Yeah, but he's certainly not going to just take a cube up in a shuttle and heave it out the cargo bay (although that was my first mental image -- I like the idea of hundreds of little cubes orbitting the earth). I think he's planning on starting with the guts of a cube (which are very small, lightweight, cool-running, etc.) and building it into his 120lb satelite.
AMD's Sledgehammer "simulator is quite slow. It runs at speeds like PCs 15 years ago," said a source with a software company, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
This is referring to their existing simulator, not the Transmeta one. And at any rate, for the purpose of optimizing your software (especially server software where you don't need to make the kind of subjective evaluations about screen refresh being fast enough like you do in a game) you don't need a processor that runs at full speed, you just need to be able to profile your software to identify which loops are eating up too many cycles, etc.
It occurred to me that perhaps the purpose of having blocking software in schools really isn't to block objectional material per se, but to serve as a more subtle method of indoctrinating our children to get accustomed to, and accept the concept of being told what they can and cannot see. For this purpose the actual effectiveness of the software isn't terribly important, what matters is that children get used to asking permission to view certain material, and accepting that there are some things they really shouldn't see.
How often have you typed an IP address incorrectly? My office uses public IP addresses internally. Thie means that if the VPN isn't connected, my Netbios, Visual Source Safe, SQL Server Enterprise Manager, etc, are all attempting to make connections to machines on the internet. All harmless, but will trigger warnings from many people's firewall software.
Is there some reason why you don't use one of the private ip blocks? It seems like pretty bad form to use public ips on a private net that's hooked up to the public internet.
It's pretty funny, actually. I demand the right to beat up an old lady! And bomb the state capitol! Without these rights I am not truly free!
At any rate, hopefully some people got the joke (or mataphor, or whatever). It's all about balancing (conflicting) rights and responsibilities. Every right for one person has a corresponding restriction for someone else. It is impossible to say that the GPL license or the BSD license is more free, they just strike different balances between the rights of the original developers, the users, and future developers. What you give up in one place is made up for somewhere else.
Alright, this argument is getting boring. I have to get back to work now....
This last point is the real stinger - I believe that could create a program and release it as GPL, wait for the rest of the world to fix all the bugs and add cool new features, then rescind the GPL status and sell it commercially as closed-source.
You couldn't do that unless everyone that contributed to your code gave you the copyright on their contributions. You can always turn your own code commercial, but you can't do what you want with other's code.
I went to a school that didn't give grades, just evaluations (and self-evaluations). I was recently looking through my old report cards and almost without exception they end with "Although he is clearly gifted, Jesse is not living up to his potential" -- despite the fact that I was taking classes several years ahead of my grade-level. I never really understood what it was exactly what they expected of me... I think I just wanted to have fun, but they wanted me to be Einstein or something...
I think you are mostly correct, but I wanted to comment on why people call for the elimination of nuclear power. While for many people there is a negative association with nuclear weapons, and for some operational safety is a big issue, I think the biggest un-resolved problem, and the one that worries people the most, is the fact that there is still no long-term solution for dealing with the byproducts of fission. So far everything we've tried will require constant monitoring for the next 10,000 years or so, which understandably upsets people with somewhat less-than-optimistic expectations for the long-term stability of our society.
You're right - there's a lack of clarity - it's not theoretically impossible, in the same way as proving Fermat is not impossible, but since mathematicians have been trying to do it since pretty much the dawn of mathematics with no success, it's fair to say it's impossible for us at the moment.
Uh, I guess you don't keep up too much on mathematical happenings, but you should know that Fermat's last theorem was proved in 1995.
Re:Too much idealism, too little practicality
on
The Encryption Wars
·
· Score: 1
Who administers the network? You have thousands of computers that need to be refurbished and installed with the proper software, not to mention who fixes the bad things that will eventually happen to the network. That takes manpower (and I don't think conscript soldiers can build email servers) and more importantly, money to pay for that manpower.
Keep in mind that military service is manditory in Israel, so you should have plenty of CS majors doing their service that could act as sys admins.
When it pries the relevant patents from Photoshop's cold, dead fingers.
I don't think Adobe (or anyone else for that matter) has patents on CMYK -- it certainly predates photoshop, or even computer design by a long shot. Pantone on the other hand....
You honestly think that dumping another few thousand copies of a rare artifact into the marketplace would do nothing to dampen its unit value?
No, but don't you think they'd rather sell those 5,000 issues for $300 each rather than 50 (Well, that's what they were the last time I bought one!)? I think that's his point.
I have to admit that when I heard about a stainless-steel mouse, I pictured something shaped like the new button-less Apple mice, but with a cool brushed-steel finish. That would rock.
Also ironic that it shows this page even for the Mac version of IE, even though the only mentioned bug in IE (not even an incompatibility, mind you) doesn't effect the Mac version.
you hid a clause in a EULA saying that "you agree to pay the manufacturer $100 per year in perpetuity." Technically should you be able to enforce this? Is there any limit to what people can agree to in this manner? What about agreeing to give up rights to your soul?
