Well. They do make piles of money with them. Surely putting some of our best and brightest minds to work selling web advertising can't be a mistake, after all, this is what the free market decided to do with all that talent.
Thinkpad, you're obsolete. You may be able to do dinosaur things like email and web surfing, but you are not even up to yesterday's tasks, like video editing for youtube.
Yes, I feel terrible that people are starving. I haven't bought anything frivolous in the last decade+ as a result. But you're probably right, this is probably a left/right thing where the people on the right just don't care, and never will.
"How would Slashdotters go about picking a solid, basic laptop for Web surfing and document editing that won't be obsolete in two years?""
No one would go about doing that because it's impossible. Every laptop made yesterday will be obsolete in about a year and a half from yesterday, at best.
They may feel as good as him right now, but at some point the anti-financial-waste-of-life banter might break through their shell of ignorance, and then how are they going to feel when they realize the misery they've caused with their lives?
And during all but about 2 of those ~10 years, wages were rising everywhere else, exacerbating the problem. That's why none of the good graduate brainpower in the last decade has gone there (or MS, etc), and it's definitely part of the reason all those old dinosaur companies are fading.
Yes, really, precisely because it is about lifting more than anyone else, and nothing more. As an example, what strategy would you employ when dead-lifting 400 pounds. Either you do it or you don't.
You can't compare a grandmaster that has a fabulous direct knowledge of 5000-15.000 games to a database that has every important game since the invention of notation in them. My own database at this moment holds over 15 million games, That is far beyond what any human is capable of.
Wait, so you're an AI that has learned to troll slashdot about chess?
The state of the art took a quantum leap forward about 8 or 9 years ago. There were some new ideas in the programs that jumped the ratings on typical pc level hardware by something like 3-400 points.
Not all sports are games. Weightlifting is widely regarded to be a sport, but there is no game element to it. You can either lift a big pile of metal, or you can't.
It's not really fair to call it NIMBY... that's disparaging, and usually applies to people who are opposed to things for irrational reasons. What you're dealing with is people who have actually already paid into a system, expecting to get a certain low-density quality of life, and then later people chasing after that quality demanding the right to increase the density to suit themselves. That's why people who have established something that they like write it into the laws to protect their investments.
The real problem is that people want sprawling houses, and are not comfortable living in smaller places.
I mean, why bother living in a small apartment downtown when I can get a sprawling, waste of space out in the 'burbs, and drive 20 miles each way?
People raise kids in NYC and in other big cities. You can just put your kids in a private school, and they can take the train or the bus to get to where they want.
No, I think this is a great idea. Some of us ride bikes and take buses and trains. And we do not live out in suburbs, and even live in neighborhoods which are well connected with good, public transportation.
I assume you were aiming for funny/troll, people mostly seem to have taken you seriously. You probably should have put <sarcasm> tags around things like 'The real problem is that people want sprawling houses, and are not comfortable living in smaller places.' or you'll have people seriously thinking that you believe that people wanting to be comfortable is a 'problem'.
You're cavalierly wasting our road paving resources whether you burn a lot of gas doing it or not. They're just talking about fairly allocating those resource costs to the wasters of those resources.
Gasoline, on the other hand, is already paid for on a per-gallon basis, meaning the greatest wasters pay the greatest share of the costs.
I honestly think today is a pretty different day in computing history. Today, about 3/4 of the applications I care about are browser based, and run on any hardware platform. By next year, 90%. At that point, I could probably switch off x86 without caring. Ten years ago, only about 2% of what I cared about was browser based.
Within 5 years, I doubt if more than 1% of what I care about will require a fast x86. 99% will require fast javascript/flash/html5 execution.
Slashdot Mirror
A significant percentage of our oxygen supply comes from ocean photosynthesis, so let's not be too quick to just plaster that over with solar cells.
http://www.wisegeek.com/where-does-atmospheric-oxygen-come-from.htm
Yeah, I'm sorry if the 'funny' intention of my post escaped you, I do not actually feel that Einstein was a loser.
Well. They do make piles of money with them. Surely putting some of our best and brightest minds to work selling web advertising can't be a mistake, after all, this is what the free market decided to do with all that talent.
