[i]Call me crazy, but you don't see a problem with talking about ethics, and advertising some ipod/minimac pyramid scheme at the same time?
I say that for now on, we pledge to never mod up people with this bullcrap in their sigs.[/i]
And what exactly is wrong with putting that in your sig? Unlike Sitefinder, it's not like you're forced to go to it, or even could accidentally go to it, you intentionally have to click the link.
There's nothing unethical about putting that in your sig. Now if he had tricked you into going there, then yes... but it's pretty plain and obvious what it is when he asks you to go there.
I say from now on, people that complain about unintrusive sigs for things like this should be modded down for 6 months per offense, regardless of post content or merit.
Just one more giant ram into the hind end of Intel. Man, they took a beating last year, and here we are only 6 days into 2005, and Intel is shaping up to be the industry punching bag.
I hate to jump on the underdog bandwagon, but given the high price of Intel processors over the past couple decades, I'm glad to see it finally catching up to them, and in spades no less.
The sad thing is that AMD seems to be heading down the Intel road now and in another decade or two AMD will just be where Intel is now... offering overpriced processors, and we'll be rooting for whoever is eyeing AMD's chops at that point.
Why can't any company come in, clean up with good products at cheap prices and STAY THAT WAY? Why do they all have to get greedy in the end? This phenomenon is not constrained to the CPU market, of course, we see it every single day.
A strange as that may sound to some, PHP is the "new" basic being taught at many community (and 4 year?) colleges.
My local community college switch just this year from teaching QuickBASIC to PHP as the starter language. At first I was like... WHaaaaa?
Then I got to thinking about it, and realized that PHP can be as simple or as complex as the user wants it to be, and it really *is* a good starter language, and a spectacular path towards C++. The web browser is something most people are already familiar with, and what can be better than designing programs that communicate with your web browser if you want, or they can do other things, obviously... but the web browser is pretty close to a basic prompt, and you can do some neat things that would be entertaining for kids (maybe not 3 or 4 year old kids, but 7 or 8 and up).
If you're like me, your first reaction is going to be the "Whaaaaaa?" to it, but stop and think about it and give it some serious consideration before dismissing the idea... it really does have some merit.
I love how you use the Xeon as the lynchpin in your whole arguement. It makes it so easy to bring your whole house of cards down.
The Xeon processor IS a middle of the road processor. It's not the speeds of Xeon that make it a desirable processor for business, it's the stability and large cache. The Xeon processor is SLOWER, or at best exactly the same as the fastest P4's. The Xeon offers absolutely nothing in terms of processor speeds that can't be achieved at a signifigantly lower price point by buying a "non" Xeon version of the same processor. The only gains realized (and they are valid gains for a limited set of applications) is the L1 cache.
As for Intel pushing the Xeon line... haha, are you serious? They push the Xeon line because it's a cash cow. Offer the same processor with a bit more L1 cache for two or three times the price. What's not to like about that? I'd be pushing the hell out of that, too... when in reality 99.8% of the people buying Xeon's wouldn't know the difference between a Xeon and a stock P4 at the same clock speed.
I have no idea how you can say that "high end rendering farms" et al is the majority of the sales of Apple and x86 vendors. That's just plain ludicrous. Go do some research... the lions share of processor sales goes towards middle of the road CPUs... Why do you think the Celeron line is so popular?
I make a "bold, absolute" statment becaus that's what the yearly sales figures for the companies you mention show... It's a pretty cut and dried set of statistics that you perhaps need to research a bit before you make claims to the contrary.
I never said there aren't legitimate businesses that need the fastest CPUs for something other than games... I said they are a limited market, and compared to the consumer CPU market, they pale in comparison. You just can't ship tens of millions of processors to render farms around the world... there aren't enough of them.
Did you just not bother to read what I wrote, are you intetionally obtuse or is it just your natural state of beign? I normally can tell when someone is being obtuse intentionally, but it appears you have a knack for making it look like it's a natural function of your daily activity.
Your obtusness aside, though... Let me restate what I said in perhaps simpler terms that you might be able to comprehend.
