You said that she brought it in to be fixed, but you didn't say that you then proceeded to laugh in her face. Can you actually fix this? How much would it run? Is it worth it?
I say this because my PowerBook G4 is probably the most valuable uninsured thing that I own (I wonder if homeowner's insurance would pay for it) and I shudder to imagine something like this happening to mine.
Well, not something like THIS, for crying out loud. I can't imagine the logic that would result in even temporary storage of my PowerBook in the OVEN. But I often think about how I'm just a drop or a crush away from being REALLY pissed off and out the $2000 that I spent on my PowerBook.
This is barely different than what I used to write to get MindSpring REALLY pissed off at me, back when I was doing virtual hosting. Didn't take me awfully long after that to get myself a dedicated server.
Seems like if you want to go after Charmin Networks, you can get to them through Mr Whipple, their well-known spokesperson in their pre-internet days when they were simply in the toilet paper business.
Ok, bad joke on which I tried to hard to establish the link between "Sharman" and "Charmin". Withdrawn.
"National security" is not a new buzzword. "Homeland defense" is a new buzzword, but "national security" has origins much older than 9/1/01 -- at least as far back as the beginning of the cold war.
Good point in general, though. Seems like the maintainer of a website should have the ability to remove content from said website, in the event that it turns out to not be true, to be libelous, dangerous, or any number of other things. I've always thought a Google feature to purge specific pages from the cache would be a good idea, but the implementation of that would be tricky.
One of the biggest problems with this is how to ensure that the requestor is authorized to speak for the website? A good first thought is to coordinate with the e-mail addresses in the whois record for the domain, but of course any domain can have any number of separate websites managed by different people.
Let me think aloud for a moment... we know that Google looks for a robots.txt file before indexing a site. Let's say that a field were added to the robots.txt file that identifies a specific PGP key that is authorized to perform such actions. Not specific to Google, of course... this would be the e-mail address that speaks for the site in any number of ways. Something as simple as:
MaintainerKey: 9AB3250D
I don't know a whole LOT about PGP, but I think I know that each public key has a hex identifier (mine is above) that uniquely identifies it and allows others to request it from a keyserver.
When an e-mail formatted in a specific format (at the discretion of Google and other individual publishers of course) comes in, the public key can be retrieved and the signature of the e-mail validated, and they at least know that the sender is authorized by the site to speak for it. Action from this point forward would be at the discretion of Google, but this is at least a potential TECHNICAL solution to the problem of access.
Then there's the matter of public key revocation and expiration. Perhaps it's a better idea to have an e-mail address is the robots.txt file and to accept e-mail from that address provided that the current PGP public key is used to sign the message.
Is this a little scary? Sure. Not so much for me, because I've always felt that, if I like certain music, I should pay for it. But I know there are a lot of people out there that were playing by the "anonymous and no consequences" rules. Now the rules have been changed and it's scary.
However, if there is any enforcement to be done here, it's nice to see that they're looking at the right place. Napster was absolutely brilliant and it was a fantastic service. The service itself did not violate the law... rather, it was a tool for MP3 file sharing, and the content was up to the users of the service. Clearly, many people violated the law (as stupid as some may believe the law to be) while using Napster, and Napster paid the ultimate price, as a result of being held responsible for their user's behavior, which they really shouldn't have been.
Next in the pipeline is the ISP. They also shouldn't be held responsible. It's just like anything else illegal on the internet. Nobody would be surprised if the government was demanding that an ISP reveal information about a terrorist or somebody trading child porn on the internet. But since the feeling about MP3s is that they're "no big deal", the community is up in arms about this. This is a victory for ISPs in a way, because they're not being held responsible.
Now, does this mean that I support the recording industry? No so much, actually. I buy music so that it will continue to be available and to support the artists. I think the record companies are absolute idiots for fighting the internet, because it's the greatest tool since radio for them and they don't realize it yet. I think a new record label that wanted to use the internet for distribution could quickly do extremely well against the old-school companies, and I only wish I had the capital to get such a thing going (because distribution is not the only expense of a record company).
But, the issue at hand deals with the current law and those users who have downloaded excessively while knowing that it was in violation of the law. I support this particular decision, even though I realize how surprised the affected user(s) will be. I also support leniancy against this individual, since the rules of the game seemed to have changed after the fact. But now the new rules are in place and it should be noted by other users.
