Re:Where is the left wing? It's at NASA!
on
More on Columbia
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Where is the left wing? It disintegrated along with most of the rest of the ship....
How the heck did this ignorant A/C post get modded up to 5? NASA already has a big piece of the left wing, see here.
What they can learn from it, and what they will admit after they do are different issues, but moding someone up to 5 when they shoot their mouth off as an A/C and claim that something can't happen when it's well known that it already has doesn't make much sense.
honest, but not the way to get subscribers
on
Salon Asks for Help
·
· Score: 1
So when trying to get subscribers, you tell them that it's very likely that they will be out of business in a matter of weeks and what they paid for the subscription will be lost? Mod them up for honesty, down for driving away new business.
Because a few companys control distribution and collude with each other to keep these deals so unfairly slanted towards them. The also conspire with each other to fix prices artifically high. If the consumer, who has a complete choice of buy the music or not, can't deal with the RIAA cartel, why would you expect a band that has to choose between take their deal, starve, or get out of the industry, can?
Well, for $1299 you only get an A to D board. But a pretty important part of a GNU software radio project is a digitally controlable tuner that can feed this board. This thing can't convert from the R/F directly, you need a tuner to get the signal down to a low enough frequency range that the $1299 board can deal with it. In addition, the tuner must output a suitable singal that the board can use and it must be tuneable over a wide enough range of input frequencies to be worthwile. What does it really cost to play with GNU radio? This $1299 board doesn't really get you in the door!
I made it pretty clear that this was from the 70's. Once it was discovered, there was a national shutdown of the ATMs affected and a very hasty rework of the software. Yes, I observed that change after the event. Just because you don't see the problem now is hardly a reason to call it an urban myth.
And for the other post that such a scam would mess up your entire life, banks are pretty easy about accepting your money and letting you open an account, even more so back then. I've been asked for ID to get money from a bank, but never to give them money. It would have not been hard back then, before there were cameras in all of the ATMs and other precautions, to open an account, get an ATM card sent to a Post Office Box, and empty a town full of ATM's in one night, with little left behind to be found from. They are damn lucky the guy who figured it out was not so inclined.
This seems the right time and place to relate a story about a 30 year old ATM bug I heard about:
A student at my old school noticed once that the ATM machine had a problem and so voided the transaction he was making. He also noted that the ATM gave him his money before it gave the ATM card back.
He went up to an ATM one evening and slipped in his card. Pushed all the righ buttons to take out his daily limit. Took the cash. The ATM asked if he wanted to do anything else, he said no. As the ATM was about to eject his card, he put his hand in front of the slot. The ATM displayed that there was a jam. It voided the transaction and displayed that it was unavailable. He removed his hand and was able to grab the card by it's edge and pull it out. The ATM sensed the jam was cleared and displayed it was ready for business.
The procedure was repeated. and repeated. and repeated. Eventually the ATM was empty.
The next day he went into the bank, put down a pile of cash and explained to the manager that they had a problem.
Probably the best part of that strategy for Timeline is that they can go after the various users, rather than try to gouge money out of Microsoft itself. Microsoft could easily tie the case up in court for a decade or more, and make it
apparent to Timeline that they'll never be able to make it worth the effort.
Absolutely correct. Mod the above comment up.
Microsoft has stolen plenty of IP from company after company, but they are too powerful for many to go after. Even when one does and wins, M$ will not honor a legal decision but will juet keep fighting it and continue to sell the stolen technology while they do. Take for example Stac Electronics vs. Microsoft; they won their case and got a judgement against Microsoft, but ended up accepting much less than the judgement and giving the company to Microsoft, clearly because Microsoft let them know it would never honor the judgement but just cost them more than they could afford to try to collect it.
What Timeline is doing might not look so great if you are a M$ SQL user, but by taking on the burden of going after all the M$ SQL users, they are putting much more presure on M$ than they could have ever done by going after them directly. I applaud them. It would be wonderful if everyone Microsoft stole from had the resources to do this. The fallout to M$ from lots of upset customers (and likely some state AG offices) suing them will be far greater than from one Company that they know they can kill in legal costs.
The problem is how to do this? How do you "encrypt" a file and give the decryption technique to everyone on the p2p system except to the people who want it to make the fingerprint technology? If you can't keep the key out of their hands then there is little gained in doing this, your impact on the casual user is far greater than on the fingerprinter you are trying to foil.
