So, basically, all the features the nForce2-integrated Geforce4 MX had when it debuted back in mid-2002? THAT'S AMAZING!
The choice of the GMA 950 is hardly something to get worked up about. In fact, it's a downright bad choice, seeing as ATI's X1300 series has MUCH, MUCH better video support.
Your nVidia video card doesn't support Aigl, you mean. It's missing an extension that nVidia is adding in the next driver release. This is hardly a show-stopper. Indeed, from the article, nVidia seems to believe this is the way to go.
That's kind of misleading. By the time Sony's put out the PS3, they'll have to deal with an Xbox 360 that's had a good half year's head start in the channel, since the supply chain problems have apparently been fixed. Last stats I heard, _50%_ of 360 owners had put their console online. That's an excellent number, if they can maintain it.
Milton Friedman said it best: "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
$45 yearly seems reasonable for matchmaking and actual servers, to me at least. Those servers cost real money to maintain and provide bandwidth for, regardless of whether you paid for it all up front or not. Along with that, you also get at least a certain level of service that random, player-owned servers don't give. If Joe Random's Q4 server dies, there aren't any real consequences to him beyond the loss of the server. If something goes wrong at the Xbox Live server farm, there's a whole chain of people who have responsibility to get it fixed, or possibly be fired.
There's also incentive to keep things secure and working. Remember CoD 2 for PC? No one's paying them directly for servers, so they've got no incentive to care about security and cheating issues in the game once it goes off the shelves. When you're paying yearly, there's still at least some reason for Microsoft to care - bad service makes you less likely to pay for Live.
You're totally missing the point. The issue is not protecting your http traffic - rather, it's to protect your LAN. Without a good wireless security protocol, your internal network is _wide open_ for anyone to attack. WEP is NOT a good security protocol, and if DS doesn't support WPA, you can't use the thing at home for wireless browsing.
Who cares? Honestly, it's not like you can just "target the Internet" to only those people you want. That's what makes it such a powerful medium, in a way.
Have you checked out Crossover Office, by Codeweavers? We use it extensively where I work, and it's quite excellent. Version 5.0 gave us some trouble with Office 2003 (buggy!), but 5.0.1 has been pretty stable in comparison. Additionally, it has some useful management functions - you can bundle up a "Windows install" in an RPM, and install it straight on someone else's computer. In fact, in version 5, it separates Crossover and the applications - you can now upgrade your Crossover Office install without updating your Windows applications.
"If I ever have kids, I can guarantee you that they won't go to school in the US."
You don't need to go elsewhere. Just start supporting vouchers. Everyone else in the world but the US seems to have them, and they appear to work damned well, too. I can send my kids to a good parochial school (if that's what I want), you can send them to your friendly good secular school (if that's what you want!), and we'll both be happy, instead of bitching at each other like we are now. You don't need to worry about my terrible religious beliefs influencing your precious children, and vica versa.
What's that? You don't want to support my school at all, because it teaches things you don't agree with? Well, I don't want to support yours, either, but I'm willing to do so anyways to be fair. A little compromise goes a long way. I cannot fathom why leftists in this country can't bring themselves to support vouchers. Just bizarre.
As for the "blacklist", it's a free country, and they can do what they want. Frankly, a bunch of private citizens doing as they wish is hardly comparable to the state-sanctioned insane paranoia of the McCarthy-era, but who needs facts? It's always about imposing your beliefs on other people - you just like the ones being imposed right now, so you don't care. It's no surprise the profs are playing the "poor victim" card - why can't they just stand up and being proud of their beliefs? If someone tossed me on the "libertarians" list, I'd be proud, not ashamed.
Just discarding the idea that students are discriminated against because of their political views (which have nothing to do with class) is naive, and reeks of some bias on your side. Would you be so blase about discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation? As long as they're fair, and include discrimination from all sides, not just the left, I think it's a good idea.
Did you even read the blurb? All the things you're saying wouldn't cause a _decrease_ in the chances of cancer on the LHS of your brain. You've explained very well why there might be an increase on the right side, but that's only half the equation.
"Regarding gun ownership, isn't that down to a particular interpretation of the constitution (and its ammendments). Do you think the ACLU should be defending the rights of white supremacists (or radical muslims, for that matter) to own machine guns, nuclear weapons etc?"
Everything comes down to an "interpretation" of the Constitution, so your argument is kind of silly. It's funny, though, how their interpretations seem to line up _exactly_ with the Democratic party's interpretations. If they're defending citizens' liberties, why aren't they doing so for the right to own whatever property they want?
And, yes, I support white supremacists being able to buy machine guns, assuming they haven't been convicted of a crime before.
