When playing the odds, I'd rather bet on the seat belt being helpful. Yes, some people have been trapped and died from seat belts, but a great deal more people have been saved by them. It's like fear of flying... flying is statistically much safer than driving by any metric you care to use (per mile traveled, number of passengers, whatever). But more people fear flying than driving. A seat belt cutter is not a bad idea to have accessible in a car, but you're an idiot if you refuse to wear a seat belt because there is no cutter or justify it by saying you might get trapped.
I get my info straight from the horse's mouth, the AMD developers and from wikipedia.
I can't believe you fell for the advertising. The RS690 is a DirectX 9.0c part. It has 3D working with the current open source drivers, which none of the new generation chips do due to the architecture change needed for non-software DX10 support. I have an X1250 (also an RS690) in my desktop... I really do know what I'm talking about. The X1200 is just the very last chip in the previous design, it is not DX10 compliant, and it was dropped from the driver because they're just not making any more improvements to that codebase. What is out there now is as good as it gets.
Ok, so make it a 36" flat panel... whatever those uber-resolution displays are at any more. My point remains... your older 9800GTX+ can do it, and the current ATI chips are faster. You only run into ATI's cards being noticeably slower than Nvidia's when you're talking about higher resolutions than the 1920x1080 you're running. Even 2048x1152, which is the highest resolution non-specialist display I've seen, as compared to the starting at $600 uber-displays out there.
The X1200 series was launched in 2005. Just because you bought a 1969 Chevy from a dealer and they warrant it, do you get pissy that Chevy isn't still making parts for your car? It's an OpenGL 2.0 series card, DirectX 9.0c. They simply aren't doing any new development for it. It doesn't support Vista or Windows 7 features... why wouldn't they drop support? They're still giving you the drivers for the card which install and work fine. They even give you a package with just the driver, not including the ATI CCC that you despise. It's just good business sense to concentrate your developer energy on cards that are supported and have a more advanced architecture, all the HD 2xxx and later cards are OpenGL 3.0/DirectX 10+ and so on.
So what you're saying is that for the minority of the market, workstation users and gamers who will spend all the money they can to get the absolute most performance possible, Intel and Nvidia are currently the best choice? No shit, sherlock. The thing is, AMD and ATI machines are much more cost effective, and give much more performance for the dollar, as well as being able to upgrade them in the future. Not everyone will drop $500 on an i7. Some people only want to spend, say, $65 on X2 7750 and a good motherboard which will let them buy a better CPU in the future without having to get all new RAM and a new mobo and such, as you'd have to do with a current Core 2 system.
You do know that ATI already has Crossfire, and even CrossfireX, which will let you mix cards of different speeds and still get a benefit? They don't have to be matched cards?
When you're talking "up there with nVidia for performance", make sure you note that's only on 2560x1600 or so resolutions. AMD's cards pump way more frames than is needed for any sub-$300 monitor, which is what most people have. Unless you're trying to play Crysis on a 30" flat panel monitor, the top end card from either company will be more than adequate.
Xmms and BMPx use GTK, and development on them has pretty much stalled from what I can tell. Amarok is Qt, and should only be with the KDE desktop. Besides, you can still install XMMS if you really want to, it's in the repos no source compilation needed (check for xmms2). What the hell are you blathering about?
The question is not "How much would make a reasonable deterrent for future infringers?" It is "How much is a reasonable deterrent to KEEP HER FROM REINFRINGING?"
Laws no longer exist to make an example of people to others. That is why we don't chop the hands off of people who get caught stealing. Laws exist to punish the specific offense, and as such, the punishment should be relative to what would influence her future decisions WITHOUT causing undue duress. Pay for her own crimes, not all the theoretical future crimes of everyone else.
But this definitely should be examined. These asinine penalties for a non-commercial copyright infringement is just insane. Hell, even for commercial copyright infringement... $1.9 million for someone selling essentially two copied CD's? Does that sound right to anyone other than someone who works for the RIAA directly or indirectly?
Wow. Way to fail at correcting the parent. He was completely right, which is actually an aberration as far as my experience goes:( A queue is a line. If you cue someone or something, you give them the signal to start. So, cuing the other subjects is appropriate.
