It's a pretty big assumption that everyone really wants to go 3rd party, but is too scared about throwing their vote away. I would assume that very few people who think voting 3rd party is wasteful would actually want that 3rd party candidate to win (and hence vote for him). I personally don't even want a specific 3rd party candidate to win. I just don't want to have to choose between repubs and dems my whole life.
3rd party candidates aren't necessarily better for every issue. A 3rd party candidate might want to legalize pot, but also to repeal the civil rights act(s).
The point is, it doesn't matter because he won't win. You vote for him because it's a vote cast that didn't go to the major parties. People voting for McCain didn't waste their votes because the race was between him and Obama (or Palin and Obama depending on how you look at it) and if anyone was going to beat Obama it was him.
Maybe I shouldn't have said the word "wasted". It's useful for making a point, but not useful in having a say in which of the two parties is inevitably elected.
Well it is. First-past-the-post essentially mandates that it is, but drawing attention to the flawed voting system is still worthwhile and voting 3rd party is good for that. The wasted vote basically becomes a martyr for the cause.
Yeah I do. You're saying you wish he were still alive so you wouldn't have to give up your dream of sucking him off.
they had something truly buzzworthy with the Courier and they killed it off internally over nothing.
[Citation Needed]
their shareholders aren't happy, they don't have decisive leadership or vision... that isn't what drives innovation.
Fuck what the short-term shareholders want, if you want to talk about lack of decisiveness you should be referring to Google (Microsoft sticks with most of their crap), vision is subjective, and anyone who talks about "driving innovation" has already lost their grip on reality (much like those in the twitter-sphere).
To everyone who's replying about compiler switches to activate multithreading: it's only relevant in this instance (maybe). I can totally sympathize with the disappointment in this machine, as I too have recently begun using this exact computer and have realized zero gains in having 5 extra cores. My work day involves running vim and about 50 verilog logic simulations, which are single threaded, and having this supercomputer under my desk (which I connect to remotely anyway) is absolutely useless. I wish they would give me a crappier one and a $4000 bonus instead.
No this isn't start-up related. Chips have a lot of variation in "switching-activity" or the need to suddenly charge and discharge internal nodes. This is during normal operation, and you do what you can to throw in as much "decoupling capacitance" as possible (to insulate other circuitry from rail noise and relax current draw requirements) but it takes up space and can only do so much.
Larger chips provide for more interconnects (more edge space) but at some point, that'll be overkill because the system will be all in there, and only I/O will need to be brought out.
There's a little more to it than that. Larger chips draw a large amount of power (very suddenly) which means the number of pins used just for VDD + GND/VSS goes way up. That's especially true since more of the analog circuitry (notoriously sensitive to rail noise) would have to be integrated into the same chip within same process. That's just power, and depending on the application there's a lot more to consider for your pinout. You can really never have enough pins. That rule of thumb isn't going anywhere soon.
Sigh.. you're sort of right. He would need a new TV because composite (or component) output blu-ray players and the like only support 480i *from those connectors*. It's completely artificial. The analog composite technology *can* support 1080i.
Say, what do you sell for a living? Cars? I'm one of the people that's been stealing cars off your lot. You're losing money? Bullshit! You're insured! And your cars suck anyway! And you're an asshole!
Tip: people will take you more seriously without the bullshit analogies. If you can't tell the moral difference between stealing a car and downloading a song then you don't deserve to make any money in the music business.
here in Canada, my band is postponing our annual nationwide tour because larger venues are doing less and less live music in favour of DJ bullshit (which many of them play pirated music)
So you're blaming DJ piracy on your lack of venues?. That's absurd.
I've done over 100,000 miles of touring, I've seen members of hit bands looking for odds jobs because their back catalog doesn't sell
I'm of the opinion that a musician should be able to make enough money from live shows. Your studio work should be thought of almost like advertising with the CD revenues being there to recoup recording expenses + a small bonus.
Microsoft has been losing market share over the past decade or so precisely because it was not forward thinking! If you disagree, what other explanation do you have?
"Forward thinking" doesn't necessarily translate to "ability to predict what's most profitable". So what if they couldn't predict that people wouldn't give a shit if a device was locked down and expensive as hell as long as it was shiny and hip? They're "forward thinking" in the sense that they're open to people using their software in unintended ways.
From what I've seen, mobile "broadband" has always been bullshit. 3G is relatively slow and still expensive as hell. 4G is supposed to be really fast, but we've already got carriers claiming they offer 4G/LTE and only actually providing a slight boost up from 3G. Even if you can get actual 4G, you can bet it's going to be wildly expensive. This move doesn't surprise me at all. Why anyone would play the mobile internet game in the first place is beyond me.
that's a stigma that's would stick to a product for its entire life
I think that depends entirely on the consumer. Personally, I go for the best (current) performance for the lowest cost. I realize that getting your CPU in a larger share of mainstream computers from Dell etc may be affected by general perception, but AMD is already losing on that front. Intel has a much larger desktop market share and, anecdotal as it is, most people I talk to favor intel for seemingly emotional reasons. I believe that the perception of the "enthusiasts", however, are ultimately what sways the PC market and it seems these are the people that AMD is now aiming to impress.
