Ahrrrr! My slashdot, what are they doing to it!?!?
The layout doesn't seem to be broken in any way other than concept, being a Web 2.0 Layout (TM). I mean, check out the rounded corners gradient semi-transparent overlay "Headlines from Slashdot" boxes to the right of the story text. Stuff doesn't just break and end up looking that way.
This looks like a bunch of digg users hacked slashdot and redesigned it according to their screwed up sense of what a website should look like. To their credit, it renders fine in Opera.
Read the item - one user claims proof that Comcast is throttling ftp as well
Yeah, he also claims HTML is much faster than FTP. I guess you could say that, just like you could say that your nose is much faster than a jet because it takes the jet 3 hours to get to you.
You think people here won't like you for saying that Wii is the best console ever? I don't think you could be farther from truth (well except maybe for your original claim). Look outside your window, there's probably a bunch of slashdotters lining up to give you blowjobs.
> It was ENTIRELY their decision to advertise a 6mbps "unlimited" service. If they expect users to stay under some amount of data transfer every month, they should advertise as such.
This is exactly what is starting to happen, and people are still complaining. In fact, they're now starting to mourn the "unlimited" data transfer plans which they never really had in the first place.
-
ISPs do set up caches and mirrors, even if they're not quite what you're suggesting. Throughput/bandwidth might be expensive, but I think having on-site mirrors of Google, MSN, Apple, Netflix, Youtube, etc. can get astronomically expensive too. Do you have any idea what their datacenters look like?
Software equivalent of Unsafe at Any Speed?
on
Geekonomics
·
· Score: 1
So, this book blows the problem completely out of proportion, demonizes the producers and calls for more attention from the clueless masses?
Well, let's just get ready to welcome presidential candidate David Rice!
But that Benz guy wasn't leeching off our tax money, was he? Neither were the Wright brothers. Yet here we are with half a billion of cars and a carrierload of planes. Sure you could bring up the impact military research during WWI/II, but then, we'd never know the alternative in which zee German scientists and entrepreneurs toy around with these ideas in safety and economic prosperity.
Perhaps you're misunderstanding the question. It's not realty "why do anything?". For a question like that, you don't really need an answer beyond "I enjoy $something". It's nobody's business why you want to go watch Gigli on an IMAX screen, that's your thing. Perhaps you could say "my enjoyment of Gigli on a huge screen >= price of admission" if somebody asked to justify your decision further. But things get much more complicated when we're talking about public spending on some pet projects, there has to be more supporting evidence than a bunch of people finding it cool in order to convince me to pay up.
It's easy to point at some existing technology* and claim that it's clearly worth whatever was spent on it, especially if one's not doing any retrospective hidden/opportunity cost analysis. So then, let's engage in some mental masturbation. What if, instead of "wasting"** money on space exploration, we were spending the same amount on exploring our oceans? Having a permanent base on the bottom of the Marianas Trench, a-la Bioshock perhaps, would be pretty damn awesome, I'd say. We'd have scientific research going on, a tourism industry, etc. Then, in the process of exploration we discover a species of fish with the ability to cure cancer telepathically***. Surely then, "cancer curing fish" > "downloading porn while on a desert island"? Looks like we're (indirectly) responsible for deaths of millions every year by choosing space instead of ocean exploration.
The point is, I think, that we can rarely tell in advance what discoveries something like space/ocean exploration will bring, but it'd be nice to have something more than the coolness factor determine the fate of various projects. Go ahead and make a case for human exploration of space, we certainly need more open discussion, but let's try to keep things objective and measurable. It's certainly possible even when dealing with space exploration, just avoid the common fallacies and Utopian dreams. Alright, at this point I'm not sure if this post is forming a coherent argument or not, but I'll leave it at this.
------- *- Some of the things you listed aren't financed from public spending; think Sat TV, Iridium... **- My position on this isn't relevant, so don't flame me on this ***- That's pretty damn stupid, but whatever.
I'm not saying that GM's in good shape right now, just that they're improving. And I'm certainly not intending to argue over GM's strategic decision making, since I'd probably be agreeing with you more often than not anyway. I just wanted to counter your statements with some examples of when GM does get things right.
