The whole problem with this scenario is it's all about credibility. In order for Infinium to succeed they need to create a perception that they have momentum to get funding, developer support and console sales. Hard OCP attacking them on every piece of FUD they could come up with damaged their company. No it wasn't necessarily false but there was a lot of conjecture and innuendo. If you undermine the perception that Infinium is a credible business then you undermine their ability to do business. There's no denying that HardOCP has a burr up their ass on this one for no apparent reason other than the unbridled ego of Kyle.
Everyone knows that this system as proposed isn't technically difficult, the only issue is momentum to get critical mass and funding until they reached profitability. It'll be much less likely to happen thanks to HardOCP's article.
Rather than doing anyone a favour they've actually guaranteed that this will probably never happen and injured the current investors as they masquerade as helping them.
There's a lot of excessive intimidation of web publishers, but this particular case doesn't exactly make me sympathetic towards HardOCP. Kyle Bennett setting out to do a mean spirited hatchet job on a startup company trying to pull off a hail mary play in the console market.... frankly I don't care about this one, let them stew.
SCO are attacking their own customer again over a contract issue, they want to audit Daimler Chrysler based on an earlier Unix license. This has nothing to do with Linux. But it should be a warning to anyone thinking of buying a license from SCO. Watch out because the assholes at SCO will use any contract you sign as a foot in the door and use it to sue you down the line.
What's the betting that SCO picked these two based on their inept response to SCO's extortion letters. Perhaps they smelled blood in the water and maybe have some incriminating response in letter form. Ether that or they just picked the largest targets. SCO need to be countersued for this and WHERE THE HECK ARE THE U.S. ATTOURNEY GENERALS? They're supposed to stop this kind of blatant shakedown.
This is a classic mismatch. This is basically a fixed administrative contract that they acquired, where they sell names and administer a database. These idiots don't understand this and want to "grow the business". Well they can't do that by abusing the monopoly granted them by fucking with their administrative responsibilities. Just do the damned job, if you have ideas for other businesses fine, but don't dick with the core function that it's your DUTY to administer in the public interest as permitted by congress.
They don't seem to understand that they're only supposed to sell and administed a bunch of.com domains. That's their mandate, to administer what is basically a public service. They don't seem to understand that congress & everyone else just wants them to perform this fixed funtion and if they dick with it someone else will be found to do it better without the B.S.
I still can't figure out why they're so spectacularly misguided as to think that this service responsibility gives them the unilateral right to screw with the World's internet infrastructure, and sue the only regulatory body in place to stop their shenanigans.
I'm just shocked, I had to read this again because it is truly stunning, I feel like I've fallen into a parallel universe where Verisign has an innate right to the monopoly they've been granted by the organization they're suing. Heaven forbid that the body created to regulate internet domain name serving actually regulates it! This has to be the most spectacular example of biting the hand that feeds you that I've ever seen. They'd have no business interest if ICANN hadn't handed it to them on a silver platter.
Verisign should lose all control & responsibility of any TLDs for this, it's just amazing that they could attempt to undermine internet infrastructure like this and then brazenly turn around and sue the regulators.
They have no shame, it's time to farm TLD administration out to people who are at least slightly rational.
Geeze it's just inventory tracking. There's no "you" in the tracking so give it a rest. I'm sick of this idiotic scaremongering over these non-issues. Companies have a right to track their inventory and always have. This is just tracking to point of sale over the country. It's not merely anonymous tracking it's amorphous, there's no distinction between any of the buyers, they're tracking beer not people and they absolutely have a right to do that.
Surely the first thing a visus will attempt to circumvent is any built in virus protection. It will effectively be useless. In addition there is the usual chicken and egg problem. Virus protection needs known viruses to be totally effective, therefore the operating system cannot know about a virus until it is in the wild. Then Microsoft will have to patch but by that time the virus has had an opportunity to undermine the AV components and the update components.
It seems to me like you'd be well advised to stick with 3rd party AV in addition to the Microsoft AV stuff, if for no other reason than it won't be the primary target of every infection and the Microsoft AV software obviously will.
