Intel is committing hara-kiri in my opinion here (thats suicide for honor in Japanese)
Really? I thought it was a former announcer for the Chicago Cubs ("It could be... It moght be... It is!")
Wouldn't it make more sense to put that 64 on the server, with XXGB of RAM, and push the display to the clients? X-terms, Terminal Services, whatever? Then, what, you've got 64 bit apps on the server, and a 32 bit clients, and no worry about memory usage.
I'm not going to argue with you about whether it really means what you say or not, because those above have done that already, but I will say that he CAN NOT be using it incorrectly, for the following reason: your usage is idiomatic, while his is not. Translation -- your meaning is not the sum of the parts, while beg (ask for) a question, certainly holds to the literal meaning. Whatever the idiom means or has come to mean, it can not displace the literal meaning. A good example would be "give a hoot," (my girlfriend recommends it), as in "I don't give a hoot what you think." It can certainly mean to literally shout, if I care to make it that. Fantastically, unbelievably, and amazingly, while not idioms, can be used in the literal meanings of those words, despite the fact that common usage dictates otherwise.
Regarding the use of loose and lose referred to above, they are not a common American problem, and mispellings such as these almost certainly spring from a lack of daily reading.
Hey, I don't know you, so I'm not trying to assume anything or judge you, but it seems that you've made this decision based on who watches it. If you're a geek, (like most of us here), you know all well and good what people refusing to join your fun because they think you are uncool is like. I say, watch it, like I did, and if you like watching it, go ahead. If you don't like watching it (like me), then don't. Isn't that reason enough?
Can someone help me as to just why he needs to move his source back and forth between computers. I mean, I like that he's consolidated to one machine and all, but couldn't he just use a samba share or something to save the (apparently complicated) step of moving the source code from one machine to another. What's the real advantage here? (Real question, not a flame)
I'm the originator of this thread, and I wasn't trying to compare my first set (blue) with the 1974 version, just reminiscing a little. I remember that it was a basic set that only went to level 10, now that others have jogged my memory. I seem to remember that I got those "chit," as well.
I went to Shadowrun website linked to by another poster, and am assuming that this RPG is based on a short story anthology from about twenty years ago. I used to like the book, getting it from the Sci-Fi book club. Is this correct? Are there more books out now, and, if so, are they any good?
Yep. That was the box, alright. I think back and am amazed that I was able to comprehend the rules with no one to show me the way. I am more amazed that, at eleven years old (or whatever), I had the attention span to read and reread until I got it. From what I remember of reading them before I recovered...oops, I mean stopped playing..., those rules were anything but easy to understand. It was, however, self contained enough that you could play with only that box.
Thanks for the correction on the link. I was in between classes and didn't have time for a preview ( or even a proofread, apparently). I have no idea how the link got slashdot in it...
I wasn't playing in 1974, but, in 1979 (I think) I won a gift certificate from my toy store down the street and spent about half of it on a box with a dragon on it. Everyone in the thread is talking about a white box, but I specifically remember it being blue, with a blue book (same dragon) maybe 60 pages long. I had no idea what an RPG or even miniatures were, and this book was still big on miniatures. At 11 years old, and never having played anything but cards and board games, I read it maybe seven times before something clicked and I got this rush of excitement as I realized that is was so much more of a game than I had ever dreamed of.
I made my mother sit down and play it with me (she hated it). I found some friends at school and convinced them to play, but no one could really get the hang of it. I wasn't any kind of DM, either.
It took about another two years of me trying to find people to play begore I hit the jackpot, and by the time I gave it up at 17 years old, I had amassed 30 different boxed set games, all of whigh I donated to the gaming club of my university when I went.
I recently found some interest in playing again, and happened across a Open Documentation license game, here
If anyone can tell me what kind of edition that blue box was (D&D, not AD&D), I would appreciate it.
However, the reality of it is that our current environment still favors closed source software
I think I would agree with you, but this editorial doesn't. Don't hate me, Trinity,. I'm just the messenger.
Before we begin the bashing, let's note that two flavors of 2.4.19 were compared to two closed source Unix operating systems. Let's try to keep the evil empire out of this one!
