The heat a CPU generates is roughly proportional to how much power it consumes. Power costs money. With the computer power consumption fast increasing, and electricity costs going much the same way, at least in Gray California, I suspect this has to start becoming a major buying decicion factor.
Does anybody have any numbers on current and future power consumption, and what it would cost per year with current or future electricity prices to keep a computer turned on 24/7?
I mean, it's not like you elected him or anything!
Terrorism can not be defeated
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Terrorism is different from Nazism and Communism in that it is a military tactic that anyone can use. Which means it can never be defeated. Which means the War on Terrorism, and the "exceptional war time" security measures need never be lifted.
This is very similar to the totalitarian tactics described in Orwells 1984. I know it's a tired cliche, but read the book and compare!
What does "supporting the troops" mean, exactly?
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As someone from a country that never fights wars, I am confused by the constant pledges from Americans that they "support the troops", whether they're for or against the war.
Can anyone who uses this expression explain what it means? Is it just that you wish they will not be harmed? Or that they will be successful and reach their objectives? The second seems incompatible with with at least some reasons for being opposed to the war.
Obviously, "the troops" did not decide to start this war, so being for or against the war must be independent of your view of the troops. But that's an other issue.
The governments who support the US do it mainly since they don't want to piss of the US. They know what the US does to countries that piss them off.
Japan knows it will need help with North Korea later, and do what they have to, etc.
While they were trying to get a vote through the security council and get Turkey's support, a lot money was also thrown around, coining the phrase "The Coalition of the Billing". That's apart from the dirty tricks.
I'm not aware of any democratic country where the public is not against the war, except perhaps Poland.
The issue is not whether M$ makes enough money on it that it affects the overall finances of the comapny. Hardly anything they do meets that criteria.
The issue is if it makes money for them. VPC clearly made money for Connectix when they owned it to justify the expense of developing it, and it will by necessity make more money for M$. So from that perspective it seems like a nobrainer.
If there is some strategic over riding goal that is served by cancelling the product, they will do that anyway, of course. But I can't see what that would be, other than possibly trying to hurt Apple for some reason. Killing Office would be much more effective to reach that goal though.
The real danger may be if the developers quit. You can't just find that skill on the street.
I was afraid someone would ask that. Let's see how I can back this up...
There is a war of sorts between Hollywood and the computer industry. Hollywood would want to ultimately ban the general purpose computer, or at least cripple it with DRM and draconian criminalization.
This would make computers less useful for consumers than they could be, and fewer computers would be sold. This is obviously bad for the hardware industry.
You're right that the software industry is in a sort of inbetween position. But the bigger SV companies are mostly hardware. Intel, AMD, Applied Materials, Apple and Sun are all much bigger than Adobe. Oracle is software, but isn't much in the pirated space.
And note that she is in no way suggesting repealing DMCA, just amending it with some media fair use rights. It's not clear to me that they would even apply to software.
Then again, perhaps I am a bit too cynical. The large voter population of clued in computer nerds may play a role as well.
For those who may not know it, Zoe Lofgren is representing Silicon Valley in congress.
So rather than being a rare honest and insightful figther for What's Right, she is just another politician running the errands of the corporations in her district. These just happen to be corporations whose agenda is aligned with the average Slashdot reader.
That doesn't mean this legislation isn't "right". But it's naive to believe that is why she is pushing for it.
When people predict the future, it's normally based around the unstated expectation that current trends will more or less continue.
The first half of the 20th century saw a huge development of means of transportation, and people extrapolated from that. As it turned out, that development soon hit some natural limits, and other, completely unforeseen fields as computing, information communication and bio engineering picked up the slack.
And if we expect those fields to continue the next 50 years, chances are we're wrong. Or, then again, not.
You're thinking inside a box here. Assuming that they're trying to say "Think Differently", the grammar is indeed wrong, though you could argue that it is a self referential joke in that a "different" grammar is used to promote "different" thinking.
But you can also read it as "Think 'Different'". Don't know what it's called but here is a conversational example that should make it clear.
- How was the movie? - Think 'Star Wars' but with horses instead of space ships.
Or to phrase it less elegantly: "Think Different" means "The simplest way to describe our product line and attitude is by the word 'different'"
The US has the worlds by far highest porison population, both in numbers and percentage. I haven't seen any numbers recently, but it's on the order of 10 times as much as an average EU nation.
So the firmly rooted conviction among many Americans that their system gives better protection to the accused, because of the technical implementation of their double jeopardy rule seems very misguided, and more of parroting what hey were told in school than based on actual knowledge of the issues.
The reality is that in the US you are far more likely to be thrown in jail for far longer times than in the rest of the free world, "Land of the Free" rhetoric notwithstanding.
It's sad in a way, but all things must come to an end. SMG has been working 80 hour weeks on it for 7 years now, since she was 19. No matter what you do or how much you get paid for it, that's gotta wear you out. Sure, the show made SMG the star she is, but she also made the show the star it is. In the hands of a less talented and hard working actress, who knows what it would have been. I doubt we'd be discussing it here.
