Yup, the only way to do it is to let people be responsible for their own actions. No other way is fair, or makes sense. As far as interest rates on credit, credit cards companies weren't being predatory, people just don't understand how a revolving credit account works.
See, back in the Bad Ol' Days, when American Express was king of the hill, you had to pay the full balance at the end of term (usually 30 days). You also had to be making some pretty good income and have your finances in order to get a credit card, and if you didn't pay the full balance, it was a lot like defaulting on a regular loan. Now anyone and his dog can get a credit card, you can spread out the payments over your lifetime (if you're that negligent), as long as you don't go over your limit, and you make at least the minimum payments. People can gripe all they want about "50 per cent interest compounded minutely", but they'd never pay a dime of that if they just pay the goddamn balance in full and on time. If you ask me, I like the freedom allowed by a credit card, and by the fact that the current system actually allows a middle-class shmuck like me to have one.
Exactly! It's about network effects. Microsoft can deliver MSO through OEMs if they wish, or even through WU if they had to. It doesn't matter if Office is huge, slow, a virus vector, and has a file format which is basically a memory dump of OLE streams (which get corrupted quite often).
If Microsoft gives away 10 million copies of Office 2005 XPNTME, they will still break even, because another 10 million will need to be able to read and revise the data.
Continue developing Internet Explorer would be BAD for Microsoft
Ah, but Microsoft has already fooled you. Microsoft is pushing IE as a development component, and believe it or not, it is actually being used by developers the same way VB is used; It's a quick-and-dirty way to get an interface on software - with built-in ability to understand some common "Internet" protocols. Here's a short list of software that requires IE6 to run: Intuit Tax software, H&R Block TaxCut, Quickbooks Pro.
It's not about general web browsing anymore, Microsoft is successfully getting software makers to use all of IE's non-standard extensions as, well, almost like an API. IE is not going away any time soon. As long as Microsoft can deliver it's own software through OEM channels (pretty much uncontested), or through its own update mechanisms, they will continue to dominate.
It's not about who supports what standards, it's about the network effects of being first to deliver, i.e. being the first option the user has. It doesn't matter if a user can remove IE, because the next run of WU is going to add IE as a "critical" update, complete with a shiny new desktop icon. Now it isn't in the user's best interest to remove IE, because that would break some popular third-party software.
I'd like to see some figures on that. What do you mean by fast? Are you comparing load times? Page rendering times? What type of content? Static HTML? XML? Javascript? Running Java applets?
Based on my experience, Netscape is slower to load (the first time). Other than that, it renders the elements in a page in a different order than does IE, but the time from DNS lookup to completely rendered page doesn't seem all that different from other browsers. I have no doubt that Netscape has the biggest memory footprint of all available browsers, but it's hard to tell what IE uses, because most of it loads when Windows boots, instead of when you use it for the first time.
As far as I'm aware they havent improved the FPU yet. Someone let me know if I'm wrong. This armchair CPU designer would of liked to see them throw more silicon at this area.
Simply increasing the clock speed always generates more heat, a more complex FPU would only generate more heat if your making use of the FPU.
According to VIA's own benchmarks, you are correct, the FPU is still as terrible as in the old Cyrix chips. The emphasis seems to be on power consumption with these mini-ITX boards, and of course, there is always excess that ends up as radiated heat.
I looked into a mini-ITX set-up to build small firewall/NAT/proxy boxes for people. So far, the performance of the C3 makes me uneasy, and the prices can only be offset by the fact that their smaller footprint makes them convenient.
I figure that if a 200MHz K6-2 does the job for me at home (NAT only), I can get away with something on the lower end of the MHz scale. I'm still on the lookout for mITX boards that accept older mobile Pentiums, or perhaps AMD Durons if I need some horsepower.
For the most part, I'd say the solution is simple. Both the sender and recipient need to authenticate to send/receive messages. It's a very logical conclusion, considering how people currently avoid unwanted messages. Consider how most of us deal with telemarketers: People read their caller ID. "Is it someone we know? Nope." Why can't we do the same thing with e-mail, but with a service that makes the determination (where a passcode replaces a phone number as the ID)? Does the sender have the proper sender auth? No? No delivery for you!