So when I found that Apple had come out with X11 for OS X, the first thing I thought was "So what? That's already been done. Somewhere along the way (probably while waiting for the new X11's "Optimizing" process to finish), I went over to the OroborOSX site to see if they had mentioned Apple's new X11, and that was when I remembered what's so cool about (most of) the open source community.
They didn't bash it. They didn't knock it. They didn't even complain about it. They said something like, "How does this affect our project? We don't know. Download it. Check it out. Don't forget to back up the X11 directories beforehand, just in case." And they linked to a message forum thread on their site that had been created to talk about this new product from Apple. Even in the forum, there was very little criticism of Apple's X11 product, and everything critical they had to say was constructive.
Even though this product could completely obliterate the need for their software, they were open to an alternative. They didn't go into FUD mode and immediately issue press releases bashing the "competition".
One could argue that they have no reason to get upset or concerned, because they were giving their software away anyway. No money to be made or lost, right? So take your ball and go home. Not so. You can't tell me there's no pride in Open Source. These people found a void and filled it, and the void could very well be filled AGAIN by the very people who caused the void in the first place. It would be very understandable for the OroborOSX team to get a little miffed.
Hats off to these guys for representing the best of the Open Source Community, which most often really DOES seem to be about ensuring that we all have the very best software that we can get, no matter who makes it.
Now I'll check to see if my "optimization" is done yet, and I'll begin my little evaluation of Apple's new effort. But I will be very careful to REMEMBER who has already been here and to not forget the work that they have done. Now that they have been here, the bar has been RAISED for Apple and they will have to produce quality software. This is a great role for Open Source software, if nothing else.
I think you probably have memories from before the age of 7... it's just that you don't remember the age you were in those memories so you can't put them in chronological order. I have many random memories from very young childhood, including nap time with my sisters in our cribs (I have twin sisters who are 20 months older). Were weren't BABIES in our cribs and we were probably in cribs longer than we needed to be, but I do remember it.
I consider my youngest VERIFIED memory to be when I woke up on my fourth birthday. I say "verified" only because that's the earliest memory in which I absolutely remember my age. I know I must also be able to remember the days preceeding that day, which means I have memories as far back as age 3, but there was nothing as memorable as that morning that is automatically associated with an age.
Remember the PBS TV show "The Electric Company" and how they would feature a specific letter or number with all kinds of psychedelic colors and patterns? That was what I saw in my head the moment I woke up on my fourth birthday. I had the number 4 in my head and was absolutely thrilled to finally be 4. I was fortunate to be in that state of mind on that morning, because it has given me a "verified" early memory, and without that I would be unable to do anything but guess about other memories.
It's moderately ammusing that EVERY single time somebody purports to have an interface that strives to look "just like windows", it's easy to identify it as a clone at first glance, thanks to lame fonts. I don't mean that the fonts aren't good, but they're not THE SAME. "MS Sans Serif" -- view it, study it, and copy it. Without that very font, the eye will refuse to believe it's looking at Windows. Yes, you can use other fonts instead of MS Sans Serif under Windows, but most people use the default, and you should at least default to the same font that Windows uses.
...is 20 years in prison. It doesn't hurt to have national press coverage of the guys who have tried this and have failed. It's not like you can get away with this very easily.
Let's see? Who has had access to all of these systems? Who has recently quite or been fired? Who just sold a boatload of stock when we got hit? A smart admin realizes that there are other admins as smart or smarter. People can piece these things together, and obviously this employer and the government are taking this crime very seriously.
I guess there are a few ways to read that headline. At first reading, I figured a few "disciples" had gotten together and made a distribution of Linux... figured they called it "Port of Disciples". And now they're announcing their second version, considering the raving success of the first version.
Good point, and I hesitate to nitpick your nitpicking, but alas if you can't do that sort of thing on Slashdot, where can you?
The post didn't refer to the entire symphony as Ode to Joy. All it said was "Ever wonder what 'Ode to Joy' would sound like if stretched to 24 hours?". You could say the same thing about Mars if somebody did this with the larger work, The Planets. They never suggested that Ode to Joy and the Symphony were one in the same.
> It was a summary comment... the link provides the details. > I mean, you found the information after clicking the link, right?
