I just that when that drunk delivery person runs you down in the street, you smile and say "at least the government didn't take away their right to earn a living."
Last I checked probation was a punishment meant to be less severe than imprisonment. So yeah, you may have to work less desirable jobs than sitting on your ass at a computer (I should point out there are many classy jobs that don't involve computers, like music, art, literature, pottery, etc).
And I agree that attempted piracy is going to be really vague and hard to enforce.
So you'd rather lock them up and deny any ability for them to get on with their life? BTW we do deny driving privileges, parental rights, and other things based on criminal records. What about that?
Oh I know, we should let drunks drive even after caught repeatedly, because their life would just end if they couldn't drive....
Believe it or not, many people work everyday without using a computer that could effectively serve as a conduit for P2P.
One thing that gets me. The lack of decent bots (that are configurable and act more like humans). I'm really tired of either having no bots or bots that are perfect and make no mistakes [or strategy for that matter].
While I like a good bout online as much as the next guy, sometimes it's nice to just play on your terms [and not put up with other players, net lag, retarded hacked servers, etc].
Plus I'd play party games if I'm with peeps. Wii Smoothmoves y0!
You're not going to be pirating software/movies from a PDA... and be running a mastering business. A computer would be a processing device with mass storage, network connectivity, and media devices like a CDR and/or DVD-R.
Your cell phone with 2MB of flash doesn't have mass storage. you can't pirate 4GB movies with a cell phone [nor would you want to anyways]. I agree it should be criminal. And for those who are repeat offenders jail time should be warranted, but life? I also disagree with serving time for first time offenders.
I honestly think it's cheaper to perform a random search once a week than to house/feed/cloth/watch someone 24/7.
We could easily enforce a ban, or at the very least severely hamper their ability to perform the tasks.
It'd be enough I think to just say anything running a PPC, ARM, x86 or MIPS processor. Cuz honestly, if some dude is bittorrenting with an 8051... man they earned the right to do so.
I think for the purposes of law banning the use of computer would be a processing device with a display and mass storage.
Using it would be directly causing, or causing to be used, a computing device.
You wouldn't ban all electronics since that's just asinine. But I think it's totally possible to enforce a ban on anything capable of torrenting.
They didn't say life in prison, so much as they said that they want to trigger repeat offender status [e.g. three strikes]. I'm sure if you were convicted of murder a third time you'd definitely get life.
That said, I agree that it's absurd that we can even think of locking people up for life for copying bits. There are easier and more humane ways to go about this. For example, probation, being forbidden to own/operate a computer, etc.
You can still be a totally productive member of society without a computer. Being locked up in a cell is hardly productive.
Yeah but all the little things add up. I'm also in favour of driving smaller cars, less often, etc.
By your logic we could excuse any and all wastes of natural resources as no one of them would amount to the entire picture. It's ok for me to speed in my 10MPG SUV, cuz I'm just one person. And I should own a 5000sqft house just for myself, cuz my one house is doesn't contribute that much, etc...
Point is the vast majority of people don't need anywhere as near as powerful computing as they have. And where we do specialize it should be with specialized gear. E.g. a console specifically optimized for gaming. Since people already tend to own both a PC and a console it's not a stretch.
Linux is aware of SMT, multi-core, SMP and combinations there of. It calcs migration costs for moving processes around and the like. For example, in a NUMA aware setup, it won't migrate a process to a different NUMA zone unless it has to. It does round-robin processes through cores though kinda like load-balancing [keeps the heat down too].
You can extract CPU info from the/sys dir, and use sched_setaffinity() to lock your threads to a given core if you want.
Idle cores still consume electricity. In fact, even a gated off circuit [e.g. all inputs and'ed with 0] still consumes electricity. I suggest you learn what leak current is.
Multiply that by the 10s of millions of cores running around out there and each individual 10W here 10W there that is wasted adds up.
