Better add another monitor so you can compute while you compute and not worry about a second monitor or x session.
That's cool, but isn't US $400 a little overpriced for what it is essentially a 7" LCD monitor?
Personally, I think they should design the monitor to go into the other monitor so I could make a lame continuation of the joke that I heard you like monitors in your monitor so we put a monitor in your monitor so you can monitor your monitor while you...
"Nearly 5GHz". The whole point here that everyone seems to be missing is that they made something go more than 1000 times as fast as the original 4.77 MHz IBM PC.
Well, only if you're referring to the clock speed. In terms of raw processing speed (by any reasonable benchmark), they're likely *significantly* more than 1000 times faster, since clock speed refers simply to the number of cycles per second, and doesn't account for how much work can be done per cycle.
The situation is even worse with computers. Like with the automotive companies you listed, all of those computer companies merely assemble computers. They all use components made by a very small number of manufacturers
The obvious- and most central- example is that of the x86 PC's CPU itself, where the market is basically a duopoly that's just a few not-quite-competitive AMD releases away from being a monopoly.
The GPL vs BSD license argument never gets old for some folk does it?
I agree.
Each to their own, but the GPL allows people who contribute to the public good to make sure that their work is not [etc.]
Yeah, thanks a bunch.
You (rightly) bemoan the tired, repetitive nature of GPL vs. BSD discussions. The ones that regurgitate the exact same argumentative points every time without shedding any new light on them, that let people feel good by justifying the same entrenched positions.
Then you self-indulgently kickstart exactly that type of thread-hijacking discussion because you can't resist sticking your oar in anyway. Despite the fact that what you say is the exact same explanation of the GPL that appears about a dozen times in every GPL vs. BSD thread ever. You know the arguments, the BSD-philes know the arguments and they've been repeated ad nauseum.
You know this, and you criticise it... then you do it anyway.
Actually, I've heard "the Ukraine" used quite often in reputable English-language contexts- if you search this article, you'll note that "the Ukraine" pops up twice in the names of referenced texts.
It does sound strange if you think about it; I'm not sure what the explanation for such usage is. Whether such usage is becoming slightly archaic, I don't know. But it was definitely acceptable- if not standard- not so long ago.
Reciprocity works both ways. If you want the gain, you have to take the pain.
Er, wasn't half the problem with the banking crisis that the people getting paid big bucks to take risky decisions *didn't* have to deal with the pain if the shit hit the fan, although they got their money if everything was okay?
(Additional; "digibox" = genericised trademark commonly used in the UK to refer to an external digital terrestrial DVB-T TV tuner (*), similar to the American "converter box")
(*) Irony is that the trademark Digibox came from Sky's *satellite* TV set-top box...
Am I the only human in the world who has reverted to CRTs on the desktop and in the living room?
FWIW, I'm still watching my Trinitron portable, and very happy with it. Until about a month ago I was also using a CRT monitor, and replaced it partly due to some scratch-like damage to the CRT coating that (oddly) appears to have grown much worse and intrusive even in casual use- and partly due to it being fairly lo-res by modern standards.
But despite the benefits of my new monitor, the viewing angle is poor (LCDs seem to have started getting *worse* after years of improvement in that area(!)) and its inbuilt TV tuner isn't as nice for standard definition material as the Trinitron. Partly because it's upscaled to 1080i, and partly because it's a matte screen. But the viewing angle is still an issue for TV viewing- then again, I bought the TV tuner as a cheap "nice to have" additional feature on a monitor, so no big deal.
But the fact remains that there's a glut of portable CRT TVs, particularly since such sets never(?) include an integrated DVB-T digital tuner and my area is switching off the analogue signal soon. Sure, you can buy a digibox, as I've owned for years- but it's still not as "nice" if you're looking for an excuse to buy a new, dirt-cheap LCD telly anyway.
That COBOL system may be running the finances for a large company. I have seen many 30 or 40 year old COBOL apps manging many terabytes of data.
