Maybe. But those effects are what make a GUI look less 1990 and more 2009. Enlightenment is more or less where lightweight meets design and "prettiness", rather than the polarity of KDE, Gnome or Blackbox and Fluxbox, etc.
The 64bit ISA started with the Athlon 64's, and soon after Intel licensed it. That was 2003. That means that the chips were the next step in the progression from 16->32->64 bit. The way of the future. 256bit may be, but there's no ISA to program to, so there's no reason to think about it. But hey, if you wanna be stupid, go for it.
The point is, they have had LOTS of time to get a 64bit version going. Even if not many of their customers need it now, they will need it eventually. They've had the demand there, they've had the resources, all new computers are 64bit capable, and a number of them, especially media professionals (you know, they people they claim to target as a business) NEED to use 64bit operating systems any more.
I stand by my assertion that Adobe either has an untenable codebase, or they're incompetent. And I'll add another assertion... you have no clue what you're talking about.
It's not trivial. I just said that it's doable, and they have had two years since that statement, and something like 5 years since it was quite apparent that 64bit was the way of the future.
Java has had a 64bit version for a long time (though not the plugin) but since Flash is just a plugin it's a fair comparison. It's doable. The problem either has to be that they don't have competent employees, or they have a completely fucked up codebase that needs a complete rewrite, and I get the feeling that they just don't want to admit the truth.
I hate jacking a high-up post, but it needs to be said that both McCain AND OBAMA were co-sponsors of this bill. "tragedy in chaos" is a hypocritical jackass, and this article's blurb needs amended.
You've made an implicit assumption that every sex offender on the list deserves to be there. The law means that the 16 year old couple that got caught having sex would never be able to use any social networking sites (ever do something stupid as a teenager? I know I did). Perfectly honest, law-abiding "sex offenders" that are now prevented from normal social activities. This law, and the sex offender registration issue in general, is bullshit. Either they're safe on the street, or they should be in jail. Why not let some pot smokers out of jail instead of the assault and battery convicts? You know, people who actually hurt others?
Really? I'm running 64 bit Kubuntu 8.04 here with Flash 9 and nspluginwrapper, and it's only 20% of my CPU on Youtube. Running it full-screen is much higher usage, but the default size isn't bad. Non-video flash files are even nicer on the CPU... something like Dick Dynamite only uses up 20% at max.
That was also written, oh, two fucking years ago! They haven't figured out how to make their JIT compiler work in two years? What kind of incompetents are they? I'm sure it's a hard problem. Lots of problems are hard. But somehow Firefox and Opera and even IE managed to get their Javascript code working on 64bit platforms in the meantime. Why is Flash somehow special?
Your statement implied that you DID still work there and continued to pay "quite a bit of money", so I responded in kind. Don't get mad at me for your incapacity to write clearly.
And even though real-estate is "owned" by someone, it actually is a concession from the government. You don't own it if you don't pay your tithe to the government, and it can be taken from you if your ownership of it gets in the way of the public good. Or someone can make an argument that it does. And either way, not all real estate is privately owned, either. I explained that in my previous post, about parks and roads and such.
Yes, some places ARE horrifically crowded. But imagine if someone owned an apartment building in, say, Manhattan. They would be stupid to not rent it out... they'd have astronomical taxes to pay and no money coming in from it. The same forces don't affect the IP space, since it's a "virtual" good, and even though you pay a lot for your ARIN allocations, a/8 costs just as much as a/14, and that's only $18K a year at max. There's no incentive to change or relinquish addresses if you're a big enough company (which, coincidentally, are the ones who own the majority of the "dark" addresses.) After any employer insurance contributions and so on, I'd doubt that $18K is even a minimum wage worker's salary, so it would scarcely affect many medium companies or some small ones. So no, a "real estate" style market will NOT work.
Basically, the only solution to this (and it's only short-term, as more and more machines come online) is to redistribute the IP allocation, by mandate if necessary. Confiscation could quite easily be done under an "eminent domain" type clause, where you wouldn't be out money, you'd just be out of resources you weren't using anyway, and everyone would be better off by having more IP's available in general.