This is the best possible solution for the people (ex: me) that really rely on e-mail to do their jobs. It sucks for those that wish to fill your inbox with junk. It doesn't really matter to me at this point, we buy one product from a vendor and they're sending ads to my inbox on a daily basis. The marketers can have their own separate protocol from e-mail, but no one can force us to use it.
I play K-Poker (comes with KDE). I never lose, because I figured out how to edit the config file so that the lowest dollar amount win is always more than what you "pay" for a re-deal. I'm not the kind of geek they'd want playing in a tournament. =P
They steal this kind of stuff because it can be crammed in a trash bag in under 5 minutes, and because it's very liquid, i.e. they can easily sell it at a pawn shop without attracting much attention. Selling a crappy stereo may net $20, but the unicycle is pretty unique, and is going to attract trouble, so its value is probably in the negative when you figure the cost of hiding from the law. Detachable-face stereos, or other lame anti-theft gizmos aren't really that effective; It's not like the devices can't be circumvented, or a replacement face plate be stolen/bought. My point is that small time thieves are very good at what they do: Why steal a $100 item and get caught, when you can steal 5 $20 items and never attract attention?
The photo archives may make it possible for thieves to "case" potential targets without being seen in the neighborhood, or without visiting the town hall. I know what my neighbors look like and what cars they drive. I'd be able to spot an outsider in an instant. This kind of information helps police catch thieves.
Yeah, probably radioactive waste. The protection was for her own good. Also explains why the base isn't full-time staffed any longer. Perhaps in the past it was kept in secret because of the experimental vehicles being tested there, but now it's pretty much a health hazard. Anyway, what military facility does allow trespassers?
While, looks like this is the end of the line for John Woo. This is about as low as one can stoop. Sorry if you disagree, but he has had a hand in producing some of the worst crap to ever be spattered on the silver screen. If you don't believe me, watch MI:2 and try not to wince. It the old rip-off-the-latex-mask-disguise device not once, but three times. Even the most lame Scooby Doo mystery managed to use this gag only once, and the audience wasn't asked to take Scooby Doo seriously.
I look forward to the day when John Woo's next project is "Job Hunter".
It seem to me more and more patents are being ruled as invalid, If this is indeed the case why are they being assigned in the first place?
Because the USPTO gets revenue from patent applications. The whole system is set up to encourage volume and not quality. I'd say that a smart way to show the damage done by junk patents is to show that the cost of the court proceedings is at least as much as the revenue generated. I'm not saying that this is the case, but I suspect that it eventually will be, and the point can be made that even though they both cost the taxpayer, one of the ways clogs up the courts and costs people jobs (because company finances are being allocated to fight unnecessary legal battles).
And that's a problem with a mob of reactive, angry citizens. Despite what may be the best course of action, the government ends up handling the highest profile problems first. Sometimes, those problems aren't the worst. It's hard to argue with logic once emotionalism and media hype take over.
The only time I began to become better was when I stopped believing in meds and thrust my salvation and deliverance into the hands of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I just checked, my HMO doesn't cover prescriptions for that, even as a co-pay.
Homosexuality was in the DSM as a treatable psychological disorder up till 1973 That's because there is no isometric model for human behavior. It's based on You versus Everyone Else. Considering the social consequences, it's no surprise that the majority of homosexuals were off the map for so long.
Medicalizing everything is a specialty of psychology in general. That's psychiatry, not psychology. Psychologists study, psychiatrists treat. Very few of them are foolish enough to think that medication is much more than a tool to be used in conjuction with the major part of the treatment.
Astrology has more hard fact in it than psychology does. That's a ridiculous statement. Psychologists observe and test theories the same way any other researcher does. The problem is that the mind is complex, and it's environment is subject to change. We're not all clones, so the effect of medication and treatment varies widely between patients.
