you've been using IE7 on the mac for years? mac browsers suck.
much of the list isn't really comparable to mac or is vague. security fixes? more media? improved mp3 library? hard to know what he's really talking about. new user interface? hard to say you've been using that on a mac or that you'd want to.
Selective enforcement is an abuse of power whether suffer from it or not. Perhaps you are more attractive than the other poster. Perhaps you are a girl with big tits or a mother/grandmother that looks sweet and innocent. Perhaps you are frequently the officer's type. Doesn't matter. Fact is that society treats people unequally based on appearance. That goes for men as well as women.
In 25+ years of driving I've been let off exactly one time because I'm not the kind of driver that gets let off with a warning. Just because you've can recall more times than I've ever experienced doesn't make you a better driver or mean that police don't abuse their power. In fact, it's evidence of it.
Perhaps we should adopt a national speed limit of 15 MPH then. That would drive out fatality rate down to near 0.
Speed limits are rarely set for safety reasons and are generally controlled by people unqualified to judge. They are established with the commmon understanding that the won't be enforced until they are exceeded by a certain amount and they're considered guidelines for safe driving under ideal conditions. Excessive speed is a matter of judgement and interpretation, so changing the interpretation doesn't improve anything. Speed limits are set too low all the time as either a knee-jerk reaction to an incident or to enable revenue generation.
The point of the original poster was that there were problems with the road that made it unsafe and the overenthusiastic enforcement of speed limits aggravated the problem rather than addressed it. Roads are for getting somewhere and, if drivers are creating safety issues because of a road problem, the road should be improved. The government is here to serve the people, not the other way around.
Yeah, so? people put all sorts of stuff on their pages and say all sorts of things. I doubt rapists advertise themselves as such as a pickup line.
Many people, probably most, approve most anyone who requests it. Just what kind of personal information does a 14 year old put on his site that places him at risk? Address? Telephone? I never see those things. What I do see are the city, the school, and sometimes IM handles. That's hardly terrible stuff.
If Tom the Rapist talked his 14 year old target into meeting him then that would be different. Adding him means nothing.
How should they do this, by forcing users to click "ENTER" to certify that they are of age? MySpace does the same thing that porn sites do. If that's not good enough then there's a larger problem than just mySpace.
You should also mention that profiles for those under 16 are restricted, so in some ways the cutoff age is 16. There are some kids clearly underage that lie in order to have a page. Others lie in order to have unrestricted pages, while some kids 16 and old lie in order to have their page restricted.
what's so new about this idea? Is it that it's blockbuster and its video?...and what's with the fascination with xServes? Is it really necessary to use a specific Apple server product for this example? Couldn't any potential server do? Certainly for the author to make his point an xServe wouldn't be necessary.
DV video doesn't use isochronous mode so that part of your argument doesn't stand. USB2 is indeed slower than F400 but not by a great deal. In any event, DV video requires only a fraction of the bandwidth of either so USB2 is entirely suitable for it. Of course, USB2 didn't exist when Sony standardized on firewire. Remember, it was Sony that made firewire a standard, not Apple, and it was specifically for DV. If they were doing it today it would most definitely be USB2 instead and firewire wouldn't even exist.
Intel promised firewire integrated into it's desktop chipset but decommitted time after time. The reason was because there was no demand, not because of patent royalties. The percentage of desktop PC's that are equipped with firewire is small. Nearly all PC notebooks have it.
That's totally untrue. Apple's implementation of USB2 is dog slow but that's their fault. Windows implementations of USB2 are slower than firewire but the difference is not that great. CPU utilization is similar as well.
One other thing, the architectural differences between firewire and USB are not very analogous to SCSI versus IDE. SCSI as a protocol is slower that IDE. Firewire and USB storage devices both use a SCSI command set. Firewire is a peer bus whereas USB is not. Firewire and USB are both relatively inefficient with their raw bandwidth, USB moreso than firewire. CPU requirements for USB are more a function of the host controller design than anything else. Firewire interfaces for computers are more complex and expensive than USB ones.
