In other words, "everybody gets the heaven they wish for", or for some "if I believe, I will believe"; I can, seriously, live with that:) (even if its completelly washed out of most meaning...but that's a general trend over last few thousand years, with too easily falsifiable mythologies gradually discarded' "survival of the fittest" for systems of beliefs)
And please...it's beyond your comprehension. Which I do understand, I was like you for a very long time, also. So there... (really, it's mental pingpong, let it go)
Almost any lack of interoperability could fall under that explanation. But does it really seem complete in the case of company which refused to license their CPU interconnect to 3rd party chipset makers? (compliance would be responsibility of those 3rd parties) Or sold Atom for higher price than Atom + its chipset...
Well, yes, Judaism has been initially essentially xenophobic (at least that's what the story tells); it follows that current forms retained a form of that and don't try to enlist everybody around, quite the contrary actually (which usually does end up rather charming, from what I hear:) )
But my post wasn't about efforts to enlist, just that many/most/all religions have quite absolutist view as to what is right (their mythology) and what is, to lesser or greater extent, wrong (other mythologies) - hence their particular worldview encompasses best, in their eyes, whole world and all of humanity - even those who disagree, are not ready, etc. Plus the last part, about you surely suffering, requires only few established religions which claim that but are exclusive...no need for Judaism to be involved at all.
BTW, how does anti-blasphemy not limit atheism in this case? And personally I'd have a hard time calling Judaism a religion in the same meaning of the word as for most of the rest...from my limited exposure it almost seems to be now a philosophy of life with cherishing of tradition.
It would be fun to determine where the line differentiating those lies.
But remember we're talking about a company which tried to block later s370 from working in slotkeys, activelly blocked possibility of dual cpu operation, used illegal tricks to ensure maintaining upper hand, goes far with castrating cheap CPUs from features, tried hard and succeeded in killing "alien" chipsets for their CPUs (hence ensuing profit for their own...now, how to ensure more will be sold?...)
The only major "failure" of AMD is that Intel lately managed to be noticeably ahead in both R&D and fab technology; there is nothing particuarly wrong with AMD tech, nothing that says "failure" - they are just behind. Behind in areas which are crucial for CPU manufacturer and vastly expensive to pursue; to the point that hardly anybody does so.
Money which Intel did illegally channel from AMD (you haven't heard about quite recent EU rulling?) would help greatly with pursuing them.
...probably they were also one of the echoes of Greek philosophical thought.
Anyway, same worshipping of objects (and ancestors in some places) is rampant in Catholicism, at the least. That plus Orthodoxy gives you strong majority of Christianity.
I don't care what religion it is, if I am not a follower of that religion, I am not subject to its rules. Period.
Many (if not most/all) religions thinks otherwise. You're a direct descendant of their particular creation myth (how couldn't you be?), for starters. Only their gods exist, so only them influence you (and not the obviously false ones you were led to believe, in almost 100% of cases by your astray family). Plus bad things are sure to happen to you after you die... (since there's many religions claiming this to be the case if you don't follow them)
But I figure, why should I expect people to respect something they were forcefully brought into, with real detrimental effects for them; and with this thing still trying to get in their way every single day...while they just would like to be left alone.
That was the stated reason, yes. But with such complex societal mechanisms as religions, it's more revealing to look past stated reasons and motivations; trying to see how particular rule might have been beneficial for the spread of given mythology.
...and which technology is succesfull, which one profilates, depends on circumstances ("enviroment"). Often with small gradual changes over the "lifespan" of technology...with no single human really grasping it anymore; the whole picture living its own life as a set of desciptions ("technological code") undergoing mutations (with the best adapted ones surviving, even if they are not the "best")
Sure, it's not a straightforward analogy. But a usefull model nonetheless, to think of technology as and extension of our evolution, the "natural" one (why our creations are not "natural"?)
I can agree it might be oversight...which doesn't speak very good of Intel if AMD manages to do it usually. Heck, I've seen a very late i865 ASRock motherboard with Core 2 Duo support. And latest Intel CPUs (as well as those upcoming in 2011) basically use just PCI Express and some interface to output video...