I expect virus writers (the actual code authors not the script kiddies) are actually thrilled by this development because it represents a new challenge.
I'm a bit concerned that people are slagging Intel excessively for this. I mean technically they did the right thing. Yea they definitely should have recognized AMD and made life a bit easier (that's actually Torvalds main criticism). It's a U-turn, but would you rather that after a careful comparrison that they turn out to be incompatible? That would be a huge pain in the ass for everyone. The benefit of using the same instruction set MASSIVELY MASSIVELY MASSIVELY outweighs the inconvenience of a few people figuring that out for themselves.
64 bit instruction set design is not new, there are many 64 bit chips out there and some of these decisions are either inevitable or arbitrary. Copying someone on their instruction set for vanilla 64 bit instructions is not a big deal and is a million times better than designing yet another one.
The Germans, Italians and Japanese weren't convinced by talk, they were convinced by crushing military defeat followed by reconstruction, propaganda and show trials.
The recipe is clear, now if it weren't for all the idiots getting in the way of sensible action we could actually come through this without mushroom clouds over U.S. population centers some day.
This is what happens when you have feature creep, no competition, overly optimistic technology goals and nobody kicking ass making these guys deliver something. I mean where was the need if 18 years ago they started it and produced nothing deployable in the interval. At least someone had the stones to cancel this boondoggle, geeze after 18 years of work the 2005 budget target was still another $1.2 billion on R&D and $12 million on procurement, i.e. STILL no deliverable units.
And while we're on the subject, we already have more Apaches than we'll ever use they're all around the country at various units not deployed anywhere.
It is very telling that Sun was pushing the indemnification angle in this timeframe. This really sheds some light on their funding of SCO as a means to further their own hidden adgenda. Like Microsoft they appear to have used SCO to attack Linux by proxy and advance their own business. In SUN's case it is particularly mendacious as they pose as a Linux ally while working against our interests.
Name them 'nuff said. You're just buying into the perception that the media have created reporting on French and German objections. Go check the facts instead of regurgitating the myth.
Actually treaties prevent illegal protectionism, and every country practices protectionism as they should. Free trade and their treaties are both negotiated and selective, it's not an abstract philosiphy, it's a practical reality and every nation does a bit of both. It should come as no surprise to anyone. Trade deficits are a serious and important issue and it ain't like the USA is screwing anyone with a *half trillion* dollar trade deficit. complainers don't have a leg to stand on. Steel was only an issue because it was against a treaty and was a lost cause from the start.
As for Canadians being scandalized, that's utter tosh, the USA is not Canada. If I were Canadian I'd be scandalized by the antics of your leadership but I suppose the media there keeps you dutifully happy.
As a Brit I'm proud of the way Tony Blair has conducted himself and scandalized by the BBC and it's gross political bias. Hopefully they'll stop funneling unjustified taxes into that particular pig trough. As a resident in America I'm pretty proud of the way the Bush administration has handled themselves and thing the political pandering and opportunism of the left is both dangerous and a national disgrace.
There are many Americans who think the same way so don't go assuming that you or anyone else can make sweeping generalizations about this.
This vast majority of US citizens were behind this war, now it's about a 50/50 split after a pretty one sided presentation over the past few months with the Democratic primaties.
The spread of communism and in that case rebel surrogates in Vietnam was a very real threat and an overt goal of the Soviet Union. Where the heck did you get the idea that the U.S. had no reason to be there. What fantasy world do you live in?
Actually in my opinion the US listens to critics and that only encourages them. The critics kinda give up on most other nations. As for more power = more responsibility, I don't think so. It's a pat phrase that has no supporting basis and a cop out to cover hypocricy.
There you go with the old world opinion, look, France and Germany are not world opinion, there were more countries supporting US action than opposing it. It's amazing that people who worry about world "opinion" have no bother accepting murderous dictatorships in some countries. If it was opinion you cared about you'd be supporting teh best route to democracy.