In short: CPUs aren't exactly like vacuum cleaners when it comes to marketing.
They had to disable the hacks because again, people kept using them to pirate, and piracy is not something you have the right to do.
What pisses people off isn't that they can't pirate (as if), it's that they bought a product with a certain feature which was later disabled without their consent. Maybe they "had" to disable the otherOS feature, but if they were "just doing what's right" they would have offered a refund for anyone who chose to send back their PS3. It's clearly bait-and-switch.
From the wiki: "...may be used to imply that those who assert the Castle Doctrine defense want to have to shoot their assailant."
Very interesting in conjunction with the previous comment: "...but at least I get to keep my guns. Well, I cant use them in self defense anymore, but they sure do look neat."
No one is copying the iPod wheel but it's just a simulated version of a mechanical jog wheel, all computer storage tech eventually goes out of date, iTunes was kind of a ripoff of Napster that let you download individual songs (legally), single brand stores are not a new concept and just doing it with computers doesn't make it innovative, I don't even know what that means but it sounds like you want to have sex with an iPod, the iPhone was a touchscreen smartphone (combines previously invented technologies), using a temporary folder to store things you might want to delete isn't such a genius concept (I re-alias rm in linux to move things into/tmp because of the dangerous nature of rm), so now they're genius architects too?
It's good that they're putting cool stuff in their products, but the point is that they didn't get the idea for all of that stuff in a vacuum.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure what you're looking for in a game is what other people look for in a game. Challenge is not a synonym for exhilaration.
I like how you use celsius and miles per hour.
It's a pretty big assumption that everyone really wants to go 3rd party, but is too scared about throwing their vote away. I would assume that very few people who think voting 3rd party is wasteful would actually want that 3rd party candidate to win (and hence vote for him). I personally don't even want a specific 3rd party candidate to win. I just don't want to have to choose between repubs and dems my whole life.
3rd party candidates aren't necessarily better for every issue. A 3rd party candidate might want to legalize pot, but also to repeal the civil rights act(s).
The point is, it doesn't matter because he won't win. You vote for him because it's a vote cast that didn't go to the major parties. People voting for McCain didn't waste their votes because the race was between him and Obama (or Palin and Obama depending on how you look at it) and if anyone was going to beat Obama it was him.
Maybe I shouldn't have said the word "wasted". It's useful for making a point, but not useful in having a say in which of the two parties is inevitably elected.
Well it is. First-past-the-post essentially mandates that it is, but drawing attention to the flawed voting system is still worthwhile and voting 3rd party is good for that. The wasted vote basically becomes a martyr for the cause.
CDs not being lossy doesn't make them any less over-priced. (plus who wants to run to the store when it's all digital anyway)
You can nitpick, but you know what I am saying.
Yeah I do. You're saying you wish he were still alive so you wouldn't have to give up your dream of sucking him off.
they had something truly buzzworthy with the Courier and they killed it off internally over nothing.
[Citation Needed]
their shareholders aren't happy, they don't have decisive leadership or vision... that isn't what drives innovation.
Fuck what the short-term shareholders want, if you want to talk about lack of decisiveness you should be referring to Google (Microsoft sticks with most of their crap), vision is subjective, and anyone who talks about "driving innovation" has already lost their grip on reality (much like those in the twitter-sphere).
Scratch that. $1000 bonus.
To everyone who's replying about compiler switches to activate multithreading: it's only relevant in this instance (maybe). I can totally sympathize with the disappointment in this machine, as I too have recently begun using this exact computer and have realized zero gains in having 5 extra cores. My work day involves running vim and about 50 verilog logic simulations, which are single threaded, and having this supercomputer under my desk (which I connect to remotely anyway) is absolutely useless. I wish they would give me a crappier one and a $4000 bonus instead.
No this isn't start-up related. Chips have a lot of variation in "switching-activity" or the need to suddenly charge and discharge internal nodes. This is during normal operation, and you do what you can to throw in as much "decoupling capacitance" as possible (to insulate other circuitry from rail noise and relax current draw requirements) but it takes up space and can only do so much.
Larger chips provide for more interconnects (more edge space) but at some point, that'll be overkill because the system will be all in there, and only I/O will need to be brought out.
