Sure, but they only need one graphics card per workstation.
There are a hell of a lot of geeks who have a lot of money, like games, and have a dual boot machine. Even if they usually use Windows, they like a graphics card that's still quite good under Linux, even if they only want to dabble with the OS.
A disproportionate number of Linux users have nVidia cards primarily because they have decent drivers which work for all kernels, and tend to install without too much hassle. I downgraded my Linux box to a TNT2 because of this.
This has resulted in a large chunk of the market share going to nVidia, encouraging them to invest a little more in Linux. A sort of feedback loop.
It may only be a niche, but it's another chunk of income for them. nVidia will sell chips to anyone if they can get more money back than they spend.
I doubt filmgimp has as much of an impact. This is a smaller market than 3d enthusiasts with dual boot Linux systems.
You can get one. Just ask this guy who built his one.
It's all down to supply and demand. The seller only sold one because virtually nobody is willing to pay $3.4 million on a toilet. If he could reduce the price to about $24.99, then he would sell a lot, but he wouldn't make a profit.
The cost of overly restricted DRM is too high. Unless you give it away, nobody will want it.
Well, all that depends. The FCC will not get their demands if nobody takes up digital TV. If other people are like me, they will not accept the limitations required to benefit from digital TV.
At the very least, most people do not want to be told what they can and can't record. They just don't have faith in the companies not to interfere with their ability to fast forward through the commercials. They'll also be a bit annoyed if there are region controls. In many countries, region free DVD players are almost as common as region locked ones.
I am not going to buy any technology that is not at least as flexible as my existing equipment. Flexibility is more important than image quality.
Specifically:
I want to be able to view anything on any device.
I also want at least some capability to make a single copy. If this is limited to 1 generation, then this will be acceptable to me, but possibly not to everyone.
I want to be able to record any broadcast for later viewing. Including Pay Per view.
This must not be location limited at all.
It is not my concern that the media cartels have a business model that divides the world into regions. It is possible to make a profit without region control. They should adapt their business model to what the consumer (i.e. me) wants.
But the British don't have stamps that say "Great Britain" on them even if they did want them, and there is no logic to an international stamp.
The US does have its own tld, and there is some logic to an international tld.
The main problem is that.us was beaurocratically organised, with state, county and district subdomains. I think this has changed now, but a nationwide chain of stores does not want to be restricted to a single state.
Personally, I would have preferred nothing at all, and have the money spent on marketing.
There is at least some small trivial possibility tyhat the extra amount spent on marketing woulf have resulted in a couple of extra sales, and some good word of mouth marketing, which would have resulted in better profitability for the company, and better conditions for the staff.
Alternatively, they could have spent the money on a lottery ticket per staff member.
But it was fair use. The guy clearly wanted to make sure he had a copy of each of his CDs in every room he may visit in the rest of his life.
Of course, you're right. They should just be more honest about the figures. Its not like this matters after all. And if they really want a big number that takes into account CD speed, they should say how many CDs could be burned in a day.
I guess its very hard to argue that piracy affects sales when piracy on a platform has always been around. I remember tape to tape copiers were a godsend when I was about 12.
Come to think of it, reducing piracy by switching to CD didn't seem to have much of an impact on sales either before or after burners became affordable.
I want to kill myself IRL, be reincarnated as someone else entirely, and then be able to ressurect myself.
Yes, I know this is just a game, but the point is that we want it to be fairly realistic. We don't want to have anyone who is someone else in disguise. And besides, the other point is that this hardly matters. It is just a game. It has rules. Play by the rules or if you don't like them, find a different game.
The best solution I can come up with is this - grouping days into batches of 100
If prisoner X has entered the room previously on this batch of days, he switches the light on. After the 100th day, if the light is off, the prisoner states that all people have entered the room. Otherwise turn the light off.
This is arather inefficient thouygh. It relies on all 100 prisoners being randomly selected once in a batch of 100 days. We could probable find some optimisations to this solution though.
Okay, I should have picked a site without pop-ups.
I guess the lesson here is its a trust thing. If all advertising was honest about what it was selling, as well as unobtrusive, it would work a lot better. Well, I learned something here.
My current theses is that we're actually suffering from a type of hyper inflation of online advertising. They get more pushy, and people get more resistant.
Good point. I'm not even sure if there is a banner ad on the full story page. I still think that it's a losing battle. Ads get bigger, people learn to tune them out.
Its rather annoying though that the ads irritate people, and the advertisers solution to their problems is to make them more irritating.
That was proably a lot more succesful than the flashy banner ads, less irritating because it doesn't flash, and it was totally honest about the benefits of clicking there. This may encourage people to click on it. It also has the benefit to advertiser that it is targetted at people who want to play video games, and it cannot be blocked by ad blocking software.