Yes, very few people want and expect to mess around with the insides...so why Intel, seemingly, does some effort to outright block such possibility?
But you were likely to buy it 3 years ago, in the form of AM2 Athlon64. Now, and still for quite some tinme to come, you can slap in a quadcore. Or if buying now some cheap CPU you would still be able to upgrade to significantly faster one later on...
You can also donate just the old CPU, btw...somebody will need it (old sticks of RAM? You just buy reasonable amount in two sticks at first and have two free slots for later expansion...yes, you have take note to get a motherboard with 4 RAM slots, but that won't really cost you any extra)
"Incremental" is not a good word in this case btw. Just two-step (plus you can get quite a bit more than 10%...)
AMD dropped the ball pretty badly after a very strong run with earlier Athlons. It'd be great to see them get back into the game
(corrected one product name...)
That's not so simple. How much of "AMD dropping the ball" was because if illegal, anticompetitive practices of Intel? Practices which, essentially, robbed AMD from money needed for aggresive R&D and fab expansion.
Intel, through illegal practises, prevented AMD from benefiting fully from their lead with K7 and early K8 Athlons. This illegally rerouted money weakened AMD R&D and fabs, while strenghtening Intel ones at the same time.
Only because Intel chooses to obsolete old chipsets (or, more preciselly, arbitrarily changes bus specs on new motherboards - I've seen an ASRock one for C2D with i865). AMD somehow manages to keep latest versions of their CPU interconnect backwards compatible...you really want to say Intel isn't capable of doing so? (especially if Intel simply uses PCI Express for those chips, which is explicitly backwards compatible)
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, "everybody gets the heaven they wish for", or for some "if I believe, I will believe"; I can, seriously, live with that :) (even if its completelly washed out of most meaning...but that's a general trend over last few thousand years, with too easily falsifiable mythologies gradually discarded' "survival of the fittest" for systems of beliefs)
And please...it's beyond your comprehension. Which I do understand, I was like you for a very long time, also. So there... (really, it's mental pingpong, let it go)
Plus some kinds of activity seem to indeed increase performance of your brain...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-back
http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/
Almost any lack of interoperability could fall under that explanation. But does it really seem complete in the case of company which refused to license their CPU interconnect to 3rd party chipset makers? (compliance would be responsibility of those 3rd parties) Or sold Atom for higher price than Atom + its chipset...
Well, yes, Judaism has been initially essentially xenophobic (at least that's what the story tells); it follows that current forms retained a form of that and don't try to enlist everybody around, quite the contrary actually (which usually does end up rather charming, from what I hear :) )
But my post wasn't about efforts to enlist, just that many/most/all religions have quite absolutist view as to what is right (their mythology) and what is, to lesser or greater extent, wrong (other mythologies) - hence their particular worldview encompasses best, in their eyes, whole world and all of humanity - even those who disagree, are not ready, etc. Plus the last part, about you surely suffering, requires only few established religions which claim that but are exclusive...no need for Judaism to be involved at all.
BTW, how does anti-blasphemy not limit atheism in this case? And personally I'd have a hard time calling Judaism a religion in the same meaning of the word as for most of the rest...from my limited exposure it almost seems to be now a philosophy of life with cherishing of tradition.
Oh, this one doesn't condemn people for eternity of unspeakable suffering if they hurt his feelings by not believing?
It would be fun to determine where the line differentiating those lies.
But remember we're talking about a company which tried to block later s370 from working in slotkeys, activelly blocked possibility of dual cpu operation, used illegal tricks to ensure maintaining upper hand, goes far with castrating cheap CPUs from features, tried hard and succeeded in killing "alien" chipsets for their CPUs (hence ensuing profit for their own...now, how to ensure more will be sold?...)
You give those extremists power if you identify yourself with common organised movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R2-45
The only major "failure" of AMD is that Intel lately managed to be noticeably ahead in both R&D and fab technology; there is nothing particuarly wrong with AMD tech, nothing that says "failure" - they are just behind. Behind in areas which are crucial for CPU manufacturer and vastly expensive to pursue; to the point that hardly anybody does so.
