Benchmarks here. Leopard is slower than Tiger on all G5 and only the 64 bit version is faster than Tiger on the Intel Macs. I seem to recall that which version is faster 64 biut or 32 bit depends on what kind of benchmark you're doing but pretty much every benchmark I've seen shows that Tiger is faster on PPC chips.
Snow Leopard should fix this in a couple of months. It may or may not support PowerPC when released, but early builds did, and if the final build does too, older computers will benefit from Grand Central, OpenCL, and many of the other improvements.
When replicator molecules replicate, they make copies with the same handedness as themselves.
Is this necessarily true? If a left molecule replicates to the right molecule, which in turn replicates to a left molecule again, you'd probably end up homogenous organisms that could use any available molecules, left or right.
Dropping yourself into another inhabited planet would probably be a death sentence as your body would have no resistance to the kinds of viruses and bacteria that live there. But could having opposite chirality make you immune to their effects?
I suppose it depends on the kind of chemical reactions involved. I don't know much about chirality, but I'm guessing the reason we can't digest those molecules is because our enzymes are the wrong shape to link up to them and rip them apart. But if an alien pathogen produced highly reactive compounds or toxic metals, or breaks cells through mechanical rather than chemical effects, we'd be affected, and our immune system would have trouble dealing with them. Can we even build antibodies for opposite chiralities?
How exactly does the immune system fight off a parasite? The immune system is geared to cell-sized threats, as far as I can tell. The most I could see it doing to a large invader is giving it a rash.
It has never been an acceptable trait, for example, to be a traitor against your own country / society / tribe.
Well, except in the case of civil war or widespread revolution, when men in good conscience may disagree and act on their beliefs. So, yeah. There are very, very few universal beliefs, bordering on "none at all."
Seriously, that fact wasn't "established" at all...it was testified to by one of the defendants. The fact that the prosecution didn't challenge it just means that they screwed up (which wouldn't by far be the prosecution's only screw-up in this case).
If a defendant makes an assertion, and that assertion isn't challenged, it is established. That's the way it goes, and, given the philosophy of the adversarial system, that's the way it has to be and should be. And if the prosecution screws up, well, sucks to be them. Also part of the adversarial system.
Rather, no one is directly deprived of it; however, the programmer is still deprived of income IF someone who would otherwise have bought the software chooses to "copyright infringe" it instead.
Sure, but it is in no way illegal or unethical to indirectly deprive someone of income. My competitors do that to me all the time. Hell, my market directly deprives me of income when they do not buy my product.
How, exactly? For that to work, someone has to pay the programmer to come up with the software that he will then distribute for free. I fail to see who would pay the programmer in such a situation.
If a client wants a piece of software, and that software doesn't already exist, how else are they going to get it? They've got to pay someone. Even if the programmer distributes the product to the rest of the world, the client still gets the software he wants.
Slashdot nerds do have a depressing tendency to justify their desire for free stuff with a lot of complex rationalizations.
I admit that rationalization is fun. It feels like debate, or problem-solving.
Most of the people I know, excepting only old people and a few others, pirate some form of media. Almost without exception they consider what they are doing to be "wrong" and admit that they will use piracy as an alternative to purchasing.
I learned an interesting phrase today: malum prohibitum. It means "wrong only because there's a law." The complementary phrase is malum in se, which means "wrong because it's wrong."
These people you know? I bet they mean malum prohibitum. They do not consider ignoring copyright to be wrong, except insofar as disobeying an arbitrary law is wrong.
If you strongly identify with the Democrats decrying Republicans or the Republicans decrying the Democrats, could you please just re-examine why you're allowing either of the two dominant political parties control you like a mindless sheep. These guys are pretty much all liars and using you.
Oh, sure, we know that. But there's a plan, see. We play one side off against the other (loyalists aside). That's easier to do with only two parties than with five.
Pothos and Busemeyer's results are published in a recent issue of Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
Royal Society B? Are there Royal Societies A-Z? Do different subject areas get randomly-assigned letters of the alphabet? Does this have anything to do with James Bond's Q and M?
A PC is a hardware platform. It can run a variety of Operating Systems, many of which are not licensed by Microsoft and are not called "Windows". Heck, if you get just the right combination of "PC" hardware, and you have the right skillset, you can even run a slightly modified MacOSX on a "PC".
