Mod me down instead. I'll make an even more pro-Bush statement (which I of course don't actually believe), so that this post sucks up most of the slashthink reactionary down-moderation.
I think Bush is a great leader and visionary. He belongs in the White House, and the same can't be said of his opponent. I believe he approves of this message.
whether or not he's actually got anything to do with it.
Or, if you want to sound like an exceptionally smart slashbot, you blame it on Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.
Wrong. Your statement obviously doesn't point blame at rich, obese stockholders who devise schemes in dark rooms which end up making them a lot of money at the expense of poor, innocent civilians.
I'd say "you're new here, aren't you?" but not only do I find that to be a rather condescending and arrogant statement, but your UID suggests that a more appropriate one would work better:
Actually, I have a dual P3-1Ghz system and I can tell you that SMP is excellent--it offloads all the overhead and gives you a dedicated CPU to record with.
You think those on the Ways And Means Committee (majority Republican) aren't influenced by Bush?
No, I didn't say that. They (the committee) should be held more accountable than the President. Ideally, thy wouldn't be influenced by him at all. At any rate, the President will continue to have influence in this committee as long as we hold him accountable for the economy.
You think that Bush's budget busting tax cuts are not affecting the economy? They were nominally intended to provide short-term stimulus (which it did not provide), but the long term effect of the excessive borrowing required to finance the deficit will likely be higher interest rates.
I don't think that the President should have the kind of power to propose legislation and have it pushed through. The reason he does is because we expect the President to fix our economy. If we began holding our senators and reps accountable, then the President, who is usually not an economist by trade, will no longer have to be responsible. Besides, I think you've overestimated the effect that these tax cuts have had--which is exactly what King George wants us to do.
You think that war (especially unnecessary war) does not have an effect on the market? Do you think war in Iraq and $55/bbl oil are a coincidence?
Of course not--but whether or not we should go to war should be based on whether or not the political reasons for going to war are correct. Where in my original statement did I fail to make this clear?
Your comment about the president not having control of the economy reminds me of a quote from one of the Godfather movies where Michael Corleone compares himself to a Senator:
He has de facto power, but he doesn't have power granted to him by the Constitution. This is something about American politics I can't stand, and the solution (as I see it) is to not blame the President for a bad economy, and not praise a President for a good one.
I'm not a Bush-ite, but your comment was as illogical as the arguments used by the Right to support morality laws in order to abate the impending wrath of God.
We are so partisan that our idea of political discourse is like a junior high dance--boys on the left side of the gymnasium, girls on the right.
About the economy comment, I see the Democrats have programmed you well. Unfortunately, Bush isn't on the Ways and Means committee, nor is he on the Federal Reserve board, nor is he part of any decision making process that Constitutionally *ought* to have anything to do with the control of the economy.
And Congress did declare war. It may or may not have been political suicide to go against it, but at the time there was a lot of false intelligence floating around, and it sure seemed like Saddamm wasn't really planning on letting the US in to check for WMD. I'm not saying it's right--I think the war is wrong, but I don't think we should blame the President for the economic ramifications.
I'm sick of liberals who think that the President and his staff are the only officials that we hold accountable in this country.
This zealous, blind hatred for Bush probably turned off a lot of would-be Kerry voters. And now Democrats have started coming down on Kerry for being too soft.
Democrats *hate* the Witchunter logic used by the Right Wing today (I'm thinking evangelicals). Of course, human nature being what it is, I suppose I shouldn't expect anything more out of them than the same rabid hatred and unwillingness to understand the "other side."
The two-party system has destroyed this country and made the more intelligent succumb to groupthink and a willingness to abandon truth in favor of getting a quick bash in on those with whom you disagree.
You probably just want to implement a 2-tier network topology with a lower latency interconnect like InfiniBand connecting the second tier switches.
Like, have 64 GigE (or 10GigE) to InfiniBand switches. Of course, you'd have a bandwidth bottleneck, as I doubt InfiniBand could handle 8 Gigabytes/sec., but that would be the idea.
Now you can just make certain nodes into masters and then you have a sectioned off portion. Of course, this is somewhat inflexible, since if the needs of one application (one of the cluster-within-a-clusters) suddenly spike, they can't migrate jobs to the rest of the cluster.
