Try doing some real research. It's not uncommon for me to have several Firefox sessions with 10+ tabs in each session. Not to mention having PuTTY up and listening to MP3s. On top of that, I'm running Word to type up my report. You could do the same; have fun watching your disk thrash as your pagefile fills up.
Actually, PuTTY and most MP3 players don't use a whole ton of memory. Nor does Word. Firefox has been known to leak memory, but generally it's not too bad.
512M is plenty to do what you're talking about. Your memory needs are a ctually quite low - compared to, for example, mine - I like to do all that while playing World of Warcraft (which has no problem stealing 600M of memory) and recording two channels of TV (albeit with hardware encoding). And, of course, there are plenty of tasks that make mine look small - even low-end servers are now often equipped with as much as 16GB of memory.
Try ripping some CDs to MP3 or OGG on there. It'll take you at least twice as long to rip 20 CDs as someone with a better computer.
Actually, for me, the speed of the drive has been a limiting factor for some time - CDs can only be spun so fast, and most CD drives never approach their claimed read speed. I have an Athlon 64 3000+, FYI.
My home PC records TV for me, outputs recorded video to the entertainment center, has 3 users (with fast user switching) running multiple programs, rips DVDs and MP3s, plays games, and much more
Shocker. My PC records over 150GB of TV per week, displays recorded TV on my TV, streams it to my notebook over a VPN, streams it to an XBOX 360, runs BitTorrent, rips DVDs and CDs, and is often running WoW, Maple, and plenty of other software.
I didn't need a fancy dual-core CPU or high-end GPU to do this - the system has a GeForce 6200 AGP.
If it's my server, I don't bother with the stupid serial cable - no serious server today ships without some kind of lights-out management. Most even support SSH, remote display, and media emulation for doing recovery/installs remotely.
You might not use those "useless features" on your phones, but we most certainly do. Entire message boards exist solely to compare the picture quality and associated features of the various camera phones, which is a serious deciding factor for some people when buying a new phone...
Oh, really? You have message boards for cellular phones! Wow! It's not like HowardForums has 6.54 million posts or anything.
Also, the statistics are wrong. CITA claims that 7.3 billion messages were sent in the US in October 2005, about 235 million per day or 1/2 as much per capita as the UK.
That's odd... Texting has been practical in the UK much longer than in the US, where for the longest time it simply wasn't possible to send text between networks. There's so much more support for text in the UK and one sees so much more online evidence of a text 'culture' there that it seems unlikely that its per-capita text message use would be higher
Yeah, that's why the (albeit confusing) statistics show that US users send far fewer texts than UK users.
As for your comment about the lack of carrier interoperability, I have had no problems sending texts to any network for some time now - even back in 1997 I recall sending texts from a GSM phone (Voicestream) to a D-AMPS phone (AT&T Wireless) and to CDMA2000 phones (Verizon and Sprint).
I never saw the point of SMS - most of my friends stay signed in to AIM all the time, and sending an IM is easier and costs less, particularly if you have a GPRS IM client like I do.
Re:GNOME's audio backend GStreamer to use DRM
on
A Look at GNOME 2.14
·
· Score: 1
It's not unreasonable at all. MySQL is licensed similarly, as are many other successful open-source projects. Dual-licensing is certainly one way to make money while keeping your product Free Software.
If, however, you want to allow commercial plug-ins and applications to be linked against your source, there's the LGPL. The grandparent poster seemed to believe that this was some kind of a "scheme" by an evil corporation - nothing could be further from the truth.
Re:Try to separate sarcasm and your point....
on
A Look at GNOME 2.14
·
· Score: 1
I must laugh in your general direction - you didn't understand what I said at all.
Of course there are commercial Qt applications - they all paid Trolltech's licensing fees.
And nowhere did I say that Qt was closed-source. It is GPL.
So, you're a commerical developer who wants to develop a closed-source application for Linux. Do you: - Use GTK+ and pay no licensing fees while retaining control of your source code - Use Qt and pay a pretty hefty fee to Trolltech ($1990 per developer for the "light" edition)
Qt is an excellent product and Trolltech has a right to license it any way they want. But when other developers want to be more open in their licensing, you shouldn't condemn them for doing so.
Interestingly enough, MSN search validates as XHTML 1.0 strict, MSN.com has only 2 errors (also XHTML 1.0 strict), and microsoft.com validates as HTML 4 transitional.
Actually having chatted with Woz....
on
Woz On Apple's Success
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Having actually met (and chatted with) Woz a few months back, just after the Intel transition was announced, I got the impression that he was cautiously optimistic. He understood the problems with the G4 and the G5, but he was concerned about Macs becoming too "PC-like" - what differentiates Macs from PCs now? He also knew about the fact that hackers had gotten OS X (the development release at the time) to run on common PCs, but he didn't seem to be nearly as concerned about it as Apple seems to be now (not surprising considering his legacy).
