Most of what you say sounds somewhat reasonable, except for "self-defense will only be valid if another gun was drawn". That's a terrible idea. That would prevent someone from defending themselves from thugs with knives, a gang with baseball bats, et cetera: all things that can kill. Hell, even someone unarmed but much stronger than you and enraged is capable of killing. A gun should be a reasonable defense anytime you face a threat to your life.
What difference, morally, does it make to murder millions of people because they weren't enthusiastic enough about your murderous regime, and murdering somewhat fewer millions just because you want to? Why is one any worse than the other? They're both equally terrible, in my eyes, and it would seem that others agree.
Also, your sig is out of date. You should update it to "I like paying taxes. With them I line the pockets of millionaire bankers."
The last two systems I've built for myself have used ECC memory, because I feel the same way about it that you do. I've found that ASUS motherboards, at least for 64 bit AMD CPUs, always support ECC, and few others (Tyan is one that does) do. If the manufacturer doesn't specifically state that they support ECC, they almost certainly don't. (There was even a case years ago where a manufacturer that claimed that they did support ECC, namely Abit, didn't!) So you could get a situation where you have an ECC-supporting memory controller (on an AMD chip), and ECC ram, but the motherboard they're plugged into isn't designed to allow it. It sounds stupid, and it is: a lot of these manufacturers are really stupid. Earlier in the comments for this story someone mentioned how they'll sometimes automatically overclock the memory or CPU under load, or set the clock speed of "overclockable" memory high without adjusting its voltage to the correct settings for that speed.
I've only ever built with AMD, so that's all the advice that I can give for now, aside from mentioning that the new i7 CPU from Intel doesn't support ECC at all. So avoid that one.
Aren't they even more susceptible to burn-in than CRTs, though? That seems like a deal killer to me. Which is too bad, because they're otherwise excellent...
If it does cause software to operate incorrectly, then some software test could detect that. If it doesn't cause software to operate incorrectly, then why does it matter? It's simple logic. The whole point of a CPU is to execute software.
Wow, you're a tool. Anyway, obviously the manufacturers know the maximum possible speed of a design on a given process. That is what I meant by "among other things". But up to that maximum, stress testing is how they are binned. Aside from the possibility of physical inspection, I'm not convinced that it is fundamentally different from software testing. Something that would cause a test to fail at the manufacturer would cause a properly written software test to fail as well, for if it doesn't, then how is the CPU not operating correctly?
But how do you think they determine the nominal speed of a CPU or other such component? Among other things, they stress test them. Sometimes a component will be marked down to a lower speed than it could handle because of market concerns, but when they want to determine the maximum speed it will reliably operate at, that is how they determine it.
I don't think it's really a loophole. I think it's more intended to be easy on people for whom the requirement to offer it to *anyone* for three years would be too much of a pain in the ass. After all, they would have to keep the last three years' worth of versions handy. Not that this is an insurmountable requirement: lots of people do it. But for a company who's not specializing in distributing anything over the web, it's probably easier just to send the source code with the binary code.
And as you said, anyone who gets it from that point can make it available to others. Kind of a shame when companies like Red Hat force people to remove all references to them from what is redistributed, though, and sounds borderline illegal as well. Statements of fact on the website that tell that the source was derived from Red Hat's Enterprise Linux shouldn't infringe trademark, I think.
That "any third party" requirement only kicks in if they DON'T supply the source code with the software. If they do supply it to anyone who gets the software, they're well within their rights to tell the original complainer to buy it or shut up.
If you read the first link, it says that the explosive was a fertilizer/fuel oil bomb, ie, ANFO. Which is NOT a fuel/air bomb in any way. So the parent lies.
You've said that three times now, and you've been wrong three times. It is not possible for the air around the power supply to get hotter than the power supply itself unless something else is heating it (in which case it wouldn't be the PSU's fault) or it's being compressed, like in an air compressor, which it is not. If it ever DID get as hot as the only source of heat, the PSU, then the PSU would not be able to heat it anymore, because heat does not flow from cold to hot. So stop spreading nonsense.
