I'm looking at a page on storagereview.com regarding the BB and JB models. Summary: Xfer rates: outer( BB: 49.3 JB:49.0) inner( BB:29.2 JB:29.2) They don't mention the type of data they are writing, but it appears to be sequential reads/writes, probably in sector sizes. In any case the numbers are essentially identical. Looking at the 'desktop performance' page, there are wider, but still rather insignificant differences in performance. Certainly small enough that other factors could be causing some or all of the difference between drives.
Targeted at the 'third world' at $214 a pop? Who exactly is going to buy them for these people? I can't help but think that if residents of the underdeveloped nations could get their hands on $200, they'd MUCH rather purchase a cow, grain, a plow or many of life's other necessities so they could survive another day.
Does the thing come standard with a solar battary charger and a satellite dish to connect to the Internet? Most of these people don't have reliable electricity, never mind a reliable data connection. And what good will such a device do if they can't connect to the 'net to learn things. They'll just have a fragile piece of equipment to which they can transcribe their existing database (books and papers).
They have a nice idea, but I just don't see it working in the environment they target.
But the buffers are insignificant. an 8MB buffer will be emptied or filled over the wire in.06 seconds at 133MB/s. So you can't get max throughput for anything longer than about.2 seconds.
Since the caches on the drives don't undstand filesystems or file structure, they can only contain things that have already been read from disk, or assume the next read will be a sequential block and pre-fetch that. More often than not, the cache on the drive does not contain the requested data. The disk cache only helps for small files that are re-read often like directories, and really the OS's disk cache will provide even better performance in these situations. The drive buffer does nothing to increase real-world data throughput on ATA disks, it's just there so the drive makers can claim a really high (wire speed) peak throughput number. Caches do make sense on SCSI drives where the drive can be ordered to read a set of blocks to buffer, disconnect, and later have the blocks read from buffer. During that drive's read phase (while disconnected) other drives can be commanded to read or write data to/from their buffers. This is why SCSI RAID systems outperform ATA RAID systems.
As for the increase in drive throughput from media: if future advances play out the way the industry has advanced in the past, it will be 15-20 years before a drive will be able to move 100MB/s sustained from rotational media. 10 years ago we where getting 10MB/s sustained, today we are getting 20, sometimes 30. Switching to some non-rotational media might see throughput increase dramatically, but all such devices I've seen connect to Firewire or USB[2] thus negating the need for more ATA bandwidth.
Serial ATA is a project in search of a problem, or perhaps more accurately marketing hype in search of consumer dollars.
They still don't say that serial ATA will support more than two devices per channel. In fact they say it will be software compatible with ATA in its current form, suggesting it continues the master/slave relationship.
Today's drive media can only reach 40MB/s reading from the platters for short bursts, if their lucky. Normally they'll read/write about 20MB/s. What's the point of another boost in speed of ATA (to the suggested 150MB/s) when you will only ever be able to use 80MB/s of that. Oh, that's right... the ignorant users need bigger numbers on their cardboard boxes to show off to the neighbors.
Does anyone have any information on a HD soon to be released that will offer a quantum leap of read-from-meadia performance to something like 75MB/s? That's more than triple the current read-from-meadia speeds, and they seem to only ever increase the speeds by about 1-2MB/s each year.
SCSI makes sense having very high bus bandwidth, as you can connect quite a few devices and use the connect/disconnect to send simultaneous reads/writes to multiple devices. In that scheme, you can keep most of your drives operating at the same time. Of course Apple has shown that at least for a small RAID, multiple independent ATA channels are just as fast and lower cost than a single SCSI channel. I persoanally have a difficult time thinking that multi-ATA design would scale well to a 32 drive RAID, where a dual channel SCSI would shine.
In fact I have. I've owned, or had a friend who owned an example of most all model families since the Mac 512. You do sight some excellent flaws in the case design under Amellio et al.
But, anyone going to purchase a Mac now would very likely not be purchasing such a machine. Even a 'used' system today would likely be a B G4.