It's possible that data storage requirements would have grown approximately in line with massive exponential increases in storage capacity over the years. But that would be pretty coincidental and convenient and I doubt it would apply to typical cases.
At any rate, if a near 30-year-old program is currently generating and/or managing "many terabytes" of data- which would have been an incredible amount and way beyond any reasonable available capacity back then- it brings into question the original design of the program.
Even accounting for growth of a company, that's an absolutely massive increase and suggests a bad design that only got away with its crapness due to technological increases in storage capacity (that couldn't have been guaranteed 30 years ago) and luck that the company's rapid expansion wasn't just a *little* faster than that of typical data capacities. (Since having a program that generates terabytes of data in an era when the largest reasonable capacities were measured in gigabytes would have posed a problem).
While another explanation would be that the program could have been substantially modified in the intervening years, I wouldn't count that as being the same program as existed in 1982.
Why would you think the data is manages wouldn't grow?
I didn't say it wouldn't grow- you're reading more into it than was said.
The bottom line is that if it didn't grow at anything like the same rate as increases in data storage capacity over the past 30 years, then it would quickly have been dwarfed by such capacities.
or wait, I answered that with my first sentence.
Yeah, that'll be the one where you come up with some lame insult about my intelligence while demonstrating your (*) inability to differentiate between "you're" and "your"... right?
* copyright 2010 djdbass. Warning: The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000.
I regret to inform you that I already hold the copyright on your copyright warning, and you now owe me $100,000 and a bag of jelly babies if you don't want investigated by the FBI, sent to prison for 5 years and fined $250,000.
He's paying the loan IT took out to integrate a system to provide 1TB in 2005 across who knows how many platforms probably including wonderful legacy applications from 1982 written in COBOL.
Yeah, but both programs and data from almost 30 years ago would have exceptionally small- if not negligible- storage requirements by modern standards, so those likely aren't adding much to the total.
Most places where this would be useful can't afford a TV to hook it up to.
Where I live (*not* a particularly rich town), there is a total glut of old-style portable CRT TVs- no-one wants them and charity shops aren't even accepting them any more. I'm damn sure you could get one for bugger all if you wanted to.
Teletext exists since ages and nobody complains about it being unreadable.
People aren't trying to read Wikipedia on it though. And if people didn't complain about it in the past, it's because there was nothing better (it was good for the time, but still limited compared to (e.g.) a newspaper). And if people don't complain now, it's probably because very few people use it. The operator of the UK's commercial Teletext service illegally ditched it last year (in breach of their license) because it wasn't making them money any more.
Anyway, Teletext's 40 columns is very narrow by modern standards, and would spread the average article over countless pages. Even 80 columns is pretty small by today's standards, and that's bordering on unpleasant to read on an old-style TV.
My first 3 computers hooked up to an old SDTV. In fact as I recall it was a Black & White TV.
But did you tie an onion to your belt?;-)
I don't usually talk to myself, but:
1. Timex Sinclair 1000
2. TRS-80 Color Computer 2
3. TRS-80 Color Computer 3
Oh, the irony!:-)
Er, I can't talk, given that the first computer I used was a ZX81 (i.e. UK version of the TS-1000), and the first three machines I used were connected to black and white tellies, including my Amiga at one point(!)
After bankruptcy, any remaining cleanup costs would be passed directly to the owners of BP. Mansions, Yachts, Real Estate - All assets would be forfeit. Then they'd have to work in whatever capacity for the rest of their lives paying back the damage.
You do realise that a significant number of pension funds, both in the UK and the US, make up a large proportion of the holding of BP? (I'm not sure if you were endorsing the view you stated, or just explaining the logical situation that would result from a "true" free market).
While I agree with you (to some extent) that corporations should be more responsible for external costs than they are just now, it goes to show that the situation is more complex.
