Admittedly I learned the 8086 instruction set first, and I'm not entirely up to speed on the more abstruse bits or the vector instructions - but I actually quite like the x86 instruction set. It actually falls out quite logically - most instructions are composed of one or two bytes, with each octal digit of the byte conveying a distinct meaning; likewise, most addressing modes are conveyed with an additional one or two octal bytes. It actually hangs together quite nicely. The 16-bit instruction set is somewhat scattered with special cases, unfortunately, which betrays its 8080 heritage somewhat (the V30, NEC's sped-up 8086 clone, gave a lot of instructions Z80-style mnemonics, and indeed I'd say that anyone who grew up on a Z80 machine would probably find the 8086 similar in ethos); but the 32-bit instruction set is mercifully free of most of that. It's not as nice or orthogonal as the ARM instruction set, of course, but IA32 is probably not too far behind the 68k for pleasantness.
Of course, there's one advantage to still using real mode - being limited to four segments of 64k each and only a megabyte of addressable RAM in total, 16-bit applications fit entirely into cache and consequently run like shit off a shovel on modern CPUs.:) (Indeed, 16-bit instructions are also a lot more compact than 32-bit ones, so your 64k and L1 icache go a good 30-50% further.)
I've got choppers flying around me here and I just can't see it happening. Literally.
Well, theorising is all well and good, but if you feel so strongly about this, then you really ought to try it and report back on your findings. I'm sure the pilots in your area would be more than happy to co-operate. Especially retroactively.
But unless all your applications are based on the same toolkit, KDE will win in the long run. (I'm still waiting for kitchensink, but everything else seems to be there.)
I think it's a straw man, is that the correct term? You see, he says that it's either food or a laptop
False dilemma - presenting two (or more) options as an either/or choice when the reality is that other options exist, or that the options presented are not mutually exclusive. All are true here.
Indeed, the options lead to different places. Food gets you a population that isn't dying - a necessary precondition for development, but not really contributory. OLPCs give you a communications infrastructure, which is absolutely necessary for development. Indeed, if I were to use Dvorak's tactics against him, I would be accusing him of advocating keeping the populations of developing countries imprisoned in basic subsistence conditions, the better for greedy fat Westerners (like him and me) to treat them as a big pool of slave labour, rather than allowing them to become the masters of their own development and compete with the West head-on. I won't, though, because I'm sure his heart is in the right place (even if his tongue is below his tail).
Nonetheless, why do Slashdot submitters continue to submit links to professional trolls, and why do Slashdot editors continue to dignify them with selection?
"The benefit of the doubt" is only really applicable when there is any doubt. There appears not to be in this case - Asus are in violation now; the question is whether they will voluntarily move into compliance with their obligations, in whatever way is most convenient for them, before they are forced to. But "Give me time" is right up there with "I didn't know" when it comes to legal lines of defence.
So it's true - jurors really are the people too stupid to find a way out of jury service...
(It's always amusing to hear ignorant hicks like Mr Hegg denounce the idea that they're ignorant hicks. When it gets expensive for some poor victim, though, it's not funny. "We wanted to send a message" - what, the message that juries in the boondocks will break you if they feel personally insulted by your case?)
Is there any chance that this can form the basis of an appeal, to have a mistrial declared? Or do the juror's comments reveal no more than the prevailing opinion of the jury?
Remember, there's a fine tradition in the UK of enforcing ridiculous laws to the letter in order to demonstrate how offensive they truly are... and also that at the moment all the judge in question has said is that there is a case to be heard - he explicitly stated that this didn't necessarily mean the PRS was sure to prevail.
And looking at it, that might be quite a good thing. Kwik-Fit's position is that they have a decade-long ban on playing radios in the workplace. In insisting that management must have tacitly permitted playing the radio in the workplace, Lord Emslie would seem to have forced the issue of whether playing a radio is in fact copyright infringement to be tried. If that means a jury trial, it's not inconceivable that the jury could dig their heels in and find for the defendant regardless of the law - the publicity surrounding which would make future trials on such grounds somewhat difficult to win, even if it wouldn't set a precedent.
Is there any good reason why we shouldn't follow your logic to its ultimate conclusion, that only shiny happy people should be able to earn a living?
I'm reminded of the horde of mediocre companies proclaiming their commitment to only ever hiring the most talented developers... guys, you never even see the best or the happiest, so get over yourselves!
