The guns that are legally registered (and of whose existence the government knows) actually aren't used for murders - except by idiots, I guess. A few of the many many other guns are.
Well, not used by the registered owners I think you mean. But yeah, you're right.
No, its the bullets that make holes in peoples bodies that kill them, ban bullets.
Bullets are a lot easier to make than guns. And, if you ban the legitimate sale of bullets, you'll just create an enormous opportunity for a black market, which is even hard to monitor and control.
USA has 90 guns per 100 residents, Sweden has 30 per 100.
That's disingenuous. You're implying that out of every hundred Americans, ninety of them possess a firearm. I'd like to see some real research to back that up that claim. You're also implying that without guns, people wouldn't find some other ways to kill each other. That's another fundamentally unsound assumption: guns make killing easier in some ways, but that's all. If someone wants you dead, he doesn't need a gun. People have been committing acts of murder, both individually and en masse, for thousands of years before gunpowder came along. Geez, you're as bad as the RIAA claiming that every illegal download is a lost sale.
Also, trying to compare a culture like Sweden's to the United States, which is currently under violent assault from a number of quarters (most of them south of the border) is just ridiculous. Does Sweden have a collapsing third-world nation right next door, one that is largely controlled by drug cartels that have no compunction about killing anyone that gets in their way, and are perfectly happy to export that violence northward? The vast majority of U.S. citizens are just about as violent as the average Swede, which is to say, not very, and of those who do own guns, very few ever have to use them. What violence we do experience is largely confined to a few specific subcultures, and no form of gun control will ever manage to either prevent such people from owning firearms, or from killing. If you believe that, you're naive.
Personally, I don't own a gun (well, I have a BB pistol, if that counts) but if more law-abiding citizens did have guns, and knew when and how to use them, they might suffer less collateral damage. Perhaps we should require gun training by law, as we do for obtaining a driver's license: a car is arguably a more dangerous weapon than any handgun, given the fact that we mow each other down by the thousands every year.
BP's monitoring IT systems on the failed Deepwater Horizon oil rig relied too heavily on engineers following complex data for long periods of time, instead of providing automatic warning alerts.
So, in other words, let's replace engineers who are on the spot and have some feel for what is going on with software that might not know what to do when something bad happens, and is dependent upon settings provided by people who apparently weren't able to recognize the signs of disaster until it was too late anyways. Regardless, I have the feeling there were plenty of alarm systems involved in this disaster, and I'll wager that the relevant ones were either incorrectly programmed or were turned off because they were inconvenient.
Sorry, do your own googling. And study a little history*. Pick a period, any period. It doesn't matter. Over and over again the same things happen, damn near play by play, word for word.
Consumers have always been cheap-ass bastards. Software development is just one of many industries that have been hard hit by a complete unconcern for anything but price.
I think that's a component of the feeling of "rightness" that you get when you see the box on your shelf or have the serial number for the legit copy stored away somewhere.
I agree. But in this day and age, with product activation and remote runtime authentication becoming more and more common, the availability of a cracked copy is good insurance.
The stock speed that most phone vendors run their phones is often less than half of the processor's rated speed. So you can generally run the CPU quite a bit faster without it having any problems.
To elaborate on "generally"...
Running the CPU at its rated speed may generate more heat than the design of a particular device can accommodate. The design may only be within its thermal specs when the CPU is running at its reduced clock rate. Excess heat can cause incorrect results even if the clock rate is OK.
Very true, although if your OS has a CPU governor that dynamically adjusts the CPU clock based upon demand, you can probably get away with a lot. Average heating will be a lot less if the CPU is only responding to peak loads.
... as with all overclocking, it works fine with some units, not so well with others...
Judging an overclocked CPU to be working fine is quite tricky. Not all overclocking induced failures are catastrophic or otherwise noticeable. Sometimes the failure is as simple as giving an incorrect answer, a 1+2=4 for example.
Very true, and the CPU isn't the only issue. The stock speed that most phone vendors run their phones is often less than half of the processor's rated speed. So you can generally run the CPU quite a bit faster without it having any problems. Unfortunately, the rest of the components in the system may not be rated for the higher clock rate. Memory, for example.
Aye... even the G2, with its stock speed of 800mhz, can easily hit 1.2ghz, and most can hit 1.5ghz without any problems other than reduced battery life.
What do you mean, "even the G2"? That's a fast phone. I can overclock it to 1.5 Ghz easily, like you said. But you're both right: the fact that a Nexus S can hit 1.2 gigs really isn't all that noteworthy in the overall scheme of things.
