What I like about this SLI trend is that by spending ungodly amounts of cash now on a multi-GPU solution it is possible to "simulate" the performance of next year's single GPU card.
Game developers can more realistically target a platform that does not really exist yet (because a cutting edge dual card or dual-GPU solution is too expensive for most people).
And unauthorized redistribution is a felony. It always was.
Actually that is not entirely accurate, at least for US law. The NET Act signed by Clinton in 1997 changed our copyright laws significantly. It removed the "for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain" requirement. Before 1997 file sharing was not criminal.
Due to the NET Act however $1000-$2499 in total value of infringing material is a misdemeanor with up to a 1 year prison sentence. $2500+ is a felony with up to a 3 year prison sentence.
However the infringement must be "willful" meaning the violator must have knowledge of the laws they are violating (in this case the NET Act). So ignorance of the law is a defense in this case. Probably a good reason why we rarely see this law enforced against file sharers.
The laws you refer to on VHS tapes simply do not apply. That was only if you were actually selling stuff. The changed laws do however.
I use that method too. If I get so much as one spam per month, I switch the address. But I have gotten nailed by dictionary attacks. You cannot use a common name or any word that would appear in a dictionary.
Don't forget all those caring folks putting their feet up on the seats in front of them, kicking the seats, talking on their cell phones and talking loudly to each other to comment on the movie. Also those lovely people (usually women) who laugh loudly whenever a character speaks. If I stayed away from the theater I would also miss out on the loud crunching of popcorn and slurping sounds 6 inches from my ear. Unforgettable.
I do admit that, at least until digital projection takes over (at which time there will be [i]no[/i] reason to go to the theatre), it is the only way to actually see the film on film. Video is a poor substitute, which is why the MPAA should have nothing to worry about.
Javascript is the work of the devil. Leave it off unless you have a damn good reason to turn it on. Why give anyone that much control over your computer just to surf the web?
For firefox or opera just turn it on when you absolutely need it and never forget to turn it off right away when you are done. For IE make use of the security zones to implement javascript whitelisting. That's what I do because with firefox and opera I often don't remember to turn it off again until I start getting annoying popups or worse.
Seems like more than half of these vulnerabilities that keep popping up make use of javascript. That last one with the online banking passwords was pretty scary and made me very glad that I browse with javascript off.
I use IE with javascript disabled except on a select few trusted sites. So this javascript based test doesn't work for me. Get back to me when firefox finally gets around to javascript whitelisting. Obviously not a high priority for the devs.
Also, does anyone have a link to a test like this that doesn't use javascript so I can join in on the festivities?
Oh god if only I had more mod points to give. This is in fact the only reason that I don't use firefox. IE has javascript whitelisting. Firefox does not. I will never use a browser that does not support javascript whitelisting precisely because javascript is so easy to abuse and because it is almost never necessary.
I don't purchase from sites that use javascript if there are any other sites around that don't. Many all javascript web sites I just completely skip over unless I have a very compelling reason to whitelist them.
I'd like to spend some quality time with these javascript only web developers in a small room with a baseball bat.
When I want the truth on a difficult issue I don't take a poll. I don't give a rats arse how many "scientists" agree on such a politically charged topic. I don't find argument by authority particularly convincing. I need to see the evidence and the logic for myself. Either you understand the evidence for a particular theory or you don't. Others opinions are no substitute for thinking for yourself. I personally don't find the "evidence" convincing at all. In fact I cannot even imagine what convincing evidence would look like. Even if the predicted armageddon took place we could never know if human produced CO2 were the cause.
How do you suggest we prove it?
Even if it is true, I actually don't think it is provable and a non-verifiable hypothesis is not one that I have much faith in.
Unless you are an authority on climate change yourself, I can't see how you can suggest that this entire field of science knows less about their subject than you do?
There are no authorities on climate change. From what I have seen this field is about as scientific as astrology. Just a lot of wild guessing disguised as science.
Could you be more specific? Would you advocate a switch to nuclear power and electric vehicles for instance? What kinds of "corporations" are you referring to? Electric utilities?
Not only is it unproven, but it may even be unprovable. Even if our oceans start boiling by 2010 (we can only hope) how would you go about proving not only that we did it but that human produced carbon dioxide is to blame, that it would not have happened even without our help?
Exactly. There aren't many people who think oil will still be around as a cost effective energy source in 50 years. But I guess some of you believe the oceans will be boiling by then.
I live in a cold climate. When I hear talk about global warming I say "Bring it on!".
I wonder if this would work for head injuries too. the same problem occurs with cascading neural damage after the injury. I don't know if I'd be inclined to inject some PEG directly into my brain though. We seem to have a natural aversion to injecting anything into our brains.
