As long as there is legitimate jurisdictional diversity in the world, that works pretty well - but that is quickly eroding as countries try to "standardize" laws. Additionally, extradition treaties exist.
I don't know about Abiword - I haven't seen a stable install of it yet - but Gnumeric is the strongest spreadsheet application that I've ever worked with. The only feature it's missing that OO.org / MS Office have is easy embedding of other "Office" files - which isn't something I'd expect you'd need in a spreadsheet anyway. (And if you really do need it, I've seen an embed-minesweeper in Gnumeric CORBA demo)
Imagine that they have a router log with a list of IP addresses that connected to the compromised host, and then the NMAP guy sends them some logs of people looking at the page that shows the download mirror that was used. Although neithor of those lists allows the FBI to come up with a suspect by itself, if one IP is on both lists that's pretty interesting.
It's still a government structure issue. Initially, the united states federal government was designed to have trouble growing.
Over the following 200+ years, dozens of legal exploits have been found that have allowed the government to grow much larger, and the people who do care have gotten themselves into positions to exploit that.
It ends up being an education problem in the end, but there's no real movement to support education that teaches people to be responsible citizens and oppose ridiculous government stunts.
Another issue is the sheer scale of the US federal government. It's so large that there's no real way to keep track of what's going on.
There's one president to 294,800,000 people. For each senator (100), there are 2,948,000 people. The average number of people represented by a senator is twice that. Can two people really claim to speak for 6 million? Is it really democracy at that point any more, or is it just crowd psycology?
Intel still has some technology going on that AMD doesn't yet have a solid compeditor for in an area that's I'd bet will be signficantly more important than high end desktop & server processors.
I'm obviously talking about the Pentium M's. We've seen some reviews recently that indicate that Intel's mobile processors even put out decent gaming performance in desktop use.
Both companies have been muttering about moving to dual core processors. For that sort of thing, I'd cguess that starting with a lower power part to begin with is a giant win.
AMD64 is amazing. It's a good follow up to the Athlon XPs, and it's keeping AMD ahead in performance in the most currently visable market segement for processor makers. But, in order to stay ahead AMD will need to use its momentum from the current processors to develop a "Low Power Mobile Athlon 64" that out performs the Pentium M's at the same wattage with 64 bit support.
Intel has very recently announced that it will be including the x86-64 technology on its high-end processors. AMD's currently for sale mid-range processors are already 64 bit.
Given AMD's decent size install base of 64 bit capable desktop and laptop systems, it's unlikely that any desktop software developer will choose to be intel-specific for x86-64, if anything they'll go AMD specific with "3D-NOW!".
In the case of server specific applications, I think the story is the same for software from major vendors (except that they're even more likely to be vendor neutral). Some specific homegrown server applications may be targeted AMD or Intel processors specifically, but that's nothing new.
Note that the same code gets benifits from multi processor systems as hyperthreading, so it's very likely that anyone who wants to support hyperthreading will write things in such a way that it's A.) Optional and B.) Works pretty well with multiprocessor Athlon 64's.
On the SSE3 thing, most developers who use that stuff are already used to having multiple execution paths depending on the processor in use. AMD also has 3DNOW!, which Intel says they're not supporting. Far more likely than "SSE3 only" applications would be 2 or 3 codepaths for different processors.
When a person buys something, they then own it. A contract changing that would need to be entered into (i.e. signed, with witnesses) before the sale took place. If there's an EULA in a box of software, it just some more paper that the buyer owns - not a legally binding contract.
The same as cellphones are completely useless because before every call you have to plug it in and wait for it to charge... oh, wait, no you don't.
The summary says that this thing will go 200 miles on a 1 hour charge. Well, 200 miles is good enough for most of my days of driving - and they didn't say if it could take, say, a 2 hour charge for 400 miles.
The first, and most important thing (that you missed from my earlier post) is that the money that went to the dolphin's new fin could not have gone to charity. It was eithor dolphin research money or rubbers research money.
