Hmm. Cheesy first film, somewhat like Star Wars (be honest), and what looks like a cracking second film (just like ESB). Just what is it with Lucas and trilogies anyway?
I'll reserve judgment until I see the film. BTW, ESB was probably helped out by the fact that it was NOT directed by Lucas, whereas ANH WAS directed by Lucas!
Any satellites put into orbit should be required to have the capability of being brought down safely.
Where's the fun in that? Besides, you don't need any new laws, there are already existing laws that prevent people or companies (groups of people) from inflicting harm on citizens of the United States. This is all the incentive most satellite-launching organizations need to make sure their satellites come down safely. And for those that don't, they risk having million-dollar lawsuits and criminal charges brought against them if their satellite should strike someone due to negligence.
ps I am bitter because I submitted this exact article and had it rejected several hours before it appeared.
Get over it, yours was probably submitted AFTER the one that eventually got posted AND/OR it sucked compared to the one submitted.
Done well, this has the potential to be really cool. I doubt it will be done well.
When you're talking about Longhorn, the correct phrase is "well done," and I prefer Flo's Filet, thank you.
Seriously, Microsoft needs to go buy the book Dominic Giampalo wrote about the Be File System (BFS), and steal many ideas from him (they already took the taskbar window grouping idea from BeOS).
I have high hopes for this new FS, seeing as how MS SQL Server has been the best Microsoft product I've ever used.
In light of these naming tie-ins to Whistler mountain, the Blue Screen of Death will be replaced in subsequent versions of Windows by a skinny guy with an afro whining, "I think I just made yellow snow."
(Sorry, I've been playing too much SSX Tricky lately.)
Yes, funny. But who the hell says that they have to open up the fscking netbios ports? Or anything other than port 80????
I think his [valid] point was that airports will suddenly become popular for hackers with wireless cards and laptops. What good is an airport firewall if the hackers are already behind it?
Phone companies should spend less time with data services and make voice work. Consumer reports has an article on Cellular this month. They say that 2% of all calls on a cell phone drop in the first 2 minutes.
That is unacceptable.
Please realize that not every area in the country has such shitty coverage as you. In my area, I will welcome 3G when SprintPCS rolls it out nationwide this summer. And no, I won't use it to watch video, as the stupid-ass media reports, but rather as a data modem. (DUH!)
Yep, that is billion with a B. Do you think that the timing of the lawsuit against Microsoft had anything to do with the fact the press is catching onto the mistakes AOL has made during the merger.
According to Fortune, "Instead of adding up to the world's most valuable company, this merger has subtracted $155 billion of market cap. CEO-designate Richard Parsons promises to do the numbers a different way."
Market capitalization is just what the market thinks AOL/TW is worth, not what the company is REALLY worth. All that happened was a couple of overinflated stock prices came back down to earth when the market 'crashed.'
If you want to talk about money lost, talk about actual losses in revenue for AOL/TW, not market cap!
For some reason only "privilidged" people are allowed to buy the stock before it starts. So why do we allow the rich to get richer? Everybody should be able to buy those stocks before trading starts.
No exceptions.
Believe me, the companies would love it if everybody could get in on the IPO at the same time, before the bell starts. Because what would really happen is everyone with a broker would place their bets before the stock 'prices.' Then the firms would raise their opening amount to what they think everyone would be willing to pay. The more people bidding, the more it goes up. Then those companies would actually profit from the huge upward swings that have accompanied these IPO's, instead of the initial buyers profiting from them.
IPO's are handled the way they are, because most of the stock being bought is held by large organizations that will NOT sell them on the open market for a while. The investment firms set this up so that they can keep the stock price stable. But there's always those that get in on the IPO and flip the stock anyway, and that's why the opening days can be crazy for the price.
Maybe we need to add "separation of corporation and state" to our "separation of church and state" in the constitution?
Hardly. We need more of this. As long as Microsoft does not get any illegal favors in return, I love the idea of the government making money from corporations instead of taxpayers.
See, these people write in with links to articles, and they write a summary of the article and usually throw in their opinion. Those parts are italicized. Then an editor approves the story and sometimes they make comments themselves.
And sometimes they don't make comments. Like this time.
Mind you their tech support was helpful and I had a new unit (from Toronto, Canada to Hong Kong and back) in a week. My friend got one when he was in Hong Kong. Died in a month. Just won't turn on. The plastic is cheap and the battery removal process is cumbersome.