This was true in the 80s. Terms change. Now, the generic word is "computer," and specifically, "PCs" run Windows and "Macs" run Mac OS. PCs don't run Linux, Unix, Solaris, etc.; each of those is a "machine" or "box."
Also, "gay" used to mean "happy." Nowadays, it means "Mac user." (I kid, I kid.)
How will they respond to the titanium dioxide in an evolutionary context?
Article says they only take up titanium dioxide if no silicon dioxide is available. But if they maintain a strain of diatoms perpetually deprived of titanium dioxide, we might see some natural selection in action. I guess diatoms don't currently make used of silicon dioxide in any capacity aside from shell production, though, since the diatoms fed only titanium dioxide seem to be able to live, so I doubt anything much would happen.
Which anyone sane — by which I mean any Mac user — does automatically using such convenient short-cuts as shift-option-dash, option-semicolon, option-2, option-o, option-e, etc.
Despite what Monopoly may have taught you, there is NEVER a bank error in your favor.
Not true. Back when I routinely checked all my bank statements, I found more than one missing withdrawal (meaning I withdrew or spent money and they didn't debit the account). I even called them up about it once. They said "we don't have a record of it, and thanks anyway, but it's not worth correcting." Usually, the error was less than $40, but I think I remember one that was one-hundred-something.
They should -- and could -- totally include this in the game. You'd give up your unit-building capabilities and resources, but in return, you get to
Finish him!
In other words, once you know you've won the match, you could break out the Terra-tron and rub it in. A battle finishing move. Of course, there'd have to be something like that for the Zerg and Protoss as well. Let's see...
For the Protoss, some sort of chain lightning effect, culminating in a singularity; or maybe a big mothership whose shadow covers the screen warps in and starts zapping. And for the Zerg, a Cerebrate pod meteors in from orbit, or tunnels in Bugs-Bunny-style, and tentacles whip out of the ground and wreak havoc; or maybe the Creep comes alive and devours everything in its path.
Slashdot Mirror
Great...till it crawls inside you...not a pleasant thought.
Opinions differ. :)
Benchmarks here. Leopard is slower than Tiger on all G5 and only the 64 bit version is faster than Tiger on the Intel Macs. I seem to recall that which version is faster 64 biut or 32 bit depends on what kind of benchmark you're doing but pretty much every benchmark I've seen shows that Tiger is faster on PPC chips.
Snow Leopard should fix this in a couple of months. It may or may not support PowerPC when released, but early builds did, and if the final build does too, older computers will benefit from Grand Central, OpenCL, and many of the other improvements.
When replicator molecules replicate, they make copies with the same handedness as themselves.
Is this necessarily true? If a left molecule replicates to the right molecule, which in turn replicates to a left molecule again, you'd probably end up homogenous organisms that could use any available molecules, left or right.
I suppose it depends on the kind of chemical reactions involved. I don't know much about chirality, but I'm guessing the reason we can't digest those molecules is because our enzymes are the wrong shape to link up to them and rip them apart. But if an alien pathogen produced highly reactive compounds or toxic metals, or breaks cells through mechanical rather than chemical effects, we'd be affected, and our immune system would have trouble dealing with them. Can we even build antibodies for opposite chiralities?
How exactly does the immune system fight off a parasite? The immune system is geared to cell-sized threats, as far as I can tell. The most I could see it doing to a large invader is giving it a rash.
Ignorantia juris non excusat; ignorance of the law is no excuse. Sounds like the leagal system is exactly like the afterlife you describe
Except that in our legal systems, ignorance is sometimes an acceptable excuse. See ignorantia juris non excusat .
It has never been an acceptable trait, for example, to be a traitor against your own country / society / tribe.
Well, except in the case of civil war or widespread revolution, when men in good conscience may disagree and act on their beliefs. So, yeah. There are very, very few universal beliefs, bordering on "none at all."
Seriously, that fact wasn't "established" at all...it was testified to by one of the defendants. The fact that the prosecution didn't challenge it just means that they screwed up (which wouldn't by far be the prosecution's only screw-up in this case).
