> Material you create on an electronic device is *yours* and if that is encrypted or > "protected" by some third party technology you always have the right to break that > technology to get to the content you rightly own.
This is true.
> Yes.. this is directly in contrast with the DMCA
But not one that defines "technology" as "teh intertubes". We have been deeply and irrevocably dependent on technology for millennia (hint: Weaving is technology. Cooking is technology. Agriculture is technology). A "technology bill of rights" that described individual rights to technology in the broad sense would be interesting and possibly desireable. One that focuses on "technology" as defined by the newsies would deal only with transient superficial issues with the particular gadgets currently in vogue and would be at best silly.
> Ok, maybe you don't, but most people do just that.
They're accurately describing the symptoms, and that is fine. These people are doing the equivalent of saying "The engine has siezed up" when the brakes are squealing.
> Even if you hate MS for whatever reason, it's still worth knowing what they're doing, > especially if you can do so for free on whatever platform you're (probably) currently > using.
Why? I learn all I need to know about what Microsoft is doing by reading Slashdot.
Note that he wrote "has stopped", not "will halt". "Check the exit status" isn't quite pedantically correct, but it's the one-liner that popped into my head. "jobs" will tell you what jobs are currently stopped.
I thought it was fairly clear that it was oriented toward math, science, and technology. I'm not surprised that there are better sources for sports trivia and financial data.
Think about how small that is, and how large a cubic meter is. I'm not impressed. You can find a few molecules of almost anything almost everywhere, if you have sensitive enough equipment.
> These guys aren't talking about new processor designs (though I'm sure some engineers at > AMD and Intel read/. and will find this research), they're looking for ways to better > implement the power saving features that are already present in modern CPUs.
They also seem to be assuming that the only function of the cpu is to provide snappy GUI response (which is probably true for most users).
Slashdot Mirror
No. They have simply convinced the world that there is no other choice.
I thought this was about Windows.
> Material you create on an electronic device is *yours* and if that is encrypted or
> "protected" by some third party technology you always have the right to break that
> technology to get to the content you rightly own.
This is true.
> Yes.. this is directly in contrast with the DMCA
No it isn't.
But not one that defines "technology" as "teh intertubes". We have been deeply and irrevocably dependent on technology for millennia (hint: Weaving is technology. Cooking is technology. Agriculture is technology). A "technology bill of rights" that described individual rights to technology in the broad sense would be interesting and possibly desireable. One that focuses on "technology" as defined by the newsies would deal only with transient superficial issues with the particular gadgets currently in vogue and would be at best silly.
I bet he doesn't tell the jeweler that the mainspring is broken when the second hand has fallen off, though.
> Doesn't this come from the time when the hard drive really was a box on its own?
No. None of these people were born then.
> Ok, maybe you don't, but most people do just that.
They're accurately describing the symptoms, and that is fine. These people are doing the equivalent of saying "The engine has siezed up" when the brakes are squealing.
The problem is that "now, I am computer illiterate..." is usually followed by "but..."
> Even if you hate MS for whatever reason, it's still worth knowing what they're doing,
> especially if you can do so for free on whatever platform you're (probably) currently
> using.
Why? I learn all I need to know about what Microsoft is doing by reading Slashdot.
> You've gotta respect the "analysts" at Gartner. Anyone who's read anything about PCs
> within the last year would have come to this conclusion.
Well, no. Some of us have come to the conclusion that the thing to do is not have bugger-all to do with any Microsoft products at all.
> Since when do I care about what advertisers say?
Well, you care enough to know what they say.
Note that he wrote "has stopped", not "will halt". "Check the exit status" isn't quite pedantically correct, but it's the one-liner that popped into my head. "jobs" will tell you what jobs are currently stopped.
I don't hink that people who are startled and horrified when things go wrong during intitial large-scale testing of a system are the target audience.
I'm sorry to say that I'm finding it pretty much useless.
I thought it was fairly clear that it was oriented toward math, science, and technology. I'm not surprised that there are better sources for sports trivia and financial data.
Try again. The error message is now much better.
> You know, finally, we might be able to get a clear answer on how to determine whether a
> program has stopped.
Check the exit status.
And if you ask nicely and have something interesting to offer in trade the Canadians just might let you have some of the food they grow on that land.
Wrong. Daydreaming is also fattening.
> Before these things came into service, who approved them and what was their test
> procedure? Did they just look at the brochure?
No. They also went out to lunch with the salesman.
Think about how small that is, and how large a cubic meter is. I'm not impressed. You can find a few molecules of almost anything almost everywhere, if you have sensitive enough equipment.
Well, lets say you have a few billion gallons of "soup" and you let it stew for a few hundred million years...
With enough trials low probability events become near certainties.
The popup goes away after you click "Cancel" ten times.
> Tell me one advantage this knucklehead idea possesses over having a simple slider/dial
> to adjust processor speed.
It is suitable for knuckleheads who couldn't deal with such a slider.
> These guys aren't talking about new processor designs (though I'm sure some engineers at /. and will find this research), they're looking for ways to better
> AMD and Intel read
> implement the power saving features that are already present in modern CPUs.
They also seem to be assuming that the only function of the cpu is to provide snappy GUI response (which is probably true for most users).