God knows what I would have done if I had noticed this article before my accident. I wonder if I would have been crazy enough.
wrt head injuries it has been found that progesterone also provides some protective effect if administered within 48 hours of the injury. Of course, women have less need for this and typically recover better from head injuries. I wonder if this would be true for spinal cord injuries as well.
After having torn down and rebuilt a good section of my own house, and having done my own plumbing and electrical work, I don't think the building codes are unreasonable at all. I think they actually make a lot of sense. The trick is to understand why the codes are in place. They are really just a list of good building practices.
The real problem is licensing. More specifically, the laws prohibiting the hiring of unlicensed tradespeople. Plumbers in my area (of the US) get upwards of $100/hour. I could do a similar job (to code) for $10/hour, but it would be illegal for anyone to hire me.
Your logic is flawed. 100 sources giving you 3.3k/sec will give you 3300k/sec. The number of files you share has nothing to do with it.
Remember that in any network Total Upload must be the same as Total Download. The ed2k network does not actively encourage uploading the way that BT does. In BT a higher upload speed will almost always result in a higher download speed. In ed2k this is not always true.
For instance, my UL bandwidth is just under 100kB/sec but I often limit my UL speed in Emule to around 16k in order to maintain a reasonable UL/DL ratio.
In BT I never do that because I know that I will usually get back what I give to the network. Multiply my case by thousands of others and you discover at least one reason why ed2k is so much slower than BT. It has more upload bandwidth.
How exactly does this slow down Edonkey? Or do you mean that it slows it down for 0 upload leechers? In any network total upload == total download. You cannot download faster than others are uploading to you. TAINSTAFL.
The upload requirements are not designed to stop leeching and they don't. They just help with 0 upload leeching. Leeching is anything but a "trivial problem".
BT actually has a protocol with inherent anti-leeching qualities. It is far, far more resistant to leeching than the ed2k network.
Re:I hope it isn't "the cure"
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: 1
I know it isn't PC to say this, but we need AIDS and maybe 3-5 more plagues like it
Well then would global thermonuclear war satisfy you? Or would that leave too many Australians alive?
Re:Practical Explanation?
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: 1
Uh, well that part might actually be true if you only consider privately funded research. Cures and preventative vaccines are not profitable.
Re:Time to quote the Peace Nobel Prize
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: 1
One flaw in her little theory is that no one else gives a rats arse about Africa. Why would anyone bother creating some super-virus to wipe out a continent that the rest of world doesn't care about.
As far as HIV being a manmade virus, I don't think even our current technology is up to the task, let alone the technology that was around 20 years ago. Maybe in another 20 years it would be possible to construct such a virus.
Re:There's a preventive vaccine already
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It is like this no where else in the world.
That is completely false.
and another cause is less sanitary conditions and more disease (open sores and such)
"open sores"? You must be joking.
Nowhere else in the world except Africa do you have a significant chance of contracting AIDS through heterosexual sex.
You really seem to have this fixed idea that homosexual sex is somehow inherently different and that transmission through "normal" sex is nearly impossible. I am wondering where you got this idea. It is completely false and dangerous. I also can't help wondering whether you are over the age of 12.
The only difference with Central African HIV is that it is so common. It has reached truly epidemic map-clearing proportions. Ignorance and superstition definitely seem to play a part in this (ie. the virgin cure, lack of condom use, distrust in the "germ theory" as the cause of AIDS).
The bottom line is HIV is easily transmittable through heterosexual sex. The fact that it is even more easily transmittable through sodomy is actually not all that important. Either way, if you are having sex with an HIV infected partner your chances of acquiring it from even a single encounter are quite high.
At the very least it's life-extending and could turn HIV from an incurably deadly nasty into an incurably nasty chronic infection, while "we" work on a real cure or vaccine.
This is the best vaccine imaginable from the POV of the pharmaceutical companies. They don't want a cure and they don't want a truly preventative vaccine. They might never even make back their research costs with those. Keep 'em alive but keep 'em paying is their motto.
They want to treat AIDS without killing the golden egg laying chicken known as HIV. Every year that the HIV infected person remains alive is money in the bank for them in terms of the annual drug therapy costs as well as in the chances of acquiring more "customers".
first ever considered 'vaccine' was tested on a boy who already had smallpox, so calling this vaccine goes back a long time.
Don't you mean cowpox? It was found that being infected with cowpox, aka the vaccinia virus, (the "vaccine") protected you from contracting smallpox. I think this was done by first infecting a boy with cowpox and then trying to infect him with smallpox.
Slashdot Mirror
What I like about this SLI trend is that by spending ungodly amounts of cash now on a multi-GPU solution it is possible to "simulate" the performance of next year's single GPU card.
Game developers can more realistically target a platform that does not really exist yet (because a cutting edge dual card or dual-GPU solution is too expensive for most people).