If a defendant makes an assertion, and that assertion isn't challenged, it is established. That's the way it goes, and, given the philosophy of the adversarial system, that's the way it has to be and should be. And if the prosecution screws up, well, sucks to be them. Also part of the adversarial system.
Sure, but it is in no way illegal or unethical to indirectly deprive someone of income. My competitors do that to me all the time. Hell, my market directly deprives me of income when they do not buy my product.
If a client wants a piece of software, and that software doesn't already exist, how else are they going to get it? They've got to pay someone. Even if the programmer distributes the product to the rest of the world, the client still gets the software he wants.
I admit that rationalization is fun. It feels like debate, or problem-solving.
I learned an interesting phrase today: malum prohibitum. It means "wrong only because there's a law." The complementary phrase is malum in se, which means "wrong because it's wrong."
These people you know? I bet they mean malum prohibitum. They do not consider ignoring copyright to be wrong, except insofar as disobeying an arbitrary law is wrong.
Or... taking the bus.
Spoken like someone who doesn't go camping. Buses don't take the dirt roads.
Oh, sure, we know that. But there's a plan, see. We play one side off against the other (loyalists aside). That's easier to do with only two parties than with five.
That's right retard-moderator, I'm talking to you. I've got karma to burn so blow your points you brain-stem freak.
Your momma's a moderator.
Pothos and Busemeyer's results are published in a recent issue of Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
Royal Society B? Are there Royal Societies A-Z? Do different subject areas get randomly-assigned letters of the alphabet? Does this have anything to do with James Bond's Q and M?
A PC is a hardware platform. It can run a variety of Operating Systems, many of which are not licensed by Microsoft and are not called "Windows". Heck, if you get just the right combination of "PC" hardware, and you have the right skillset, you can even run a slightly modified MacOSX on a "PC".
This was true in the 80s. Terms change. Now, the generic word is "computer," and specifically, "PCs" run Windows and "Macs" run Mac OS. PCs don't run Linux, Unix, Solaris, etc.; each of those is a "machine" or "box."
Also, "gay" used to mean "happy." Nowadays, it means "Mac user." (I kid, I kid.)
His death meant something.
Yes. Indigestion.
How will they respond to the titanium dioxide in an evolutionary context?
Article says they only take up titanium dioxide if no silicon dioxide is available. But if they maintain a strain of diatoms perpetually deprived of titanium dioxide, we might see some natural selection in action. I guess diatoms don't currently make used of silicon dioxide in any capacity aside from shell production, though, since the diatoms fed only titanium dioxide seem to be able to live, so I doubt anything much would happen.
My career is nowhere near any type of coding, so I ask, do any programmers feel like they are creating some type of applied artwork?
I'm pretty sure we all do.
Only if you insist on typing them literally.
Which anyone sane — by which I mean any Mac user — does automatically using such convenient short-cuts as shift-option-dash, option-semicolon, option-2, option-o, option-e, etc.
Let's just hope these new optimizations don't href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/technologynews/5105
Hey, you totally the link.
Really, entities are a hack. You should be able to enter the characters directly. Here's what happens when I try:
UTF-8 beeyatch!
Despite what Monopoly may have taught you, there is NEVER a bank error in your favor.
Not true. Back when I routinely checked all my bank statements, I found more than one missing withdrawal (meaning I withdrew or spent money and they didn't debit the account). I even called them up about it once. They said "we don't have a record of it, and thanks anyway, but it's not worth correcting." Usually, the error was less than $40, but I think I remember one that was one-hundred-something.
They should -- and could -- totally include this in the game. You'd give up your unit-building capabilities and resources, but in return, you get to
Finish him!
In other words, once you know you've won the match, you could break out the Terra-tron and rub it in. A battle finishing move. Of course, there'd have to be something like that for the Zerg and Protoss as well. Let's see...
For the Protoss, some sort of chain lightning effect, culminating in a singularity; or maybe a big mothership whose shadow covers the screen warps in and starts zapping. And for the Zerg, a Cerebrate pod meteors in from orbit, or tunnels in Bugs-Bunny-style, and tentacles whip out of the ground and wreak havoc; or maybe the Creep comes alive and devours everything in its path.
I've got the music playing on a loop. I like it. it's not slowly turning my brain to mush at all...well, not noticeably anyway.