I traded a buddy of mine some 45RPM vinyl records I got as part of a set (along with some old collectible books and some brass, walnut and marble shelve knick-knacks or my home office) for $1 at an auction. He didn't take all the records, mind you, just twelve or so he really liked. I got a SmallLinux laptop out of the deal. I'm thinking about putting DOS back on it, though, to play some of my old games on real DOS instead of DOSBox.
I could go out and buy a 6 pound laptop with Windows on it for $500, fdisk it, and install Linux. I could buy this thing, which is 2 pounds, and then choose whether to keep the installation that's on it or install a different Linux distro on it for $199.
So while you're being all cute about actually being technically competent enough to install Fedora or Ubuntu, I'll have saved myself enough money to buy a Wii and some games, or a second laptop for my wife so she's not sharing mine. I'll also be able to pack it into a carry-on with other stuff rather than calling my laptop bag a carry-on by itself.
This is Slashdot, and while it might be funny to claim you're the most technically gifted one around or the most old-school hacker on the site, those odds are pretty slim, Mr. 1135037. So go ahead and pay your Microsoft tax, lug around a 6 pound laptop you paid more for than you should have, ridicule those people who think preloaded Linux is the best way to grow Linux desktop use, and make fun of everyone who has a sense of convenience or frugality. We'll just be over here -->, chuckling about how 31337 you must be to make the observation that Linux can be installed at home on Slashdot.
I only had EGA in my 1meg 286 with 40meg hard drive, and mine wasn't state of the art. I chose to have a 286 20MHZ with 1 meg of RAM and EGA plus a 4-color dot matrix printer instead of a 486sx25 with 4 megs of RAM and VGA without the printer. In retrospect, I'm not sure I made the wrong choice since two years later I got a dx4 100 with 16 megs (which I later upgraded to 64) and a 540meg hard drive (which I upgraded to 8.4 gigs). The printer was still about the same price at that point.
What really burns me is the Wang 2400 bps modem with 9600 bps send and 4800 bps receive fax. I dropped $135 on that. It does still work, though. I tested it out a couple of months ago just out of curiosity.
Wow, I wish I'd known about that one before I submitted the article summary. Now I think I might want one of these... but it's $300 (Canadian, but the Canadian dollar is not as weak compared to the US dollar as it once was). It's an ARM, and there's lots of software for Linux on ARM. It's got twice the battery life, the keyboard looks to detach, and it has dual SD slots.
Oh, it's a great day when you're deciding between two different sub-$300 ultra-portables.
The problem with OLPC is that they currently have no plans to sell to the public. If you're not a government buying them for weapons^W poor children in lot sizes in the millions, they're not interested.
I would probably take the XO over this at the same price, but I'm not going to support "blood laptops" any more than I support "blood diamonds". If I can buy this on the open market this fall while Negroponte is still trying to decide if XO is ever going to be available to adults in developed countries, this would make a nice update to my Pentium II laptop instead of getting a Turion or a Core 2 Duo.
I game on my desktop, but I have no intention of buying a laptop for gaming right now. I just want something small and useful. Ever since my Psion 5mx went away, I've been trying to figure out how small a clamshell machine I can get for not much cash.
I'm not going to flame you, but I'll attempt to make a simple, civil counterpoint.
Mac applications that are properly set up to use the Carbon/Cocoa interface and packaged specifically as Mac apps are about as easy to install as ever. It is now also possible to run Unixy things on the Mac without rebooting into Yellow Dog, Fedora PPC, or NetBSD.
Some (maybe even most, I'll give you that) of the Unixy things designed for generally Unixy operating systems and not originally to be Mac-specific are just as difficult and messy as on any other OS. They are, though, a lot easier to port to Mac now, and they are in addition to the official Mac stuff and not in lieu of it.
When the merit of two current solutions is close, one probably should consider a couple of other factors.
One is the ability of the implementer to make improvements. Yes, it's possible for Ingo to get up to speed on Con's scheduler. It might be worthwhile to have the better overall programmer make improvements to what's the better solution at this point. However, Ingo is going to be intimately familiar with his own work already.
Another factor is where the two solutions can go from here. If one is easier to change and improve over time than the other, then it should get consideration for that.
I'm not saying that Linus necessarily made the right decision. I'm just saying that there's more to a decision than a comparison of two solutions at an exact point in time when you're working within an iterative process.