And no, the same laws that will be used against you if you are caught to use a program like DeCss will not be fairly applied against the RIAA if they decide to go after your encryption system.
The effect prevents oil's dispersion in water, and means that you can only make oil and water emulsions, such as French dressing for salads, by shaking them and adding stabilising agents. ?
Second of all, the oil/water thing is more of an Italian dressing, I believe; and First of all, we don't call it french dressing any more, we call it Freedom Dressing.
While it does stop some fair use (depending on the technology), I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate.
Names are very important. Few politicians are brave enough to not vote for a bill titled something like "Special schooling spending for Kids at risk", while they would not vote for the same bill if it was called "Tax increase to spend more money on disruptive delinquent students than the entire rest of the class combined". In this case, if the name anti-piracy is attached to the technology, it makes it sound like anyone who opposes it is in favor of theft of intellectual property. That hardly the case and most Slashdot readers know this technology stops more legitimate uses that it stops any real piracy. Slashdot should not call such technology by a name that encourages it's legal support and enforcement.
This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology; it's very strange to see Slashdot use such a deceptive term. This is anti-copy technology. It prevents fair use as well as piracy. It prevents users from doing things with the music they buy that the Supreme Court has already declaired as totally legal. There is no technology that just prevents piracy but allows legitimate use by users, just the opposite, many of these technologies hardly slow pirates at all, but present serious problems for legitimate users.
Absolutely. There is no good reason to randomize here. Just the opposite; if my coins to retailers are discarded then how can PepperCoin ever collect that money from me? If they are acting like a clearing house so as to minimize the Visa/MC surcharge, then they don't have to discard anything, they just have to use a good secure encryption system to ensure that someone else out there doesn't start creating peppercoin cash.
I suspect this is mostly smoke and mirrors, the only reason I can see for claiming to have a system that discards payments is otherwise you just become another e-cash system, and one focusing on small payments at that. Who wants to try to be another Flooz? But the bank card people are starting to clamp down on people trying to cut in on their profit margin, and if people (like
Terry Fiddler at the Start Tribune) don't think this through, then some chumps might buy in.
but it's nice to see America's favorite monopoly putting its power to good use."
It would even be nicer to see the unwanted spam I get from Microsoft to stop. I don't even have a hotmail account, but I get plenty of spam from M$ in another of my accounts. And I'm not talking about all of the spam that uses hotmail return addresses and the like, I'm talking about spam that I never signed up for that claims to come from Microsoft and is outright selling a Microsoft product. Unless you belive in a conspiracy theory that someone else is going to a lot of trouble to forge these things to make poor old Bill Gates look even more evil, then Microsoft is also a spammer.
This isn't an anti-spam measure, it's just another step by Microsoft in the ultamate goal of Get ALL the Money. Don't get stupid and believe for a second that this has anything to do with stopping spam, if anything it will do the opposite:
Most ISPs, and I expect this includes MSN, already have anti-spam clauses in their service agreements. So what's the problem? Simply that they don't or can't enforce them. All they do is cancel a spamming account and let the user go on to get another account somewhere else, eventually even with them again. So what would be the effect of a penny charge on spam? Simple, the spammer wouldn't get killed the first day, he could keep the account running for a while before M$ figured out it just wasn't going to get paid for all that spam (after all, if they really had a way to get paid, they could enforce a nice payment for voilation of an anti-spam terms-of-service. But that just doesn't happen, and neither will this). But meanwhile, the spammer is "legitimized" by being able to claim they are paying for it and so have a "right" to overflow your in-box with spam.
Heck, even if soeone does pay look, at the result: you still get stuff in your in-box that you don't want, maybe even so much that it affects your ability to receive other stuff (this is certainly the case with at least one box I have), the sender can now claim that it's completely legitimate to do so, and Bill Gates gets richer.
Meanwhile, while a penny an e-mail doesn't sound like much, it will affect many legitimate users. E-mail based forums will be put out of operation if they have to pay a penny per member for every message that is sent. While there are other technology that might server, e-mail based forums are a ideal way for very special interests to be handeled when the total world-wide members might number in the few hundreds and don't justify other technology such as a newsgroup or the expense of maintaining their own website and web based forum. Others will be adversely affected as well. OK, I could almost live with this if I believed for one second that it could have any positive effect on fighting spam, but it clearly will not. Just the opposite, things like this will lessen any chance we might have to get laws passed to pervent spam, as the spam industry can point to Microsoft's charge and claim that since M$ is charging to send spam they have a right to stuff your in-box with pr0n and the like.