Also if you read the slides you'd see that each core can clock independently but not voltage. So the savings aren't as good as they could be anyways. And at anyrate, better would be cutting cores off completely, e.g. a relay or switch. Thus removing the leak current, but greatly increasing the spinup time.
I'd have less of a problem with this if you could truly turn unused cores completely off. But that isn't the case and probably won't ever be, at least for the forseeable future [it costs a lot to put things on many power rails, etc...].
You're missing my point. Whatever your target customer is you pick suitable requirements and stick to that. If it means javascript and whatever else, and browser $X doesn't have it so be it.
What? Do you think every application ever written is meant to be run on every platform in existence?
You're like the 9th person to point that out. Yes, i know about parallel builds. you don't build a $7000 workstation without the basics of how to use build tools like make.
My point though is that unless you're doing build 24/7 it's just not worth it. That opteron box can build LTC in 8 seconds. A decent dual core can do it in 14 seconds. A single core can do it in ~30 seconds. The single core box can also use a lot less power.
I think a reasonable tradeoff for developers is a dual-core box. But for most home users I think they're better served by single core boxes that consume less power.
You read wrong. It says voltages are locked to the highest utilized core's p-state. So while the freq will change the voltage won't, and yes, that will still result in saving power.
I should point out that the Intel Core 2 Duo's can do this already.
No, you say "our application requires HTML v4.02 and CSS version whatever..."
It's called a requirements list for a reason.
And I'd say there are WAY more people using firefox than lynx. So if you were to write an app I'd stick to the standards and openly berate any browser claiming compatibility that provably does not hit the target.
Bingo, and with an email addr [addy hhahahaa] like tomstdenis@gmail.com you would have thought it sounds like either an English or French name. But that's just the point isn't it? Spammers are indiscriminate and don't care who's time they waste.
I had a 2P dual-core opteron 2.6GHz box as my workstation for several months. To be honest I couldn't really find a legitimate use for it. And I was running gentoo and doing a lot of my own OSS development [re: builds].
While I think quad-cores are important for the server rooms, I just don't see the business case for personal use. It'll just be more wasted energy. Now if you could fully shut off cores [not just gate off] when it's idle, then yeah, hey bring it on. But so long as they sit there wasting 20W per core or whatever at idle, it's just wasted power.
To get an idea of it, imagine turning on a CF lamp [in addition to the lighting you already have] and leave it on 24/7. Doesn't that seem just silly? Well that's what an idling core will look like. It's in addition to the existing processing power and just sits there wasting Watts.
i don't get your comment. Gentoo can host both KDE and Gnome at the same time. Neither changes the runlevel scripts, portage system, etc. I just don't get what "more similar than the same distro running GNOME and it running KDE" is supposed to mean.
Do you mean that KDE and Gnome are different window managers?
Do you think that Internet Explorer is the Internet?
For those of us who played the game and wanted to be accessible by the public [re: supporting an OSS project] it's part and parcel. If users can reach me for support emails, so can spammers.
I imagine if I just didn't take part in the OSS world and didn't post on usenet, I'd probably be spam free too.
I'm sure the epaper display is better for reading. It's just not worth the cost, and in the meantime I'll make due with something else [e.g., my laptop].
$700 for what basically amounts to just a display is insane. The software is freely available, the rest of the components probably total $50-$100 in volume. So what you're paying for is either an inefficiently setup company, the license fees for epaper, or greedy profit margins.
No, what I think happened is when you delete an account google doesn't let anyone else use the name. Because it was "taken" 30 seconds after I deleted it. Google would be stupid to let others re-use usernames.
Slashdot Mirror
Um ok. Think what you want.
I just that when that drunk delivery person runs you down in the street, you smile and say "at least the government didn't take away their right to earn a living."
Wouldn't want you to be hypocritical.
Tom
Last I checked probation was a punishment meant to be less severe than imprisonment. So yeah, you may have to work less desirable jobs than sitting on your ass at a computer (I should point out there are many classy jobs that don't involve computers, like music, art, literature, pottery, etc).
And I agree that attempted piracy is going to be really vague and hard to enforce.