If psychology is so effective, why do women go to shrinks and get drugs rather than undergo Freudian psychoanalysis? Drugs should always be administered as part of the treatment. I've seen GPs hand out drugs they should not, but I don't know any psychiatrists that are loose with their prescriptions. Are you confusing this with people who doctor-shop and self-medicate? Modern psychiatric techniques rarely acknowledge the work of Freud. He's yesterdays news. My personal opinion is that Freud was a coke-head who was obsessed with sex. Other's opinions may vary.
And why did you specifically target women?
Most of psychology rests upon a few semi-understood brain chemicals and the ethereal realm of consciousness which no one can define, No, it has nothing to do with that. That's biology. Psychology deals with behavior. Psychology's foundation is study. Tons of study. I know you'll be disappointed to read this, but they don't just make it all up.
Agoraphobia has no known treatment. "Agoraphobia" isn't recognized as the proper name of any real condition, it's a likely symptom of a real mental illness, or just a personality trait. For example, someone with an anxiety disorder can experience an almost uncontrollable urge to run scared or burst in tears (or start swinging), and perhaps being in a crowd of strangers gave the anxiety attack a boost in severity, or even brought on the attack.
I don't know how to address the rest of your post. You have some deep misunderstandings about your fellow man.
Sorry, just can't stay away from this article. I also believe that there is prior art for the patent in question. This company produced "infringing" products prior to the patent being issued in 1996, and IIRC even prior to the 1993 submission of the patent. I can't find anything on the web, but I'm going to dig up some old copies of my computer rags to see if I can find the first "accelerator" board for the Amiga, which I'm fairly certain was sold prior to 1990 (and definitely prior to 1993).
Is this patent overly broad. I mentioned in another post it appears to be a patent on a PLL circuit. However, since all chips need to sync to another signal, and CPUs / GPUs in particular use a multiple of the host signal, every processor produced by everyone in the PC industry is potentially infringing.
The USPTO basically allowed someone to patent the synchronous computer. Read the text of the patent, it reads like a 7th graders description of how a PC works.
Oh come on! If this isn't a fishing expedition, then I don't know what is. What the hell does FSF have to do with contracts between SCO/IBM or SCO/Novell?
Indiana parents are the first to buy (en masse) licenses for Essay Constructor Pro v2.0. The software produces essays that are indistinguishable from those written by real students, using the latest screen-scrape-from-Internet 'n' plagiarism-from-non-credible-sources techniques.
Indiana Director of State Board of Ed comments: "Isn't it wonderful how technology is improving education?"
...is that the porn industry doesn't like this because filtering doesn't always happen at the terminal point. Just like if there was a requirement for, say, a ".porn" domain, righteous ISPs would probably start filtering through proxies based on that indentifying information. There could conceivably be a majority of ISP customers that ask for this. The problem here is that they really shouldn't have a say over what Joe Porn-fan wants on his PC.
Anyway, no use worrying about it, it's not enforceable. My only regret is that they're going to try, and it will have negligible impact on society or my quality of life, while costing us all in taxes.
I don't know, but at my job they're already trying to push for permanent archiving of all electronic correspondence. We're supposed to accomplish this with a budget that forces me to buy refurbished servers when I need replacements. I don't even have enough disk space for the users' important files, let alone trivial interoffice correspondence.
If that's what they want it, then they can pay for all the costs involved in doing it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yup, the only way to do it is to let people be responsible for their own actions. No other way is fair, or makes sense. As far as interest rates on credit, credit cards companies weren't being predatory, people just don't understand how a revolving credit account works.
See, back in the Bad Ol' Days, when American Express was king of the hill, you had to pay the full balance at the end of term (usually 30 days). You also had to be making some pretty good income and have your finances in order to get a credit card, and if you didn't pay the full balance, it was a lot like defaulting on a regular loan. Now anyone and his dog can get a credit card, you can spread out the payments over your lifetime (if you're that negligent), as long as you don't go over your limit, and you make at least the minimum payments. People can gripe all they want about "50 per cent interest compounded minutely", but they'd never pay a dime of that if they just pay the goddamn balance in full and on time. If you ask me, I like the freedom allowed by a credit card, and by the fact that the current system actually allows a middle-class shmuck like me to have one.