I don't know what directions you could possibly need to open up a current G4 case and get inside. Opening the case of a G4 and getting complete access to all internal components takes no tools and about 6 seconds. The [ei]Mac are of course exeptions, but they aren't built for 'modders', they're built for schools and casual home/office users who care more about the form than the function of case design.
I've already covered your objections (quotes of public records and well known texts)in previous posts. I'm not going to have the same debate in multiple sub-threads. Please go back and read the other replies.
As for the intentional garbling of audio in a sound bite: that would be handled as a violation of the standards in the contract, and a mis-use of the trademark. The offender would be dealt with under the terms of the contract.
Perhaps if this has become a fear for you, then you should visit Apple. All of my mac systems to date run very cool. I've intentionally shut down the fans (usually one, not more than two in a case) and run the computers for hours without any significant heat build up.
The PPC runs much cooler than its x86 cousins. Mac cases also tend to be built with convection cooling in mind with vents on back and sides unlike most solid metal cases sold for use as x86 machines. The inside of my G3 didn't start running at all warm until I installed a VooDoo5/5500 card (that thing pumps out some heat).
I'm not looking to start a war here, but this is simply just one aspect of the Mac that most people seem to like: the cases. Many articles and revires pine over the Mac's enclosures, wishing some generic case vendor would attempt something like that for the modders on the x86 side.
I don't see how you can consider having a writer elaborate (voluntarily) on a quotation to be censorship. Censoring is suppressing things you disagree with or find objectionable. Making someone elaborate is anti-censorship if anything.
Again, the idea of the rules would be to eliminate quotes and sound bites in favor of independent and objective research. When a quote is necessary to a report, it should be complete and of sufficent length to give the viewer/reader a significant sense of context.
Otherwise, I could quote you as saying:
...censor things just because... Who cares...
Makes you sound like a pro-censorship zealot. And while a valid quote, it is not at all in the spirit of what you really said.
Your comments seem petty and spiteful. From them I assume that you either did not read the entire comment I posted, or you managed to miss the entire point. A brief review:
Much news today is fluff, reporting on things that don't really impact peoples lives: bank robberies, drug busts, automobile, airplane and train collisions, shooting deaths, celebrity birthdays, sports scores, reading of corporate press-releases, etc. While these draw an audience, they are not newsworthy, they are entertainment. These are 'false-facts' and 'not-news' as you call them
There would be no agency per se; certainly not a government one. This would be a contractual agreement that could be dissolved at any time by either party. Some institution (perhaps formed for just such a purpose) would oversee the use of the brand name. Violators would be dealt with according to the rules of the contract. When neccessary, legal suit could be brought. But most importantly, this is a completely voluntary opt-in on the part of the news outlets. There is absoloutly nothing Orwellian about it.
On the quotes part, I don't think you can remove that. But first let me state that personally I think a sound-bite/quote has limited value in reporting. It's great for stories, but usually not for reports. Perhaps the rules would allow short quotes if the publishing agency also made the full text of the interview/speech publicly avaiable via the Internet, mail or stopping by the office to view it in person.
I agree there are many things to be fleshed out in such a list of restrictions/rules. For some quick feedback:
Sources: If a reporter can't reveal a source, then they should be able to do some other research to verify or locate the same information. Basically, I feel that if someone is going to provide information so important as to warrant inclusion in a news report, that person should be responsible for their statements.
Quotes: I disagree. Quotes are supposed to inform you about what someone said. Being very selective you can make many a quote in to a negative or a positive. Providing the context I feel is vital to credibility.
All news is local: Yea, I've heard that someplace: My post. The idea here is there are PLENTY of issues that affect a majority of the nation that could be reported on. Forest fires don't make the list (plane crashes don't either). The 1/3 number isn't meant to be concrete, it's just a starting point for debate.
Ads: Yes. I would prohibit your scenareo if it where up to me.
Press releases: Unless the press release is something like "we've cured X disease" or the release is reffering to some report that has been through the peer review process, I would tend to drop the 'story', and opt instead to put resources in to developing a 'report' with other objective information gained from at least some un-biased or opposition parties to the press release.
