Since the business practices are left "unspecified", Intel is certainly not admitting they were engaged in illegal business practices.
One has to wonder if this settlement isn't partly spurred on by the apparent chilly reception software patents received at the In re Bilski case the other day. I can't say I know a lot about either Intel or AMD's patent portfolios, but both companies make a substantial amount of software. If a large portion of both sides portfolios wind up being nullified, AMD's antitrust claim may be the only thing of significance left between the two cases.
Intel worries that they'll have little or no claim left against AMD, and AMD knows full well that you can't really predict how the Supreme Court will decide just because they had some hard, pointed questions for one side, so suddenly it seems like a great time to bury the hatchet.
I'm too lazy to go back and reread the entire Anandtech article, but if I remember correctly, it speculates on the amount of memory on Intel's controller and specifically states that Intel doesn't use the controller memory the way you describe, for the exact reason you state. Or perhaps it was the other article they did about the hiccuping drive from... was it OCZ? Either way, I feel pretty confident power loss won't cause data loss (at least not at the fault of the SSD controller)
Not quite. Hook your modem up to #2. How much data can you transfer? A max of 56kbps. You get unlimited connection time, but the amount of data is capped at 56kbps. The same logic applies to "unlimited broadband". You have unlimited connect time, but the amount of data you can send is capped, although this time not by the technical limitations of the line (although you may be capped there as well) but an arbitrary limit set by the ISP to ensure the *average* user has enough bandwidth but still make boatloads of cash.
This analogy is totally false. 56kbps is a *rate* not an amount. They are totally different things. Nobody is complaining about the rate. They are complaining about limits on the total amount of transferred data. It's completely an apples to oranges comparison you're making.
Actually its only 363 feet or so vertically - you should be safe in the capsule on the top of the damn thing without getting pulverized.
This is only because the shuttle's launch system sprays massive amounts of water a few feet above the launch pad to diffuse the sound reflected from the ground. Without this system, the sound waves reflecting up from the launch pad would destroy the shuttle.
Put the addresses those companies send from in your address book.
Mozilla automatically uses your "Personal Address Book" as a whitelist. If yours isn't set up that way, you can do so via "Junk Mail Controls" under the Tools menu.
This is exactly how the RIAA/MPAA are shooting themselves in the foot.
It won't take long before people want to watch a movie a second time and get denied and grow sick of it. Eventually they will just decide to start copying them instead of viewing them.
With each ratcheting up of digital restrictions, the RIAA and MPAA are placing successively larger groups of people in the camp against them. Eventually, it will be RIAA/MPAA against everyone, and that will spell big trouble unless they ease back DRM.
To paraphrase Princess Leia: "The more you tighten your grip, MPAA, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Carbon fiber rotors/pads used in F1 would not be good for street use. The operating temperatures they require would basically never be reached on the street because of low top speeds, comparitively infrequent braking, and low-g breaking, resulting very poor stopping power.
You obviously haven't renewed your CO license recently. I got mine renewed back in January, and you not only have to provide them the number, but you have to actually have your Social Security Card with you.
They claim it's to track down deadbeat dads, but I suspect that's just a BS line to make people sound unreasonable for not wanting to give out their SSN.
"What... you have something to hide?"
Well, yeah, maybe I do, and maybe it's none of your freakin' business either.
<i> It's obvious this was an attempt to generate revenue. If the actual goal of this stunt was to prevent speeding, the company should have just notified police of speeding infractions while they were happening.</i>
This is obviously the case. There are so many other ways they could deal with speeders:
1.) Notify the police, as stated above
2.) Refuse to rent to speeders in the future
3.) Ignore them. After all, what does speeding cost the rental company? Nothing! If the car gets damaged, then the renter has to pay for the damages. Speeding doesn't damage the car, so why charge for it? The answer, of course, is revenue.
The problem is they got greedy. If they'd made the "fine" something small enough, they could have collected tons of revenue. At $25 per offense, this guy would have been charged $75 instead of $450. I don't know about you, but for $75 I probably wouldn't care enough to fight it. I just wouldn't rent from them again. For $450, though, I'd probably be angry enough to fight it.
Until you realize that the US Government is a litigant in the case. The DOJ is the plaintiff in this case, and the DOJ is part of which branch?
