Re:I don't understand you people.
on
Real DRM
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I have a Constitution-given right to make as many "fair-use" copies as I please...
Wow, with this stunning baldfaced statement of complete non-fact, you've ended any real conversation. You're simply wrong. You have no such right. End of story.
I'm sure people pointed this out already, Corky, but why would you put your site on a semi-public network in this case? Block it with access control, or make it an Intranet site.
It's asinine.
I don't understand you people.
on
Real DRM
·
· Score: 1
Do you people think DRM is inherently a bad thing - artists and companies can't manage how their property is used?? You seem to automatically knock any type of DRM.
You all just like your free stuff, huh? Microsoft can't sell their own software the way they like, but you all can copy your porn and MP3's with impunity. What hypocrits.
And no, Virginia, you don't have a God-given right to "fair-use" as defined "anything I want to do", though DRM isn't mutually exclusive with the concept. DRM schemes that would allow a single backup are possible (e.g. a counter that says how removed this copy of something is from the parent copy, and when it hits 0 you can't copy).
Oh come on, quit your sophistry. This has nothing to do with MS's monopoly. This is a separate product available only to OEM manufacturers for a very specific purpose. This isn't destined for every desktop, at least not yet.
It's impossible to eliminate the "what-about-before-the-big-bang" question in the same way it's unknowable whether there is a God or not (unless there is one and it decides to make itself known).
Hawking and some other physicists (or perhaps the people who interpret their work) try to think too big. At some point they become no better than religious profits masquerading in a cloak of mathematics. You can't define where "time" began, and you can't define the complete, true "universe" because there's always the possibility there is more out there.
1. Time did not start with the big bang. Its inhenerently unprovable to know when "time" began. The concept of time 'beginning' is asinine new-age physics crap.
2. The "Universe" is similarly unknowable. The idea of saying that the area of space/matter we can see or even extrapolate is the entirety of all things existing is ludcrious.
I hate it when new-age physicists bandy about terms like "Universe" as if such a concept is knowable. What if there is more matter 10e1000000000 AU's away? We'd never ever know it.
These are actually real things, not a conglomeration of imaginations by science fiction should-be's.
I just heard somebody on NPR taking a look back, and she sounded more like a science fiction author than a scientist. Extra dimensional this, multiple universe that, wormhole here, yadda yadda yadda. It's nice to see that the theoretical "physicists" of the make-believe imagination type haven't completely taken over 20th/21st century phsyics.
Re:I'm sure you'll hear about this one..
on
SGI launches R16000
·
· Score: 1
We have a cheerleader! Wonderful - I assume you work in the scientific visualization field?
You seem to be confusing mainstream P4/PPC/even _Alpha_/Power4 chips with high end systems based on them.
Do you really think SGI's competition is Dell or Gateway? IBM, HP, and many other companies sell very high end systems, and there are supercomputer class systems based on all of the above processors.
And how many single-quad processor systems does SGI sell to suckers out there for 5 times the price of a better performing system just because people are so enamored of the SGI name? Lots. We're not always talking about the heavy iron, here.
The only thing your pathetic 500MHz alpha will be a 2GHz P4 in is running hand-compiled Alpha code. Even then, I wouldn't be so sure.
You are very stupid or very naive. What you claim simply isn't true.
I'm sure you'll hear about this one..
on
SGI launches R16000
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Uh oh, be prepared for people crawling out of the woodwork telling you MHz don't matter, it's the IO rate, it's the efficiency, etc...
Bullshit. This pathetic, 2-generation old CPU is SGI's excuse to charge you so much for their highly proprietary, extremely expensive _shit_. Talk about a monopoly, these assholes have every scientist out there mesmerized with their crap.
Why don't they just use PPC? Use a Power 4 chip? Hell, use a P4 or AMD? Because they want to charge the government $10 trillion billion dollars to do tasks that could be done more quickly on other platforms for a fraction of the price. And they've got cheerleaders in certain computing domains who _let_ them.
