Heh. Actually I still think it was a pretty good assumption- the statement "Most of the librarians that I know" is pretty meaningless for the vast majority of people. I'd guess that the number of people that have had meaningful conversations with librarians about Laura Bush's credentials as a librarian is even less. Do librarians just love to talk about her or something?
Laura Bush earned a Master of Library Science degree from the University of Texas in 1973, and after that she worked as a librarian at the Houston public library (Source).
Most of the librarians that you know (which, lets be honest, is probably just one or two) are wrong.
The problem that I see is that Asus is not really disclosing that they are overclocking the northbridge, and that what they are doing could affect the system's stability. They are merely saying that they have enabled PAT. So not only are they enabling it on chips that Intel said didn't pass the test at the fab, they are overclocking the chip to exaggerate any problems. It just doesnt seem smart to me.
Of course, you are free to do whatever you would like to with your chipset, but I think I want my memory controller to be as stable as possible:)
As I posted here, Asus's solution to enable PAT in the 865 involves overclocking the northbridge, so not only are you trying to enable PAT on a chip that did not pass the tests at the fab, you are running the chip way out of spec. Not good.
I really wouldn't recommend buying one of these Asus boards where they hacked the 865.
As I understand it, there are 2 signals from the CPU to the northbridge that dictate what the FSB frequency is. The 875 northbridge takes these signals, and if they show that the FSB is 800MHz then PAT is enabled. The 865 northbridge is configured to disable PAT with an 800 MHz FSB.
Now, what Asus has done is to hijack these 2 signals coming from the CPU, and always tell the northbridge that the FSB is 533 MHz. This allows them to enable the PAT, and to compensate for the lower FSB setting, they jack up the clock chip on the board and overclock the northbridge. The result is that the entire northbridge is running way out of spec, and there are probably tons of stability issues that will surface over time. Intel spends A LOT of money validating the supported configurations, and when a vendor is overclocking a chip by 50%, all bets are off.
I don't think its worth it for a 5% increase in memory performance.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
Does a person making a million bucks a year consume tremendously more than the average person?
On the flip side, do the rich people that are paying most of the taxes get more from the government? They can use the highways just as much as anybody else. The military doesn't protect them more than a poorer person. They don't collect any welfare. I think the national budget boils down to around $12k/person/year. So you could argue that the people paying over $12k are getting screwed while the people paying less than that are getting a pretty good deal (and no, I am not arguing for a flat $12k tax...).
While I'm pretty anti-tax around the board
Maybe the "fairest" taxation system would be to get rid of all income taxes, and only levy sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, and tariffs. That way each person would get to choose how much tax they paid by deciding how much money to spend. The rich people spend more, and therefore they would pay higher taxes.
BTW- our country went without income taxes until 1913 (and even then, over 90% of the population was tax exempt). Income taxes were even found unconstitutional back in 1894- it wasn't until congress passed the 16th Amendment that income taxes became "legal".
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
Yes- those numbers are based on adjusted gross income. But take a look at the second spreadsheet that I linked to- even after all of these evil tax shelters and income hiding that people accuse them of, the rich are still paying a majority of income taxes. Here are how those numbers break down:
- The richest 1% account for 20% of all taxable income, and they pay 37% of all income tax - The richest 5% account for 35% of all taxable income, and they pay 56% of all income tax - The richest 10% account for 46% of all taxable income, and they pay 67% of all income tax - The richest 25% account for 67% of all taxable income, and they pay 84% of all income tax - The richest 50% account for 87% of all taxable income, and they pay 96% of all income tax
That means he poorest 50% account for 13% of all taxable income, but they only pay 4% of income tax.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
You have been watching too much TV. Look at the numbers- all of the high income groups pay 22+% in taxes, and that is substantially more than any lower income group. Even if some rich people find loopholes and don't pay any taxes (and according to the IRS, that was about 2000 people out of 2.5 million high income returns in the year 2000), they are still paying way more taxes than the poor.