Yes, but the whole point of the summary was to communicate that Dell has Pocket PC device available and that it's very cheap. $199 conveys the cheap part better than $299, and the only difference that I see between them at first glance is that the cheaper model has less memory.
I agree with the original comment poster that it's strange that they didn't announce the $199 version, and the user would have then clicked through and seen that they also had a $299 version. I believe the question was valid.
Anybody ever meant a male named Mandi? Could this possibly be a female offering to maintain the Porn-on-Linux HOWTO? Gentlemen, your search is over. Make your move NOW.
Uh, maybe the story changed since you saw it, but this is a very common way for Slashdot stories to link. They link to the (yes, usually useless) publication or organization home page, and link to the story with a link like "story" or "reporting" or "article" or something. I found it a little confusing at first, but I'm used to it now. A good reason to do this is that the hostnames aren't always the same for the main organization or publication and the specific article in question. For example, you could say that AOL has announced something about Netscape... AOL would link to their site and the Netscape story would be on netscape.com -- sorry, quick examples are hard to come up with sometimes.
Anyway, it's good practice to give credit to the responsible party in addition to just linking to the story. In many cases, one link would suffice, but this is kind of the Slashdot standard way of doing it.
I keep thinking about this, every time some poor site is slammed. This time I'll bring it up publicly and allow it to be exposed as the ridiculous idea that I'm sure it really is.
The Slashdot Effect is well known, and it seems like only the strongest sites are able to handle it. One of those sites, clearly, is Slashdot itself. Seems like there could be some mirroring done on Slashdot before a story is posted. Of course, the obvious problem with this idea is that Slashdot has never been about actual hosted content (other than the comments, which are arguably the best part about the site), but rather links to content on other servers. But it has become pretty much standard procedure to link to a site with extra cool content every two to three days only to find that the site is completely unable to hang (or all-too-able to "hang", if you know what I mean). Mirrors often pop up on their own, which is great, but I always wonder why Slashdot doesn't just mirror the extra cool content anyway (I would imagine we can all guess what kind of content qualifies for pre-mirroring... super-cool pictures of the Sun, for example).
The other issue is one of advance notice, which has already been mentioned in this story's comments. I realize that some information is timely and advance notice is not always possible, but the sun's not going anywhere and there could be advanced notification workflow built into the story approval process (ugh, I said "workflow" and "process" in the same sentence). I would suggest that a "site contact" e-mail address or maybe even a phone number be included with story submissions. The "author" (I've never understood why they're called authors when generally they are administrators or approvers only) could then determine in their best judgement whether they think the site is likely to withstand a good slashdotting and, if not, they can have an e-mail message sent to the contact address, which will advise them of the impending slashdotting and give them some options:
Can't handle it or don't want it... don't link to my site (yes, I believe that anybody should have the right to link to anybody, unless there's good reason to believe that linking in this way will seriously affect the operating of the target site)
We would love the publicity but can't handle the load... please mirror and feel free to advertise on the mirrored pages, even replacing any advertisements that we have on our site.
We're either seriously prepared for this or we want to see what happens to our servers just for fun... fire away
This decision would be made by clicking on a link or filling out a form on the Slashdot site, which would clear that story for submission to the world, once any pre-mirroring takes place.
I realize this complicates the process, but Slashdot is no doubt aware of it's impact on sites that it links to, and an otherwise good site that gets killed by a terribly unusual load could be made to look like it's run by incompetents, even if it's in perfectly good hands. I wonder how many sites were actually negatively affected by the Slashdot effect, in either the short or the long term.
OK, now I get it. You mean "they bumped up the speed".
Since a "speed bump" is a bump put into the road for the purpose of slowing traffic, I figured you were reporting on a story about Apple intentionally making PowerBooks slower than they could be. I found that to be a remarkably interesting story, and it turned out to not be that story at all.
Of course, the faster processors are interesting also... anybody know if I can upgrade my PowerBook G4 550 to the faster chip? (probably not). Anyway, just thought I'd point that out.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, it's FUN :)
Just my 0.0184536 EUR worth
(exchange rate as of 2003.02.22 05:57:21 GMT)
OK, call me a Karma Whore, but here's a link to another page with screenshots from the game:
You said that she brought it in to be fixed, but you didn't say that you then proceeded to laugh in her face. Can you actually fix this? How much would it run? Is it worth it?
