Agree. DRM in exchange for lower prices may be an excellent trade off. Hopefully, you would be able to pay a certain amount for your several day window and I would be able to pay less for a six hour window (maybe even for a single screen/device).
The thing that intel is 'best' at is providing massive amounts of processing power at low price points, and increasing that power over time (they also have chipped away at consumption of watts, but that has largely been a side effect of their performance/$ obsession).
The number of people that have tasks that are best run on a single core and are not fast enough is getting smaller and smaller. That means that the benefits of making a single core faster are smaller and smaller (and thus the amount of money available for faster and faster cores is also smaller).
Combine those two concepts and you end up realizing that intel pretty much competed themselves into a situation where all they face are decreasing margins. If the fab costs really are going up, then they face huge margin pressure (because fewer and fewer people are interested in paying more and more to upgrade machines that are fast enough).
Exactly what environment do you think this is happening in? There are not Invisible Pink Unicorns running things in Afghanistan.
I don't think that this situation is anything even resembling right, but I can tell right now that I am not going to do anything about it. Is that the environment you are talking about?
It is relatively harmless, but given that we have any number of non real time communication systems, I find it grating when someone thinks they need to use a system that is designed to demand my immediate attention just to send my some automated notice.
I would hope that users of your clearly brilliant system would mostly fail to schedule annoying phone calls for their friends.
With a distributed VCS, you don't need the server. You can make a copy on another machine as a backup, but you don't actually need to run a server (or have one running somewhere).
Slashdot Mirror
Agree. DRM in exchange for lower prices may be an excellent trade off. Hopefully, you would be able to pay a certain amount for your several day window and I would be able to pay less for a six hour window (maybe even for a single screen/device).
Windows XP, as of service pack 2, provides all the software firewall that an average user needs.
I meant that it is a stupid good, not that it is for everybody.
Your premise is wrong. This is not a luxury good.
Your post degenerates into rambling incoherence.
The thing that intel is 'best' at is providing massive amounts of processing power at low price points, and increasing that power over time (they also have chipped away at consumption of watts, but that has largely been a side effect of their performance/$ obsession).
The number of people that have tasks that are best run on a single core and are not fast enough is getting smaller and smaller. That means that the benefits of making a single core faster are smaller and smaller (and thus the amount of money available for faster and faster cores is also smaller).
Combine those two concepts and you end up realizing that intel pretty much competed themselves into a situation where all they face are decreasing margins. If the fab costs really are going up, then they face huge margin pressure (because fewer and fewer people are interested in paying more and more to upgrade machines that are fast enough).
It is funny because they are going to get raped.
Ha ha.
It pays to be tight with your money.
Exactly what environment do you think this is happening in? There are not Invisible Pink Unicorns running things in Afghanistan.
I don't think that this situation is anything even resembling right, but I can tell right now that I am not going to do anything about it. Is that the environment you are talking about?
Only after Columbia.
People use open source software because it is high quality. Lower costs are simply a nice side benefit, not a core motivation.
Remember, even expensive stuff like Oracle ends up saving companies money, or they wouldn't be using it at all.
Damn You M.C. Hammer.
From the look of it, you are already in a depression.
It is relatively harmless, but given that we have any number of non real time communication systems, I find it grating when someone thinks they need to use a system that is designed to demand my immediate attention just to send my some automated notice.
I would hope that users of your clearly brilliant system would mostly fail to schedule annoying phone calls for their friends.
How about a misdemeanor for automatically calling someone without a prior agreement?
How come those guys aren't featured in those "Come to California" advertisements?
I can see it now: "Come to California where we murder your ass, because we are fucking crazy."
tldr
Your attitude is very French.
Read the post I replied to. He is working on a one man project team.
Are there mechanisms to correct against mechanism bias?
With a distributed VCS, you don't need the server. You can make a copy on another machine as a backup, but you don't actually need to run a server (or have one running somewhere).
If you have municipal water, you can get pumps that use the water pressure from your tap to run.
Might not work all that great in catastrophic situations though.
The human spirit will overcome this 'horrible' abuse?
Why not just argue that private insurance based on complete information isn't something that you think will work for society?
Yes, global immigration policies are oh-so-liberal.
Also, I'm pretty sure that 'universal' is a lot closer to the truth than 'free'.
Are you volunteering to kill yourself?
Or is it not that simple?