I personally haven't really had any issues with reduced battery life though... I think you'll find that you'll gain a lot more life by keeping track of what your applications are doing, and getting rid of the poorly-written ones and those that run unnecessary background tasks. You can't just install anything you want on a device with such a limited power budget: Android gives you the tools to monitor power usage, use them. There are also a number of tools (JuiceDefender, etc.) that can be used to help even more.
Furthermore, my phone only overclocks when it needs to: most of the time (when it's idle) it's either asleep or running at 245 Mhz. Let the CPU governor change the clock rate on-demand, so you'll only use the extra power when you need it.
What kind of masochistic drive compels people to be so obsessed with all kinds of stuff painfully displayed on a screen less lengthy and girthy than my cock?
Those who want to use their phones as navigation assistants which don't choke horribly under the stress posed by running on 1st/2nd-generation hardware?
Oh. Sorry... was I not supposed to burst your shell of arrogance with an actual real-world example?
-- not the GP. I've owned a G1 (OCed heavily), N1 (briefly), and now a Droid X (undervolted).
I too had a G1, ran a number of alternative ROMs and finally settled on Cyanogenmod. I also overclocked the hell out of it. Never had a problem with the thing stability-wise either. It was about as good as a G1 was ever going to get, although when I had it running as a Wi-Fi hotspot it could get kinda warm.
Now I have a G2, and I normally run on-demand between 245 and 800 Mhz (I run Cyanogenmod 6.1 with the Pershoot kernel) for ordinary use, but there are times when I want to multitask. I'll have Google Nav running, some music in the background while I'm driving, maybe a Wi-Fi scanner or some other utility going and a few other background tasks... and then I'll overclock to whatever I need. With the stock Cyanogen, I can run it up to 1.4 Ghz (the design max for that CPU, I believe) but Pershoot lets me bump it up to 1.5. Even so, 1 Ghz generally does what I need and it's smooth as silk.
My battery life doesn't seem to be impacted very much by overclocking, although it does depend upon the mix of applications. Those that use 3G/4G extensively seem to benefit the most, presumably because if they can get their job done faster, they can use the radio less. Oddly enough, I've tried pretty much all the 3D games that are in the Market, and none of them really seemed to gain as much as I would have expected by overclocking.
googles long term policy to most companies has been to buy them to recruit the people working in them and then kill their inhouse projects and axe the whole thing. it doesn't sound smart or logical, but that's the way they're doing it.
In other words, it's the same corporate policy followed by most large tech companies. Microsoft has always operated in much the same way (they're perfectly happy to steal the work and put the company out of business.
Patenting something just means it's an idea someone came up with.
Unfortunately, that is now true. It didn't used to be that way, of course... you were not patenting an idea, a concept, something completely nebulous and fundamentally useless, you were patenting an implementation of that idea, something concrete, something of value in the real world.
But our rather well-paid and not particularly intelligent or honest Congress finished that.
There once was a shampoo that somebody liked. And she told two friends, and they told two friends, and they told two friends, and so on, and so on, and so on.
I think it's more like, "And she told two friends the first day, and they all told two friends the second day, and they all told two friends the third day..." Next thing you know, there are more ads than grains of sand in the Universe.
Apart from that their video strategy is clear, provide advertisement (which is revenue on planet Google) whilst not providing content.
That's their immediate strategy. I'm talking longer-term here... it's pretty obvious from the way Google has been creating and releasing products that they're looking for a. more ways to gain eyeballs for advertising and b. other ways to make money. Same goes for Microsoft, for that matter: both are basically one-trick ponies that would like to have a few more up their respective sleeves.
where you can be turned into an unperson just because a handful of big companies decide they don't want to do business with you.
I remember an episode of the old Max Headroom series, where Edison Carter has been falsely accused of credit fraud by a rogue AI, and Jeffrey Tambor's character says, "That's worse than murder!"
That show had a habit of being prophetic (which is nothing more than an extrapolation of existing trends), but it was interesting because many of those trends weren't so obvious a quarter-century ago.
First he wants control of his own app store to decide what he wants in it and what he wants out. Now he's trying to do the same thing for eBay. Whats next!
Slashdot Mirror
The guns that are legally registered (and of whose existence the government knows) actually aren't used for murders - except by idiots, I guess. A few of the many many other guns are.
Well, not used by the registered owners I think you mean. But yeah, you're right.
No, its the bullets that make holes in peoples bodies that kill them, ban bullets.
Bullets are a lot easier to make than guns. And, if you ban the legitimate sale of bullets, you'll just create an enormous opportunity for a black market, which is even hard to monitor and control.
Its insane just to think that you actually need a weapon at home.
Your naivete is almost endearing but the reality is this: it's insane to think that you are immune from the consequences of a home invasion.