Lets start with your statements about IBM, Motorola, Apple and SUN. They do not sell fast chips to businesses. Their primary sale are of the middle of the road chips. The high end processors are sold by those companies in startlingly limited quantities when compared to "yesterdays" processors. The fastest CPUs are not needed for 95% of the markets those companies you mention sell to. The ones that DO need the fastest/latest/greatest/highest power chips do NOT buy in quantities approaching anything NEAR what the gaming market buys.
See, the problem with Slashdot is indeed pimply faced school-children... but you are a shining example of why even those not in school are complete degenerates who have no idea, not even the vaguest shred of a clue, as to what drives the industry you think you're so into. I've been working in this industry for over 20 years now, and I started with building my own Hazeltine computer. I certainly don't need a fallicious lecture from a pimply-faced schoolkid like yourself to tell me what actually drives the industry.
You have NO idea what you are talking about. It's painfully clear to anyone with even a few years experience in this industry that you are a snot nosed brat who likes to talk a lot of crap, but has nothing to back it up. Please stop posting on/. so that the adults can have reasonable conversations with you interjecting your ill-informed opinions that you pull out of your ass.
The reasons those CPUs didn't get benchmarked (aside from the time and effort it would take) is because they really aren't that relevant to the article. No one used those CPUs for any gaming, and gaming is what drives the CPU market. Not business apps, not scientific apps, and certainly not Mom and Dad word processing or desktop publishing their way to fame and fortune.
Games drive consumer CPU advances, plain and simple, and the CPUs you mentioned had virtually nothing (comparitively) to offer in terms of games, and thus they are really irrelevant to the comparison.
Are they nice CPUs? Yes. Are they innovative? Yes. Are they for niche markets? Yes. I know Mac, Amiga, or anything but x86 people don't like to be relegated to a "niche" market, but in terms of $$ expenditure and mindshare, the x86 is (obviously) the primary game platform for computers, far, far, FAR outstripping EVERY OTHER CPU EVER MADE COMBINED. You could put the dollar value of non x86 games together from the beginning of time (that was a Tuesday in 1970, wasn't it?:) ) and it still wouldn't add up to one year of the dollar value of the x86 game market.
I've had one of the most popular Sourceforge projects for a number of years now (the popularity is waning now, for obvious reasons... but I was in the top 10 for awhile) - My project is ShowEQ. We had a code split with SINS, and SINS developed in conjunction with ShowEQ for a time.
We did incorporate a lot of SINS stuff back into ShowEQ, because I did believe some of the directions that SINS headed in were good, but the overall direction I did not believe was what was needed for the community. However, the code was not a drop in replacement into ShowEQ for current fuctions (or to add new functionality, etc...) so we used the SINS code as a starting point and wrote the SEQ code with SINS as a base idea.
Regardless, the point is that Open Source and GPL are meant to do exactly this. There is _NOTHING_ unethical/immoral about taking bits and pieces of code from other projects and using them in your own. That's exactly what SHOULD be happening. The maintainer of SINS contacted me about using some of the code/ideas from SINS and asked me to give him credit in ShowEQ, which I had neglected to do since we didn't take the code directly and drop it in to the SEQ codebase... but I agreed that giving SINS credit within SEQ was the right thing to do... so in your case, I would definitely attribute portions of the code to the other guys project, even thank him. But there is certainly nothing what so ever immoral about what you are doing with GPL code.
Whoever the guy is that said that is the immoral asshole for even suggesting that... especially if he is the one that forked the code base to begin with and is using other peoples code himself.
That guy that complained needs to be taken out an beaten. Rental cars? Please... if the customers of rental cars don't like the service so much, and find it so obscene, then they don't rent from that rental company any more.
Listening to Satellite radio is a CHOICE. You can't "accidentally" listen to it. You have to actively and willfully make an attempt to listen to it, and thus the FCC has absolutely NO grounds to censor it.
That guy is just a chump and can't compete in the market place, so he wants big brother to step in and fight his battles for him. People like that need to be removed from the gene pool.