Interestingly, Woz denied having anything to do with ADB (although he is frequently cited as the inventor), he carries a RAZR (despite his association with Danger, the company that produces the Sidekick) and a Bluetooth headset.
I happened to have a Sony MagicLink with me, and Woz indicated that he hadn't seen someone actually using one in years.
I heard that there's this giant bright thing that shows up during the day and blasts out all kinds of electromagnetic radiation - at such intense levels that even short-term exposure can cause serious burns and even significantly increase your risk of skin cancer!
But, I'm sure the 100mW put out by 802.11b chipsets is much more dangerous than that. And certainly much more dangerous than the ~600mW-1.6W put out by the portable digital radio transcievers that 1/3 of all the people on the planet now own/wear.
Um, a typical player will reach the level cap in WOW within 10-15 days of playtime. At 24 hours a week, that's only 2-4 months. Of course, there's a lot of endgame content, but even the hardcore gamers will eventually plateau.
Really, it's a matter of perspective. If your'e the kind of person who can't stand being "second best", than a game that so distinctly differentiates bettwen those who invest a lot of time and those who invest a little is certainly not for you.
I've learned that the best students at my university aren't the smartest students - they are the students who work the hardest. There are so many bright students who refuse to study and so many average students who excel because they are willing to invest the time to practice and study the material.
Oh, and as a sidenote, WOW is as much about playing smart as it is about playing a lot. Having a guild that is smart (and not filled with assholes), knowing how much honor to get per week and the easiest way to get it, knowing what mob(s) drop the best items, etc. It took me less time to get from 40-60 than it did to get from 20-40, precisely because I got better at playing and made better use of my time.
Finally, I'd like to remind everyone of one thing: it's just a game. Letting WOW become intertwined with your life is unhealthy. I play 10-15 hours per week, mostly on the weekends, because there are more important things to me than WOW. If you're avoiding social contact, damaging your performance at school or work, or (worst of all) are screwing up your sleep schedule, you are playing far too much and it's time to realize what your priorities really are.
if you don't abide by the contract you have with them (EULA)
Just a sidenote, but EULAs aren't contracts. EULAs have unclear status - if the EULA is found to be unenforcable (as they have been in multiple cases), the software is limited to the protection offered by copyright law.
Note that you are correct that they can void your warranty.
They do not purposefully add code to their operating system which is specifically designed to take control away from you.
Not the case at all. OS X for Intel has substantial and increasing hardware-lockouts, ensuring that you can only run the software on Apple-approved hardware. How does that not take control away from the user?
You are free, by law, to take your copy of OS X and attempt to install it on your toaster if you like (iToaster?)
Yes, you are. The problem is that Apple doesn't seem to think so - and they have threatened legal action against websites that so much as link to information on how to circumvent the hardware lockout.
The other thing I notice is that Apple doesn't really care WHAT you do with the products you buy from them, as long as you don't violate copyright law.
Not the case either. Apple has clearly stated that they do care what you do with their products, and they have threatened legal action against a number of parties who have attempted to circumvent their hardware locks.
Previously, my plan was to buy a copy of Mac OS X for Intel when it becomes available at retail. I already have a nice notebook, don't have $2000 for a MacBook, and want to be able to run Windows on my system as well. I wasn't expecting Apple to make it easy and wasn't expecting any support at all. Now, however, with the actions that Apple has been taking, I don't think that I can buy any Apple products at all.
At least Windows Vista will run on my hardware.
Re:GNOME's audio backend GStreamer to use DRM
on
A Look at GNOME 2.14
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Fluendo, the company that controls GStreamer, wants to link their DRM plugins to LGPL code
Yeah, screw them for adding value to GStreamer while leaving the core framework open! How dare they write licensed plugins for MP3 and other formats.
who don't realize that by writing LGPL multimedia code, they might as well be working for the RIAA and MPAA
Yeah, screw those developers for wanting to write a media framework that is open enough to allow closed-source plugins.
Too bad the makes of GTK and GNOME didn't listen. But thank God the makers of Qt and KDE did!
Yeah, thank god that you can't develop a closed-source Qt app without paying Trolltech. We wouldn't want to encourage people to write commercial applications that interoperate wiht the rest of the desktop!
You critisize Microsoft from using proprietary formats to deter interoperability, but when an open-source project makes the decision to allow compatibility with closed-source applications, you jump all over them! VMWare wouldn't use GTK+ if it were GPL, and neither would many of the other commercial Linux apps - we'd be exactly where we were 10 years ago, with every application using its own UI.
They placed a huge hunk of copper with a large noisy fan on that chip. That doesn't make for a Silent PC. The Zalman ZM-7000AlCu, which they used, has a lot of surface area and, perhaps more importantly, a mounting system that is unlikely to crack the die on the Turion. Without an IHS (lid), it's unfortunately all too easy if you have a poorly designed heatsink.