IDE has DMA modes which reduce it's CPU utilization to negligable levels. SCSI has traditionally had benefits over IDE but CPU utilization is not inherently one of them. With serial SCSI (SAS) adopting the point-to-point connection AND the physical interface of SATA, with ATAPI providing support for SCSI command sets and SATA 2 providing command queuing and connections to switches, the advantages of SCSI going forward are nil. SAS exists largely to prop up the higher profit margins of "enterprise" drives.
Sure, except at the time of the 604e the Pentium Pro had already been out a year. When the G3 was announced the Pentium II had already been in the market for 5-6 months.
Claiming that PowerPC's have almost always been faster than a pentium clock for clock is also not true. The original 601 and 603 were not. The 604 was faster than the Pentium but not the Pentium Pro at the time. The G3 and G4 not faster than the Pentium II and after. The G5 faster than the P4 but not the Pentium M or the AMD parts. Fact is the opposite is true but no matter. Macs have never had a demonstrable performance lead over PC's in the general case. Sure, DP G5's are faster than single processor PC's, G4 and G5 vector processing has mostly been superior, but as a general rule the basic computing performance of macs has always lagged.
Intel was pushed by AMD with the Athlon but they improved their products steadily before that. If anything, the rush to compete with AMD led to some quality issues with Intel, for example the withdrawn 1.1GHz Pentium III. Intel knew what they were doing before AMD. It was PowerPC that arguably did not.
Apple has always been about style. Performance, on the other hand, is a function of what their suppliers can provide. You can bet that Apple would make faster machines if they could and they frequently negotiate exclusives with suppliers of new technology so that the market will perceive that Apple is an innovator. Take the first DVD-R drives. Apple got an exclusive on the drive and branded it "Superdrive". Compaq got it one month later and the rest a month after that. Apple perpetuates the Superdrive name to this day.
How you can claim that the G4 is as good a workstation for heavy multitasking loads as current PC's is beyond me. It's overall performance lags considerable and task switches don't help matters any. If you want to claim that OS X is a better tasker than XP then go ahead (don't know that myself) but the G4 is archaic.
Zimmermann originally intended his work to be a commercial product. When he realized that was likely a deadend he decided instead to give it away. In the end, his notoriety landed him a job. "Human rights" had nothing to do with it.
Property taxes are something that should be done away with anyway. It's just one more unfair tax that creates extra work for everyone effected and introduces opportunities for abuse on both sides.
In my state, larger properties are almost always exempted from taxes anyway. That leaves the upper middle class paying the bulk. After all, the poor don't own valuable property and the rich manage their ag exemptions by hiring professional exemption maintainers. If you don't want to play the game you're gonna get screwed, just like dealing with the IRS.
Interesting thing, if the victim of this mistake wasn't watching what was going on, he could have been in a world of hurt. Where I live, there's a relatively short window of time to dispute a valuation. After that you're in real trouble.
People need to realize that a consumption tax is the way to go. Infrastructure for that largely exists already and cheating is hard to do. Wealthier people consume more so therefore pay more and there's a builtin incentive to save. The fewer hidden taxes we have the better since it gives us better visibility to how much we really pay.
Actually, RMS has no say whatsoever in the Linux kernel and neither does the "community" that supposedly values his opinion. All that matters is what the copyright holders want to do, and the most important one of those has already stated that it's grossly impractical to contact all contributors and get universal buy-in to a licensing change whether it's desirable or not.
No one cares about that. It's about "cheating". Why would anyone insist on excluding Bonds or McGuire from the record books simply because they risked growing tits (as you say)?
Now, how many steroid users with shrivelled balls or grown tits do you know?
Frankly, why shouldn't professional athletes take performance enhancing drugs?
Hell, why not 20/0 then? Why limit yourself? Ever seen a 20/5 line on a test chart?