"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - The Dalai Lama, 2001"
What is wrong with that? Are you saying it's not reasonable for someone to defend themselves?
And interestingly, he apparently wants to kill off retarded children:
Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance. - The Dalai Lama, to the New York Times.
That's not killing off retarded children, that's potentially aborting fetuses that would grow up to be retarded. That's something that a lot of reasonable people would do. You are deliberately misrepresenting what he said.
I'm pretty sure it HAS happened, though: I've heard of a case of someone in one european country, where abortions were legal but not after the first trimester, travelled to a different european country, got an abortion, returned, and was charged with murder. Recent, too - heard about it here on/.. Found something about it here.
Except that reality could easily be changed to prevent them from ever coming back into society, in which case, their punishment could - and should - continue. Someone's right to treatment for their "condition" ends as soon as they hurt another human being. After that, punishment is all they deserve.
Did you even read his comment? From the grandparent: "I'm not talking about the 20 year old/15 year old thing. I mean the real sexual predators." Obviously he's not talking about public urination. And as long as he limits his vengeance to people who do things like kidnapping and molesting children, then I think his stance is reasonable.
... AND the fact that what is spam to one person isn't spam to another...
That's not true though. Spam is defined as bulk, unsolicited e-mail. Even if some retard actually likes to read their spam e-mails and buy things they advertise, that doesn't change the fact that the message was sent in bulk (to many other people as well), and that it was unsolicited by at least the vast, overwhelming majority of them.
Slashdot Mirror
... so did they pay what you wanted or did they leave it?
Looks roughly the same in Firefox 3.0.11 on XP. It's Slashdot that's the problem, not Opera.
That makes sense. Thanks!
Just curious: why swap out the rectangular headlights for round ones?
Most of what you say sounds somewhat reasonable, except for "self-defense will only be valid if another gun was drawn". That's a terrible idea. That would prevent someone from defending themselves from thugs with knives, a gang with baseball bats, et cetera: all things that can kill. Hell, even someone unarmed but much stronger than you and enraged is capable of killing. A gun should be a reasonable defense anytime you face a threat to your life.
What difference, morally, does it make to murder millions of people because they weren't enthusiastic enough about your murderous regime, and murdering somewhat fewer millions just because you want to? Why is one any worse than the other? They're both equally terrible, in my eyes, and it would seem that others agree.
Also, your sig is out of date. You should update it to "I like paying taxes. With them I line the pockets of millionaire bankers."
I'm Canadian, and I've seen all of those on American TV except for drugs with side effects including death. That sounds hilarious. What drug was that?
The last two systems I've built for myself have used ECC memory, because I feel the same way about it that you do. I've found that ASUS motherboards, at least for 64 bit AMD CPUs, always support ECC, and few others (Tyan is one that does) do. If the manufacturer doesn't specifically state that they support ECC, they almost certainly don't. (There was even a case years ago where a manufacturer that claimed that they did support ECC, namely Abit, didn't!) So you could get a situation where you have an ECC-supporting memory controller (on an AMD chip), and ECC ram, but the motherboard they're plugged into isn't designed to allow it. It sounds stupid, and it is: a lot of these manufacturers are really stupid. Earlier in the comments for this story someone mentioned how they'll sometimes automatically overclock the memory or CPU under load, or set the clock speed of "overclockable" memory high without adjusting its voltage to the correct settings for that speed.
I've only ever built with AMD, so that's all the advice that I can give for now, aside from mentioning that the new i7 CPU from Intel doesn't support ECC at all. So avoid that one.
Aren't they even more susceptible to burn-in than CRTs, though? That seems like a deal killer to me. Which is too bad, because they're otherwise excellent...
Nothing is free. There is a cost in weight and a dollar cost to the vehicle itself. 3% efficient doesn't look very good when it's not free at all.
