Well, that's only because they don't see that there's any benefit to atomic power, and as you say are operating based upon emotion rather than any real grasp of the risk vs. benefit ratio. That will change however, when the electric bills start to inch up to the point where gasoline seems positively cheap, when every State in the Union is instituting rolling blackouts to conserve fossil fuels, when refrigerating our food becomes impractical because electricity is too unreliable... we may (I say, may) come to our senses regarding nuclear. Trust me, when the lights start going out people will accept any solution to keep them on for a while longer (people get pragmatic fast when the shit hits the fan for real.)
just make a huge pile of glowing, long-lived nuclear waste, and surround it with a high stone fence. Put signs on that barrier in every language known to Mankind that say "if you cross this fence you will die". Undoubtedly, some people will cross that fence. Niven called this effect "Evolution in action" and that's certainly the case. However, after a few years, the growing pile of radioactive skeletons would serve as a graphic example to future generations about the dangers of radioactive waste, while simultaneously cleaning the gene pool.
Right, and like I said, if Apple neglects their other profit centers (i.e., the Mac) they might have problems. As of right now, Apple doesn't need iTunes and the music cartel to survive, because it is not solely an music player/music download company, and Apple would do well to keep that firmly in mind. Remember, this alliance with the labels is an uneasy one at best and is not stable, long-term. The studios would like nothing better than to dump Apple and iTunes and do it themselves, but for the moment they know they couldn't pull it off.
Apple is not nor will it ever be the next Microsoft... I'm not sure the world will tolerate another Microsoft. Furthermore, I don't necessarily believe that Jobs wants to be the next Microsoft, the next bastion of mediocrity. He'd have to be a fool, and while I don't particularly like the man I can say that if there's one thing Jobs isn't, it's a fool. He was, once, but he's not anymore.
for the time being, the labels need Apple more than Apple needs the labels. Now, if Apple begins to bank too heavily on the iPod and neglects their other profit centers, that might change. But for now, Apple has a lot of leverage, which just goes to show why the music industry has always fought to maintain control of distribution.
Really, though, in this case the comparison to terrorism is weak. I'd say it's more like dealing with a school of really hungry piranha. Or maybe a programmed death machine... to quote Reese when he was describing a Terminator to Sarah Connor:
Listen. Understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with... it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead.
That's kinda how I look at these patent-wielding law firms. As long as you have the money to pay prote^H^H^H^H^Hlicense fees they absolutely will not stop. Ever.
Well, this is really an exercise in optimization, an iterative process whereby broadcasters try to find that sweet spot where they can gain the maximum revenue. While they're doing this, expect things to get pretty weird until they settle on a new way of advertising that works well enough for them.
unlike Microsoft, they are respectable and non-crimminal.
Yes, but underfunded. I'm rather surprised that IBM isn't kicking a bit more into the kitty on this one. Seems like it would be a tiny investment with a potentially huge payoff.
Okay, I'll buy that... but you don't seem to see them as often as you used to. Doesn't matter to me, I'm just a software guy, but in the places I've worked that's been the general attitude. I guess they're just being cheap.
Well, FireFox is free so "buy firefox" wouldn't fly. How about this: Clippy pops up and says, "It looks like your Internet Explorer has crashed. Would you like me to install FireFox instead?"
The ONLY people who need these graphics cards are people who place top end games.
That's not entirely true. For example, in the mechanical engineering department where I work there's one guy with a really fast PC and a high-end (I think nVidia but I'm not sure) graphics card that does 3-D design and rendering of parts for the automated machine tools on the plant floor. Not that many years ago, he would have had some kind of special "workstation video board" that would have cost a couple of grand. Those have all but died out as the likes of nVidia and ATI have pushed the performance envelope so far that engineering tasks pale in comparison to the requirements of a game. I guess my point is that there are many tasks that need high-performance 3D, they're just not as high-profile as gaming. And even that is a rather small subset of the total number of computer users out there.
Render farms don't need or have video on each processor... you just have thousands of machines in racks processing data streams. The resulting output files are then taken and rendered to video or film. Besides, the number of systems in all the world's render farms is a tiny fraction of the number of chipsets ATI sells to the notebook and desktop markets. When Linux makes significant inroads into those markets ATI will follow suit. What you're reallying complaining about is the fact ATI is making no particular effort to develop that market by supplying video drivers in a format that you find acceptable. And there's no particular reason that they should unless their own analysis says that it will be profitable. Companies get to choose where they put their development dollars. Now, if there was some proof that, say, Microsoft was paying off or pressuring ATI to keep their Linux drivers on the back burner, that might be different.