I'm Scottish, I know all about the Scottish soldiers who were killed by the A-10 in the Gulf, how many British troops were saved by US air superiority in that war?
Almost everything else you have written consists of vague questions with no stated facts and the implication that the answer is bad. Of course you have no shred of evidence to support your vague implication that these things are covered up. For example I could ask:
Do you have any idea how much inaccurate information is spread by anti-American propagandists about the U.S. use of cluster munitions and DU armaments?
Except the implications of my statement are actually supportable.
The US uses overwhelming force to minimize casualties, it is a successful strategy and well known military doctrine, but there's no evidence it leaves additional friendly fire incidents or collateral damage, in fact there's considerable evidence that ending a conflict decisively is the cleanest outcome with the least collateral damage, that's just what's supported by the facts. I don't really have anything as convincing as your vague assertions backed up by your opinion. Nor does the US shoot first and ask questions later.
The trouble with most of your statements is that relative to other armies the US is actually better behaved on every point you raise.
All you can do here is gripe about this of course. YOu never come out and take a position of anything of substance for example saying that the US should never drop bombs, or that they should never go to war.
Either statement of course would demonstrate how foolish your position is so you just take pot shots at the outcome and nasty consequences of military conflict without offering a rational alternative.
And yes I know all about bomblets, the phrase smart not being so smart is cute, but really these weapons don't have to me smart and nobody claims they are intelligent, they are tools that are wielded with discrimination. They are designed for specific purposes and they are very good at what they do.
The damage they do is not disgraceful, it is intentional, and dropping cluster munitions on a tank column does not kill civilians, it kills tanks and soldiers, it also saves American lives by eliminating enemy forces.
What is disgraceful is every time a cluster munition, even those *DEDICATED* to killing tanks, is used we have politically motivated organized liars who come along and trot out the same rubbish about their lack of discrimination as if every bomblet falls randomly without control in some random part of a country. Cluster munitions on enemy tank and troop concentrations are very effective at ending conflict quickly.
I agree that most secrets aren't secret, but they are treated that way, it's just the way it's done, peopel don't want to sit and decide what is and isn't secret. The jobs do stay domestic. It is true that raw materials and some components can come from abroad, even a few sophisticated components on systems where we have partners like Britain and a work share agreement, but the high tech machining and parts manufacture and assembly, design, software, training, maintenance etc is domestic and must remain that way.
So we agree. Look I'm not disagreeing for the sake of it. These weapon systems are the best option. Now you can argue for pacifism, then I get to label you a pacifist and we both go away happy, but the systems are accurate and the mistakes are few and far between, (for a bombing system). When errors occur they can investigated and avoided in future if it doesn't place an excessive burden on our ability to fight. The analyst who chose the embassy was fired and systems put in place to avoid future screw ups.
So I just don't see the point of an objection unless you really want our citizens running around with gross misconceptions as to our abilities. We drop bombs really accurately with the occasional unavoidable mistake. Even the pentagon won't take issue with that. You aren't happy with that though, you want to play up and exaggerate the mistakes.
By which statistics? You do know that major populated developing countries where US jobs are being exported to got exemptions don't you? This would effectively export CO2 production abroad and make the problem worse? Moreover enforcement abroad is often a joke unlike a few western countries (not all). You're also implying that motor vehicles are the major cause of CO2 pollution, that's just false. As with most of the science and statistics surrounding Kyoto and these issues, it's junk.
Do you have any idea of the cost vs benefit of Kyoto? It was a hot potato that was passed by Clinton to the next administration and no sane house or senate would have approved anyway.
Other countries are not ratifying, not because of the U.S. didn't, they each have their own concerns, they're starting to wake up to seeing the staggering expense the gigantic international loopholes and the best case payoff as negligible.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like the HardOCP fanboys got me on this one. Flamebait? Do you idiots even know what flamebait is? Geeze.
