Got a call from my bank a couple days ago saying that someone had cloned my debit card and was trying to brute force my pin number. Of course, they locked out the card after a couple false positives, but at least I know now where they got my card info from.
I thought the whole reason they were doing 48 FPS was to solely for the benefit of the 3D version. Of course, that only makes sense if they're using active shutter 3d glasses. (24 FPS/eye)
It's always better to have too many frames than not enough. They can always remove, but you can't add and be true to life.
If the energy costs are similar or more, then it doesn't matter. Greenpeace doesn't care about equipment cost or deployment cost. It's 100% energy. Theoretically, the energy cost should be similar between cloud and non-cloud. However, server farms a single point of energy purchase with the potential to greatly reduce the amount of energy coming from fossil fuels. Therefore, focusing on cloud data centers and trying to reduce their fossil fuel intake has a high impact potential over trying to get each tiny company to find alternative sources of energy.
If companies don't like estimates by Greenpeace, perhaps they should reveal official numbers backed up by data. A single statement from Apple off-handedly spouting a number doesn't it make it any truer than Greenpeace estimating the cost. Sorry, I just don't believe unverified numbers from the likes of Apple.
Google's response: Urs Hoelzle Google’s Senior Vice President for Technical Infrastructure - "The company welcomed the Greenpeace report and believed that it would intensify the industry’s focus on renewable energy." Adding: "We’ve put a significant time and resources into making Google as energy efficient as possible, using renewable energy, and investing in the sector. We welcome reports like this, as they bring additional attention to these important issues for the industry.
My CR-48 has no problems storing and playing large videos. I play an offline version of Angry Birds that's installed onto the computer. Plays Bastion ( http://chrome.supergiantgames.com/ )easily, too, but there's no offline mode for that.
As for total storage? The Samsung Series 5 Chromebook has a 16 GB solid state drive. The OS takes up about 300 MB. About total 1 GB total if you add in web cache. At the worst, you have 14 GB free.
That article's real knee-jerker. My favorite part: "If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%" Let's rephrase that to what it really says: "If you ignore 58% of all hybrid-buyers, the statistics becomes more inflammatory."
A couple fun facts not included in their stats:
* As of March 2012, 3.44% of all car sales were hybrids. Higher than the 2.4% included in the article, and even higher than the 2.8 "high mark" from 2008 that the survey was using to give the impression of impending doom.
* Total hybrid sales in March 2012 was +39.6% over the last year. Total vehicle sales over the same period was +12.7%.
* 27,800 of the 48,206 hybrid cars sold in March were Toyota Prius's, those "super-loyal" customers that were so easily waved away.
Payback for playback killed the original mp3.com artist community? That's funny, 'cause I could've sworn it was the RIAA lawsuit that shutdown the site for a while that did that.
Unless Mozilla releases its own advertising network or office suite, it isn't competing with Google. Frankly, anyone who even believed for a second that Google would let the search deal with Mozilla expire doesn't understand Google at all. Google has one main directive: Increase usage of Google **websites** to increase **advertising revenue**. Ending a deal with a major browser to provide the default search engine is completely adverse Google's business plan. You better believe that if Google could, they'd pay Microsoft to make IE's default search engine Google's.
Chrome isn't a business model. It is a tool Google is using to influence every other browser and the web. By making a fast, standards-based browser, and influencing other browsers to follow their example, they make general internet usage--and by extension ALL Google sites--work better. And if Google sites work better, users will spend more time using them.... will see more ads... will use Google Docs... will increase Google's revenue.
Comparing 2011's Google/Chrome to 1997's Microsoft/IE is a false dichotomy. Microsoft thought it could control the web to lock people into proprietary software. Google wants to speed up the web to get people to use it even more then they already do.
Twitter Terms of Service: http://twitter.com/tos
"By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).
You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals who partner with Twitter for the syndication, broadcast, distribution or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use."
Hey, EU. You're doing something wrong if you face huge budget shortfalls if you don't get your annual big business fine every year. Fining prosperous companies should not be a major source of income for ANY government.
Standard operating procedure.
Gamestop even opens PC games if you can find one in their store, even the boxes that say "Not valid for sale if opened." I made the mistake of buying a PC game there once and they didn't give me the CD key card. I had to call the store when I got home, and they read it to me over the phone.
Never again.
This post will likely get flooded away in the sea of well-wishers, but I thought I'd post anyway. Thank you. Slashdot was the very first website I ever went to on a regular basis, and has been bookmarked and visited daily for nearly half of my life. I wish you nothing but success in whatever you choose to do next.