I'm so SICK AND TIRED of being told what I can and can't watch/hear by other people. I wish there was someplace left on this earth I could go start my own nation./sigh
Those nice phone fees are where the legs of this fee grow from. The FCC line fee was introduced, and then increased under the same pretense -- "long distance rates will continue to fall, so even with increased FCC Line Fee you will see reduction of your overall bill". The hell it did.
You must be fairly young... at least compared to me. I remember when long distance, to another city in your same state, was close to $1.00/min. International calls were multi-dollar a minute propositions. I can call from one side of the country to the other for 3 - 4 cents a minute... if I really shop around, even cheaper than that.
Long distance rates have fallen dramatically over the past two decades. In fact, they've fallen so far that they/it has become a commodity item... just look at a vending machine with a bunch of calling cards in it.
Don't get me wrong, I think those line taxes are totally bogus... and it's one of the many reasons I don't have a land line phone (I refuse to pay all those ridiculous taxes, which literally double my bill). I agree 100% that they are bogus... but long distance rates have fallen, and fallen a lot. I expect long distance rates to be a thing of the past within the next 5 years or so. We already see the beginning of it with some of the bigger players offering flat fee long distance plans. As VoIP starts to move faster, flat fee LD, and then eventually LD will not even exist as a concept within the US... you just place a call like any other.
Top notch compared to what? A box of raisins? Maybe, but that's pushing it.
The last two Nokia phones I had were on AT&T and Cellular One (I think it was, was awhlie ago) They sucked.
I work with every new cellular handset that comes out for Sprint, Nokia's included... and they all suck. Every last one of them. All my co-workers agree as well. We laugh at the poor saps that have to test the Nokias out.
You are so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.
Shortmail was used concurrently with Sprints SMS service. There was no web-based product that was required to be used, regardless of whether you were using shortmail or sms; it was transparent to the user.
Regardless of the complexity of the back end authentication, the user experience was that of being able to send and receive SMS messages, and the user has been able to do that for the past several years. So the original posters premise is totally false, as is yours. Web based text messaging was not a *requirement* to send sms.
It's unfortunate your entire post is one giant lie. Sprint has had two way SMS for the past 5 years (or more). I have no clue as to where you got the idea you had to use a WAP page for sending text messages. *boggle.
Nokia phones are the lowest reliability phones on the market. They are literally the crappiest phones you can buy. If they "treatet you well," I would hate to see what treats you poorly.
Sprint also has had a PTT solution similar to Nextels for over a year now. Eh.
We all new they would eventually turn upon themselves, when they have nothing *new* left to feed upon.
It seems the day of reckoning may be seeing it's first light of dawn. Here's to hoping they all devour each other in a darwinistic orgy of competition. Maybe, in the end, each company competing will be the best form of Spyware removal tools a user could ask for.
Let the programs compete until there's a winner, then shoot the winner. Problem solved.
I sent this letter to the parentstv.org email address. Maybe send them similar letters?
Hello,
I'm not sure who I might be addressing at editor@parentstv.org, so I apologize for the lack of personalization.
I am somewhat curious about your organization and why it exists. I realize you probably get all sorts of crank emails, spam, etc... So I expect this email to most likely get ignored.
I don't like most of what's shown on TV today... I rarely watch TV as a matter of fact. However, I find that trying to prevent other people from doing so is a) futile and b) wrong. I am wondering why your organization thinks it's ok to dictate what other people do in the privacy of thier own homes?
I understand you are working under a "save the children" banner, and that's fine. But is it not more logical for a parent to parent, as opposed to expecting the government or TV and radio stations to do it for them? Why does your organization feel that it's acceptable to deny programming to people who may find it funny/interesting/worth watching? Why do you feel that your "rights" override other's "rights" to watch what they please?
As I said, I have no real agenda; I don't watch the TV shows you label as "Bad" nor do I watch the ones you label as "Good." If either or both of them are cancled or taken off the air, I don't really care one whit. What I do care about is your organizations internal justification for censoring programming because parents can't be bothered to actually monitor what their children watch. I have a very real problem with organizations like yours dictating to others what's "right" and what isn't.
