Let me start out by saying HotHardware itself is nothing better than a middle-of-the-pack hardware review site. If I remember correctly, they're a generic offshoot of one of the more major tech sites that tries (too hard) to appeal to enthusiasts but comes across as nothing more than stiff corporate whores desperately spewing cool lingo to draw hapless internet goers into viewing their adbortion (SPELLING INTENTIONAL) of a website. And I'm OK with that.
What I'm not OK with is their oh so blatant blogspam bullshit they send to slashdot. Wow guys, you reviewed a small form factor PC. If that's not front page worthy, I don't know what is! Even worse, the only link in their submission was to their own site.
In the spirit of sharing, I've decided to help out slashdotters who might be genuinely interested in the product beyond a "sweet flames, bro!" 10 pager (it's a fucking barebones system!) fluff review with some informative links. Let's start with a direct link to hothardware's printable version of the page. http://www.hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?artic leid=986
That wasn't so hard, was it guys? Oh sure, it might cut into your ad revenue, but it would be disingenuous of me to accuse you guys of submitting this for the shallow purpose of bumping ad revenue, right? Right?!
Maybe the hardware review business is now just as inbred as most news blog sites. I don't know. What I do know is I spent way too much time writing this post. And this story is beyond worthless.
Sure, we're all guilty of some occasional borderline trolling, but I genuinely fail to understand the motivation of someone who ceaselessly downmods and harasses random slashdot users they decide they don't like.
Shit, I automatically +5 my foes'/freaks' comments.
Americans are still consumers, and while we may be a largely unthinking purchasing mass, people can quite easily distinguish "shitty" from "awesome" which is exactly the distinction one can make between a mass media run network with terrible latency and low bandwidth and one run by, say, Google.
If the networks go to hell in a flaming hand basket, what would it take for Google to start lighting up fiber they already own? Get a few major metropolitan areas wired up, get word out, and consumers will begin switching in droves. It wouldn't take much pressure beyond that to wake up the telecoms and get them right back into the game.
I'm no free market blind follower, but this seems like a situation when a viable and large enough competitor is sitting in the wings, ready to smack the wannabe monopolists upside the head if they attempt their backwater cousin fucking ideas of raping the connections we pay for.
Uhhhh, that wasn't my intention at all. I don't use a mac, my only apple product is an ipod Christmas gift, and I have no intention of jumping ship anytime soon.
In case you haven't noticed, this isn't a Mac specific problem. Take your typical office cow who claims she can't lose weight. Well now she's got a vested interest in not losing weight, or she proves herself wrong; cue a million failed diet "attempts" as her "evidence" for not being able to lose weight.
Witness a billion Christians with no proof one way or another about their faith who can't stand the idea of being proved wrong: Suddenly, any idea that even appears to not keep in lock-step with their gravy train is attacked as heresy.
Most humans are irrational as all hell, using their ego as a handy set of blinders. With my argument, no implied statements about Apple products are necessary, nor are they included.
She just plain doesn't want to switch, and there's no rational basis for her decision. As you've pointed out, at this point in time she is looking more for convenient rationalizations for not switching, "leaning curve" being one of the great excuses.
This is a common thing among people. They'd rather cling to outmoded ideas or irrational opinions to which they're already married because switching would be admitting they're "wrong," a terrifying prospect in modern day society, as the smallest admission of imperfection is blood in the water for the egotistical social sharks that populate our wars.
Basically, don't hold out much hope for her ever switching, as now that ego is involved she's incredibly unlikely to make any concessions.
Try to stay on point here. Your self-treatment with milk has no relevance to how incorrect you are with spreading such information about sugar turning kids hyperactive.
It's all I asked you to do. Please stop with the red herrings and misleading hapless parents into needless anxiety and false hope associated with sugar.
It's callous, but heart attacks and strokes are some of the most effective culling agents for our population. They get rid of people who are otherwise contributing nothing to society yet costing it tens of thousands of dollars (if not more) to keep alive.
This isn't a technique that will help quality of life much (except for possibly helping Parkinson's patients), but will simply to extend the length of it. Net bad for society.
Oh, you're into voodoo magic. I guess there's no reasoning with you, especially considering your instant response to my scientific refutation of your anecdotal evidence was to clam up into defensive mode and sling more anecdotal evidence my way.
As my link mentioned, there is anecdotal evidence to support your claims, but parents aren't the most objective observers. Placebo effect may have worked for you, but for the sake of general knowledge please stop spreading misinformation like "sugar causes hyperactivity" when the opposite effect has been more frequently observed. It does nobody any favors.
Yes it's an argument from ignorance, mostly because the people who are so concerned about "cyberbullying" (dumb term imo) have yet to make any rational arguments for why its so bad that I can attempt to refute. All you ever hear about are how badly emotionally scarred people are getting from email and IMs that say mean things about them. It seems like a bunch of panicky fluff designed to garner sympathy so people can push through legislation that criminalizes being mean.
Sure, stalking and death threats ARE bad, but last time I checked there were already laws in place to deal with those. If you ask me, this is just the next front for the politically correct clownshoes to work in their feel good laws that accomplish nothing and ultimately end up turning your average jackass into a criminal, you know, "for the greater good."