Fear: I don't really understand what would be to fear. Yes, there are some tought decisions to make and there would be a lot of work to start such a scheme, but there would be no government involvment in this, and no mandatory compliance. The news orginizations would vouluntarily subscribe to and adhere to the rules. Any disputes would be litigated via arbitration or court battle. If some orginization decided to drop out, they drop out. But... they can't re-join for some time period. Anyone could run a non certified story, just not in a "real-NEWS" program or section.
For news papers in particular, I see such reporting and certification as a value added service. Imagine the NYT putting out a premium 'real-NEWS' paper/edition and charging $1.00 per copy. The reader pays a premium, but gets a paper that they know won't be wasting their time. The stories in this edition can also run in the standard NYT at the same time. The premium paper subsidises the standard paper.
Re:quality of this discussion
on
Microsoft Freon
·
· Score: 2
I agree with that. The problem is that so many people in the world prefer to direct their energy toward the path of least resistance.
In this case, the path of least resistance is complaining/whining ahout what they consider to be the evil empire. The constructive route of providing alternatives to that empire are considered too difficult and so they just whine.
It's a shame really, because you can learn enough C or C++ in a week or two to get started in programming; at least in modifying existing code or expanding it. While coding does require skill and thought, one could always just write documentation.
But then again, if the population would actually apply itself, instead of always being a 'victim', we wouldn't need the government. People like the government: it does things for them. Then the people can just watch TV and complain (about the government).
Even something as simple as being forced to reveal the initial source of the story. How many 'news' stories today are nothing more then press releases, or marketing hype from a company that's been latched on to by media and re-spun to look relatively neutral.
Perhaps some other rules should be set in place by this oversight body. Any new show, magazine, paper or other meda that follows these rules will be able to use the trademarked name of something like 'Real-NEWS'
If a TV station where to follow these rules, they could have one broadcast of the news that is certified. They could run another show where they report all the fluff they want, and still call it news, it just woudn't be certified. A paper could just insert a 'real-NEWS' section and put all the real news there. The rest of the paper could be the standard fluff.
My idea for some rules (in no particuar order):
Whenever a report of a passenger plane, train or other large crash or some other disater (like 9/.11) is reported, it will be obligatory to also report the number of automobile collisions and deaths for the current reporting day and year to date. These events are trivial in the perspective of killings and death by accident that occur on a daily basis, the public needs to understand these are really non-events. They are only reported because nothing draws a crowd like a large fireball.
When a couple has a litter of 5 or more kids that gets glamourized on TV as a 'miracle', they must also report on how much the popluation will be subsidizing them via the tax breaks they will be getting just for being over-breeders. They must futher report on the number of un-adopted children living in orphanages awaiting a home and family.
Any 'sound bite' must include the previous 15 and following 15 seconds of audio. The same should go for written stories with a 'previous three and following three' sentences from the desired quote. The media continually cherry pick quotes, ofen out of context, to sensationalize their story.
Nothng should be reported on the national news unless it affects at lest 1/3 of the population of the country. I think that' a nice low number and will still weed out all these 'some kid abducted' stories. The fact is that most all news is local news. The national news should latch on to the 'real' stories and provide in-depth unbiased coverage of those stories.
Require that no advertising related to a story will apear in the broadcast, or on the same page as the story in print.
Anything based on a press release instead of independent/objective research and interviews will not be reported as a news item. It will be placed in the advertisement or opinion sections of a broadcast/paper/magazine.
Re:quality of this discussion
on
Microsoft Freon
·
· Score: 2
...remember the fascination that got us interested in computers/technology in the first place.
You insinuate that Microsoft was that 'fascination'. I must state that in my case that is most certainly not the way it happened. Granted, I'm an oddball, but I first got hooked on mainframes. My dad worked on IBM mainframes and would take me to work from time to time.
From there, I went to Tandy's CoCo, TI's 99/4a and the Commodore 64. After that: Unix worstations and Macs. I've owned an IBM PC or clone from time to time, just to tinker with, but I can't recall that Windows or any Wintel system caused any facination or modivation in me. Microsoft has in fact almost continually obfisticated or restricted everything that facinates me most about computers and in particular programming.