Neil Youngs Law states that "it is better to burn out than to fade away", and I would so much more want to see a grandiose mindboggling finale to top all finales - and I can't see Joss Whedon going for anything less - than the heart breaking Alzheimerish multi year decline of X-Files and Xena.
Buffy showed that you can make stunningly novel and smart TV, and have it be successful. All you need is a freakishly talented genius. Joss just went ahead and invented a new genre - the horror-comedy-action-drama-soap opera. Anyone would have told you that that is impossible to pull of. Until he proved it.
I watch TV differently now. I still appreciate a good comedy - but why was there no acrobatic kung fu action? A good heart wrenching drama? Fine, but it could have used some side splitting laughter to spice it up. At it's best, Buffy delivers an hour that is at the same time high quality drama, comedy, action, horror and soap opera.
Life will go on. And the half full is that all the talented people will still be around to do other work. Alyson Hannigan is very good at saying "pussy" on American Pie. Nothing wrong with that, but it's just 5% of her range. She can do anything, and I'm sure we'll see her prove that. SMG seems determined to make a name in the fart comedy movie world. I can see how she'd need a change of pace... But she'll be back in the serious acting world where she belongs in a while. Eliza Dushku, the one star to come out of Buffy in my book, can be as big as she wants to be. If she wants to spend the effort. And so on.
And whatever Joss does after this, it will not be nothing. He's incapable of that. And it will not be boring.
Virtual PC is a nice piece of software that sells a fair number of copies, but doubt it's installed on more than 1% of all Macs. Killing or not killing it simply isn't a big deal either way in any Windows/Apple war.
Yeah, there are nasty people out there wanting to kill us.
But I find increased government power far more scary. Remember that more than 90% of all mass killings have been done by governments, including the US federal government.
If that gets out of hand, and anything that has unchecked power will abuse that power, we will long back to the rosy happy innocent days of only fearing a rag tag band of deranged lunatics.
Slashdot Mirror
The heat a CPU generates is roughly proportional to how much power it consumes. Power costs money. With the computer power consumption fast increasing, and electricity costs going much the same way, at least in Gray California, I suspect this has to start becoming a major buying decicion factor.
Does anybody have any numbers on current and future power consumption, and what it would cost per year with current or future electricity prices to keep a computer turned on 24/7?
The two most known cases are Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi. You can google them yourself, but here is one of many articles describing their cases.
Since people can be tried and executed in secret under this act, there is no telling how many more have gotten in trouble like this.
Dude, this is something one individual congressman is doing. He is not running the US, so his actions say nothing about US war motives.
Try reading British, Australian or Canadian media on the net for a few days. Or watch the BBC 24/7 news tv on the net.
I do, and Foxnews and CNN look like 24/7 Pentagon infomercials in comparision to serious media.
I mean, it's not like you elected him or anything!
Terrorism is different from Nazism and Communism in that it is a military tactic that anyone can use. Which means it can never be defeated. Which means the War on Terrorism, and the "exceptional war time" security measures need never be lifted.
This is very similar to the totalitarian tactics described in Orwells 1984. I know it's a tired cliche, but read the book and compare!
As someone from a country that never fights wars, I am confused by the constant pledges from Americans that they "support the troops", whether they're for or against the war.
Can anyone who uses this expression explain what it means? Is it just that you wish they will not be harmed? Or that they will be successful and reach their objectives? The second seems incompatible with with at least some reasons for being opposed to the war.
Obviously, "the troops" did not decide to start this war, so being for or against the war must be independent of your view of the troops. But that's an other issue.
The governments who support the US do it mainly since they don't want to piss of the US. They know what the US does to countries that piss them off.
Japan knows it will need help with North Korea later, and do what they have to, etc.
While they were trying to get a vote through the security council and get Turkey's support, a lot money was also thrown around, coining the phrase "The Coalition of the Billing". That's apart from the dirty tricks.
I'm not aware of any democratic country where the public is not against the war, except perhaps Poland.
The issue is not whether M$ makes enough money on it that it affects the overall finances of the comapny. Hardly anything they do meets that criteria.
The issue is if it makes money for them. VPC clearly made money for Connectix when they owned it to justify the expense of developing it, and it will by necessity make more money for M$. So from that perspective it seems like a nobrainer.
If there is some strategic over riding goal that is served by cancelling the product, they will do that anyway, of course. But I can't see what that would be, other than possibly trying to hurt Apple for some reason. Killing Office would be much more effective to reach that goal though.
The real danger may be if the developers quit. You can't just find that skill on the street.
..like an Anonymous Coward post on Slashdot!
[If you have to ask, you wouldn't appreciate it anyway]
I will boycott his until they release a Mac version!
That'll show'em...
I was afraid someone would ask that. Let's see how I can back this up...
There is a war of sorts between Hollywood and the computer industry. Hollywood would want to ultimately ban the general purpose computer, or at least cripple it with DRM and draconian criminalization.
This would make computers less useful for consumers than they could be, and fewer computers would be sold. This is obviously bad for the hardware industry.
