All the x86-64 procs incorporate all the instruction sets by both AMD and Intel that exist at the time they are developed, with the possible exception of whatever brand new extension each has incorporated into their newest generation of processors. If by "second way" you mean Intel's collaboration with HP, no, those instructions don't run on Intel's x86-64 procs. It's an entirely separate and incompatible architecture. It's also been dying slowly since the day it was released. AMD created the modern 64-bit processor architecture. Intel copied it (since AMD was open with the architecture) to stay competitive, but apparently did not follow the architecture to the letter.
Those who aren't affected escaped by virtue of not using the instruction Intel screwed up.
I believe the point actually being contended originally was the assertion that there is no form of capitalistic business apart from crony capitalism.
There most certainly are, they are usually just limited to being in small players in big markets or big players in small markets. Once you reach a certain level it requires having gobs of money in order to maintain independence from crony networks, making it much more rare. Yes, you can make gobs of money without being close friends with your local mafia officials, it just tends to be a lot harder than sticking close by them. One that comes to mind as a potential example (I'm not saying it actually is, but based on my general impression of the company) is Bose. On a smaller scale, I could name several dozen companies making good (but not ungodly) amounts of money, none of which most people here have likely ever heard of on account of their regional nature. They exist because they serve markets well and don't incur the notice of those involved in crony capitalism.
By percentage of world GDP though, I'd guess a pretty massive percentage of the world's output is derived from companies engaged in crony capitalism though.
I definitely agree that life is neither fair nor a meritocracy.
Creating fairness first comes with defining what "fairness" actually means. Much of the total effort spent on fairness has been on trying (and usually failing) to hash out what exactly the word should mean.
Agreed with many points, but none of those actually support the original statement I was disagreeing with. That money still does not go to the publisher.
Only in the case of purchase-size discounts would there be a differential, and I would have to see real data on large university purchases vs Amazon/B&N purchases before assuming the latter are far larger in general, for every current edition text in common use in US universities.
As for custom binding and printing, they're more likely to be workbooks rarely topping 50-100 pages. Black and white duplex printing and automated binding does not cost $0.10/page unless you're doing it at the retail level unless you're doing one-offs or you're really getting screwed. It also does not make sense, unless you are trying to inflate sales, to incorporate destructive elements into a custom book. By pulling out the destructive elements, the burden on students is decreased related to costs, the burden on the school is decreased in infrastructure, equipment, distribution, and stock needs, and the professor can focus on moonlighting somewhere else where they're not selling their work to an audience who is compelled to buy it after entering the general lock-in that comes with picking a university to attend. They can still sell some smaller subset of copies (not everyone returns books, or keeps them intact enough to return), and they still can sell a (much smaller) workbook to every student every semester. That is, if they actually care about the students more than they care about the perks of a guaranteed market.
While I won't be happy to see it used for more DRM, it actually could prove quite beneficial to have increased general access to a chip which should be usable as a crypto coprocessor.
Crypto offloading cards are pretty expensive, and this would allow for modules to be rewritten on AMD+Linux boxes to dedicate SSL and like functions without increasing the general processor load.
Margins on gasoline at US retailers aren't large enough to allow discretionary price swings of 20c/gal, much less 20c/L. Any swings that large will come only as a result of something influencing terminal prices. As far as I'm aware, even the stations bearing a major oil company's name are only franchisees leasing the rights to the name.
I don't use AT&T, so I've never had reason to delve into this issue, but how exactly do they enforce the cost differential between a smartphone and a dumphone on a GSM network?
If you're not using any extra smartphone services (like BES) which require the plan be specifically provisioned for a smartphone, what's stopping you from activating a dumbphone and tossing the SIM into a smartphone afterward?
The above, coupled with the ability to consciously recognize and avoid the bias traps created by those who write the tests (or unconsciously avoiding them by coming from a culture without the bias those traps are designed to exploit in the first place).
Were you using your regular browser piped through Tor? If so, it still has all those unique identifying characteristics it always did.
Given that browsers leak various tidbits system information, I'm not sure there is really a way to be truly anonymous short of large numbers of people browsing from a VM/browser combo set up to display identical leaked information.
Even using the bundled Tor browser stock, your system fonts can easily shortlist your identity.
I agree. The 9th Circuit judges who heard the case I listed do not.
Specifically:
The ALA fears that the software industry’s licensing practices could be adopted by other copyright owners, including book publishers, record labels, and movie studios.
These are serious contentions on both sides, but they do not alter our conclusion that our precedent from Wise through the MAI trio requires the result we reach. Congress is free, of course, to modify the first sale doctrine and the essential step defense if it deems these or other policy considerations to require a different approach.
The Court tacitly agrees with the ALA's claims as to the potential effects of the ruling on other media should the licensing practices of the software industry be adopted by other distributors outside the software industry. Book sales are only different because the use of licensing has not been adopted. Without Congressional intervention, book and video sellers are free to adopt the conventions of software licensing and end secondary markets.