So, what I wan't to know is: Do these, and MP3 players in general, have any moving parts, and are they very resistance to shock, vibration and continuous movement?
Any MP3 player that does NOT use a hard drive or CDROM drive should have NO moving parts, and be completely resistent to shock, vibration, and continuous movement.
So long as that 'shock' you speak of does not include throwing the device on the ground. (They aren't indestructible.)
Because it's deceptive marketing. I'm an AMD user myself (TBird 1.2 GHz), but it really annoys me that they would be willing to mark a processor as something that it is not . Please don't try to tell me that 'performance rating...blah blah...equivalent speed in old architecture.' They are marking the new processors as speeds that they do not run at, period
That is horse shit. For the Athlon XP 1900+, where do they ever say it runs at 1900Mhz? No where. All they are doing is letting people understand that their architecture allows their XP 1900 to run just as well as the Intel chips running at 1.9Ghz. And if you look at the benchmarks that many sites are coming out with, you'll see the 1900 actually beats the 2+ Ghz chips from Intel.
If you want to talk about 'deceptive' practices, how about Intel designing the P4 so that the clock speeds are MUCH higher than their P3 chips, but the actual performance is not improved by that much?
AMD is just trying to make it easier for shoppers to compare. As long as they don't start naming their products "XP 2500" when they don't compete with the 2.5Ghz Intel chips (for example), then I think their naming system is good.
Re:Am I the only one who doesn't understand...
on
1.3GHz Duron Arrives
·
· Score: 2
So, if you want people who don't know anything about benchmarks to buy your chip, just say it's got a high clock rate, and they'll think it's fast
I think that the guy who wrote the article is assuming the 1.3Ghz AMD chip is similar to the XP/MP chips, in that it runs about as fast as Intel chips at higher clock frequencies. In other words, the 1.3Ghz AMD runs like a 1.7Ghz Intel, so why didn't they name this chip a Duron 1700?
But in reality, maybe this chip performs just as fast as the Celeron 1.3Ghz, so they didn't bother?
Finally, it integrates nicely with Konqueror's audioCD IO slave. You can simply type "audiocd:/ogg/" in Konq's location bar, and it shows you a list of.ogg files with the track names grabbed from FreeDB. To actually encode, one symply drags the.ogg file to another directory, and the IO slave works its magic.
Early glimpses of the plan suggested a system in which water is replaced by a fluid that evaporates over the hot parts of the pc, is then moved by convection to a radiator where it cools, condenses and is returned by gravity to the start of the cycle. Sadly the idea remained vaporware for a long time.
To prove their security they have to make Windows open source
Wrong. To prove their security to OPEN SOURCE fanatics, they have to open the source. To prove their security to me, they have to change the behavior of the operating system so that it is more secure. They have to eventually be able to go 6 months or a year without a new hack being found for Windows. They have to find a way to prevent the spread of viruses amongst Windows systems. None of this requires the source to be open.
Just because an OS has its source open doesn't make it secure. Exploits are still being released for open source systems like Linux.
Linux and OpenBSD are both open source. Why does OpenBSD have a better security record than Linux? According to your theory, they should both be equally secure, right?
You have on piece of closed source software (Windows) of which you don't know exactly what it is doing. And now you want to feel better by adding another piece of closed source software (personal firewall) of which you also don't know what it is doing.
You may not know what it is doing, but I know what it is doing. It is blocking programs from using the network unless I specifically give them permission. I use this in addition to a hardware firewall to prevent intruders. (Also closed source software.)
Sure, the source is not available, but I wouldn't examine the source even if it was.
My understanding of the original post was that the poster was speaking to destruction by development of superior quality
Nope, sorry, I was only talking about Microsoft destroying competitors when it sets it mind to it. It set its sights on the Internet, and destroyed competitors in the Windows market. Now its going to focus on security, and destroy competitors in that market, too.
Slashdot Mirror
After reading this, I sent Cringly my shipping address. Do you think this is a bit too forward?
Only if you didn't have the common courtesy to correctly spell his name in your message to him.
C-R-I-N-G-E-L-Y
Hmm. Cheesy first film, somewhat like Star Wars (be honest), and what looks like a cracking second film (just like ESB). Just what is it with Lucas and trilogies anyway?