In fact, it's been said that the reason for America's prosperity is that its relatively lenient bankruptcy laws (vs. those in other countries at the time) allowed people to make mistakes and start again, rather than risking leaving themselves in a hole they had no real chance of getting out of. (Then again, IIRC that was said by right-wing historian Niall Ferguson, so take it with a pinch- or tub- of salt).
At any rate, if corporations' direct and indirect (*) owners were held to that level of responsibility, then nothing would ever be done by them for the reasons given above- matter of fact, their raison d'etre would cease to exist anyway.
FWIW, it would make more sense to ensure beforehand that corporations held enough money to (e.g.) clean up the results of their mistakes before granting them a license for a particular activity- and not rely on taking their word for it. And where those working for the corporation (particularly higher up) blatantly flouting laws or regulations in an obviously criminal manner would be charged and prosecuted accordingly.
But the logical conclusion of a completely "free market" approach would see granny and grandad having to "work in whatever capacity for the rest of their lives paying back the damage". The obvious conclusion is that many of those who argue for a "free market" would not- and do not- really want *that* free a market.:-)
(*) If only "direct" owners counted, the real owners would simply hide behind some form of legal indirection to protect themselves.
History is easy to forget. DVD was around on the shelves for almost a decade before it hit mass consumption levels.
No, it wasn't.
DVD came out between late 1996 (Japan) and early 1999, depending on where you lived. Here in the UK it apparently came out in late 1998 (*), and in 3-4 years sharply falling prices were already seriously eroding the VHS market. I got a DVD-ROM drive for UK £40-45 circa 2002, and that wasn't especially cutting edge (nor expensive!) by that time.
(*) Or so Wikipedia claims. However, I remember DVD-ROM drives and decoder cards being offered- albeit it at a notable premium- as a mainstream option when I was choosing a PC in Spring '98.
Translation: The company I work for wants to profit off of a legion of other peoples' work, but doesn't feel it has any particular obligation to play by the same rules.
Translation: Profit is evil.
Either ignorant or deliberate misinterpretation. He didn't criticise the company for wanting to profit off the GPL, he criticised them for wanting to enjoy the benefit of the GPL while not wanting to fulfil their legal obligations under the same license.
(FWIW, I know that the OP got it wrong and that the company was actually *avoiding* open source- which they're quite entitled to do. Still, you answered on the basis of that argument, and what you said has been said before and was wrong then).
The 90's called they want their website and products back.
The 90s called, they want their "[decade] called, they want their [subject] back" cliche back.:-) (*1)
And isn't that ironic.... don't you think? (*2)
(*1) I suspect this may cause the post to crash with an infinite recursion error.
(*2) It's like raaaaaiiiiiiiiiiaaaaaaain..... yeah, Alanis Morissette can sod off back to the 90s too.
We all know that once the ring goes on the finger, our libido stops cold.
I like the way that in recent years the old "I can't get laid because I can't get a girlfriend" cliche has been joined by "I can't get laid because I'm married"- without any indication of anything having happened inbetween.
Slashdotters are the carbon dioxide of the sex world- they sublimate directly from the "no girlfriend -> no sex" state to the "married -> no sex" state with no sign of the usual transitional phase (and its accompanying shagging).:-)
Hmm. Never heard of Idaho potatoes before I read your comment. I'd wager the rest of the world that exists outside the US borders hasn't heard either.
Seconded- here in the UK, the only location really associated with potatoes is the island of Jersey. Only reason I've ever heard of Idaho's alleged fame for its potatoes at all is because I saw it mentioned in a Wikipedia article a few months back. I doubt many other people here know of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Better add another monitor so you can compute while you compute and not worry about a second monitor or x session.
That's cool, but isn't US $400 a little overpriced for what it is essentially a 7" LCD monitor?
Personally, I think they should design the monitor to go into the other monitor so I could make a lame continuation of the joke that I heard you like monitors in your monitor so we put a monitor in your monitor so you can monitor your monitor while you...
I'll get me coat.
"Nearly 5GHz". The whole point here that everyone seems to be missing is that they made something go more than 1000 times as fast as the original 4.77 MHz IBM PC.
