These idiots who think they can save the world by denying people the right to look at the "wrong" things would be comical if they didn't so often succeed in getting idiotic laws passed. Humans enjoy ritualized violence, whether it's playing tackle football, boxing, hunting, video games, movies... that's not going to change until humans either evolve away from it or become extinct.
Taking away access to this stuff in no way takes away the innate human desire for it, and pretending otherwise is just willful stupidity. Before kids had XBoxes they had cap guns. Before they had cap guns they had toy spears and sharp rocks. It's not the behaviors that have changed, just the tools and implementation. As for the Columbine kids, I'd argue that he's got it all wrong. The kids sought out and surrounded themselves with violent imagery because that's what spoke to their hearts and minds, in the same way another child might seek out beautiful landscape paintings or elegant progamming code or slapstick comedy or politics or religion or who knows what else. If he honestly thinks that some bright-eyed, angelic child with no evil or violence in her heart can pick up a copy of GTA and turn into a murderous freak, he's even stupider than I give him credit for already. I'd also argue that if they hadn't had access to violent imagery they'd have probably been more inclined to create their own (torturing animals, etc.).
Just because kids are imitative enough to use what they've seen in games or movies as templates for their own acts of violent stupidity doesn't mean they wouldn't have come up with something else on their own if they hadn't had something to imitate. I love action movies, murder mysteries, violent video games. I've committed virtual murder who knows how many times and loved it. I still remember blowing bodies all to pieces in Soldier of Fortune, sniping brains all over the walls and gleefully mutilating corpses. But you know what else? The thought of gleefully or even accidentally hurting an actual person or animal is repulsive to me, just as it is to any healthy human being no matter how many slasher flicks they've watched or virtual corpses they've dismembered. The notion that the majority of us shouldn't be able to do a thing because a tiny, dysfunctional minority might not be able to handle it is absurd.
A consistent schedule, at least a nod toward marketing the show and maybe one or two episodes being shown in the proper order might have helped, too. I actually liked John Doe... it was like "X-Files & The Pretender: What if they mated?"
They're just rebroadcasting the old episodes, not producing new ones. So they'll show the 20-whatever shows a few times, including the final cliffhanger that was never resolved, and that's that.
He has no memory of his past and sees everything in black and white. Sometimes, though, he'll see an object or person in color, which causes him to pay special attention to the person/oject and, you know, go adventuring and solve crimes and stuff.
The series ended with a cliffhanger (first season finale), which I've always thought is a pretty nasty thing to do to your audience, not that I'd expect anything better from Fox. I watched it the first time around in tandem with Firefly and was looking forward to some payoff in the second season, but I can't see a reason to watch it again knowing there will never be a payoff at all. You can bet Sci-Fi won't mention that when they are promoting it.
I couldn't agree more. I have a Gateway 7405GX that is completely supported EXCEPT for sleep (well, also the Broadcom wireless [ndiswrapper works, tho, even in 64-bit mode] and maybe the various memory card readers, which I never tested since I don't use any).
In all my fiddling with various Ubuntu and SUSE 9.3 installs I've only seen this laptop wake up and actually work properly once, and that was apparently just a fortunate accident since I couldn't reproduce it.
I'd LOVE to use Linux on this machine, but having to shutdown every time I want to move the thing more than a few feet is just too tedious. It destroys the whole point of having a mobile computer.
In XP I can just close the lid, drive wherever, open the lid and keep going where I left off. XP's hibernate is fantastic in that regard, too, since you can hibernate and come backs DAYS later and pick up exactly where you left off without having to worry about the gradual dying of the battery while the machine sleeps.
The day I can get even close to that kind of convenience while running Linux is the day I blow the XP install away for good. I'm not going to hold my breath, though, since I've been waiting for YEARS for proper Linux laptop support and the pace of improvement seems glacial.
If you look at those results more carefully you'll realize that the machines listed there comprise only an incomplete subset of laptops on the market (none of the very popular eMachines M68XX models, no Gateway models, only one Apple listing, no Powerbook info, etc.), so using those results to say that sleep works on "most modern laptops" is just plain wrong.
I have an older Toshiba that works okay, but a Gateway 7405GX and a Powerbook that either wake up braindead and broken or, much more often, not at all.
Telling people it works on "most" laptops when it clearly doesn't even come close, and having them get all excited and waste time installing something that's going to be nothing but frustration for them and will send them running back to Windows does nothing to help Linux and/or OSS in general.