SOME real-estate is owned. The road in front of your house, as per my example, is NOT owned, as it's a public resource.
Really, get your head around it. And as for your later comments as to whether or not you're using them, if you can prove you're using them, there's not a problem. Resources are meant to be utilized, otherwise they wouldn't be called resources. But if you AREN'T using them, they should be redistributed to someone who will, simply because of their limited nature.
Eminent domain exists for a reason... sometimes there are douchebags like you who will buy up land just to fuck things up for everyone else.
Just because you say it doesn't make it so. IP space is a limited resource used by everyone. Or do you not like your municipal water, sewer and road system?
You would cry foul if a company "reserved" the road in front of your house (didn't have to pay for it, though), and didn't do anything with it, but made damn sure you couldn't use it. Why is IP space different?
Or votes from pure party affiliation. I have no respect for someone who approaches politics like it's a religion or a sporting event, where they're cheering for their "side" to win, making excuses for the misdeeds of "their" party.
We're all Americans. We should ALL win in an election, by selecting the candidate that best represents we, the people. Unfortunately, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can seem to field someone that does that.
I'm voting Libertarian every chance I get. Not because I think they'll win this election, but because I think we need more than two parties to become viable. This two party system has evolved into a grotesque competition between two masks on the same charlatan.
NAT is not a solution unless you're a fan of getting rid of the peer-to-peer nature of the Internet. The whole point of it was to put every IP on more or less equal ground as far as communication... NAT prevents that. Hell, there are already a lot of ISP's that NAT their customers, so they have to give out fewer "real" IP's. That will happen even more often if "everybody did things like this". That does not bode well for the 'net as a communications platform, because it puts users into different classes.
There's no reason why 98% of users SHOULD be behind NAT gateways. The Internet was designed peer to peer. It should stay that way, unless you don't like actually being able to, you know, communicate, and would rather have the Internet just evolve into another broadcast medium where a limited cartel of media companies control access to information.
Not quite. IP space is "common" space, just like the roads, parks and so on. Doing nothing with the chunk of public, limited resources you reserved for yourself most certainly IS hoarding. If there were a way to make more IP addresses, you would be correct.
Even better... the latest patches for StarCraft and Diablo II remove the DRM from the software. Copy a file over from the install CD, and you can play it without it checking for the CD or anything. How awesome is that? Blizzard just earned my business going forward, they want to make sure people can still play their older games.
It's completely rational. They aren't listening to us voting with our dollars (still plenty of frat boys buying Madden to pad the bottom line, still lots of people buying Spore to crack it and play it properly), they aren't listening to their customers as evidenced by the CEO's statement, but they ARE listening to the reviews on Amazon. That's the ONLY reason they changed anything with Spore.
A lot of people search the videos for information, talks by Richard Dawkins, car reviews, whatever. I think it's perfectly valid to call Youtube a search engine, even though it's a very specialized one.
Except that ignoring the truth is a very special thing that the human brain can do that a computer can't.
As you lament, it is a problem in a society as well, but that doesn't mean that it's not a benefit when "competing" against a computer (which is what a captcha essentially is).
That's where you're wrong. You'd have to replicate the source data set and relationships therein... and THAT is a non-trivial feat many times. Date comparison isn't terribly secure, but say you build a database of things like John is 5'5", Suzy is 5'6", Steve is 6'1". Then the machine spits out "Suzy is taller than John, Suzy is shorter than Steve, who is the tallest?" after a simple randomized query, it'd take some time to start breaking that with a computer, a lot of samples or a direct programming of the algorithm.
Your first statement is wrong. The question is stated as a hypothetical query, not implying that you actually WERE born in 1973. It's just saying IF you were born in 1973, hypothetically, would you have been alive for JFK being shot? Fixing the date, and it's still a valid question. With a 50% chance of getting it right, but it's still a valid question;)
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe. But those effects are what make a GUI look less 1990 and more 2009. Enlightenment is more or less where lightweight meets design and "prettiness", rather than the polarity of KDE, Gnome or Blackbox and Fluxbox, etc.