Once presbyopia sets in you'll wonder why you ever even thought of such things. Your eyesight is already perfect. Why would you think that your life would be enhanced in any way by making it marginally better? Ask someone who requires correction if the difference between 20/20 and 20/15 even matters. It doesn't. You should be thankful that you don't have to mess with glasses, contacts or lasik.
How do you know it could have been better? If your eyesight is indeed 20/10 (is that both eyes or each eye tested individually?) then you've max'ed out the test chart. There's a limit to just how good a human eye can be and there's no reason you should assume that an imaginary set of glasses could possibly improve yours at this point.
Except that what you say isn't true in my experience and it's an unsubstantiated claim. You may not have said that nearsightedness always gets worse but you strongly implied it (since all your friends fit in that category). Why don't you show where strain on the focusing muscles is what's responsible for nearsightedness?
Also, getting farsighted with age isn't normal. That process is called presbyopiahttp://www.allaboutvision.com/conditions /presbyopia.htm/. Basically, presbyopia is a hardening of the lens as we age that reduces the eye's focusing range. It has nothing to do with the eye itself changing shape. Of course, if you wish to imagine that using reading glasses now will save you from presbyopia when you get older then go on with it. Others know better.
I guess since all of your friends have a particular problem then everyone in the world does. My eyesight deteriorated through my teenage years then leveled off before I was 20. My prescription stayed the same from that point for 25 years. A year ago I had custom lasik and now have 20/15 in each eye. Curiously, my prescription all those years was too strong by nearly a full power according to my lasik doctor. You would think that having that would have accelerated my so-called deteriorating vision. It did not.
I was told to expect exactly my experience when I was a teenager. I would suggest that there are many like me, perhaps more than are like all your friends.
Slashdot Mirror
you've been using IE7 on the mac for years? mac browsers suck.
much of the list isn't really comparable to mac or is vague. security fixes? more media? improved mp3 library? hard to know what he's really talking about. new user interface? hard to say you've been using that on a mac or that you'd want to.
Selective enforcement is an abuse of power whether suffer from it or not. Perhaps you are more attractive than the other poster. Perhaps you are a girl with big tits or a mother/grandmother that looks sweet and innocent. Perhaps you are frequently the officer's type. Doesn't matter. Fact is that society treats people unequally based on appearance. That goes for men as well as women.
In 25+ years of driving I've been let off exactly one time because I'm not the kind of driver that gets let off with a warning. Just because you've can recall more times than I've ever experienced doesn't make you a better driver or mean that police don't abuse their power. In fact, it's evidence of it.
Perhaps we should adopt a national speed limit of 15 MPH then. That would drive out fatality rate down to near 0.
Speed limits are rarely set for safety reasons and are generally controlled by people unqualified to judge. They are established with the commmon understanding that the won't be enforced until they are exceeded by a certain amount and they're considered guidelines for safe driving under ideal conditions. Excessive speed is a matter of judgement and interpretation, so changing the interpretation doesn't improve anything. Speed limits are set too low all the time as either a knee-jerk reaction to an incident or to enable revenue generation.
The point of the original poster was that there were problems with the road that made it unsafe and the overenthusiastic enforcement of speed limits aggravated the problem rather than addressed it. Roads are for getting somewhere and, if drivers are creating safety issues because of a road problem, the road should be improved. The government is here to serve the people, not the other way around.
Yeah, so? people put all sorts of stuff on their pages and say all sorts of things. I doubt rapists advertise themselves as such as a pickup line.
Many people, probably most, approve most anyone who requests it. Just what kind of personal information does a 14 year old put on his site that places him at risk? Address? Telephone? I never see those things. What I do see are the city, the school, and sometimes IM handles. That's hardly terrible stuff.
If Tom the Rapist talked his 14 year old target into meeting him then that would be different. Adding him means nothing.
How should they do this, by forcing users to click "ENTER" to certify that they are of age? MySpace does the same thing that porn sites do. If that's not good enough then there's a larger problem than just mySpace.
