Those benchmarks are widely believed to be fake. Among other problems, Bryce doesn't support multiprocessing, so the alleged speedup on the dual 1.8 machine is extremely unlikely.
I would think that a lot of liberal slashdotters would see this for what it really is.
It depends. I can see communitarian liberals believing we should all live without secrets in a big happy utopia where everyone's lives and views are public and respected (e.g. David Brin's "transparent society"). On the other hand, as an individualist conservative/libertarian with an inherent distrust of government power, I think this is a terrible idea.
I was entering into systems administration/programming as my main job, so my code needed to run fast, lean, and mean.
Not all programs have the same requirements. In most cases developer time is much more valuable than CPU time.
Stay as close to the CPU core as possible, but far enough away to be effective. C and C++ are the only languages that accomplish this role.
Ridiculous. Most good programming techniques are independent of language. If you can't develop effectively in anything but C or C++, then your "skillz" could use some work.
Think before you code.
Yes. Think whether the performance gained by using a low-level language is actually significant, and if so whether it offsets the increased development time and greater risk of uncontrolled failures (e.g. exploitable buffer overruns).
C is a fine language, and is often necessary. But it's a premature optimization to insist on always using it because of nebulous performance concerns.
But there's like three people in the world who actually use altivec.
More than 3 people have ripped music in iTunes. Then there's the tremendous acceleration it provides for encoding DVDs, Final Cut Pro's real-time effects, BLAST, and plenty more. It's not even close to just Photoshop.
but surely you can't deny that the vast, vast majority of P2P users rarely buy CDs of the songs they download
True. But given a reasonably priced legal alternative, many would choose that. The Apple Music Store has sold 2 million tracks in 2 weeks, despite only being available to a small fraction of the population.
Properly written Mac apps shouldn't assume processor endianness. There are built-in functions to convert binary data to the processor's native format.
By no means am I saying Apple should switch to x86. There are still technical problems (e.g. Altivec) and it would be a marketing and logistical nightmare.
What would be different is nearly 1.5 trillion in tax cuts for the rich wouldn't have been passed and the federal economy wouldn't have been running record deficits.
Yes and no. We wouldn't have gotten tax cuts (which are not just for the "rich"), but instead we'd have gotten more massive social programs and vote-buying schemes. Neither party is terribly interested in fiscal discipline, and we the people continually let them get away with it.
Of course we now know the "prosperity" was based primarily on an unsustainable market bubble and massive corporate fraud. And I seem to recall various military adventures in Serbia, Somalia, and Haiti.
Music from the Apple Music store can only be played on Apple computers, on Apple's MP3 software and on Apple's handheld device.
Until you burn it to a CD, which you can do without any restrictions. And at that point you can re-rip to MP3 or any other format with minimal quality loss.
I mostly agree with your answer, but I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't think it's black and white.
So no, the 8th html page is in the public and is like anything in real life that can get "bumped into by accident."
No it isn't. Nothing links to it; I had to make a deliberate effort to see it. Clearly my intent was to obtain something of value without paying for it, against the wishes of the site's owner. You recognize that even if you don't properly secure your personal computer, accessing it without permission isn't allowed, so what's the difference here? The owner intended for page 8 to be "closed", he just didn't do a good job of it.
If it is closed you cannot come in. If there is a private area you cannot have access to it.
Define "closed" and "private". Suppose there's a site with 8 pages of content: page1.html, page2.html, and so on. Each page links to the next, except for the 7th which has a notice that the final page is only available to paying customers. So I manually enter the URL with "page8.html" at the end, and the "private" document appears. Have I committed a crime?
These are hard issues precisely because they don't have good real-world equivalents.
While Gore never claimed to have invented the Internet, his statements were exaggerations. See here for a balanced discussion.
Re:Download AND Pay?
on
The Law and P2P
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
how many slashdot readers would be without a job if their software was copied freely
Most software development is never released to the public; it's done for in-house business-specific projects. If copyright were entirely abolished there would still be a sizeable demand for programmers.
Thus what is the reason for implementing a very weak and ineffective DRM scheme by Apple?
To make the labels happy. Apple knows any DRM that's remotely hard to break will be unacceptably limiting to users. For example, MS can't possibly allow an app like Audio Hijack to run on "secure" Windows. Apple's wimpy DRM prevents kiddies from downloading music from iTunes and just plopping the files in their "shared" directory, and that's all it's meant to do.
Apple is a firm believer in getting the big labels on board so they actually have music to sell, and by all appearances they did the absolute minimum to make that happen. Their "DRM" doesn't interfere with fair use at all. Jobs has consistently said that technological barriers are not the solution to copyright infringement.