And unauthorized redistribution is a felony. It always was.
Actually that is not entirely accurate, at least for US law. The NET Act signed by Clinton in 1997 changed our copyright laws significantly. It removed the "for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain" requirement. Before 1997 file sharing was not criminal.
Due to the NET Act however $1000-$2499 in total value of infringing material is a misdemeanor with up to a 1 year prison sentence. $2500+ is a felony with up to a 3 year prison sentence.
However the infringement must be "willful" meaning the violator must have knowledge of the laws they are violating (in this case the NET Act). So ignorance of the law is a defense in this case. Probably a good reason why we rarely see this law enforced against file sharers.
The laws you refer to on VHS tapes simply do not apply. That was only if you were actually selling stuff. The changed laws do however.
I use that method too. If I get so much as one spam per month, I switch the address. But I have gotten nailed by dictionary attacks. You cannot use a common name or any word that would appear in a dictionary.
Don't forget all those caring folks putting their feet up on the seats in front of them, kicking the seats, talking on their cell phones and talking loudly to each other to comment on the movie. Also those lovely people (usually women) who laugh loudly whenever a character speaks. If I stayed away from the theater I would also miss out on the loud crunching of popcorn and slurping sounds 6 inches from my ear. Unforgettable.
I do admit that, at least until digital projection takes over (at which time there will be [i]no[/i] reason to go to the theatre), it is the only way to actually see the film on film. Video is a poor substitute, which is why the MPAA should have nothing to worry about.
Javascript is the work of the devil. Leave it off unless you have a damn good reason to turn it on. Why give anyone that much control over your computer just to surf the web?
For firefox or opera just turn it on when you absolutely need it and never forget to turn it off right away when you are done. For IE make use of the security zones to implement javascript whitelisting. That's what I do because with firefox and opera I often don't remember to turn it off again until I start getting annoying popups or worse.
Seems like more than half of these vulnerabilities that keep popping up make use of javascript. That last one with the online banking passwords was pretty scary and made me very glad that I browse with javascript off.
I use IE with javascript disabled except on a select few trusted sites. So this javascript based test doesn't work for me. Get back to me when firefox finally gets around to javascript whitelisting. Obviously not a high priority for the devs.
Also, does anyone have a link to a test like this that doesn't use javascript so I can join in on the festivities?
Oh god if only I had more mod points to give. This is in fact the only reason that I don't use firefox. IE has javascript whitelisting. Firefox does not. I will never use a browser that does not support javascript whitelisting precisely because javascript is so easy to abuse and because it is almost never necessary.
I don't purchase from sites that use javascript if there are any other sites around that don't. Many all javascript web sites I just completely skip over unless I have a very compelling reason to whitelist them.
I'd like to spend some quality time with these javascript only web developers in a small room with a baseball bat.
Actually I was born in the late 60s. Not only did I own a record player (Gerrard and Philips IIRC), but I keenly remember 8-track tapes.
CDs were touted as being more than just "more scratch resistant" than soft vinyl records. They were touted as being nearly scratch proof.
2. TDK has developed a scratch-free surface for Blu-ray DVD's
I'll see that when I believe it. I remember all too well the promises that were made about the scratch resistance of CDs.
When I want the truth on a difficult issue I don't take a poll. I don't give a rats arse how many "scientists" agree on such a politically charged topic. I don't find argument by authority particularly convincing. I need to see the evidence and the logic for myself. Either you understand the evidence for a particular theory or you don't. Others opinions are no substitute for thinking for yourself. I personally don't find the "evidence" convincing at all. In fact I cannot even imagine what convincing evidence would look like. Even if the predicted armageddon took place we could never know if human produced CO2 were the cause.
How do you suggest we prove it?
Even if it is true, I actually don't think it is provable and a non-verifiable hypothesis is not one that I have much faith in.
Unless you are an authority on climate change yourself, I can't see how you can suggest that this entire field of science knows less about their subject than you do?
There are no authorities on climate change. From what I have seen this field is about as scientific as astrology. Just a lot of wild guessing disguised as science.
Could you be more specific? Would you advocate a switch to nuclear power and electric vehicles for instance? What kinds of "corporations" are you referring to? Electric utilities?
Not only is it unproven, but it may even be unprovable. Even if our oceans start boiling by 2010 (we can only hope) how would you go about proving not only that we did it but that human produced carbon dioxide is to blame, that it would not have happened even without our help?
Exactly. There aren't many people who think oil will still be around as a cost effective energy source in 50 years. But I guess some of you believe the oceans will be boiling by then.
I live in a cold climate. When I hear talk about global warming I say "Bring it on!".