The article linked to mentions how the sites must be banned by computers, not by humans as the company claims. Here's some evidence that a stupid human must be at least partly involved:
www.theonion.org : General News
www.theonion.com: Adult Humour
They're the same exact site. The content is 100% exactly the same at both TLDs. If a computer where categorizing these things they'd both be the same. Only puny humans could mess up this badly.
They are not disconintuing the software according to the report. They are discontinuing MS Windows sales, development and possibly support. This won't affect most of Emagic's user base.
Macintosh-based products account for over 65 percent of Emagic's current revenues. Emagic's Windows-based product offerings will be discontinued on September 30, 2002.
In rough numbers that means there are only about 90,000 people world-wide using this software on MS Window and other platforms Emusic supported. Assuming 20% of those people will want further upgrades and features, and decide to stick with the software, that's only about 18,000 users Apple will 'gain' because of this purchase or that will be affected negatively by the removal of MS Windows development.
Clearly there must be some other motivation for Apple to make this purchase, user base just doesn't seem to be it.
Hmmm...
you have the right to remain silent, just not the copyright to remain silent. Anything you don't say may be used in a DMCA case against you.
Double Hmmm... "We have ways of making you talk". It may be decision time: testify against yourself, or face the rats nest that is a copyright/DMCA case against you. Either way you're screwed.
Now you can steal gold and silver jewelry and smelt it to some other form within minutes of returning to your evil lair.
On the legal side of things, perhaps there will be no more waiting a week for the dentist to make a gold crown. Simply make the ceramic mold, insert gold alloy, microware for a few minutes. Viola, instant gold crown.
How unpatriotic.
Our country is founded on the ideas of diversity, debate and balance of power (checks and balances). Conversations like this embody all three of those ideas and are what make the U.S. a tolerable place to live. To those who comment as you did that those who don't like the government should "shut up or move", I offer the reverse.
If you do not enjoy participating in meaningful debate, or do not like the idea of others performing constructive critisizm of the governement, perhaps it is you who should leave.
Then you all can start a country where the President is a dictator and no-one has the right to critisize any decision or action of the government. You could all live happily in your little country where everyone thinks alike, and everyone
In short, being a patriotic American demands that one complain about things that seem wrong (construcitely when possible). That's what voting is in a sense. If you don't vote for the encumant, you are complaining.
As for the intelligence quotient of my posterior; who is the one that formed two intelligent and thoughtful messages and who is the one who chose vulgar retorts lacking any constructive value?
For the most part there is no wood (ie trees) in our currency in the U.S. The recipie for the paper is motly cotton. Cotton is most definately an easily renewable resource.
As for those evil Americans "inventing weapons of war", well guess what---your using one of those "weapons" right now. The Internet started as DARPANET--A Defense Department network designed to keep communication going during nuclear attack.
A more appropriate example is the Interstate Highway System. It was designed to provide the military a redundant and reliable mechanism for moving large numbers of ground vehicles in case of invasion.
Yes, it was always meant for civilian use, but it was concieved as a military project.
Is that the U.S. Federal government is spending tax money, and personel resources in setting up "stings" to retrieve moon rocks.
Seriously... with all the political corruption, coroporate bullying, and other things going on in the country over the last 15 years, would you rate a moon rock sting as a worthy use of your tax dollars?
You know the gov can't do anything for less than $200,000 these days. What did this "sting" cost the people? What corporate embezzler, political bribe or corporate espionage was not thwarted because the fed thought it more prudent to search for moon rocks?
But since this is happening in Honduras (no?) I don't see how U.S law pertains.
Despite the opine of the current President, US law is not enforcable in other nations..
I've been waiting for this thing to come out for a year. Not I can't find the price. Dish support doesn't have a price yet as they claim to not beselling it direct, only via resellers. any my reslellers aren'y open on weekends.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay... that result also shows almost no difference between the different models.
I'm looking at a page on storagereview.com regarding the BB and JB models.