It may make you feel better to point your finger at the rich to explain your problems, or to believe that the only way that somebody could be successful is by cheating, but doing that doesn't help your situation at all. Our society rewards people that take risks- go make something happen for yourself!
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
but this group is usually considered the average.
I meant they are not considered average, dang it.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
Is it just me or does it seem like almost everything Dubya does is intended to lower the quality of life for the average American?
What do you consider the "average American". I believe the median income in the US is a little over $27k/year (according to this. According to the article, the proposed changes would increase the minimum non-exempt income from $8k/year to $22k/year. This will guarantee that a lot more "average" Americans will earn overtime pay.
On the other hand, many people earning over $65k/year will be excluded from overtime pay, but this group is usually considered the average.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
When you have more money to spend you can find more tax loopholes, so you pay less tax per dollar earned.
You are talking out of your ass. Lets look at the real numbers, ok?
In 2001, the average tax burdon as a % of income for all tax returns was 16.1%. Here are some examples to see how that breaks down:
- People that made between $19k-$22k/year paid 7.6% in taxes - People that made between $40k-$50k/year paid 10% in taxes - People that made between $100k-$200k/year paid 17.3% in taxes - People that made between $1.0M-$1.5M/year paid 29.2% in taxes
What do you know- the more money you make, the higher your tax burdon is. In fact, the richest 1% of taxpayers account for about 20% of all income, but they pay over 37% of all income taxes in this country (Source).
In fact, most people who make really excessive amounts of money per year pay less taxes per dollar than those in lower tax brackets as a result.
Wrong. The highest income group (people that made over $10M in 2001) paid about 25.4%. Compare that with the 2.0% paid by the lowest income level.
The next time Daschle is on TV whining about the "tax cuts for the rich", keep these numbers in mind...
I suppose you would think it's ok for Dell to solder in the RAM and not let you open your case?
Yes, in fact I do think that is perfectly ok. It is also perfectly ok for me to choose not to buy a system like that.
In fact, many products we buy are designed to make it difficult to use them in unintended ways. CPU's lock the clock multiplier so it is harder to overclock, for example. Does that mean that you do not own the chip, or that you don't have the right to try to hack the chip to unlock it (like that pencil trick with locked Athlons a few years back)? Of course not.
The xbox is no different- it was intentionally designed to make it hard to run "unapproved" software. This was never a secret. If you don't like that, don't buy an xbox.
Perhaps you should read the article before you start spouting off next time.
In case you missed it, these geeks are demanding that Microsoft release a signed Linux boot loader. Hmmmmmmm. That sounds like they are asking for support after all.
Microsoft is in no way obligated to do this, and there are probably several big business reasons why they would want to anyway. So go ahead and do whatever you want with your hardware, but don't expect Microsoft to just stand on the sidelines without taking steps to prevent it. It is their business, after all...
If you disagree with the entire concept of IP, then we are really coming at this from two different directions.
However, the same arguments that you are making about stifling creativity and scientific advance were made 20 years ago when the courts ruled that you could patent a living organism. Look what has happened since then- there has been an explosion of scientific advancement in the biotech and pharmaceuticals industries. These patents were an important ingredient in that growth.
Sure, our patent system isn't perfect, but I think our IP laws are partly responsible for our technological advancements this century.
Here is an idea (for/. in general, not just for you). Instead of just complaining about how horrible the USPTO is, why don't you make some efforts to change it? There are Patent Examiner jobs open, including jobs in Computer Science and engineering. For an unemployed/.-er that is convinced he could do a better job examining patents, thats a win-win situation.
Has/. become so skewed that any patent is considered evil? I mean, Netflix did come up with a very innovative business plan, and they execute that business plan very well. WalMart came along several years later is trying to copy Netflix. Why shouldn't Netflix get some license revenue from that?
I'm not trying to nit-pick, but I think you missed my point. If we created a nastiness scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being "Marry Poppins" and 10 being "Faces of Death" or "Debbie Does Dallas", I would say the highest number from that top 20 list is about a 3 (well, maybe 4 if you don't agree that Kate Winslet's breast was shown more artistically than sexually). These are all pretty much movies that you could take kids to without many reservations- they definately do not push the envelope.