Is he right? Should we be willing to
listen to what Microsoft has to say? Aren't open minds important to open source?"
No one stops Microsoft from speaking, and it would be extremely difficult to claim that their message isn't getting out. If Tony Stanco is putting on a conference on Open Source in government (as opposed to Software in government) then there is hardly any reason to waste important time, space and resources to give Microsoft another chance to attack Open Source, and it certainly could turn off someone in the government who came to this with an open mind to learn what he could about Open Source, only to see it turned into another pitch for Microsoft.
Sure, people should have an open mind, but you don't need to waste conference resources to give Microsoft a platform to try to destroy you to have an open mind. Microsoft would not give the open source people a chance to come in and persent alternatives if they were doing a "Microsoft in government" forum, they don't belong here.
Apparently the these graphics link is bad or has been taken down. I've played the game (on Windows) and I'm not all that impressed with the graphics. One thing you quickly notice is that all the trees are cheap 2-d cheats and keep the same "front" towards you as you move past or around them. It's fine that the engine is being GPL'ed rather than lost, but it still remains for someone to do something good with it. And if , as someone else here said, it gives the hardware the whole world and relies on the hardware to sort it out, then I don't expect it's going to be very useful in a lot of cases (the software I used did seem to limit how far I could go without good reason, I expect this is why).
I have a small ($3 million) study grant from the E.P.A. and after careful study and review I've determined that global warming is caused by squirrels having their litter earlier and earlier.
OK, the above is from a UK newspaper published in Israle as well as the International Herald Tribune. Wish I could find a link to the original Washington Post article; it seems to have vanished. But I did see the story about the text messages on the Washington Post site myself, and so did millions of other people
And, of course, if you want a local respected U.S. source you can still find the article on ABC News' site about the Jews who filmed and celebrated the destruction, although you really had to see the show to get a full appreciation of how smug and happy that were about it.
Yea, these people are our good friends, our 51st state. Heck, they haven't openly attacked and killed us since they got the U.S. Liberty over 30 years ago.
Our good honest decent friends the Isrealis would share their spy stuff with us, why they even believe in sharing so much they had Jonathan Pollard spy on us to make sure that we shared with them.
This isn't designed to stop piracy. All it is is an inventory/sales tracking mechanism. The unique ID is generated and saved for each download of a particular song. So at the end of the month they can say song "X" had such and such amount of sales. From there they can divy up the money.
And you believe they need to go to the extra effort of putting a unique download ID on each file just so they can count how many they have downloaded? Can you explain why they would need to uniquely mark the files just to count how many they sent? Everyone who believes this, please get out of the gene pool.
Sure, that slightly faster CPU will perform slightly faster for it's whole life, but it costs way too much for the little gain in speed. In most cases you can buy a little slower CPU for a lot less, and then buy that now top-of-the-line CPU (or one even faster than it) six months to a year from now, pop it in the same mb, and have as fast or faster system for a lot less cash, even though you bought two CPU's rather than one overpriced one. So if you can't justify paying insane prices for what you're doing on the computer right now, don't try to justify paying too much by talking about tomorrow. Tomorrow the $600 CPU will cost $99, but you'll still be out $600 for it.
Ok, interesting comment, but your expertise is brought into serious question by the fact that you are electing to use Windows Media Encoder (compressing to WM9's video codec). Use a much better quality codec like Divx and you'll see some differences, better quality, better speed, better compatability. For example, I can make an extremely high quality 2 pass Divx encode on my non-XP Athlon 1000 mhz system and compress two hours of video in about 10 hours. Perhaps more that the fastest CPU on the market, you need to take the time to get the right tools.
rejecting the EULAs for the software mentioned above, going back to CompUSA and being told she couldn't return them because the boxes were opened.
Actually, these EULAs are the manufacturer's way of giving free software to those who don't want to pay for it. You just open the box and copy want you want. Then take it back to the store. They will take it back, although often you have to talk to a manager and be sure you're talking loud enough for the people in the back of the store to hear you. No 15% restocking charge either, and if they waste your time too much fighting over little issues like this, get aggressive and get them to pay for your gas for the return trip (it can be done). It also helps if you can make the veins in your forehead pop out a little and otherwise look like you're not exactly the calm type (of course, much of life gets easier if you can cultivate this way of dealing with retailers). A good suggestion here is don't go to the store with someone who is going to give you a hard time for embarrassing her when you draw a little attention to yourself.