Summary:
Xfer rates: outer( BB: 49.3 JB:49.0) inner( BB:29.2 JB:29.2)
They don't mention the type of data they are writing, but it appears to be sequential reads/writes, probably in sector sizes. In any case the numbers are essentially identical. Looking at the 'desktop performance' page, there are wider, but still rather insignificant differences in performance. Certainly small enough that other factors could be causing some or all of the difference between drives.
Does the thing come standard with a solar battary charger and a satellite dish to connect to the Internet? Most of these people don't have reliable electricity, never mind a reliable data connection. And what good will such a device do if they can't connect to the 'net to learn things. They'll just have a fragile piece of equipment to which they can transcribe their existing database (books and papers).
They have a nice idea, but I just don't see it working in the environment they target.
Since the caches on the drives don't undstand filesystems or file structure, they can only contain things that have already been read from disk, or assume the next read will be a sequential block and pre-fetch that. More often than not, the cache on the drive does not contain the requested data. The disk cache only helps for small files that are re-read often like directories, and really the OS's disk cache will provide even better performance in these situations. The drive buffer does nothing to increase real-world data throughput on ATA disks, it's just there so the drive makers can claim a really high (wire speed) peak throughput number. Caches do make sense on SCSI drives where the drive can be ordered to read a set of blocks to buffer, disconnect, and later have the blocks read from buffer. During that drive's read phase (while disconnected) other drives can be commanded to read or write data to/from their buffers. This is why SCSI RAID systems outperform ATA RAID systems.
As for the increase in drive throughput from media: if future advances play out the way the industry has advanced in the past, it will be 15-20 years before a drive will be able to move 100MB/s sustained from rotational media. 10 years ago we where getting 10MB/s sustained, today we are getting 20, sometimes 30. Switching to some non-rotational media might see throughput increase dramatically, but all such devices I've seen connect to Firewire or USB[2] thus negating the need for more ATA bandwidth.
Serial ATA is a project in search of a problem, or perhaps more accurately marketing hype in search of consumer dollars.
They still don't say that serial ATA will support more than two devices per channel. In fact they say it will be software compatible with ATA in its current form, suggesting it continues the master/slave relationship.
Today's drive media can only reach 40MB/s reading from the platters for short bursts, if their lucky. Normally they'll read/write about 20MB/s. What's the point of another boost in speed of ATA (to the suggested 150MB/s) when you will only ever be able to use 80MB/s of that. Oh, that's right... the ignorant users need bigger numbers on their cardboard boxes to show off to the neighbors.
Does anyone have any information on a HD soon to be released that will offer a quantum leap of read-from-meadia performance to something like 75MB/s? That's more than triple the current read-from-meadia speeds, and they seem to only ever increase the speeds by about 1-2MB/s each year.
SCSI makes sense having very high bus bandwidth, as you can connect quite a few devices and use the connect/disconnect to send simultaneous reads/writes to multiple devices. In that scheme, you can keep most of your drives operating at the same time. Of course Apple has shown that at least for a small RAID, multiple independent ATA channels are just as fast and lower cost than a single SCSI channel. I persoanally have a difficult time thinking that multi-ATA design would scale well to a 32 drive RAID, where a dual channel SCSI would shine.
In fact I have. I've owned, or had a friend who owned an example of most all model families since the Mac 512. You do sight some excellent flaws in the case design under Amellio et al.
But, anyone going to purchase a Mac now would very likely not be purchasing such a machine. Even a 'used' system today would likely be a B G4.
I don't know what directions you could possibly need to open up a current G4 case and get inside. Opening the case of a G4 and getting complete access to all internal components takes no tools and about 6 seconds. The [ei]Mac are of course exeptions, but they aren't built for 'modders', they're built for schools and casual home/office users who care more about the form than the function of case design.
As for the intentional garbling of audio in a sound bite: that would be handled as a violation of the standards in the contract, and a mis-use of the trademark. The offender would be dealt with under the terms of the contract.
The PPC runs much cooler than its x86 cousins. Mac cases also tend to be built with convection cooling in mind with vents on back and sides unlike most solid metal cases sold for use as x86 machines. The inside of my G3 didn't start running at all warm until I installed a VooDoo5/5500 card (that thing pumps out some heat).