The more violent movies, like "Saving Private Ryan" or even "The Matrix", are not on the list. Neither are the more sexual movies like "Basic Instinct" or any of the PG-13 teen movies. If your assertion was true that sex and violence are what sells movies, then we would see some movies like that on the list.
Yet, as that list shows, a little violence, vulgarity, nudity, sexual situations and drug use is perfectly acceptable by those who pay to make a movie profitable.
Kind of a strange way to make that point. There isn't a single movie with an R rating in that top 20 list that you linked to. In fact, that list is full of some of the most innocent movies I have ever seen. If money talks, then it looks to me like it is voting for the movies with less sex and violence.
You have no right to go through life being unoffended.
Ok- just remember that next time you get offended when somebody "censors" the latest movie you worked on. Since you have no right to be unoffended, you had better learn to deal with it.
Is there a -1 BUZZWORD_ABUSE moderation? I know you think its cool to take this "firm stand" against censorship, but please explain to me what this self-censorship has to do with you? Answer: it has NOTHING to do with you! Whether or not somebody decides to edit his/her own DVD has no effect on the content that is available to you.
I get the feeling you are only opposed to people having different views of morality than you have.
Whoops. Your right. PCI Express supports both an emulated INTx and MSI. The do say that the legacy INTx emulation might be deprecated in future revisions of the spec, though.
PCI Express gets rid of all of the sideband interrupt signals and only uses Message Signalled Interrupts (MSI). This gets rid of any need for IRQ sharing. The only limitation of MSI is the number of interrupt vectors available in the local APIC in the CPU (currently 256).
Slashdot Mirror
Heh. Actually I still think it was a pretty good assumption- the statement "Most of the librarians that I know" is pretty meaningless for the vast majority of people. I'd guess that the number of people that have had meaningful conversations with librarians about Laura Bush's credentials as a librarian is even less. Do librarians just love to talk about her or something?
Laura Bush earned a Master of Library Science degree from the University of Texas in 1973, and after that she worked as a librarian at the Houston public library (Source).
Most of the librarians that you know (which, lets be honest, is probably just one or two) are wrong.
The problem that I see is that Asus is not really disclosing that they are overclocking the northbridge, and that what they are doing could affect the system's stability. They are merely saying that they have enabled PAT. So not only are they enabling it on chips that Intel said didn't pass the test at the fab, they are overclocking the chip to exaggerate any problems. It just doesnt seem smart to me.
:)
Of course, you are free to do whatever you would like to with your chipset, but I think I want my memory controller to be as stable as possible
As I posted here, Asus's solution to enable PAT in the 865 involves overclocking the northbridge, so not only are you trying to enable PAT on a chip that did not pass the tests at the fab, you are running the chip way out of spec. Not good.
I really wouldn't recommend buying one of these Asus boards where they hacked the 865.
As I understand it, there are 2 signals from the CPU to the northbridge that dictate what the FSB frequency is. The 875 northbridge takes these signals, and if they show that the FSB is 800MHz then PAT is enabled. The 865 northbridge is configured to disable PAT with an 800 MHz FSB.
Now, what Asus has done is to hijack these 2 signals coming from the CPU, and always tell the northbridge that the FSB is 533 MHz. This allows them to enable the PAT, and to compensate for the lower FSB setting, they jack up the clock chip on the board and overclock the northbridge. The result is that the entire northbridge is running way out of spec, and there are probably tons of stability issues that will surface over time. Intel spends A LOT of money validating the supported configurations, and when a vendor is overclocking a chip by 50%, all bets are off.
I don't think its worth it for a 5% increase in memory performance.
Does a person making a million bucks a year consume tremendously more than the average person?