The public computer labs at Florida State University use Mozilla. IE isn't available. I've never noticed anyone complaining (or even seeming to care / notice the difference).
If someone steals your car they are doing you a serious disservice and actively depriving you of something you cannot easily do without.
To use your analogy in a way that actually makes sense:
He isn't stealing your car. He is walking up and seeing if the door is unlocked and the keys are in the ignition. At the very MOST he is starting the car to prove he COULD steal it if he wanted to. But he never actually steals the car or harms you in any way (except maybe making you feel really stupid for having such an easily stolen car). He doesn't deprive you of it "for a month".
Basically he's checking to see if he COULD steal your car, NOT stealing it. Then he tells you what to do to keep others from stealing it.
Doesn't sound like evil incarnate to me. If I was being a total idiot as regards security I think I'd appreciate it if someone pointed that out to me before someone else came along and took advantage of it and ended up doing real harm.
The shame would be worth it in the end, I think. Unless you happen to be the NY Times, which is probably pretty sick of being shamed at this point.
The scary part for me is worrying that people will not get angry -- that the government can cover up any damn thing it wants and the people will just go blissfully along not giving a damn.
Citizens of the U.S. long ago learned to take freedom for granted. 9/11 was a slap in the face. Nothing upsets people more than showing them the error of their ways, in this instance complacency. The knee-jerk reaction seems to be "The government is taking care of it, and they're the United States government so I'm sure whatever they're doing must be okay..." That reaction seems to be waning now in a few cases and Congress is asking increasingly insistentent questions of the administration. Maybe the power grab is coming to an end and the damage can be mitigated -- or shown to be not as damaging as people fear. Maybe the administration has nothing to hide, but if so why hide it? Bush and his cronies seem to want to hide EVERYthing just for the sake of hiding it.
One of the great things about being a U.S. citizen is supposedly that we don't have to much care or think about our government except to bitch and complain at tax time. The current administration is using that to do what I personally consider some very unAmerican things.
Again, it's not whether things are kept secret, it's what is kept secret. As an example look at how the Bush administration is fighting any requests that they disclose how they've made use of the PATRIOT Act. Look at how the PATRIOT was pushed through Congress without having even been READ by most of those voting (some in MY name) to pass it. Look at how Ashcroft has said, regarding the Freedom Of Information Act, "Try to find a way NOT to give them anything," instead of "Try to find the least worst way to give them what they want."
The current adminstration thrives on obscurity and strongly resists any call for transparency. Apparently we, the people, the unwashed masses, either cannot handle or are too stupid to benefit from disclosure.
Also, the gov't witholds certain information for our own safty. You don't want people panic'd and making situations worse. It doesn't justify keeping all information classified, but it does justify keeping some of it.
I don't think anyone sane would argue with the need to keep some information safely classified. The problems arise when determining which information to include in that "some", in what amounts and for what length of time.
Everything the government is free to hide is a thing they are potentially getting away with. At the other extreme, a government that hides nothing is courting disaster.
The key is electing people to make sure a reasonable balance is struck. Unfortunately the corporations and special interest groups have much greater control of those in power than the public does. How many Americans can even name their congressional representatives, let alone what they (claim to) stand for?
Normally I don't post in threads like this, which mostly consist of every user with a functional keyboard doing his best to shout down everyone else.
I've read through this thread and read "ATI is great and you're a moron" and "ATI sucks and YOU'RE a moron"... I must say, it'd almost be amusing if the people saying this crap didn't come across as being so serious.
Let's review:
ATI's website has been revamped. Completely replacing a website this large in place is, one would expect, nontrivial. We can expect a few glitches here and there. It's not like some guy at GeoCities unveiling his new "Pamela's Yummy Tits" website. It's certainly NOT worthy of this level of discussion (term used VERY loosely) when the simple fact is, as you're about to see, it's all about... NOTHING!
After reading all about the horrors facing innocent Linux-using high-end Radeon owners, I did the unthinkable: before posting ANYthing I visited the site for myself. I know, I know, the ancient Greek method of simply thinking about something and then expounding on it rather than actually sullying ones' self by investigating... it's ugly. But I never claimed to be perfect. Next thing you know I'll actually start READING THE ARTICLES BEFORE COMMENTING... god help me.
Then I clicked the big link called "DRIVERS". That brought me to here.