Yeah, but he was a loser who couldn't figure out relativity until adulthood. This kid actually has some talent.
Thinkpad, you're obsolete. You may be able to do dinosaur things like email and web surfing, but you are not even up to yesterday's tasks, like video editing for youtube.
A computer with internet service I have to have for my job, yes.
Yes, I feel terrible that people are starving. I haven't bought anything frivolous in the last decade+ as a result. But you're probably right, this is probably a left/right thing where the people on the right just don't care, and never will.
"How would Slashdotters go about picking a solid, basic laptop for Web surfing and document editing that won't be obsolete in two years?""
No one would go about doing that because it's impossible. Every laptop made yesterday will be obsolete in about a year and a half from yesterday, at best.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
They may feel as good as him right now, but at some point the anti-financial-waste-of-life banter might break through their shell of ignorance, and then how are they going to feel when they realize the misery they've caused with their lives?
The talented people are typically making ~400k. The low end (with experience) is about 160k.
And during all but about 2 of those ~10 years, wages were rising everywhere else, exacerbating the problem. That's why none of the good graduate brainpower in the last decade has gone there (or MS, etc), and it's definitely part of the reason all those old dinosaur companies are fading.
A torturer's work is appreciated, brings new challenges every week, and pays well too. Maybe you should consider going into that next.
Yes, really, precisely because it is about lifting more than anyone else, and nothing more.
As an example, what strategy would you employ when dead-lifting 400 pounds. Either you do it or you don't.
You can't compare a grandmaster that has a fabulous direct knowledge of 5000-15.000 games to a database that has every important game since the invention of notation in them. My own database at this moment holds over 15 million games, That is far beyond what any human is capable of.
Wait, so you're an AI that has learned to troll slashdot about chess?
The state of the art took a quantum leap forward about 8 or 9 years ago. There were some new ideas in the programs that jumped the ratings on typical pc level hardware by something like 3-400 points.
Not all sports are games. Weightlifting is widely regarded to be a sport, but there is no game element to it. You can either lift a big pile of metal, or you can't.
In this case the game was cheating, and they innovated a new sort of menage-a-trois system for beating chess organizers.
It's not really fair to call it NIMBY ... that's disparaging, and usually applies to people who are opposed to things for irrational reasons. What you're dealing with is people who have actually already paid into a system, expecting to get a certain low-density quality of life, and then later people chasing after that quality demanding the right to increase the density to suit themselves. That's why people who have established something that they like write it into the laws to protect their investments.
The real problem is that people want sprawling houses, and are not comfortable living in smaller places.
I mean, why bother living in a small apartment downtown when I can get a sprawling, waste of space out in the 'burbs, and drive 20 miles each way?
People raise kids in NYC and in other big cities. You can just put your kids in a private school, and they can take the train or the bus to get to where they want.
No, I think this is a great idea. Some of us ride bikes and take buses and trains. And we do not live out in suburbs, and even live in neighborhoods which are well connected with good, public transportation.
I assume you were aiming for funny/troll, people mostly seem to have taken you seriously. You probably should have put <sarcasm> tags around things like 'The real problem is that people want sprawling houses, and are not comfortable living in smaller places.' or you'll have people seriously thinking that you believe that people wanting to be comfortable is a 'problem'.
You're cavalierly wasting our road paving resources whether you burn a lot of gas doing it or not. They're just talking about fairly allocating those resource costs to the wasters of those resources.
Gasoline, on the other hand, is already paid for on a per-gallon basis, meaning the greatest wasters pay the greatest share of the costs.
Define good (in good idea). They clearly want to, because they (mostly) have options.
I honestly think today is a pretty different day in computing history. Today, about 3/4 of the applications I care about are browser based, and run on any hardware platform. By next year, 90%. At that point, I could probably switch off x86 without caring. Ten years ago, only about 2% of what I cared about was browser based.
Within 5 years, I doubt if more than 1% of what I care about will require a fast x86. 99% will require fast javascript/flash/html5 execution.
How much of that x86 software that simply cannot be ported also can't run on an emulator?
And you're sounding more and more shrill. Or is it, shill?
But the ios users can do so exactly as long as apple tells them they can.