You should also mention that profiles for those under 16 are restricted, so in some ways the cutoff age is 16. There are some kids clearly underage that lie in order to have a page. Others lie in order to have unrestricted pages, while some kids 16 and old lie in order to have their page restricted.
what's so new about this idea? Is it that it's blockbuster and its video? ...and what's with the fascination with xServes? Is it really necessary to use a specific Apple server product for this example? Couldn't any potential server do? Certainly for the author to make his point an xServe wouldn't be necessary.
DV video doesn't use isochronous mode so that part of your argument doesn't stand. USB2 is indeed slower than F400 but not by a great deal. In any event, DV video requires only a fraction of the bandwidth of either so USB2 is entirely suitable for it. Of course, USB2 didn't exist when Sony standardized on firewire. Remember, it was Sony that made firewire a standard, not Apple, and it was specifically for DV. If they were doing it today it would most definitely be USB2 instead and firewire wouldn't even exist.
Intel promised firewire integrated into it's desktop chipset but decommitted time after time. The reason was because there was no demand, not because of patent royalties. The percentage of desktop PC's that are equipped with firewire is small. Nearly all PC notebooks have it.
That's totally untrue. Apple's implementation of USB2 is dog slow but that's their fault. Windows implementations of USB2 are slower than firewire but the difference is not that great. CPU utilization is similar as well.
One other thing, the architectural differences between firewire and USB are not very analogous to SCSI versus IDE. SCSI as a protocol is slower that IDE. Firewire and USB storage devices both use a SCSI command set. Firewire is a peer bus whereas USB is not. Firewire and USB are both relatively inefficient with their raw bandwidth, USB moreso than firewire. CPU requirements for USB are more a function of the host controller design than anything else. Firewire interfaces for computers are more complex and expensive than USB ones.
IDE has DMA modes which reduce it's CPU utilization to negligable levels. SCSI has traditionally had benefits over IDE but CPU utilization is not inherently one of them. With serial SCSI (SAS) adopting the point-to-point connection AND the physical interface of SATA, with ATAPI providing support for SCSI command sets and SATA 2 providing command queuing and connections to switches, the advantages of SCSI going forward are nil. SAS exists largely to prop up the higher profit margins of "enterprise" drives.
Sure, except at the time of the 604e the Pentium Pro had already been out a year. When the G3 was announced the Pentium II had already been in the market for 5-6 months.
Claiming that PowerPC's have almost always been faster than a pentium clock for clock is also not true. The original 601 and 603 were not. The 604 was faster than the Pentium but not the Pentium Pro at the time. The G3 and G4 not faster than the Pentium II and after. The G5 faster than the P4 but not the Pentium M or the AMD parts. Fact is the opposite is true but no matter. Macs have never had a demonstrable performance lead over PC's in the general case. Sure, DP G5's are faster than single processor PC's, G4 and G5 vector processing has mostly been superior, but as a general rule the basic computing performance of macs has always lagged.
Intel was pushed by AMD with the Athlon but they improved their products steadily before that. If anything, the rush to compete with AMD led to some quality issues with Intel, for example the withdrawn 1.1GHz Pentium III. Intel knew what they were doing before AMD. It was PowerPC that arguably did not.
Apple has always been about style. Performance, on the other hand, is a function of what their suppliers can provide. You can bet that Apple would make faster machines if they could and they frequently negotiate exclusives with suppliers of new technology so that the market will perceive that Apple is an innovator. Take the first DVD-R drives. Apple got an exclusive on the drive and branded it "Superdrive". Compaq got it one month later and the rest a month after that. Apple perpetuates the Superdrive name to this day.
How you can claim that the G4 is as good a workstation for heavy multitasking loads as current PC's is beyond me. It's overall performance lags considerable and task switches don't help matters any. If you want to claim that OS X is a better tasker than XP then go ahead (don't know that myself) but the G4 is archaic.
got any links to cameras with greayscale CCD's? Easier? I don't think so.
