No, that is a myth. For example, if you open two video players at once and play some porn in each, but run the first player full screen and the other in the background then the CPU cycles of the background porn are being wasted, because no one is watching it!
Everybody loves the underdog in theory, so they write and link to articles about it.
In actual practice everyone knows interoperability between Macs and the Wintel world is as much of a pain as with Linux.
I know I am sort of preaching to the choir, but as everyone knows:
A. Cost: High to Very High P. Performance: Moderate (excepting video/media) P. Value: Moderate to low L. Support: Good E. HW Compatibility: Very poor .. SW Compatibility: Fair to poor .. Ease of use: Very Good .. Overall Quality: Good .. Coolness factor: High for non-geeks .. Niche market: Dumb people, nonconformists, educational institutions, and professionals with specific needs.
W. Cost: Moderate to High I. Performance: Fair N. Value: Moderate D. Support: Widespread O. HW Compatibility: High W. SW Compatibility: High S. Ease of use: Good .. Overall Quality: Poor .. Coolness factor: Low .. Niche Market: Idiots, conformists, and anyone with lots of money.
L. Cost: Low to very low I. Performance: Moderate to High N. Value: Moderate to High U. Support: Rare (but increasingly "Fair") X. HW Compatibility: Fair .. SW Compatibility: Fair to Poor .. Ease of use: Poor .. Overall Quality: Good .. Coolness factor: High for geeks .. Niche Market: Hardcore geeks, stingy corporations, and the occasional IT journalist.
SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil
It's clear that however fast a human or a car moves, it's always possible to go 10 mph faster.
It's also clear that however "deep" or "far ahead" a human or computer thinks about chess moves, it's allways possible to think 1 more move ahead.
There may be a fundamental limit on how well it is possible to play chess.
Well, yes and no. There is a finite amount of possible moves on an 8x8 chessboard with 16 pieces. With current computers it would take millions of years to find a list of the best solutions to the "problem" of chess, but the important thing to realize is that computers will eventually beat grandmasters easily, because the human mind will never be able to think that deep unaided.
> 2.6 seems to perform about the same as 2.4 on my boxes
Yes 2.4 and 2.6 are very similar, but 2.6 does have a couple advantages. Asside from the exta.2 you also get increased bragging rights, i.e. you get to laugh at people still using that backward 2.4.22;)
No need for that, if they have a touch tone phone they can just key in the request as a large decimal and the computer will automatically convert it to binary.
Slashdot Mirror
> I always hold my drive between my legs
and I thought 48" IDE cables were useless...
> No, no. You mean BSD is dying and Apple is beleaguered.
and you, sir, are persnickety
you are still *wasting* the CPU cycles that go toward rendering the video - which is much more intensive than sound
> You cannot waste CPU cycles on Pr0n.
No, that is a myth. For example, if you open two video players at once and play some porn in each, but run the first player full screen and the other in the background then the CPU cycles of the background porn are being wasted, because no one is watching it!
Any credibility you might have had is destroyed by your stupid sig attempting to equate Microsoft with Hitler.
Yes, well, sigs like mine are commonly refered to as "jokes".
Everybody loves the underdog in theory, so they write and link to articles about it.
. Cost: High to Very High . Performance: Moderate (excepting video/media) . Value: Moderate to low . Support: Good . HW Compatibility: Very poor . SW Compatibility: Fair to poor . Ease of use: Very Good . Overall Quality: Good . Coolness factor: High for non-geeks . Niche market: Dumb people, nonconformists, educational institutions, and professionals with specific needs.
. Cost: Moderate to High . Performance: Fair . Value: Moderate . Support: Widespread . HW Compatibility: High . SW Compatibility: High . Ease of use: Good . Overall Quality: Poor . Coolness factor: Low . Niche Market: Idiots, conformists, and anyone with lots of money.
. Cost: Low to very low . Performance: Moderate to High . Value: Moderate to High . Support: Rare (but increasingly "Fair") . HW Compatibility: Fair . SW Compatibility: Fair to Poor . Ease of use: Poor . Overall Quality: Good . Coolness factor: High for geeks . Niche Market: Hardcore geeks, stingy corporations, and the occasional IT journalist.
In actual practice everyone knows interoperability between Macs and the Wintel world is as much of a pain as with Linux.
I know I am sort of preaching to the choir, but as everyone knows:
A
P
P
L
E
.
.
.
.
.
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
.
.
.
L
I
N
U
X
.
.
.
.
.
SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil
Would you like some mayonnaise with that?
It's clear that however fast a human or a car moves, it's always possible to go 10 mph faster.
It's also clear that however "deep" or "far ahead" a human or computer thinks about chess moves, it's allways possible to think 1 more move ahead.
There may be a fundamental limit on how well it is possible to play chess.
Well, yes and no. There is a finite amount of possible moves on an 8x8 chessboard with 16 pieces. With current computers it would take millions of years to find a list of the best solutions to the "problem" of chess, but the important thing to realize is that computers will eventually beat grandmasters easily, because the human mind will never be able to think that deep unaided.
It just seems like humans couldn't make chess software that was better than a human itself
And it just seems to me that humans couldn't make motor vehicles that run faster than a human itself...
What are we to think?
"Life sucks." ?
> never come across Mozilla's "Accept images that come from the originating server only" setting
Oh he's come across it alright, but he doesn't consider it a valid option because it makes it harder to browse for porn with Google's image search.
> I for one welcome our Microsoft overlords.
Heretic!! FLAY HIM ALIVE!
> 2.6 seems to perform about the same as 2.4 on my boxes
.2 you also get increased bragging rights, i.e. you get to laugh at people still using that backward 2.4.22 ;)
Yes 2.4 and 2.6 are very similar, but 2.6 does have a couple advantages. Asside from the exta
Do the internet a favor and click the "Shutdown" icon.
> Bars to start selling "most active" lists to liquor companies
You mean painkiller companies.
No need for that, if they have a touch tone phone they can just key in the request as a large decimal and the computer will automatically convert it to binary.
uh, I've never used an ipod or the ilk but I assume there is _SOME_ sort of buffer.
anything with "girls" in it is bound to match 1000's of results...
I think the idea is to go find a priest to perform last rites...
I don't now about you, but my version of Adobe Acrobat Reader has this newfangled "print" feature.
Nope, carrier pigeons!
No it will not be interesting. It will be increadibly boring given all the marketing hype. "Improved Hyperthreading" !
Just what we need.
RMS is not against money, he is simply against distributing programs in binary only form.
competition is always good!
Not against something as holy as Google!
This is about the movies which are, in fact, a trilogy. The books are irrelevant to this event.