Even a small amount of logic would reveal that when the baseband radio firmware is in an unknown state... future updates, either to the firmware or the OS or both, may break things.
And the sensible thing to do with things that are in indeterminate states is completely reset them to a known state. Not guess the state and go patch-happy. Following this logic, the only negative effect that an unlocked iPhone would suffer on upgrade is that it relocks itself (because the radio firmware is reloaded as part of the upgrade process); anything worse than this (especially a bricking) seems quite hard to justify on technical grounds.
Sadly, getting stomped on at work because you have an emotional, passive nature isn't something that's limited to one gender - finding the right work environment is critical for such people. Society is, by and large, populated with people without such natures, and they also shout louder; and as a result things end up running in their favour. I've worked in IT and non-IT, and whilst there's way too much testosterone in the IT world, people with emotional, passive natures and a tendency towards introversion get stomped on wherever they are, even in majority-female working environments. (Worse, sometimes all it takes is one person with the interpersonal skills of a shrimp to sour a whole office.)
One book I found enormously helpful was "The Highly Sensitive Person", by Elaine Arons. It made sense of a lot of things that I'd previously believed were just me being crap.
I think I'd feel insulted if I saw my face in that ad, too. I can understand why she's feeling aggrieved.
On the other hand, her lawsuit seems to be doomed to failure; it's in the wrong country, suing the wrong people, on a basis of law that might not apply where the alleged infringement occurred, and where the use made of the photo was explicitly permitted by its licence. And when they lose, they'll have a nasty legal bill to pay, which won't make them feel any better.
So the question is - did the family ignore legal advice in favour of their own feelings of grievance, or have they got a lawyer who likes to say a $200/hr "Yes" even when s/he really shouldn't? And if the latter - how does someone know when their lawyer is just telling them what they want to hear, for whatever motive?
Slashdot Mirror
Admittedly I learned the 8086 instruction set first, and I'm not entirely up to speed on the more abstruse bits or the vector instructions - but I actually quite like the x86 instruction set. It actually falls out quite logically - most instructions are composed of one or two bytes, with each octal digit of the byte conveying a distinct meaning; likewise, most addressing modes are conveyed with an additional one or two octal bytes. It actually hangs together quite nicely. The 16-bit instruction set is somewhat scattered with special cases, unfortunately, which betrays its 8080 heritage somewhat (the V30, NEC's sped-up 8086 clone, gave a lot of instructions Z80-style mnemonics, and indeed I'd say that anyone who grew up on a Z80 machine would probably find the 8086 similar in ethos); but the 32-bit instruction set is mercifully free of most of that. It's not as nice or orthogonal as the ARM instruction set, of course, but IA32 is probably not too far behind the 68k for pleasantness.
:) (Indeed, 16-bit instructions are also a lot more compact than 32-bit ones, so your 64k and L1 icache go a good 30-50% further.)
Of course, there's one advantage to still using real mode - being limited to four segments of 64k each and only a megabyte of addressable RAM in total, 16-bit applications fit entirely into cache and consequently run like shit off a shovel on modern CPUs.
Well, theorising is all well and good, but if you feel so strongly about this, then you really ought to try it and report back on your findings. I'm sure the pilots in your area would be more than happy to co-operate. Especially retroactively.
But unless all your applications are based on the same toolkit, KDE will win in the long run. (I'm still waiting for kitchensink, but everything else seems to be there.)
I bet they aren't going to try and find the other mistakes in the database though.
But the word "all" is conspicuous by its absence.
False dilemma - presenting two (or more) options as an either/or choice when the reality is that other options exist, or that the options presented are not mutually exclusive. All are true here.
Indeed, the options lead to different places. Food gets you a population that isn't dying - a necessary precondition for development, but not really contributory. OLPCs give you a communications infrastructure, which is absolutely necessary for development. Indeed, if I were to use Dvorak's tactics against him, I would be accusing him of advocating keeping the populations of developing countries imprisoned in basic subsistence conditions, the better for greedy fat Westerners (like him and me) to treat them as a big pool of slave labour, rather than allowing them to become the masters of their own development and compete with the West head-on. I won't, though, because I'm sure his heart is in the right place (even if his tongue is below his tail).
Nonetheless, why do Slashdot submitters continue to submit links to professional trolls, and why do Slashdot editors continue to dignify them with selection?