If it does cause software to operate incorrectly, then some software test could detect that. If it doesn't cause software to operate incorrectly, then why does it matter? It's simple logic. The whole point of a CPU is to execute software.
Wow, you're a tool. Anyway, obviously the manufacturers know the maximum possible speed of a design on a given process. That is what I meant by "among other things". But up to that maximum, stress testing is how they are binned. Aside from the possibility of physical inspection, I'm not convinced that it is fundamentally different from software testing. Something that would cause a test to fail at the manufacturer would cause a properly written software test to fail as well, for if it doesn't, then how is the CPU not operating correctly?
But how do you think they determine the nominal speed of a CPU or other such component? Among other things, they stress test them. Sometimes a component will be marked down to a lower speed than it could handle because of market concerns, but when they want to determine the maximum speed it will reliably operate at, that is how they determine it.
I don't think it's really a loophole. I think it's more intended to be easy on people for whom the requirement to offer it to *anyone* for three years would be too much of a pain in the ass. After all, they would have to keep the last three years' worth of versions handy. Not that this is an insurmountable requirement: lots of people do it. But for a company who's not specializing in distributing anything over the web, it's probably easier just to send the source code with the binary code.
And as you said, anyone who gets it from that point can make it available to others. Kind of a shame when companies like Red Hat force people to remove all references to them from what is redistributed, though, and sounds borderline illegal as well. Statements of fact on the website that tell that the source was derived from Red Hat's Enterprise Linux shouldn't infringe trademark, I think.
That "any third party" requirement only kicks in if they DON'T supply the source code with the software. If they do supply it to anyone who gets the software, they're well within their rights to tell the original complainer to buy it or shut up.
If you read the first link, it says that the explosive was a fertilizer/fuel oil bomb, ie, ANFO. Which is NOT a fuel/air bomb in any way. So the parent lies.
What else is life imprisonment, if not ruining a life?
P.S. Sorry if my tone was rude.
You've said that three times now, and you've been wrong three times. It is not possible for the air around the power supply to get hotter than the power supply itself unless something else is heating it (in which case it wouldn't be the PSU's fault) or it's being compressed, like in an air compressor, which it is not. If it ever DID get as hot as the only source of heat, the PSU, then the PSU would not be able to heat it anymore, because heat does not flow from cold to hot. So stop spreading nonsense.
"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - The Dalai Lama, 2001"
What is wrong with that? Are you saying it's not reasonable for someone to defend themselves?
And interestingly, he apparently wants to kill off retarded children:
Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance. - The Dalai Lama, to the New York Times.
That's not killing off retarded children, that's potentially aborting fetuses that would grow up to be retarded. That's something that a lot of reasonable people would do. You are deliberately misrepresenting what he said.
He points out some real insight, has a really sensible view of things, and idiot moderators are trying to mod him down. Mod parent up!
I'm pretty sure it HAS happened, though: I've heard of a case of someone in one european country, where abortions were legal but not after the first trimester, travelled to a different european country, got an abortion, returned, and was charged with murder. Recent, too - heard about it here on /.. Found something about it here.
Except that reality could easily be changed to prevent them from ever coming back into society, in which case, their punishment could - and should - continue. Someone's right to treatment for their "condition" ends as soon as they hurt another human being. After that, punishment is all they deserve.
Did you even read his comment? From the grandparent: "I'm not talking about the 20 year old/15 year old thing. I mean the real sexual predators." Obviously he's not talking about public urination. And as long as he limits his vengeance to people who do things like kidnapping and molesting children, then I think his stance is reasonable.
... AND the fact that what is spam to one person isn't spam to another...
That's not true though. Spam is defined as bulk, unsolicited e-mail. Even if some retard actually likes to read their spam e-mails and buy things they advertise, that doesn't change the fact that the message was sent in bulk (to many other people as well), and that it was unsolicited by at least the vast, overwhelming majority of them.