I wonder if this would work for head injuries too. the same problem occurs with cascading neural damage after the injury. I don't know if I'd be inclined to inject some PEG directly into my brain though. We seem to have a natural aversion to injecting anything into our brains.
God knows what I would have done if I had noticed this article before my accident. I wonder if I would have been crazy enough.
wrt head injuries it has been found that progesterone also provides some protective effect if administered within 48 hours of the injury. Of course, women have less need for this and typically recover better from head injuries. I wonder if this would be true for spinal cord injuries as well.
After having torn down and rebuilt a good section of my own house, and having done my own plumbing and electrical work, I don't think the building codes are unreasonable at all. I think they actually make a lot of sense. The trick is to understand why the codes are in place. They are really just a list of good building practices.
The real problem is licensing. More specifically, the laws prohibiting the hiring of unlicensed tradespeople. Plumbers in my area (of the US) get upwards of $100/hour. I could do a similar job (to code) for $10/hour, but it would be illegal for anyone to hire me.
Your logic is flawed. 100 sources giving you 3.3k/sec will give you 3300k/sec. The number of files you share has nothing to do with it.
Remember that in any network Total Upload must be the same as Total Download. The ed2k network does not actively encourage uploading the way that BT does. In BT a higher upload speed will almost always result in a higher download speed. In ed2k this is not always true.
For instance, my UL bandwidth is just under 100kB/sec but I often limit my UL speed in Emule to around 16k in order to maintain a reasonable UL/DL ratio.
In BT I never do that because I know that I will usually get back what I give to the network. Multiply my case by thousands of others and you discover at least one reason why ed2k is so much slower than BT. It has more upload bandwidth.
It doesn't give you any indication as to the authenticity of the content.
Can you name a single P2P app that does?
Ideally you could trust that bad files will be unpopular and have fewer sources, but that simply doesn't happen.
Well that isn't my experience. On Emule at least, the fake files usually have 1/10 to 1/100 the number of sources as the geniune versions.
How exactly does this slow down Edonkey? Or do you mean that it slows it down for 0 upload leechers? In any network total upload == total download. You cannot download faster than others are uploading to you. TAINSTAFL.
The upload requirements are not designed to stop leeching and they don't. They just help with 0 upload leeching. Leeching is anything but a "trivial problem".
BT actually has a protocol with inherent anti-leeching qualities. It is far, far more resistant to leeching than the ed2k network.
I know it isn't PC to say this, but we need AIDS and maybe 3-5 more plagues like it
Well then would global thermonuclear war satisfy you? Or would that leave too many Australians alive?
Uh, well that part might actually be true if you only consider privately funded research. Cures and preventative vaccines are not profitable.
One flaw in her little theory is that no one else gives a rats arse about Africa. Why would anyone bother creating some super-virus to wipe out a continent that the rest of world doesn't care about.
As far as HIV being a manmade virus, I don't think even our current technology is up to the task, let alone the technology that was around 20 years ago. Maybe in another 20 years it would be possible to construct such a virus.
It is like this no where else in the world.
That is completely false.
and another cause is less sanitary conditions and more disease (open sores and such)
"open sores"? You must be joking.
Nowhere else in the world except Africa do you have a significant chance of contracting AIDS through heterosexual sex.
You really seem to have this fixed idea that homosexual sex is somehow inherently different and that transmission through "normal" sex is nearly impossible. I am wondering where you got this idea. It is completely false and dangerous. I also can't help wondering whether you are over the age of 12.
The only difference with Central African HIV is that it is so common. It has reached truly epidemic map-clearing proportions. Ignorance and superstition definitely seem to play a part in this (ie. the virgin cure, lack of condom use, distrust in the "germ theory" as the cause of AIDS).
The bottom line is HIV is easily transmittable through heterosexual sex. The fact that it is even more easily transmittable through sodomy is actually not all that important. Either way, if you are having sex with an HIV infected partner your chances of acquiring it from even a single encounter are quite high.
At the very least it's life-extending and could turn HIV from an incurably deadly nasty into an incurably nasty chronic infection, while "we" work on a real cure or vaccine.
This is the best vaccine imaginable from the POV of the pharmaceutical companies. They don't want a cure and they don't want a truly preventative vaccine. They might never even make back their research costs with those. Keep 'em alive but keep 'em paying is their motto.
They want to treat AIDS without killing the golden egg laying chicken known as HIV. Every year that the HIV infected person remains alive is money in the bank for them in terms of the annual drug therapy costs as well as in the chances of acquiring more "customers".
first ever considered 'vaccine' was tested on a boy who already had smallpox, so calling this vaccine goes back a long time.
Don't you mean cowpox? It was found that being infected with cowpox, aka the vaccinia virus, (the "vaccine") protected you from contracting smallpox. I think this was done by first infecting a boy with cowpox and then trying to infect him with smallpox.