On the flip side, do the rich people that are paying most of the taxes get more from the government? They can use the highways just as much as anybody else. The military doesn't protect them more than a poorer person. They don't collect any welfare. I think the national budget boils down to around $12k/person/year. So you could argue that the people paying over $12k are getting screwed while the people paying less than that are getting a pretty good deal (and no, I am not arguing for a flat $12k tax...).
While I'm pretty anti-tax around the board
Maybe the "fairest" taxation system would be to get rid of all income taxes, and only levy sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, and tariffs. That way each person would get to choose how much tax they paid by deciding how much money to spend. The rich people spend more, and therefore they would pay higher taxes.
BTW- our country went without income taxes until 1913 (and even then, over 90% of the population was tax exempt). Income taxes were even found unconstitutional back in 1894- it wasn't until congress passed the 16th Amendment that income taxes became "legal".
Yes- those numbers are based on adjusted gross income. But take a look at the second spreadsheet that I linked to- even after all of these evil tax shelters and income hiding that people accuse them of, the rich are still paying a majority of income taxes. Here are how those numbers break down:
- The richest 1% account for 20% of all taxable income, and they pay 37% of all income tax
- The richest 5% account for 35% of all taxable income, and they pay 56% of all income tax
- The richest 10% account for 46% of all taxable income, and they pay 67% of all income tax
- The richest 25% account for 67% of all taxable income, and they pay 84% of all income tax
- The richest 50% account for 87% of all taxable income, and they pay 96% of all income tax
That means he poorest 50% account for 13% of all taxable income, but they only pay 4% of income tax.
You have been watching too much TV. Look at the numbers- all of the high income groups pay 22+% in taxes, and that is substantially more than any lower income group. Even if some rich people find loopholes and don't pay any taxes (and according to the IRS, that was about 2000 people out of 2.5 million high income returns in the year 2000), they are still paying way more taxes than the poor.
It may make you feel better to point your finger at the rich to explain your problems, or to believe that the only way that somebody could be successful is by cheating, but doing that doesn't help your situation at all. Our society rewards people that take risks- go make something happen for yourself!
but this group is usually considered the average.
I meant they are not considered average, dang it.
Is it just me or does it seem like almost everything Dubya does is intended to lower the quality of life for the average American?
What do you consider the "average American". I believe the median income in the US is a little over $27k/year (according to this. According to the article, the proposed changes would increase the minimum non-exempt income from $8k/year to $22k/year. This will guarantee that a lot more "average" Americans will earn overtime pay.
On the other hand, many people earning over $65k/year will be excluded from overtime pay, but this group is usually considered the average.
When you have more money to spend you can find more tax loopholes, so you pay less tax per dollar earned.
You are talking out of your ass. Lets look at the real numbers, ok?
In 2001, the average tax burdon as a % of income for all tax returns was 16.1%. Here are some examples to see how that breaks down:
- People that made between $19k-$22k/year paid 7.6% in taxes
- People that made between $40k-$50k/year paid 10% in taxes
- People that made between $100k-$200k/year paid 17.3% in taxes
- People that made between $1.0M-$1.5M/year paid 29.2% in taxes
What do you know- the more money you make, the higher your tax burdon is. In fact, the richest 1% of taxpayers account for about 20% of all income, but they pay over 37% of all income taxes in this country (Source).
In fact, most people who make really excessive amounts of money per year pay less taxes per dollar than those in lower tax brackets as a result.
Wrong. The highest income group (people that made over $10M in 2001) paid about 25.4%. Compare that with the 2.0% paid by the lowest income level.
The next time Daschle is on TV whining about the "tax cuts for the rich", keep these numbers in mind...
I suppose you would think it's ok for Dell to solder in the RAM and not let you open your case?
Yes, in fact I do think that is perfectly ok. It is also perfectly ok for me to choose not to buy a system like that.
In fact, many products we buy are designed to make it difficult to use them in unintended ways. CPU's lock the clock multiplier so it is harder to overclock, for example. Does that mean that you do not own the chip, or that you don't have the right to try to hack the chip to unlock it (like that pencil trick with locked Athlons a few years back)? Of course not.