On the other hand, ATI has never been particularly good about drivers, even under Windows, so don't expect them to be much help in the Linux world either. That stupid-ass.Net-based "Catalyst Control Panel" they've been shipping for a while now is just obnoxious.
Of course, while terrorism and child pornography and {insert favorite heinous crime here} are being used as a cover for these kinds of regulations, like some other posters I'm convinced that this has as much to do with the Telcos wanting to squelch competition. Hell, SBC has been routinely violating quality-of-service regulations for years... they just pay the fines because it's cheaper than actually providing quality service. The same thing will happen here: smaller providers won't be able to afford to comply or to pay the penalties for non-compliance, but the big boys won't even break a sweat. And when it comes to the free wireless grids that some cities want to set up, well, I'll bet that this proposed law will squarely target them as well since the phone companies don't much like that idea either.
It should be a requirement when naming a bill that the name of the bill be accurate and truthful. Period. It would be a hell of a lot harder to get a majority to sign off on a bill if the name is honest: the Patriot Act would be the "Anti-Terrorism via Civil Liberties Reduction Act". How would that fly? Like a lead balloon. "So, Mr. Congressman, is it true you voted for the Civil Liberties Reduction Act?" But the Patriot Act... nobody wanted to be seen voting against that, even if they hadn't even read it yet.
No, because they stopped shipping EPROM chips in them, and started using masked ROM. That explains a whole generation of frustrated parents who just can't understand why their kids just "won't listen". It's not they their offspring don't want to listen, it's that they can't because their brains are read-only.
Slashdot Mirror
{sigh} it was a joke, son. See The Roentgen Standard.
Well, that's only because they don't see that there's any benefit to atomic power, and as you say are operating based upon emotion rather than any real grasp of the risk vs. benefit ratio. That will change however, when the electric bills start to inch up to the point where gasoline seems positively cheap, when every State in the Union is instituting rolling blackouts to conserve fossil fuels, when refrigerating our food becomes impractical because electricity is too unreliable ... we may (I say, may) come to our senses regarding nuclear. Trust me, when the lights start going out people will accept any solution to keep them on for a while longer (people get pragmatic fast when the shit hits the fan for real.)
just make a huge pile of glowing, long-lived nuclear waste, and surround it with a high stone fence. Put signs on that barrier in every language known to Mankind that say "if you cross this fence you will die". Undoubtedly, some people will cross that fence. Niven called this effect "Evolution in action" and that's certainly the case. However, after a few years, the growing pile of radioactive skeletons would serve as a graphic example to future generations about the dangers of radioactive waste, while simultaneously cleaning the gene pool.
... oh, never mind.
And well you should fear the Beast ... because he is us.
Extortion-racket Tier
Hilarious. And very true.
Okay. I'll buy that. I just wanted to work in that quote.
Right, and like I said, if Apple neglects their other profit centers (i.e., the Mac) they might have problems. As of right now, Apple doesn't need iTunes and the music cartel to survive, because it is not solely an music player/music download company, and Apple would do well to keep that firmly in mind. Remember, this alliance with the labels is an uneasy one at best and is not stable, long-term. The studios would like nothing better than to dump Apple and iTunes and do it themselves, but for the moment they know they couldn't pull it off.
... I'm not sure the world will tolerate another Microsoft. Furthermore, I don't necessarily believe that Jobs wants to be the next Microsoft, the next bastion of mediocrity. He'd have to be a fool, and while I don't particularly like the man I can say that if there's one thing Jobs isn't, it's a fool. He was, once, but he's not anymore.
Apple is not nor will it ever be the next Microsoft
for the time being, the labels need Apple more than Apple needs the labels. Now, if Apple begins to bank too heavily on the iPod and neglects their other profit centers, that might change. But for now, Apple has a lot of leverage, which just goes to show why the music industry has always fought to maintain control of distribution.
Really, though, in this case the comparison to terrorism is weak. I'd say it's more like dealing with a school of really hungry piranha. Or maybe a programmed death machine ... to quote Reese when he was describing a Terminator to Sarah Connor:
... it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear ... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead.