You mention the FOI law, but that has nothing to do with Microsoft. That's completely the responsibility of the college - if they don't like it or it's not legal they can't sign the contract. End of story.
Microsoft isn't doing anything wrong, and it sounds like the college isn't either. I've pulled more interesting, and bloody, things out of my nose.
Panty waist liberal my ass. I love guns. I'm planning to buy my second H&K USP 45 sometime soon (previous one was stolen by a dirtbag relative).
I just think it's idiocy to tempt a young child with a gun lying on your nightstand. Same with matches, the pool, the garage, etc... You don't have a pool fence, and you don't lock it? You let your 5 year old have access to chemicals in your kitchen?!
I just don't understand your point. You think it's OK to trust small children with dangerous things because there are all kinds of things that _could be_ dangerous?! It's utterly nonsensical.
Personally I'd keep loaded weapons away from any child I didn't know for a fact was trained to either keep away from or properly use a weapon. But if I knew a 5yo had the proper respect for what a gun can do, I'd not think twice about leaving a pistol on the nightstand.
You're a dangerous lunatic and I hope you don't have any kids. A 5 year old is unpredictable. Giving him access to your guns, no matter how responsible, trained, and mature he may be, is purest negligence.
You're about as smart as those people with pet tigers or bears. Oh, they trust the animal because it's usually quite nice, until it eats their neck out and plays with their head like a soccer ball.
Good Lord, _please_ don't go out saying this on Gun Advocacy forums - you'll single-handedly ruin the cause with your idiocy.
You don't get around much, do you? Worked for a few months at a small business managing their Netware machines before you got your big break as a manager at Bob's Big Gulp, did you?
The simple fact is you're fucked if you hire an asshole or an idiot (as this guy obviously was) as a sysadmin. Who do you think sets up these wonderful precautions you mention? And do you seriously think a large enviroment could be managed in such a way?
David Brin, professional ass.
on
David Brin On LOTR
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Did you read his sequel novel to Asimov's Foundation series? Benford and Bears' were great. They wrote somewhat "in the spirit" of Asimov.
Brins, on the other hand, is so crappy it's hard to find in stores. In his commentary he makes all these insipid, arrogant, and wrong comments about technical flaws in the stories which he then awkwardly tries to solve. What an arrogant knob.
Everything else I've read that he's written is just as idiotic and arrogant.
That is truly daft. You're pointing me to some data about the number of "Cumulative defacements"? You've got to be kidding.
Umm, let's see, I wonder what possible relevence that has when there's no normalization for the number of _available_ targets per OS, the types of targets, etc... In fact, you may as well have sent me a link to the average prices of tea in various regions of China.
Try looking up the data on the number of exploitable OS holes for Windows versus for other OS's. It's not like Windows has tons more holes.
What stunning ignorance. Linux has as many or more security holes than Windows. Unix as a 'whole' has had the most ridiculous security historically.
Or are you joking? Really - you do know that Unix security over the past 25 years has been pathetic, and the only reason we don't read about it more is because no one (relative the the millions running Windows) uses it?
Pfft. What days we live in. Back in my day, we called them "filthy retards" if they was lucky, now you got your scientific names for them and all.
"Waah, it's not my fault, I'm a paranoid schizophrenic!". Crybaby fakers. They belong in the straight jackets and dank windowless holes we used to throw them in, not these "treatment centers".
You think Alpha, PowerPC, MIPS, and StrongARM are better hardware than the P4? You're sadly mistaken. StrongArm, for cripes sake? It's perfect for embedded, but what are you smoking that you even include it in the list?
The P4 performs better than any of the chips you list - on what criteria do you judge the others better? Performance matters, abstract concepts of IPC or "cleaner architecture" are for the obscurists.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I have a Constitution-given right to make as many "fair-use" copies as I please...
Wow, with this stunning baldfaced statement of complete non-fact, you've ended any real conversation. You're simply wrong. You have no such right. End of story.
I'm sure people pointed this out already, Corky, but why would you put your site on a semi-public network in this case? Block it with access control, or make it an Intranet site.
