Which government do you mean by the government. It can't be the US government. The government has no constitional authority to have any role whatsoever in education, the environment, or television. All you're saying is that you don't like the government's blatantly unconstitional and illegal interference in television standards, but you'd like the government to engage in blatantly unconstitional and illegal power grabs for your pet issues education and "the environment." You have no more legitimacy or authority than the very people you're railing against!
Clearly, monster.jobs is required, because monster.com has had such a low hit rate. And I suppose a few others. So we've created a top level domain for about 4 or 5 sites total.
Hey, how come they have a line with a one-year no defective pixel guarantee, but my IBM Thinkpad has at least 4 of them? This was after the screen was replaced because it had about 16.
What's the point? Wikipedia is an inherently online medium. The articles change daily, new ones are created, etc. This cannot be reasonably placed on a static medium.
Sir, I ask you to consider the notion that the prospect of "comfort" can go a long way towards influencing consumer thinking that one product is "better" than another for their particular needs.
Nah. For whatever reason, most people's opinions are clearly that Microsoft's products are better than the competition. This may because they aren't aware of the alternatives, but hey, no consumer is omniscient (this is where marketing in its many forms comes in). When I run software X on Microsoft, or Microsoft on Microsoft, it's because in my opinion, that's the best option available at that time. Same when I run software Y on a Linux distro. Or if you can afford it and are willing, Mac OS X or whatever else you may think is best.
I think you're completely missing his point. He stated that the system would stay in idle mode, and stop responding to user input. I think. Dvorak has the coherency of a chimpanzee on Atkins.
You don't mean to imply that the only reason Apple hasn't released an x86 version of OS X is fear that Redmond might explode, do you? Also, what are your sources for Apple porting their OS to x86 since System 7? They never even successfully ported System 7; that failed with project Star Trek.
Isn't ALSA the base level sound driver, and arts the sound server? Although I have tons of problems with applications configured to use arts being unable to play sounds concurrently with another arts configured app. That's if you can figure out a way to set it to arts.
Um, yeah, "The 90nm technology chip will use the same 939-pin infrastructure and cooling solutions as the current Athlon 64 chips, meaning that upgrading to a dual core chip from your current AMD64 will require little more than a BIOS update. Available in the second half of this year, the chip will be added to AMD's current line (Athlon64, Athlon FX, Sempron)." seems to have been completely made up guesses, as this is no where in the source article. Oh, and also, cooling solution, not mentioned. Only that that the power dissipation was closer to single-core chip, not that the cooling solution would be identical to single core chips.
Actually, indicated by historical prices and adjusted for inflation, oil is getting cheaper, not more expensive (not that it doesn't go back and forth a little on its way). Using basic supply and demand, we can tell that oil is becoming more available, not less. Also, the nature of oil as a "reserve" is in question. I quote from Wikipedia:
"Thomas Gold was the most widely known Western proponent of the Russian-Ukrainian theory of abiogenic petroleum origin. This theory suggests that large amounts of carbon exist naturally in the planet, some in the form of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are lighter than rocks so they seep upward. Deep microbial life convert them into the various hydrocarbon deposits.
There is also a new theory, presented in Scientific American in 2003, which proposes that hydrocarbons are generated by active nuclear activity in the Earth's core."
Now, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that oil, while becoming more plentiful, will still one day run out. This actually isn't as big of a problem as it may seem at first glance. First, if the supply of oil does indeed to run out at some future date, it will not stop all at once, but rather at a gradual rate. During this period, as the supply contracted, the price of oil would rise. At some point, it would become more expensive to use than alternative energy sources (take your pick; nuclear seems to be a popular choice). In response and leading up to this point, various competing alternatives would jostle in the free marketplace for acceptance, and the most efficient and desirable solution would be adopted. The worst possible option would be to prematurely cut off the oil supply before any downturn in reserves has been detected, thereby artificially raising prices and dragging down economies to a great extent. This, indeed, would be seen as an "energy crisis."
"as the scientific consensus is well established."
This is pure FUD. The scientific consensus, if anything, is that the models currently used for global warming don't backdate, that global warming seems to be more natural than man-made, and that it seems odd that the data shows temperature increases dating back to before the Industrial Revolution, when for all intents and purposes human emissions were nil. You can't cite one highly suspect website and make up the claim that there's a "consenus" where none exists in your favor. This isn't science, it's feel-good eco-politics.
They already trampled over polticial speech with the McCain-Feingold Incumbency Protection Act. You really thought they'd stop there? Not to mention the FCC.
The OS already is sold on the market for over $100. Haven't you been to Best Buy, CompUSA, Buy.com, etc. lately? Asking for the government to cripple your opponent will just come back 3x as worse against you.
'We use these accounts to communicate with you folks, view internet sites, and conduct other non-sensitive bureau business such as sending out press releases.'
You folks? Gee, thanks alot, we don't trust you much either.
This could be another causal fallacy by those twin titans of journalism, Slashdot and the NYT. One would have to have a much longer trend line to even discern if the amount of the increase in SPAM is abnormal or not. Even then, you'd have to run a regressive analysis to figure out what the liklihood that the SPAM increase was related to the CAN-SPAM Act was or not. Techies are supposed to have logical, reason and statistical skills. Slashdot isn't for techies anymore, and hasn't been in years.