I run a desktop Athlon 64 with the fan on my ZM-7000AlCu off.
I'm a university student and no professor, TA, or student could get by on campus without email. There is too much information that needs to be distributed to too many people - when a lecture is canceled, we get an email. When we have a balance that needs to be paid, we get an email. When the TA needs to tell us what we need to do before the lab next week, we get an email.
There are other ways to distribute notifications and information, but email has proven itself to be extremely useful over the years.
Practically every senator and representitive has a BlackBerry, Treo, or some other mobile email device. To hear that the Secretary of Defense doesn't even use email is shocking.
computer illiterate
In a business environment, a person who did not use email would be considered exactly that. "I don't like email" isn't an excuse that you can tell your boss - in practically every white-collar job, email is a necessity - it is an essential skill that you cannot function without.
Indeed, the S12 series generally runs around 18-22 dBA/1m (often below the background noise level, let alone any of the other fans in the system).
The S12 is also very efficent (78-82%), runs cool (particularly compared to fanless units), has good voltage stability, active PFC, automatically adapts to 100-240V and 50/60Hz, and has all of the expected safety certifications.
Basically, the problem with fanless PSUs is that they often become unacceptably hot during high-load conditions. Moreover, they often increase the case temperature and can actually increase the noise of a system (by requiring faster case or CPU fans).
Save yourself the $100 and get an S12-330 (or an S12-430 if you need more power).
Awesome! Then, I guess you'd have no concerns with me completely ignoring the GPL as I see fit if I have no intention of ever using OSS "support?"
The GPL clearly states that it is not a contract; indeed, you can violate the GPL all you want so long as you do not copy or distribute the program or works based on it.
EULAs have been found to be unenforcable many times; indeed, the hardware provision in Apple's EULA is actually illegal in certain jurisdictions.
Lexmark attempted a similar trick to prevent 3rd-party toner cartridges from working with their printers; it was hacked, Lexmark sued, and they lost.
Unless I sign a contract with Apple, their rights are limited to copyright alone. If I obtained the copy legally, and am not copying or distributing the work, then only the DMCA can limit what I can do with the software.
I don't really like either console. The 360 seems to rely heavily on you having a passport account and paying Microsoft a monthly fee for the privilige of owning the box.
I'd be willing to bet that most 360s aren't even connected to a network. The 360 works fine without Live - stop spreading FUD.
I think Nintendo's already won this round before they're even out the door.
I find that comment somewhat perplexing. Nintendo has stated that they do not see the Revolution as direct competition to the PS3 or 360. They haven't announced specs, games, pricing, or even a launch date.
How can you say that they've "won this round"? Remember: - The Gamecube was $100 cheaper than the PS2 or XBOX on launch - The 'Cube had a lot of excellent games including plenty of Nintendo exclusives - The 'Cube also didn't focus on "raw power", nor were there significant supply problems
By the time that either the Revolution or the PS3 launches, there will be plenty of 360 stock, a nice lineup of games, and better quality control. Remember, neither the PS3 nor the Revolution are due to launch for at least 4-6 months, and that's a minimum.
Will the Revolution make money for Nintendo? Almost certainly. Nintendo understands how to target their demographic groups and make a profit. They also know that it's better not to fight Sony or Microsoft head-on (as they learned with the 'Cube).
Additionally, it's the only console that's made any sort of substantial innovation other than "marginally better graphics" this time around. - Built in wireless controllers that can power on/off the system - Network & local (USB/iPod) media playback, even during games - Online gameplay with voice chat (built into controller), friends list, friend status (what game are they playing?), etc. built into the system - Downloadable demos & movies - Micropayment system for independent games - Online objective & scoring system, even for single-player games - Customizable UI - HD and 5.1 audio in every game
On the 360, I can play tunes from my iPod Shuffle while playing Call of Duty 2. I can download Geometry Wars for $5. I can tell who is online and what game they are playing. I can stream music, TV, and videos from my PC. I can pull up the system menu while I am playing a game, boot the system from the controller, and use my headset wirelessly.
You can say what you want about the 360, but it offers a lot more than just "marginally better graphics".
Exellent comment - your example helps illustrate the necessity of law.
Basically, I believe that the problem with the "content producer should have final say" theory is that it fundamentally infringes upon my rights. It's one thing to have a contract that I accept with (in theory) full knowledge of how it limits my rights. It's an entirely different thing to limit my rights based on a sale that was made on the premise that it did not affect my rights at all.
If Apple wants to ensure that OS X is only used in the way that they want it to be, then they need to have individuals agree to their conditions before the sale is made. Otherwise, Apple is limited to the protection offered by the law - copyright.
Note that the GPL is fully aware of this - it explicitly states that it is not a contract and that you are not compelled to follow any of its terms. You are, however, bound by copyright law, and the only thing that gives you the right to distribute the software is the GPL (or whatever other terms the copyright holder has specified). Excluding certain provisions of the DMCA, copyright applies to the right to distribute a work alone - you are well within your rights, for example, to take a GPL application, modify it, and keep your changes secret - so long as you do not copy or distribute the application or any derivitive work based on it.