Everyone needs thicker skin, as the whole uproar about this is more a symptom of our continued pussification than any problem endemic to the internet.
Absolute bullshit. Diabetes, obesity, yes those are the (partial) fault of refined sugars (in addition to increasingly sedentary lives and our ability to help the supermorbidly obese and diabetics live longer), but sugar does not bear the responsibility for anyone's hyperactivity.
Do sugars cause hyperactivity?
In the 1970s, anecdotal reports suggested sugars cause hyperactivity in children. Research, however, failed to confirm this theory. Hyperactivity was not seen in children after consistent high intakes or single large doses of sugars.
In a recent study, researchers examined the effect of eating sucrose (table sugar) on the behavior of children aged 6 to 10 years. The children were chosen for the study because their parents believed the children reacted negatively to sucrose. Preschool children were also studied. They are often considered sensitive to some foods. The researchers found no differences in the behavior of the children when they ate higher-than-normal amounts of sucrose compared to when they ate diets low in sucrose.
Actually, this and other research suggests sugars tend to calm both children and adults. This effect could go unnoticed due to other influences. For instance, the excitement of a birthday party or Halloween could override the calming effect of sugars.
Don't mean to be harsh, but as a student of physiology and all that I hate to see people spreading misinformation.
Thank you for an interesting and informative read. It's nice to know that even while any questions will get crapflooded with generic "I'm better than you posts" there remain people like you who actually provide information.
They mention the nebulous idea of simulating weather patterns, yes. Hence my inclusion of the qualifiers "real" and "practical," implying I would like real world examples.
Perhaps with the exception of frequent meetings with foreign government agents, I think the FBI just described the vast majority of college students.
1) Unexplained affluence: What trust fund kiddie brags about the money he has coming from his dad? 2) Failure to report overseas travel: Sex tourism is a big industry, mang. 3) Interest outside job scope: They're called hobbies, guys. 4) Unusual work hours: We're fucking students. We go to class during the day. We work for our beer money when we can. 5) Unexplained absences? Yeah, regular attendance has always been a hallmark of the average college student. Three letters: T, H, and C.
Slashdot Mirror
Kneejerk flamebait mods: Avert your eyes.
c leid=986
t =19838b arebones-system-7831.htmlp =673332
Let me start out by saying HotHardware itself is nothing better than a middle-of-the-pack hardware review site. If I remember correctly, they're a generic offshoot of one of the more major tech sites that tries (too hard) to appeal to enthusiasts but comes across as nothing more than stiff corporate whores desperately spewing cool lingo to draw hapless internet goers into viewing their adbortion (SPELLING INTENTIONAL) of a website. And I'm OK with that.
What I'm not OK with is their oh so blatant blogspam bullshit they send to slashdot. Wow guys, you reviewed a small form factor PC. If that's not front page worthy, I don't know what is! Even worse, the only link in their submission was to their own site.
In the spirit of sharing, I've decided to help out slashdotters who might be genuinely interested in the product beyond a "sweet flames, bro!" 10 pager (it's a fucking barebones system!) fluff review with some informative links. Let's start with a direct link to hothardware's printable version of the page.
http://www.hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?arti
That wasn't so hard, was it guys? Oh sure, it might cut into your ad revenue, but it would be disingenuous of me to accuse you guys of submitting this for the shallow purpose of bumping ad revenue, right? Right?!
In other news, I was looking for alternate reviews of this system. What did I find? HotHardware are apparently a bunch of linkwhoring board spamming bastards. Witness the evidence:
http://www.elitebastards.com/forum/viewtopic.php?
http://www.dvhardware.net/review/31338
http://forums.hardwarelogic.com/f68/shuttle-sdxi-
http://www.mbreview.com/article.php?sid=11683
http://www.motherboards.org/forums/viewtopic.php?
Maybe the hardware review business is now just as inbred as most news blog sites. I don't know. What I do know is I spent way too much time writing this post. And this story is beyond worthless.
IMHO, Slashdot badly needs a way to metamod overrated, redundant, and other such downmods.
That and the mods need to learn the actual meaning of the word troll. But... I'll take babysteps.
You get that too?
Sure, we're all guilty of some occasional borderline trolling, but I genuinely fail to understand the motivation of someone who ceaselessly downmods and harasses random slashdot users they decide they don't like.
Shit, I automatically +5 my foes'/freaks' comments.
Americans are still consumers, and while we may be a largely unthinking purchasing mass, people can quite easily distinguish "shitty" from "awesome" which is exactly the distinction one can make between a mass media run network with terrible latency and low bandwidth and one run by, say, Google.
If the networks go to hell in a flaming hand basket, what would it take for Google to start lighting up fiber they already own? Get a few major metropolitan areas wired up, get word out, and consumers will begin switching in droves. It wouldn't take much pressure beyond that to wake up the telecoms and get them right back into the game.