Slashdot Mirror
Which government do you mean by the government. It can't be the US government. The government has no constitional authority to have any role whatsoever in education, the environment, or television. All you're saying is that you don't like the government's blatantly unconstitional and illegal interference in television standards, but you'd like the government to engage in blatantly unconstitional and illegal power grabs for your pet issues education and "the environment." You have no more legitimacy or authority than the very people you're railing against!
Wait a minute, I thought I was using beta software all along?
And I thought Slashdot had been posting random articles all these years...
Clearly, monster.jobs is required, because monster.com has had such a low hit rate. And I suppose a few others. So we've created a top level domain for about 4 or 5 sites total.
Hey, how come they have a line with a one-year no defective pixel guarantee, but my IBM Thinkpad has at least 4 of them? This was after the screen was replaced because it had about 16.
The search slowness is a problem with Wikipedia's servers being overloaded, not the internet connection.
What's the point? Wikipedia is an inherently online medium. The articles change daily, new ones are created, etc. This cannot be reasonably placed on a static medium.
Smells like stinky, irrelevant product placement.
See:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_classic/ stats/mac_plus.html/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=112 165/
They are, so you are correct.
Sir, I ask you to consider the notion that the prospect of "comfort" can go a long way towards influencing consumer thinking that one product is "better" than another for their particular needs.
Darwin is a far cry from OS X, mind you.
Nah. For whatever reason, most people's opinions are clearly that Microsoft's products are better than the competition. This may because they aren't aware of the alternatives, but hey, no consumer is omniscient (this is where marketing in its many forms comes in). When I run software X on Microsoft, or Microsoft on Microsoft, it's because in my opinion, that's the best option available at that time. Same when I run software Y on a Linux distro. Or if you can afford it and are willing, Mac OS X or whatever else you may think is best.
I think you're completely missing his point. He stated that the system would stay in idle mode, and stop responding to user input. I think. Dvorak has the coherency of a chimpanzee on Atkins.
You don't mean to imply that the only reason Apple hasn't released an x86 version of OS X is fear that Redmond might explode, do you? Also, what are your sources for Apple porting their OS to x86 since System 7? They never even successfully ported System 7; that failed with project Star Trek.
Isn't ALSA the base level sound driver, and arts the sound server? Although I have tons of problems with applications configured to use arts being unable to play sounds concurrently with another arts configured app. That's if you can figure out a way to set it to arts.
Great, so we're pushing them into an oversaturated and cratering market. Talk about do-gooders...
Well, it seems clear that hamsters can compose music better than those pop-tarts...
Um, yeah, "The 90nm technology chip will use the same 939-pin infrastructure and cooling solutions as the current Athlon 64 chips, meaning that upgrading to a dual core chip from your current AMD64 will require little more than a BIOS update. Available in the second half of this year, the chip will be added to AMD's current line (Athlon64, Athlon FX, Sempron)." seems to have been completely made up guesses, as this is no where in the source article. Oh, and also, cooling solution, not mentioned. Only that that the power dissipation was closer to single-core chip, not that the cooling solution would be identical to single core chips.
"Thomas Gold was the most widely known Western proponent of the Russian-Ukrainian theory of abiogenic petroleum origin. This theory suggests that large amounts of carbon exist naturally in the planet, some in the form of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are lighter than rocks so they seep upward. Deep microbial life convert them into the various hydrocarbon deposits.
There is also a new theory, presented in Scientific American in 2003, which proposes that hydrocarbons are generated by active nuclear activity in the Earth's core."
Now, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that oil, while becoming more plentiful, will still one day run out. This actually isn't as big of a problem as it may seem at first glance. First, if the supply of oil does indeed to run out at some future date, it will not stop all at once, but rather at a gradual rate. During this period, as the supply contracted, the price of oil would rise. At some point, it would become more expensive to use than alternative energy sources (take your pick; nuclear seems to be a popular choice). In response and leading up to this point, various competing alternatives would jostle in the free marketplace for acceptance, and the most efficient and desirable solution would be adopted. The worst possible option would be to prematurely cut off the oil supply before any downturn in reserves has been detected, thereby artificially raising prices and dragging down economies to a great extent. This, indeed, would be seen as an "energy crisis."
This is pure FUD. The scientific consensus, if anything, is that the models currently used for global warming don't backdate, that global warming seems to be more natural than man-made, and that it seems odd that the data shows temperature increases dating back to before the Industrial Revolution, when for all intents and purposes human emissions were nil. You can't cite one highly suspect website and make up the claim that there's a "consenus" where none exists in your favor. This isn't science, it's feel-good eco-politics.
They already trampled over polticial speech with the McCain-Feingold Incumbency Protection Act. You really thought they'd stop there? Not to mention the FCC.
The OS already is sold on the market for over $100. Haven't you been to Best Buy, CompUSA, Buy.com, etc. lately? Asking for the government to cripple your opponent will just come back 3x as worse against you.
You folks? Gee, thanks alot, we don't trust you much either.
This could be another causal fallacy by those twin titans of journalism, Slashdot and the NYT. One would have to have a much longer trend line to even discern if the amount of the increase in SPAM is abnormal or not. Even then, you'd have to run a regressive analysis to figure out what the liklihood that the SPAM increase was related to the CAN-SPAM Act was or not. Techies are supposed to have logical, reason and statistical skills. Slashdot isn't for techies anymore, and hasn't been in years.