(Yes, this is off-topic) Just about. 400 people have been killed in the north. At this point, the police need to only claim that you are dealing drugs to shoot you. They can toss a bag of heroine on you after you're dead if they turn out to be wrong. Any oversight disappeared a month ago. Quite scary.
Mozilla has crashed on this page 3 times, just totally hanging, requiring a kill. Anyone else having this problem? Are they using some strange Flash or something? Can't get to the page to find out.
Man -- This is awesome! Can we get this at Panthip Plaza? What we really need in Thailand is a "This is an illegal copy" sticker, because, really, I like to buy he real thing. Anyway, the Prime Ministr has declared that illegal CDs will be stopped by next month. I wonder if they'll shoot them all like they are the drug dealers...
What most of the founding father were, and the word to use there, is Deists. They, mostly, believed in a god which created and then left man alone. In short, that he/she has/had no real influence over daily life. Just asking whether beliefs were the same and whether that word (Creator) can still be supported in the US constitution.
Your math was incorrect. The correct answer is 1,922,000,000,000 / 250,000,000 = US$7688. I think that you introduced three zeroes by assuming that 1 Billion = 1 Million Million, when in the US (and most financial the world over) it is read as a thousand million. Where the other zeroes came from, I do not know
that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
Since all of these can be, and are, taken away by the legal system, your point is, well, pointless. Jefferson agreed with that when he said "I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."
This agrees with you parent poster, I'm afraid to say. On another note, do you agree with Jefferson that these rights were given by the Creator?
This is not a flame, and I respect your post highly. I believe that you're blurring the line between efficiency and effectiveness. (I was originally going to say confusing the line, but I don't think that you are confused at all, just possibly not interested) The corporate world, where everything comes down to money, must be concerned with efficiency, and can't afford to waste precious time and money before getting a product out the door to compete, moreso in a fast-moving industry like tech. OSS plays by different rules, ones that encourage effectiveness over eficiency. In fact, by the comments on Slashdot, you could assume that efficiency in production is seen as a hinderance, causing buggy, ill-conceived software.
Microsoft, however, has been shown to have the money and know-how to inefficiently, but very effectively, crush the competition. Anyone who has ever been in the military knows that the difference is important, and that, in a war, your army needs to be effective, and damn efficiency to hell. The problem is that OSS is not a conventional army, whose attacks stop when overpowered and forced to surrender. They are, instead, idealists living in camps in the jungle, recruiting young and preaching freedom to their members.
I see Microsoft as playing the role of the US in the Vietnam war, with OSS guerillas seemingly appearing out of nowhere and evaporating back into the jungle when attacked en masse. How can Microsoft defeat a grass roots force that has no real leadership to call surrender for it? I suspect that, for this reason, Microsoft will eventually have to adapt to this style of production, or will be atritted into oblivion. I won't make any claims that this will happen soon.
Kevin Lawton is the article submitter, the author of the program and bochs, and is really well known and highly regarded for his skill at this. Virtualizing a bios and all the devices is about as low level as you can get.
Well, since we KNOW that will never happen, let's just check the numbers from the link given by your parent poster. Total income tax in millions for 2000 (the latest year available): $980,521. Tax paid by top 25% (the closest bracket available): $823,706. That percent again? 84.01%. 84-25. But, you are right, we know THAT will never happen; they just won't let it.
That is all.
It's very loving that someone took the time and effort to mod my last 4 comments as overrated, despite having their original score. I love you. I really do. Now find a life.
You know what... you're absolutely right about insurance, and as a man in my mid-thirties, I knew it when I said it, but I get really tired of this argument, and the "if you don't like their license, don't use the software" argument that I often use just falls on deaf ears.
I honestly believe you just live up to your agreement if you made one. Citing that the EULA is no good is like when I was a kid, and the other kid had his fingers crossed. If you don't think the EULA is valid, make sure that the publisher knows this and can react accordingly. Anything else is cowardly, which is how I would characterize most warezers (is that the word?).
If you look at my posting history, you will see that I am consistent on this, and don't troll, though I may insight debate on some occasions.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Intel is committing hara-kiri in my opinion here (thats suicide for honor in Japanese)
Really? I thought it was a former announcer for the Chicago Cubs ("It could be... It moght be... It is!")