If you replace the concept of "wealth" with the concept of "intellectualism" you have a great point that applies to you. Similarly, the arrogance of the Right's "moral highground" has it's parallel in the Left's intellectual snootiness.
I find your statement unduly hostile and arrogant.
Your statement was not a scientific one--it was a completely objective philosophical opinion, and yet you had the nerve to call the parent a "dumbass" for simply holding an equally objective opinion. There's nothing here that you understand that his feeble mind cannot comprehend, you just have two different points of view.
Welcome to Slashdot: A place where people pretend to be twice as old and as educated as they really are, but end up demonstrating the maturity of people half their age and with half their level of education.
On another topic, I think that it is rather foolish to order a specialty PC and not be able to repair it yourself, or have the money to buy totally new parts.
Yeah, that and the fact that you're not really much of a technician if fixing these computers poses any more difficulty than "regular" computer.
Except for the small size--that might suck...but I've built a couple of mini-itx systems. Really, it's not that bad.
That would be nice, but 10k rpm drives have three disadvantages.
#1 They consume much more power.
#2 They make more heat.
#3 The majority are quite loud. (Doesn't mean all) But unless you buffer the sound a lot, which insulates the drive more, compounding #2)
Yeah, good point. A 7200rpm would give significant gains--I wonder how hot it would get. Laptop hard drives get pretty hot too--I was under the assumption that the heat was pretty comporable, and size/power were the issue.
On a friend's brand new dell (1.5GHz P-M, Radeon 9600, the thing that gets hot to the touch is not the chip or radeon (when playing something 3d), it's the hard drive.
Another thing is modern moble processors will clock down that far already, (assuming they have absolutely equal performance and power consumption at ths same MHz, and I think Pentium Ms and Athlon mobiles both have an advantage there.) thus there is little to no gain from that. Low end power consumption, it would be the same, but there would be no way to get more performance, as P-Ms and A-Ms do by clocking up. (Though if the chip were designed specifically for this, you could use one of their cores, and cut the pipeline back down.)
I read about VIA's new Esther processor than will run anywhere between 1.2 to 2 ghz (1.5 fanless) at somewhere around 3w, and be able to sport an 800mhz front side bus.
So, yeah kinda. What will work however, is having a huge amount of RAM, so that things wanted on the hard drive are already in memory. This would likely resolve the issue with my friend's laptop and allow the drive to spin down, consuming less power, making less heat AND actually making the programs run faster.
Sick of people being jealous because gentoo's package management system is better?
They're all the same to me, just redirect the make install to a temp directory and tar it up.
Modern processors don't just have higher clock speeds--they have higher bus speeds as well, so RAM access is much faster. So moving to a celeron 500 would be a bigger jump than just 3 ghz to 500 mhz.
What about a really fast processor with a huge bus speed, but radically underclocked? This would solve a lot of heat and power issues at the same time, and wouldn't reduce performance as much.
In fact, I doubt performance would be affected too much at all. If the system used a small form factor (2.5") SATA hard drive instead of a notebook drive, it could run the hdd at 10k rpm.
I agree on the last point. If Clinton lied about something of the magnitude of the PATRIOT act, like Bush has repeatedly, the Pubs would have eaten him alive.
I'm not saying I discount the sources, there is just a lot of speculation amidst the facts. One example is Palast's first reasoning for voting fraud in one state was basically that the Dems should have won.
"It would be nice" is not the same thing as "I don't believe a word of it because."
Slashdot Mirror
I think Bush is a great leader and visionary. He belongs in the White House, and the same can't be said of his opponent. I believe he approves of this message.
whether or not he's actually got anything to do with it.
Or, if you want to sound like an exceptionally smart slashbot, you blame it on Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.
Now I know where BitTorrent came from.
I'd be more excited about dual-core Esthers if I were you.
His post might be really out there, but when your rebuttal doesn't attack his claims, it makes his case look a lot stronger.
What if you have more than two friends and you all want the file?
Wrong. Your statement obviously doesn't point blame at rich, obese stockholders who devise schemes in dark rooms which end up making them a lot of money at the expense of poor, innocent civilians.