It's time to stop blaming TV, Radio, Newspaper and other media for the poor condition some children find themselves in, and it's time to start looking at the parents. I know it's hard to accept responsibilty for the majority of parents that are part of your organization, but the very real facts of the matter are that any parent that joins your organization is a poor parent and is obviously incapable of taking care of a child in an appropriate manner. They rely on the TV to babysite or educate then children, when that is a job for the parents themselves, not to be shunned off on the anonymous TV screen.
As I said, of course I do not expect this letter to be given any serious thought by the people of your organization. It's often hard, if not impossible to convince a zealot that they are misguided and doing harm rather than good. It's a very sad state of affairs and a very sad day for the nation when people with misguided political agendas are able to influence freedom of speech and democracy. Shame on your ogranization for further erroding our right to free speech and freedom of expression. Your ogranization is part of the problem, not a part of the solution.
I just love how they talk about encryption, and how they are going to prevent pirates, blah blah blah.
When are people going to realize that in things like this, encryption/obfuscation/etc... will only keep honest people honest. The pirates and people who have extra time will break ANYTHING they can put on a disc.
Why is this?
The answer is so simple, which is why it flabbergasts me that people put so much time and effort into copy protection.
The decrypted content is IN THE HANDS OF THE END USER. Right there, that simple fact is why every possible method of copy protection will fail. If the end user has the decrypted content, it is possible to (obviously) retrieve that content by the end user (I know that's circular). Because of this, you can NOT protect a DVD or whatever from being copied, no matter what.
It's appalling the kind of money and time that goes into trying to keep content from the user, when in the end, it's doomed to fail and it's obvious to anyone with half a brain.
If you want to look towards the future, you can drop a few more bucks now and buy this, it will handle your data backup needs for a long time to come I suspect:
Keep this hush hush though... this technology is bleeding edge and if there's a lot of people using these, the RIAA might get wind of it and start sueing people. It would be ugly. The MPAA might get involved in the second link's hardware as well.
So keep it on the DL brother, but I feel your backup pain. 500MB is a lot of Metal AE downloads.
I'm not pretending anything, you ignorant fuck. If it came down to the wire, I could produce the receipts/serial numbers... but the fact is, I'm not going to keep jewel cases or paperwork around and handy. If you can't believe that, that's your own narrow minded pathetic problem... but don't lump me in with your ignorant ilk, because I won't have anything to do with slime sucking pieces of shit like you. In fact, I'll be happy to go to court over it, and when I produce the required documentation, you get to pay my court fees, how about that? Oh... what's that? You are a poor high school kiddie without a clue as to how the real world works, and thus couldn't afford the court fees? Waaaa, I feel bad for you.
Another good example is ALL of my windows machines at work have warez serial numbers for the install. I have EVERY single copy licensed (and we have MSDN)... but I'm not about to go look for the serial numbers when installing Windows. It would take 15 minutes to track one down, when it would take 30 seconds to grab it off of #serialz. So why should I spend 15 minutes looking for something I don't need to?
So in other words, shut your pie hole, because it's obvious you have no clue (and never had) what you're talking about. Waaaa, now go cry me a river about pirated software in your parents basement (or is it a dorm room?)... because you see, adults actual have lives and places to store shit, instead of on our floor or stuffed in a closet, like you.
Now go back to your Sims online, and leave the adult discussions to the adults... this isn't for the kiddies to pipe up with their ill formed opinions.
PS -
You also have a reading comprehension problem, you might want to go back to Jr. High to work on that (or are you still in Jr. High?) - I didn't say I lost my registrations, I said it's easier to grab the serial numbers off of #serialz... no mention was made of anything being lost. If I thought I had LOST the registrations, I would email the company for a duplicate. Once again, another example of the total lack of a clue vending machine near your house.