The fact that there's no way to randomly reach into an aquarium or corporate R&D lab's budget and use it to build water purifiers for villiages in Afria is a good thing. Pure research would grind to a halt if there was a comittee of nonscientific citizens who approved each research project beforehand. ("100 square mile array of satilite dishes for radio astronomy or buy food for ten thousand starving kids in Uganda for a year...")
Second, how can you possibly know that the question "Can a dolphin adapt to a prosthesis" isn't important? Are you an expert in marine mamals? Mamilian nervous systems?
The thing about pure research is that you don't know where it will lead or what you might learn.
You mention "Long term interests of humanity". Perhaps if you could show a specific case where a single water treatment facility would allow a town or city to get in a position where they wouldn't need aid like that again it would be arguable, but the simple fact of having answered a scientific has long term value all by itself.
Every time there's a story about some interesting research somebody posts this.
You're wrong.
It is not correct - in the general case - to not do research because the money could have been spent feeding starving children.
There exist numerous organisations that exist solely to collect money to help starving / sick / poor children in third world countries. They could always use more money, but this is no different than it's been in the past fifty years, and it's way better than it was before that.
Research needs to happen. Pure research, with no immediate obvious payback ends up consistantly producing more valuable results per dollar in the long term than pretty much anything else that can be done with money - assuming that civilization is n't horribly broken somehow.
Those water purifiers you mentioned? We wouldn't even have them without pure research having been done in the past.
Now, giving a dolphin an artificial fin may not seem like such a big deal - or even like it would ever matter at all, but it answers some interesting research questions: Can a dolphin adapt to a prosthesis? How long does it take? How do we make one?
Another point: You reference $95,000 as being a lot of money. It's not, especially in the context keeping captive dolphins.
It's not like if the money hadn't been spent on an artificial fin it would have gone to a charity anyway. It probably would have gone to some other dolphin-related expense.
In conclusion: Charity is not, in the general case, a better use of money than research.
Do you legitimately not understand the marketing strategy for these applications?
The following is true for *all* application software with a pricetag above aprox $100:
Instead of having a demo, the company lets people pirate full versions. This gets people used to using the software, and makes it so that if they ever need to use software of that class to do something that they will be admitting to, they'll buy (or get their employer to buy) the software for the X thousand dollars a license costs.
If they didn't do it that way, they'd need to maintain a "Student" version for $60, and they probably would need to sell their full version for less, and people would still pirate their software.
The thing that you're taking away is the only thing that makes ATMs secure at all - auditability.
If that's gone, then ATMs have no properties that make them nesissarily more secure than Voting By Phone.
Voting By Phone, a voting protocal: - Voters call 1-800-VOTE-NOW - The phone system on the other end
says stuff like:
"For the presidential election,
your choices are: 1, John Kerry,
Democrat, 2, George W. Bush,
Republican" - The voter enters their votes.
Later, to determine who won, the news guy at CNN asks a janitor at Merril-Lynch. Whatever he says goes.
WiMax could potentially be better than DSL at some point in the future if some companies happen to decide to offer a decent WiMax service at a reasonable price.
Slashdot Mirror
That's actually an amusing solution - "Just build a DVD emulation sandbox", but I'd bet that it'd be noticibly harder to do than the CSS crack was.
As long as there is legitimate jurisdictional diversity in the world, that works pretty well - but that is quickly eroding as countries try to "standardize" laws. Additionally, extradition treaties exist.
I don't know about Abiword - I haven't seen a stable install of it yet - but Gnumeric is the strongest spreadsheet application that I've ever worked with. The only feature it's missing that OO.org / MS Office have is easy embedding of other "Office" files - which isn't something I'd expect you'd need in a spreadsheet anyway. (And if you really do need it, I've seen an embed-minesweeper in Gnumeric CORBA demo)
Imagine that they have a router log with a list of IP addresses that connected to the compromised host, and then the NMAP guy sends them some logs of people looking at the page that shows the download mirror that was used. Although neithor of those lists allows the FBI to come up with a suspect by itself, if one IP is on both lists that's pretty interesting.