I'd say "you're new here, aren't you?" but not only do I find that to be a rather condescending and arrogant statement, but your UID suggests that a more appropriate one would work better:
How are you not sick of it yet?
Ardour's website recommends SMP.
I am not a Republican--I disagree with Bush on the war in Iraq, and I did not vote for him.
I even said that I am not a Bush supporter in my post.
Do I need to say it again? I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN.
You think those on the Ways And Means Committee (majority Republican) aren't influenced by Bush?
No, I didn't say that. They (the committee) should be held more accountable than the President. Ideally, thy wouldn't be influenced by him at all. At any rate, the President will continue to have influence in this committee as long as we hold him accountable for the economy.
You think that Bush's budget busting tax cuts are not affecting the economy? They were nominally intended to provide short-term stimulus (which it did not provide), but the long term effect of the excessive borrowing required to finance the deficit will likely be higher interest rates.
I don't think that the President should have the kind of power to propose legislation and have it pushed through. The reason he does is because we expect the President to fix our economy. If we began holding our senators and reps accountable, then the President, who is usually not an economist by trade, will no longer have to be responsible. Besides, I think you've overestimated the effect that these tax cuts have had--which is exactly what King George wants us to do.
You think that war (especially unnecessary war) does not have an effect on the market? Do you think war in Iraq and $55/bbl oil are a coincidence?
Of course not--but whether or not we should go to war should be based on whether or not the political reasons for going to war are correct. Where in my original statement did I fail to make this clear?
Your comment about the president not having control of the economy reminds me of a quote from one of the Godfather movies where Michael Corleone compares himself to a Senator:
He has de facto power, but he doesn't have power granted to him by the Constitution. This is something about American politics I can't stand, and the solution (as I see it) is to not blame the President for a bad economy, and not praise a President for a good one.
You're on slashdot, and you're glad Bush won?
I'm not a Bush-ite, but your comment was as illogical as the arguments used by the Right to support morality laws in order to abate the impending wrath of God.
We are so partisan that our idea of political discourse is like a junior high dance--boys on the left side of the gymnasium, girls on the right.
About the economy comment, I see the Democrats have programmed you well. Unfortunately, Bush isn't on the Ways and Means committee, nor is he on the Federal Reserve board, nor is he part of any decision making process that Constitutionally *ought* to have anything to do with the control of the economy.
And Congress did declare war. It may or may not have been political suicide to go against it, but at the time there was a lot of false intelligence floating around, and it sure seemed like Saddamm wasn't really planning on letting the US in to check for WMD. I'm not saying it's right--I think the war is wrong, but I don't think we should blame the President for the economic ramifications.
I'm sick of liberals who think that the President and his staff are the only officials that we hold accountable in this country.
This zealous, blind hatred for Bush probably turned off a lot of would-be Kerry voters. And now Democrats have started coming down on Kerry for being too soft.
Democrats *hate* the Witchunter logic used by the Right Wing today (I'm thinking evangelicals). Of course, human nature being what it is, I suppose I shouldn't expect anything more out of them than the same rabid hatred and unwillingness to understand the "other side."
The two-party system has destroyed this country and made the more intelligent succumb to groupthink and a willingness to abandon truth in favor of getting a quick bash in on those with whom you disagree.
You probably just want to implement a 2-tier network topology with a lower latency interconnect like InfiniBand connecting the second tier switches.
Like, have 64 GigE (or 10GigE) to InfiniBand switches. Of course, you'd have a bandwidth bottleneck, as I doubt InfiniBand could handle 8 Gigabytes/sec., but that would be the idea.
Now you can just make certain nodes into masters and then you have a sectioned off portion. Of course, this is somewhat inflexible, since if the needs of one application (one of the cluster-within-a-clusters) suddenly spike, they can't migrate jobs to the rest of the cluster.
Most other Gnome 2 complaints fall in the "gtk is slow as molasses" bucket.
I still love Gnome 2, but gtk2 is really slow. I think it has something to do with font rendering.
Or maybe it's my theme. I'm going to try installing some other themes.
Ummm...webdav?
OK, you missed my penis joke.