The whole problem with this scenario is it's all about credibility. In order for Infinium to succeed they need to create a perception that they have momentum to get funding, developer support and console sales. Hard OCP attacking them on every piece of FUD they could come up with damaged their company. No it wasn't necessarily false but there was a lot of conjecture and innuendo. If you undermine the perception that Infinium is a credible business then you undermine their ability to do business. There's no denying that HardOCP has a burr up their ass on this one for no apparent reason other than the unbridled ego of Kyle.
.... frankly I don't care about this one, let them stew.
Everyone knows that this system as proposed isn't technically difficult, the only issue is momentum to get critical mass and funding until they reached profitability. It'll be much less likely to happen thanks to HardOCP's article.
Rather than doing anyone a favour they've actually guaranteed that this will probably never happen and injured the current investors as they masquerade as helping them.
There's a lot of excessive intimidation of web publishers, but this particular case doesn't exactly make me sympathetic towards HardOCP. Kyle Bennett setting out to do a mean spirited hatchet job on a startup company trying to pull off a hail mary play in the console market
SCO are attacking their own customer again over a contract issue, they want to audit Daimler Chrysler based on an earlier Unix license. This has nothing to do with Linux. But it should be a warning to anyone thinking of buying a license from SCO. Watch out because the assholes at SCO will use any contract you sign as a foot in the door and use it to sue you down the line.
What's the betting that SCO picked these two based on their inept response to SCO's extortion letters. Perhaps they smelled blood in the water and maybe have some incriminating response in letter form. Ether that or they just picked the largest targets. SCO need to be countersued for this and WHERE THE HECK ARE THE U.S. ATTOURNEY GENERALS? They're supposed to stop this kind of blatant shakedown.
This is a classic mismatch. This is basically a fixed administrative contract that they acquired, where they sell names and administer a database. These idiots don't understand this and want to "grow the business". Well they can't do that by abusing the monopoly granted them by fucking with their administrative responsibilities. Just do the damned job, if you have ideas for other businesses fine, but don't dick with the core function that it's your DUTY to administer in the public interest as permitted by congress.
.com domains. That's their mandate, to administer what is basically a public service. They don't seem to understand that congress & everyone else just wants them to perform this fixed funtion and if they dick with it someone else will be found to do it better without the B.S.
They don't seem to understand that they're only supposed to sell and administed a bunch of
I still can't figure out why they're so spectacularly misguided as to think that this service responsibility gives them the unilateral right to screw with the World's internet infrastructure, and sue the only regulatory body in place to stop their shenanigans.
I'm just shocked, I had to read this again because it is truly stunning, I feel like I've fallen into a parallel universe where Verisign has an innate right to the monopoly they've been granted by the organization they're suing. Heaven forbid that the body created to regulate internet domain name serving actually regulates it! This has to be the most spectacular example of biting the hand that feeds you that I've ever seen. They'd have no business interest if ICANN hadn't handed it to them on a silver platter.
Verisign should lose all control & responsibility of any TLDs for this, it's just amazing that they could attempt to undermine internet infrastructure like this and then brazenly turn around and sue the regulators.
They have no shame, it's time to farm TLD administration out to people who are at least slightly rational.
This guy is a fruitcake.
What the heck is he trying to do? Convince everyone that Microsoft has no clue about security at the highest level?
Keep talking dude, you're doing a fine job.
Geeze it's just inventory tracking. There's no "you" in the tracking so give it a rest. I'm sick of this idiotic scaremongering over these non-issues. Companies have a right to track their inventory and always have. This is just tracking to point of sale over the country. It's not merely anonymous tracking it's amorphous, there's no distinction between any of the buyers, they're tracking beer not people and they absolutely have a right to do that.
Surely the first thing a visus will attempt to circumvent is any built in virus protection. It will effectively be useless. In addition there is the usual chicken and egg problem. Virus protection needs known viruses to be totally effective, therefore the operating system cannot know about a virus until it is in the wild. Then Microsoft will have to patch but by that time the virus has had an opportunity to undermine the AV components and the update components.
It seems to me like you'd be well advised to stick with 3rd party AV in addition to the Microsoft AV stuff, if for no other reason than it won't be the primary target of every infection and the Microsoft AV software obviously will.