There's a little more to it than that. Larger chips draw a large amount of power (very suddenly) which means the number of pins used just for VDD + GND/VSS goes way up. That's especially true since more of the analog circuitry (notoriously sensitive to rail noise) would have to be integrated into the same chip within same process. That's just power, and depending on the application there's a lot more to consider for your pinout. You can really never have enough pins. That rule of thumb isn't going anywhere soon.
Sigh.. you're sort of right. He would need a new TV because composite (or component) output blu-ray players and the like only support 480i *from those connectors*. It's completely artificial. The analog composite technology *can* support 1080i.
DRM's a bitch
Say, what do you sell for a living? Cars? I'm one of the people that's been stealing cars off your lot. You're losing money? Bullshit! You're insured! And your cars suck anyway! And you're an asshole!
Tip: people will take you more seriously without the bullshit analogies. If you can't tell the moral difference between stealing a car and downloading a song then you don't deserve to make any money in the music business.
here in Canada, my band is postponing our annual nationwide tour because larger venues are doing less and less live music in favour of DJ bullshit (which many of them play pirated music)
So you're blaming DJ piracy on your lack of venues?. That's absurd.
I've done over 100,000 miles of touring, I've seen members of hit bands looking for odds jobs because their back catalog doesn't sell
I'm of the opinion that a musician should be able to make enough money from live shows. Your studio work should be thought of almost like advertising with the CD revenues being there to recoup recording expenses + a small bonus.
David Simon couldn't have said it better himself. Or maybe he already did. Either way, +1.
Of course they're going to talk about version numbers in the "Google Chrome Releases" blog. Now compare these and see which one advertises the version number: http://www.google.com/chrome/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/
Microsoft has been losing market share over the past decade or so precisely because it was not forward thinking! If you disagree, what other explanation do you have?
"Forward thinking" doesn't necessarily translate to "ability to predict what's most profitable". So what if they couldn't predict that people wouldn't give a shit if a device was locked down and expensive as hell as long as it was shiny and hip? They're "forward thinking" in the sense that they're open to people using their software in unintended ways.
I think it says less about the US than it does about how seriously random polls should be taken.
From what I've seen, mobile "broadband" has always been bullshit. 3G is relatively slow and still expensive as hell. 4G is supposed to be really fast, but we've already got carriers claiming they offer 4G/LTE and only actually providing a slight boost up from 3G. Even if you can get actual 4G, you can bet it's going to be wildly expensive. This move doesn't surprise me at all. Why anyone would play the mobile internet game in the first place is beyond me.
Bulldozer is mostly compatible with older motherboards
I think you've got that backwards. The *older* chips (Phenom/Athlon II) are mostly compatible with *newer* motherboards.
that's a stigma that's would stick to a product for its entire life
I think that depends entirely on the consumer. Personally, I go for the best (current) performance for the lowest cost. I realize that getting your CPU in a larger share of mainstream computers from Dell etc may be affected by general perception, but AMD is already losing on that front. Intel has a much larger desktop market share and, anecdotal as it is, most people I talk to favor intel for seemingly emotional reasons. I believe that the perception of the "enthusiasts", however, are ultimately what sways the PC market and it seems these are the people that AMD is now aiming to impress.
In short: CPUs aren't exactly like vacuum cleaners when it comes to marketing.
PCIe x16, x8, x4 + sata 3 + usb 3.0, what more could you ask for on a micro ATX for $170
You didn't even read my comment.
TLDR version: It doesn't matter why they took linux away, it's bait-and-switch without refunds.
They had to disable the hacks because again, people kept using them to pirate, and piracy is not something you have the right to do.
What pisses people off isn't that they can't pirate (as if), it's that they bought a product with a certain feature which was later disabled without their consent. Maybe they "had" to disable the otherOS feature, but if they were "just doing what's right" they would have offered a refund for anyone who chose to send back their PS3. It's clearly bait-and-switch.
From the wiki: "...may be used to imply that those who assert the Castle Doctrine defense want to have to shoot their assailant."
Very interesting in conjunction with the previous comment: "...but at least I get to keep my guns. Well, I cant use them in self defense anymore, but they sure do look neat."
No one is copying the iPod wheel but it's just a simulated version of a mechanical jog wheel, all computer storage tech eventually goes out of date, iTunes was kind of a ripoff of Napster that let you download individual songs (legally), single brand stores are not a new concept and just doing it with computers doesn't make it innovative, I don't even know what that means but it sounds like you want to have sex with an iPod, the iPhone was a touchscreen smartphone (combines previously invented technologies), using a temporary folder to store things you might want to delete isn't such a genius concept (I re-alias rm in linux to move things into /tmp because of the dangerous nature of rm), so now they're genius architects too?
It's good that they're putting cool stuff in their products, but the point is that they didn't get the idea for all of that stuff in a vacuum.