"Yes, the economy would take a serious hit if Microsoft, ExxonMobil, and other major players were suddenly replaced by free alternatives..."
No, it wouldn't. If suddenly lots of products become free, that means that more people will afford them, and no one will stop affording. How is that an economical hit?
"Now, if you ran a circuit at twice the clock but did the same amount of work and shut it off at T=0.5 would you still use more power? [homework question].
"
It depends on the specific values of the clocks, chips have an optimum point. If you take about a chip with the optimum at 1GHz and run it at 500MHz, at the same voltage, it will need more energy mostly because of leackage. Now, if you put the same chip at 2GHz, you'd still need more energy, mostly because of the increased resitence of the components (you also may not get a wrong result...).
Now, if you change the voltage, as well as the clock, the lower voltage, the smaller amount of energy that you need. Not considering the leackage, the energy consumed per task increases almost linearly with the voltage (with maximum clock speed for that voltage). If you consider leackage, it increases even faster.
All that considering that the chip halts perfectly. Normal microprocessors don't do that, so you'll need to add some consumption for doing nothig that changes with voltage and clock speed.
"Weird... if this were true, the capacitance of the capacitor would increase as the voltage across the plates increased (because the hairs would wrap more and tighter)."
Until it short circuits:) We alread have devices that do that (mostly semiconductors), but not with huge capacitances.
I also agree, and think that registration of the source of the work (source code, editable text file) should be mandatory. The copyright note should also be mandatory (a legally distributed work without this notice not being protected) and the renovation (10 more years) should be taxed.
I was wondering... Nanotubes are conductors, but there is something stopping the electrons from jumping from one nanotube to another? Or they isolate the plates? How easy is to isolate those plates without losing surface area?
You have never created an internal short circuit on a conventional (rechargable) battery, did you? It is also able to deliver all the stored energy on an explosion that will take your hand away.
Now, batteries don't explode all the time, because they are well blinded. Capacitors are less dangerous (carry less energy), so they are not that well blinded, and explode often. There is nothing stopping the people from making blinded capacitos out of economics, and it could be even safer than battteries, because there is no ion trading going on.
Use GDB inside of Emacs (M-x gdb) That way, you have an entire buffer to navigate through the code, while the debugger output is displayed on another buffer. And, yes, the code buffer is always actualized to the running instruction when the debugger beaks.
Linux protects the user better than Windows from that on at least 2 different ways: 1) It normaly comes with the dancing cursors and weather forecasting apps included, so the user won't be that tempted to install them. 2) Most software doesn't have a EULA*, so we can teach Joe Sixpack to be sispicious of software that shows it.
There are also 2 unrelated advantages: 1) Linux DEs don't ask confirmation every time for every stupid action, so the user gets used to read dialog windows. 2) Most document formats don't hide executable code, and *nix permissions make it hard to execute programs. Those also contribute a lot to security of Joe Sixpack's computer.
* It is very sad the number of free software projects that asks you to accept the GPL before you install their code. Hint for the developpers, if it is a free license, THE END USER DOESN'T NEED TO ACCEPT IT! Just you, that is distributing the software must accept it, and sometimes not even you.
You seem to be a Debian user that didn't discovered yet the wonderful "mark as automatic" option of Aptitude. I don't use deborphan and debfoster for years, I simply type "M" at their packages at Aptitude, and when they are not needed anymore, they go away automaticaly.
Algoritmicaly constructing the key is also quite common around programmers that are new to crytography. The fact is that is as flawed as putting it as a constant, just need a bit more of time to decode. But it is much harder to implement, and may lead to bugs (that may compromise the program's security...).
People who know what they are doing would use assymetrical criptography, or any other algorithm that is really more secure. Not security through obscurity.
"...but all the modern computers that we use are called Von Neumann machines for a reason."
Because the Turing machines are too hard to program? Or because fast and big memories are hard to build? I can't really understand what answer did you want from this.
You are quite wrong. XML is a very nice format to compartimentize sutf, you can work on only one branch of the tree any time. And ODF makes it even better distributing the content among several different files.
It may take longer to parse than an binary file (I guess that is the original argument, but I didn't RTFA), but there is no reason for it being slower after that.
"# ODF encourages piracy. You know, document piracy.
# ODF undermines our current business strategy and is unfair to Microsoft."
Those where already tried. With a very small sucess until now.
"# Microsoft supports Open formats such as ODF...
#...in fact, we've introduced some exclusive new features to make ODF even better! (only available in Microsoft Office 2008, make that 9, no, 2010, maybe...)"
Well, the only similarity of javascript and ads blocking is that normaly only geeks do both. It is very hard to belive that there is any correlation, since the motivation to block them are completely different.
Also, there is something weard with your statistics. Are you sure that there you have no problem with people blocking the pages you are measuring, or that they work on all browsers? (Linux < FreeBSD & 90% of IE6 is weard, it may be that your users are just different, but it may also be a failed measurement.)
Slashdot Mirror
No, it wouldn't. If suddenly lots of products become free, that means that more people will afford them, and no one will stop affording. How is that an economical hit?