I expect virus writers (the actual code authors not the script kiddies) are actually thrilled by this development because it represents a new challenge.
I'm a bit concerned that people are slagging Intel excessively for this. I mean technically they did the right thing. Yea they definitely should have recognized AMD and made life a bit easier (that's actually Torvalds main criticism). It's a U-turn, but would you rather that after a careful comparrison that they turn out to be incompatible? That would be a huge pain in the ass for everyone. The benefit of using the same instruction set MASSIVELY MASSIVELY MASSIVELY outweighs the inconvenience of a few people figuring that out for themselves.
64 bit instruction set design is not new, there are many 64 bit chips out there and some of these decisions are either inevitable or arbitrary. Copying someone on their instruction set for vanilla 64 bit instructions is not a big deal and is a million times better than designing yet another one.
He said ATM, i.e. use a check card where you have a ballance in your account.
The Germans, Italians and Japanese weren't convinced by talk, they were convinced by crushing military defeat followed by reconstruction, propaganda and show trials.
The recipe is clear, now if it weren't for all the idiots getting in the way of sensible action we could actually come through this without mushroom clouds over U.S. population centers some day.
This is what happens when you have feature creep, no competition, overly optimistic technology goals and nobody kicking ass making these guys deliver something. I mean where was the need if 18 years ago they started it and produced nothing deployable in the interval. At least someone had the stones to cancel this boondoggle, geeze after 18 years of work the 2005 budget target was still another $1.2 billion on R&D and $12 million on procurement, i.e. STILL no deliverable units.
And while we're on the subject, we already have more Apaches than we'll ever use they're all around the country at various units not deployed anywhere.
READ what he was saying, they did pump money into SCO, or have you missed that part.
It is very telling that Sun was pushing the indemnification angle in this timeframe. This really sheds some light on their funding of SCO as a means to further their own hidden adgenda. Like Microsoft they appear to have used SCO to attack Linux by proxy and advance their own business. In SUN's case it is particularly mendacious as they pose as a Linux ally while working against our interests.
Name them 'nuff said. You're just buying into the perception that the media have created reporting on French and German objections. Go check the facts instead of regurgitating the myth.
Actually treaties prevent illegal protectionism, and every country practices protectionism as they should. Free trade and their treaties are both negotiated and selective, it's not an abstract philosiphy, it's a practical reality and every nation does a bit of both. It should come as no surprise to anyone. Trade deficits are a serious and important issue and it ain't like the USA is screwing anyone with a *half trillion* dollar trade deficit. complainers don't have a leg to stand on. Steel was only an issue because it was against a treaty and was a lost cause from the start.
As for Canadians being scandalized, that's utter tosh, the USA is not Canada. If I were Canadian I'd be scandalized by the antics of your leadership but I suppose the media there keeps you dutifully happy.
As a Brit I'm proud of the way Tony Blair has conducted himself and scandalized by the BBC and it's gross political bias. Hopefully they'll stop funneling unjustified taxes into that particular pig trough. As a resident in America I'm pretty proud of the way the Bush administration has handled themselves and thing the political pandering and opportunism of the left is both dangerous and a national disgrace.
There are many Americans who think the same way so don't go assuming that you or anyone else can make sweeping generalizations about this.
This vast majority of US citizens were behind this war, now it's about a 50/50 split after a pretty one sided presentation over the past few months with the Democratic primaties.
auto-determine themselves and *others* with ak-47s
The spread of communism and in that case rebel surrogates in Vietnam was a very real threat and an overt goal of the Soviet Union. Where the heck did you get the idea that the U.S. had no reason to be there. What fantasy world do you live in?
Actually in my opinion the US listens to critics and that only encourages them. The critics kinda give up on most other nations. As for more power = more responsibility, I don't think so. It's a pat phrase that has no supporting basis and a cop out to cover hypocricy.