Well, only if you're referring to the clock speed. In terms of raw processing speed (by any reasonable benchmark), they're likely *significantly* more than 1000 times faster, since clock speed refers simply to the number of cycles per second, and doesn't account for how much work can be done per cycle.
The situation is even worse with computers. Like with the automotive companies you listed, all of those computer companies merely assemble computers. They all use components made by a very small number of manufacturers
The obvious- and most central- example is that of the x86 PC's CPU itself, where the market is basically a duopoly that's just a few not-quite-competitive AMD releases away from being a monopoly.
You missed the point that he criticised such discussions then kickstarted one such thread hijack anyway.
The GPL vs BSD license argument never gets old for some folk does it?
I agree.
Each to their own, but the GPL allows people who contribute to the public good to make sure that their work is not [etc.]
Yeah, thanks a bunch.
You (rightly) bemoan the tired, repetitive nature of GPL vs. BSD discussions. The ones that regurgitate the exact same argumentative points every time without shedding any new light on them, that let people feel good by justifying the same entrenched positions.
Then you self-indulgently kickstart exactly that type of thread-hijacking discussion because you can't resist sticking your oar in anyway. Despite the fact that what you say is the exact same explanation of the GPL that appears about a dozen times in every GPL vs. BSD thread ever. You know the arguments, the BSD-philes know the arguments and they've been repeated ad nauseum.
You know this, and you criticise it... then you do it anyway.
Fuck me, I'd forgotten what a pile of shite Deacon Park South Texas were. Thanks a bastarding bunch for reminding me, you heiferflap.
WTF? Is this what happens when some late-1980s Scottish bands get mixed up in a transporter with a popular animation series?
:-/
If something that tenuous links to "Real Gone Kid" in your head, you must have some major trauma
it's Ukraine, no "the"
Actually, I've heard "the Ukraine" used quite often in reputable English-language contexts- if you search this article, you'll note that "the Ukraine" pops up twice in the names of referenced texts.
It does sound strange if you think about it; I'm not sure what the explanation for such usage is. Whether such usage is becoming slightly archaic, I don't know. But it was definitely acceptable- if not standard- not so long ago.
Reciprocity works both ways. If you want the gain, you have to take the pain.
Er, wasn't half the problem with the banking crisis that the people getting paid big bucks to take risky decisions *didn't* have to deal with the pain if the shit hit the fan, although they got their money if everything was okay?
Sorry to be pedantic, but the TS-1000 was the US version of the ZX81 - the ZX81 (invented by Sinclair) was the original
Well yeah, I know- I honestly didn't elaborate on that point though as I didn't want to be pedantic(!)
(Additional; "digibox" = genericised trademark commonly used in the UK to refer to an external digital terrestrial DVB-T TV tuner (*), similar to the American "converter box")
(*) Irony is that the trademark Digibox came from Sky's *satellite* TV set-top box...
Am I the only human in the world who has reverted to CRTs on the desktop and in the living room?
FWIW, I'm still watching my Trinitron portable, and very happy with it. Until about a month ago I was also using a CRT monitor, and replaced it partly due to some scratch-like damage to the CRT coating that (oddly) appears to have grown much worse and intrusive even in casual use- and partly due to it being fairly lo-res by modern standards.
But despite the benefits of my new monitor, the viewing angle is poor (LCDs seem to have started getting *worse* after years of improvement in that area(!)) and its inbuilt TV tuner isn't as nice for standard definition material as the Trinitron. Partly because it's upscaled to 1080i, and partly because it's a matte screen. But the viewing angle is still an issue for TV viewing- then again, I bought the TV tuner as a cheap "nice to have" additional feature on a monitor, so no big deal.
But the fact remains that there's a glut of portable CRT TVs, particularly since such sets never(?) include an integrated DVB-T digital tuner and my area is switching off the analogue signal soon. Sure, you can buy a digibox, as I've owned for years- but it's still not as "nice" if you're looking for an excuse to buy a new, dirt-cheap LCD telly anyway.