Tom
So you'd rather lock them up and deny any ability for them to get on with their life? BTW we do deny driving privileges, parental rights, and other things based on criminal records. What about that?
Oh I know, we should let drunks drive even after caught repeatedly, because their life would just end if they couldn't drive....
Believe it or not, many people work everyday without using a computer that could effectively serve as a conduit for P2P.
Tom
One thing that gets me. The lack of decent bots (that are configurable and act more like humans). I'm really tired of either having no bots or bots that are perfect and make no mistakes [or strategy for that matter].
While I like a good bout online as much as the next guy, sometimes it's nice to just play on your terms [and not put up with other players, net lag, retarded hacked servers, etc].
Plus I'd play party games if I'm with peeps. Wii Smoothmoves y0!
Tom
You're not going to be pirating software/movies from a PDA ... and be running a mastering business. A computer would be a processing device with mass storage, network connectivity, and media devices like a CDR and/or DVD-R.
Your cell phone with 2MB of flash doesn't have mass storage. you can't pirate 4GB movies with a cell phone [nor would you want to anyways]. I agree it should be criminal. And for those who are repeat offenders jail time should be warranted, but life? I also disagree with serving time for first time offenders.
I honestly think it's cheaper to perform a random search once a week than to house/feed/cloth/watch someone 24/7.
We could easily enforce a ban, or at the very least severely hamper their ability to perform the tasks.
Tom
And where would you hide it if I knocked on your door at 6am?
Also where would you hide your modem and all that jazz?
We're not talking about a search that is planned in advance.
Tom
It'd be enough I think to just say anything running a PPC, ARM, x86 or MIPS processor. Cuz honestly, if some dude is bittorrenting with an 8051 ... man they earned the right to do so.
I think for the purposes of law banning the use of computer would be a processing device with a display and mass storage.
Using it would be directly causing, or causing to be used, a computing device.
You wouldn't ban all electronics since that's just asinine. But I think it's totally possible to enforce a ban on anything capable of torrenting.
Tom
Under probation you agree to random inspections and have to record your employment, etc...
So unless you can hide your desktop rig somewhere they'll never find it at a moments notice...chances are it's enforceable.
Tom
They didn't say life in prison, so much as they said that they want to trigger repeat offender status [e.g. three strikes]. I'm sure if you were convicted of murder a third time you'd definitely get life.
That said, I agree that it's absurd that we can even think of locking people up for life for copying bits. There are easier and more humane ways to go about this. For example, probation, being forbidden to own/operate a computer, etc.
You can still be a totally productive member of society without a computer. Being locked up in a cell is hardly productive.
Tom
Yeah but all the little things add up. I'm also in favour of driving smaller cars, less often, etc.
By your logic we could excuse any and all wastes of natural resources as no one of them would amount to the entire picture. It's ok for me to speed in my 10MPG SUV, cuz I'm just one person. And I should own a 5000sqft house just for myself, cuz my one house is doesn't contribute that much, etc...
Point is the vast majority of people don't need anywhere as near as powerful computing as they have. And where we do specialize it should be with specialized gear. E.g. a console specifically optimized for gaming. Since people already tend to own both a PC and a console it's not a stretch.
Tom
Linux is aware of SMT, multi-core, SMP and combinations there of. It calcs migration costs for moving processes around and the like. For example, in a NUMA aware setup, it won't migrate a process to a different NUMA zone unless it has to. It does round-robin processes through cores though kinda like load-balancing [keeps the heat down too].
/sys dir, and use sched_setaffinity() to lock your threads to a given core if you want.
You can extract CPU info from the
Tom
Idle cores still consume electricity. In fact, even a gated off circuit [e.g. all inputs and'ed with 0] still consumes electricity. I suggest you learn what leak current is.
Multiply that by the 10s of millions of cores running around out there and each individual 10W here 10W there that is wasted adds up.