GM's a huge company, but a few successful models per brand can make a huge difference. Opel (and Saturn) now doesn't just make the boring Vectra (or whatever), but also the Speedster (Sky) and the hip new Astra. Pontiac's getting some actually powerful, sporty RWD cars instead of the shitty FWD (WTF, I used to think Pontiac was basically GM's BMW) stuff. Thanks mainly to the CTS, when somebody says "Cadillac", people no longer imagine outdated land barges, but modern, distinct, and luxurious cars. See where this is going? Several strong products can greatly improve a brand's image and customer loyalty.
The purpose of the GCotY link was to show that GM does, contrary to your original statement, have a real hybrid vehicle. It's probably not widely available yet, but it's no vaporware either. So sure, GM doesn't have a successful full hybrid. But then, who, except perhaps for Toyota, does? The Volt can still go either way, and for now I'm on "plausible". Biodiesel and E85 are buzzwords now, but what that basically means is that there would be a diesel (slightly modified to safely operate on BD) and gas (... ethanol) engine.
Sorry to disappoint, and I can see how you got that impression, but I don't read (car) magazines at all. I just remembered most of that from an occasional blog or episode of Top Gear, then google did the rest.
Give 'em a break. Despite the financial clusterfuck they're in right now, GM's not doing that poorly.
They're clearly fixing what is wrong. The new CTS is Car of the Year in the US (Chevy Malibu was second pick (or third ?)), the Opel Astra is one of the best selling cars in Europe, and Buick's doing very well in China. It's hard to talk about reliability, but Buick's been doing pretty well in that area. The Holden Commodore holds the top selling spot in Australia, as I could imagine (having not looked at any numbers) does Daewoo in its home market. Overall, they're having record sales and solid profits around the world, except the US. Saabs have been historically some of the safest cars around, and most recent GM cars are doing fine too.
Now that we got this out of the way... of course, most of the concepts are bound to remain just that, concepts. Just look at some of the past concepts. Still, I think Volt has a pretty good chance of being the real thing, since it's not that far fetched. The driverless car, on the other hand... probably not, but we might see some elements appearing in production vehicles. BTW, you might want to check out Green Car of the Year, you'll be surprised by the winner.
What kind of an idiot would put the flight control systems and the on-board entertainment/voip/net/pr0n on the same physical network? Were they trying to save weight/money by running only one cable through the plane? I recall reading about MS stuffing their software into cars (that probably evolved into Ford's SYNC) and even there the MS crap and the engine management systems were completely separate.
Is there any info regarding how soon KDE 4 will be out? I'm having problems with KDE under FreeBSD, but now Mr Yushchenko suggests I should just use the latest release. I'm not sure if 3.5 will do the trick, or I should just wait for 4.0?
Well, duh. Of course it's weak, and feeble. It's the Ukrainian crossbow after all. Still, the monitor was a sitting duck in this case, I'm sure they could really put the hurt on it with a 9mm.
I wouldn't say that the laptop is more powerful than your PC. First of all it's dual core vs your quad, but even for the purposes of WoW, its single core runs at 2.2GHz vs your 2.4. The laptop does have two graphics cards, but they're mobile 8700 GTs. It's pretty difficult to tell which are faster in the real world since mobile and desktop cards are rarely compared directly, but keep in mind that the laptop's WUXGA screen has 30% more pixels to fill.
Or maybe it's just cognitive dissonance on my part, trying to justify my recent $1k Q6600/8800GT build. Actually, scratch the 8800GT part, it's yet to arrive.
What do you mean, "stolen by ASUS"? The original GPL code is still there, freely available from wherever the ASUS folks got it from. The owners are still in full posession of the code. Does not compute. EOF
Slashdot Mirror
Ahrrrr! My slashdot, what are they doing to it!?!?
The layout doesn't seem to be broken in any way other than concept, being a Web 2.0 Layout (TM). I mean, check out the rounded corners gradient semi-transparent overlay "Headlines from Slashdot" boxes to the right of the story text. Stuff doesn't just break and end up looking that way.
This looks like a bunch of digg users hacked slashdot and redesigned it according to their screwed up sense of what a website should look like. To their credit, it renders fine in Opera.