Pray it never happens to you, because if it does, you'll wish you had a trigger to pull.
USA has 90 guns per 100 residents, Sweden has 30 per 100.
That's disingenuous. You're implying that out of every hundred Americans, ninety of them possess a firearm. I'd like to see some real research to back that up that claim. You're also implying that without guns, people wouldn't find some other ways to kill each other. That's another fundamentally unsound assumption: guns make killing easier in some ways, but that's all. If someone wants you dead, he doesn't need a gun. People have been committing acts of murder, both individually and en masse, for thousands of years before gunpowder came along. Geez, you're as bad as the RIAA claiming that every illegal download is a lost sale.
Also, trying to compare a culture like Sweden's to the United States, which is currently under violent assault from a number of quarters (most of them south of the border) is just ridiculous. Does Sweden have a collapsing third-world nation right next door, one that is largely controlled by drug cartels that have no compunction about killing anyone that gets in their way, and are perfectly happy to export that violence northward? The vast majority of U.S. citizens are just about as violent as the average Swede, which is to say, not very, and of those who do own guns, very few ever have to use them. What violence we do experience is largely confined to a few specific subcultures, and no form of gun control will ever manage to either prevent such people from owning firearms, or from killing. If you believe that, you're naive.
Personally, I don't own a gun (well, I have a BB pistol, if that counts) but if more law-abiding citizens did have guns, and knew when and how to use them, they might suffer less collateral damage. Perhaps we should require gun training by law, as we do for obtaining a driver's license: a car is arguably a more dangerous weapon than any handgun, given the fact that we mow each other down by the thousands every year.
Don't replace the engineer
I wasn't saying that, but it looks like that report is just another example of blaming the technical people for systemic failures of management.
Typical. Absolutely typical.
When will we get a governing body that can punish or apply fines for this and enforce those fines or punishments
Two words: regulatory capture.
BP's monitoring IT systems on the failed Deepwater Horizon oil rig relied too heavily on engineers following complex data for long periods of time, instead of providing automatic warning alerts.
So, in other words, let's replace engineers who are on the spot and have some feel for what is going on with software that might not know what to do when something bad happens, and is dependent upon settings provided by people who apparently weren't able to recognize the signs of disaster until it was too late anyways. Regardless, I have the feeling there were plenty of alarm systems involved in this disaster, and I'll wager that the relevant ones were either incorrectly programmed or were turned off because they were inconvenient.
Sorry, do your own googling. And study a little history*. Pick a period, any period. It doesn't matter. Over and over again the same things happen, damn near play by play, word for word.
You mean like this
People really have become cheap-ass bastards...
Consumers have always been cheap-ass bastards. Software development is just one of many industries that have been hard hit by a complete unconcern for anything but price.
Last I heard, he was still installing the latest crack of everything on his workstation.
Not too bright, is he? It's one thing to make a mistake ... it's entirely another when you keep repeating it.
I think that's a component of the feeling of "rightness" that you get when you see the box on your shelf or have the serial number for the legit copy stored away somewhere.
I agree. But in this day and age, with product activation and remote runtime authentication becoming more and more common, the availability of a cracked copy is good insurance.
Reynolds Wrap is aluminum, not tin. Though you might not understand the difference, it's important for those 'in the know.'
Correct. Mind-control satellite radiation passes through metallic tin almost unimpeded.
The stock speed that most phone vendors run their phones is often less than half of the processor's rated speed. So you can generally run the CPU quite a bit faster without it having any problems.
To elaborate on "generally" ...
Running the CPU at its rated speed may generate more heat than the design of a particular device can accommodate. The design may only be within its thermal specs when the CPU is running at its reduced clock rate. Excess heat can cause incorrect results even if the clock rate is OK.
Very true, although if your OS has a CPU governor that dynamically adjusts the CPU clock based upon demand, you can probably get away with a lot. Average heating will be a lot less if the CPU is only responding to peak loads.
... as with all overclocking, it works fine with some units, not so well with others ...
Judging an overclocked CPU to be working fine is quite tricky. Not all overclocking induced failures are catastrophic or otherwise noticeable. Sometimes the failure is as simple as giving an incorrect answer, a 1+2=4 for example.
Very true, and the CPU isn't the only issue. The stock speed that most phone vendors run their phones is often less than half of the processor's rated speed. So you can generally run the CPU quite a bit faster without it having any problems. Unfortunately, the rest of the components in the system may not be rated for the higher clock rate. Memory, for example.
Aye... even the G2, with its stock speed of 800mhz, can easily hit 1.2ghz, and most can hit 1.5ghz without any problems other than reduced battery life.