Wouldn't it make more sense to put that 64 on the server, with XXGB of RAM, and push the display to the clients? X-terms, Terminal Services, whatever? Then, what, you've got 64 bit apps on the server, and a 32 bit clients, and no worry about memory usage.
I'm not going to argue with you about whether it really means what you say or not, because those above have done that already, but I will say that he CAN NOT be using it incorrectly, for the following reason: your usage is idiomatic, while his is not. Translation -- your meaning is not the sum of the parts, while beg (ask for) a question, certainly holds to the literal meaning. Whatever the idiom means or has come to mean, it can not displace the literal meaning. A good example would be "give a hoot," (my girlfriend recommends it), as in "I don't give a hoot what you think." It can certainly mean to literally shout, if I care to make it that. Fantastically, unbelievably, and amazingly, while not idioms, can be used in the literal meanings of those words, despite the fact that common usage dictates otherwise.
Regarding the use of loose and lose referred to above, they are not a common American problem, and mispellings such as these almost certainly spring from a lack of daily reading.
Hey, I don't know you, so I'm not trying to assume anything or judge you, but it seems that you've made this decision based on who watches it. If you're a geek, (like most of us here), you know all well and good what people refusing to join your fun because they think you are uncool is like. I say, watch it, like I did, and if you like watching it, go ahead. If you don't like watching it (like me), then don't. Isn't that reason enough?
Can someone help me as to just why he needs to move his source back and forth between computers. I mean, I like that he's consolidated to one machine and all, but couldn't he just use a samba share or something to save the (apparently complicated) step of moving the source code from one machine to another. What's the real advantage here? (Real question, not a flame)
I'm the originator of this thread, and I wasn't trying to compare my first set (blue) with the 1974 version, just reminiscing a little. I remember that it was a basic set that only went to level 10, now that others have jogged my memory. I seem to remember that I got those "chit," as well.
I went to Shadowrun website linked to by another poster, and am assuming that this RPG is based on a short story anthology from about twenty years ago. I used to like the book, getting it from the Sci-Fi book club. Is this correct? Are there more books out now, and, if so, are they any good?
Yep. That was the box, alright. I think back and am amazed that I was able to comprehend the rules with no one to show me the way. I am more amazed that, at eleven years old (or whatever), I had the attention span to read and reread until I got it. From what I remember of reading them before I recovered ...oops, I mean stopped playing..., those rules were anything but easy to understand. It was, however, self contained enough that you could play with only that box.
Thanks for the correction on the link. I was in between classes and didn't have time for a preview ( or even a proofread, apparently). I have no idea how the link got slashdot in it...
I wasn't playing in 1974, but, in 1979 (I think) I won a gift certificate from my toy store down the street and spent about half of it on a box with a dragon on it. Everyone in the thread is talking about a white box, but I specifically remember it being blue, with a blue book (same dragon) maybe 60 pages long. I had no idea what an RPG or even miniatures were, and this book was still big on miniatures. At 11 years old, and never having played anything but cards and board games, I read it maybe seven times before something clicked and I got this rush of excitement as I realized that is was so much more of a game than I had ever dreamed of.
I made my mother sit down and play it with me (she hated it). I found some friends at school and convinced them to play, but no one could really get the hang of it. I wasn't any kind of DM, either.
It took about another two years of me trying to find people to play begore I hit the jackpot, and by the time I gave it up at 17 years old, I had amassed 30 different boxed set games, all of whigh I donated to the gaming club of my university when I went.
I recently found some interest in playing again, and happened across a Open Documentation license game, here
If anyone can tell me what kind of edition that blue box was (D&D, not AD&D), I would appreciate it.
That's ok, because nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!. Thank you, I'll be here till Thursday. Try the veal.
However, the reality of it is that our current environment still favors closed source software
I think I would agree with you, but this editorial doesn't. Don't hate me, Trinity,. I'm just the messenger.
Before we begin the bashing, let's note that two flavors of 2.4.19 were compared to two closed source Unix operating systems. Let's try to keep the evil empire out of this one!