"But, no matter who you are, you have to admit that the ACLU prevents you from losing anything that might be considered a civil liberty."
Unless, of course, you're talking about the right to own a gun. The ACLU doesn't care much about that particular civil liberty. Or freedom from racism - unless you're a non-white-male.
The ACLU picks and chooses its issues. That's just not something you can deny. When the group first started, they were a lot more impartial. Back in the 1970s, when their membership became more left-wing, the group started down that path as well. There is more than a grain of truth in the idea that they are a left-wing organization at this point.
The ACLU does a lot of good things, and I applaud them for those things. But, do not mistake them for "defenders of all civil liberties, now and always". It's simply not true, and applying that sort of idealism to them is misleading.
This is the dumbest argument ever, and it all seems to stem from a single book - hardly water-tight. It essentially rests on the idea that if Iran moves to Euros to sell oil, everyone will dump the dollar immediately and buy the Euro. This won't happen because: 1. US Treasuries are still in high demand as an almost risk-free security. ("almost" in the sense that we've never defaulted on our debts) 2. The value of the dollar can be pushed up with interest rate hikes. 3. China has their currency backed by US Treasuries - if they thought the dollar would plunge if Iran started selling oil in Euros, why the hell aren't they leading the charge to "flatten Iran"?
The dollar _or_ the Euro taking a nosedive is a bad thing for everyone involved.
Linux is a damned secure OS, at least as good as MacOS X. Yet, you find Linux sysadmins often talking about relatively paranoid security measures when talking about keeping their systems safe. Linux has a good security culture. (The same could be said for the BSDs.)
The issue, in my eyes, is not whether MacOS users are going to be immediately vulnerable to any virus outbreaks because they're not securing their computers properly - it's whether this whole "I use Macs, therefore, I am impervious" is fostering a culture of bad security practices in the Mac community. A good OS is only half the battle - you need to make sure you have good security practices, too, if you don't want to get owned.
I don't know if you realize this, but GPS can't just be turned off for only European citizens, and not Americans. The satellites are either broadcasting the common carrier and p-code, or they're not. If what you're saying is true (and, frankly, I'd like to see some sort of documentation on it), it screwed over any American shipping in the area as much as everyone else. US citizens aren't _always_ in the US, and many US companies have holdings overseas where they use GPS.
The idea that the US would just unilaterally, without warning, turn off GPS to Europe is insane. Are you guys getting that paranoid? We're your MILITARY ALLIES. We stick tight with our allies. Don't panic. I really can't believe the amount of FUD Europeans are swallowing on this topic.
That said, I really don't care at all about Gallileo. The more, the merrier, in my opinion. At the very least, if something goes catastrophically wrong with either system, there's still something in the sky to handle navigation for a while.
If by "workaround", you mean centimeter-level accuracy, sure. Differential GPS is already being used by many people who require insane levels of accuracy - I've seen it in action, and it's damned impressive. You can also use it while moving, so the idea that GPS isn't good enough for aircraft is kind of stupid. P-code is not the end-all, be-all of accuracy, in any case.
Reading these posts, it's pretty obvious that the last exposure some people had to GPS information was in 1997 or something. Low-res selective availability? That got turned off in like 2000. And "turning off GPS for Europe" sounds kind of stupid, too - are American pilots just going to fly into the dark all the sudden? A little less paranoia, and a little more education, please...
"Tell me thats not a concession to a party unrelated to the project? "
I know you Europeans have totally forgotten, but we're actually a non-inconsquential military ally of yours. It's called NATO. The US is hardly a third party to all of this.
As usual, Zonk's got no clue what he's talking about. DQ 1-4 and 7-8 were all released here - that's 75% of the series. That's hardly "largely absent". Heck, it compares well to Final Fantasy - 2, 3, and 5 only came out within the past few years.
Bad comparison. You have personal ownership of your bank account. No one has personal ownership of an asteroid.
You can exploit a resource responsibly, too. You need to stop thinking of exploitation as "taking advantage of", and start thinking of "making use of".
Slashdot Mirror
So, basically, all the features the nForce2-integrated Geforce4 MX had when it debuted back in mid-2002? THAT'S AMAZING!
The choice of the GMA 950 is hardly something to get worked up about. In fact, it's a downright bad choice, seeing as ATI's X1300 series has MUCH, MUCH better video support.
-Erwos
Your nVidia video card doesn't support Aigl, you mean. It's missing an extension that nVidia is adding in the next driver release. This is hardly a show-stopper. Indeed, from the article, nVidia seems to believe this is the way to go.