I say this because my PowerBook G4 is probably the most valuable uninsured thing that I own (I wonder if homeowner's insurance would pay for it) and I shudder to imagine something like this happening to mine.
Well, not something like THIS, for crying out loud. I can't imagine the logic that would result in even temporary storage of my PowerBook in the OVEN. But I often think about how I'm just a drop or a crush away from being REALLY pissed off and out the $2000 that I spent on my PowerBook.
John
This is barely different than what I used to write to get MindSpring REALLY pissed off at me, back when I was doing virtual hosting. Didn't take me awfully long after that to get myself a dedicated server.
Seems like if you want to go after Charmin Networks, you can get to them through Mr Whipple, their well-known spokesperson in their pre-internet days when they were simply in the toilet paper business.
Ok, bad joke on which I tried to hard to establish the link between "Sharman" and "Charmin". Withdrawn.
"National security" is not a new buzzword. "Homeland defense" is a new buzzword, but "national security" has origins much older than 9/1/01 -- at least as far back as the beginning of the cold war.
Good point in general, though. Seems like the maintainer of a website should have the ability to remove content from said website, in the event that it turns out to not be true, to be libelous, dangerous, or any number of other things. I've always thought a Google feature to purge specific pages from the cache would be a good idea, but the implementation of that would be tricky.
One of the biggest problems with this is how to ensure that the requestor is authorized to speak for the website? A good first thought is to coordinate with the e-mail addresses in the whois record for the domain, but of course any domain can have any number of separate websites managed by different people.
Let me think aloud for a moment... we know that Google looks for a robots.txt file before indexing a site. Let's say that a field were added to the robots.txt file that identifies a specific PGP key that is authorized to perform such actions. Not specific to Google, of course... this would be the e-mail address that speaks for the site in any number of ways. Something as simple as:
MaintainerKey: 9AB3250D
I don't know a whole LOT about PGP, but I think I know that each public key has a hex identifier (mine is above) that uniquely identifies it and allows others to request it from a keyserver.
When an e-mail formatted in a specific format (at the discretion of Google and other individual publishers of course) comes in, the public key can be retrieved and the signature of the e-mail validated, and they at least know that the sender is authorized by the site to speak for it. Action from this point forward would be at the discretion of Google, but this is at least a potential TECHNICAL solution to the problem of access.
Then there's the matter of public key revocation and expiration. Perhaps it's a better idea to have an e-mail address is the robots.txt file and to accept e-mail from that address provided that the current PGP public key is used to sign the message.
Again, just thinking out loud...
Is this a little scary? Sure. Not so much for me, because I've always felt that, if I like certain music, I should pay for it. But I know there are a lot of people out there that were playing by the "anonymous and no consequences" rules. Now the rules have been changed and it's scary.
However, if there is any enforcement to be done here, it's nice to see that they're looking at the right place. Napster was absolutely brilliant and it was a fantastic service. The service itself did not violate the law... rather, it was a tool for MP3 file sharing, and the content was up to the users of the service. Clearly, many people violated the law (as stupid as some may believe the law to be) while using Napster, and Napster paid the ultimate price, as a result of being held responsible for their user's behavior, which they really shouldn't have been.
Next in the pipeline is the ISP. They also shouldn't be held responsible. It's just like anything else illegal on the internet. Nobody would be surprised if the government was demanding that an ISP reveal information about a terrorist or somebody trading child porn on the internet. But since the feeling about MP3s is that they're "no big deal", the community is up in arms about this. This is a victory for ISPs in a way, because they're not being held responsible.
Now, does this mean that I support the recording industry? No so much, actually. I buy music so that it will continue to be available and to support the artists. I think the record companies are absolute idiots for fighting the internet, because it's the greatest tool since radio for them and they don't realize it yet. I think a new record label that wanted to use the internet for distribution could quickly do extremely well against the old-school companies, and I only wish I had the capital to get such a thing going (because distribution is not the only expense of a record company).
But, the issue at hand deals with the current law and those users who have downloaded excessively while knowing that it was in violation of the law. I support this particular decision, even though I realize how surprised the affected user(s) will be. I also support leniancy against this individual, since the rules of the game seemed to have changed after the fact. But now the new rules are in place and it should be noted by other users.