(Yes, this is off-topic) Just about. 400 people have been killed in the north. At this point, the police need to only claim that you are dealing drugs to shoot you. They can toss a bag of heroine on you after you're dead if they turn out to be wrong. Any oversight disappeared a month ago. Quite scary.
Mozilla has crashed on this page 3 times, just totally hanging, requiring a kill. Anyone else having this problem? Are they using some strange Flash or something? Can't get to the page to find out.
Man -- This is awesome! Can we get this at Panthip Plaza? What we really need in Thailand is a "This is an illegal copy" sticker, because, really, I like to buy he real thing. Anyway, the Prime Ministr has declared that illegal CDs will be stopped by next month. I wonder if they'll shoot them all like they are the drug dealers...
What most of the founding father were, and the word to use there, is Deists. They, mostly, believed in a god which created and then left man alone. In short, that he/she has/had no real influence over daily life. Just asking whether beliefs were the same and whether that word (Creator) can still be supported in the US constitution.
Your math was incorrect. The correct answer is 1,922,000,000,000 / 250,000,000 = US$7688. I think that you introduced three zeroes by assuming that 1 Billion = 1 Million Million, when in the US (and most financial the world over) it is read as a thousand million. Where the other zeroes came from, I do not know
that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
Since all of these can be, and are, taken away by the legal system, your point is, well, pointless. Jefferson agreed with that when he said "I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."
This agrees with you parent poster, I'm afraid to say. On another note, do you agree with Jefferson that these rights were given by the Creator?
This is not a flame, and I respect your post highly.
I believe that you're blurring the line between efficiency and effectiveness. (I was originally going to say confusing the line, but I don't think that you are confused at all, just possibly not interested) The corporate world, where everything comes down to money, must be concerned with efficiency, and can't afford to waste precious time and money before getting a product out the door to compete, moreso in a fast-moving industry like tech. OSS plays by different rules, ones that encourage effectiveness over eficiency. In fact, by the comments on Slashdot, you could assume that efficiency in production is seen as a hinderance, causing buggy, ill-conceived software.
Microsoft, however, has been shown to have the money and know-how to inefficiently, but very effectively, crush the competition. Anyone who has ever been in the military knows that the difference is important, and that, in a war, your army needs to be effective, and damn efficiency to hell. The problem is that OSS is not a conventional army, whose attacks stop when overpowered and forced to surrender. They are, instead, idealists living in camps in the jungle, recruiting young and preaching freedom to their members.
I see Microsoft as playing the role of the US in the Vietnam war, with OSS guerillas seemingly appearing out of nowhere and evaporating back into the jungle when attacked en masse. How can Microsoft defeat a grass roots force that has no real leadership to call surrender for it? I suspect that, for this reason, Microsoft will eventually have to adapt to this style of production, or will be atritted into oblivion. I won't make any claims that this will happen soon.
Kevin Lawton is the article submitter, the author of the program and bochs, and is really well known and highly regarded for his skill at this. Virtualizing a bios and all the devices is about as low level as you can get.
Well, since we KNOW that will never happen, let's just check the numbers from the link given by your parent poster. Total income tax in millions for 2000 (the latest year available): $980,521. Tax paid by top 25% (the closest bracket available): $823,706. That percent again? 84.01%. 84-25. But, you are right, we know THAT will never happen; they just won't let it.
That is all.
best-of-bread software
Does it use the G4 to make toast, too?
It's very loving that someone took the time and effort to mod my last 4 comments as overrated, despite having their original score. I love you. I really do. Now find a life.
You know what... you're absolutely right about insurance, and as a man in my mid-thirties, I knew it when I said it, but I get really tired of this argument, and the "if you don't like their license, don't use the software" argument that I often use just falls on deaf ears.
I honestly believe you just live up to your agreement if you made one. Citing that the EULA is no good is like when I was a kid, and the other kid had his fingers crossed. If you don't think the EULA is valid, make sure that the publisher knows this and can react accordingly. Anything else is cowardly, which is how I would characterize most warezers (is that the word?).
If you look at my posting history, you will see that I am consistent on this, and don't troll, though I may insight debate on some occasions.;)