I'll reserve judgment until I see the film. BTW, ESB was probably helped out by the fact that it was NOT directed by Lucas, whereas ANH WAS directed by Lucas!
You do the math.
Any satellites put into orbit should be required to have the capability of being brought down safely.
Where's the fun in that? Besides, you don't need any new laws, there are already existing laws that prevent people or companies (groups of people) from inflicting harm on citizens of the United States. This is all the incentive most satellite-launching organizations need to make sure their satellites come down safely. And for those that don't, they risk having million-dollar lawsuits and criminal charges brought against them if their satellite should strike someone due to negligence.
ps I am bitter because I submitted this exact article and had it rejected several hours before it appeared.
Get over it, yours was probably submitted AFTER the one that eventually got posted AND/OR it sucked compared to the one submitted.
Done well, this has the potential to be really cool. I doubt it will be done well.
When you're talking about Longhorn, the correct phrase is "well done," and I prefer Flo's Filet, thank you.
Seriously, Microsoft needs to go buy the book Dominic Giampalo wrote about the Be File System (BFS), and steal many ideas from him (they already took the taskbar window grouping idea from BeOS).
I have high hopes for this new FS, seeing as how MS SQL Server has been the best Microsoft product I've ever used.
In light of these naming tie-ins to Whistler mountain, the Blue Screen of Death will be replaced in subsequent versions of Windows by a skinny guy with an afro whining, "I think I just made yellow snow."
(Sorry, I've been playing too much SSX Tricky lately.)
I guess I think it is kind of a cheap shot.
Way to take a strong stand, buddy.
It's always The Man keeping us down!
Yes, funny. But who the hell says that they have to open up the fscking netbios ports? Or anything other than port 80????
I think his [valid] point was that airports will suddenly become popular for hackers with wireless cards and laptops. What good is an airport firewall if the hackers are already behind it?
Phone companies should spend less time with data services and make voice work. Consumer reports has an article on Cellular this month. They say that 2% of all calls on a cell phone drop in the first 2 minutes.
That is unacceptable.
Please realize that not every area in the country has such shitty coverage as you. In my area, I will welcome 3G when SprintPCS rolls it out nationwide this summer. And no, I won't use it to watch video, as the stupid-ass media reports, but rather as a data modem. (DUH!)
Yep, that is billion with a B. Do you think that the timing of the lawsuit against Microsoft had anything to do with the fact the press is catching onto the mistakes AOL has made during the merger.
According to Fortune, "Instead of adding up to the world's most valuable company, this merger has subtracted $155 billion of market cap. CEO-designate Richard Parsons promises to do the numbers a different way."
Market capitalization is just what the market thinks AOL/TW is worth, not what the company is REALLY worth. All that happened was a couple of overinflated stock prices came back down to earth when the market 'crashed.'
If you want to talk about money lost, talk about actual losses in revenue for AOL/TW, not market cap!
For some reason only "privilidged" people are allowed to buy the stock before it starts. So why do we allow the rich to get richer? Everybody should be able to buy those stocks before trading starts.
No exceptions.
Believe me, the companies would love it if everybody could get in on the IPO at the same time, before the bell starts. Because what would really happen is everyone with a broker would place their bets before the stock 'prices.' Then the firms would raise their opening amount to what they think everyone would be willing to pay. The more people bidding, the more it goes up. Then those companies would actually profit from the huge upward swings that have accompanied these IPO's, instead of the initial buyers profiting from them.
IPO's are handled the way they are, because most of the stock being bought is held by large organizations that will NOT sell them on the open market for a while. The investment firms set this up so that they can keep the stock price stable. But there's always those that get in on the IPO and flip the stock anyway, and that's why the opening days can be crazy for the price.
Maybe we need to add "separation of corporation and state" to our "separation of church and state" in the constitution?
Hardly. We need more of this. As long as Microsoft does not get any illegal favors in return, I love the idea of the government making money from corporations instead of taxpayers.
See, these people write in with links to articles, and they write a summary of the article and usually throw in their opinion. Those parts are italicized. Then an editor approves the story and sometimes they make comments themselves.
And sometimes they don't make comments. Like this time.
So, I think you owe timothy an apology.
Mind you their tech support was helpful and I had a new unit (from Toronto, Canada to Hong Kong and back) in a week. My friend got one when he was in Hong Kong. Died in a month. Just won't turn on. The plastic is cheap and the battery removal process is cumbersome.