By maintaining the temperature of the device at a certain temperature at a given ambient temperature, you are creating and maintaining a difference in temperature between two points (a point on the device and a point in the environment) within the volume affected by the cooling system.
So what you just said, besides being overly snarky, was complete and utter nonsense. If you sub in the words for what the words mean, you said, "What you described is achieving a temperature differential, not achieving a temperature differential".
Humpty Dumpty may be able to change the meanings of words as he pleases, and for all I know you might be egg-shaped, but that doesn't mean you can just blather on without regard for what the words mean and expect anyone to agree with what you've said.
Actually, you do design the cooling system to keep the CPU below a certain ambient temperature. I'll use Celsius here because it's important to get some perspective on this if you want to have a conversation about it.
If your only goal is keeping it under 350 C, and it's being operated in a climate controlled room at 20 C, then unless it's dissipating shitloads of heat itself it won't need a cooling system at all. Even then, a small and simple one should do well.
If, however, you're operating it on Venus or inside a volcano, your cooling system must be up to keeping the chip under 350 C despite the fact that ambient might be that hot or hotter. This is a different type of system altogether.
If you use the system designed to cool the chip on the surface of Venus for your processor in your server room on Earth, you have seriously over-engineered and over-spent to get to that point.
There's no point in having a cooling system that will keep your CPU at 20 C or 200 C or even 200,000 C on the surface of the Sun. Your system will not be there. There is always an ambient temperature, and you cannot design something to be both effective and as inexpensive as possible without considering how much you need to cool something to get it to the desired temperature range.
Shake your head all you fucking want. Then read a fucking book about it.
Well, the first step is getting rid of stupidly broad laws and the people who write them.
The second is to give a judge some credit for being able to do what his title implies, and stop having legislatures tie the hands of judges with mandatory labeling of people who don't deserve it and mandatory minimum sentences for people with mitigating circumstances.
The third is to repeal a bunch of laws that cause nothing but confusion, and get nice, clear, easily indexed and understood laws on the books.
The fourth is to enforce the new, clearer, more sensible, more targeted laws better.
The fifth is to stick harsh harsh penalties to those who really do deserve them. I can see why some people are against the death penalty, so I won't argue again for it here.
When a drug dealer peacefully selling pot to adults goes away longer than a guy who plainly gets caught molesting or killing children, there's no justice. When there's no justice for one, there's no justice for anyone.
We're talking about something that will emit light intense enough to blind someone temporarily.
I never argued against that point.
As far as the abuse of this power goes, you are incredibly naive if you think the government never abuses it's power.
I never said the government didn't abuse its power. Notice the "its".
And what about Tasers?
Yeah, those can be a bitch when they're misused, too. But this article, the summary, and the thread aren't about tasers.
If you think that this new device will be used even less than tasers when it can disable one or many suspects from a long range, consequences be damned, then you're a fool.
I never said it might not be abused.
Look, read my GP post. Then read my Parent post. Then read my post. Remember that conversations happen in context. What I said was that my parent post misrepresented my GP post. That's all I said.
So get off your high horse, quit calling em an idiot for disagreeing with things you believe that I don't necessarily disagree with and never said I disagree with, and READ THE FUCKING POSTS BEFORE GOING OFF ON SOME DAMNED RANT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE POST TO WHICH YOU ARE REPLYING!
See? the shift key can be abused, too, but that doesn't mean it always will be.
Hopefully not every thread on this damned topic will become "Oh, my Flying SPaghetutti MaWnsTER! THeysa mekkin' NiVes ovder dere... NiVeS cann kilt joo! Oh, noes! They be lettun does foos o'er their drive Kars! But Karrs can be dangeroooS! No! Not powwor tewls! The gubmint can cut offa your toes wid a powwar tewl!"