<church lady>
Could it be EXECUTIVE?
</church lady>
Sure, "W" couldn't poke his nose into a case between IBM and Microsoft, but as the plaintiff, the government can decide to forego prosecution any time they want to. If not in fact, then in spirit for certain.
I assume that this won't happen in part because of the consolidation with the 29(?) States' cases, but as they say... I am not a lawyer, so I could be wrong on that count.
Yeah, this is a good idea... until you actually think about it.
According to your system the year would have only 100 days (10 days/mo * 10 mo/yr). That unfortunately is not anywhere close to reality.
A day is defined by the time it takes the earth to rotate on its axis, and a year is defined by the time it takes our earth to orbit the sun.
The two are interrelated in that the time for one orbit ~= time for 365 revolutions. i.e. 1 year = 365 days. There's nothing you can do about it.
You could go to a 10 month year, with each month having 36.5 days. (or 1/2 would have 36 days and 1/2 would have 37) But is that really gaining us anything?
To have a 100 day year as you propose, you would have to change the definition of "day" or "year", neither of which is appealing: Would yo prefer a "day" with 3.65 daylight/nighttime cycles, or having it take 3.65 "years" to complete the four seasons?
> Most Improved Open Source Project / Most Improved Kernel Module
> Have you benchmarked it? Done regression testing? Checked the source for comments? No? Then abstain, 'cos you don't know!
What is this nonsense? The concept that you have to be a programmer and look at source code, or run benchmarks to know how a module/project has improved is absurd!
What about driving a car? "This car rides better than a Yugo. It's faster too." What? did you run fifth wheel tests on it to time accelerations? Did you measure suspension travel, and spring rates? No of course not. But you can tell whether something is better by using it:
"Gee, before half my PCMCIA devices didn't work... now they all do"
"Last time I tried GNOME it was barely useable, but now it has every feature I expect of an advanced window manager."
I'd say those are improved....
And don't forget that what's better/worse is an individual opinion! Just because you have one standard of evaluating something as better/worse doesn't mean that others feel the same things are important.
What's even more likely, IMHO is that a drug will transform itself into something that has new side effects along with its new desired behaviors.
Very similar drugs (say, different by one atom) can have very different effects on the body. Just look at ephedrine vs. speed... they have similar effects, but definitely not the same effect.
Adaptable drugs sound cool, but we don't know what they'll adapt into. Perhaps harmful viruses themselves?
One area I could definitely see self adaptation used is in laboratory research to develop new, non adaptive drugs.
Either way, things like this are dangerous. Not that we should ignore their possibilities, just that we should tread carefully.
Re:And the answer... (and rest of the questions...
on
The Simpsons Turn 10
·
· Score: 1
I don't remember them all, but: 2.) A Donut ("Daddy's soul donut. Don't eat") 3.) Maggie Simpson. Though there was an alternate version filmed where Smithers did it. 4.) a toaster ("Marge, would you please pass me a donut?" "whats a donut?" "ahhh!" (Home leaves) "Oh, look kids, it's raining!") 5.) Because he was trying to grab the Gummi de Milo off her butt. 6.) He brought in a frog from the USA 7.) himself, I believe. 8.) Don't remember... 9.) Can't remember either... he had some funky eyes, though 10.) Chili spiced with the mexican insanity pepper.
I guess that's why so many Americans float to Cuba on homemade rafts...
Capitalism is not perfect. Not even close. But it's the closest thing we have to Darwin at a societal level.
Nobody denies that it's hard to transition to capitalism. But an analogy to your argument is: "Look how many people are injured learning how to ride a bike! We should stop bike riding at once."
Learning how to ride a bike is hard, but once you know how, you can't imagine not knowing how.
IMHO, Jurassic Park did one of the best jobs of portraying computers accurately. They didn't slap some rediculous looking GUI on a monitor. They showed things like lots of text-based consoles, and they even had it running on UNIX. "Newman" (I forget the actor's real name) even deleted the keystroke logs...
The only thing I didn't like was when the little brat says "This is a UNIX system... I know this" while using that goofy SGI visual file manager that I've never seen anyone actually use.
Re:About "tapping" the Internet...