There you go with the old world opinion, look, France and Germany are not world opinion, there were more countries supporting US action than opposing it. It's amazing that people who worry about world "opinion" have no bother accepting murderous dictatorships in some countries. If it was opinion you cared about you'd be supporting teh best route to democracy.
As a matter of fact I *sound* very Scottish, how about posting with a name when you make accusations.
I'm Scottish, I know all about the Scottish soldiers who were killed by the A-10 in the Gulf, how many British troops were saved by US air superiority in that war?
Almost everything else you have written consists of vague questions with no stated facts and the implication that the answer is bad. Of course you have no shred of evidence to support your vague implication that these things are covered up. For example I could ask:
Do you have any idea how much inaccurate information is spread by anti-American propagandists about the U.S. use of cluster munitions and DU armaments?
Except the implications of my statement are actually supportable.
The US uses overwhelming force to minimize casualties, it is a successful strategy and well known military doctrine, but there's no evidence it leaves additional friendly fire incidents or collateral damage, in fact there's considerable evidence that ending a conflict decisively is the cleanest outcome with the least collateral damage, that's just what's supported by the facts. I don't really have anything as convincing as your vague assertions backed up by your opinion. Nor does the US shoot first and ask questions later.
The trouble with most of your statements is that relative to other armies the US is actually better behaved on every point you raise.
All you can do here is gripe about this of course. YOu never come out and take a position of anything of substance for example saying that the US should never drop bombs, or that they should never go to war.
Either statement of course would demonstrate how foolish your position is so you just take pot shots at the outcome and nasty consequences of military conflict without offering a rational alternative.
And yes I know all about bomblets, the phrase smart not being so smart is cute, but really these weapons don't have to me smart and nobody claims they are intelligent, they are tools that are wielded with discrimination. They are designed for specific purposes and they are very good at what they do.
The damage they do is not disgraceful, it is intentional, and dropping cluster munitions on a tank column does not kill civilians, it kills tanks and soldiers, it also saves American lives by eliminating enemy forces.
What is disgraceful is every time a cluster munition, even those *DEDICATED* to killing tanks, is used we have politically motivated organized liars who come along and trot out the same rubbish about their lack of discrimination as if every bomblet falls randomly without control in some random part of a country. Cluster munitions on enemy tank and troop concentrations are very effective at ending conflict quickly.
I agree that most secrets aren't secret, but they are treated that way, it's just the way it's done, peopel don't want to sit and decide what is and isn't secret. The jobs do stay domestic. It is true that raw materials and some components can come from abroad, even a few sophisticated components on systems where we have partners like Britain and a work share agreement, but the high tech machining and parts manufacture and assembly, design, software, training, maintenance etc is domestic and must remain that way.
So we agree. Look I'm not disagreeing for the sake of it. These weapon systems are the best option. Now you can argue for pacifism, then I get to label you a pacifist and we both go away happy, but the systems are accurate and the mistakes are few and far between, (for a bombing system). When errors occur they can investigated and avoided in future if it doesn't place an excessive burden on our ability to fight. The analyst who chose the embassy was fired and systems put in place to avoid future screw ups.
So I just don't see the point of an objection unless you really want our citizens running around with gross misconceptions as to our abilities. We drop bombs really accurately with the occasional unavoidable mistake. Even the pentagon won't take issue with that. You aren't happy with that though, you want to play up and exaggerate the mistakes.
By which statistics? You do know that major populated developing countries where US jobs are being exported to got exemptions don't you? This would effectively export CO2 production abroad and make the problem worse? Moreover enforcement abroad is often a joke unlike a few western countries (not all). You're also implying that motor vehicles are the major cause of CO2 pollution, that's just false. As with most of the science and statistics surrounding Kyoto and these issues, it's junk.
Do you have any idea of the cost vs benefit of Kyoto? It was a hot potato that was passed by Clinton to the next administration and no sane house or senate would have approved anyway.
Other countries are not ratifying, not because of the U.S. didn't, they each have their own concerns, they're starting to wake up to seeing the staggering expense the gigantic international loopholes and the best case payoff as negligible.