get people comfortable with doing work with your license
change some wording in your favor
keep calling it the same license even though it has changed
keep tightening your hold on the code in the project
close it up and let the community try to make their fork compete against Microsoft, the largest software bully there is
get license OSI approved
convince people to sign the copyright over to your project on all contributions
get an initial round or two of public help
close it up, and let the fork try to compete with Microsoft's full-time programmers, installed base, and marketing
convince everyone you're a big OSS supporter
convince as many people as possible that you're now totally objective because you're on both sides of the fence
convince as many as possible that OSS really is just for hobbyists and tinkerers, and that your now "objective" opinion reinforces the fact that you need to pay MS for any software that does anything reliably
get a bunch of stuff out under your OSS license
allow bunches of people to work on it
base your source code on another project's
sue every other OSS project out there for stealing your source code, since it's obvious they had access to it and some of it looks the same
put out OSS stuff
allow copying into other OSS stuff
patent everything you code
say it's okay that people copied, because the license allows that, but sue for patent infringement
put out patented stuff in OSS
say your customer are covered but other people need to pay patent royalties
charge nearly as much for royalties as for your product, but make the paperwork convoluted and don't give support for the patent royalty option
encourage copying of the patented code far and wide
get known for having an OSS license (license A)
release a bunch of stuff under a similar looking, similarly named license with key differences (license B)
use the confusion to, oh, say, require in license B that contributions be sent directly to MS or distributed only as patch sets against a particular stated version
don't allow anyone to host the main branch, just the patch sets
have license B state that anything sent to MS for possible inclusion in the main branch becomes copyright MS
have license B state that any patch set made available must be maintained and available for download X number of years
update your version number a hundred or so times a year, with each version update invalidating the markings on each patch set
watch as people drop off the MS approved patch set vendors for the problems of storage and bookkeeping
close all the versions from this point on
close-source the current version once MS is happy with all the free code
stop offering the main branch for the old versions
sue into oblivion anyone who acts according to the terms of license A when they are bound by license B
I'm sure there are more ways to screw with Open Source people through license atrocities. MS probably has a team of people working on this idea full-time.
Of course not all of them would work beautifully, and some will raise the ire of those who really grok Open Source, but this is Microsoft. They're the ones with corporate drone customers they've kept brainwashed into thinking only Microsoft can do things correctly. They've built up a hate among many of these drones for OSS.
Now, they're going to be saying, hey, the face of Open Source has changed. Microsoft came in and made Open Source what it should be. Now, there's a geek's experimenting paradise. We make sure none of that confusing, buggy geek crap gets to you in our products, though.
You know, that's a pretty good question. I didn't expect Informative, but I didn't expect Flamebait, either, since it's clearly marked as "pedantry".
If someone thinks that was flamebait, they'd probably cry at some of my other posts. I usually try to be civil, and this time was at least thinly civil.
Sometimes I'm pissed enough that I do flame or bait a flame, and this just doesn't measure up to those standards. If I was trying to bait a flame with this one, I'd have determined it a failure upon re-reading it.
Maybe a couple of people just "needed" to spend some mod points before they expired, and computer poker is the only thread they weren't going to post about.
Of course, some people may never have played poker, and some people may never have seen quality flamebait. So I guess both mods could be honest from someone's perspective. I guess if someone's never played much of any card games that they might not realize how specific the jargon is. It's pretty simple compared to a lot of computer jargon, but it's still jargon.
If anyone hasn't played much cards, I highly recommend spades, euchre, oh heck, 500 rummy, gin rummy, and various forms of poker. It works lots of places where it's hard to get a proper PC or console setup, and after your PSP or DS batteries have gone dead.
There's a reason there is defined terminology, though. Any two cards is not a pair. A pair is two cards of the same rank.
For all the flames and attacks made over someone mistyping a digit on a revision number of a motherboard on this damn site, you'd think people would have some respect for the proper terminology in other geekly pursuits.
well, no. not if the guy was dealt a "suited pair" from a single deck.
There's no such thing as a "suited pair" in a single deck.
You have four distinct suits, and thirteen distinct ranks. There is one card of each of the thirteen ranks in each suit, and likewise there is exactly one card of each suit at a given rank.
A "pair" is two cards of the same rank. "Suited" means two cards of the same suit. So to have a "suited pair", one must have two cards of the same rank and the same suit.
Therefore, by definition, if you have a "suited pair" and you're playing a single-deck game, the game cannot possibly be honest.
They've had a hard time vanquishing OSS by embracing and extending standards, so now they'll try to embrace and extend code and licenses.
Expect the same tactics on different fronts. It's still Microsoft, and they are still run by the same inner circle of Gates and Ballmer cronies no matter what Hilf does from his little playpen.
What kind of dumbass doesn't know that you can tell what's going to and from mail.google.com by seeing the IP address in the header and doing a PTR lookup?
Saying, "oooh, they can tell what's bound for GMail with this, and that goes beyond the header info" makes it sound like the IP address isn't already in the damned header or the people doing the snooping don't know a) that it's in the header b) that they do a PTR lookup to find the hostname from and IP address and/or c) that mail.google.com is GMail.