That COBOL system may be running the finances for a large company. I have seen many 30 or 40 year old COBOL apps manging many terabytes of data.
It's possible that data storage requirements would have grown approximately in line with massive exponential increases in storage capacity over the years. But that would be pretty coincidental and convenient and I doubt it would apply to typical cases.
At any rate, if a near 30-year-old program is currently generating and/or managing "many terabytes" of data- which would have been an incredible amount and way beyond any reasonable available capacity back then- it brings into question the original design of the program.
Even accounting for growth of a company, that's an absolutely massive increase and suggests a bad design that only got away with its crapness due to technological increases in storage capacity (that couldn't have been guaranteed 30 years ago) and luck that the company's rapid expansion wasn't just a *little* faster than that of typical data capacities. (Since having a program that generates terabytes of data in an era when the largest reasonable capacities were measured in gigabytes would have posed a problem).
While another explanation would be that the program could have been substantially modified in the intervening years, I wouldn't count that as being the same program as existed in 1982.
Why would you think the data is manages wouldn't grow?
I didn't say it wouldn't grow- you're reading more into it than was said.
The bottom line is that if it didn't grow at anything like the same rate as increases in data storage capacity over the past 30 years, then it would quickly have been dwarfed by such capacities.
or wait, I answered that with my first sentence.
Yeah, that'll be the one where you come up with some lame insult about my intelligence while demonstrating your (*) inability to differentiate between "you're" and "your"... right?
:-P
(*) Note the *correct* usage of "your"
Pot, meet Kettle*
* copyright 2010 djdbass. Warning: The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000.
I regret to inform you that I already hold the copyright on your copyright warning, and you now owe me $100,000 and a bag of jelly babies if you don't want investigated by the FBI, sent to prison for 5 years and fined $250,000.
And the jelly babies have to be green.
He's paying the loan IT took out to integrate a system to provide 1TB in 2005 across who knows how many platforms probably including wonderful legacy applications from 1982 written in COBOL.
Yeah, but both programs and data from almost 30 years ago would have exceptionally small- if not negligible- storage requirements by modern standards, so those likely aren't adding much to the total.
Most places where this would be useful can't afford a TV to hook it up to.
Where I live (*not* a particularly rich town), there is a total glut of old-style portable CRT TVs- no-one wants them and charity shops aren't even accepting them any more. I'm damn sure you could get one for bugger all if you wanted to.
Teletext exists since ages and nobody complains about it being unreadable.
People aren't trying to read Wikipedia on it though. And if people didn't complain about it in the past, it's because there was nothing better (it was good for the time, but still limited compared to (e.g.) a newspaper). And if people don't complain now, it's probably because very few people use it. The operator of the UK's commercial Teletext service illegally ditched it last year (in breach of their license) because it wasn't making them money any more.
Anyway, Teletext's 40 columns is very narrow by modern standards, and would spread the average article over countless pages. Even 80 columns is pretty small by today's standards, and that's bordering on unpleasant to read on an old-style TV.
My first 3 computers hooked up to an old SDTV. In fact as I recall it was a Black & White TV.
But did you tie an onion to your belt? ;-)
I don't usually talk to myself, but:
1. Timex Sinclair 1000
2. TRS-80 Color Computer 2
3. TRS-80 Color Computer 3
Oh, the irony! :-)
Er, I can't talk, given that the first computer I used was a ZX81 (i.e. UK version of the TS-1000), and the first three machines I used were connected to black and white tellies, including my Amiga at one point(!)
No, it's the last roll of Kodachrome to be manufactured that has been processed- not the last roll to have been processed. Smartass.
After bankruptcy, any remaining cleanup costs would be passed directly to the owners of BP. Mansions, Yachts, Real Estate - All assets would be forfeit. Then they'd have to work in whatever capacity for the rest of their lives paying back the damage.
