They may look that way but here are a couple of things to watch out for:
Even if you opt for electronic statements they will still send you 3-4 pieces of junk mail a year. If anything goes wrong with that mail and it gets bounced back to them they will freeze your account until you verify your addresss by mail. If you need to access your money in the week or so that takes you are shit out of luck.
Watch your interest rate it will drop after a year. Once your bonus interest rate goes you cannot recover it. If you close your account and reopen another there must be a three month gap before you count as a new customer and get the advertised rate.
No worries, if you tell us your IP address then we can cancel it for you. In fact as there is no penalty for submitting incorrect DMCA takedown requests the best thing to do would be to start reporting *every* suddenlink subscriber. I bet they would change their policy quickly enough.
Ah, so you are talking about some hypothetical use long in the future. And that dvd is going to be in good enough shape after all these years that it still works, eh?
Create a civv-wjousts account just for that game. Log in to it once when you install. Set it to offline play. Get up with your life and quite whining about Steam.
...which would quash Moore's Law. Hint: moving from hitting an engineering target of improving a well-understood process to inventing an entirely new one will change the rate of progress.
No-one has invented a buzzword to cover this yet, alongside all of the curve-jumping bullshit. I nominate progress-refraction as a suitable misunderstanding of a physical process for MBAs
So this has not already happened (as the article implies) but is an idea for future development.
When you quote the article to dispute what the article implied something is seriously wrong. Either the fabric of the universe has become distorted and... difficult... or you don't know the difference* between the summary and the article.
The goal is to assign a unique identity to each visitor if they are new, and to work out their identity if they are a repeat. So for each visit you need to give them a set of images which is both unique (as a fingerprint for later tracking) and common to *all* of their possible identities (which is every hit on your site so far).
These criteria are mutually exclusive, and if you consider them separately the second one implies a completely infeasible amount of server-side processing. So, quite a nice idea, but it doesn't fly.
No. I miss out on everything *bad* about the web. It is nice. You see I didn't say that I don't use flash / video, you assumed that. Actually there are only four sites in my whitelist that I reckon need that.
Why would you need to? Cached images don't get uploaded during normal page rendering. You need some sort of client-side scripting to look at the cached image. So disabling flash and javascript would be enough to turn this into a normal cookie, and disabling cookies as well would defeat it completely.
My browser was setup that way already, but that's just the way I roll...
To which? This isn't a logic class - "or" doesn't have the same meaning in general discourse. Congratulations on failing to understand English.
Oh dear, so you understood that I meant yes to both, but you are still trying to force a false choice upon me. Perhaps you need the class in both English and logic?
Why's it always the uneducated who are first to come out with the epithets?
Perhaps that course in English would teach you what an epithet is. Or perhaps not, miracles are not that common.
When you are using your prejudices to hypothesise randomly on the motivations of urban gangs, do you use terms like "stupid niggers"?
No. Because unlike you I am not racist enough to assume that an urban gang is black. Tell me, have you stopped beating your wife yet you redneck hick?
So are you saying that they are in the wrong because Google it is not evil, or they are in the wrong because it is bad (immoral? ineffective?) to use guerrilla tactics against a powerful enemy?
Ah, so a citizen trying to live freely should consider a global information aggregator as a harmless and healthy part of society, eh?
Yes. Because unless they are some dumbass redneck there is no way to argue that shooting at their equipment is a good response. In fact even the dumb hicks who did it would probably "argue" that they were just pissing around because they were wasted. It takes a real armchair nutjob like you to claim that they were in the right against some evil global multinational.
Ah, so an internet company should consider fuckwit withs guns as part of its normal operating procedure, eh? Are you from Oregon perhaps?
Or if you are no, but you are so disturbed by Google that you can't even read a story like this without ranting what bad guys they are then do the obvious thing: fuck off to the opt-out village.
Low-latency asynchronous communication has different benefits to low-latency synchronous communication.
For example if you are trying to organise something with a bunch of people then it is easier firing texts between each other than making a series of phone-calls.
But is this really news? When I was teen in the late 90s this was equally true. If anything my generation use texts less because we can afford nice phones that have IM clients...
No, the limit on switching speed in silicon is 40Ghz. There is a world of difference between the switching speed of transistors and the clockspeed of a processor. I suggest that you look up propagation delay.
Well,..... no. There are many things wrong with your post but the biggest one is that you don't seem to be able to double numbers properly. Did you pull 1Tbit out of your ass?
Moore originally speculated about transistor density doubling every 12 months - but his actual observation that was published was that density doubles every 18 months. This is the figure that has been used for decades when people talk about his "law". In more recent times (the last decade or so) that period has increased to 2 years.
log_18mths(12yrs) = 8 log_24mths(12yrs) = 6
So, if we accept your claim about 1Gbit chips in 1999 then we would expect chips in the range 64Gbit - 256Gbit. A long way off of the 1Tb that you used. Assuming that you mean flash when you say "ram chip" a quick search shows that 64Gbit chips were available in 2007. So your conclusion is bogus.