You're right that the software industry is in a sort of inbetween position. But the bigger SV companies are mostly hardware. Intel, AMD, Applied Materials, Apple and Sun are all much bigger than Adobe. Oracle is software, but isn't much in the pirated space.
And note that she is in no way suggesting repealing DMCA, just amending it with some media fair use rights. It's not clear to me that they would even apply to software.
Then again, perhaps I am a bit too cynical. The large voter population of clued in computer nerds may play a role as well.
For those who may not know it, Zoe Lofgren is representing Silicon Valley in congress.
So rather than being a rare honest and insightful figther for What's Right, she is just another politician running the errands of the corporations in her district. These just happen to be corporations whose agenda is aligned with the average Slashdot reader.
That doesn't mean this legislation isn't "right". But it's naive to believe that is why she is pushing for it.
When people predict the future, it's normally based around the unstated expectation that current trends will more or less continue.
The first half of the 20th century saw a huge development of means of transportation, and people extrapolated from that. As it turned out, that development soon hit some natural limits, and other, completely unforeseen fields as computing, information communication and bio engineering picked up the slack.
And if we expect those fields to continue the next 50 years, chances are we're wrong. Or, then again, not.
You're thinking inside a box here. Assuming that they're trying to say "Think Differently", the grammar is indeed wrong, though you could argue that it is a self referential joke in that a "different" grammar is used to promote "different" thinking.
But you can also read it as "Think 'Different'". Don't know what it's called but here is a conversational example that should make it clear.
- How was the movie?
- Think 'Star Wars' but with horses instead of space ships.
Or to phrase it less elegantly: "Think Different" means "The simplest way to describe our product line and attitude is by the word 'different'"
That's one way of looking at it.
Personally I would consider anyone knowingly entering a hard, dangerous and easy to go bankrupt profession, well..., STUPID!!
I saw nothing in the article indicating this would be subjected to a vote by your elected representatives.
Misspellsurfing can be fun. Here are some more.
"would of" - 283,000 vs "would have" - 6,410,000
"should of" - 116,000 vs "should have" - 4,900,000
"congradulations" - 43,500 vs "congratulations" - 2,810,000
The US has the worlds by far highest porison population, both in numbers and percentage. I haven't seen any numbers recently, but it's on the order of 10 times as much as an average EU nation.
So the firmly rooted conviction among many Americans that their system gives better protection to the accused, because of the technical implementation of their double jeopardy rule seems very misguided, and more of parroting what hey were told in school than based on actual knowledge of the issues.
The reality is that in the US you are far more likely to be thrown in jail for far longer times than in the rest of the free world, "Land of the Free" rhetoric notwithstanding.
It's sad in a way, but all things must come to an end. SMG has been working 80 hour weeks on it for 7 years now, since she was 19. No matter what you do or how much you get paid for it, that's gotta wear you out. Sure, the show made SMG the star she is, but she also made the show the star it is. In the hands of a less talented and hard working actress, who knows what it would have been. I doubt we'd be discussing it here.
Neil Youngs Law states that "it is better to burn out than to fade away", and I would so much more want to see a grandiose mindboggling finale to top all finales - and I can't see Joss Whedon going for anything less - than the heart breaking Alzheimerish multi year decline of X-Files and Xena.
Buffy showed that you can make stunningly novel and smart TV, and have it be successful. All you need is a freakishly talented genius. Joss just went ahead and invented a new genre - the horror-comedy-action-drama-soap opera. Anyone would have told you that that is impossible to pull of. Until he proved it.
I watch TV differently now. I still appreciate a good comedy - but why was there no acrobatic kung fu action? A good heart wrenching drama? Fine, but it could have used some side splitting laughter to spice it up. At it's best, Buffy delivers an hour that is at the same time high quality drama, comedy, action, horror and soap opera.
Life will go on. And the half full is that all the talented people will still be around to do other work. Alyson Hannigan is very good at saying "pussy" on American Pie. Nothing wrong with that, but it's just 5% of her range. She can do anything, and I'm sure we'll see her prove that. SMG seems determined to make a name in the fart comedy movie world. I can see how she'd need a change of pace... But she'll be back in the serious acting world where she belongs in a while. Eliza Dushku, the one star to come out of Buffy in my book, can be as big as she wants to be. If she wants to spend the effort. And so on.
And whatever Joss does after this, it will not be nothing. He's incapable of that. And it will not be boring.
So, don't be sad. This is only the beginning.
Virtual PC is a nice piece of software that sells a fair number of copies, but doubt it's installed on more than 1% of all Macs. Killing or not killing it simply isn't a big deal either way in any Windows/Apple war.
Yeah, there are nasty people out there wanting to kill us.
But I find increased government power far more scary. Remember that more than 90% of all mass killings have been done by governments, including the US federal government.
If that gets out of hand, and anything that has unchecked power will abuse that power, we will long back to the rosy happy innocent days of only fearing a rag tag band of deranged lunatics.
Internet mail order is no different than phone or mail based mail order.
If they want to enforce sales tax on those sales, fine. But call it what it is.
Or will they actually tax mail order orders ordered over the web, but not the same orders from the same customer to the same vendor using phone??
That would be so stupid that it may just happen...