It is
The 64bit ISA started with the Athlon 64's, and soon after Intel licensed it. That was 2003. That means that the chips were the next step in the progression from 16->32->64 bit. The way of the future. 256bit may be, but there's no ISA to program to, so there's no reason to think about it. But hey, if you wanna be stupid, go for it.
The point is, they have had LOTS of time to get a 64bit version going. Even if not many of their customers need it now, they will need it eventually. They've had the demand there, they've had the resources, all new computers are 64bit capable, and a number of them, especially media professionals (you know, they people they claim to target as a business) NEED to use 64bit operating systems any more.
I stand by my assertion that Adobe either has an untenable codebase, or they're incompetent. And I'll add another assertion... you have no clue what you're talking about.
It's not trivial. I just said that it's doable, and they have had two years since that statement, and something like 5 years since it was quite apparent that 64bit was the way of the future.
Java has had a 64bit version for a long time (though not the plugin) but since Flash is just a plugin it's a fair comparison. It's doable. The problem either has to be that they don't have competent employees, or they have a completely fucked up codebase that needs a complete rewrite, and I get the feeling that they just don't want to admit the truth.
I hate jacking a high-up post, but it needs to be said that both McCain AND OBAMA were co-sponsors of this bill. "tragedy in chaos" is a hypocritical jackass, and this article's blurb needs amended.
Screw Hillary... both McCain and Obama were co-sponsors.
Fucking hypocritical writers.
You've made an implicit assumption that every sex offender on the list deserves to be there. The law means that the 16 year old couple that got caught having sex would never be able to use any social networking sites (ever do something stupid as a teenager? I know I did). Perfectly honest, law-abiding "sex offenders" that are now prevented from normal social activities. This law, and the sex offender registration issue in general, is bullshit. Either they're safe on the street, or they should be in jail. Why not let some pot smokers out of jail instead of the assault and battery convicts? You know, people who actually hurt others?
Really? I'm running 64 bit Kubuntu 8.04 here with Flash 9 and nspluginwrapper, and it's only 20% of my CPU on Youtube. Running it full-screen is much higher usage, but the default size isn't bad. Non-video flash files are even nicer on the CPU... something like Dick Dynamite only uses up 20% at max.
That was also written, oh, two fucking years ago! They haven't figured out how to make their JIT compiler work in two years? What kind of incompetents are they? I'm sure it's a hard problem. Lots of problems are hard. But somehow Firefox and Opera and even IE managed to get their Javascript code working on 64bit platforms in the meantime. Why is Flash somehow special?
Your statement implied that you DID still work there and continued to pay "quite a bit of money", so I responded in kind. Don't get mad at me for your incapacity to write clearly.
And even though real-estate is "owned" by someone, it actually is a concession from the government. You don't own it if you don't pay your tithe to the government, and it can be taken from you if your ownership of it gets in the way of the public good. Or someone can make an argument that it does. And either way, not all real estate is privately owned, either. I explained that in my previous post, about parks and roads and such.
Yes, some places ARE horrifically crowded. But imagine if someone owned an apartment building in, say, Manhattan. They would be stupid to not rent it out... they'd have astronomical taxes to pay and no money coming in from it. The same forces don't affect the IP space, since it's a "virtual" good, and even though you pay a lot for your ARIN allocations, a /8 costs just as much as a /14, and that's only $18K a year at max. There's no incentive to change or relinquish addresses if you're a big enough company (which, coincidentally, are the ones who own the majority of the "dark" addresses.) After any employer insurance contributions and so on, I'd doubt that $18K is even a minimum wage worker's salary, so it would scarcely affect many medium companies or some small ones. So no, a "real estate" style market will NOT work.
Basically, the only solution to this (and it's only short-term, as more and more machines come online) is to redistribute the IP allocation, by mandate if necessary. Confiscation could quite easily be done under an "eminent domain" type clause, where you wouldn't be out money, you'd just be out of resources you weren't using anyway, and everyone would be better off by having more IP's available in general.