That's so far away from what I actually said that I simply don't know how to respond.
You said that the US has a poverty rate of zero. You also said that people survive below the poverty line. I don't know exactly what you mean to say with that. Clearly people survive in poverty, what is that supposed to mean? Being that you said that there is no poverty in the US, I assumed you meant that people that survive aren't poor.
You see people in the streets in the US, and just assume the cause is a non-caring government (or non-caring citizens such as me).
Well, yes. Clearly not the only cause, or even the primary cause, but it is within our (as a people and as a government) power to end, or at least greatly reduce the rate of poverty. We choose not to, and pretend that the poor are not our problem, beyond our control.
The rub is in the definition of "poverty". As I said, by the standards of the world the US has a poverty rate of zero. Go to Somalia, or heck, even Mexico if you want to see real poverty.
I have lived for several years in latin America, and have travelled extensively throughout the "third world". Believe me, I have seen devestating poverty. But I have also seen people living on the street (and yes, starving) in US cities. Or try taking a trip to Appalachia some day.
You seem to be implying that if you are able to survive than you must not be poor. I don't really know what to say to that. I just hope that you never end up in a policy-making position.
The "poverty line" is an arbitrary line compared to the average, it is not a "starvation line". By the standards of the world, the poverty rate in the US is zero.
This, unfortunately, is completely false. According to the government (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture) 10.2% of US households are "food insecure", meaning that they don't have access to enough food to meet basic needs. This is a number that is actually rising, despite the recent economic boom. And by the way, the poverty line isn't completely arbitrary -- it is based on calculations of how much money is required to meet the most basic needs of survival (like food and shelter). If anything, it underestimates the rate of poverty, because it isn't locally adjusted to account for higher costs of living in many urban areas like New York.
While it is true that we don't have high levels of starvation here, it is ludicrous to say there is no poverty.
"Education"? Educate them about what? People are going to reproduce if they want to. Any other solution requires the government to regulate whether you can reproduce or not, which is a thousand times worse than anything (look at China).
You don't need to educate them specifically about reproduction, but there is a very strong correlation between level of education and reproductive rates. Better education generally does lead to lower rates of reproduction.
And the biggest problem with over-population isn't figuring out where to put the people, it's dealing with the increased use of natural resources and disposing of increasing quantities of waste.
The world goes hungry not because of an unequal distribution of resources, but because of an unequal distribution of capitalism. It's a political problem, not a resource problem. If you want to feed the world, change the governments.
I'm sorry, but all I can say to this is: bullshit. (OK, not the part about changing the governments, but...) If you think that capitalism cures hunger, OPEN YOUR EYES! Why do so many in the US live below the poverty line? Why has the poverty rate increased in Latin American countries as they adopt IMF-sponsored "free-market" reforms? Why are the lowest levels of hunger and poverty in western-european countries with strong welfare states?
OK -- I agree with you about the fusion stuff, so at least we agree about something!
I don't think that they MD5 the whole file, just the beginning. It should be useful for avoiding the "booby-trapped" songs that some people upload -- you know, the ones that have the first couple seconds of a song followed by birds chirping or something like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but he's certainly not going to just take a cube up in a shuttle and heave it out the cargo bay (although that was my first mental image -- I like the idea of hundreds of little cubes orbitting the earth). I think he's planning on starting with the guts of a cube (which are very small, lightweight, cool-running, etc.) and building it into his 120lb satelite.
Yeah, but moving ships out of the harbor would have given away the secret.
This is referring to their existing simulator, not the Transmeta one. And at any rate, for the purpose of optimizing your software (especially server software where you don't need to make the kind of subjective evaluations about screen refresh being fast enough like you do in a game) you don't need a processor that runs at full speed, you just need to be able to profile your software to identify which loops are eating up too many cycles, etc.
It occurred to me that perhaps the purpose of having blocking software in schools really isn't to block objectional material per se, but to serve as a more subtle method of indoctrinating our children to get accustomed to, and accept the concept of being told what they can and cannot see. For this purpose the actual effectiveness of the software isn't terribly important, what matters is that children get used to asking permission to view certain material, and accepting that there are some things they really shouldn't see.
Is there some reason why you don't use one of the private ip blocks? It seems like pretty bad form to use public ips on a private net that's hooked up to the public internet.
Actually, you should have ancestors that tasted terrible!
It's pretty funny, actually. I demand the right to beat up an old lady! And bomb the state capitol! Without these rights I am not truly free!
At any rate, hopefully some people got the joke (or mataphor, or whatever). It's all about balancing (conflicting) rights and responsibilities. Every right for one person has a corresponding restriction for someone else. It is impossible to say that the GPL license or the BSD license is more free, they just strike different balances between the rights of the original developers, the users, and future developers. What you give up in one place is made up for somewhere else.
Alright, this argument is getting boring. I have to get back to work now....