Listen. Understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with
That's kinda how I look at these patent-wielding law firms. As long as you have the money to pay prote^H^H^H^H^Hlicense fees they absolutely will not stop. Ever.
I believe the chocolate-pecan ones are called "Galactic Turtles".
Well, this is really an exercise in optimization, an iterative process whereby broadcasters try to find that sweet spot where they can gain the maximum revenue. While they're doing this, expect things to get pretty weird until they settle on a new way of advertising that works well enough for them.
unlike Microsoft, they are respectable and non-crimminal.
Yes, but underfunded. I'm rather surprised that IBM isn't kicking a bit more into the kitty on this one. Seems like it would be a tiny investment with a potentially huge payoff.
Okay, I'll buy that ... but you don't seem to see them as often as you used to. Doesn't matter to me, I'm just a software guy, but in the places I've worked that's been the general attitude. I guess they're just being cheap.
"Whoa ... heavy."
"What is this 'heavy'. Is there something wrong with the force of gravity in your time?"
Find him a little female companionship ... he'll leave voluntarily.
Well, FireFox is free so "buy firefox" wouldn't fly. How about this: Clippy pops up and says, "It looks like your Internet Explorer has crashed. Would you like me to install FireFox instead?"
Just make sure that you configure your "boss button" properly.
The ONLY people who need these graphics cards are people who place top end games.
That's not entirely true. For example, in the mechanical engineering department where I work there's one guy with a really fast PC and a high-end (I think nVidia but I'm not sure) graphics card that does 3-D design and rendering of parts for the automated machine tools on the plant floor. Not that many years ago, he would have had some kind of special "workstation video board" that would have cost a couple of grand. Those have all but died out as the likes of nVidia and ATI have pushed the performance envelope so far that engineering tasks pale in comparison to the requirements of a game. I guess my point is that there are many tasks that need high-performance 3D, they're just not as high-profile as gaming. And even that is a rather small subset of the total number of computer users out there.
Render farms don't need or have video on each processor ... you just have thousands of machines in racks processing data streams. The resulting output files are then taken and rendered to video or film. Besides, the number of systems in all the world's render farms is a tiny fraction of the number of chipsets ATI sells to the notebook and desktop markets. When Linux makes significant inroads into those markets ATI will follow suit. What you're reallying complaining about is the fact ATI is making no particular effort to develop that market by supplying video drivers in a format that you find acceptable. And there's no particular reason that they should unless their own analysis says that it will be profitable. Companies get to choose where they put their development dollars. Now, if there was some proof that, say, Microsoft was paying off or pressuring ATI to keep their Linux drivers on the back burner, that might be different.
.Net-based "Catalyst Control Panel" they've been shipping for a while now is just obnoxious.
On the other hand, ATI has never been particularly good about drivers, even under Windows, so don't expect them to be much help in the Linux world either. That stupid-ass
Of course, while terrorism and child pornography and {insert favorite heinous crime here} are being used as a cover for these kinds of regulations, like some other posters I'm convinced that this has as much to do with the Telcos wanting to squelch competition. Hell, SBC has been routinely violating quality-of-service regulations for years ... they just pay the fines because it's cheaper than actually providing quality service. The same thing will happen here: smaller providers won't be able to afford to comply or to pay the penalties for non-compliance, but the big boys won't even break a sweat. And when it comes to the free wireless grids that some cities want to set up, well, I'll bet that this proposed law will squarely target them as well since the phone companies don't much like that idea either.
... nobody wanted to be seen voting against that, even if they hadn't even read it yet.
It should be a requirement when naming a bill that the name of the bill be accurate and truthful. Period. It would be a hell of a lot harder to get a majority to sign off on a bill if the name is honest: the Patriot Act would be the "Anti-Terrorism via Civil Liberties Reduction Act". How would that fly? Like a lead balloon. "So, Mr. Congressman, is it true you voted for the Civil Liberties Reduction Act?" But the Patriot Act
You haven't installed the rootkit yet, apparently.
Do kids still program?
No, because they stopped shipping EPROM chips in them, and started using masked ROM. That explains a whole generation of frustrated parents who just can't understand why their kids just "won't listen". It's not they their offspring don't want to listen, it's that they can't because their brains are read-only.
National Astronaut Scattering Administration
Priceless. Not particularly politically correct, but priceless nevertheless.
turn off enough unessential services, and it's just as lean as Windows 2000 ever was.
Yes. nLite is pretty slick in that regard.