In the left pane I clicked "Graphic Driver". The pane to the right of that then presented an array of choices. I chose "Linux" and then from the pane just to the right of that I chose "RADEON 9700 PRO".
And what did I find after clicking the little red and quite intuitive "GO" button?
Driver Download and Installation Before you start, please read these installation tips.
Download this driver bundle if you are having issues with your ATI product, including those mentioned in the "Fixed in this driver" ATI Linux Driver Version 2.5.1: Install the Driver Package for XFree 4.1.0 OR Install the Driver Package for XFree 4.2.0. Xfree86 Version Driver Version 4.1.0 X4.1.0-2.5.1 4.2.0 X4.2.0-2.5.1
Posted: November 29, 2002 Released/Not Supported
Driver Release Notes (HTML)
This version supports only Linux/x86 versions based on libc 6.2. To find out which library you have, download the script 'Check.sh' and run it. This bundle contains the necessary files for any X86 version of Linux based on libc 6.2 (glibc 2.2) Submit feedback on this driver to our ATI Linux Driver Feedback
Further Linux and XFree86 information on ATI products is available from the ATI website.
And there you go. Emergency over. After reading all the pure CRAP in this thread I must say it was a bit of a letdown.
And for those a bit braver, beta drivers for X 4.3 can be found HERE If you want to know what the deal is with these drivers (which are much newer than the ones on the main ATI site) just head over to HERE and you'll find lots of comments made by people who have (*gasp!*) actually USED the drivers instead of just making uninformed and mostly WRONG sweeping statements about them on Slashdot.
I apologize. I don't normally post things this mean-spirited but watching this thread unfold just kind of disgusted me. So many people ready to spout whatever bullshit pops into their minds, so FEW people who take a look at what's actually going on... and you know what else?
Mod me down all you want. In this case I really, really very honestly don't care.
It doesn't rely heavily on synthetic benchmarks, it just "throws them in for whatever they're worth" (paraphrased) and specifically makes a point that the performance of the 5900 in 3DMark03 doesn't line up quite the way you'd expect with the real-world performance scores. That is, the 5900 spanks the 9800 in 3DMark03 even though the real-world tests (taken together) slightly favor the 9800 and the 5900 doesn't really just all-out clobber the 9800 in any one benchmark BUT 3DMark03 (and to a lesser extent in Code Creatures)...
But it wouldn't really be all that hard to tweak the drivers for Code Creatures either, would it?
What exactly are they covering for? It's fair to say that Wal-Mart would have to raise prices substantially if, say, 5% of their inventory was routinely shoplifted. The people who bought the other 95% would have to absorb the costs.
But how does digitally copying a song inflate the prices of CDs? I never understood that. If all the music stealers were going to the brick-and-mortar music stores and literally stealing the CDs, yes, it would be cause to raise CD prices to force honest consumers to absorb the cost of the theft.
But -- really, tell me, because I don't get it -- how does copying a file from one machine to another COST them money? At most it's money they won't earn (so they aren't having money TAKEN from them, they just aren't having money GIVEN to them). Lots of people copy songs they would never buy anyway so the RIAA has lost NOTHING. Lots of people copy songs and still buy the album so the RIAA has GAINED something. I'd be willing to bet that the RIAA doesn't lose NEARLY as much due to song copying as they'd like us to believe -- not even close. The truth is, the RIAA isn't actively LOSING money to regular home users with an illicit MP3 collection, they simply see each and every song as $12-20 they didn't GET, and whether they'd have gotten the money (in the absence of file copying) or not is irrelevant. Saying it is "lost money" lets them turn the screws on the artists and the consumers. It's a sham, it's a racket, it's disgusting and it makes me thankful I don't much give a damn about music. I don't have any MP3s, I don't have any CDs. Whatever is on the radio (if I even bother to turn it on) is good enough for me.
When a country has laws that arbitrarily criminalize a vast swath of its population at the behest of a single industry (or entity), something is wrong. Isn't the law supposed to be representative of the wishes of society in general? How can a law representative of a people criminalize the actions of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of those same people? If music trading is so damned evil and so damned widespread what does that say about us as a society? It says that we're obviously letting the wrong people define "evil".
A fork? You girly-man. Real men scoop out their eyes with spoons... or maybe sporks...