Does it really matter if you could? I'm a fan of Blizzard's products, but definitely not their legal department.
SOME real-estate is owned. The road in front of your house, as per my example, is NOT owned, as it's a public resource.
Really, get your head around it. And as for your later comments as to whether or not you're using them, if you can prove you're using them, there's not a problem. Resources are meant to be utilized, otherwise they wouldn't be called resources. But if you AREN'T using them, they should be redistributed to someone who will, simply because of their limited nature.
Eminent domain exists for a reason... sometimes there are douchebags like you who will buy up land just to fuck things up for everyone else.
But they're busy keeping people from bringing in sketches of knit SUV covers. They're overloaded!
Just because you say it doesn't make it so. IP space is a limited resource used by everyone. Or do you not like your municipal water, sewer and road system?
You would cry foul if a company "reserved" the road in front of your house (didn't have to pay for it, though), and didn't do anything with it, but made damn sure you couldn't use it. Why is IP space different?
Or votes from pure party affiliation. I have no respect for someone who approaches politics like it's a religion or a sporting event, where they're cheering for their "side" to win, making excuses for the misdeeds of "their" party.
We're all Americans. We should ALL win in an election, by selecting the candidate that best represents we, the people. Unfortunately, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can seem to field someone that does that.
I'm voting Libertarian every chance I get. Not because I think they'll win this election, but because I think we need more than two parties to become viable. This two party system has evolved into a grotesque competition between two masks on the same charlatan.
NAT is not a solution unless you're a fan of getting rid of the peer-to-peer nature of the Internet. The whole point of it was to put every IP on more or less equal ground as far as communication... NAT prevents that. Hell, there are already a lot of ISP's that NAT their customers, so they have to give out fewer "real" IP's. That will happen even more often if "everybody did things like this". That does not bode well for the 'net as a communications platform, because it puts users into different classes.
There's no reason why 98% of users SHOULD be behind NAT gateways. The Internet was designed peer to peer. It should stay that way, unless you don't like actually being able to, you know, communicate, and would rather have the Internet just evolve into another broadcast medium where a limited cartel of media companies control access to information.
Not quite. IP space is "common" space, just like the roads, parks and so on. Doing nothing with the chunk of public, limited resources you reserved for yourself most certainly IS hoarding. If there were a way to make more IP addresses, you would be correct.
Even better... the latest patches for StarCraft and Diablo II remove the DRM from the software. Copy a file over from the install CD, and you can play it without it checking for the CD or anything. How awesome is that? Blizzard just earned my business going forward, they want to make sure people can still play their older games.
It's completely rational. They aren't listening to us voting with our dollars (still plenty of frat boys buying Madden to pad the bottom line, still lots of people buying Spore to crack it and play it properly), they aren't listening to their customers as evidenced by the CEO's statement, but they ARE listening to the reviews on Amazon. That's the ONLY reason they changed anything with Spore.
A lot of people search the videos for information, talks by Richard Dawkins, car reviews, whatever. I think it's perfectly valid to call Youtube a search engine, even though it's a very specialized one.
Except that ignoring the truth is a very special thing that the human brain can do that a computer can't.
As you lament, it is a problem in a society as well, but that doesn't mean that it's not a benefit when "competing" against a computer (which is what a captcha essentially is).
That's where you're wrong. You'd have to replicate the source data set and relationships therein... and THAT is a non-trivial feat many times. Date comparison isn't terribly secure, but say you build a database of things like John is 5'5", Suzy is 5'6", Steve is 6'1". Then the machine spits out "Suzy is taller than John, Suzy is shorter than Steve, who is the tallest?" after a simple randomized query, it'd take some time to start breaking that with a computer, a lot of samples or a direct programming of the algorithm.
Your first statement is wrong. The question is stated as a hypothetical query, not implying that you actually WERE born in 1973. It's just saying IF you were born in 1973, hypothetically, would you have been alive for JFK being shot? Fixing the date, and it's still a valid question. With a 50% chance of getting it right, but it's still a valid question ;)