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
Don't be ridiculous. The situation is not even close to that black and white. To stop all crime, you'd have to give up all personal freedom (including privacy). But some crime can be stopped by giving up some personal freedom (i.e. cameras in parking garages). The point is to strike a balance. When you feel the balance has shifted too far towards one extreme, push back. Hard. Damn right. But to say that we can only have one or the other is folly.
I Meta Moderated for the first time today, and I have to say the system is good. Though it was a very small sample, I have to say that it reaffirmed my belif that for the most part the comments that people moderate up are usually deserving.
The ones that really need to be examined are the ones that are moderated down. Basically, everyone who posts on/. should have an equal opportunity to be heard. As long as what they say is on topic, I have no problem with someone having a different opinion than mine.
It definately makes me suspicious when a comment has been moderated down though, as they're less commonl. If a comment is moderated down, and it is on topic, I'm extra suspicious. What offended the person who read it so much they wasted a prized moderation point downing someone else's thought? Were they really moderating rationally?
As for features, Rob: It would be nice to know what the values of the post were before and after moderation (or maybe just one with the delta). It would help to put moderations like "Overrated" in better perspective.
I really believe that Open Source software will empower more people to use the internet for communication and level the technological playing field for many people.
However, having said that, the acomplishments of Linus, Linux, RMS, GNU or any other Open Source phenomenon or personality pales in comparison to the incredible scientific acheivments by Einstein, or the amazing non-violent resistance movement headed by Gandhi. These are truly great people when measured by the yardstick of the average person. Especially Gandhi. This man, through total peacefull resistance, gained sovereignty for India from the British Empire. If you've never seen the movie, go see it. It's a great story, and shows the philosophy that Martin Luther King, Jr. adopted in the civil rights movement in the US. (how then King is listed above Gandhi is unknown to me..:) )
I'm a big Linux fan, but putting your life on the line for others, and creating software just aren't in the same boat, IMHO.
Slashdot Mirror
Since the business practices are left "unspecified", Intel is certainly not admitting they were engaged in illegal business practices.
One has to wonder if this settlement isn't partly spurred on by the apparent chilly reception software patents received at the In re Bilski case the other day. I can't say I know a lot about either Intel or AMD's patent portfolios, but both companies make a substantial amount of software. If a large portion of both sides portfolios wind up being nullified, AMD's antitrust claim may be the only thing of significance left between the two cases.
Intel worries that they'll have little or no claim left against AMD, and AMD knows full well that you can't really predict how the Supreme Court will decide just because they had some hard, pointed questions for one side, so suddenly it seems like a great time to bury the hatchet.
I'm too lazy to go back and reread the entire Anandtech article, but if I remember correctly, it speculates on the amount of memory on Intel's controller and specifically states that Intel doesn't use the controller memory the way you describe, for the exact reason you state. Or perhaps it was the other article they did about the hiccuping drive from... was it OCZ? Either way, I feel pretty confident power loss won't cause data loss (at least not at the fault of the SSD controller)
Not quite. Hook your modem up to #2. How much data can you transfer? A max of 56kbps. You get unlimited connection time, but the amount of data is capped at 56kbps. The same logic applies to "unlimited broadband". You have unlimited connect time, but the amount of data you can send is capped, although this time not by the technical limitations of the line (although you may be capped there as well) but an arbitrary limit set by the ISP to ensure the *average* user has enough bandwidth but still make boatloads of cash.
This analogy is totally false. 56kbps is a *rate* not an amount. They are totally different things. Nobody is complaining about the rate. They are complaining about limits on the total amount of transferred data. It's completely an apples to oranges comparison you're making.
Actually its only 363 feet or so vertically - you should be safe in the capsule on the top of the damn thing without getting pulverized.
This is only because the shuttle's launch system sprays massive amounts of water a few feet above the launch pad to diffuse the sound reflected from the ground. Without this system, the sound waves reflecting up from the launch pad would destroy the shuttle.
Here's a link with more info: Sound Suppression Water System
Put the addresses those companies send from in your address book.
Mozilla automatically uses your "Personal Address Book" as a whitelist. If yours isn't set up that way, you can do so via "Junk Mail Controls" under the Tools menu.
This is exactly how the RIAA/MPAA are shooting themselves in the foot.
It won't take long before people want to watch a movie a second time and get denied and grow sick of it. Eventually they will just decide to start copying them instead of viewing them.