Unless Apple makes it mandatory for all applications on Macs be installed using the new app store, then it doesn't prevent anything. It's not like Mac users are going to immediately stop installing stand-alone programs the moment the store comes out. And if they're installing standalone programs, then the people who get tricked into installing fake anti-virus software won't give it a second thought about installing what that fake system message pop-up told them.
On my 4 GB system, if all the applications running on my system right now claimed 100% of the RAM they're using as private, unshared RAM, that still leaves half of my RAM available for other programs. This with an instance of Google Chrome with eight open tabs that's been been in use and running non-stop for the last six hours.
Frankly, unless you are running some sort of critical application that must have RAM now, then even an OS that is horribly inefficient at handling shared memory management will do a good enough job. And it isn't working well enough for you, RAM is currently selling for $10 per GB.
If that "bloated piece of shit window manager" is making you hit you hit 100% RAM usage with whatever program you're using, perhaps you might want to spend the $40 and get 2 2GB sticks.
If you're not hitting 100% RAM usage, then it doesn't matter. RAM that sits unused is wasted RAM. You don't get karma points by not using it if you have it. The computer isn't happier just because you're letting the RAM sit there and do nothing.
An efficient and smart personal computer operating system should have 100% of available RAM in use all the time to speed up common tasks, but freely give up that RAM when other programs need it.
what happens when every app decides it is "the one true app" and should use as much memory as it can grab? When you have a half dozen or more programs all deciding that it can use all of your RAM for its cache and you start swapping everything else out to disk, it can be extremely painful to switch between tasks.
You close a couple programs? Or get more RAM? In all seriousness, there's never been more free RAM for programs to use than right now, and it's only going to get better. It could be worse: it could be 1985 and you have one program running at a time due to memory constraints.
I realize that not everyone has a problem with it, but Firefox kills my Vista laptop with 3GB RAM after leaving it running for a day or two with a dozen tabs open, and at some point, will often starting pausing for 60 seconds or more due to swapping. On the flip side, with my Linux desktop with 6GB of RAM, I hardly notice it chewing up crazy amounts of memory (1.2-1.5GB) until it's been open for a couple weeks.
You should try Windows 7 instead of Vista. It's memory management is years ahead of it. As for UI choices, I can respect your decision.
Slashdot Mirror
Got a call from my bank a couple days ago saying that someone had cloned my debit card and was trying to brute force my pin number. Of course, they locked out the card after a couple false positives, but at least I know now where they got my card info from.
I thought the whole reason they were doing 48 FPS was to solely for the benefit of the 3D version. Of course, that only makes sense if they're using active shutter 3d glasses. (24 FPS/eye) It's always better to have too many frames than not enough. They can always remove, but you can't add and be true to life.
If the energy costs are similar or more, then it doesn't matter. Greenpeace doesn't care about equipment cost or deployment cost. It's 100% energy. Theoretically, the energy cost should be similar between cloud and non-cloud. However, server farms a single point of energy purchase with the potential to greatly reduce the amount of energy coming from fossil fuels. Therefore, focusing on cloud data centers and trying to reduce their fossil fuel intake has a high impact potential over trying to get each tiny company to find alternative sources of energy.
If companies don't like estimates by Greenpeace, perhaps they should reveal official numbers backed up by data. A single statement from Apple off-handedly spouting a number doesn't it make it any truer than Greenpeace estimating the cost. Sorry, I just don't believe unverified numbers from the likes of Apple. Google's response: Urs Hoelzle Google’s Senior Vice President for Technical Infrastructure - "The company welcomed the Greenpeace report and believed that it would intensify the industry’s focus on renewable energy." Adding: "We’ve put a significant time and resources into making Google as energy efficient as possible, using renewable energy, and investing in the sector. We welcome reports like this, as they bring additional attention to these important issues for the industry.
Right. I'm sure Apple isn't skewing the numbers at all to make themselves look better. *wink* *wink*
They'll add that when Oracle stops suing Google for using modified Java in Android.
The internet and networks in general are for sharing data, nothing more.
Funny. Sharing data is 99% of my computer use. Without the Internet, I might as well not own a computer.
Also worth noting: It has a memory card slot that you can use as extra storage. And it supports flash drives.
My CR-48 has no problems storing and playing large videos. I play an offline version of Angry Birds that's installed onto the computer. Plays Bastion ( http://chrome.supergiantgames.com/ )easily, too, but there's no offline mode for that. As for total storage? The Samsung Series 5 Chromebook has a 16 GB solid state drive. The OS takes up about 300 MB. About total 1 GB total if you add in web cache. At the worst, you have 14 GB free.