It's asinine.
Do you people think DRM is inherently a bad thing - artists and companies can't manage how their property is used?? You seem to automatically knock any type of DRM.
You all just like your free stuff, huh? Microsoft can't sell their own software the way they like, but you all can copy your porn and MP3's with impunity. What hypocrits.
And no, Virginia, you don't have a God-given right to "fair-use" as defined "anything I want to do", though DRM isn't mutually exclusive with the concept. DRM schemes that would allow a single backup are possible (e.g. a counter that says how removed this copy of something is from the parent copy, and when it hits 0 you can't copy).
So quit your crybabying.
Oh come on, quit your sophistry. This has nothing to do with MS's monopoly. This is a separate product available only to OEM manufacturers for a very specific purpose. This isn't destined for every desktop, at least not yet.
Crybabies and sore losers to a one.
It's impossible to eliminate the "what-about-before-the-big-bang" question in the same way it's unknowable whether there is a God or not (unless there is one and it decides to make itself known).
Hawking and some other physicists (or perhaps the people who interpret their work) try to think too big. At some point they become no better than religious profits masquerading in a cloak of mathematics. You can't define where "time" began, and you can't define the complete, true "universe" because there's always the possibility there is more out there.
New age science-fiction mumbo jumbo.
1. Time did not start with the big bang. Its inhenerently unprovable to know when "time" began. The concept of time 'beginning' is asinine new-age physics crap.
2. The "Universe" is similarly unknowable. The idea of saying that the area of space/matter we can see or even extrapolate is the entirety of all things existing is ludcrious.
I hate it when new-age physicists bandy about terms like "Universe" as if such a concept is knowable. What if there is more matter 10e1000000000 AU's away? We'd never ever know it.
These are actually real things, not a conglomeration of imaginations by science fiction should-be's.
I just heard somebody on NPR taking a look back, and she sounded more like a science fiction author than a scientist. Extra dimensional this, multiple universe that, wormhole here, yadda yadda yadda. It's nice to see that the theoretical "physicists" of the make-believe imagination type haven't completely taken over 20th/21st century phsyics.
We have a cheerleader! Wonderful - I assume you work in the scientific visualization field?
You seem to be confusing mainstream P4/PPC/even _Alpha_/Power4 chips with high end systems based on them.
Do you really think SGI's competition is Dell or Gateway? IBM, HP, and many other companies sell very high end systems, and there are supercomputer class systems based on all of the above processors.
And how many single-quad processor systems does SGI sell to suckers out there for 5 times the price of a better performing system just because people are so enamored of the SGI name? Lots. We're not always talking about the heavy iron, here.
The only thing your pathetic 500MHz alpha will be a 2GHz P4 in is running hand-compiled Alpha code. Even then, I wouldn't be so sure.
You are very stupid or very naive. What you claim simply isn't true.
Uh oh, be prepared for people crawling out of the woodwork telling you MHz don't matter, it's the IO rate, it's the efficiency, etc...
Bullshit. This pathetic, 2-generation old CPU is SGI's excuse to charge you so much for their highly proprietary, extremely expensive _shit_. Talk about a monopoly, these assholes have every scientist out there mesmerized with their crap.
Why don't they just use PPC? Use a Power 4 chip? Hell, use a P4 or AMD? Because they want to charge the government $10 trillion billion dollars to do tasks that could be done more quickly on other platforms for a fraction of the price. And they've got cheerleaders in certain computing domains who _let_ them.
Fuck SGI, and the horse they ride in on.
You mention the FOI law, but that has nothing to do with Microsoft. That's completely the responsibility of the college - if they don't like it or it's not legal they can't sign the contract. End of story.
Microsoft isn't doing anything wrong, and it sounds like the college isn't either. I've pulled more interesting, and bloody, things out of my nose.
Panty waist liberal my ass. I love guns. I'm planning to buy my second H&K USP 45 sometime soon (previous one was stolen by a dirtbag relative).