If, say, this will operate from 20 C to 320 C (a 300 degree range) and some other device (like a current CPU) is only really stable between 20 C and 50 C (a 30 degree range), then one device has a thermal tolerance _range_ that is clearly much larger than the other.
Keeping a harsh environment between 20 C and 320 C is much, much easier and more cost effective than keeping it between 20 C and 50 C. If one processor can handle the whole range, and the other can't, how is that less important than the actual numbers? If one is made to withstand 350 C but breaks below 300 C, it's simply not as useful as one that goes from 20 C to 310 C. There are many more places you can use the latter than the former.
Therefore, the higher absolute temperature handling of the one is less important overall than the range which the other can handle.
How about, oh, I don't know, killing child molesters and jailing people who try (in the general prison population, with some publicity about what they are in for)?
That'll help protect the children more than anything.
Hell, hang the fuckers by their penis and scrotum until they plummet to the floor from the ripping off of their privates, then let the blood loss and infection finish them off. Nothing is too cruel and unusual for someone who would rape a child. Nothing.
I've killed some time on this since it's a pretty interesting idea. It turns out there are plenty outside the D and F range. It does seem to like pages with a single Flash object and not much else, so that's bad. It also makes some pretty arbitrary decisions which don't mean squat to many sites. There are some sites that get enough traffic that speed is a factor but not so much that a content delivery network is really necessary, for example.
I skipped the actual link and score on sites that are pretty much just representative of the sites around them. I wanted to include them by name, though, to show where they fall. I've stuck mostly to main index pages, and I've noted where I've gone deeper.
F: MS IIS (49%), microsoft.com, msn.com, linux.com, fsf.org, discovery.com, newegg.com, rackspace.com, the Simtel archive (26%), CNet Download (29%), Adobe (58%), savvis.com, mtv.com, sun.com, pclinuxos.com, freebsd.org, phpnuke.org, use.perl.org, ruby-lang.org, python.org, java.com, Rolling Stones band page (56%), powellsbooks.com, amazon.com, barnesandnoble.com, getfirefox.com
My site for my company (96%) gets an A (no, I'm not going to get it slashdotted) which is pretty simple but has a pic and some Javascript on it. Several sites I have done or have helped design with someone else get C or D ratings.
If you limit is local, then it's not really reflecting the speed of your site. It's reflecting the speed of your local connection. Only when the limiting factor is the site, or when a reliably stable transfer speed has been established, can the speed of the site relative to another site be reliably tested.
Slashdot Mirror
Gadgettastic says 800x480.
I'm sure you could get Ubuntu installed.
I traded a buddy of mine some 45RPM vinyl records I got as part of a set (along with some old collectible books and some brass, walnut and marble shelve knick-knacks or my home office) for $1 at an auction. He didn't take all the records, mind you, just twelve or so he really liked. I got a SmallLinux laptop out of the deal. I'm thinking about putting DOS back on it, though, to play some of my old games on real DOS instead of DOSBox.
I could go out and buy a 6 pound laptop with Windows on it for $500, fdisk it, and install Linux. I could buy this thing, which is 2 pounds, and then choose whether to keep the installation that's on it or install a different Linux distro on it for $199.
So while you're being all cute about actually being technically competent enough to install Fedora or Ubuntu, I'll have saved myself enough money to buy a Wii and some games, or a second laptop for my wife so she's not sharing mine. I'll also be able to pack it into a carry-on with other stuff rather than calling my laptop bag a carry-on by itself.
This is Slashdot, and while it might be funny to claim you're the most technically gifted one around or the most old-school hacker on the site, those odds are pretty slim, Mr. 1135037. So go ahead and pay your Microsoft tax, lug around a 6 pound laptop you paid more for than you should have, ridicule those people who think preloaded Linux is the best way to grow Linux desktop use, and make fun of everyone who has a sense of convenience or frugality. We'll just be over here -->, chuckling about how 31337 you must be to make the observation that Linux can be installed at home on Slashdot.
I only had EGA in my 1meg 286 with 40meg hard drive, and mine wasn't state of the art. I chose to have a 286 20MHZ with 1 meg of RAM and EGA plus a 4-color dot matrix printer instead of a 486sx25 with 4 megs of RAM and VGA without the printer. In retrospect, I'm not sure I made the wrong choice since two years later I got a dx4 100 with 16 megs (which I later upgraded to 64) and a 540meg hard drive (which I upgraded to 8.4 gigs). The printer was still about the same price at that point.