Source: Baum & Associates, via http://www.hybridcars.com/news/march-2012-dashboard-44059.html
An alien drops a monolith down amongst the people and is angry the people don't use it correctly. Sounds about right.
I use this a lot. - https://www.facebook.com/help/?faq=167722253287296
I have a feeling that as time goes on, more and more sites will be losing your business/views.
Payback for playback killed the original mp3.com artist community? That's funny, 'cause I could've sworn it was the RIAA lawsuit that shutdown the site for a while that did that.
Unless Mozilla releases its own advertising network or office suite, it isn't competing with Google. Frankly, anyone who even believed for a second that Google would let the search deal with Mozilla expire doesn't understand Google at all. Google has one main directive: Increase usage of Google **websites** to increase **advertising revenue**. Ending a deal with a major browser to provide the default search engine is completely adverse Google's business plan. You better believe that if Google could, they'd pay Microsoft to make IE's default search engine Google's.
Chrome isn't a business model. It is a tool Google is using to influence every other browser and the web. By making a fast, standards-based browser, and influencing other browsers to follow their example, they make general internet usage--and by extension ALL Google sites--work better. And if Google sites work better, users will spend more time using them.... will see more ads... will use Google Docs... will increase Google's revenue.
Comparing 2011's Google/Chrome to 1997's Microsoft/IE is a false dichotomy. Microsoft thought it could control the web to lock people into proprietary software. Google wants to speed up the web to get people to use it even more then they already do.
Twitter Terms of Service: http://twitter.com/tos "By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals who partner with Twitter for the syndication, broadcast, distribution or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use."
Hey, EU. You're doing something wrong if you face huge budget shortfalls if you don't get your annual big business fine every year. Fining prosperous companies should not be a major source of income for ANY government.
Standard operating procedure. Gamestop even opens PC games if you can find one in their store, even the boxes that say "Not valid for sale if opened." I made the mistake of buying a PC game there once and they didn't give me the CD key card. I had to call the store when I got home, and they read it to me over the phone. Never again.
This post will likely get flooded away in the sea of well-wishers, but I thought I'd post anyway. Thank you. Slashdot was the very first website I ever went to on a regular basis, and has been bookmarked and visited daily for nearly half of my life. I wish you nothing but success in whatever you choose to do next.
Thanks again,
Jeff
Let x be amount of lulz to be had.
Let y be number of arrests.
Let z be AnonCon
z = x/y
Do you know anything about Turkey? You do realize it's more like Greece than Syria, right?
Unless Apple makes it mandatory for all applications on Macs be installed using the new app store, then it doesn't prevent anything. It's not like Mac users are going to immediately stop installing stand-alone programs the moment the store comes out. And if they're installing standalone programs, then the people who get tricked into installing fake anti-virus software won't give it a second thought about installing what that fake system message pop-up told them.
On my 4 GB system, if all the applications running on my system right now claimed 100% of the RAM they're using as private, unshared RAM, that still leaves half of my RAM available for other programs. This with an instance of Google Chrome with eight open tabs that's been been in use and running non-stop for the last six hours. Frankly, unless you are running some sort of critical application that must have RAM now, then even an OS that is horribly inefficient at handling shared memory management will do a good enough job. And it isn't working well enough for you, RAM is currently selling for $10 per GB.
If that "bloated piece of shit window manager" is making you hit you hit 100% RAM usage with whatever program you're using, perhaps you might want to spend the $40 and get 2 2GB sticks.
If you're not hitting 100% RAM usage, then it doesn't matter. RAM that sits unused is wasted RAM. You don't get karma points by not using it if you have it. The computer isn't happier just because you're letting the RAM sit there and do nothing.
An efficient and smart personal computer operating system should have 100% of available RAM in use all the time to speed up common tasks, but freely give up that RAM when other programs need it.
what happens when every app decides it is "the one true app" and should use as much memory as it can grab? When you have a half dozen or more programs all deciding that it can use all of your RAM for its cache and you start swapping everything else out to disk, it can be extremely painful to switch between tasks.
You close a couple programs? Or get more RAM? In all seriousness, there's never been more free RAM for programs to use than right now, and it's only going to get better. It could be worse: it could be 1985 and you have one program running at a time due to memory constraints.
I realize that not everyone has a problem with it, but Firefox kills my Vista laptop with 3GB RAM after leaving it running for a day or two with a dozen tabs open, and at some point, will often starting pausing for 60 seconds or more due to swapping. On the flip side, with my Linux desktop with 6GB of RAM, I hardly notice it chewing up crazy amounts of memory (1.2-1.5GB) until it's been open for a couple weeks.
You should try Windows 7 instead of Vista. It's memory management is years ahead of it. As for UI choices, I can respect your decision.