Well written laws are precise, consistent, and fair. Morality seldom is.
You clearly believe in a definition of copyright that goes far beyond what even the (rather broad) US copyright statutes cover. That's your right, but I think that you will find that your view is far out of the mainstream.
Your argument, again, is premised on the belief that the creator of a work has the right to determine how that work is used. From an ethical standpoint, that is extremely dangerous.
Again, why should the creator of a CD have the moral right to determine how I listen to that CD? Despite what the RIAA would have us believe, we have - and should have - the right to rip, back up, sell, trade, or lend our CDs.
When I purchase a book or a painting, I have the right to do whatever I want to it - I can rip out half the pages or black out half the words. So long as I obtained that copy legally, there is neither a moral nor a legal issue.
The next time I buy a car, should the previous owner get to dictate how I drive it? How I maintain it? When I buy a house, should the previous owner be able to dictate how I decorate it?
If the RIAA decides that it will only sell you a CD under the condition that you don't rip it, then you are definitely morally wrong if you do so. If you don't like it, don't buy the damn CD.
If the RIAA establishes that condition in a contract, then, yes, you are in the wrong. I certainly hope that you have never ripped a CD, because the RIAA has stated many times that they consider CD ripping to be unauthorized use of the CD.
And what happens when the RIAA says you can't resell or lend the CD? What then? Are you in the "wrong" simply because you excersized your rights over the property that you purchased?
What about if GM will only sell you a vehicle on the condition that you never buy any other brand again? A requirement not stated in a contract, mind you, but only in an agreement that you have never signed and only shown after you purchase the vehicle.
By viewing this comment, in fact, you agree to give me $1,000,000. Really. Think it's stupid? So do I! But by your standards, you just committed a sin! Don't like my terms? You didn't have to read my comment!
Thankfully, we live in a world where people can't just spell out arbitrary conditions after a transaction. I don't know where you got the idea that a copyright holder has some kind of a moral right to apply conditions to the use of their work, but it certainly wasn't from any kind of law or morality that I've ever seen.
I don't understand why you think you have the right to do what you want with Mac OS X, just because you're not happy with the conditions that Apple sells it under.
They wrote OS X. They get to decide how to sell it. If you don't like the conditions, don't buy it.
Unfortunately for you, that's not the case. Copyright law has a number of limitations, and in many jurisdictions (such as the EU and potentially even the US - see the Lexmark toner suit) clauses limiting which hardware a product can be used with are unlawful.
All of this, of course, is assuming that the EULA is actually a legally binding agreement, which is also unclear.
If Microsoft put a clause in the Office EULA that you couldn't run it on WINE, everyone would be up in arms. This is no different.
Now, as for distributing OS X illegally, that's a pretty clear cut case of copyright infringement.
Funny how Slashdot talks big about how the TPM is "evil" and circumventing it is morally just, yet when Apple goes and uses the TPM to tie their OS to particular hardware, Slashdot jumps to Apple's defense.
It was Apple that brought DRM to the masses with iTunes, and they are the first to create a TPM-encumbered OS. Even Windows Vista will run on systems without a TPM.
It is immoral to say "I don't like the conditions they're selling it under, so I'm going to violate them." How can you not respect the fact that they, as authors of the software, have the right to sell it under the terms they prefer?
That's quite frankly crap. Should we not be able to rip CDs because "the RIAA gets to set the conditions"? What about letting a friend borrow a DVD? I'm sure that the MPAA doesn't like that. What about running Word on WINE? What about using refilled toner cartridges?
If the company releasing software wants you to agree to certain terms, they need to have you sign a contract - in most cases, EULAs were found to be unenforcable.
Your argument is based on the theory that someone selling a product has a right to determine how that product is used. Without a contract, that right does not exist.
And because we are lazy, we keep the chargers plugged in, all year long. Switched-Mode power supplies draw very little current when no load is connected, generally well less than 100mW. Older linear supplies are worse.
Why are there no chargers that we can keep plugged in, with true mechanical ON/OFF switches? Because few people are insane enough to worry about a few mWh, and those who are will unplug the chargers anyway.
Then came Stand-by mode. OFF suddenly meant: a little bit ON. Goodbye to the big fat Power switch. Enter the apparatus that consumes power all day long. Standby is convenient, and a well-designed device consumes extremely little power while in standby.
The fact is, you will almost certainly save more power by replacing one bulb with a compact-flourescent lamp than you will by disconnecting all of your "leech" electronics from the wall. The 50W of difference between an incondescent bulb and a CFL will eat up any power savings you might get from disabling leeches in under an hour.