What really burns me is the Wang 2400 bps modem with 9600 bps send and 4800 bps receive fax. I dropped $135 on that. It does still work, though. I tested it out a couple of months ago just out of curiosity.
Wow, I wish I'd known about that one before I submitted the article summary. Now I think I might want one of these... but it's $300 (Canadian, but the Canadian dollar is not as weak compared to the US dollar as it once was). It's an ARM, and there's lots of software for Linux on ARM. It's got twice the battery life, the keyboard looks to detach, and it has dual SD slots.
Oh, it's a great day when you're deciding between two different sub-$300 ultra-portables.
The problem with OLPC is that they currently have no plans to sell to the public. If you're not a government buying them for weapons^W poor children in lot sizes in the millions, they're not interested.
I would probably take the XO over this at the same price, but I'm not going to support "blood laptops" any more than I support "blood diamonds". If I can buy this on the open market this fall while Negroponte is still trying to decide if XO is ever going to be available to adults in developed countries, this would make a nice update to my Pentium II laptop instead of getting a Turion or a Core 2 Duo.
I game on my desktop, but I have no intention of buying a laptop for gaming right now. I just want something small and useful. Ever since my Psion 5mx went away, I've been trying to figure out how small a clamshell machine I can get for not much cash.
I'm not going to flame you, but I'll attempt to make a simple, civil counterpoint.
Mac applications that are properly set up to use the Carbon/Cocoa interface and packaged specifically as Mac apps are about as easy to install as ever. It is now also possible to run Unixy things on the Mac without rebooting into Yellow Dog, Fedora PPC, or NetBSD.
Some (maybe even most, I'll give you that) of the Unixy things designed for generally Unixy operating systems and not originally to be Mac-specific are just as difficult and messy as on any other OS. They are, though, a lot easier to port to Mac now, and they are in addition to the official Mac stuff and not in lieu of it.
When the merit of two current solutions is close, one probably should consider a couple of other factors.
One is the ability of the implementer to make improvements. Yes, it's possible for Ingo to get up to speed on Con's scheduler. It might be worthwhile to have the better overall programmer make improvements to what's the better solution at this point. However, Ingo is going to be intimately familiar with his own work already.
Another factor is where the two solutions can go from here. If one is easier to change and improve over time than the other, then it should get consideration for that.
I'm not saying that Linus necessarily made the right decision. I'm just saying that there's more to a decision than a comparison of two solutions at an exact point in time when you're working within an iterative process.
temperature differential, definition
By maintaining the temperature of the device at a certain temperature at a given ambient temperature, you are creating and maintaining a difference in temperature between two points (a point on the device and a point in the environment) within the volume affected by the cooling system.
So what you just said, besides being overly snarky, was complete and utter nonsense. If you sub in the words for what the words mean, you said, "What you described is achieving a temperature differential, not achieving a temperature differential".
Humpty Dumpty may be able to change the meanings of words as he pleases, and for all I know you might be egg-shaped, but that doesn't mean you can just blather on without regard for what the words mean and expect anyone to agree with what you've said.
Actually, you do design the cooling system to keep the CPU below a certain ambient temperature. I'll use Celsius here because it's important to get some perspective on this if you want to have a conversation about it.
If your only goal is keeping it under 350 C, and it's being operated in a climate controlled room at 20 C, then unless it's dissipating shitloads of heat itself it won't need a cooling system at all. Even then, a small and simple one should do well.
If, however, you're operating it on Venus or inside a volcano, your cooling system must be up to keeping the chip under 350 C despite the fact that ambient might be that hot or hotter. This is a different type of system altogether.
If you use the system designed to cool the chip on the surface of Venus for your processor in your server room on Earth, you have seriously over-engineered and over-spent to get to that point.
There's no point in having a cooling system that will keep your CPU at 20 C or 200 C or even 200,000 C on the surface of the Sun. Your system will not be there. There is always an ambient temperature, and you cannot design something to be both effective and as inexpensive as possible without considering how much you need to cool something to get it to the desired temperature range.
Shake your head all you fucking want. Then read a fucking book about it.
Well, the first step is getting rid of stupidly broad laws and the people who write them.
