does RealNetworks' DVD copying software _charge users $20_ for burning DVDs playable on multiple computers (still limited to a maximum of 5)?
The only DVDs worth burning are those that play in your plain vanilla DVD player sitting on the shelf below your television, or in your portable player. To call anything else DVD movie burning is a misstatement of the facts!
A courtroom is something most of us with even a modicum of common sense do our best to stay out of. There are no guarantees (well none except that the lawyers on both sides will get rich) of what can happen in there. To go all preemptive over this must mean that Real suspects that the MPAA themselves are not wanting to see this before a judge and Real feels they may have leverage. Heaven knows that the MPAA otherwise is hardly shy or retiring about filing suits of their own over imagined slights.
Whenever an article about an amazing new breakthrough contains the words all that needs to be done I deflate my expectations and walk quietly away. All that needs to be done here is to actually get it working. Who knows, the scanner plate is small, but it may require a computer the size of a major city's sports arena to handle the results.
What this tells me is that, if you have good analysis in ahead of time (and with computers and lots of information available this isn't a very high barrier to campaigns with hundreds of millions of dollars available), that you don't have to change very much to commit effective election fraud. In short, you won't need anything like the scale of what the JFK supporters pulled in Illinois in the 1960 election.
And I'm left to wonder how many of their initial sales are to Apple itself who, no doubt, is now working feverishly on a patch to kill it.
This is the same Apple who, when confronted with accusations of performing Reverse Engineering on the gadget against the DMCA will proclaim, "What? Who? Us? We're entitled! Laws are only to stop other people from ripping off our stuff, not stop us from preventing legally sold copies of OS-X from running on non-branded hardware."
If it's this easy to seize domains, can another jurisdiction now seize them from Kentucky and put them back online?
But on a more serious note, where is the WTO in all of this? The WTO has ruled that the USA cannot bar gambling and now Kentucky, a clearly parochial, backwards part of the USA to say the least, has done exactly that. There should be huge damages awarded over this screw-up and Kentucky should have to pay them all.
Also, Kentucky's rational for all this is that Commonwealth law allows seizing "devices used in illegal gaming", and this somehow extends to Internet domains. You'd think under that logic that they ought to be breaking into their own citizen's homes and seizing personal computers and broadband connections, but somehow they're refraining from that so far. Wonder why?
Note to gamblers: Seizing the domain name is different than trying to seize the actual IP addresses. Chances are that all these sites can be gotten to by IP address at minimum.
Note to Kentucky residents: There's an election only about 6 weeks from now. Take this opportunity to throw out all these assholes while it's easy to do.
Not so fast here with the bubbly. This judge still says that copyright infringement can be shown by "circumstantial evidence", rather than the strict proof of the details of actual infringement required by the law and court decisions. And that (in another related case) downloads by MediaSentry count as infringement even thought MediaSentry is a paid agent of the copyright holder and the law has long held that a copyright owner cannot infringe their own copyrights. While all this is good news, it is yet to be great news.
There's only a few fringe cases (people that do outdoor advertising images maybe that need to edit images larger than 4GB in uncompressed size) where the 64 bit processing is really needed.
Actually this is a common misconception that large display sizes require large images. Get up close to a billboard (which is designed to be viewed from a minimum of 30 to 50 feet away, and usually much further) and you'll find that instead of pixels per inch, that it is measured in inches per pixel, and some pixels are the size of your fist. You don't need 64-bit addressing to make very attractive billboards, or may other large outdoor signs.
Both Premiere Pro and After Effects only support GPU features on Nvidia's professional range of Quadro GPUs
Isn't Quadro just a different identifier in the GPU bios and people have been turning their consumer level cards into Quadros with a bios update? The only "magic" about Quadro cards (aside from their insanely high prices) is that the Quadro driver won't run when it detects a consumer card id. To limit this to "Quadro" cards is Adobe, and most especially Nvidia, ripping off the average consumer.
State-of-the-art systems today can simulate about five years per day of computer time, he says, but some climatologists yearn to simulate 100 years in a day."
Something just doesn't jib here. So it takes you 20 days instead of 1 to compute the next hundred years. Why is this a problem? It's still a hundred years in 20 days. Don't you have even a little bit of patience?
The only reason to compute a hundred years in one day is if you're going to restart the computation each morning to see what the next hundred years is looking like. But that means you're throwing away the previous day's computation each morning and starting over. Which means you believe that the previous day's computation is bad. Which means why are you even running it in the first place?
If you can't compute the next hundred years accurately anyway, why don't you work in getting the next 5 years working instead. And hey, you've already got that amount of computing power. And when you do get the thing working right then I can wait an additional 19 days for the answers to the remaining 95 years.
In short, quit yer complaining and get your models running correctly. Then you'll only have to compute it once!
Once I read an insightful article that pointed out how a stock buyback is the sign of a dying company.
Why would it be that, you ask?
Because a company who can't find a better place to invest their cash in expanding themselves into new areas (as opposed to merely buying back their stock) clearly has no vision or wish to be anything more than they already are.
A space elevator is hardly the greatest sci-fi vision of all. The greatest sci-fi vision of all (aside from higher ratings for the SciFi Channel allowing them to produce more original features) is faster than light interstellar travel. A space elevator to nowhere pales compared to that.
I once learned COBOL, and programmed it exclusively for 54 weeks before moving on to jobs outside of the typical business shop. I'm wondering now if the next big thing will be COBOL-script?
Slashdot Mirror
The only DVDs worth burning are those that play in your plain vanilla DVD player sitting on the shelf below your television, or in your portable player. To call anything else DVD movie burning is a misstatement of the facts!