You do realise that a significant number of pension funds, both in the UK and the US, make up a large proportion of the holding of BP? (I'm not sure if you were endorsing the view you stated, or just explaining the logical situation that would result from a "true" free market).
:-)
While I agree with you (to some extent) that corporations should be more responsible for external costs than they are just now, it goes to show that the situation is more complex.
In fact, it's been said that the reason for America's prosperity is that its relatively lenient bankruptcy laws (vs. those in other countries at the time) allowed people to make mistakes and start again, rather than risking leaving themselves in a hole they had no real chance of getting out of. (Then again, IIRC that was said by right-wing historian Niall Ferguson, so take it with a pinch- or tub- of salt).
At any rate, if corporations' direct and indirect (*) owners were held to that level of responsibility, then nothing would ever be done by them for the reasons given above- matter of fact, their raison d'etre would cease to exist anyway.
FWIW, it would make more sense to ensure beforehand that corporations held enough money to (e.g.) clean up the results of their mistakes before granting them a license for a particular activity- and not rely on taking their word for it. And where those working for the corporation (particularly higher up) blatantly flouting laws or regulations in an obviously criminal manner would be charged and prosecuted accordingly.
But the logical conclusion of a completely "free market" approach would see granny and grandad having to "work in whatever capacity for the rest of their lives paying back the damage". The obvious conclusion is that many of those who argue for a "free market" would not- and do not- really want *that* free a market.
(*) If only "direct" owners counted, the real owners would simply hide behind some form of legal indirection to protect themselves.
History is easy to forget. DVD was around on the shelves for almost a decade before it hit mass consumption levels.
No, it wasn't.
DVD came out between late 1996 (Japan) and early 1999, depending on where you lived. Here in the UK it apparently came out in late 1998 (*), and in 3-4 years sharply falling prices were already seriously eroding the VHS market. I got a DVD-ROM drive for UK £40-45 circa 2002, and that wasn't especially cutting edge (nor expensive!) by that time.
(*) Or so Wikipedia claims. However, I remember DVD-ROM drives and decoder cards being offered- albeit it at a notable premium- as a mainstream option when I was choosing a PC in Spring '98.
Translation: The company I work for wants to profit off of a legion of other peoples' work, but doesn't feel it has any particular obligation to play by the same rules.
Translation: Profit is evil.
Either ignorant or deliberate misinterpretation. He didn't criticise the company for wanting to profit off the GPL, he criticised them for wanting to enjoy the benefit of the GPL while not wanting to fulfil their legal obligations under the same license.
(FWIW, I know that the OP got it wrong and that the company was actually *avoiding* open source- which they're quite entitled to do. Still, you answered on the basis of that argument, and what you said has been said before and was wrong then).
Damn imagine how much Apple could've raked in if they had of named it eMac
You mean like this?
The 90's called they want their website and products back.
The 90s called, they want their "[decade] called, they want their [subject] back" cliche back. :-) (*1)
And isn't that ironic.... don't you think? (*2)
(*1) I suspect this may cause the post to crash with an infinite recursion error.
(*2) It's like raaaaaiiiiiiiiiiaaaaaaain..... yeah, Alanis Morissette can sod off back to the 90s too.
We all know that once the ring goes on the finger, our libido stops cold.
I like the way that in recent years the old "I can't get laid because I can't get a girlfriend" cliche has been joined by "I can't get laid because I'm married"- without any indication of anything having happened inbetween.
:-)
Slashdotters are the carbon dioxide of the sex world- they sublimate directly from the "no girlfriend -> no sex" state to the "married -> no sex" state with no sign of the usual transitional phase (and its accompanying shagging).
Hmm. Never heard of Idaho potatoes before I read your comment. I'd wager the rest of the world that exists outside the US borders hasn't heard either.
Seconded- here in the UK, the only location really associated with potatoes is the island of Jersey. Only reason I've ever heard of Idaho's alleged fame for its potatoes at all is because I saw it mentioned in a Wikipedia article a few months back. I doubt many other people here know of it.