Zimmermann originally intended his work to be a commercial product. When he realized that was likely a deadend he decided instead to give it away. In the end, his notoriety landed him a job. "Human rights" had nothing to do with it.
PDA's are dead because no one wants them, not because MS killed them. People want their PDA functions integrated into phones.
Ah, you mean a task switcher in an operating system. Great idea.
Property taxes are something that should be done away with anyway. It's just one more unfair tax that creates extra work for everyone effected and introduces opportunities for abuse on both sides.
In my state, larger properties are almost always exempted from taxes anyway. That leaves the upper middle class paying the bulk. After all, the poor don't own valuable property and the rich manage their ag exemptions by hiring professional exemption maintainers. If you don't want to play the game you're gonna get screwed, just like dealing with the IRS.
Interesting thing, if the victim of this mistake wasn't watching what was going on, he could have been in a world of hurt. Where I live, there's a relatively short window of time to dispute a valuation. After that you're in real trouble.
People need to realize that a consumption tax is the way to go. Infrastructure for that largely exists already and cheating is hard to do. Wealthier people consume more so therefore pay more and there's a builtin incentive to save. The fewer hidden taxes we have the better since it gives us better visibility to how much we really pay.
A vested interest in the GPL growing? He can write new versions of the GPL all he wants but he can't force anyone to adopt them.
Actually, RMS has no say whatsoever in the Linux kernel and neither does the "community" that supposedly values his opinion. All that matters is what the copyright holders want to do, and the most important one of those has already stated that it's grossly impractical to contact all contributors and get universal buy-in to a licensing change whether it's desirable or not.
har har. innovative companies like Palm. that's a good one.
the real reason to have multiple companies is so that ones like dell and MS can make all the profit!
No one cares about that. It's about "cheating". Why would anyone insist on excluding Bonds or McGuire from the record books simply because they risked growing tits (as you say)?
Now, how many steroid users with shrivelled balls or grown tits do you know?
Frankly, why shouldn't professional athletes take performance enhancing drugs?
Hell, why not 20/0 then? Why limit yourself? Ever seen a 20/5 line on a test chart?
Once presbyopia sets in you'll wonder why you ever even thought of such things. Your eyesight is already perfect. Why would you think that your life would be enhanced in any way by making it marginally better? Ask someone who requires correction if the difference between 20/20 and 20/15 even matters. It doesn't. You should be thankful that you don't have to mess with glasses, contacts or lasik.
How do you know it could have been better? If your eyesight is indeed 20/10 (is that both eyes or each eye tested individually?) then you've max'ed out the test chart. There's a limit to just how good a human eye can be and there's no reason you should assume that an imaginary set of glasses could possibly improve yours at this point.
Except that what you say isn't true in my experience and it's an unsubstantiated claim. You may not have said that nearsightedness always gets worse but you strongly implied it (since all your friends fit in that category). Why don't you show where strain on the focusing muscles is what's responsible for nearsightedness?
s /presbyopia.htm/. Basically, presbyopia is a hardening of the lens as we age that reduces the eye's focusing range. It has nothing to do with the eye itself changing shape. Of course, if you wish to imagine that using reading glasses now will save you from presbyopia when you get older then go on with it. Others know better.
Also, getting farsighted with age isn't normal. That process is called presbyopiahttp://www.allaboutvision.com/condition
I guess since all of your friends have a particular problem then everyone in the world does. My eyesight deteriorated through my teenage years then leveled off before I was 20. My prescription stayed the same from that point for 25 years. A year ago I had custom lasik and now have 20/15 in each eye. Curiously, my prescription all those years was too strong by nearly a full power according to my lasik doctor. You would think that having that would have accelerated my so-called deteriorating vision. It did not.
I was told to expect exactly my experience when I was a teenager. I would suggest that there are many like me, perhaps more than are like all your friends.