I can personally think of a few hundred arguments that would defeat its enforceability.
Such as?
You couldn't do that unless everyone that contributed to your code gave you the copyright on their contributions. You can always turn your own code commercial, but you can't do what you want with other's code.
I went to a school that didn't give grades, just evaluations (and self-evaluations). I was recently looking through my old report cards and almost without exception they end with "Although he is clearly gifted, Jesse is not living up to his potential" -- despite the fact that I was taking classes several years ahead of my grade-level. I never really understood what it was exactly what they expected of me... I think I just wanted to have fun, but they wanted me to be Einstein or something...
I think you are mostly correct, but I wanted to comment on why people call for the elimination of nuclear power. While for many people there is a negative association with nuclear weapons, and for some operational safety is a big issue, I think the biggest un-resolved problem, and the one that worries people the most, is the fact that there is still no long-term solution for dealing with the byproducts of fission. So far everything we've tried will require constant monitoring for the next 10,000 years or so, which understandably upsets people with somewhat less-than-optimistic expectations for the long-term stability of our society.
Uh, I guess you don't keep up too much on mathematical happenings, but you should know that Fermat's last theorem was proved in 1995.
Keep in mind that military service is manditory in Israel, so you should have plenty of CS majors doing their service that could act as sys admins.
Keep in mind that in many countries the phone company is state-owned, so it's a pretty different scenario then.
When it pries the relevant patents from Photoshop's cold, dead fingers.
I don't think Adobe (or anyone else for that matter) has patents on CMYK -- it certainly predates photoshop, or even computer design by a long shot. Pantone on the other hand....
BTW-- I like your sig.
No, but don't you think they'd rather sell those 5,000 issues for $300 each rather than 50 (Well, that's what they were the last time I bought one!)? I think that's his point.
I have to admit that when I heard about a stainless-steel mouse, I pictured something shaped like the new button-less Apple mice, but with a cool brushed-steel finish. That would rock.
Also ironic that it shows this page even for the Mac version of IE, even though the only mentioned bug in IE (not even an incompatibility, mind you) doesn't effect the Mac version.
you hid a clause in a EULA saying that "you agree to pay the manufacturer $100 per year in perpetuity." Technically should you be able to enforce this? Is there any limit to what people can agree to in this manner? What about agreeing to give up rights to your soul?
'nuff said.
That's so far away from what I actually said that I simply don't know how to respond.
You said that the US has a poverty rate of zero. You also said that people survive below the poverty line. I don't know exactly what you mean to say with that. Clearly people survive in poverty, what is that supposed to mean? Being that you said that there is no poverty in the US, I assumed you meant that people that survive aren't poor.
You see people in the streets in the US, and just assume the cause is a non-caring government (or non-caring citizens such as me).
Well, yes. Clearly not the only cause, or even the primary cause, but it is within our (as a people and as a government) power to end, or at least greatly reduce the rate of poverty. We choose not to, and pretend that the poor are not our problem, beyond our control.
I have lived for several years in latin America, and have travelled extensively throughout the "third world". Believe me, I have seen devestating poverty. But I have also seen people living on the street (and yes, starving) in US cities. Or try taking a trip to Appalachia some day.
You seem to be implying that if you are able to survive than you must not be poor. I don't really know what to say to that. I just hope that you never end up in a policy-making position.
The "poverty line" is an arbitrary line compared to the average, it is not a "starvation line". By the standards of the world, the poverty rate in the US is zero.
This, unfortunately, is completely false. According to the government (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture) 10.2% of US households are "food insecure", meaning that they don't have access to enough food to meet basic needs. This is a number that is actually rising, despite the recent economic boom. And by the way, the poverty line isn't completely arbitrary -- it is based on calculations of how much money is required to meet the most basic needs of survival (like food and shelter). If anything, it underestimates the rate of poverty, because it isn't locally adjusted to account for higher costs of living in many urban areas like New York.
While it is true that we don't have high levels of starvation here, it is ludicrous to say there is no poverty.
You don't need to educate them specifically about reproduction, but there is a very strong correlation between level of education and reproductive rates. Better education generally does lead to lower rates of reproduction.
And the biggest problem with over-population isn't figuring out where to put the people, it's dealing with the increased use of natural resources and disposing of increasing quantities of waste.
I'm sorry, but all I can say to this is: bullshit. (OK, not the part about changing the governments, but...) If you think that capitalism cures hunger, OPEN YOUR EYES! Why do so many in the US live below the poverty line? Why has the poverty rate increased in Latin American countries as they adopt IMF-sponsored "free-market" reforms? Why are the lowest levels of hunger and poverty in western-european countries with strong welfare states?
OK -- I agree with you about the fusion stuff, so at least we agree about something!
I don't think that they MD5 the whole file, just the beginning. It should be useful for avoiding the "booby-trapped" songs that some people upload -- you know, the ones that have the first couple seconds of a song followed by birds chirping or something like that.