As for one final wrap-up post, that's not going to happen. People like bad news. People like controversy. People like to read about SCO taking on the world in what is either going to prove a truly brilliant financial endeavour or one of the most spectacular corporate suicides ever. People detest SCO, so they want to read about what SCO is up to.
Personally I read this stuff while picturing SCO as an enraged Munchkin shouting obscenities, dire threats and ominous proclamations (replete with helium-constricted vocal cords) while hacking at the ankle of Jack's Giant (IBM) with a wooden sword. You just know the big SQUISH! is coming... wait for it... wait for it...
At any rate, it's not as if/. is on a direct feed into your brain and you can't avoid the articles you don't want.
I'm using Opera and certain characters have been replaced with a tiny question mark in a black diamond.
Like this --> ï½ (even in the textbox I see that as a black diamond with a little question mark in it) In Internet Explorer, NoteTab Pro, Word, etc. it shows up as a little rectangle. One of the characters being replaced seems to be the apostrophe (but not always), but in the case of whatever the character I used here is, I have no idea...
I am conscious to me that it is a rather moved idea to build itself its own CCU but perhaps give it of people, which I can animate by this Website to something something similar or which even my CCU to copy to want. I will make everything available on this side gradually, which is needed for the reproduction of the CCU.
Say that 3 times fast. Go ahead, I dare ya.
The site is short on (understandable) details, but the thing apparently runs at a blistering 5Mhz which happens to be 5Mhz faster than anything I could ever build. Impressive, but I don't think AMD and Intel should be worried just yet. Via... maybe.
I don't know why they don't just get nVidia to design it. That way the sending machine will only send the packets it thinks you're actually going to be able to see instead of the entire datastream.
HEMMER: You run a search engine at your campus, right?
JORDAN: Yes, my search engine is much like Google. You can pretty much use it to search for any type of file.
HEMMER: Jesse, could I access music on that search engine?
JORDAN: You could search for music, you could search for any other type of file as well.
HEMMER: So If I found music, could I download it to my computer?
JORDAN: Yes, you could download music. You can do that from any search engine as well. Actually, Alta Vista has their own MP3 search engine which you can use to download music.
HEMMER: So if that's the case then, what did the government -- or I'm sorry, I apologize again -- what did the RIAA, the recording industry, come after you and say that you were guilty of?
JORDAN: They said I'm guilty of contributory copyright infringement, which would mean that I assist people in downloading copyrighted material and direct infringement.
HEMMER: So you agreed to pay $12,000. You're not admitting any guilt here. Why pay the money, Jesse?
JORDAN: I don't really have the resources to defend this case in court, so I don't really have much of a choice. I also don't have the time, because I'm very busy in college.
HEMMER: Andy, do you think, with the case of your son right now, how do you categorize this? A case of intimidation?
ANDY JORDAN, JESSE'S FATHER: Well, it's -- I categorize it as an elaborate publicity stunt. Nothing more, nothing less.
Note the parts in bold. Morpheus and Grokster just won a suit by claiming the exact same thing. Of course, they have lawyers...
It would be beneficial if instead of just telling me I'm stupid you'd help out. Based on what I saw in the interview, it looks to me like he has the same defense as Morpheus and Grokster, just not the funds to present that defense.
Slashdot Mirror
These idiots who think they can save the world by denying people the right to look at the "wrong" things would be comical if they didn't so often succeed in getting idiotic laws passed. Humans enjoy ritualized violence, whether it's playing tackle football, boxing, hunting, video games, movies ... that's not going to change until humans either evolve away from it or become extinct.
Taking away access to this stuff in no way takes away the innate human desire for it, and pretending otherwise is just willful stupidity. Before kids had XBoxes they had cap guns. Before they had cap guns they had toy spears and sharp rocks. It's not the behaviors that have changed, just the tools and implementation. As for the Columbine kids, I'd argue that he's got it all wrong. The kids sought out and surrounded themselves with violent imagery because that's what spoke to their hearts and minds, in the same way another child might seek out beautiful landscape paintings or elegant progamming code or slapstick comedy or politics or religion or who knows what else. If he honestly thinks that some bright-eyed, angelic child with no evil or violence in her heart can pick up a copy of GTA and turn into a murderous freak, he's even stupider than I give him credit for already. I'd also argue that if they hadn't had access to violent imagery they'd have probably been more inclined to create their own (torturing animals, etc.).