Money which Intel did illegally channel from AMD (you haven't heard about quite recent EU rulling?) would help greatly with pursuing them.
So...how come your god allows majority of humanity to mock him, by denying it exists?
...probably they were also one of the echoes of Greek philosophical thought.
Anyway, same worshipping of objects (and ancestors in some places) is rampant in Catholicism, at the least. That plus Orthodoxy gives you strong majority of Christianity.
I don't care what religion it is, if I am not a follower of that religion, I am not subject to its rules. Period.
Many (if not most/all) religions thinks otherwise. You're a direct descendant of their particular creation myth (how couldn't you be?), for starters. Only their gods exist, so only them influence you (and not the obviously false ones you were led to believe, in almost 100% of cases by your astray family). Plus bad things are sure to happen to you after you die... (since there's many religions claiming this to be the case if you don't follow them)
But I figure, why should I expect people to respect something they were forcefully brought into, with real detrimental effects for them; and with this thing still trying to get in their way every single day...while they just would like to be left alone.
^fixed that part a bit...
Ultimatelly there is place for only one reason - to uproot other mythologies. "Obedience to the rules" is an important part of that.
That was the stated reason, yes. But with such complex societal mechanisms as religions, it's more revealing to look past stated reasons and motivations; trying to see how particular rule might have been beneficial for the spread of given mythology.
...and which technology is succesfull, which one profilates, depends on circumstances ("enviroment"). Often with small gradual changes over the "lifespan" of technology...with no single human really grasping it anymore; the whole picture living its own life as a set of desciptions ("technological code") undergoing mutations (with the best adapted ones surviving, even if they are not the "best")
Sure, it's not a straightforward analogy. But a usefull model nonetheless, to think of technology as and extension of our evolution, the "natural" one (why our creations are not "natural"?)
Such an opportunity with two identical cars and license plate swap at the right moment.
(a fine for driving at supersonic speeds would be...interesting ;p )
I can agree it might be oversight...which doesn't speak very good of Intel if AMD manages to do it usually. Heck, I've seen a very late i865 ASRock motherboard with Core 2 Duo support. And latest Intel CPUs (as well as those upcoming in 2011) basically use just PCI Express and some interface to output video...
Yes, very few people want and expect to mess around with the insides...so why Intel, seemingly, does some effort to outright block such possibility?
What about extra engineering effort to block upgrades, eh?
Did you really use "stylish" in there?... O_o (also, you probably wanted to write "blood-stained bookmarks")
That's to be expected if for many systems sensible upgrades are blocked. Anyway, if the group willing to upgrade is so small...why Intel blocks it?
But you were likely to buy it 3 years ago, in the form of AM2 Athlon64. Now, and still for quite some tinme to come, you can slap in a quadcore. Or if buying now some cheap CPU you would still be able to upgrade to significantly faster one later on...
You can also donate just the old CPU, btw...somebody will need it (old sticks of RAM? You just buy reasonable amount in two sticks at first and have two free slots for later expansion...yes, you have take note to get a motherboard with 4 RAM slots, but that won't really cost you any extra)
"Incremental" is not a good word in this case btw. Just two-step (plus you can get quite a bit more than 10%...)
AMD dropped the ball pretty badly after a very strong run with earlier Athlons. It'd be great to see them get back into the game
(corrected one product name...)
That's not so simple. How much of "AMD dropping the ball" was because if illegal, anticompetitive practices of Intel? Practices which, essentially, robbed AMD from money needed for aggresive R&D and fab expansion.
Intel, through illegal practises, prevented AMD from benefiting fully from their lead with K7 and early K8 Athlons. This illegally rerouted money weakened AMD R&D and fabs, while strenghtening Intel ones at the same time.
Only because Intel chooses to obsolete old chipsets (or, more preciselly, arbitrarily changes bus specs on new motherboards - I've seen an ASRock one for C2D with i865). AMD somehow manages to keep latest versions of their CPU interconnect backwards compatible...you really want to say Intel isn't capable of doing so? (especially if Intel simply uses PCI Express for those chips, which is explicitly backwards compatible)