What do you expect, dude? It's
MADE IN HONG KONG
So, what I wan't to know is: Do these, and MP3 players in general, have any moving parts, and are they very resistance to shock, vibration and continuous movement?
Any MP3 player that does NOT use a hard drive or CDROM drive should have NO moving parts, and be completely resistent to shock, vibration, and continuous movement.
So long as that 'shock' you speak of does not include throwing the device on the ground. (They aren't indestructible.)
Because it's deceptive marketing. I'm an AMD user myself (TBird 1.2 GHz), but it really annoys me that they would be willing to mark a processor as something that it is not . Please don't try to tell me that 'performance rating...blah blah...equivalent speed in old architecture.' They are marking the new processors as speeds that they do not run at, period
That is horse shit. For the Athlon XP 1900+, where do they ever say it runs at 1900Mhz? No where. All they are doing is letting people understand that their architecture allows their XP 1900 to run just as well as the Intel chips running at 1.9Ghz. And if you look at the benchmarks that many sites are coming out with, you'll see the 1900 actually beats the 2+ Ghz chips from Intel.
If you want to talk about 'deceptive' practices, how about Intel designing the P4 so that the clock speeds are MUCH higher than their P3 chips, but the actual performance is not improved by that much?
AMD is just trying to make it easier for shoppers to compare. As long as they don't start naming their products "XP 2500" when they don't compete with the 2.5Ghz Intel chips (for example), then I think their naming system is good.
So, if you want people who don't know anything about benchmarks to buy your chip, just say it's got a high clock rate, and they'll think it's fast
I think that the guy who wrote the article is assuming the 1.3Ghz AMD chip is similar to the XP/MP chips, in that it runs about as fast as Intel chips at higher clock frequencies. In other words, the 1.3Ghz AMD runs like a 1.7Ghz Intel, so why didn't they name this chip a Duron 1700?
But in reality, maybe this chip performs just as fast as the Celeron 1.3Ghz, so they didn't bother?
Finally, it integrates nicely with Konqueror's audioCD IO slave. You can simply type "audiocd:/ogg/" in Konq's location bar, and it shows you a list of .ogg files with the track names grabbed from FreeDB. To actually encode, one symply drags the .ogg file to another directory, and the IO slave works its magic.
And you guys thought Mozilla was bloated!
Beg pardon? Surely you mean region 42?
(No, and don't call me Shirley.)
Early glimpses of the plan suggested a system in which water is replaced by a fluid that evaporates over the hot parts of the pc, is then moved by convection to a radiator where it cools, condenses and is returned by gravity to the start of the cycle. Sadly the idea remained vaporware for a long time.
Sounds like it still is?
To prove their security they have to make Windows open source
Wrong. To prove their security to OPEN SOURCE fanatics, they have to open the source. To prove their security to me, they have to change the behavior of the operating system so that it is more secure. They have to eventually be able to go 6 months or a year without a new hack being found for Windows. They have to find a way to prevent the spread of viruses amongst Windows systems. None of this requires the source to be open.
Just because an OS has its source open doesn't make it secure. Exploits are still being released for open source systems like Linux.
Linux and OpenBSD are both open source. Why does OpenBSD have a better security record than Linux? According to your theory, they should both be equally secure, right?
You have on piece of closed source software (Windows) of which you don't know exactly what it is doing. And now you want to feel better by adding another piece of closed source software (personal firewall) of which you also don't know what it is doing.
You may not know what it is doing, but I know what it is doing. It is blocking programs from using the network unless I specifically give them permission. I use this in addition to a hardware firewall to prevent intruders. (Also closed source software.)
Sure, the source is not available, but I wouldn't examine the source even if it was.
My understanding of the original post was that the poster was speaking to destruction by development of superior quality
Nope, sorry, I was only talking about Microsoft destroying competitors when it sets it mind to it. It set its sights on the Internet, and destroyed competitors in the Windows market. Now its going to focus on security, and destroy competitors in that market, too.
Hardly. For one, I do exactly what you say.
You do? You don't visit any sites that use Microsoft IIS for their webserver software?
As for the rest of your argument, I never said they innovated. Just dominated.
Note that everything you mention in your e-mail has been involved in HUGE security holes...
As have all their competitors' products.