The worst thing I've seen happen to one of my own papers was a reviewer who wrote positive things in all of the sections, and then recommended rejection. You can't counter any of his objections, because he didn't give any.
Or the terrible things that you don't see (but hear about afterwards) like the reviewer who had no objections, was a weak accept (stiffling any decent discussion by insisting there was nothing *wrong* with this paper) but who then dropped the paper like a rock when asked to make a choice between papers sitting on the line...
Everything that you've pointed out is true, so we have no disagreement there. But I suspect that you are not understanding the point that I have made.
Any file-system makes a set of semantic guarantees / constraints on any application that uses it. It is the responsibility of the application to make sure that what it does matches these constraints, while relying on these guantees. Same as any API.
It's the same as saying 'well, my application polled the disk-free in second one, then assumed it was safe to allocate an extra 4Meg.. But then when it came time to do so, there was no free space. waaah).
No. It is very different. It is taking a situation that exists in every application out there (modifying the contents of a file) and allowing there to be a failure where previously there was none. Every application assumes that changing bytes it has already allocated on the disk is not a situation that can fail due to disk space running out. Several application depend upon this behaviour.
You do know that the 50GB of data on a blueray is heavily compressed already?
Do you also know that capturing the real-time video output would result in 150MB/s? That's not an easy stream to store. You are instantly looking at SSD or a RAID of spinning disks just to deal with the transfer rate. There is no system that could do a decent job at encoding that in real-time without severe loss of quality.
So each hour of movie will take 540GB of storage in raw form. Let's say 1TB per movie roughly. I don't think SSDs are going to be an option so good luck with that RAID. Then all you have to do is x264 the terrabyte of data to compress it back down. In a couple of hours, eh? Good luck.
It's hard to tell if you are stupid or just uninformed. You do know that the 50GB of data on a blueray is heavily compressed already?
Do you also know that capturing the real-time video output would result in 150MB/s? That's not an easy stream to store. You are instantly looking at SSD or a RAID of spinning disks just to deal with the transfer rate. There is no system that could do a decent job at encoding that in real-time without severe loss of quality.
So each hour of movie will take 540GB of storage in raw form. Let's say 1TB per movie roughly. I don't think SSDs are going to be an option so good luck with that RAID. Then all you have to do is x264 the terrabyte of data to compress it back down. In a couple of hours, eh? Good luck.
Slashdot Mirror
They may look that way but here are a couple of things to watch out for:
Even if you opt for electronic statements they will still send you 3-4 pieces of junk mail a year. If anything goes wrong with that mail and it gets bounced back to them they will freeze your account until you verify your addresss by mail. If you need to access your money in the week or so that takes you are shit out of luck.
Watch your interest rate it will drop after a year. Once your bonus interest rate goes you cannot recover it. If you close your account and reopen another there must be a three month gap before you count as a new customer and get the advertised rate.
How do you know that? All optical media has a shelf-life. It won't work indefinitely.
No worries, if you tell us your IP address then we can cancel it for you. In fact as there is no penalty for submitting incorrect DMCA takedown requests the best thing to do would be to start reporting *every* suddenlink subscriber. I bet they would change their policy quickly enough.
Ah, so you are talking about some hypothetical use long in the future. And that dvd is going to be in good enough shape after all these years that it still works, eh?
I'll say exactly what I said before to answer your question:
Set your account into offline mode after authentication. It will never need to see a Steam server again.
Then don't
Create a civv-wjousts account just for that game. Log in to it once when you install. Set it to offline play. Get up with your life and quite whining about Steam.
...which would quash Moore's Law. Hint: moving from hitting an engineering target of improving a well-understood process to inventing an entirely new one will change the rate of progress.
No-one has invented a buzzword to cover this yet, alongside all of the curve-jumping bullshit. I nominate progress-refraction as a suitable misunderstanding of a physical process for MBAs
From TFA: ...snip...
So this has not already happened (as the article implies) but is an idea for future development.
When you quote the article to dispute what the article implied something is seriously wrong. Either the fabric of the universe has become distorted and ... difficult ... or you don't know the difference* between the summary and the article.
*slashdot editors
Is it like he is standing in the garage, about to drive to work, when he realises that his keys are still in the hall?
Not really.
The goal is to assign a unique identity to each visitor if they are new, and to work out their identity if they are a repeat. So for each visit you need to give them a set of images which is both unique (as a fingerprint for later tracking) and common to *all* of their possible identities (which is every hit on your site so far).
These criteria are mutually exclusive, and if you consider them separately the second one implies a completely infeasible amount of server-side processing. So, quite a nice idea, but it doesn't fly.
