a lot more crap, now, said crap is amazingly better and it doesn't matter at all in the end, just makes life a lot more expensive. I'm thinking of thngs like cell phones: we didn't have them and so they didn't matter. Now we have to have them, because if you don't, then you're condifered unreachable. Our expectations of time and availability for communications have shifted, and we are expected to maintain a whole new system just so we can remain just as adequate as before.
Russell called it a long time ago, and look at where we are now. Sometimes I wonder if we'll really transition to a post-consumerist, post-scarcity society, like Paul Fernhout often describes here, or if we'll keep endlessly inventing jobs and functions that do not add to our lives but are infinitely scalable as long as at least two parts are fueling the market in opposite ways, like advertising, laywering, pateting, lobbying etc.
I think the problem is that unless you're very familiar with Mars and its satellites it's a little bit of a let down to see a group of pixels move across the screen
What are you talking about? When I first saw Phobos being rendered before my eyes, even if at a shoddier pixel count than one would like, I was instantly amazed. The sense of wonder took whole weeks to dissipate, and got a second wind when I reached the Cyberdemon. And I knew absolutely jack about Mars back then.
Well, there are those who are functional adults that don't leave their rooms unless they have to. I think those extreme cases mentioned in TFA are more visible representations of a prevalent behaviour related to profound changes in ways of interacting with society (or not needing to anymore).
The basis of laws surrounding it is that the production of child porn harms a child
Citation needed. No doubt that's one reason, but what about the effects of conditioning people (or leaving the legal door open for them to condition themselves, if you prefer) to respond sexually to minors? There are some very good reasons not to encourage or allow child pornography which doesn't directly involve children.
Surely you must realize we have already failed at curbing such conditioning. Watch an hour of random TV or leaf through a few magazines to see how incredibly youth-driven sexuality is generally portrayed and how sexually teens are usually presented. Aspects of youth are painstakingly emulated through makeup or surgery, and the norm is the younger, the better.
Actually, the NSA thought about recording all the Kardashians' conversations. Then if the secret police ever needed to "break" a prisoner, they could just make them listen to the recordings.
However, the idea was rejected, because even the US government wasn't willing to go that far.
The idea was rejected?
Well, we do have standards for torture for anyone with an IQ over 70, so makes sense I guess.
Also explains why they are still relevant in any way.
Once again, 1% of the population getting special treatment...
Its almost like the discussion about having DRM support in HTML 5 was for real-world practical reasons, rather than just killing puppies and taking your freedom.
Its better than flash and silverlight because this could become standard if everyone takes their head out of the sand and accepts that HTML5 video needs DRM support to be attractive to the people renting video.
FTFY.
I can tell why political correctness is the best choice even for the purely pragmatic: if you persecute or ostracize a particular group of people, you will be creating rancor. While profiling makes sense when you think about immediate prevention of hate crimes, on the long run it's self-defeating. Why do you think religion in the middle east hasn't "grown the fuck up" like a few others, given they were all equally violent a couple of centuries ago? Because it still fits their mindset, because they live still in an environment greatly conductive to that mindset. The why can be found in plenty of history books.
Let's get something out of the way first: that 5GHz chip will suck. Incredibly. However,
The Bulldozer architecture is fundamentally broken
is not exactly prudent phrasing. Bulldozer sucked. Period. It was obviously half-baked. Trinity is much better. If AMD can repeat their predicted 15% performance improvement on their next BD iteration, then they will have a truly good product. Yes, Intel is still better. An i3 is better than an FX-4300 and an i5 is better than an FX-8350 for most workloads. However, Intel jumped way ahead of AMD with Sandy Bridge and, since then, they have been mostly stagnant on the CPU front. Compare SB, IB and Haswell and you'll see mostly low single-digit increases in performance, while increasingly worsening heat dissipation. Currently, Intel has a big process node advantage (22nm vs 32nm) and they still aren't that far ahead. AMD launched a crappy product way before it was ready, but that doesn't mean the architecture sucks.
Furthermore, the reduced number of FP units is to be offset by their HSA, only to be seen in their next product, coupled with GCN iGPUs. So, while I wouldn't buy AMD either right now (except for the FX-6300, perhaps), it's not exactly smart to condemn a move before it's throughly played out.
Interesting considerations regarding gaming.
Regarding your "Android tablet with bigger screen", you might want to look into those tiny Androids on sticks. There are a few powerful quad-cores now. With a TV and bluetooth keyboard/mouse combo, you'd be set.
In the same vein, I'd go with Stewart Lee.
Though I actually liked their performances, those last doctors have been too manic in their enthusiasm, too emotional over minor things, considering their enormous life span and the breathtaking breadth of their previous experiences. I seriously think the show would benefit tremendously from having a more brainy lead. Stewart could make a fantastic doctor, annoyed by mostly everyone and bored almost all the time.