Slashdot Mirror
Try doing some real research. It's not uncommon for me to have several Firefox sessions with 10+ tabs in each session. Not to mention having PuTTY up and listening to MP3s. On top of that, I'm running Word to type up my report. You could do the same; have fun watching your disk thrash as your pagefile fills up.
Actually, PuTTY and most MP3 players don't use a whole ton of memory. Nor does Word. Firefox has been known to leak memory, but generally it's not too bad.
512M is plenty to do what you're talking about. Your memory needs are a ctually quite low - compared to, for example, mine - I like to do all that while playing World of Warcraft (which has no problem stealing 600M of memory) and recording two channels of TV (albeit with hardware encoding). And, of course, there are plenty of tasks that make mine look small - even low-end servers are now often equipped with as much as 16GB of memory.
Try ripping some CDs to MP3 or OGG on there. It'll take you at least twice as long to rip 20 CDs as someone with a better computer.
Actually, for me, the speed of the drive has been a limiting factor for some time - CDs can only be spun so fast, and most CD drives never approach their claimed read speed. I have an Athlon 64 3000+, FYI.
My home PC records TV for me, outputs recorded video to the entertainment center, has 3 users (with fast user switching) running multiple programs, rips DVDs and MP3s, plays games, and much more
Shocker. My PC records over 150GB of TV per week, displays recorded TV on my TV, streams it to my notebook over a VPN, streams it to an XBOX 360, runs BitTorrent, rips DVDs and CDs, and is often running WoW, Maple, and plenty of other software.
I didn't need a fancy dual-core CPU or high-end GPU to do this - the system has a GeForce 6200 AGP.
If it's my server, I don't bother with the stupid serial cable - no serious server today ships without some kind of lights-out management. Most even support SSH, remote display, and media emulation for doing recovery/installs remotely.
You might not use those "useless features" on your phones, but we most certainly do. Entire message boards exist solely to compare the picture quality and associated features of the various camera phones, which is a serious deciding factor for some people when buying a new phone...
Oh, really? You have message boards for cellular phones! Wow! It's not like HowardForums has 6.54 million posts or anything.
Also, the statistics are wrong. CITA claims that 7.3 billion messages were sent in the US in October 2005, about 235 million per day or 1/2 as much per capita as the UK.
Ummm, according to CTIA, more than 7 billion texts are sent per month in the US (approx 235 million per month):
t ober_05.pdf
http://files.ctia.org/pdf/Wireless_Quick_Facts_Oc
That's odd... Texting has been practical in the UK much longer than in the US, where for the longest time it simply wasn't possible to send text between networks. There's so much more support for text in the UK and one sees so much more online evidence of a text 'culture' there that it seems unlikely that its per-capita text message use would be higher
Yeah, that's why the (albeit confusing) statistics show that US users send far fewer texts than UK users.
As for your comment about the lack of carrier interoperability, I have had no problems sending texts to any network for some time now - even back in 1997 I recall sending texts from a GSM phone (Voicestream) to a D-AMPS phone (AT&T Wireless) and to CDMA2000 phones (Verizon and Sprint).
I never saw the point of SMS - most of my friends stay signed in to AIM all the time, and sending an IM is easier and costs less, particularly if you have a GPRS IM client like I do.
It's not unreasonable at all. MySQL is licensed similarly, as are many other successful open-source projects. Dual-licensing is certainly one way to make money while keeping your product Free Software.
If, however, you want to allow commercial plug-ins and applications to be linked against your source, there's the LGPL. The grandparent poster seemed to believe that this was some kind of a "scheme" by an evil corporation - nothing could be further from the truth.
I must laugh in your general direction - you didn't understand what I said at all.
Of course there are commercial Qt applications - they all paid Trolltech's licensing fees.
And nowhere did I say that Qt was closed-source. It is GPL.
So, you're a commerical developer who wants to develop a closed-source application for Linux. Do you:
- Use GTK+ and pay no licensing fees while retaining control of your source code
- Use Qt and pay a pretty hefty fee to Trolltech ($1990 per developer for the "light" edition)
Qt is an excellent product and Trolltech has a right to license it any way they want. But when other developers want to be more open in their licensing, you shouldn't condemn them for doing so.
Interestingly enough, MSN search validates as XHTML 1.0 strict, MSN.com has only 2 errors (also XHTML 1.0 strict), and microsoft.com validates as HTML 4 transitional.
Having actually met (and chatted with) Woz a few months back, just after the Intel transition was announced, I got the impression that he was cautiously optimistic. He understood the problems with the G4 and the G5, but he was concerned about Macs becoming too "PC-like" - what differentiates Macs from PCs now? He also knew about the fact that hackers had gotten OS X (the development release at the time) to run on common PCs, but he didn't seem to be nearly as concerned about it as Apple seems to be now (not surprising considering his legacy).
Interestingly, Woz denied having anything to do with ADB (although he is frequently cited as the inventor), he carries a RAZR (despite his association with Danger, the company that produces the Sidekick) and a Bluetooth headset.