Incidentally, that competition was just a Google search for "Win a PC". I have no affiliation with the company.
A question for those of you who have not blocked advertising - Without looking - what was it for?
People learn to ignore these thing pretty quickly. Making them bigger isn't going to help. They need to find new ways to advertise. How do they do this? Here's an idea - Give some reason for the customers to click. Offer prizes. Pay for a promotional story. I'm sure people would have no objection to Slashdot having clearly labelled advertising articles written by the advertisers.
That's true, but people don't really consider downloading to be "the wrong thing" unless money changes hands. Its analogous to giving someone a home copy of a tape.
And you're quite right in saying that I'll take the free alternative. This is only for convenience. There are two major inconveniences to a paid for service:
The hassle of giving my credit card details
The cost to me.
The inconvenience of a file sharing is that downlods are often slow, and I can't always find what I want.
They just need to circumvent these disadvanteges. They need to make their service somehow more convenient. For example, in some countries (e.g. Australia), broadband use is limited to a certain amount of data per month. They could make a deal with the broadband suppliers to give them a cut.
That's what I thought. At the time, it was truly a supercomputer.
2K of RAM, and 300kHz processing will be pretty useful for quite a lot of work. For example, it could calculate trajectories in less time than it would take to input the data, and it could come up with a whole page full of a mathematical table in seconds. It could probably have cracked a contemporary encryption in a short time too. The fact that it would take hours to do something that a modern much cheaper PC could do in seconds doesn't matter. Sometimes the data doesn't need to be delivered that quickly.
This does depend on how efficient the actual processor was of course.
Slashdot Mirror
Also give your area 'Weights & Measures' office a call.
Is this sort of thing in their jurisdiction? If so, then that's a really good idea.
In my experience, these guys have a lot of power, precisely because merchants have been pulling this sort of scam for centuries.
Sure, but they only need one graphics card per workstation.
There are a hell of a lot of geeks who have a lot of money, like games, and have a dual boot machine. Even if they usually use Windows, they like a graphics card that's still quite good under Linux, even if they only want to dabble with the OS.
A disproportionate number of Linux users have nVidia cards primarily because they have decent drivers which work for all kernels, and tend to install without too much hassle. I downgraded my Linux box to a TNT2 because of this.
This has resulted in a large chunk of the market share going to nVidia, encouraging them to invest a little more in Linux. A sort of feedback loop.
It may only be a niche, but it's another chunk of income for them. nVidia will sell chips to anyone if they can get more money back than they spend.
I doubt filmgimp has as much of an impact. This is a smaller market than 3d enthusiasts with dual boot Linux systems.
You're quite right.
I got my metaphors muddled. Please beat me round the head with the LART.
You can get one. Just ask this guy who built his one.
It's all down to supply and demand. The seller only sold one because virtually nobody is willing to pay $3.4 million on a toilet. If he could reduce the price to about $24.99, then he would sell a lot, but he wouldn't make a profit.
The cost of overly restricted DRM is too high. Unless you give it away, nobody will want it.
Well, all that depends. The FCC will not get their demands if nobody takes up digital TV. If other people are like me, they will not accept the limitations required to benefit from digital TV.
At the very least, most people do not want to be told what they can and can't record. They just don't have faith in the companies not to interfere with their ability to fast forward through the commercials. They'll also be a bit annoyed if there are region controls. In many countries, region free DVD players are almost as common as region locked ones.
Well, who does then?
Specifically:
- I want to be able to view anything on any device.
- I also want at least some capability to make a single copy. If this is limited to 1 generation, then this will be acceptable to me, but possibly not to everyone.
- I want to be able to record any broadcast for later viewing. Including Pay Per view.
-
This must not be location limited at all.
It is not my concern that the media cartels have a business model that divides the world into regions. It is possible to make a profit without region control. They should adapt their business model to what the consumer (i.e. me) wants.But the British don't have stamps that say "Great Britain" on them even if they did want them, and there is no logic to an international stamp.
.us was beaurocratically organised, with state, county and district subdomains. I think this has changed now, but a nationwide chain of stores does not want to be restricted to a single state.
The US does have its own tld, and there is some logic to an international tld.
The main problem is that
One Bush voter, speaking on condition of anonymity, said ...
One of the problems of privacy advocates is that you can never get a reliable attributable quote from them.
Personally, I would have preferred nothing at all, and have the money spent on marketing.
There is at least some small trivial possibility tyhat the extra amount spent on marketing woulf have resulted in a couple of extra sales, and some good word of mouth marketing, which would have resulted in better profitability for the company, and better conditions for the staff.