Slashdot Mirror
Those benchmarks are widely believed to be fake. Among other problems, Bryce doesn't support multiprocessing, so the alleged speedup on the dual 1.8 machine is extremely unlikely.
Which parts? Did Giles have even more gratuitously grotesque slides of them ripping people's hearts out? I entirely agree, that episode was brilliant.
2) Shrink-wrap licenses have NEVER been held to be valid in court.
Ditto. (Just wanted this at +2)
Where it does not attempt to remove any of your existing rights under standard copyright law.
It depends. I can see communitarian liberals believing we should all live without secrets in a big happy utopia where everyone's lives and views are public and respected (e.g. David Brin's "transparent society"). On the other hand, as an individualist conservative/libertarian with an inherent distrust of government power, I think this is a terrible idea.
No, because it's still a self-selected sample group.
Not all programs have the same requirements. In most cases developer time is much more valuable than CPU time.
Stay as close to the CPU core as possible, but far enough away to be effective. C and C++ are the only languages that accomplish this role.
Ridiculous. Most good programming techniques are independent of language. If you can't develop effectively in anything but C or C++, then your "skillz" could use some work.
Think before you code.
Yes. Think whether the performance gained by using a low-level language is actually significant, and if so whether it offsets the increased development time and greater risk of uncontrolled failures (e.g. exploitable buffer overruns).
C is a fine language, and is often necessary. But it's a premature optimization to insist on always using it because of nebulous performance concerns.
Corporations only have power because the government hands it to them. Without the DMCA and other unbalanced laws, the **AAs wouldn't be a danger.
More than 3 people have ripped music in iTunes. Then there's the tremendous acceleration it provides for encoding DVDs, Final Cut Pro's real-time effects, BLAST, and plenty more. It's not even close to just Photoshop.
True. But given a reasonably priced legal alternative, many would choose that. The Apple Music Store has sold 2 million tracks in 2 weeks, despite only being available to a small fraction of the population.
By no means am I saying Apple should switch to x86. There are still technical problems (e.g. Altivec) and it would be a marketing and logistical nightmare.
Mostly just recompiled, but even that would be a major pain.
Not to mention scrollbars on the left of windows, which is obviously the correct position if you think about it for a minute.
Yes and no. We wouldn't have gotten tax cuts (which are not just for the "rich"), but instead we'd have gotten more massive social programs and vote-buying schemes. Neither party is terribly interested in fiscal discipline, and we the people continually let them get away with it.
Of course we now know the "prosperity" was based primarily on an unsustainable market bubble and massive corporate fraud. And I seem to recall various military adventures in Serbia, Somalia, and Haiti.
Until you burn it to a CD, which you can do without any restrictions. And at that point you can re-rip to MP3 or any other format with minimal quality loss.
So no, the 8th html page is in the public and is like anything in real life that can get "bumped into by accident."
No it isn't. Nothing links to it; I had to make a deliberate effort to see it. Clearly my intent was to obtain something of value without paying for it, against the wishes of the site's owner. You recognize that even if you don't properly secure your personal computer, accessing it without permission isn't allowed, so what's the difference here? The owner intended for page 8 to be "closed", he just didn't do a good job of it.
Define "closed" and "private". Suppose there's a site with 8 pages of content: page1.html, page2.html, and so on. Each page links to the next, except for the 7th which has a notice that the final page is only available to paying customers. So I manually enter the URL with "page8.html" at the end, and the "private" document appears. Have I committed a crime?
These are hard issues precisely because they don't have good real-world equivalents.
Our company develops on Mac OS X and deploys on Linux and Solaris. We'd never consider locking ourselves into Windows with
I know whenever I see an app that advertises itself as cross-platform, but turns out to be written in Java, I tend to kind of dismiss it.
Sure, Java mostly sucks for traditional desktop applications (with a few exceptions). But it's great for servers and back-end apps.
I would think they'd have to be like singletons, with the compiler creating exactly one instance of each enum value.
While Gore never claimed to have invented the Internet, his statements were exaggerations. See here for a balanced discussion.
Most software development is never released to the public; it's done for in-house business-specific projects. If copyright were entirely abolished there would still be a sizeable demand for programmers.
To make the labels happy. Apple knows any DRM that's remotely hard to break will be unacceptably limiting to users. For example, MS can't possibly allow an app like Audio Hijack to run on "secure" Windows. Apple's wimpy DRM prevents kiddies from downloading music from iTunes and just plopping the files in their "shared" directory, and that's all it's meant to do.
Apple is a firm believer in getting the big labels on board so they actually have music to sell, and by all appearances they did the absolute minimum to make that happen. Their "DRM" doesn't interfere with fair use at all. Jobs has consistently said that technological barriers are not the solution to copyright infringement.
$700 actually. But yeah, it's a great platform that is woefully under-marketed.