Do any of you insightful people understand that you just can't display 2000+ fps on a video monitor (and LCD displays are even slower than CRT's)? OK, just maybe a frame rate above 30 fps might help a little, but if your system is actualy spending cpu power on rendering any more than the useful number of video frames, then it's really wasing time that it could be better spending on user input or data transfer or something else that really does matter in the game. Of course, this delay is also very small, so only hair splitting fanatics would care about it, but those are just the people going after unrealistically high frame rates.
Of course, more video power can be applied other ways that do help the user, such as higher resolution, better lighting effects, and so on, but that isn't the issue that many here seem to care about - they just want frame rates that their video display is never going to show, so even if they foolishly think their eye can extremely high frame rates, they miss the basic truth that vido cards could get 100 times faster, but more frames will never reach their eyes.
Slashdot Mirror
How the heck did this ignorant A/C post get modded up to 5? NASA already has a big piece of the left wing, see here.
What they can learn from it, and what they will admit after they do are different issues, but moding someone up to 5 when they shoot their mouth off as an A/C and claim that something can't happen when it's well known that it already has doesn't make much sense.
So when trying to get subscribers, you tell them that it's very likely that they will be out of business in a matter of weeks and what they paid for the subscription will be lost? Mod them up for honesty, down for driving away new business.
Because a few companys control distribution and collude with each other to keep these deals so unfairly slanted towards them. The also conspire with each other to fix prices artifically high. If the consumer, who has a complete choice of buy the music or not, can't deal with the RIAA cartel, why would you expect a band that has to choose between take their deal, starve, or get out of the industry, can?
Well, for $1299 you only get an A to D board. But a pretty important part of a GNU software radio project is a digitally controlable tuner that can feed this board. This thing can't convert from the R/F directly, you need a tuner to get the signal down to a low enough frequency range that the $1299 board can deal with it. In addition, the tuner must output a suitable singal that the board can use and it must be tuneable over a wide enough range of input frequencies to be worthwile. What does it really cost to play with GNU radio? This $1299 board doesn't really get you in the door!
And for the other post that such a scam would mess up your entire life, banks are pretty easy about accepting your money and letting you open an account, even more so back then. I've been asked for ID to get money from a bank, but never to give them money. It would have not been hard back then, before there were cameras in all of the ATMs and other precautions, to open an account, get an ATM card sent to a Post Office Box, and empty a town full of ATM's in one night, with little left behind to be found from. They are damn lucky the guy who figured it out was not so inclined.
A student at my old school noticed once that the ATM machine had a problem and so voided the transaction he was making. He also noted that the ATM gave him his money before it gave the ATM card back.
He went up to an ATM one evening and slipped in his card. Pushed all the righ buttons to take out his daily limit. Took the cash. The ATM asked if he wanted to do anything else, he said no. As the ATM was about to eject his card, he put his hand in front of the slot. The ATM displayed that there was a jam. It voided the transaction and displayed that it was unavailable. He removed his hand and was able to grab the card by it's edge and pull it out. The ATM sensed the jam was cleared and displayed it was ready for business.
The procedure was repeated. and repeated. and repeated. Eventually the ATM was empty.
The next day he went into the bank, put down a pile of cash and explained to the manager that they had a problem.
Absolutely correct. Mod the above comment up.
Microsoft has stolen plenty of IP from company after company, but they are too powerful for many to go after. Even when one does and wins, M$ will not honor a legal decision but will juet keep fighting it and continue to sell the stolen technology while they do. Take for example Stac Electronics vs. Microsoft; they won their case and got a judgement against Microsoft, but ended up accepting much less than the judgement and giving the company to Microsoft, clearly because Microsoft let them know it would never honor the judgement but just cost them more than they could afford to try to collect it.
What Timeline is doing might not look so great if you are a M$ SQL user, but by taking on the burden of going after all the M$ SQL users, they are putting much more presure on M$ than they could have ever done by going after them directly. I applaud them. It would be wonderful if everyone Microsoft stole from had the resources to do this. The fallout to M$ from lots of upset customers (and likely some state AG offices) suing them will be far greater than from one Company that they know they can kill in legal costs.
And no, the same laws that will be used against you if you are caught to use a program like DeCss will not be fairly applied against the RIAA if they decide to go after your encryption system.
The effect prevents oil's dispersion in water, and means that you can only make oil and water emulsions, such as French dressing for salads, by shaking them and adding stabilising agents. ?