Alternatively, they could have spent the money on a lottery ticket per staff member.
Doesn't add up. RIAA's math skills should be used to power interstellar space ships.
"We got to Houston, but at 60mph, which is the equivalent of getting to Alpha Centauri at five times the speed of light."
People like that should get busted.
But it was fair use. The guy clearly wanted to make sure he had a copy of each of his CDs in every room he may visit in the rest of his life.
Of course, you're right. They should just be more honest about the figures. Its not like this matters after all. And if they really want a big number that takes into account CD speed, they should say how many CDs could be burned in a day.
I guess its very hard to argue that piracy affects sales when piracy on a platform has always been around. I remember tape to tape copiers were a godsend when I was about 12.
Come to think of it, reducing piracy by switching to CD didn't seem to have much of an impact on sales either before or after burners became affordable.
Why, thank you for that. It's so convenient of you to save me the effort of clicking on tht darn link.
This is on a Sony site for chrissake! It more than enough bandwidth to deal with a slashdotting. What is the point in reposting the whole thing here?
I want to kill myself IRL, be reincarnated as someone else entirely, and then be able to ressurect myself.
Yes, I know this is just a game, but the point is that we want it to be fairly realistic. We don't want to have anyone who is someone else in disguise. And besides, the other point is that this hardly matters. It is just a game. It has rules. Play by the rules or if you don't like them, find a different game.
The best solution I can come up with is this - grouping days into batches of 100
If prisoner X has entered the room previously on this batch of days, he switches the light on. After the 100th day, if the light is off, the prisoner states that all people have entered the room. Otherwise turn the light off.
This is arather inefficient thouygh. It relies on all 100 prisoners being randomly selected once in a batch of 100 days. We could probable find some optimisations to this solution though.
I think I get the idea.
So am I corrent if I say my above example is a valid state transition?
So does this mean I also can't do something like "switch to state C if N-1 and N+1 are both in state B, and N is in state A?"
How does an FSM work then? Can we only trigger a change based on a change?
Okay, I should have picked a site without pop-ups.
I guess the lesson here is its a trust thing. If all advertising was honest about what it was selling, as well as unobtrusive, it would work a lot better. Well, I learned something here.
My current theses is that we're actually suffering from a type of hyper inflation of online advertising. They get more pushy, and people get more resistant.
Good point. I'm not even sure if there is a banner ad on the full story page. I still think that it's a losing battle. Ads get bigger, people learn to tune them out.
Its rather annoying though that the ads irritate people, and the advertisers solution to their problems is to make them more irritating.
That's true. They need something a little more honest. Rather than a big flashy abstract you have won, tell them what you're advertising.
For example, if I said by clicking here, you can enter a competition to win a video game (Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin) , you may feel like clicking on it. If you are interested, then the advertising was succesful. It told you about the existence of the game.
That was proably a lot more succesful than the flashy banner ads, less irritating because it doesn't flash, and it was totally honest about the benefits of clicking there. This may encourage people to click on it. It also has the benefit to advertiser that it is targetted at people who want to play video games, and it cannot be blocked by ad blocking software.
Incidentally, that competition was just a Google search for "Win a PC". I have no affiliation with the company.
There was a large box below the story.
A question for those of you who have not blocked advertising - Without looking - what was it for?
People learn to ignore these thing pretty quickly. Making them bigger isn't going to help. They need to find new ways to advertise. How do they do this? Here's an idea - Give some reason for the customers to click. Offer prizes. Pay for a promotional story. I'm sure people would have no objection to Slashdot having clearly labelled advertising articles written by the advertisers.
That's true, but people don't really consider downloading to be "the wrong thing" unless money changes hands. Its analogous to giving someone a home copy of a tape.
And you're quite right in saying that I'll take the free alternative. This is only for convenience. There are two major inconveniences to a paid for service:
The hassle of giving my credit card details
The cost to me.
The inconvenience of a file sharing is that downlods are often slow, and I can't always find what I want.
They just need to circumvent these disadvanteges. They need to make their service somehow more convenient. For example, in some countries (e.g. Australia), broadband use is limited to a certain amount of data per month. They could make a deal with the broadband suppliers to give them a cut.
That's what I thought. At the time, it was truly a supercomputer.
2K of RAM, and 300kHz processing will be pretty useful for quite a lot of work. For example, it could calculate trajectories in less time than it would take to input the data, and it could come up with a whole page full of a mathematical table in seconds. It could probably have cracked a contemporary encryption in a short time too. The fact that it would take hours to do something that a modern much cheaper PC could do in seconds doesn't matter. Sometimes the data doesn't need to be delivered that quickly.
This does depend on how efficient the actual processor was of course.