I'm not looking to start a war here, but this is simply just one aspect of the Mac that most people seem to like: the cases. Many articles and revires pine over the Mac's enclosures, wishing some generic case vendor would attempt something like that for the modders on the x86 side.
I don't see how you can consider having a writer elaborate (voluntarily) on a quotation to be censorship. Censoring is suppressing things you disagree with or find objectionable. Making someone elaborate is anti-censorship if anything.
Again, the idea of the rules would be to eliminate quotes and sound bites in favor of independent and objective research. When a quote is necessary to a report, it should be complete and of sufficent length to give the viewer/reader a significant sense of context.
Otherwise, I could quote you as saying:
Makes you sound like a pro-censorship zealot. And while a valid quote, it is not at all in the spirit of what you really said.Your comments seem petty and spiteful. From them I assume that you either did not read the entire comment I posted, or you managed to miss the entire point. A brief review:
Much news today is fluff, reporting on things that don't really impact peoples lives: bank robberies, drug busts, automobile, airplane and train collisions, shooting deaths, celebrity birthdays, sports scores, reading of corporate press-releases, etc. While these draw an audience, they are not newsworthy, they are entertainment. These are 'false-facts' and 'not-news' as you call them
There would be no agency per se; certainly not a government one. This would be a contractual agreement that could be dissolved at any time by either party. Some institution (perhaps formed for just such a purpose) would oversee the use of the brand name. Violators would be dealt with according to the rules of the contract. When neccessary, legal suit could be brought. But most importantly, this is a completely voluntary opt-in on the part of the news outlets. There is absoloutly nothing Orwellian about it.
On the quotes part, I don't think you can remove that. But first let me state that personally I think a sound-bite/quote has limited value in reporting. It's great for stories, but usually not for reports. Perhaps the rules would allow short quotes if the publishing agency also made the full text of the interview/speech publicly avaiable via the Internet, mail or stopping by the office to view it in person.
I agree there are many things to be fleshed out in such a list of restrictions/rules. For some quick feedback:
Sources: If a reporter can't reveal a source, then they should be able to do some other research to verify or locate the same information. Basically, I feel that if someone is going to provide information so important as to warrant inclusion in a news report, that person should be responsible for their statements.
Quotes: I disagree. Quotes are supposed to inform you about what someone said. Being very selective you can make many a quote in to a negative or a positive. Providing the context I feel is vital to credibility.
All news is local: Yea, I've heard that someplace: My post. The idea here is there are PLENTY of issues that affect a majority of the nation that could be reported on. Forest fires don't make the list (plane crashes don't either). The 1/3 number isn't meant to be concrete, it's just a starting point for debate.
Ads: Yes. I would prohibit your scenareo if it where up to me.
Press releases: Unless the press release is something like "we've cured X disease" or the release is reffering to some report that has been through the peer review process, I would tend to drop the 'story', and opt instead to put resources in to developing a 'report' with other objective information gained from at least some un-biased or opposition parties to the press release.
Fear: I don't really understand what would be to fear. Yes, there are some tought decisions to make and there would be a lot of work to start such a scheme, but there would be no government involvment in this, and no mandatory compliance. The news orginizations would vouluntarily subscribe to and adhere to the rules. Any disputes would be litigated via arbitration or court battle. If some orginization decided to drop out, they drop out. But... they can't re-join for some time period. Anyone could run a non certified story, just not in a "real-NEWS" program or section.
For news papers in particular, I see such reporting and certification as a value added service. Imagine the NYT putting out a premium 'real-NEWS' paper/edition and charging $1.00 per copy. The reader pays a premium, but gets a paper that they know won't be wasting their time. The stories in this edition can also run in the standard NYT at the same time. The premium paper subsidises the standard paper.
In this case, the path of least resistance is complaining/whining ahout what they consider to be the evil empire. The constructive route of providing alternatives to that empire are considered too difficult and so they just whine.
It's a shame really, because you can learn enough C or C++ in a week or two to get started in programming; at least in modifying existing code or expanding it. While coding does require skill and thought, one could always just write documentation.