-Erwos
Did you even RTFA? All the work was done upstream. Nothing's there that's Fedora specific.
-Erwos
That's kind of misleading. By the time Sony's put out the PS3, they'll have to deal with an Xbox 360 that's had a good half year's head start in the channel, since the supply chain problems have apparently been fixed. Last stats I heard, _50%_ of 360 owners had put their console online. That's an excellent number, if they can maintain it.
-Erwos
Milton Friedman said it best: "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
$45 yearly seems reasonable for matchmaking and actual servers, to me at least. Those servers cost real money to maintain and provide bandwidth for, regardless of whether you paid for it all up front or not. Along with that, you also get at least a certain level of service that random, player-owned servers don't give. If Joe Random's Q4 server dies, there aren't any real consequences to him beyond the loss of the server. If something goes wrong at the Xbox Live server farm, there's a whole chain of people who have responsibility to get it fixed, or possibly be fired.
There's also incentive to keep things secure and working. Remember CoD 2 for PC? No one's paying them directly for servers, so they've got no incentive to care about security and cheating issues in the game once it goes off the shelves. When you're paying yearly, there's still at least some reason for Microsoft to care - bad service makes you less likely to pay for Live.
-Erwos
You're totally missing the point. The issue is not protecting your http traffic - rather, it's to protect your LAN. Without a good wireless security protocol, your internal network is _wide open_ for anyone to attack. WEP is NOT a good security protocol, and if DS doesn't support WPA, you can't use the thing at home for wireless browsing.
-Erwos
Who cares? Honestly, it's not like you can just "target the Internet" to only those people you want. That's what makes it such a powerful medium, in a way.
-Erwos
Oh - many apologies. Must have missed that.
-Erwos
Have you checked out Crossover Office, by Codeweavers? We use it extensively where I work, and it's quite excellent. Version 5.0 gave us some trouble with Office 2003 (buggy!), but 5.0.1 has been pretty stable in comparison. Additionally, it has some useful management functions - you can bundle up a "Windows install" in an RPM, and install it straight on someone else's computer. In fact, in version 5, it separates Crossover and the applications - you can now upgrade your Crossover Office install without updating your Windows applications.
-Erwos
Doesn't thise sort of assume that WiMax is on a non-licensed spectrum? IIRC, WiMax is going to be operating on a licensed spectrum...
-Erwos
France comes to mind immediately.
-Erwos
"If I ever have kids, I can guarantee you that they won't go to school in the US."
You don't need to go elsewhere. Just start supporting vouchers. Everyone else in the world but the US seems to have them, and they appear to work damned well, too. I can send my kids to a good parochial school (if that's what I want), you can send them to your friendly good secular school (if that's what you want!), and we'll both be happy, instead of bitching at each other like we are now. You don't need to worry about my terrible religious beliefs influencing your precious children, and vica versa.
What's that? You don't want to support my school at all, because it teaches things you don't agree with? Well, I don't want to support yours, either, but I'm willing to do so anyways to be fair. A little compromise goes a long way. I cannot fathom why leftists in this country can't bring themselves to support vouchers. Just bizarre.
As for the "blacklist", it's a free country, and they can do what they want. Frankly, a bunch of private citizens doing as they wish is hardly comparable to the state-sanctioned insane paranoia of the McCarthy-era, but who needs facts? It's always about imposing your beliefs on other people - you just like the ones being imposed right now, so you don't care. It's no surprise the profs are playing the "poor victim" card - why can't they just stand up and being proud of their beliefs? If someone tossed me on the "libertarians" list, I'd be proud, not ashamed.
Just discarding the idea that students are discriminated against because of their political views (which have nothing to do with class) is naive, and reeks of some bias on your side. Would you be so blase about discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation? As long as they're fair, and include discrimination from all sides, not just the left, I think it's a good idea.
-Erwos
Did you even read the blurb? All the things you're saying wouldn't cause a _decrease_ in the chances of cancer on the LHS of your brain. You've explained very well why there might be an increase on the right side, but that's only half the equation.
-Erwos
"Regarding gun ownership, isn't that down to a particular interpretation of the constitution (and its ammendments). Do you think the ACLU should be defending the rights of white supremacists (or radical muslims, for that matter) to own machine guns, nuclear weapons etc?"
Everything comes down to an "interpretation" of the Constitution, so your argument is kind of silly. It's funny, though, how their interpretations seem to line up _exactly_ with the Democratic party's interpretations. If they're defending citizens' liberties, why aren't they doing so for the right to own whatever property they want?
And, yes, I support white supremacists being able to buy machine guns, assuming they haven't been convicted of a crime before.