I happened to have a Sony MagicLink with me, and Woz indicated that he hadn't seen someone actually using one in years.
I heard that there's this giant bright thing that shows up during the day and blasts out all kinds of electromagnetic radiation - at such intense levels that even short-term exposure can cause serious burns and even significantly increase your risk of skin cancer!
But, I'm sure the 100mW put out by 802.11b chipsets is much more dangerous than that. And certainly much more dangerous than the ~600mW-1.6W put out by the portable digital radio transcievers that 1/3 of all the people on the planet now own/wear.
Um, a typical player will reach the level cap in WOW within 10-15 days of playtime. At 24 hours a week, that's only 2-4 months. Of course, there's a lot of endgame content, but even the hardcore gamers will eventually plateau.
Really, it's a matter of perspective. If your'e the kind of person who can't stand being "second best", than a game that so distinctly differentiates bettwen those who invest a lot of time and those who invest a little is certainly not for you.
I've learned that the best students at my university aren't the smartest students - they are the students who work the hardest. There are so many bright students who refuse to study and so many average students who excel because they are willing to invest the time to practice and study the material.
Oh, and as a sidenote, WOW is as much about playing smart as it is about playing a lot. Having a guild that is smart (and not filled with assholes), knowing how much honor to get per week and the easiest way to get it, knowing what mob(s) drop the best items, etc. It took me less time to get from 40-60 than it did to get from 20-40, precisely because I got better at playing and made better use of my time.
Finally, I'd like to remind everyone of one thing: it's just a game. Letting WOW become intertwined with your life is unhealthy. I play 10-15 hours per week, mostly on the weekends, because there are more important things to me than WOW. If you're avoiding social contact, damaging your performance at school or work, or (worst of all) are screwing up your sleep schedule, you are playing far too much and it's time to realize what your priorities really are.
if you don't abide by the contract you have with them (EULA)
Just a sidenote, but EULAs aren't contracts. EULAs have unclear status - if the EULA is found to be unenforcable (as they have been in multiple cases), the software is limited to the protection offered by copyright law.
Note that you are correct that they can void your warranty.
They do not purposefully add code to their operating system which is specifically designed to take control away from you.
Not the case at all. OS X for Intel has substantial and increasing hardware-lockouts, ensuring that you can only run the software on Apple-approved hardware. How does that not take control away from the user?
You are free, by law, to take your copy of OS X and attempt to install it on your toaster if you like (iToaster?)
Yes, you are. The problem is that Apple doesn't seem to think so - and they have threatened legal action against websites that so much as link to information on how to circumvent the hardware lockout.
The other thing I notice is that Apple doesn't really care WHAT you do with the products you buy from them, as long as you don't violate copyright law.
Not the case either. Apple has clearly stated that they do care what you do with their products, and they have threatened legal action against a number of parties who have attempted to circumvent their hardware locks.
Previously, my plan was to buy a copy of Mac OS X for Intel when it becomes available at retail. I already have a nice notebook, don't have $2000 for a MacBook, and want to be able to run Windows on my system as well. I wasn't expecting Apple to make it easy and wasn't expecting any support at all. Now, however, with the actions that Apple has been taking, I don't think that I can buy any Apple products at all.
At least Windows Vista will run on my hardware.
Fluendo, the company that controls GStreamer, wants to link their DRM plugins to LGPL code
Yeah, screw them for adding value to GStreamer while leaving the core framework open! How dare they write licensed plugins for MP3 and other formats.
who don't realize that by writing LGPL multimedia code, they might as well be working for the RIAA and MPAA
Yeah, screw those developers for wanting to write a media framework that is open enough to allow closed-source plugins.
Too bad the makes of GTK and GNOME didn't listen. But thank God the makers of Qt and KDE did!
Yeah, thank god that you can't develop a closed-source Qt app without paying Trolltech. We wouldn't want to encourage people to write commercial applications that interoperate wiht the rest of the desktop!
You critisize Microsoft from using proprietary formats to deter interoperability, but when an open-source project makes the decision to allow compatibility with closed-source applications, you jump all over them! VMWare wouldn't use GTK+ if it were GPL, and neither would many of the other commercial Linux apps - we'd be exactly where we were 10 years ago, with every application using its own UI.
They placed a huge hunk of copper with a large noisy fan on that chip. That doesn't make for a Silent PC.
The Zalman ZM-7000AlCu, which they used, has a lot of surface area and, perhaps more importantly, a mounting system that is unlikely to crack the die on the Turion. Without an IHS (lid), it's unfortunately all too easy if you have a poorly designed heatsink.
I run a desktop Athlon 64 with the fan on my ZM-7000AlCu off.
I'm a university student and no professor, TA, or student could get by on campus without email. There is too much information that needs to be distributed to too many people - when a lecture is canceled, we get an email. When we have a balance that needs to be paid, we get an email. When the TA needs to tell us what we need to do before the lab next week, we get an email.