No. I miss out on everything *bad* about the web. It is nice. You see I didn't say that I don't use flash / video, you assumed that. Actually there are only four sites in my whitelist that I reckon need that.
Why would you need to? Cached images don't get uploaded during normal page rendering. You need some sort of client-side scripting to look at the cached image. So disabling flash and javascript would be enough to turn this into a normal cookie, and disabling cookies as well would defeat it completely.
My browser was setup that way already, but that's just the way I roll...
Oh dear, so you understood that I meant yes to both, but you are still trying to force a false choice upon me. Perhaps you need the class in both English and logic?
Perhaps that course in English would teach you what an epithet is. Or perhaps not, miracles are not that common.
No. Because unlike you I am not racist enough to assume that an urban gang is black. Tell me, have you stopped beating your wife yet you redneck hick?
Yes.
Yes. Because unless they are some dumbass redneck there is no way to argue that shooting at their equipment is a good response. In fact even the dumb hicks who did it would probably "argue" that they were just pissing around because they were wasted. It takes a real armchair nutjob like you to claim that they were in the right against some evil global multinational.
Ah, so an internet company should consider fuckwit withs guns as part of its normal operating procedure, eh? Are you from Oregon perhaps?
Or if you are no, but you are so disturbed by Google that you can't even read a story like this without ranting what bad guys they are then do the obvious thing: fuck off to the opt-out village.
Low-latency asynchronous communication has different benefits to low-latency synchronous communication.
For example if you are trying to organise something with a bunch of people then it is easier firing texts between each other than making a series of phone-calls.
But is this really news? When I was teen in the late 90s this was equally true. If anything my generation use texts less because we can afford nice phones that have IM clients...
No, the limit on switching speed in silicon is 40Ghz. There is a world of difference between the switching speed of transistors and the clockspeed of a processor. I suggest that you look up propagation delay.
Well, ..... no. There are many things wrong with your post but the biggest one is that you don't seem to be able to double numbers properly. Did you pull 1Tbit out of your ass?
Moore originally speculated about transistor density doubling every 12 months - but his actual observation that was published was that density doubles every 18 months. This is the figure that has been used for decades when people talk about his "law". In more recent times (the last decade or so) that period has increased to 2 years.
log_18mths(12yrs) = 8
log_24mths(12yrs) = 6
So, if we accept your claim about 1Gbit chips in 1999 then we would expect chips in the range 64Gbit - 256Gbit. A long way off of the 1Tb that you used. Assuming that you mean flash when you say "ram chip" a quick search shows that 64Gbit chips were available in 2007. So your conclusion is bogus.
Exactly. Look how hard it has been for that TimeCube guy to get published just because this reviewers were educated stupid.
Or the terrible things that you don't see (but hear about afterwards) like the reviewer who had no objections, was a weak accept (stiffling any decent discussion by insisting there was nothing *wrong* with this paper) but who then dropped the paper like a rock when asked to make a choice between papers sitting on the line...
Everything that you've pointed out is true, so we have no disagreement there. But I suspect that you are not understanding the point that I have made.
Any file-system makes a set of semantic guarantees / constraints on any application that uses it. It is the responsibility of the application to make sure that what it does matches these constraints, while relying on these guantees. Same as any API.
No. It is very different. It is taking a situation that exists in every application out there (modifying the contents of a file) and allowing there to be a failure where previously there was none. Every application assumes that changing bytes it has already allocated on the disk is not a situation that can fail due to disk space running out. Several application depend upon this behaviour.
I knew you'd have to correct at least one person in this story. Seriously, get out now while you still can.... ;)
You do know that the 50GB of data on a blueray is heavily compressed already?
Do you also know that capturing the real-time video output would result in 150MB/s? That's not an easy stream to store. You are instantly looking at SSD or a RAID of spinning disks just to deal with the transfer rate. There is no system that could do a decent job at encoding that in real-time without severe loss of quality.
So each hour of movie will take 540GB of storage in raw form. Let's say 1TB per movie roughly. I don't think SSDs are going to be an option so good luck with that RAID. Then all you have to do is x264 the terrabyte of data to compress it back down. In a couple of hours, eh? Good luck.
It's hard to tell if you are stupid or just uninformed. You do know that the 50GB of data on a blueray is heavily compressed already?
Do you also know that capturing the real-time video output would result in 150MB/s? That's not an easy stream to store. You are instantly looking at SSD or a RAID of spinning disks just to deal with the transfer rate. There is no system that could do a decent job at encoding that in real-time without severe loss of quality.
So each hour of movie will take 540GB of storage in raw form. Let's say 1TB per movie roughly. I don't think SSDs are going to be an option so good luck with that RAID. Then all you have to do is x264 the terrabyte of data to compress it back down. In a couple of hours, eh? Good luck.