Just because kids are imitative enough to use what they've seen in games or movies as templates for their own acts of violent stupidity doesn't mean they wouldn't have come up with something else on their own if they hadn't had something to imitate. I love action movies, murder mysteries, violent video games. I've committed virtual murder who knows how many times and loved it. I still remember blowing bodies all to pieces in Soldier of Fortune, sniping brains all over the walls and gleefully mutilating corpses. But you know what else? The thought of gleefully or even accidentally hurting an actual person or animal is repulsive to me, just as it is to any healthy human being no matter how many slasher flicks they've watched or virtual corpses they've dismembered. The notion that the majority of us shouldn't be able to do a thing because a tiny, dysfunctional minority might not be able to handle it is absurd.
If the kids are anything like I was that'll just make the games even more appealing. They must be really good if they're hidden away back there ...
A consistent schedule, at least a nod toward marketing the show and maybe one or two episodes being shown in the proper order might have helped, too. I actually liked John Doe ... it was like "X-Files & The Pretender: What if they mated?"
They're just rebroadcasting the old episodes, not producing new ones. So they'll show the 20-whatever shows a few times, including the final cliffhanger that was never resolved, and that's that.
He has no memory of his past and sees everything in black and white. Sometimes, though, he'll see an object or person in color, which causes him to pay special attention to the person/oject and, you know, go adventuring and solve crimes and stuff.
The series ended with a cliffhanger (first season finale), which I've always thought is a pretty nasty thing to do to your audience, not that I'd expect anything better from Fox. I watched it the first time around in tandem with Firefly and was looking forward to some payoff in the second season, but I can't see a reason to watch it again knowing there will never be a payoff at all. You can bet Sci-Fi won't mention that when they are promoting it.
I couldn't agree more. I have a Gateway 7405GX that is completely supported EXCEPT for sleep (well, also the Broadcom wireless [ndiswrapper works, tho, even in 64-bit mode] and maybe the various memory card readers, which I never tested since I don't use any).
In all my fiddling with various Ubuntu and SUSE 9.3 installs I've only seen this laptop wake up and actually work properly once, and that was apparently just a fortunate accident since I couldn't reproduce it.
I'd LOVE to use Linux on this machine, but having to shutdown every time I want to move the thing more than a few feet is just too tedious. It destroys the whole point of having a mobile computer.
In XP I can just close the lid, drive wherever, open the lid and keep going where I left off. XP's hibernate is fantastic in that regard, too, since you can hibernate and come backs DAYS later and pick up exactly where you left off without having to worry about the gradual dying of the battery while the machine sleeps.
The day I can get even close to that kind of convenience while running Linux is the day I blow the XP install away for good. I'm not going to hold my breath, though, since I've been waiting for YEARS for proper Linux laptop support and the pace of improvement seems glacial.
If you look at those results more carefully you'll realize that the machines listed there comprise only an incomplete subset of laptops on the market (none of the very popular eMachines M68XX models, no Gateway models, only one Apple listing, no Powerbook info, etc.), so using those results to say that sleep works on "most modern laptops" is just plain wrong.
I have an older Toshiba that works okay, but a Gateway 7405GX and a Powerbook that either wake up braindead and broken or, much more often, not at all.
Telling people it works on "most" laptops when it clearly doesn't even come close, and having them get all excited and waste time installing something that's going to be nothing but frustration for them and will send them running back to Windows does nothing to help Linux and/or OSS in general.
Lycoris is not based on Debian, it was originally based on Caldera OpenLinux.
The public computer labs at Florida State University use Mozilla. IE isn't available. I've never noticed anyone complaining (or even seeming to care / notice the difference).
That's a really awful analogy.
If someone steals your car they are doing you a serious disservice and actively depriving you of something you cannot easily do without.
To use your analogy in a way that actually makes sense:
He isn't stealing your car. He is walking up and seeing if the door is unlocked and the keys are in the ignition. At the very MOST he is starting the car to prove he COULD steal it if he wanted to. But he never actually steals the car or harms you in any way (except maybe making you feel really stupid for having such an easily stolen car). He doesn't deprive you of it "for a month".
Basically he's checking to see if he COULD steal your car, NOT stealing it. Then he tells you what to do to keep others from stealing it.
Doesn't sound like evil incarnate to me. If I was being a total idiot as regards security I think I'd appreciate it if someone pointed that out to me before someone else came along and took advantage of it and ended up doing real harm.