I did too, until I returned with a small reading light and a magnifying glass.
What do you think Slashdot is for?
I mean *subjective*.
I see you've trained yourself to pick out flaws and insult others more than admitting that, just maybe, you might have flaws of your own.
Naaaaah. Pfft.
If you replace the concept of "wealth" with the concept of "intellectualism" you have a great point that applies to you. Similarly, the arrogance of the Right's "moral highground" has it's parallel in the Left's intellectual snootiness.
I find your statement unduly hostile and arrogant.
Your statement was not a scientific one--it was a completely objective philosophical opinion, and yet you had the nerve to call the parent a "dumbass" for simply holding an equally objective opinion. There's nothing here that you understand that his feeble mind cannot comprehend, you just have two different points of view.
Welcome to Slashdot: A place where people pretend to be twice as old and as educated as they really are, but end up demonstrating the maturity of people half their age and with half their level of education.
On another topic, I think that it is rather foolish to order a specialty PC and not be able to repair it yourself, or have the money to buy totally new parts.
Yeah, that and the fact that you're not really much of a technician if fixing these computers poses any more difficulty than "regular" computer.
Except for the small size--that might suck...but I've built a couple of mini-itx systems. Really, it's not that bad.
Well looks like we're both violating eachother's patents...shall we cross-license?
That would be nice, but 10k rpm drives have three disadvantages.
#1 They consume much more power.
#2 They make more heat.
#3 The majority are quite loud. (Doesn't mean all) But unless you buffer the sound a lot, which insulates the drive more, compounding #2)
Yeah, good point. A 7200rpm would give significant gains--I wonder how hot it would get. Laptop hard drives get pretty hot too--I was under the assumption that the heat was pretty comporable, and size/power were the issue.
On a friend's brand new dell (1.5GHz P-M, Radeon 9600, the thing that gets hot to the touch is not the chip or radeon (when playing something 3d), it's the hard drive.
Another thing is modern moble processors will clock down that far already, (assuming they have absolutely equal performance and power consumption at ths same MHz, and I think Pentium Ms and Athlon mobiles both have an advantage there.) thus there is little to no gain from that. Low end power consumption, it would be the same, but there would be no way to get more performance, as P-Ms and A-Ms do by clocking up. (Though if the chip were designed specifically for this, you could use one of their cores, and cut the pipeline back down.)
I read about VIA's new Esther processor than will run anywhere between 1.2 to 2 ghz (1.5 fanless) at somewhere around 3w, and be able to sport an 800mhz front side bus.
So, yeah kinda. What will work however, is having a huge amount of RAM, so that things wanted on the hard drive are already in memory. This would likely resolve the issue with my friend's laptop and allow the drive to spin down, consuming less power, making less heat AND actually making the programs run faster.
Sick of people being jealous because gentoo's package management system is better?
They're all the same to me, just redirect the make install to a temp directory and tar it up.
Now imagine a $X00 million fireball raining down on the heads of your troops when shot down by the latest $200,000 anti-zepplin missile.
I don't think they cost that much...
Modern processors don't just have higher clock speeds--they have higher bus speeds as well, so RAM access is much faster. So moving to a celeron 500 would be a bigger jump than just 3 ghz to 500 mhz.
What about a really fast processor with a huge bus speed, but radically underclocked? This would solve a lot of heat and power issues at the same time, and wouldn't reduce performance as much.
In fact, I doubt performance would be affected too much at all. If the system used a small form factor (2.5") SATA hard drive instead of a notebook drive, it could run the hdd at 10k rpm.
Or am I crazy?
How about those Athlons designed to run fanless at 1.5GHz taking up 10w of power?
I agree on the last point. If Clinton lied about something of the magnitude of the PATRIOT act, like Bush has repeatedly, the Pubs would have eaten him alive.
I'm not saying I discount the sources, there is just a lot of speculation amidst the facts. One example is Palast's first reasoning for voting fraud in one state was basically that the Dems should have won.
"It would be nice" is not the same thing as "I don't believe a word of it because."
I'm just saying in this case, if the libs wanted to win, they needed to take the moral highground.
The real problems with the Bush presidency got faded out by all of the Bush hate.