I just think it's idiocy to tempt a young child with a gun lying on your nightstand. Same with matches, the pool, the garage, etc... You don't have a pool fence, and you don't lock it? You let your 5 year old have access to chemicals in your kitchen?!
I just don't understand your point. You think it's OK to trust small children with dangerous things because there are all kinds of things that _could be_ dangerous?! It's utterly nonsensical.
Personally I'd keep loaded weapons away from any child I didn't know for a fact was trained to either keep away from or properly use a weapon. But if I knew a 5yo had the proper respect for what a gun can do, I'd not think twice about leaving a pistol on the nightstand.
You're a dangerous lunatic and I hope you don't have any kids. A 5 year old is unpredictable. Giving him access to your guns, no matter how responsible, trained, and mature he may be, is purest negligence.
You're about as smart as those people with pet tigers or bears. Oh, they trust the animal because it's usually quite nice, until it eats their neck out and plays with their head like a soccer ball.
Good Lord, _please_ don't go out saying this on Gun Advocacy forums - you'll single-handedly ruin the cause with your idiocy.
How is the theory of relativity necessary for satellite operation? And I'm even more interested inthis massive effect from Quantum mechanics.
You seem to think that invention requires theory, it most certainly does not.
You think we wouldn't have had nuclear power without it? Umm, wrong?
Yeah, the theory of relativity has a lot of meaning to the world at large. That lead to the invention of the.. oh, wait. It didn't lead to jack shit.
Wow, you sure like to be wrong. "XML dialect", while vernacular, is certainly a reasonable thing to say in the general sense.
Who died and made you incorrect corrector of common terms of speach?
You don't get around much, do you? Worked for a few months at a small business managing their Netware machines before you got your big break as a manager at Bob's Big Gulp, did you?
The simple fact is you're fucked if you hire an asshole or an idiot (as this guy obviously was) as a sysadmin. Who do you think sets up these wonderful precautions you mention? And do you seriously think a large enviroment could be managed in such a way?
Did you read his sequel novel to Asimov's Foundation series? Benford and Bears' were great. They wrote somewhat "in the spirit" of Asimov.
Brins, on the other hand, is so crappy it's hard to find in stores. In his commentary he makes all these insipid, arrogant, and wrong comments about technical flaws in the stories which he then awkwardly tries to solve. What an arrogant knob.
Everything else I've read that he's written is just as idiotic and arrogant.
Good lord. This is very simple - why are people so daft.
Creating lift in a manned heavier than air vehicle without the aid of gravity: Flight. The Wright Brothers.
Using gravity to create lift and fly for XX meters had been done, and wasn't a first.
Rocket surgery to understand the distinction? I think not.
That is truly daft. You're pointing me to some data about the number of "Cumulative defacements"? You've got to be kidding.
Umm, let's see, I wonder what possible relevence that has when there's no normalization for the number of _available_ targets per OS, the types of targets, etc... In fact, you may as well have sent me a link to the average prices of tea in various regions of China.
Try looking up the data on the number of exploitable OS holes for Windows versus for other OS's. It's not like Windows has tons more holes.
What stunning ignorance. Linux has as many or more security holes than Windows. Unix as a 'whole' has had the most ridiculous security historically.
Or are you joking? Really - you do know that Unix security over the past 25 years has been pathetic, and the only reason we don't read about it more is because no one (relative the the millions running Windows) uses it?
who happens to be a paranoid schizophrenic
Pfft. What days we live in. Back in my day, we called them "filthy retards" if they was lucky, now you got your scientific names for them and all.
"Waah, it's not my fault, I'm a paranoid schizophrenic!". Crybaby fakers. They belong in the straight jackets and dank windowless holes we used to throw them in, not these "treatment centers".
You think Alpha, PowerPC, MIPS, and StrongARM are better hardware than the P4? You're sadly mistaken. StrongArm, for cripes sake? It's perfect for embedded, but what are you smoking that you even include it in the list?
The P4 performs better than any of the chips you list - on what criteria do you judge the others better? Performance matters, abstract concepts of IPC or "cleaner architecture" are for the obscurists.