I guess from now on I'll have to perform the 8 level DoD 5220.69M brain wipe instead of the plain old erase procedure :(
Read the item - one user claims proof that Comcast is throttling ftp as well
Yeah, he also claims HTML is much faster than FTP. I guess you could say that, just like you could say that your nose is much faster than a jet because it takes the jet 3 hours to get to you.
Wait a second...
You think people here won't like you for saying that Wii is the best console ever? I don't think you could be farther from truth (well except maybe for your original claim). Look outside your window, there's probably a bunch of slashdotters lining up to give you blowjobs.
Lucky bastard.
You might want to check on her, but I'm sure your mom's not upstairs. I just saw her in the kitchen cooking me breakfast.
Seriously. Just go watch Rambo instead.
>Give the kid a blank piece of paper, and see what they draw.
This is probably what they'll draw.
> It was ENTIRELY their decision to advertise a 6mbps "unlimited" service. If they expect users to stay under some amount of data transfer every month, they should advertise as such.
This is exactly what is starting to happen, and people are still complaining. In fact, they're now starting to mourn the "unlimited" data transfer plans which they never really had in the first place.
-
ISPs do set up caches and mirrors, even if they're not quite what you're suggesting. Throughput/bandwidth might be expensive, but I think having on-site mirrors of Google, MSN, Apple, Netflix, Youtube, etc. can get astronomically expensive too. Do you have any idea what their datacenters look like?
So, this book blows the problem completely out of proportion, demonizes the producers and calls for more attention from the clueless masses?
Well, let's just get ready to welcome presidential candidate David Rice!
No shit, it even has twice as many USB ports. Now that's impressive!
I think he meant Cockbuster...
But that Benz guy wasn't leeching off our tax money, was he? Neither were the Wright brothers. Yet here we are with half a billion of cars and a carrierload of planes. Sure you could bring up the impact military research during WWI/II, but then, we'd never know the alternative in which zee German scientists and entrepreneurs toy around with these ideas in safety and economic prosperity.
Perhaps you're misunderstanding the question. It's not realty "why do anything?". For a question like that, you don't really need an answer beyond "I enjoy $something". It's nobody's business why you want to go watch Gigli on an IMAX screen, that's your thing. Perhaps you could say "my enjoyment of Gigli on a huge screen >= price of admission" if somebody asked to justify your decision further. But things get much more complicated when we're talking about public spending on some pet projects, there has to be more supporting evidence than a bunch of people finding it cool in order to convince me to pay up.
It's easy to point at some existing technology* and claim that it's clearly worth whatever was spent on it, especially if one's not doing any retrospective hidden/opportunity cost analysis. So then, let's engage in some mental masturbation. What if, instead of "wasting"** money on space exploration, we were spending the same amount on exploring our oceans? Having a permanent base on the bottom of the Marianas Trench, a-la Bioshock perhaps, would be pretty damn awesome, I'd say. We'd have scientific research going on, a tourism industry, etc. Then, in the process of exploration we discover a species of fish with the ability to cure cancer telepathically***. Surely then, "cancer curing fish" > "downloading porn while on a desert island"? Looks like we're (indirectly) responsible for deaths of millions every year by choosing space instead of ocean exploration.
The point is, I think, that we can rarely tell in advance what discoveries something like space/ocean exploration will bring, but it'd be nice to have something more than the coolness factor determine the fate of various projects. Go ahead and make a case for human exploration of space, we certainly need more open discussion, but let's try to keep things objective and measurable. It's certainly possible even when dealing with space exploration, just avoid the common fallacies and Utopian dreams. Alright, at this point I'm not sure if this post is forming a coherent argument or not, but I'll leave it at this.
-------
*- Some of the things you listed aren't financed from public spending; think Sat TV, Iridium...
**- My position on this isn't relevant, so don't flame me on this
***- That's pretty damn stupid, but whatever.
I guess all the suction must have generated enough lift on the joke to get it right over the mods' heads.
I'm not saying that GM's in good shape right now, just that they're improving. And I'm certainly not intending to argue over GM's strategic decision making, since I'd probably be agreeing with you more often than not anyway. I just wanted to counter your statements with some examples of when GM does get things right.