What about the increase in "morally despicable" content in movies in the late 60's? Did that contribute to the downfall of civilization? Maybe comic book violence and salacious, "morally despicable" stories in the 1950's? How about the increase of "morally despicable" content in books in the 1800's? Seriously... read a damn history book. Video games are nothing more and nothing less than a new form of media, and there is always a knee-jerk reaction from society against any new media. The parent is FAR from "Insightful".
I'll bet the EFF has no problem with your blocking spam on your own. What I'd bet they have issue with is someone else upstream from you blocking what they deem spam... who knows what that could entail? Political speech they don't like? Email should never go into a black hole... filter it however you want, but don't prevent it from going through.
I'd wager that the EFF isn't against all spam blocking. They're against institutional spam-blocking. If you want to do it for your users, on your network, for yourself, fine. But an ISP shouldn't be doing that without being very clear of what you're doing, and a way to disable it. Because spam blocking can often have false positives, and it can also create a situation where anything you don't like is classified as spam, rather than just v1@gr4 pitches. Spam filtering on a large scale is a step down the slope of censorship, which is why the EFF doesn't like it at the head end.
Managers who tell IT what to do. That's the target... get somebody up the ranks to set the rules down from on high because their golf buddy knows a lot about this tech stuff, and he told them about this site. Besides... it's Microsoft! They're a huge company... why would they lie?
If they did apples to apples, they wouldn't have been able to twist the results like they wanted. Duh. When has Microsoft EVER wanted to compete on a fair playing field? They're a company that has amazing(ly slimy) marketing that happens to make software. Don't forget that.
That would take a population that wasn't allergic to manual labor and would actually work for a living. Some parts of the US are like that, but we've gone through some major cultural shifts that give people a sense of entitlement to things rather than a connection between work and reward.
They deliver mail to rural houses all the time... as long as it's easily accessible, there's no reason a rural mail carrier can't add a couple houses to their route.
Slashdot Mirror
When playing the odds, I'd rather bet on the seat belt being helpful. Yes, some people have been trapped and died from seat belts, but a great deal more people have been saved by them. It's like fear of flying... flying is statistically much safer than driving by any metric you care to use (per mile traveled, number of passengers, whatever). But more people fear flying than driving. A seat belt cutter is not a bad idea to have accessible in a car, but you're an idiot if you refuse to wear a seat belt because there is no cutter or justify it by saying you might get trapped.
There's a reason it's called an "electromagnetic field". It's both.
I get my info straight from the horse's mouth, the AMD developers and from wikipedia.
I can't believe you fell for the advertising. The RS690 is a DirectX 9.0c part. It has 3D working with the current open source drivers, which none of the new generation chips do due to the architecture change needed for non-software DX10 support. I have an X1250 (also an RS690) in my desktop... I really do know what I'm talking about. The X1200 is just the very last chip in the previous design, it is not DX10 compliant, and it was dropped from the driver because they're just not making any more improvements to that codebase. What is out there now is as good as it gets.
Ok, so make it a 36" flat panel... whatever those uber-resolution displays are at any more. My point remains... your older 9800GTX+ can do it, and the current ATI chips are faster. You only run into ATI's cards being noticeably slower than Nvidia's when you're talking about higher resolutions than the 1920x1080 you're running. Even 2048x1152, which is the highest resolution non-specialist display I've seen, as compared to the starting at $600 uber-displays out there.
The X1200 series was launched in 2005. Just because you bought a 1969 Chevy from a dealer and they warrant it, do you get pissy that Chevy isn't still making parts for your car? It's an OpenGL 2.0 series card, DirectX 9.0c. They simply aren't doing any new development for it. It doesn't support Vista or Windows 7 features... why wouldn't they drop support? They're still giving you the drivers for the card which install and work fine. They even give you a package with just the driver, not including the ATI CCC that you despise. It's just good business sense to concentrate your developer energy on cards that are supported and have a more advanced architecture, all the HD 2xxx and later cards are OpenGL 3.0/DirectX 10+ and so on.
So what you're saying is that for the minority of the market, workstation users and gamers who will spend all the money they can to get the absolute most performance possible, Intel and Nvidia are currently the best choice? No shit, sherlock. The thing is, AMD and ATI machines are much more cost effective, and give much more performance for the dollar, as well as being able to upgrade them in the future. Not everyone will drop $500 on an i7. Some people only want to spend, say, $65 on X2 7750 and a good motherboard which will let them buy a better CPU in the future without having to get all new RAM and a new mobo and such, as you'd have to do with a current Core 2 system.