Exactly! It's about network effects. Microsoft can deliver MSO through OEMs if they wish, or even through WU if they had to. It doesn't matter if Office is huge, slow, a virus vector, and has a file format which is basically a memory dump of OLE streams (which get corrupted quite often).
If Microsoft gives away 10 million copies of Office 2005 XPNTME, they will still break even, because another 10 million will need to be able to read and revise the data.
Continue developing Internet Explorer would be BAD for Microsoft
Ah, but Microsoft has already fooled you. Microsoft is pushing IE as a development component, and believe it or not, it is actually being used by developers the same way VB is used; It's a quick-and-dirty way to get an interface on software - with built-in ability to understand some common "Internet" protocols. Here's a short list of software that requires IE6 to run: Intuit Tax software, H&R Block TaxCut, Quickbooks Pro.
It's not about general web browsing anymore, Microsoft is successfully getting software makers to use all of IE's non-standard extensions as, well, almost like an API. IE is not going away any time soon. As long as Microsoft can deliver it's own software through OEM channels (pretty much uncontested), or through its own update mechanisms, they will continue to dominate.
It's not about who supports what standards, it's about the network effects of being first to deliver, i.e. being the first option the user has. It doesn't matter if a user can remove IE, because the next run of WU is going to add IE as a "critical" update, complete with a shiny new desktop icon. Now it isn't in the user's best interest to remove IE, because that would break some popular third-party software.
I'd like to see some figures on that. What do you mean by fast? Are you comparing load times? Page rendering times? What type of content? Static HTML? XML? Javascript? Running Java applets?
Based on my experience, Netscape is slower to load (the first time). Other than that, it renders the elements in a page in a different order than does IE, but the time from DNS lookup to completely rendered page doesn't seem all that different from other browsers. I have no doubt that Netscape has the biggest memory footprint of all available browsers, but it's hard to tell what IE uses, because most of it loads when Windows boots, instead of when you use it for the first time.
As far as I'm aware they havent improved the FPU yet. Someone let me know if I'm wrong. This armchair CPU designer would of liked to see them throw more silicon at this area.
Simply increasing the clock speed always generates more heat, a more complex FPU would only generate more heat if your making use of the FPU.
According to VIA's own benchmarks, you are correct, the FPU is still as terrible as in the old Cyrix chips. The emphasis seems to be on power consumption with these mini-ITX boards, and of course, there is always excess that ends up as radiated heat.
I looked into a mini-ITX set-up to build small firewall/NAT/proxy boxes for people. So far, the performance of the C3 makes me uneasy, and the prices can only be offset by the fact that their smaller footprint makes them convenient.
I figure that if a 200MHz K6-2 does the job for me at home (NAT only), I can get away with something on the lower end of the MHz scale. I'm still on the lookout for mITX boards that accept older mobile Pentiums, or perhaps AMD Durons if I need some horsepower.
For the most part, I'd say the solution is simple. Both the sender and recipient need to authenticate to send/receive messages. It's a very logical conclusion, considering how people currently avoid unwanted messages. Consider how most of us deal with telemarketers: People read their caller ID. "Is it someone we know? Nope." Why can't we do the same thing with e-mail, but with a service that makes the determination (where a passcode replaces a phone number as the ID)? Does the sender have the proper sender auth? No? No delivery for you!
This is the best possible solution for the people (ex: me) that really rely on e-mail to do their jobs. It sucks for those that wish to fill your inbox with junk. It doesn't really matter to me at this point, we buy one product from a vendor and they're sending ads to my inbox on a daily basis. The marketers can have their own separate protocol from e-mail, but no one can force us to use it.
It was a joke. I don't play games of chance, because they're pointless, especially when money is involved.