Not that I'm otherwise a huge fan of RMS, but I'm surprised I haven't seen any reference to the "Right to Read" in this discussion yet. Given the direction US copyright and education are going, it gets scarily closer every day.
Also, of the dozen or so colleges I'm at least passingly familiar with, all require professors to list at least one text even if the class is structured so one is not necessary. The better professors of those particular classes would inform the students on the first day that purchasing the text was optional even if the course guide claimed it was mandatory. This didn't help those who had purchased a new text and taken the shrinkwrap off before the first day of class though. Instant 25-30% deduction from the return price at the college bookstore.
The money you pay for a textbook goes to the textbook publisher.
Only partially true. Most colleges drastically mark up the price of textbooks, and the above ignores the vast quantity of used textbooks they purchase for 10% of cost and resell for 90% of new.
It also ignores the practice of professors creating custom, very non-professional texts for their classes and splitting the profits with the college. These are texts which cannot be obtained anywhere else, and are frequently packaged in such a way that they are not re-usable (tear-out assignments being a favorite trick).
At least according to the 9th Circuit in Vernor v. Autodesk, there is no first sale doctrine if the transaction includes a licensing agreement which substantially restricts (such as prohibiting subsequent transfer of the access license) the rights of the purchaser. All this, even if the transaction is treated as a straight-up sale in all other regards by both parties (full upfront payment with no obligation to return the material after a time, and no further obligations on the part of the seller).
As a result, any sale can be converted to a license simply by posting a licensing agreement which includes restrictive terms. This latter part is not idle speculation, but is actually specifically noted by the 9th Circuit order. Given that the 9th Circuit declined an en banc hearing on the results and SCOTUS declined certiorari, the ruling will stand unchallenged until the unlikely event that another Circuit issues an opposing ruling. Given that the US judiciary has evolved from ruling on function (looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, probably a duck) over form (looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, appellant claims it's a cat, probably a cat), it's unlikely SCOTUS would reverse this ruling even if it somehow ends up in front of them though.
Until the book is written by that particular professor, who then requires its purchase in order to pass the class the professor is teaching.
Happens all the time in US universities, so in some cases there is a financial incentive for the professor to require the purchase of a particular book.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, yeah. A subsidized phone is a deal with the devil, so you're at the whim of their insane terms. I don't do that, personally.
On typical systems needing such a card, the acceleration functions of an onboard GPU have no integral purpose.
All the x86-64 procs incorporate all the instruction sets by both AMD and Intel that exist at the time they are developed, with the possible exception of whatever brand new extension each has incorporated into their newest generation of processors. If by "second way" you mean Intel's collaboration with HP, no, those instructions don't run on Intel's x86-64 procs. It's an entirely separate and incompatible architecture. It's also been dying slowly since the day it was released. AMD created the modern 64-bit processor architecture. Intel copied it (since AMD was open with the architecture) to stay competitive, but apparently did not follow the architecture to the letter.
Those who aren't affected escaped by virtue of not using the instruction Intel screwed up.
I believe the point actually being contended originally was the assertion that there is no form of capitalistic business apart from crony capitalism.
There most certainly are, they are usually just limited to being in small players in big markets or big players in small markets. Once you reach a certain level it requires having gobs of money in order to maintain independence from crony networks, making it much more rare. Yes, you can make gobs of money without being close friends with your local mafia officials, it just tends to be a lot harder than sticking close by them. One that comes to mind as a potential example (I'm not saying it actually is, but based on my general impression of the company) is Bose. On a smaller scale, I could name several dozen companies making good (but not ungodly) amounts of money, none of which most people here have likely ever heard of on account of their regional nature. They exist because they serve markets well and don't incur the notice of those involved in crony capitalism.
By percentage of world GDP though, I'd guess a pretty massive percentage of the world's output is derived from companies engaged in crony capitalism though.
I definitely agree that life is neither fair nor a meritocracy.
Creating fairness first comes with defining what "fairness" actually means. Much of the total effort spent on fairness has been on trying (and usually failing) to hash out what exactly the word should mean.
That is pretty crappy. I thought the options in the US sucked...
That it's been posted to Slashdot when it's not relevant lessens its impact; many such things happen on a regular basis.
That the above has happened doesn't invalidate its relevance to this particular story, your opinion of its continuing usefulness notwithstanding.
Agreed with many points, but none of those actually support the original statement I was disagreeing with. That money still does not go to the publisher.
Only in the case of purchase-size discounts would there be a differential, and I would have to see real data on large university purchases vs Amazon/B&N purchases before assuming the latter are far larger in general, for every current edition text in common use in US universities.
As for custom binding and printing, they're more likely to be workbooks rarely topping 50-100 pages. Black and white duplex printing and automated binding does not cost $0.10/page unless you're doing it at the retail level unless you're doing one-offs or you're really getting screwed. It also does not make sense, unless you are trying to inflate sales, to incorporate destructive elements into a custom book. By pulling out the destructive elements, the burden on students is decreased related to costs, the burden on the school is decreased in infrastructure, equipment, distribution, and stock needs, and the professor can focus on moonlighting somewhere else where they're not selling their work to an audience who is compelled to buy it after entering the general lock-in that comes with picking a university to attend. They can still sell some smaller subset of copies (not everyone returns books, or keeps them intact enough to return), and they still can sell a (much smaller) workbook to every student every semester. That is, if they actually care about the students more than they care about the perks of a guaranteed market.