GM's a huge company, but a few successful models per brand can make a huge difference. Opel (and Saturn) now doesn't just make the boring Vectra (or whatever), but also the Speedster (Sky) and the hip new Astra. Pontiac's getting some actually powerful, sporty RWD cars instead of the shitty FWD (WTF, I used to think Pontiac was basically GM's BMW) stuff. Thanks mainly to the CTS, when somebody says "Cadillac", people no longer imagine outdated land barges, but modern, distinct, and luxurious cars. See where this is going? Several strong products can greatly improve a brand's image and customer loyalty.
The purpose of the GCotY link was to show that GM does, contrary to your original statement, have a real hybrid vehicle. It's probably not widely available yet, but it's no vaporware either. So sure, GM doesn't have a successful full hybrid. But then, who, except perhaps for Toyota, does? The Volt can still go either way, and for now I'm on "plausible". Biodiesel and E85 are buzzwords now, but what that basically means is that there would be a diesel (slightly modified to safely operate on BD) and gas (... ethanol) engine.
Sorry to disappoint, and I can see how you got that impression, but I don't read (car) magazines at all. I just remembered most of that from an occasional blog or episode of Top Gear, then google did the rest.
Give 'em a break. Despite the financial clusterfuck they're in right now, GM's not doing that poorly.
They're clearly fixing what is wrong. The new CTS is Car of the Year in the US (Chevy Malibu was second pick (or third ?)), the Opel Astra is one of the best selling cars in Europe, and Buick's doing very well in China. It's hard to talk about reliability, but Buick's been doing pretty well in that area. The Holden Commodore holds the top selling spot in Australia, as I could imagine (having not looked at any numbers) does Daewoo in its home market. Overall, they're having record sales and solid profits around the world, except the US. Saabs have been historically some of the safest cars around, and most recent GM cars are doing fine too.
Now that we got this out of the way... of course, most of the concepts are bound to remain just that, concepts. Just look at some of the past concepts. Still, I think Volt has a pretty good chance of being the real thing, since it's not that far fetched. The driverless car, on the other hand... probably not, but we might see some elements appearing in production vehicles. BTW, you might want to check out Green Car of the Year, you'll be surprised by the winner.
What kind of an idiot would put the flight control systems and the on-board entertainment/voip/net/pr0n on the same physical network? Were they trying to save weight/money by running only one cable through the plane?
I recall reading about MS stuffing their software into cars (that probably evolved into Ford's SYNC) and even there the MS crap and the engine management systems were completely separate.
> patent [..] patents [..] patents [..] patent [..] patents [..] patent [..] patent
Richard Stallman, is that you?
Is there any info regarding how soon KDE 4 will be out?
I'm having problems with KDE under FreeBSD, but now Mr Yushchenko suggests I should just use the latest release. I'm not sure if 3.5 will do the trick, or I should just wait for 4.0?
> How would your average dog owner respond to me walking a rat around, letting it pee on things?
Most would just let their dog eat your rat.
> That crossbow seemed pretty weak.
Well, duh. Of course it's weak, and feeble. It's the Ukrainian crossbow after all. Still, the monitor was a sitting duck in this case, I'm sure they could really put the hurt on it with a 9mm.
4 == "for" for space reasons
A BIOS recovery mechanism which, if the BIOS is somehow gutted, allows one to fully recover the system by leaving it off overnight in a sealed closet.
I wouldn't say that the laptop is more powerful than your PC. First of all it's dual core vs your quad, but even for the purposes of WoW, its single core runs at 2.2GHz vs your 2.4. The laptop does have two graphics cards, but they're mobile 8700 GTs. It's pretty difficult to tell which are faster in the real world since mobile and desktop cards are rarely compared directly, but keep in mind that the laptop's WUXGA screen has 30% more pixels to fill.
Or maybe it's just cognitive dissonance on my part, trying to justify my recent $1k Q6600/8800GT build. Actually, scratch the 8800GT part, it's yet to arrive.
What do you mean, "stolen by ASUS"? The original GPL code is still there, freely available from wherever the ASUS folks got it from. The owners are still in full posession of the code. Does not compute. EOF