The xbox is no different- it was intentionally designed to make it hard to run "unapproved" software. This was never a secret. If you don't like that, don't buy an xbox.
Perhaps you should read the article before you start spouting off next time.
In case you missed it, these geeks are demanding that Microsoft release a signed Linux boot loader. Hmmmmmmm. That sounds like they are asking for support after all.
Microsoft is in no way obligated to do this, and there are probably several big business reasons why they would want to anyway. So go ahead and do whatever you want with your hardware, but don't expect Microsoft to just stand on the sidelines without taking steps to prevent it. It is their business, after all...
If you disagree with the entire concept of IP, then we are really coming at this from two different directions.
/. in general, not just for you). Instead of just complaining about how horrible the USPTO is, why don't you make some efforts to change it? There are Patent Examiner jobs open, including jobs in Computer Science and engineering. For an unemployed /.-er that is convinced he could do a better job examining patents, thats a win-win situation.
However, the same arguments that you are making about stifling creativity and scientific advance were made 20 years ago when the courts ruled that you could patent a living organism. Look what has happened since then- there has been an explosion of scientific advancement in the biotech and pharmaceuticals industries. These patents were an important ingredient in that growth.
Sure, our patent system isn't perfect, but I think our IP laws are partly responsible for our technological advancements this century.
Here is an idea (for
That is your opinion. Unfortunately for you, many people, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, disagree.
Business methods are *not* patentable.
Are you sure about that?
Has /. become so skewed that any patent is considered evil? I mean, Netflix did come up with a very innovative business plan, and they execute that business plan very well. WalMart came along several years later is trying to copy Netflix. Why shouldn't Netflix get some license revenue from that?
This is not an outrageous patent.
I'm not trying to nit-pick, but I think you missed my point. If we created a nastiness scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being "Marry Poppins" and 10 being "Faces of Death" or "Debbie Does Dallas", I would say the highest number from that top 20 list is about a 3 (well, maybe 4 if you don't agree that Kate Winslet's breast was shown more artistically than sexually). These are all pretty much movies that you could take kids to without many reservations- they definately do not push the envelope.
The more violent movies, like "Saving Private Ryan" or even "The Matrix", are not on the list. Neither are the more sexual movies like "Basic Instinct" or any of the PG-13 teen movies. If your assertion was true that sex and violence are what sells movies, then we would see some movies like that on the list.
Yet, as that list shows, a little violence, vulgarity, nudity, sexual situations and drug use is perfectly acceptable by those who pay to make a movie profitable.
Kind of a strange way to make that point. There isn't a single movie with an R rating in that top 20 list that you linked to. In fact, that list is full of some of the most innocent movies I have ever seen. If money talks, then it looks to me like it is voting for the movies with less sex and violence.
You have no right to go through life being unoffended.
Ok- just remember that next time you get offended when somebody "censors" the latest movie you worked on. Since you have no right to be unoffended, you had better learn to deal with it.
Is there a -1 BUZZWORD_ABUSE moderation? I know you think its cool to take this "firm stand" against censorship, but please explain to me what this self-censorship has to do with you? Answer: it has NOTHING to do with you! Whether or not somebody decides to edit his/her own DVD has no effect on the content that is available to you.
I get the feeling you are only opposed to people having different views of morality than you have.
Whoops. Your right. PCI Express supports both an emulated INTx and MSI. The do say that the legacy INTx emulation might be deprecated in future revisions of the spec, though.
PCI Express gets rid of all of the sideband interrupt signals and only uses Message Signalled Interrupts (MSI). This gets rid of any need for IRQ sharing. The only limitation of MSI is the number of interrupt vectors available in the local APIC in the CPU (currently 256).
Since all 3 are defined in the USB 2.0 spec, I think they all are technically USB 2.0 now.
No- here is how it breaks down:
Low Speed = ~1.5Mbps
Full Speed (USB 1.1) = ~12Mbps
High Speed (USB 2.0) = ~480Mbps
This is not really a change- they have always used this terminology.