There are other ways to distribute notifications and information, but email has proven itself to be extremely useful over the years.
Practically every senator and representitive has a BlackBerry, Treo, or some other mobile email device. To hear that the Secretary of Defense doesn't even use email is shocking.
computer illiterate
In a business environment, a person who did not use email would be considered exactly that. "I don't like email" isn't an excuse that you can tell your boss - in practically every white-collar job, email is a necessity - it is an essential skill that you cannot function without.
Indeed, the S12 series generally runs around 18-22 dBA/1m (often below the background noise level, let alone any of the other fans in the system).
The S12 is also very efficent (78-82%), runs cool (particularly compared to fanless units), has good voltage stability, active PFC, automatically adapts to 100-240V and 50/60Hz, and has all of the expected safety certifications.
Basically, the problem with fanless PSUs is that they often become unacceptably hot during high-load conditions. Moreover, they often increase the case temperature and can actually increase the noise of a system (by requiring faster case or CPU fans).
Save yourself the $100 and get an S12-330 (or an S12-430 if you need more power).
Awesome! Then, I guess you'd have no concerns with me completely ignoring the GPL as I see fit if I have no intention of ever using OSS "support?"
The GPL clearly states that it is not a contract; indeed, you can violate the GPL all you want so long as you do not copy or distribute the program or works based on it.
EULAs have been found to be unenforcable many times; indeed, the hardware provision in Apple's EULA is actually illegal in certain jurisdictions.
Lexmark attempted a similar trick to prevent 3rd-party toner cartridges from working with their printers; it was hacked, Lexmark sued, and they lost.
Unless I sign a contract with Apple, their rights are limited to copyright alone. If I obtained the copy legally, and am not copying or distributing the work, then only the DMCA can limit what I can do with the software.
Worse news, buster - EULAs have generally been found to be unenforcable.
In 2004, the US government launched Alhurra, a 24-hour propaganda news network that was created to counter Aljazeera.
Maybe Rumsfeld didn't get the memo, but that's not surprising considering that he doesn't even use e-mail.
I don't really like either console. The 360 seems to rely heavily on you having a passport account and paying Microsoft a monthly fee for the privilige of owning the box.
I'd be willing to bet that most 360s aren't even connected to a network. The 360 works fine without Live - stop spreading FUD.
I think Nintendo's already won this round before they're even out the door.
I find that comment somewhat perplexing. Nintendo has stated that they do not see the Revolution as direct competition to the PS3 or 360. They haven't announced specs, games, pricing, or even a launch date.
How can you say that they've "won this round"? Remember:
- The Gamecube was $100 cheaper than the PS2 or XBOX on launch
- The 'Cube had a lot of excellent games including plenty of Nintendo exclusives
- The 'Cube also didn't focus on "raw power", nor were there significant supply problems
By the time that either the Revolution or the PS3 launches, there will be plenty of 360 stock, a nice lineup of games, and better quality control. Remember, neither the PS3 nor the Revolution are due to launch for at least 4-6 months, and that's a minimum.
Will the Revolution make money for Nintendo? Almost certainly. Nintendo understands how to target their demographic groups and make a profit. They also know that it's better not to fight Sony or Microsoft head-on (as they learned with the 'Cube).
Additionally, it's the only console that's made any sort of substantial innovation other than "marginally better graphics" this time around.
- Built in wireless controllers that can power on/off the system
- Network & local (USB/iPod) media playback, even during games
- Online gameplay with voice chat (built into controller), friends list, friend status (what game are they playing?), etc. built into the system
- Downloadable demos & movies
- Micropayment system for independent games
- Online objective & scoring system, even for single-player games
- Customizable UI
- HD and 5.1 audio in every game
On the 360, I can play tunes from my iPod Shuffle while playing Call of Duty 2. I can download Geometry Wars for $5. I can tell who is online and what game they are playing. I can stream music, TV, and videos from my PC. I can pull up the system menu while I am playing a game, boot the system from the controller, and use my headset wirelessly.
You can say what you want about the 360, but it offers a lot more than just "marginally better graphics".
Exellent comment - your example helps illustrate the necessity of law.
Basically, I believe that the problem with the "content producer should have final say" theory is that it fundamentally infringes upon my rights. It's one thing to have a contract that I accept with (in theory) full knowledge of how it limits my rights. It's an entirely different thing to limit my rights based on a sale that was made on the premise that it did not affect my rights at all.
If Apple wants to ensure that OS X is only used in the way that they want it to be, then they need to have individuals agree to their conditions before the sale is made. Otherwise, Apple is limited to the protection offered by the law - copyright.