Also if you read the slides you'd see that each core can clock independently but not voltage. So the savings aren't as good as they could be anyways. And at anyrate, better would be cutting cores off completely, e.g. a relay or switch. Thus removing the leak current, but greatly increasing the spinup time.
I'd have less of a problem with this if you could truly turn unused cores completely off. But that isn't the case and probably won't ever be, at least for the forseeable future [it costs a lot to put things on many power rails, etc...].
Tom
You're missing my point. Whatever your target customer is you pick suitable requirements and stick to that. If it means javascript and whatever else, and browser $X doesn't have it so be it.
What? Do you think every application ever written is meant to be run on every platform in existence?
Tom
You're like the 9th person to point that out. Yes, i know about parallel builds. you don't build a $7000 workstation without the basics of how to use build tools like make.
My point though is that unless you're doing build 24/7 it's just not worth it. That opteron box can build LTC in 8 seconds. A decent dual core can do it in 14 seconds. A single core can do it in ~30 seconds. The single core box can also use a lot less power.
I think a reasonable tradeoff for developers is a dual-core box. But for most home users I think they're better served by single core boxes that consume less power.
Tom
You read wrong. It says voltages are locked to the highest utilized core's p-state. So while the freq will change the voltage won't, and yes, that will still result in saving power.
I should point out that the Intel Core 2 Duo's can do this already.
Tom
No, you say "our application requires HTML v4.02 and CSS version whatever..."
It's called a requirements list for a reason.
And I'd say there are WAY more people using firefox than lynx. So if you were to write an app I'd stick to the standards and openly berate any browser claiming compatibility that provably does not hit the target.
tom
Bingo, and with an email addr [addy hhahahaa] like tomstdenis@gmail.com you would have thought it sounds like either an English or French name. But that's just the point isn't it? Spammers are indiscriminate and don't care who's time they waste.
Tom
Yeah it's faster. but how much time do you spend building software? Maybe 15 mins every three or four days at most.
Tom
In terms of market share, no. In terms of tech yes. See Opteron v. Intel P4 Xeon for example.
Tom
I had a 2P dual-core opteron 2.6GHz box as my workstation for several months. To be honest I couldn't really find a legitimate use for it. And I was running gentoo and doing a lot of my own OSS development [re: builds].
While I think quad-cores are important for the server rooms, I just don't see the business case for personal use. It'll just be more wasted energy. Now if you could fully shut off cores [not just gate off] when it's idle, then yeah, hey bring it on. But so long as they sit there wasting 20W per core or whatever at idle, it's just wasted power.
To get an idea of it, imagine turning on a CF lamp [in addition to the lighting you already have] and leave it on 24/7. Doesn't that seem just silly? Well that's what an idling core will look like. It's in addition to the existing processing power and just sits there wasting Watts.
Tom
Simple. Have a "teaching" address that only students can email to. Then have your own private one that isn't listed.
Are you sure you're the smartest man alive? Cuz my idea was pretty smart!
Tom
i don't get your comment. Gentoo can host both KDE and Gnome at the same time. Neither changes the runlevel scripts, portage system, etc. I just don't get what "more similar than the same distro running GNOME and it running KDE" is supposed to mean.
Do you mean that KDE and Gnome are different window managers?
Do you think that Internet Explorer is the Internet?
Tom
For those of us who played the game and wanted to be accessible by the public [re: supporting an OSS project] it's part and parcel. If users can reach me for support emails, so can spammers.
I imagine if I just didn't take part in the OSS world and didn't post on usenet, I'd probably be spam free too.
Tom
I'm sure the epaper display is better for reading. It's just not worth the cost, and in the meantime I'll make due with something else [e.g., my laptop].
$700 for what basically amounts to just a display is insane. The software is freely available, the rest of the components probably total $50-$100 in volume. So what you're paying for is either an inefficiently setup company, the license fees for epaper, or greedy profit margins.
Tom
No, what I think happened is when you delete an account google doesn't let anyone else use the name. Because it was "taken" 30 seconds after I deleted it. Google would be stupid to let others re-use usernames.
Tom