The shame would be worth it in the end, I think. Unless you happen to be the NY Times, which is probably pretty sick of being shamed at this point.
I don't recall a 2nd remake of "Body Snatchers" with Sutherland. The first BS remake was pretty awful, though. It was just on Sci-Fi the other night.
Are you sure the Sutherland movie you're talking about isn't "The Puppeteers," based on the Heinlein novel? I'm pretty sure he was in that.
The scary part for me is worrying that people will not get angry -- that the government can cover up any damn thing it wants and the people will just go blissfully along not giving a damn.
..." That reaction seems to be waning now in a few cases and Congress is asking increasingly insistentent questions of the administration. Maybe the power grab is coming to an end and the damage can be mitigated -- or shown to be not as damaging as people fear. Maybe the administration has nothing to hide, but if so why hide it? Bush and his cronies seem to want to hide EVERYthing just for the sake of hiding it.
Citizens of the U.S. long ago learned to take freedom for granted. 9/11 was a slap in the face. Nothing upsets people more than showing them the error of their ways, in this instance complacency. The knee-jerk reaction seems to be "The government is taking care of it, and they're the United States government so I'm sure whatever they're doing must be okay
One of the great things about being a U.S. citizen is supposedly that we don't have to much care or think about our government except to bitch and complain at tax time. The current administration is using that to do what I personally consider some very unAmerican things.
Again, it's not whether things are kept secret, it's what is kept secret. As an example look at how the Bush administration is fighting any requests that they disclose how they've made use of the PATRIOT Act. Look at how the PATRIOT was pushed through Congress without having even been READ by most of those voting (some in MY name) to pass it. Look at how Ashcroft has said, regarding the Freedom Of Information Act, "Try to find a way NOT to give them anything," instead of "Try to find the least worst way to give them what they want."
The current adminstration thrives on obscurity and strongly resists any call for transparency. Apparently we, the people, the unwashed masses, either cannot handle or are too stupid to benefit from disclosure.
I don't think anyone sane would argue with the need to keep some information safely classified. The problems arise when determining which information to include in that "some", in what amounts and for what length of time.
Everything the government is free to hide is a thing they are potentially getting away with. At the other extreme, a government that hides nothing is courting disaster.
The key is electing people to make sure a reasonable balance is struck. Unfortunately the corporations and special interest groups have much greater control of those in power than the public does. How many Americans can even name their congressional representatives, let alone what they (claim to) stand for?
I've read through this thread and read "ATI is great and you're a moron" and "ATI sucks and YOU'RE a moron"
Let's review:
ATI's website has been revamped. Completely replacing a website this large in place is, one would expect, nontrivial. We can expect a few glitches here and there. It's not like some guy at GeoCities unveiling his new "Pamela's Yummy Tits" website. It's certainly NOT worthy of this level of discussion (term used VERY loosely) when the simple fact is, as you're about to see, it's all about
After reading all about the horrors facing innocent Linux-using high-end Radeon owners, I did the unthinkable: before posting ANYthing I visited the site for myself. I know, I know, the ancient Greek method of simply thinking about something and then expounding on it rather than actually sullying ones' self by investigating
First I went here.
Then I clicked the big link called "DRIVERS". That brought me to here.
In the left pane I clicked "Graphic Driver". The pane to the right of that then presented an array of choices. I chose "Linux" and then from the pane just to the right of that I chose "RADEON 9700 PRO".
And what did I find after clicking the little red and quite intuitive "GO" button?
And there you go. Emergency over. After reading all the pure CRAP in this thread I must say it was a bit of a letdown.
And for those a bit braver, beta drivers for X 4.3 can be found HERE If you want to know what the deal is with these drivers (which are much newer than the ones on the main ATI site) just head over to HERE and you'll find lots of comments made by people who have (*gasp!*) actually USED the drivers instead of just making uninformed and mostly WRONG sweeping statements about them on Slashdot.
I apologize. I don't normally post things this mean-spirited but watching this thread unfold just kind of disgusted me. So many people ready to spout whatever bullshit pops into their minds, so FEW people who take a look at what's actually going on
Mod me down all you want. In this case I really, really very honestly don't care.
This review? You must have read it wrong.
...