With each ratcheting up of digital restrictions, the RIAA and MPAA are placing successively larger groups of people in the camp against them. Eventually, it will be RIAA/MPAA against everyone, and that will spell big trouble unless they ease back DRM.
To paraphrase Princess Leia: "The more you tighten your grip, MPAA, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Explain how transforming characters from a toy line for young girls into the stuff of male adolsecent fantasy istn't parody.
As far as I can tell, showing the characters as the exact opposite of everything they are marketed as is a pretty clearcut case of parody.
Carbon fiber rotors/pads used in F1 would not be good for street use. The operating temperatures they require would basically never be reached on the street because of low top speeds, comparitively infrequent braking, and low-g breaking, resulting very poor stopping power.
You obviously haven't renewed your CO license recently. I got mine renewed back in January, and you not only have to provide them the number, but you have to actually have your Social Security Card with you.
They claim it's to track down deadbeat dads, but I suspect that's just a BS line to make people sound unreasonable for not wanting to give out their SSN.
"What... you have something to hide?"
Well, yeah, maybe I do, and maybe it's none of your freakin' business either.
<i> It's obvious this was an attempt to generate revenue. If the actual goal of this stunt was to prevent speeding, the company should have just notified police of speeding infractions while they were happening.</i>
This is obviously the case. There are so many other ways they could deal with speeders:
1.) Notify the police, as stated above
2.) Refuse to rent to speeders in the future
3.) Ignore them. After all, what does speeding cost the rental company? Nothing! If the car gets damaged, then the renter has to pay for the damages. Speeding doesn't damage the car, so why charge for it? The answer, of course, is revenue.
The problem is they got greedy. If they'd made the "fine" something small enough, they could have collected tons of revenue. At $25 per offense, this guy would have been charged $75 instead of $450. I don't know about you, but for $75 I probably wouldn't care enough to fight it. I just wouldn't rent from them again. For $450, though, I'd probably be angry enough to fight it.
The push for quiter drives isn't as much for PC's as it is for the so called "convergance devices".
Nobody wants to listen to the hard drive in their Tivo when they're watching TV.
Checks and balances are all well and good...
Until you realize that the US Government is a litigant in the case. The DOJ is the plaintiff in this case, and the DOJ is part of which branch?
<church lady>
Could it be EXECUTIVE?
</church lady>
Sure, "W" couldn't poke his nose into a case between IBM and Microsoft, but as the plaintiff, the government can decide to forego prosecution any time they want to. If not in fact, then in spirit for certain.
I assume that this won't happen in part because of the consolidation with the 29(?) States' cases, but as they say... I am not a lawyer, so I could be wrong on that count.
Yeah, this is a good idea... until you actually think about it.
According to your system the year would have only 100 days (10 days/mo * 10 mo/yr). That unfortunately is not anywhere close to reality.
A day is defined by the time it takes the earth to rotate on its axis, and a year is defined by the time it takes our earth to orbit the sun.
The two are interrelated in that the time for one orbit ~= time for 365 revolutions. i.e. 1 year = 365 days. There's nothing you can do about it.
You could go to a 10 month year, with each month having 36.5 days. (or 1/2 would have 36 days and 1/2 would have 37) But is that really gaining us anything?
To have a 100 day year as you propose, you would have to change the definition of "day" or "year", neither of which is appealing: Would yo prefer a "day" with 3.65 daylight/nighttime cycles, or having it take 3.65 "years" to complete the four seasons?
"FYI", Groenig is also the person who gave us "Life in Hell".
Not to say he's The Funniest Person In The Universe, but I think you are selling him short.
> Most Improved Open Source Project / Most Improved Kernel Module
> Have you benchmarked it? Done regression testing? Checked the source for comments? No? Then abstain, 'cos you don't know!
What is this nonsense? The concept that you have to be a programmer and look at source code, or run benchmarks to know how a module/project has improved is absurd!
What about driving a car? "This car rides better than a Yugo. It's faster too." What? did you run fifth wheel tests on it to time accelerations? Did you measure suspension travel, and spring rates? No of course not. But you can tell whether something is better by using it:
"Gee, before half my PCMCIA devices didn't work... now they all do"
"Last time I tried GNOME it was barely useable, but now it has every feature I expect of an advanced window manager."