I play K-Poker (comes with KDE). I never lose, because I figured out how to edit the config file so that the lowest dollar amount win is always more than what you "pay" for a re-deal. I'm not the kind of geek they'd want playing in a tournament. =P
They steal this kind of stuff because it can be crammed in a trash bag in under 5 minutes, and because it's very liquid, i.e. they can easily sell it at a pawn shop without attracting much attention. Selling a crappy stereo may net $20, but the unicycle is pretty unique, and is going to attract trouble, so its value is probably in the negative when you figure the cost of hiding from the law. Detachable-face stereos, or other lame anti-theft gizmos aren't really that effective; It's not like the devices can't be circumvented, or a replacement face plate be stolen/bought. My point is that small time thieves are very good at what they do: Why steal a $100 item and get caught, when you can steal 5 $20 items and never attract attention?
The photo archives may make it possible for thieves to "case" potential targets without being seen in the neighborhood, or without visiting the town hall. I know what my neighbors look like and what cars they drive. I'd be able to spot an outsider in an instant. This kind of information helps police catch thieves.
Yeah, probably radioactive waste. The protection was for her own good. Also explains why the base isn't full-time staffed any longer. Perhaps in the past it was kept in secret because of the experimental vehicles being tested there, but now it's pretty much a health hazard. Anyway, what military facility does allow trespassers?
While, looks like this is the end of the line for John Woo. This is about as low as one can stoop. Sorry if you disagree, but he has had a hand in producing some of the worst crap to ever be spattered on the silver screen. If you don't believe me, watch MI:2 and try not to wince. It the old rip-off-the-latex-mask-disguise device not once, but three times. Even the most lame Scooby Doo mystery managed to use this gag only once, and the audience wasn't asked to take Scooby Doo seriously.
I look forward to the day when John Woo's next project is "Job Hunter".
It seem to me more and more patents are being ruled as invalid, If this is indeed the case why are they being assigned in the first place?
Because the USPTO gets revenue from patent applications. The whole system is set up to encourage volume and not quality. I'd say that a smart way to show the damage done by junk patents is to show that the cost of the court proceedings is at least as much as the revenue generated. I'm not saying that this is the case, but I suspect that it eventually will be, and the point can be made that even though they both cost the taxpayer, one of the ways clogs up the courts and costs people jobs (because company finances are being allocated to fight unnecessary legal battles).
And that's a problem with a mob of reactive, angry citizens. Despite what may be the best course of action, the government ends up handling the highest profile problems first. Sometimes, those problems aren't the worst. It's hard to argue with logic once emotionalism and media hype take over.
I see some fantastic potential for heating water without the complexity or cost of panels of semiconductors.
The only time I began to become better was when I stopped believing in meds and thrust my salvation and deliverance into the hands of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
I just checked, my HMO doesn't cover prescriptions for that, even as a co-pay.
Homosexuality was in the DSM as a treatable psychological disorder up till 1973
That's because there is no isometric model for human behavior. It's based on You versus Everyone Else. Considering the social consequences, it's no surprise that the majority of homosexuals were off the map for so long.
Medicalizing everything is a specialty of psychology in general.
That's psychiatry, not psychology. Psychologists study, psychiatrists treat. Very few of them are foolish enough to think that medication is much more than a tool to be used in conjuction with the major part of the treatment.
Astrology has more hard fact in it than psychology does.
That's a ridiculous statement. Psychologists observe and test theories the same way any other researcher does. The problem is that the mind is complex, and it's environment is subject to change. We're not all clones, so the effect of medication and treatment varies widely between patients.
If psychology is so effective, why do women go to shrinks and get drugs rather than undergo Freudian psychoanalysis?
Drugs should always be administered as part of the treatment. I've seen GPs hand out drugs they should not, but I don't know any psychiatrists that are loose with their prescriptions. Are you confusing this with people who doctor-shop and self-medicate? Modern psychiatric techniques rarely acknowledge the work of Freud. He's yesterdays news. My personal opinion is that Freud was a coke-head who was obsessed with sex. Other's opinions may vary.