-Erwos
I forgot to say it, but "freedom from racism" is actually a civil right, not a civil liberty. They're not quite the same thing.
-Erwos
"But, no matter who you are, you have to admit that the ACLU prevents you from losing anything that might be considered a civil liberty."
Unless, of course, you're talking about the right to own a gun. The ACLU doesn't care much about that particular civil liberty. Or freedom from racism - unless you're a non-white-male.
The ACLU picks and chooses its issues. That's just not something you can deny. When the group first started, they were a lot more impartial. Back in the 1970s, when their membership became more left-wing, the group started down that path as well. There is more than a grain of truth in the idea that they are a left-wing organization at this point.
The ACLU does a lot of good things, and I applaud them for those things. But, do not mistake them for "defenders of all civil liberties, now and always". It's simply not true, and applying that sort of idealism to them is misleading.
-Erwos
This is the dumbest argument ever, and it all seems to stem from a single book - hardly water-tight. It essentially rests on the idea that if Iran moves to Euros to sell oil, everyone will dump the dollar immediately and buy the Euro. This won't happen because:
1. US Treasuries are still in high demand as an almost risk-free security. ("almost" in the sense that we've never defaulted on our debts)
2. The value of the dollar can be pushed up with interest rate hikes.
3. China has their currency backed by US Treasuries - if they thought the dollar would plunge if Iran started selling oil in Euros, why the hell aren't they leading the charge to "flatten Iran"?
The dollar _or_ the Euro taking a nosedive is a bad thing for everyone involved.
-Erwos
Linux is a damned secure OS, at least as good as MacOS X. Yet, you find Linux sysadmins often talking about relatively paranoid security measures when talking about keeping their systems safe. Linux has a good security culture. (The same could be said for the BSDs.)
The issue, in my eyes, is not whether MacOS users are going to be immediately vulnerable to any virus outbreaks because they're not securing their computers properly - it's whether this whole "I use Macs, therefore, I am impervious" is fostering a culture of bad security practices in the Mac community. A good OS is only half the battle - you need to make sure you have good security practices, too, if you don't want to get owned.
-Erwos
I don't know if you realize this, but GPS can't just be turned off for only European citizens, and not Americans. The satellites are either broadcasting the common carrier and p-code, or they're not. If what you're saying is true (and, frankly, I'd like to see some sort of documentation on it), it screwed over any American shipping in the area as much as everyone else. US citizens aren't _always_ in the US, and many US companies have holdings overseas where they use GPS.
The idea that the US would just unilaterally, without warning, turn off GPS to Europe is insane. Are you guys getting that paranoid? We're your MILITARY ALLIES. We stick tight with our allies. Don't panic. I really can't believe the amount of FUD Europeans are swallowing on this topic.
That said, I really don't care at all about Gallileo. The more, the merrier, in my opinion. At the very least, if something goes catastrophically wrong with either system, there's still something in the sky to handle navigation for a while.
-Erwos
If by "workaround", you mean centimeter-level accuracy, sure. Differential GPS is already being used by many people who require insane levels of accuracy - I've seen it in action, and it's damned impressive. You can also use it while moving, so the idea that GPS isn't good enough for aircraft is kind of stupid. P-code is not the end-all, be-all of accuracy, in any case.
Reading these posts, it's pretty obvious that the last exposure some people had to GPS information was in 1997 or something. Low-res selective availability? That got turned off in like 2000. And "turning off GPS for Europe" sounds kind of stupid, too - are American pilots just going to fly into the dark all the sudden? A little less paranoia, and a little more education, please...
-Erwos
VR.5's cliff-hanger still haunts me to this day. What the hell happened to Sidney? Also, where's the damn DVD release?
-Erwos
"Tell me thats not a concession to a party unrelated to the project? "
I know you Europeans have totally forgotten, but we're actually a non-inconsquential military ally of yours. It's called NATO. The US is hardly a third party to all of this.
-Erwos
As usual, Zonk's got no clue what he's talking about. DQ 1-4 and 7-8 were all released here - that's 75% of the series. That's hardly "largely absent". Heck, it compares well to Final Fantasy - 2, 3, and 5 only came out within the past few years.
-Erwos
Bad comparison. You have personal ownership of your bank account. No one has personal ownership of an asteroid.
You can exploit a resource responsibly, too. You need to stop thinking of exploitation as "taking advantage of", and start thinking of "making use of".
-Erwos
Who cares? It's not like space trash is going to remain in stable orbit all by itself - eventually, it'll hit the atmosphere and burn up.
There's also nothing wrong with exploiting space. It's not like it's a person who you're taking advantage of. It is a resource, nothing more.
-Erwos