It doesn't rely heavily on synthetic benchmarks, it just "throws them in for whatever they're worth" (paraphrased) and specifically makes a point that the performance of the 5900 in 3DMark03 doesn't line up quite the way you'd expect with the real-world performance scores. That is, the 5900 spanks the 9800 in 3DMark03 even though the real-world tests (taken together) slightly favor the 9800 and the 5900 doesn't really just all-out clobber the 9800 in any one benchmark BUT 3DMark03 (and to a lesser extent in Code Creatures)
But it wouldn't really be all that hard to tweak the drivers for Code Creatures either, would it?
"... cover for freeloaders."
What exactly are they covering for? It's fair to say that Wal-Mart would have to raise prices substantially if, say, 5% of their inventory was routinely shoplifted. The people who bought the other 95% would have to absorb the costs.
But how does digitally copying a song inflate the prices of CDs? I never understood that. If all the music stealers were going to the brick-and-mortar music stores and literally stealing the CDs, yes, it would be cause to raise CD prices to force honest consumers to absorb the cost of the theft.
But -- really, tell me, because I don't get it -- how does copying a file from one machine to another COST them money? At most it's money they won't earn (so they aren't having money TAKEN from them, they just aren't having money GIVEN to them). Lots of people copy songs they would never buy anyway so the RIAA has lost NOTHING. Lots of people copy songs and still buy the album so the RIAA has GAINED something. I'd be willing to bet that the RIAA doesn't lose NEARLY as much due to song copying as they'd like us to believe -- not even close. The truth is, the RIAA isn't actively LOSING money to regular home users with an illicit MP3 collection, they simply see each and every song as $12-20 they didn't GET, and whether they'd have gotten the money (in the absence of file copying) or not is irrelevant. Saying it is "lost money" lets them turn the screws on the artists and the consumers. It's a sham, it's a racket, it's disgusting and it makes me thankful I don't much give a damn about music. I don't have any MP3s, I don't have any CDs. Whatever is on the radio (if I even bother to turn it on) is good enough for me.
When a country has laws that arbitrarily criminalize a vast swath of its population at the behest of a single industry (or entity), something is wrong. Isn't the law supposed to be representative of the wishes of society in general? How can a law representative of a people criminalize the actions of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of those same people? If music trading is so damned evil and so damned widespread what does that say about us as a society? It says that we're obviously letting the wrong people define "evil".
... last one to turn to grey goo please turn off the lights.
Or green goo.
Too tired to (attempt to) make any more jokes. Check here and I'm sure you can come up with some of your own.
A fork? You girly-man. Real men scoop out their eyes with spoons ... or maybe sporks ...
... wait for it ... wait for it ...
/. is on a direct feed into your brain and you can't avoid the articles you don't want.
As for one final wrap-up post, that's not going to happen. People like bad news. People like controversy. People like to read about SCO taking on the world in what is either going to prove a truly brilliant financial endeavour or one of the most spectacular corporate suicides ever. People detest SCO, so they want to read about what SCO is up to.
Personally I read this stuff while picturing SCO as an enraged Munchkin shouting obscenities, dire threats and ominous proclamations (replete with helium-constricted vocal cords) while hacking at the ankle of Jack's Giant (IBM) with a wooden sword. You just know the big SQUISH! is coming
At any rate, it's not as if
I think you hit "Reply To This" to the wrong person ...
Made to serve the public? Where the heck did you get that idea?
I'm using Opera and certain characters have been replaced with a tiny question mark in a black diamond.
...
Like this --> ï½ (even in the textbox I see that as a black diamond with a little question mark in it) In Internet Explorer, NoteTab Pro, Word, etc. it shows up as a little rectangle. One of the characters being replaced seems to be the apostrophe (but not always), but in the case of whatever the character I used here is, I have no idea
Say that 3 times fast. Go ahead, I dare ya.
The site is short on (understandable) details, but the thing apparently runs at a blistering 5Mhz which happens to be 5Mhz faster than anything I could ever build. Impressive, but I don't think AMD and Intel should be worried just yet. Via
I don't know why they don't just get nVidia to design it. That way the sending machine will only send the packets it thinks you're actually going to be able to see instead of the entire datastream.
nTCP = instant speed increase.
Note the parts in bold. Morpheus and Grokster just won a suit by claiming the exact same thing. Of course, they have lawyers
It would be beneficial if instead of just telling me I'm stupid you'd help out. Based on what I saw in the interview, it looks to me like he has the same defense as Morpheus and Grokster, just not the funds to present that defense.
So, I'm "lying"? Nope. Misinformed? Often.
Details would be nice.