I'd say those are improved....
And don't forget that what's better/worse is an individual opinion! Just because you have one standard of evaluating something as better/worse doesn't mean that others feel the same things are important.
What's even more likely, IMHO is that a drug will transform itself into something that has new side effects along with its new desired behaviors.
Very similar drugs (say, different by one atom) can have very different effects on the body. Just look at ephedrine vs. speed... they have similar effects, but definitely not the same effect.
Adaptable drugs sound cool, but we don't know what they'll adapt into. Perhaps harmful viruses themselves?
One area I could definitely see self adaptation used is in laboratory research to develop new, non adaptive drugs.
Either way, things like this are dangerous. Not that we should ignore their possibilities, just that we should tread carefully.
I don't remember them all, but:
2.) A Donut ("Daddy's soul donut. Don't eat")
3.) Maggie Simpson. Though there was an alternate version filmed where Smithers did it.
4.) a toaster ("Marge, would you please pass me a donut?" "whats a donut?" "ahhh!" (Home leaves) "Oh, look kids, it's raining!")
5.) Because he was trying to grab the Gummi de Milo off her butt.
6.) He brought in a frog from the USA
7.) himself, I believe.
8.) Don't remember...
9.) Can't remember either... he had some funky eyes, though
10.) Chili spiced with the mexican insanity pepper.
I guess that's why so many Americans float to Cuba on homemade rafts...
Capitalism is not perfect. Not even close. But it's the closest thing we have to Darwin at a societal level.
Nobody denies that it's hard to transition to capitalism. But an analogy to your argument is: "Look how many people are injured learning how to ride a bike! We should stop bike riding at once."
Learning how to ride a bike is hard, but once you know how, you can't imagine not knowing how.
IMHO, Jurassic Park did one of the best jobs of portraying computers accurately. They didn't slap some rediculous looking GUI on a monitor. They showed things like lots of text-based consoles, and they even had it running on UNIX. "Newman" (I forget the actor's real name) even deleted the keystroke logs...
The only thing I didn't like was when the little brat says "This is a UNIX system... I know this" while using that goofy SGI visual file manager that I've never seen anyone actually use.
>You can get a 366mhz laptop but I doubt you'll find a 366mhz ruggedised laptop.
http://www.pana sonic.com/computer/notebook/products/toughbook71.
Don't be ridiculous. The situation is not even close to that black and white. To stop all crime, you'd have to give up all personal freedom (including privacy). But some crime can be stopped by giving up some personal freedom (i.e. cameras in parking garages). The point is to strike a balance. When you feel the balance has shifted too far towards one extreme, push back. Hard. Damn right. But to say that we can only have one or the other is folly.
I Meta Moderated for the first time today, and I have to say the system is good. Though it was a very small sample, I have to say that it reaffirmed my belif that for the most part the comments that people moderate up are usually deserving.
/. should have an equal opportunity to be heard. As long as what they say is on topic, I have no problem with someone having a different opinion than mine.
The ones that really need to be examined are the ones that are moderated down. Basically, everyone who posts on
It definately makes me suspicious when a comment has been moderated down though, as they're less commonl. If a comment is moderated down, and it is on topic, I'm extra suspicious. What offended the person who read it so much they wasted a prized moderation point downing someone else's thought? Were they really moderating rationally?
As for features, Rob: It would be nice to know what the values of the post were before and after moderation (or maybe just one with the delta). It would help to put moderations like "Overrated" in better perspective.
you forgot the part about the 60% tax rate...
I really believe that Open Source software will empower more people to use the internet for communication and level the technological playing field for many people.
:) )
However, having said that, the acomplishments of Linus, Linux, RMS, GNU or any other Open Source phenomenon or personality pales in comparison to the incredible scientific acheivments by Einstein, or the amazing non-violent resistance movement headed by Gandhi. These are truly great people when measured by the yardstick of the average person. Especially Gandhi. This man, through total peacefull resistance, gained sovereignty for India from the British Empire. If you've never seen the movie, go see it. It's a great story, and shows the philosophy that Martin Luther King, Jr. adopted in the civil rights movement in the US. (how then King is listed above Gandhi is unknown to me..
I'm a big Linux fan, but putting your life on the line for others, and creating software just aren't in the same boat, IMHO.