The second is to give a judge some credit for being able to do what his title implies, and stop having legislatures tie the hands of judges with mandatory labeling of people who don't deserve it and mandatory minimum sentences for people with mitigating circumstances.
The third is to repeal a bunch of laws that cause nothing but confusion, and get nice, clear, easily indexed and understood laws on the books.
The fourth is to enforce the new, clearer, more sensible, more targeted laws better.
The fifth is to stick harsh harsh penalties to those who really do deserve them. I can see why some people are against the death penalty, so I won't argue again for it here.
When a drug dealer peacefully selling pot to adults goes away longer than a guy who plainly gets caught molesting or killing children, there's no justice. When there's no justice for one, there's no justice for anyone.
I never said that.
I never argued against that point.
I never said the government didn't abuse its power. Notice the "its".
Yeah, those can be a bitch when they're misused, too. But this article, the summary, and the thread aren't about tasers.
I never said it might not be abused.
Look, read my GP post. Then read my Parent post. Then read my post. Remember that conversations happen in context. What I said was that my parent post misrepresented my GP post. That's all I said.
So get off your high horse, quit calling em an idiot for disagreeing with things you believe that I don't necessarily disagree with and never said I disagree with, and READ THE FUCKING POSTS BEFORE GOING OFF ON SOME DAMNED RANT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE POST TO WHICH YOU ARE REPLYING!
See? the shift key can be abused, too, but that doesn't mean it always will be.
Hopefully not every thread on this damned topic will become "Oh, my Flying SPaghetutti MaWnsTER! THeysa mekkin' NiVes ovder dere... NiVeS cann kilt joo! Oh, noes! They be lettun does foos o'er their drive Kars! But Karrs can be dangeroooS! No! Not powwor tewls! The gubmint can cut offa your toes wid a powwar tewl!"
I'm sure there are more ways to screw with Open Source people through license atrocities. MS probably has a team of people working on this idea full-time.
Of course not all of them would work beautifully, and some will raise the ire of those who really grok Open Source, but this is Microsoft. They're the ones with corporate drone customers they've kept brainwashed into thinking only Microsoft can do things correctly. They've built up a hate among many of these drones for OSS.
Now, they're going to be saying, hey, the face of Open Source has changed. Microsoft came in and made Open Source what it should be. Now, there's a geek's experimenting paradise. We make sure none of that confusing, buggy geek crap gets to you in our products, though.
You know, that's a pretty good question. I didn't expect Informative, but I didn't expect Flamebait, either, since it's clearly marked as "pedantry".
If someone thinks that was flamebait, they'd probably cry at some of my other posts. I usually try to be civil, and this time was at least thinly civil.
Sometimes I'm pissed enough that I do flame or bait a flame, and this just doesn't measure up to those standards. If I was trying to bait a flame with this one, I'd have determined it a failure upon re-reading it.
Maybe a couple of people just "needed" to spend some mod points before they expired, and computer poker is the only thread they weren't going to post about.
Of course, some people may never have played poker, and some people may never have seen quality flamebait. So I guess both mods could be honest from someone's perspective. I guess if someone's never played much of any card games that they might not realize how specific the jargon is. It's pretty simple compared to a lot of computer jargon, but it's still jargon.
If anyone hasn't played much cards, I highly recommend spades, euchre, oh heck, 500 rummy, gin rummy, and various forms of poker. It works lots of places where it's hard to get a proper PC or console setup, and after your PSP or DS batteries have gone dead.
There's a reason there is defined terminology, though. Any two cards is not a pair. A pair is two cards of the same rank.
For all the flames and attacks made over someone mistyping a digit on a revision number of a motherboard on this damn site, you'd think people would have some respect for the proper terminology in other geekly pursuits.
ummmm.... context?!
The quote about permanent blinding is about LASERS.
Then what he wrote about this is that NOT BEING A LASER means it DOES SOMETHING DIFFERENT, as in NOT PERMANENT DAMAGE.
It was not the same quote. It wasn't all even a quote. One part was a quote, then the other part he wrote himself.
Hopefully you were only temporarily skimming and can now show some signs of reading comprehension.
"is this game honest?"
well, no. not if the guy was dealt a "suited pair" from a single deck.
There's no such thing as a "suited pair" in a single deck.
You have four distinct suits, and thirteen distinct ranks. There is one card of each of the thirteen ranks in each suit, and likewise there is exactly one card of each suit at a given rank.