Note that the GPL is fully aware of this - it explicitly states that it is not a contract and that you are not compelled to follow any of its terms. You are, however, bound by copyright law, and the only thing that gives you the right to distribute the software is the GPL (or whatever other terms the copyright holder has specified). Excluding certain provisions of the DMCA, copyright applies to the right to distribute a work alone - you are well within your rights, for example, to take a GPL application, modify it, and keep your changes secret - so long as you do not copy or distribute the application or any derivitive work based on it.
Well written laws are precise, consistent, and fair. Morality seldom is.
You clearly believe in a definition of copyright that goes far beyond what even the (rather broad) US copyright statutes cover. That's your right, but I think that you will find that your view is far out of the mainstream.
Your argument, again, is premised on the belief that the creator of a work has the right to determine how that work is used. From an ethical standpoint, that is extremely dangerous.
Again, why should the creator of a CD have the moral right to determine how I listen to that CD? Despite what the RIAA would have us believe, we have - and should have - the right to rip, back up, sell, trade, or lend our CDs.
When I purchase a book or a painting, I have the right to do whatever I want to it - I can rip out half the pages or black out half the words. So long as I obtained that copy legally, there is neither a moral nor a legal issue.
The next time I buy a car, should the previous owner get to dictate how I drive it? How I maintain it? When I buy a house, should the previous owner be able to dictate how I decorate it?
If the RIAA decides that it will only sell you a CD under the condition that you don't rip it, then you are definitely morally wrong if you do so. If you don't like it, don't buy the damn CD.
If the RIAA establishes that condition in a contract, then, yes, you are in the wrong. I certainly hope that you have never ripped a CD, because the RIAA has stated many times that they consider CD ripping to be unauthorized use of the CD.
And what happens when the RIAA says you can't resell or lend the CD? What then? Are you in the "wrong" simply because you excersized your rights over the property that you purchased?
What about if GM will only sell you a vehicle on the condition that you never buy any other brand again? A requirement not stated in a contract, mind you, but only in an agreement that you have never signed and only shown after you purchase the vehicle.
By viewing this comment, in fact, you agree to give me $1,000,000. Really. Think it's stupid? So do I! But by your standards, you just committed a sin! Don't like my terms? You didn't have to read my comment!
Thankfully, we live in a world where people can't just spell out arbitrary conditions after a transaction. I don't know where you got the idea that a copyright holder has some kind of a moral right to apply conditions to the use of their work, but it certainly wasn't from any kind of law or morality that I've ever seen.
I don't understand why you think you have the right to do what you want with Mac OS X, just because you're not happy with the conditions that Apple sells it under.
They wrote OS X. They get to decide how to sell it. If you don't like the conditions, don't buy it.
Unfortunately for you, that's not the case. Copyright law has a number of limitations, and in many jurisdictions (such as the EU and potentially even the US - see the Lexmark toner suit) clauses limiting which hardware a product can be used with are unlawful.
All of this, of course, is assuming that the EULA is actually a legally binding agreement, which is also unclear.
If Microsoft put a clause in the Office EULA that you couldn't run it on WINE, everyone would be up in arms. This is no different.
Now, as for distributing OS X illegally, that's a pretty clear cut case of copyright infringement.
Funny how Slashdot talks big about how the TPM is "evil" and circumventing it is morally just, yet when Apple goes and uses the TPM to tie their OS to particular hardware, Slashdot jumps to Apple's defense.
It was Apple that brought DRM to the masses with iTunes, and they are the first to create a TPM-encumbered OS. Even Windows Vista will run on systems without a TPM.
It is immoral to say "I don't like the conditions they're selling it under, so I'm going to violate them." How can you not respect the fact that they, as authors of the software, have the right to sell it under the terms they prefer?
That's quite frankly crap. Should we not be able to rip CDs because "the RIAA gets to set the conditions"? What about letting a friend borrow a DVD? I'm sure that the MPAA doesn't like that. What about running Word on WINE? What about using refilled toner cartridges?
If the company releasing software wants you to agree to certain terms, they need to have you sign a contract - in most cases, EULAs were found to be unenforcable.
Your argument is based on the theory that someone selling a product has a right to determine how that product is used. Without a contract, that right does not exist.
And because we are lazy, we keep the chargers plugged in, all year long.
Switched-Mode power supplies draw very little current when no load is connected, generally well less than 100mW. Older linear supplies are worse.
Why are there no chargers that we can keep plugged in, with true mechanical ON/OFF switches?
Because few people are insane enough to worry about a few mWh, and those who are will unplug the chargers anyway.
Then came Stand-by mode. OFF suddenly meant: a little bit ON.
Goodbye to the big fat Power switch. Enter the apparatus that consumes power all day long.
Standby is convenient, and a well-designed device consumes extremely little power while in standby.
The fact is, you will almost certainly save more power by replacing one bulb with a compact-flourescent lamp than you will by disconnecting all of your "leech" electronics from the wall. The 50W of difference between an incondescent bulb and a CFL will eat up any power savings you might get from disabling leeches in under an hour.