And why did you specifically target women?
Most of psychology rests upon a few semi-understood brain chemicals and the ethereal realm of consciousness which no one can define,
No, it has nothing to do with that. That's biology. Psychology deals with behavior. Psychology's foundation is study. Tons of study. I know you'll be disappointed to read this, but they don't just make it all up.
Agoraphobia has no known treatment.
"Agoraphobia" isn't recognized as the proper name of any real condition, it's a likely symptom of a real mental illness, or just a personality trait. For example, someone with an anxiety disorder can experience an almost uncontrollable urge to run scared or burst in tears (or start swinging), and perhaps being in a crowd of strangers gave the anxiety attack a boost in severity, or even brought on the attack.
I don't know how to address the rest of your post. You have some deep misunderstandings about your fellow man.
Interviewer: So tell us what we can expect from the next version of Windows in 2005.
Microsoft Spokesperson: Well, with the release of Nexthorn in the first quarter of 2006-
I: Wait, did you just say 2006?
MS: Pardon?
I: Nevermind. Go on.
MS: Well, after the initial release, slated for the last quarter of '06-
I: Hold on. What did you just say?
MS: Er, well... Where was I? Oh yes, a new technology code-named Indigo will be a major feature in enhancement with the 2007 release of Window-
I: There! Stop! You just did it again?
MS: Did what?
I: Just now.
MS: Just what? What'd I do?
I: You keep changing the date.
MS: No I'm not.
I: Yes, you are. I just heard you. You said "2007".
MS: Couldn't have.
I: What? Why not. I just heard you say it.
MS: No, I said "2008".
I: [pause] Okay. I apologize. Please continue.
MS: Allright then. Indigo will up the standard for OS design in 2009...
Sorry, just can't stay away from this article. I also believe that there is prior art for the patent in question. This company produced "infringing" products prior to the patent being issued in 1996, and IIRC even prior to the 1993 submission of the patent. I can't find anything on the web, but I'm going to dig up some old copies of my computer rags to see if I can find the first "accelerator" board for the Amiga, which I'm fairly certain was sold prior to 1990 (and definitely prior to 1993).
Can anyone else back me up on this?
Is this patent overly broad. I mentioned in another post it appears to be a patent on a PLL circuit. However, since all chips need to sync to another signal, and CPUs / GPUs in particular use a multiple of the host signal, every processor produced by everyone in the PC industry is potentially infringing.
The USPTO basically allowed someone to patent the synchronous computer. Read the text of the patent, it reads like a 7th graders description of how a PC works.
Um, actually it looks to me like they're claiming patent on a PLL circuit.
Oh come on! If this isn't a fishing expedition, then I don't know what is. What the hell does FSF have to do with contracts between SCO/IBM or SCO/Novell?
Indiana parents are the first to buy (en masse) licenses for Essay Constructor Pro v2.0. The software produces essays that are indistinguishable from those written by real students, using the latest screen-scrape-from-Internet 'n' plagiarism-from-non-credible-sources techniques.
Indiana Director of State Board of Ed comments: "Isn't it wonderful how technology is improving education?"
...is that the porn industry doesn't like this because filtering doesn't always happen at the terminal point. Just like if there was a requirement for, say, a ".porn" domain, righteous ISPs would probably start filtering through proxies based on that indentifying information. There could conceivably be a majority of ISP customers that ask for this. The problem here is that they really shouldn't have a say over what Joe Porn-fan wants on his PC.
Anyway, no use worrying about it, it's not enforceable. My only regret is that they're going to try, and it will have negligible impact on society or my quality of life, while costing us all in taxes.
I don't know, but at my job they're already trying to push for permanent archiving of all electronic correspondence. We're supposed to accomplish this with a budget that forces me to buy refurbished servers when I need replacements. I don't even have enough disk space for the users' important files, let alone trivial interoffice correspondence.
If that's what they want it, then they can pay for all the costs involved in doing it.
Dia free
What's this? Where can I get it?