It depends on the specific values of the clocks, chips have an optimum point. If you take about a chip with the optimum at 1GHz and run it at 500MHz, at the same voltage, it will need more energy mostly because of leackage. Now, if you put the same chip at 2GHz, you'd still need more energy, mostly because of the increased resitence of the components (you also may not get a wrong result...).
Now, if you change the voltage, as well as the clock, the lower voltage, the smaller amount of energy that you need. Not considering the leackage, the energy consumed per task increases almost linearly with the voltage (with maximum clock speed for that voltage). If you consider leackage, it increases even faster.
All that considering that the chip halts perfectly. Normal microprocessors don't do that, so you'll need to add some consumption for doing nothig that changes with voltage and clock speed.
Until it short circuits :) We alread have devices that do that (mostly semiconductors), but not with huge capacitances.
I also agree, and think that registration of the source of the work (source code, editable text file) should be mandatory. The copyright note should also be mandatory (a legally distributed work without this notice not being protected) and the renovation (10 more years) should be taxed.
I was wondering... Nanotubes are conductors, but there is something stopping the electrons from jumping from one nanotube to another? Or they isolate the plates? How easy is to isolate those plates without losing surface area?
Maybe it will be time to create another laptop manufactor... This time with a nice attitude.
You have never created an internal short circuit on a conventional (rechargable) battery, did you? It is also able to deliver all the stored energy on an explosion that will take your hand away.
Now, batteries don't explode all the time, because they are well blinded. Capacitors are less dangerous (carry less energy), so they are not that well blinded, and explode often. There is nothing stopping the people from making blinded capacitos out of economics, and it could be even safer than battteries, because there is no ion trading going on.
And how long will the charge last on the battery if not used? How bad is leakage?
I bet that is the best question to make.
I less. does that make me not real?
Use GDB inside of Emacs (M-x gdb) That way, you have an entire buffer to navigate through the code, while the debugger output is displayed on another buffer. And, yes, the code buffer is always actualized to the running instruction when the debugger beaks.
Linux protects the user better than Windows from that on at least 2 different ways: 1) It normaly comes with the dancing cursors and weather forecasting apps included, so the user won't be that tempted to install them. 2) Most software doesn't have a EULA*, so we can teach Joe Sixpack to be sispicious of software that shows it.
There are also 2 unrelated advantages: 1) Linux DEs don't ask confirmation every time for every stupid action, so the user gets used to read dialog windows. 2) Most document formats don't hide executable code, and *nix permissions make it hard to execute programs. Those also contribute a lot to security of Joe Sixpack's computer.
* It is very sad the number of free software projects that asks you to accept the GPL before you install their code. Hint for the developpers, if it is a free license, THE END USER DOESN'T NEED TO ACCEPT IT! Just you, that is distributing the software must accept it, and sometimes not even you.
You seem to be a Debian user that didn't discovered yet the wonderful "mark as automatic" option of Aptitude. I don't use deborphan and debfoster for years, I simply type "M" at their packages at Aptitude, and when they are not needed anymore, they go away automaticaly.
Nice to see that the entire World agreed on a single time-zone. Those 24 different times that people used to have where quite disturbing...
But, seriously, maybe if all those problems happen people may start supporting musticasting.
Now, on this ocean of buzzwords, what is different from the old web?
Algoritmicaly constructing the key is also quite common around programmers that are new to crytography. The fact is that is as flawed as putting it as a constant, just need a bit more of time to decode. But it is much harder to implement, and may lead to bugs (that may compromise the program's security...).
People who know what they are doing would use assymetrical criptography, or any other algorithm that is really more secure. Not security through obscurity.
In fact, Microsoft is just out on a walk right now. Yes, you can say that it will probably recover, but nothing is that safe.
Because the Turing machines are too hard to program? Or because fast and big memories are hard to build? I can't really understand what answer did you want from this.
You are quite wrong. XML is a very nice format to compartimentize sutf, you can work on only one branch of the tree any time. And ODF makes it even better distributing the content among several different files.
It may take longer to parse than an binary file (I guess that is the original argument, but I didn't RTFA), but there is no reason for it being slower after that.
You see... You don't need to chose to be with "us" or with "them", you can think for yourself.
And there is no Linux Jihad. It's self defence.
Those where already tried. With a very small sucess until now.
That is the really dangerous one...
Well, the only similarity of javascript and ads blocking is that normaly only geeks do both. It is very hard to belive that there is any correlation, since the motivation to block them are completely different.
Also, there is something weard with your statistics. Are you sure that there you have no problem with people blocking the pages you are measuring, or that they work on all browsers? (Linux < FreeBSD & 90% of IE6 is weard, it may be that your users are just different, but it may also be a failed measurement.)
I have no option but to agree with you.
tar -jcvf will bzip2 as easily. But I too never use it.
Agreed. Here at Brazil, the small shops stopped selling PCs with (ilegal) Windows, but anyone can get a pirate CD at any corner for less than $5.
I can't really imagine who would by this (paying 1/3 of the price up-front) instead of the normal version or a pirate one.
I know how do you fell. I've tryed to use ed... But I'm a mere mortal. I survived, barely.
Anyway, I like its first manual :)