RP
So when I found that Apple had come out with X11 for OS X, the first thing I thought was "So what? That's already been done. Somewhere along the way (probably while waiting for the new X11's "Optimizing" process to finish), I went over to the OroborOSX site to see if they had mentioned Apple's new X11, and that was when I remembered what's so cool about (most of) the open source community.
They didn't bash it. They didn't knock it. They didn't even complain about it. They said something like, "How does this affect our project? We don't know. Download it. Check it out. Don't forget to back up the X11 directories beforehand, just in case." And they linked to a message forum thread on their site that had been created to talk about this new product from Apple. Even in the forum, there was very little criticism of Apple's X11 product, and everything critical they had to say was constructive.
Even though this product could completely obliterate the need for their software, they were open to an alternative. They didn't go into FUD mode and immediately issue press releases bashing the "competition".
One could argue that they have no reason to get upset or concerned, because they were giving their software away anyway. No money to be made or lost, right? So take your ball and go home. Not so. You can't tell me there's no pride in Open Source. These people found a void and filled it, and the void could very well be filled AGAIN by the very people who caused the void in the first place. It would be very understandable for the OroborOSX team to get a little miffed.
Hats off to these guys for representing the best of the Open Source Community, which most often really DOES seem to be about ensuring that we all have the very best software that we can get, no matter who makes it.
Now I'll check to see if my "optimization" is done yet, and I'll begin my little evaluation of Apple's new effort. But I will be very careful to REMEMBER who has already been here and to not forget the work that they have done. Now that they have been here, the bar has been RAISED for Apple and they will have to produce quality software. This is a great role for Open Source software, if nothing else.
Cheers,
RP
I think you probably have memories from before the age of 7... it's just that you don't remember the age you were in those memories so you can't put them in chronological order. I have many random memories from very young childhood, including nap time with my sisters in our cribs (I have twin sisters who are 20 months older). Were weren't BABIES in our cribs and we were probably in cribs longer than we needed to be, but I do remember it.
I consider my youngest VERIFIED memory to be when I woke up on my fourth birthday. I say "verified" only because that's the earliest memory in which I absolutely remember my age. I know I must also be able to remember the days preceeding that day, which means I have memories as far back as age 3, but there was nothing as memorable as that morning that is automatically associated with an age.
Remember the PBS TV show "The Electric Company" and how they would feature a specific letter or number with all kinds of psychedelic colors and patterns? That was what I saw in my head the moment I woke up on my fourth birthday. I had the number 4 in my head and was absolutely thrilled to finally be 4. I was fortunate to be in that state of mind on that morning, because it has given me a "verified" early memory, and without that I would be unable to do anything but guess about other memories.
RP
It's moderately ammusing that EVERY single time somebody purports to have an interface that strives to look "just like windows", it's easy to identify it as a clone at first glance, thanks to lame fonts. I don't mean that the fonts aren't good, but they're not THE SAME. "MS Sans Serif" -- view it, study it, and copy it. Without that very font, the eye will refuse to believe it's looking at Windows. Yes, you can use other fonts instead of MS Sans Serif under Windows, but most people use the default, and you should at least default to the same font that Windows uses.
RP
Oh, this will be useful and a productive use of time once the site gets slammed. Glad I hit it early.
Looking forward to the first CPAN mirror in orbit.
...is 20 years in prison. It doesn't hurt to have national press coverage of the guys who have tried this and have failed. It's not like you can get away with this very easily.
Let's see? Who has had access to all of these systems? Who has recently quite or been fired? Who just sold a boatload of stock when we got hit? A smart admin realizes that there are other admins as smart or smarter. People can piece these things together, and obviously this employer and the government are taking this crime very seriously.
RP
I guess there are a few ways to read that headline. At first reading, I figured a few "disciples" had gotten together and made a distribution of Linux... figured they called it "Port of Disciples". And now they're announcing their second version, considering the raving success of the first version.
Here's a photo
How you say? Ah yes, anticlimactic. I would have preferred the story a little longer and the photos a little crappier.
Funny that it's all in spanish except "Make a Donation" :)
Good point, and I hesitate to nitpick your nitpicking, but alas if you can't do that sort of thing on Slashdot, where can you?
The post didn't refer to the entire symphony as Ode to Joy. All it said was "Ever wonder what 'Ode to Joy' would sound like if stretched to 24 hours?". You could say the same thing about Mars if somebody did this with the larger work, The Planets. They never suggested that Ode to Joy and the Symphony were one in the same.