I'm no free market blind follower, but this seems like a situation when a viable and large enough competitor is sitting in the wings, ready to smack the wannabe monopolists upside the head if they attempt their backwater cousin fucking ideas of raping the connections we pay for.
Uhhhh, that wasn't my intention at all. I don't use a mac, my only apple product is an ipod Christmas gift, and I have no intention of jumping ship anytime soon.
In case you haven't noticed, this isn't a Mac specific problem. Take your typical office cow who claims she can't lose weight. Well now she's got a vested interest in not losing weight, or she proves herself wrong; cue a million failed diet "attempts" as her "evidence" for not being able to lose weight.
Witness a billion Christians with no proof one way or another about their faith who can't stand the idea of being proved wrong: Suddenly, any idea that even appears to not keep in lock-step with their gravy train is attacked as heresy.
Most humans are irrational as all hell, using their ego as a handy set of blinders. With my argument, no implied statements about Apple products are necessary, nor are they included.
She just plain doesn't want to switch, and there's no rational basis for her decision. As you've pointed out, at this point in time she is looking more for convenient rationalizations for not switching, "leaning curve" being one of the great excuses.
This is a common thing among people. They'd rather cling to outmoded ideas or irrational opinions to which they're already married because switching would be admitting they're "wrong," a terrifying prospect in modern day society, as the smallest admission of imperfection is blood in the water for the egotistical social sharks that populate our wars.
Basically, don't hold out much hope for her ever switching, as now that ego is involved she's incredibly unlikely to make any concessions.
Try to stay on point here. Your self-treatment with milk has no relevance to how incorrect you are with spreading such information about sugar turning kids hyperactive.
It's all I asked you to do. Please stop with the red herrings and misleading hapless parents into needless anxiety and false hope associated with sugar.
It's callous, but heart attacks and strokes are some of the most effective culling agents for our population. They get rid of people who are otherwise contributing nothing to society yet costing it tens of thousands of dollars (if not more) to keep alive.
This isn't a technique that will help quality of life much (except for possibly helping Parkinson's patients), but will simply to extend the length of it. Net bad for society.
Oh, you're into voodoo magic. I guess there's no reasoning with you, especially considering your instant response to my scientific refutation of your anecdotal evidence was to clam up into defensive mode and sling more anecdotal evidence my way.
As my link mentioned, there is anecdotal evidence to support your claims, but parents aren't the most objective observers. Placebo effect may have worked for you, but for the sake of general knowledge please stop spreading misinformation like "sugar causes hyperactivity" when the opposite effect has been more frequently observed. It does nobody any favors.
That might have been the most ironic reply anyone has ever attached to a post of mine.
Yes it's an argument from ignorance, mostly because the people who are so concerned about "cyberbullying" (dumb term imo) have yet to make any rational arguments for why its so bad that I can attempt to refute. All you ever hear about are how badly emotionally scarred people are getting from email and IMs that say mean things about them. It seems like a bunch of panicky fluff designed to garner sympathy so people can push through legislation that criminalizes being mean.
Sure, stalking and death threats ARE bad, but last time I checked there were already laws in place to deal with those. If you ask me, this is just the next front for the politically correct clownshoes to work in their feel good laws that accomplish nothing and ultimately end up turning your average jackass into a criminal, you know, "for the greater good."
Everyone needs thicker skin, as the whole uproar about this is more a symptom of our continued pussification than any problem endemic to the internet.
Department of redundancy department?
I hate the intolerant, and the French.
And I hate irony!
Thank you for an interesting and informative read. It's nice to know that even while any questions will get crapflooded with generic "I'm better than you posts" there remain people like you who actually provide information.
I suppose the meaning of the word "specific" continues to elude many.
Always amusing how the most arrogant and pedantic are frequently the least deserving to be so.
They mention the nebulous idea of simulating weather patterns, yes. Hence my inclusion of the qualifiers "real" and "practical," implying I would like real world examples.
Are there real practical applications that can be sufficiently parallelized to take advantage of 4096 cores?
Maybe they could be both. Or an article could be a dupe of itself.
Personally, I'd just enjoy seeing them post a picture of a dead cat as a story.
I know grammar has been taking a hit in society as of late, but now even our computers are blatantly spewing out double negatives?
We're not in for an unrough ride, gentlemen.
Perhaps with the exception of frequent meetings with foreign government agents, I think the FBI just described the vast majority of college students.
1) Unexplained affluence: What trust fund kiddie brags about the money he has coming from his dad?
2) Failure to report overseas travel: Sex tourism is a big industry, mang.
3) Interest outside job scope: They're called hobbies, guys.
4) Unusual work hours: We're fucking students. We go to class during the day. We work for our beer money when we can.
5) Unexplained absences? Yeah, regular attendance has always been a hallmark of the average college student. Three letters: T, H, and C.
I hate you, FBI.
Your complaint has been registered and is currently scheduled for several "overrated" downmods from our crack team of Applephile moderators.
Please stand by.
Then what the hell did my doctor prescribe me? I'M SO ANXIOUS.
But... but... how else can we spread tolerance if we tolerate the tolerant of the intolerant?!
Tell the Canadian proponents of the DMCA this.