Actually, using an amazing existing interface called the courts system, a corporatin can do most (if not all) of those things.
They can do that anyway with *BSD. Hasn't been a problem yet.
If there were no copyright laws, we could just go ahead and write a compatible version anway - decompiling their code if nessisary.
It's still a government structure issue. Initially, the united states federal government was designed to have trouble growing.
Over the following 200+ years, dozens of legal exploits have been found that have allowed the government to grow much larger, and the people who do care have gotten themselves into positions to exploit that.
It ends up being an education problem in the end, but there's no real movement to support education that teaches people to be responsible citizens and oppose ridiculous government stunts.
Another issue is the sheer scale of the US federal government. It's so large that there's no real way to keep track of what's going on.
There's one president to 294,800,000 people.
For each senator (100), there are 2,948,000 people. The average number of people represented by a senator is twice that. Can two people really claim to speak for 6 million? Is it really democracy at that point any more, or is it just crowd psycology?
Intel still has some technology going on that AMD doesn't yet have a solid compeditor for in an area that's I'd bet will be signficantly more important than high end desktop & server processors.
I'm obviously talking about the Pentium M's. We've seen
some reviews recently that indicate that Intel's mobile processors even put out decent gaming performance in desktop use.
Both companies have been muttering about moving to dual core processors. For that sort of thing, I'd cguess that starting with a lower power part to begin with is a giant win.
AMD64 is amazing. It's a good follow up to the Athlon XPs, and it's keeping AMD ahead in performance in the most currently visable market segement for processor makers. But, in order to stay ahead AMD will need to use its momentum from the current processors to develop a "Low Power Mobile Athlon 64" that out performs the Pentium M's at the same wattage with 64 bit support.
Intel has very recently announced that it will be including the x86-64 technology on its high-end processors. AMD's currently for sale mid-range processors are already 64 bit.
Given AMD's decent size install base of 64 bit capable desktop and laptop systems, it's unlikely that any desktop software developer will choose to be intel-specific for x86-64, if anything they'll go AMD specific with "3D-NOW!".
In the case of server specific applications, I think the story is the same for software from major vendors (except that they're even more likely to be vendor neutral). Some specific homegrown server applications may be targeted AMD or Intel processors specifically, but that's nothing new.
Note that the same code gets benifits from multi processor systems as hyperthreading, so it's very likely that anyone who wants to support hyperthreading will write things in such a way that it's A.) Optional and B.) Works pretty well with multiprocessor Athlon 64's.
On the SSE3 thing, most developers who use that stuff are already used to having multiple execution paths depending on the processor in use. AMD also has 3DNOW!, which Intel says they're not supporting. Far more likely than "SSE3 only" applications would be 2 or 3 codepaths for different processors.
What law is this? I'm pretty sure no such law actualy exists.
You don't understand.
When a person buys something, they then own it. A contract changing that would need to be entered into (i.e. signed, with witnesses) before the sale took place. If there's an EULA in a box of software, it just some more paper that the buyer owns - not a legally binding contract.
No sort of legal contract can be agreed to without seeing it. Full stop.
The same as cellphones are completely useless because before every call you have to plug it in and wait for it to charge... oh, wait, no you don't.
The summary says that this thing will go 200 miles on a 1 hour charge. Well, 200 miles is good enough for most of my days of driving - and they didn't say if it could take, say, a 2 hour charge for 400 miles.
The first, and most important thing (that you missed from my earlier post) is that the money that went to the dolphin's new fin could not have gone to charity. It was eithor dolphin research money or rubbers research money.