Ah, that's better. Now I feel so much geekier.
It's like watching flies fuck.
(Apologies to George Carlin, who first used that simile to refer to watching golf on TV)
> It was a summary comment... the link provides the details.
> I mean, you found the information after clicking the link, right?
Yes, but the whole point of the summary was to communicate that Dell has Pocket PC device available and that it's very cheap. $199 conveys the cheap part better than $299, and the only difference that I see between them at first glance is that the cheaper model has less memory.
I agree with the original comment poster that it's strange that they didn't announce the $199 version, and the user would have then clicked through and seen that they also had a $299 version. I believe the question was valid.
RP
Anybody ever meant a male named Mandi? Could this possibly be a female offering to maintain the Porn-on-Linux HOWTO? Gentlemen, your search is over. Make your move NOW.
Uh, maybe the story changed since you saw it, but this is a very common way for Slashdot stories to link. They link to the (yes, usually useless) publication or organization home page, and link to the story with a link like "story" or "reporting" or "article" or something. I found it a little confusing at first, but I'm used to it now. A good reason to do this is that the hostnames aren't always the same for the main organization or publication and the specific article in question. For example, you could say that AOL has announced something about Netscape... AOL would link to their site and the Netscape story would be on netscape.com -- sorry, quick examples are hard to come up with sometimes.
Anyway, it's good practice to give credit to the responsible party in addition to just linking to the story. In many cases, one link would suffice, but this is kind of the Slashdot standard way of doing it.
The leading researcher on this is quoted as saying, "We thought it might be useful for something".
Ya think? What use could anybody possibly have for more data storage? (all together now: pr0n!)
The Slashdot Effect is well known, and it seems like only the strongest sites are able to handle it. One of those sites, clearly, is Slashdot itself. Seems like there could be some mirroring done on Slashdot before a story is posted. Of course, the obvious problem with this idea is that Slashdot has never been about actual hosted content (other than the comments, which are arguably the best part about the site), but rather links to content on other servers. But it has become pretty much standard procedure to link to a site with extra cool content every two to three days only to find that the site is completely unable to hang (or all-too-able to "hang", if you know what I mean). Mirrors often pop up on their own, which is great, but I always wonder why Slashdot doesn't just mirror the extra cool content anyway (I would imagine we can all guess what kind of content qualifies for pre-mirroring... super-cool pictures of the Sun, for example).
The other issue is one of advance notice, which has already been mentioned in this story's comments. I realize that some information is timely and advance notice is not always possible, but the sun's not going anywhere and there could be advanced notification workflow built into the story approval process (ugh, I said "workflow" and "process" in the same sentence). I would suggest that a "site contact" e-mail address or maybe even a phone number be included with story submissions. The "author" (I've never understood why they're called authors when generally they are administrators or approvers only) could then determine in their best judgement whether they think the site is likely to withstand a good slashdotting and, if not, they can have an e-mail message sent to the contact address, which will advise them of the impending slashdotting and give them some options:
- Can't handle it or don't want it... don't link to my site (yes, I believe that anybody should have the right to link to anybody, unless there's good reason to believe that linking in this way will seriously affect the operating of the target site)
- We would love the publicity but can't handle the load... please mirror and feel free to advertise on the mirrored pages, even replacing any advertisements that we have on our site.
- We're either seriously prepared for this or we want to see what happens to our servers just for fun... fire away
This decision would be made by clicking on a link or filling out a form on the Slashdot site, which would clear that story for submission to the world, once any pre-mirroring takes place.I realize this complicates the process, but Slashdot is no doubt aware of it's impact on sites that it links to, and an otherwise good site that gets killed by a terribly unusual load could be made to look like it's run by incompetents, even if it's in perfectly good hands. I wonder how many sites were actually negatively affected by the Slashdot effect, in either the short or the long term.
So that's my two cents.
OK, now I get it. You mean "they bumped up the speed".
Since a "speed bump" is a bump put into the road for the purpose of slowing traffic, I figured you were reporting on a story about Apple intentionally making PowerBooks slower than they could be. I found that to be a remarkably interesting story, and it turned out to not be that story at all.
Of course, the faster processors are interesting also... anybody know if I can upgrade my PowerBook G4 550 to the faster chip? (probably not). Anyway, just thought I'd point that out.