A courtroom is something most of us with even a modicum of common sense do our best to stay out of. There are no guarantees (well none except that the lawyers on both sides will get rich) of what can happen in there. To go all preemptive over this must mean that Real suspects that the MPAA themselves are not wanting to see this before a judge and Real feels they may have leverage. Heaven knows that the MPAA otherwise is hardly shy or retiring about filing suits of their own over imagined slights.
40.8% efficiency of what? A narrow spectrum of light, or of all the solar energy landing on it? Numbers can be so deceptive.
Make billions, pay millions. Sounds like a Wall Street CEO severance package.
Whenever an article about an amazing new breakthrough contains the words all that needs to be done I deflate my expectations and walk quietly away. All that needs to be done here is to actually get it working. Who knows, the scanner plate is small, but it may require a computer the size of a major city's sports arena to handle the results.
Move along, there's nothing to see here yet.
What this tells me is that, if you have good analysis in ahead of time (and with computers and lots of information available this isn't a very high barrier to campaigns with hundreds of millions of dollars available), that you don't have to change very much to commit effective election fraud. In short, you won't need anything like the scale of what the JFK supporters pulled in Illinois in the 1960 election.
And I'm left to wonder how many of their initial sales are to Apple itself who, no doubt, is now working feverishly on a patch to kill it.
This is the same Apple who, when confronted with accusations of performing Reverse Engineering on the gadget against the DMCA will proclaim, "What? Who? Us? We're entitled! Laws are only to stop other people from ripping off our stuff, not stop us from preventing legally sold copies of OS-X from running on non-branded hardware."
If it's this easy to seize domains, can another jurisdiction now seize them from Kentucky and put them back online?
But on a more serious note, where is the WTO in all of this? The WTO has ruled that the USA cannot bar gambling and now Kentucky, a clearly parochial, backwards part of the USA to say the least, has done exactly that. There should be huge damages awarded over this screw-up and Kentucky should have to pay them all.
Also, Kentucky's rational for all this is that Commonwealth law allows seizing "devices used in illegal gaming", and this somehow extends to Internet domains. You'd think under that logic that they ought to be breaking into their own citizen's homes and seizing personal computers and broadband connections, but somehow they're refraining from that so far. Wonder why?
Note to gamblers: Seizing the domain name is different than trying to seize the actual IP addresses. Chances are that all these sites can be gotten to by IP address at minimum.
Note to Kentucky residents: There's an election only about 6 weeks from now. Take this opportunity to throw out all these assholes while it's easy to do.
Not so fast here with the bubbly. This judge still says that copyright infringement can be shown by "circumstantial evidence", rather than the strict proof of the details of actual infringement required by the law and court decisions. And that (in another related case) downloads by MediaSentry count as infringement even thought MediaSentry is a paid agent of the copyright holder and the law has long held that a copyright owner cannot infringe their own copyrights. While all this is good news, it is yet to be great news.
It's evil to redefine commonly understood terms to new meanings just to suit your business model. It's also very 1984ish NewSpeak.
Technically you are completely correct. Aesthetically, however, PC's is better read by a plurality than PCs. One must try to speak to one's audience.
Actually the 64-bit Photoshop CS4 currently only runs on PC's. The Mac version remains at 32-bit for now.
Actually this is a common misconception that large display sizes require large images. Get up close to a billboard (which is designed to be viewed from a minimum of 30 to 50 feet away, and usually much further) and you'll find that instead of pixels per inch, that it is measured in inches per pixel, and some pixels are the size of your fist. You don't need 64-bit addressing to make very attractive billboards, or may other large outdoor signs.
Isn't Quadro just a different identifier in the GPU bios and people have been turning their consumer level cards into Quadros with a bios update? The only "magic" about Quadro cards (aside from their insanely high prices) is that the Quadro driver won't run when it detects a consumer card id. To limit this to "Quadro" cards is Adobe, and most especially Nvidia, ripping off the average consumer.
I didn't see the most classic: Excuse me, but there's a moth caught in one of my relays.
Something just doesn't jib here. So it takes you 20 days instead of 1 to compute the next hundred years. Why is this a problem? It's still a hundred years in 20 days. Don't you have even a little bit of patience?
The only reason to compute a hundred years in one day is if you're going to restart the computation each morning to see what the next hundred years is looking like. But that means you're throwing away the previous day's computation each morning and starting over. Which means you believe that the previous day's computation is bad. Which means why are you even running it in the first place?
If you can't compute the next hundred years accurately anyway, why don't you work in getting the next 5 years working instead. And hey, you've already got that amount of computing power. And when you do get the thing working right then I can wait an additional 19 days for the answers to the remaining 95 years.
In short, quit yer complaining and get your models running correctly. Then you'll only have to compute it once!
Once I read an insightful article that pointed out how a stock buyback is the sign of a dying company.
Why would it be that, you ask?
Because a company who can't find a better place to invest their cash in expanding themselves into new areas (as opposed to merely buying back their stock) clearly has no vision or wish to be anything more than they already are.
And how much of this will come directly from Bill Gates, who has nominally been selling a million shares a month for seemingly forever now?
IBM? Who are they?
Oh, right, they were once an important company in the ancient days of core memory.
So your limit of purchases is your PS3 hard drive capacity. How wise is that?
This should be a slam-dunk case for the ACLU to appeal.
So Comcast now provides less service for the same monthly fee. That's real progress.
A space elevator is hardly the greatest sci-fi vision of all. The greatest sci-fi vision of all (aside from higher ratings for the SciFi Channel allowing them to produce more original features) is faster than light interstellar travel. A space elevator to nowhere pales compared to that.
1: Demand to see Nielson's copyright notice and sue them when it's not forthcoming.
2: Wikileaks!
I once learned COBOL, and programmed it exclusively for 54 weeks before moving on to jobs outside of the typical business shop. I'm wondering now if the next big thing will be COBOL-script?