Second of all, the oil/water thing is more of an Italian dressing, I believe; and First of all, we don't call it french dressing any more, we call it Freedom Dressing.
Names are very important. Few politicians are brave enough to not vote for a bill titled something like "Special schooling spending for Kids at risk", while they would not vote for the same bill if it was called "Tax increase to spend more money on disruptive delinquent students than the entire rest of the class combined". In this case, if the name anti-piracy is attached to the technology, it makes it sound like anyone who opposes it is in favor of theft of intellectual property. That hardly the case and most Slashdot readers know this technology stops more legitimate uses that it stops any real piracy. Slashdot should not call such technology by a name that encourages it's legal support and enforcement.
This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology; it's very strange to see Slashdot use such a deceptive term. This is anti-copy technology. It prevents fair use as well as piracy. It prevents users from doing things with the music they buy that the Supreme Court has already declaired as totally legal. There is no technology that just prevents piracy but allows legitimate use by users, just the opposite, many of these technologies hardly slow pirates at all, but present serious problems for legitimate users.
I suspect this is mostly smoke and mirrors, the only reason I can see for claiming to have a system that discards payments is otherwise you just become another e-cash system, and one focusing on small payments at that. Who wants to try to be another Flooz? But the bank card people are starting to clamp down on people trying to cut in on their profit margin, and if people (like Terry Fiddler at the Start Tribune) don't think this through, then some chumps might buy in.
It would even be nicer to see the unwanted spam I get from Microsoft to stop. I don't even have a hotmail account, but I get plenty of spam from M$ in another of my accounts. And I'm not talking about all of the spam that uses hotmail return addresses and the like, I'm talking about spam that I never signed up for that claims to come from Microsoft and is outright selling a Microsoft product. Unless you belive in a conspiracy theory that someone else is going to a lot of trouble to forge these things to make poor old Bill Gates look even more evil, then Microsoft is also a spammer.
Most ISPs, and I expect this includes MSN, already have anti-spam clauses in their service agreements. So what's the problem? Simply that they don't or can't enforce them. All they do is cancel a spamming account and let the user go on to get another account somewhere else, eventually even with them again. So what would be the effect of a penny charge on spam? Simple, the spammer wouldn't get killed the first day, he could keep the account running for a while before M$ figured out it just wasn't going to get paid for all that spam (after all, if they really had a way to get paid, they could enforce a nice payment for voilation of an anti-spam terms-of-service. But that just doesn't happen, and neither will this). But meanwhile, the spammer is "legitimized" by being able to claim they are paying for it and so have a "right" to overflow your in-box with spam. Heck, even if soeone does pay look, at the result: you still get stuff in your in-box that you don't want, maybe even so much that it affects your ability to receive other stuff (this is certainly the case with at least one box I have), the sender can now claim that it's completely legitimate to do so, and Bill Gates gets richer.
Meanwhile, while a penny an e-mail doesn't sound like much, it will affect many legitimate users. E-mail based forums will be put out of operation if they have to pay a penny per member for every message that is sent. While there are other technology that might server, e-mail based forums are a ideal way for very special interests to be handeled when the total world-wide members might number in the few hundreds and don't justify other technology such as a newsgroup or the expense of maintaining their own website and web based forum. Others will be adversely affected as well. OK, I could almost live with this if I believed for one second that it could have any positive effect on fighting spam, but it clearly will not. Just the opposite, things like this will lessen any chance we might have to get laws passed to pervent spam, as the spam industry can point to Microsoft's charge and claim that since M$ is charging to send spam they have a right to stuff your in-box with pr0n and the like.
Absolutely. I agree with the Anonymous Coward, consider IE performance and use FTP. Tell IE users they should use better tools.
Or, you could just run Windows, share the file, and let all the hackers get a copy that way.
So now they are not even going to admit they read our e-mail?
No one stops Microsoft from speaking, and it would be extremely difficult to claim that their message isn't getting out. If Tony Stanco is putting on a conference on Open Source in government (as opposed to Software in government) then there is hardly any reason to waste important time, space and resources to give Microsoft another chance to attack Open Source, and it certainly could turn off someone in the government who came to this with an open mind to learn what he could about Open Source, only to see it turned into another pitch for Microsoft.
Sure, people should have an open mind, but you don't need to waste conference resources to give Microsoft a platform to try to destroy you to have an open mind. Microsoft would not give the open source people a chance to come in and persent alternatives if they were doing a "Microsoft in government" forum, they don't belong here.