While I won't be happy to see it used for more DRM, it actually could prove quite beneficial to have increased general access to a chip which should be usable as a crypto coprocessor.
Crypto offloading cards are pretty expensive, and this would allow for modules to be rewritten on AMD+Linux boxes to dedicate SSL and like functions without increasing the general processor load.
Margins on gasoline at US retailers aren't large enough to allow discretionary price swings of 20c/gal, much less 20c/L. Any swings that large will come only as a result of something influencing terminal prices. As far as I'm aware, even the stations bearing a major oil company's name are only franchisees leasing the rights to the name.
Caller ID and voice mail aren't included in the basic cost of Canadian cell service?
I don't use AT&T, so I've never had reason to delve into this issue, but how exactly do they enforce the cost differential between a smartphone and a dumphone on a GSM network?
If you're not using any extra smartphone services (like BES) which require the plan be specifically provisioned for a smartphone, what's stopping you from activating a dumbphone and tossing the SIM into a smartphone afterward?
The above, coupled with the ability to consciously recognize and avoid the bias traps created by those who write the tests (or unconsciously avoiding them by coming from a culture without the bias those traps are designed to exploit in the first place).
Were you using your regular browser piped through Tor? If so, it still has all those unique identifying characteristics it always did.
Given that browsers leak various tidbits system information, I'm not sure there is really a way to be truly anonymous short of large numbers of people browsing from a VM/browser combo set up to display identical leaked information.
Even using the bundled Tor browser stock, your system fonts can easily shortlist your identity.
It's pretty easy to watch traffic generated by something even if you don't have access to the source code.
I agree. The 9th Circuit judges who heard the case I listed do not.
Specifically:
The Court tacitly agrees with the ALA's claims as to the potential effects of the ruling on other media should the licensing practices of the software industry be adopted by other distributors outside the software industry. Book sales are only different because the use of licensing has not been adopted. Without Congressional intervention, book and video sellers are free to adopt the conventions of software licensing and end secondary markets.
Oops, somehow had browsing set to 1, hence not seeing the couple ACs who posted the link...
Doh.
Not that I'm otherwise a huge fan of RMS, but I'm surprised I haven't seen any reference to the "Right to Read" in this discussion yet. Given the direction US copyright and education are going, it gets scarily closer every day.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Also, of the dozen or so colleges I'm at least passingly familiar with, all require professors to list at least one text even if the class is structured so one is not necessary. The better professors of those particular classes would inform the students on the first day that purchasing the text was optional even if the course guide claimed it was mandatory. This didn't help those who had purchased a new text and taken the shrinkwrap off before the first day of class though. Instant 25-30% deduction from the return price at the college bookstore.
The money you pay for a textbook goes to the textbook publisher.
Only partially true. Most colleges drastically mark up the price of textbooks, and the above ignores the vast quantity of used textbooks they purchase for 10% of cost and resell for 90% of new.
It also ignores the practice of professors creating custom, very non-professional texts for their classes and splitting the profits with the college. These are texts which cannot be obtained anywhere else, and are frequently packaged in such a way that they are not re-usable (tear-out assignments being a favorite trick).
Since when?
Since Sept 10th, 2010.
Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 621 F. 3d 1102 - 2010
At least according to the 9th Circuit in Vernor v. Autodesk, there is no first sale doctrine if the transaction includes a licensing agreement which substantially restricts (such as prohibiting subsequent transfer of the access license) the rights of the purchaser. All this, even if the transaction is treated as a straight-up sale in all other regards by both parties (full upfront payment with no obligation to return the material after a time, and no further obligations on the part of the seller).
As a result, any sale can be converted to a license simply by posting a licensing agreement which includes restrictive terms. This latter part is not idle speculation, but is actually specifically noted by the 9th Circuit order. Given that the 9th Circuit declined an en banc hearing on the results and SCOTUS declined certiorari, the ruling will stand unchallenged until the unlikely event that another Circuit issues an opposing ruling. Given that the US judiciary has evolved from ruling on function (looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, probably a duck) over form (looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, appellant claims it's a cat, probably a cat), it's unlikely SCOTUS would reverse this ruling even if it somehow ends up in front of them though.
Professors have few incentives [...]
Until the book is written by that particular professor, who then requires its purchase in order to pass the class the professor is teaching.
Happens all the time in US universities, so in some cases there is a financial incentive for the professor to require the purchase of a particular book.
Man/woman, dead/alive
I'm a trans-gender zombie, you insensitive clod!
And, a significant number of websites have maximum length limits too.
Sites and services that artificially limit the character set and length of passwords annoy the hell out of me.