You do know that ATI already has Crossfire, and even CrossfireX, which will let you mix cards of different speeds and still get a benefit? They don't have to be matched cards?
When you're talking "up there with nVidia for performance", make sure you note that's only on 2560x1600 or so resolutions. AMD's cards pump way more frames than is needed for any sub-$300 monitor, which is what most people have. Unless you're trying to play Crysis on a 30" flat panel monitor, the top end card from either company will be more than adequate.
Larrabee is being built by a bunch of engineers that used to work at 3DLabs. They know what they're doing.
Xmms and BMPx use GTK, and development on them has pretty much stalled from what I can tell. Amarok is Qt, and should only be with the KDE desktop. Besides, you can still install XMMS if you really want to, it's in the repos no source compilation needed (check for xmms2). What the hell are you blathering about?
Meh. I'm gonna keep letting my buddy in Iran use my home server for an SSH proxy.
The question is not "How much would make a reasonable deterrent for future infringers?" It is "How much is a reasonable deterrent to KEEP HER FROM REINFRINGING?"
Laws no longer exist to make an example of people to others. That is why we don't chop the hands off of people who get caught stealing. Laws exist to punish the specific offense, and as such, the punishment should be relative to what would influence her future decisions WITHOUT causing undue duress. Pay for her own crimes, not all the theoretical future crimes of everyone else.
But this definitely should be examined. These asinine penalties for a non-commercial copyright infringement is just insane. Hell, even for commercial copyright infringement... $1.9 million for someone selling essentially two copied CD's? Does that sound right to anyone other than someone who works for the RIAA directly or indirectly?
Wow. Way to fail at correcting the parent. He was completely right, which is actually an aberration as far as my experience goes :( A queue is a line. If you cue someone or something, you give them the signal to start. So, cuing the other subjects is appropriate.
Blame the jackasses who spew those Ups yur pipelines! Firefox tweaks all over the 'net.
Doesn't IIS leave sessions "half open" generally? Some kind of IE accelerator trick? Or did they stop doing that?
What about the increase in "morally despicable" content in movies in the late 60's? Did that contribute to the downfall of civilization? Maybe comic book violence and salacious, "morally despicable" stories in the 1950's? How about the increase of "morally despicable" content in books in the 1800's? Seriously... read a damn history book. Video games are nothing more and nothing less than a new form of media, and there is always a knee-jerk reaction from society against any new media. The parent is FAR from "Insightful".
I'll bet the EFF has no problem with your blocking spam on your own. What I'd bet they have issue with is someone else upstream from you blocking what they deem spam... who knows what that could entail? Political speech they don't like? Email should never go into a black hole... filter it however you want, but don't prevent it from going through.
I'd wager that the EFF isn't against all spam blocking. They're against institutional spam-blocking. If you want to do it for your users, on your network, for yourself, fine. But an ISP shouldn't be doing that without being very clear of what you're doing, and a way to disable it. Because spam blocking can often have false positives, and it can also create a situation where anything you don't like is classified as spam, rather than just v1@gr4 pitches. Spam filtering on a large scale is a step down the slope of censorship, which is why the EFF doesn't like it at the head end.
Managers who tell IT what to do. That's the target... get somebody up the ranks to set the rules down from on high because their golf buddy knows a lot about this tech stuff, and he told them about this site. Besides... it's Microsoft! They're a huge company... why would they lie?
If they did apples to apples, they wouldn't have been able to twist the results like they wanted. Duh. When has Microsoft EVER wanted to compete on a fair playing field? They're a company that has amazing(ly slimy) marketing that happens to make software. Don't forget that.
One word explanation: Vikings.
And hopefully it'll encourage ISP's to keep their pipes open both ways, instead of treating subscribers as download-only nodes
That would take a population that wasn't allergic to manual labor and would actually work for a living. Some parts of the US are like that, but we've gone through some major cultural shifts that give people a sense of entitlement to things rather than a connection between work and reward.
They deliver mail to rural houses all the time... as long as it's easily accessible, there's no reason a rural mail carrier can't add a couple houses to their route.