Apparently the these graphics link is bad or has been taken down. I've played the game (on Windows) and I'm not all that impressed with the graphics. One thing you quickly notice is that all the trees are cheap 2-d cheats and keep the same "front" towards you as you move past or around them. It's fine that the engine is being GPL'ed rather than lost, but it still remains for someone to do something good with it. And if , as someone else here said, it gives the hardware the whole world and relies on the hardware to sort it out, then I don't expect it's going to be very useful in a lot of cases (the software I used did seem to limit how far I could go without good reason, I expect this is why).
I have a small ($3 million) study grant from the E.P.A. and after careful study and review I've determined that global warming is caused by squirrels having their litter earlier and earlier.
Sure, these people are our best friends. That's why when we declaired war on terrorists we didn't condem the biggest terrorists of them all. Heck that they knew about the WTC attack in advance and even filmed and cheered about it. Or that they sent instant messages about it hours befor it happened or that despite their high presense in the financial center, they almostly completely avoided any loss of life
OK, the above is from a UK newspaper published in Israle as well as the International Herald Tribune. Wish I could find a link to the original Washington Post article; it seems to have vanished. But I did see the story about the text messages on the Washington Post site myself, and so did millions of other people And, of course, if you want a local respected U.S. source you can still find the article on ABC News' site about the Jews who filmed and celebrated the destruction, although you really had to see the show to get a full appreciation of how smug and happy that were about it.
Yea, these people are our good friends, our 51st state. Heck, they haven't openly attacked and killed us since they got the U.S. Liberty over 30 years ago.
Our good honest decent friends the Isrealis would share their spy stuff with us, why they even believe in sharing so much they had Jonathan Pollard spy on us to make sure that we shared with them.
And you believe they need to go to the extra effort of putting a unique download ID on each file just so they can count how many they have downloaded? Can you explain why they would need to uniquely mark the files just to count how many they sent? Everyone who believes this, please get out of the gene pool.
Sure, that slightly faster CPU will perform slightly faster for it's whole life, but it costs way too much for the little gain in speed. In most cases you can buy a little slower CPU for a lot less, and then buy that now top-of-the-line CPU (or one even faster than it) six months to a year from now, pop it in the same mb, and have as fast or faster system for a lot less cash, even though you bought two CPU's rather than one overpriced one. So if you can't justify paying insane prices for what you're doing on the computer right now, don't try to justify paying too much by talking about tomorrow. Tomorrow the $600 CPU will cost $99, but you'll still be out $600 for it.
Ok, interesting comment, but your expertise is brought into serious question by the fact that you are electing to use Windows Media Encoder (compressing to WM9's video codec). Use a much better quality codec like Divx and you'll see some differences, better quality, better speed, better compatability. For example, I can make an extremely high quality 2 pass Divx encode on my non-XP Athlon 1000 mhz system and compress two hours of video in about 10 hours. Perhaps more that the fastest CPU on the market, you need to take the time to get the right tools.
Actually, these EULAs are the manufacturer's way of giving free software to those who don't want to pay for it. You just open the box and copy want you want. Then take it back to the store. They will take it back, although often you have to talk to a manager and be sure you're talking loud enough for the people in the back of the store to hear you. No 15% restocking charge either, and if they waste your time too much fighting over little issues like this, get aggressive and get them to pay for your gas for the return trip (it can be done). It also helps if you can make the veins in your forehead pop out a little and otherwise look like you're not exactly the calm type (of course, much of life gets easier if you can cultivate this way of dealing with retailers). A good suggestion here is don't go to the store with someone who is going to give you a hard time for embarrassing her when you draw a little attention to yourself.
Do any of you insightful people understand that you just can't display 2000+ fps on a video monitor (and LCD displays are even slower than CRT's)? OK, just maybe a frame rate above 30 fps might help a little, but if your system is actualy spending cpu power on rendering any more than the useful number of video frames, then it's really wasing time that it could be better spending on user input or data transfer or something else that really does matter in the game. Of course, this delay is also very small, so only hair splitting fanatics would care about it, but those are just the people going after unrealistically high frame rates.
Of course, more video power can be applied other ways that do help the user, such as higher resolution, better lighting effects, and so on, but that isn't the issue that many here seem to care about - they just want frame rates that their video display is never going to show, so even if they foolishly think their eye can extremely high frame rates, they miss the basic truth that vido cards could get 100 times faster, but more frames will never reach their eyes.