A "pair" is two cards of the same rank. "Suited" means two cards of the same suit. So to have a "suited pair", one must have two cards of the same rank and the same suit.
Therefore, by definition, if you have a "suited pair" and you're playing a single-deck game, the game cannot possibly be honest.
They've had a hard time vanquishing OSS by embracing and extending standards, so now they'll try to embrace and extend code and licenses.
Expect the same tactics on different fronts. It's still Microsoft, and they are still run by the same inner circle of Gates and Ballmer cronies no matter what Hilf does from his little playpen.
What kind of dumbass doesn't know that you can tell what's going to and from mail.google.com by seeing the IP address in the header and doing a PTR lookup?
Saying, "oooh, they can tell what's bound for GMail with this, and that goes beyond the header info" makes it sound like the IP address isn't already in the damned header or the people doing the snooping don't know a) that it's in the header b) that they do a PTR lookup to find the hostname from and IP address and/or c) that mail.google.com is GMail.
They like doing it themselves. They just don't want to share the wires with other VOIP companies.
Yeah, if you want more tech gadgets, buy separate gadgets and go early 90's Bat-belt style with them!
Keeping a harsh environment between 20 C and 320 C is much, much easier and more cost effective than keeping it between 20 C and 50 C. If one processor can handle the whole range, and the other can't, how is that less important than the actual numbers? If one is made to withstand 350 C but breaks below 300 C, it's simply not as useful as one that goes from 20 C to 310 C. There are many more places you can use the latter than the former.
Therefore, the higher absolute temperature handling of the one is less important overall than the range which the other can handle.
How about, oh, I don't know, killing child molesters and jailing people who try (in the general prison population, with some publicity about what they are in for)?
That'll help protect the children more than anything.
Hell, hang the fuckers by their penis and scrotum until they plummet to the floor from the ripping off of their privates, then let the blood loss and infection finish them off. Nothing is too cruel and unusual for someone who would rape a child. Nothing.
I've killed some time on this since it's a pretty interesting idea. It turns out there are plenty outside the D and F range. It does seem to like pages with a single Flash object and not much else, so that's bad. It also makes some pretty arbitrary decisions which don't mean squat to many sites. There are some sites that get enough traffic that speed is a factor but not so much that a content delivery network is really necessary, for example.
I skipped the actual link and score on sites that are pretty much just representative of the sites around them. I wanted to include them by name, though, to show where they fall. I've stuck mostly to main index pages, and I've noted where I've gone deeper.
A: Google (99%), Altavista main page (98%), Altavista Babelfish (90%) (including upon doing a translation from English to French), Craigslist (96%), Pricewatch (93%), Slackware Linux, OpenBSD, Led Zeppelin site at Atlantic (100%), supremecommander.com, w3m web browser site (96%)
B: Apache.org (87%), the lighttpd web server (84%), Google Maps, which also got a C once (84% in most cases), Perlmonks (84%), Dragonfly BSD (85%), Butthole Surfers band page (81%), 37 Signals
C: One Laptop Per Child,, ESR's homepage, the Open Source Initiative (78%), Google News (73%), Lucid CMS (74%), Perl.org (75%), lucasfilm.com, Charred Dirt game
D: gnu.org, The Register, A9 (66%), kernel.org, Akamai (64%), kuro5hin.org, freshmeat.net, linuxcd.org, Movable Type (61%), Postnuke, blogster.com, Joel on Software (67%), Fog Creek Software, metallica.com, gaspowered.com, Scorched 3D (68%), id software (64%), ISBN.nu book search
F: MS IIS (49%), microsoft.com, msn.com, linux.com, fsf.org, discovery.com, newegg.com, rackspace.com, the Simtel archive (26%), CNet Download (29%), Adobe (58%), savvis.com, mtv.com, sun.com, pclinuxos.com, freebsd.org, phpnuke.org, use.perl.org, ruby-lang.org, python.org, java.com, Rolling Stones band page (56%), powellsbooks.com, amazon.com, barnesandnoble.com, getfirefox.com
My site for my company (96%) gets an A (no, I'm not going to get it slashdotted) which is pretty simple but has a pic and some Javascript on it. Several sites I have done or have helped design with someone else get C or D ratings.
If you limit is local, then it's not really reflecting the speed of your site. It's reflecting the speed of your local connection. Only when the limiting factor is the site, or when a reliably stable transfer speed has been established, can the speed of the site relative to another site be reliably tested.