But then again, if the population would actually apply itself, instead of always being a 'victim', we wouldn't need the government. People like the government: it does things for them. Then the people can just watch TV and complain (about the government).
Even something as simple as being forced to reveal the initial source of the story. How many 'news' stories today are nothing more then press releases, or marketing hype from a company that's been latched on to by media and re-spun to look relatively neutral.
Perhaps some other rules should be set in place by this oversight body. Any new show, magazine, paper or other meda that follows these rules will be able to use the trademarked name of something like 'Real-NEWS'
If a TV station where to follow these rules, they could have one broadcast of the news that is certified. They could run another show where they report all the fluff they want, and still call it news, it just woudn't be certified. A paper could just insert a 'real-NEWS' section and put all the real news there. The rest of the paper could be the standard fluff. My idea for some rules (in no particuar order):
You insinuate that Microsoft was that 'fascination'. I must state that in my case that is most certainly not the way it happened. Granted, I'm an oddball, but I first got hooked on mainframes. My dad worked on IBM mainframes and would take me to work from time to time.
From there, I went to Tandy's CoCo, TI's 99/4a and the Commodore 64. After that: Unix worstations and Macs. I've owned an IBM PC or clone from time to time, just to tinker with, but I can't recall that Windows or any Wintel system caused any facination or modivation in me. Microsoft has in fact almost continually obfisticated or restricted everything that facinates me most about computers and in particular programming.
iCab 2.8.1pre renders
The article linked to mentions how the sites must be banned by computers, not by humans as the company claims. Here's some evidence that a stupid human must be at least partly involved: www.theonion.org : General News www.theonion.com: Adult Humour They're the same exact site. The content is 100% exactly the same at both TLDs. If a computer where categorizing these things they'd both be the same. Only puny humans could mess up this badly.
you have the right to remain silent, just not the copyright to remain silent. Anything you don't say may be used in a DMCA case against you.
Double Hmmm... "We have ways of making you talk". It may be decision time: testify against yourself, or face the rats nest that is a copyright/DMCA case against you. Either way you're screwed.
:)
Now you can steal gold and silver jewelry and smelt it to some other form within minutes of returning to your evil lair. On the legal side of things, perhaps there will be no more waiting a week for the dentist to make a gold crown. Simply make the ceramic mold, insert gold alloy, microware for a few minutes. Viola, instant gold crown.
How unpatriotic. Our country is founded on the ideas of diversity, debate and balance of power (checks and balances). Conversations like this embody all three of those ideas and are what make the U.S. a tolerable place to live. To those who comment as you did that those who don't like the government should "shut up or move", I offer the reverse. If you do not enjoy participating in meaningful debate, or do not like the idea of others performing constructive critisizm of the governement, perhaps it is you who should leave. Then you all can start a country where the President is a dictator and no-one has the right to critisize any decision or action of the government. You could all live happily in your little country where everyone thinks alike, and everyone In short, being a patriotic American demands that one complain about things that seem wrong (construcitely when possible). That's what voting is in a sense. If you don't vote for the encumant, you are complaining. As for the intelligence quotient of my posterior; who is the one that formed two intelligent and thoughtful messages and who is the one who chose vulgar retorts lacking any constructive value?
For the most part there is no wood (ie trees) in our currency in the U.S. The recipie for the paper is motly cotton. Cotton is most definately an easily renewable resource.
Is that the U.S. Federal government is spending tax money, and personel resources in setting up "stings" to retrieve moon rocks. Seriously... with all the political corruption, coroporate bullying, and other things going on in the country over the last 15 years, would you rate a moon rock sting as a worthy use of your tax dollars? You know the gov can't do anything for less than $200,000 these days. What did this "sting" cost the people? What corporate embezzler, political bribe or corporate espionage was not thwarted because the fed thought it more prudent to search for moon rocks?
But since this is happening in Honduras (no?) I don't see how U.S law pertains. Despite the opine of the current President, US law is not enforcable in other nations..
I've been waiting for this thing to come out for a year. Not I can't find the price.
Dish support doesn't have a price yet as they claim to not beselling it direct, only via resellers. any my reslellers aren'y open on weekends.