What do you mean, "even the G2"? That's a fast phone. I can overclock it to 1.5 Ghz easily, like you said. But you're both right: the fact that a Nexus S can hit 1.2 gigs really isn't all that noteworthy in the overall scheme of things.
... I think you'll find that you'll gain a lot more life by keeping track of what your applications are doing, and getting rid of the poorly-written ones and those that run unnecessary background tasks. You can't just install anything you want on a device with such a limited power budget: Android gives you the tools to monitor power usage, use them. There are also a number of tools (JuiceDefender, etc.) that can be used to help even more.
I personally haven't really had any issues with reduced battery life though
Furthermore, my phone only overclocks when it needs to: most of the time (when it's idle) it's either asleep or running at 245 Mhz. Let the CPU governor change the clock rate on-demand, so you'll only use the extra power when you need it.
What kind of masochistic drive compels people to be so obsessed with all kinds of stuff painfully displayed on a screen less lengthy and girthy than my cock?
Those who want to use their phones as navigation assistants which don't choke horribly under the stress posed by running on 1st/2nd-generation hardware?
Oh. Sorry... was I not supposed to burst your shell of arrogance with an actual real-world example?
-- not the GP. I've owned a G1 (OCed heavily), N1 (briefly), and now a Droid X (undervolted).
I too had a G1, ran a number of alternative ROMs and finally settled on Cyanogenmod. I also overclocked the hell out of it. Never had a problem with the thing stability-wise either. It was about as good as a G1 was ever going to get, although when I had it running as a Wi-Fi hotspot it could get kinda warm.
... and then I'll overclock to whatever I need. With the stock Cyanogen, I can run it up to 1.4 Ghz (the design max for that CPU, I believe) but Pershoot lets me bump it up to 1.5. Even so, 1 Ghz generally does what I need and it's smooth as silk.
Now I have a G2, and I normally run on-demand between 245 and 800 Mhz (I run Cyanogenmod 6.1 with the Pershoot kernel) for ordinary use, but there are times when I want to multitask. I'll have Google Nav running, some music in the background while I'm driving, maybe a Wi-Fi scanner or some other utility going and a few other background tasks
My battery life doesn't seem to be impacted very much by overclocking, although it does depend upon the mix of applications. Those that use 3G/4G extensively seem to benefit the most, presumably because if they can get their job done faster, they can use the radio less. Oddly enough, I've tried pretty much all the 3D games that are in the Market, and none of them really seemed to gain as much as I would have expected by overclocking.
googles long term policy to most companies has been to buy them to recruit the people working in them and then kill their inhouse projects and axe the whole thing. it doesn't sound smart or logical, but that's the way they're doing it.
In other words, it's the same corporate policy followed by most large tech companies. Microsoft has always operated in much the same way (they're perfectly happy to steal the work and put the company out of business.
Now that they've patented it, all the other big players won't be able to do it and it'll be easier to adblock from one central origin.
Nah ... they'll just cross-license.
Patenting something just means it's an idea someone came up with.
Unfortunately, that is now true. It didn't used to be that way, of course ... you were not patenting an idea, a concept, something completely nebulous and fundamentally useless, you were patenting an implementation of that idea, something concrete, something of value in the real world.
But our rather well-paid and not particularly intelligent or honest Congress finished that.
There once was a shampoo that somebody liked. And she told two friends, and they told two friends, and they told two friends, and so on, and so on, and so on.
I think it's more like, "And she told two friends the first day, and they all told two friends the second day, and they all told two friends the third day ..." Next thing you know, there are more ads than grains of sand in the Universe.
Apart from that their video strategy is clear, provide advertisement (which is revenue on planet Google) whilst not providing content.
That's their immediate strategy. I'm talking longer-term here ... it's pretty obvious from the way Google has been creating and releasing products that they're looking for a. more ways to gain eyeballs for advertising and b. other ways to make money. Same goes for Microsoft, for that matter: both are basically one-trick ponies that would like to have a few more up their respective sleeves.
where you can be turned into an unperson just because a handful of big companies decide they don't want to do business with you.
I remember an episode of the old Max Headroom series, where Edison Carter has been falsely accused of credit fraud by a rogue AI, and Jeffrey Tambor's character says, "That's worse than murder!"
That show had a habit of being prophetic (which is nothing more than an extrapolation of existing trends), but it was interesting because many of those trends weren't so obvious a quarter-century ago.
First he wants control of his own app store to decide what he wants in it and what he wants out. Now he's trying to do the same thing for eBay. Whats next!
iBay.
... the Julian Assange action figure.
No doubt it will come with a built-in encrypted flash drive.
Too bad they didn't arrive at "thou shalt not steal" yet.
It's not stealing if you convince people to willingly give you their money. Hypnosis, maybe.