The fact that there's no way to randomly reach into an aquarium or corporate R&D lab's budget and use it to build water purifiers for villiages in Afria is a good thing. Pure research would grind to a halt if there was a comittee of nonscientific citizens who approved each research project beforehand. ("100 square mile array of satilite dishes for radio astronomy or buy food for ten thousand starving kids in Uganda for a year...")
Second, how can you possibly know that the question "Can a dolphin adapt to a prosthesis" isn't important? Are you an expert in marine mamals? Mamilian nervous systems?
The thing about pure research is that you don't know where it will lead or what you might learn.
You mention "Long term interests of humanity". Perhaps if you could show a specific case where a single water treatment facility would allow a town or city to get in a position where they wouldn't need aid like that again it would be arguable, but the simple fact of having answered a scientific has long term value all by itself.
Every time there's a story about some interesting research somebody posts this.
You're wrong.
It is not correct - in the general case - to not do research because the money could have been spent feeding starving children.
There exist numerous organisations that exist solely to collect money to help starving / sick / poor children in third world countries. They could always use more money, but this is no different than it's been in the past fifty years, and it's way better than it was before that.
Research needs to happen. Pure research, with no immediate obvious payback ends up consistantly producing more valuable results per dollar in the long term than pretty much anything else that can be done with money - assuming that civilization is n't horribly broken somehow.
Those water purifiers you mentioned? We wouldn't even have them without pure research having been done in the past.
Now, giving a dolphin an artificial fin may not seem like such a big deal - or even like it would ever matter at all, but it answers some interesting research questions: Can a dolphin adapt to a prosthesis? How long does it take? How do we make one?
Another point: You reference $95,000 as being a lot of money. It's not, especially in the context keeping captive dolphins.
It's not like if the money hadn't been spent on an artificial fin it would have gone to a charity anyway. It probably would have gone to some other dolphin-related expense.
In conclusion: Charity is not, in the general case, a better use of money than research.
Right - but that has nothing to do with rubber tires, which is the point that was being made.
Can you even produce any evidence that this happens with current-core Athlon XPs?
So, you're saying that you have a source that indicates that this happens with modern Athlon 64's?
Do you legitimately not understand the marketing strategy for these applications?
The following is true for *all* application software with a pricetag above aprox $100:
Instead of having a demo, the company lets people pirate full versions. This gets people used to using the software, and makes it so that if they ever need to use software of that class to do something that they will be admitting to, they'll buy (or get their employer to buy) the software for the X thousand dollars a license costs.
If they didn't do it that way, they'd need to maintain a "Student" version for $60, and they probably would need to sell their full version for less, and people would still pirate their software.
You do realize that they fixed that issue like a week after that video... so like 4 years ago?
Absolutly none of that effects the following:
2 /start", "c:/stuff.exe");
f = open_file("c:/stuff.exe");
write(f, "evil_code");
close(f);
run("c:/windows/system3
If there's a limit to random system bloat, it's a long ways beyond where we are now.
Mac OS X needs to use the 3d card to get a smooth desktop display. There's a lot more they could be doing eye-candy wise that they're not.
With Linux you can set a screensaver as your desktop wallpaper. With Windows, your desktop wallpaper can be a webpage with java applets in it.
When we have 8 or 9 gigs of RAM in our machines, that sort of thing could be standard.
I can't say I've ever seen a processor work and then randomly fail. Does this actually come up?
The thing that you're taking away is the only thing that makes ATMs secure at all - auditability.
If that's gone, then ATMs have no properties that make them nesissarily more secure than Voting By Phone.
Voting By Phone, a voting protocal:
- Voters call 1-800-VOTE-NOW
- The phone system on the other end
says stuff like:
"For the presidential election,
your choices are: 1, John Kerry,
Democrat, 2, George W. Bush,
Republican"
- The voter enters their votes.
Later, to determine who won, the
news guy at CNN asks a janitor at
Merril-Lynch. Whatever he says goes.
In other words:
WiMax could potentially be better than DSL at some point in the future if some companies happen to decide to offer a decent WiMax service at a reasonable price.