Not for much longer though, eh?
Yeah, those VAIOs can be vindictive little bastards.
So that's what happened to David Steel...
Congratulations, you've just rediscovered Gnosticism.
*ducks & runs*
"The benefit of the doubt" is only really applicable when there is any doubt. There appears not to be in this case - Asus are in violation now; the question is whether they will voluntarily move into compliance with their obligations, in whatever way is most convenient for them, before they are forced to. But "Give me time" is right up there with "I didn't know" when it comes to legal lines of defence.
And because of their increased surface area, they also make easier targets. How thoughtful.
So it's true - jurors really are the people too stupid to find a way out of jury service...
(It's always amusing to hear ignorant hicks like Mr Hegg denounce the idea that they're ignorant hicks. When it gets expensive for some poor victim, though, it's not funny. "We wanted to send a message" - what, the message that juries in the boondocks will break you if they feel personally insulted by your case?)
Is there any chance that this can form the basis of an appeal, to have a mistrial declared? Or do the juror's comments reveal no more than the prevailing opinion of the jury?
Remember, there's a fine tradition in the UK of enforcing ridiculous laws to the letter in order to demonstrate how offensive they truly are... and also that at the moment all the judge in question has said is that there is a case to be heard - he explicitly stated that this didn't necessarily mean the PRS was sure to prevail.
And looking at it, that might be quite a good thing. Kwik-Fit's position is that they have a decade-long ban on playing radios in the workplace. In insisting that management must have tacitly permitted playing the radio in the workplace, Lord Emslie would seem to have forced the issue of whether playing a radio is in fact copyright infringement to be tried. If that means a jury trial, it's not inconceivable that the jury could dig their heels in and find for the defendant regardless of the law - the publicity surrounding which would make future trials on such grounds somewhat difficult to win, even if it wouldn't set a precedent.
Is there any good reason why we shouldn't follow your logic to its ultimate conclusion, that only shiny happy people should be able to earn a living?
I'm reminded of the horde of mediocre companies proclaiming their commitment to only ever hiring the most talented developers... guys, you never even see the best or the happiest, so get over yourselves!
According to this story, it was the prosecution who wanted the RIAA president to testify.
Also, it's a civil case. Damages were awarded, not fines; and if punitive damages were awarded, the figure can be pretty arbitrary.
Hey, all of those objects have perfectly legitimate, non-violent uses! ...OK, admittedly not the cat.
Remember, everyone who did that is dead now.
And the sensible thing to do with things that are in indeterminate states is completely reset them to a known state. Not guess the state and go patch-happy. Following this logic, the only negative effect that an unlocked iPhone would suffer on upgrade is that it relocks itself (because the radio firmware is reloaded as part of the upgrade process); anything worse than this (especially a bricking) seems quite hard to justify on technical grounds.
Please tell me you mean for editors.
Yes, the NetBSD / OpenBSD split was a textbook example of how to fork a project without animosity, wasn't it?
I don't think anyone is proposing that Microsoft should be prohibited from bundling Windows with Microsoft PCs.
Sadly, getting stomped on at work because you have an emotional, passive nature isn't something that's limited to one gender - finding the right work environment is critical for such people. Society is, by and large, populated with people without such natures, and they also shout louder; and as a result things end up running in their favour. I've worked in IT and non-IT, and whilst there's way too much testosterone in the IT world, people with emotional, passive natures and a tendency towards introversion get stomped on wherever they are, even in majority-female working environments. (Worse, sometimes all it takes is one person with the interpersonal skills of a shrimp to sour a whole office.)
One book I found enormously helpful was "The Highly Sensitive Person", by Elaine Arons. It made sense of a lot of things that I'd previously believed were just me being crap.
I think I'd feel insulted if I saw my face in that ad, too. I can understand why she's feeling aggrieved.
On the other hand, her lawsuit seems to be doomed to failure; it's in the wrong country, suing the wrong people, on a basis of law that might not apply where the alleged infringement occurred, and where the use made of the photo was explicitly permitted by its licence. And when they lose, they'll have a nasty legal bill to pay, which won't make them feel any better.
So the question is - did the family ignore legal advice in favour of their own feelings of grievance, or have they got a lawyer who likes to say a $200/hr "Yes" even when s/he really shouldn't? And if the latter - how does someone know when their lawyer is just telling them what they want to hear, for whatever motive?