... assuming that the file is a true warez copy that was never paid for? I have a number of (in fact, I'd say the majority) programs that have "warez" registrations... yet I own perfectly legitimate copies of the software. Why? Because it's easier to grab the serial numbers off of #serialz than it is for me to find the #@#$%#@ serial number on the CD jewl case which I may or may not have any longer... or god forbid it was on a piece of paper, because that son of a bitch is LONG gone.
I'm not saying MS or whoever did this has a legit copy of SF, but it's perfectly feasible and quite possible that they have a legit copy and are using a warez serial, simply because it's easier than keeping track of your "legit" serial every time you have to reinstall.
Slashdot Mirror
[i]Call me crazy, but you don't see a problem with talking about ethics, and advertising some ipod/minimac pyramid scheme at the same time?
I say that for now on, we pledge to never mod up people with this bullcrap in their sigs.[/i]
And what exactly is wrong with putting that in your sig? Unlike Sitefinder, it's not like you're forced to go to it, or even could accidentally go to it, you intentionally have to click the link.
There's nothing unethical about putting that in your sig. Now if he had tricked you into going there, then yes... but it's pretty plain and obvious what it is when he asks you to go there.
I say from now on, people that complain about unintrusive sigs for things like this should be modded down for 6 months per offense, regardless of post content or merit.
Just one more giant ram into the hind end of Intel. Man, they took a beating last year, and here we are only 6 days into 2005, and Intel is shaping up to be the industry punching bag.
I hate to jump on the underdog bandwagon, but given the high price of Intel processors over the past couple decades, I'm glad to see it finally catching up to them, and in spades no less.
The sad thing is that AMD seems to be heading down the Intel road now and in another decade or two AMD will just be where Intel is now... offering overpriced processors, and we'll be rooting for whoever is eyeing AMD's chops at that point.
Why can't any company come in, clean up with good products at cheap prices and STAY THAT WAY? Why do they all have to get greedy in the end? This phenomenon is not constrained to the CPU market, of course, we see it every single day.
A strange as that may sound to some, PHP is the "new" basic being taught at many community (and 4 year?) colleges.
My local community college switch just this year from teaching QuickBASIC to PHP as the starter language. At first I was like... WHaaaaa?
Then I got to thinking about it, and realized that PHP can be as simple or as complex as the user wants it to be, and it really *is* a good starter language, and a spectacular path towards C++. The web browser is something most people are already familiar with, and what can be better than designing programs that communicate with your web browser if you want, or they can do other things, obviously... but the web browser is pretty close to a basic prompt, and you can do some neat things that would be entertaining for kids (maybe not 3 or 4 year old kids, but 7 or 8 and up).
If you're like me, your first reaction is going to be the "Whaaaaaa?" to it, but stop and think about it and give it some serious consideration before dismissing the idea... it really does have some merit.
I love how you use the Xeon as the lynchpin in your whole arguement. It makes it so easy to bring your whole house of cards down.
The Xeon processor IS a middle of the road processor. It's not the speeds of Xeon that make it a desirable processor for business, it's the stability and large cache. The Xeon processor is SLOWER, or at best exactly the same as the fastest P4's. The Xeon offers absolutely nothing in terms of processor speeds that can't be achieved at a signifigantly lower price point by buying a "non" Xeon version of the same processor. The only gains realized (and they are valid gains for a limited set of applications) is the L1 cache.
As for Intel pushing the Xeon line... haha, are you serious? They push the Xeon line because it's a cash cow. Offer the same processor with a bit more L1 cache for two or three times the price. What's not to like about that? I'd be pushing the hell out of that, too... when in reality 99.8% of the people buying Xeon's wouldn't know the difference between a Xeon and a stock P4 at the same clock speed.
I have no idea how you can say that "high end rendering farms" et al is the majority of the sales of Apple and x86 vendors. That's just plain ludicrous. Go do some research... the lions share of processor sales goes towards middle of the road CPUs... Why do you think the Celeron line is so popular?
I make a "bold, absolute" statment becaus that's what the yearly sales figures for the companies you mention show... It's a pretty cut and dried set of statistics that you perhaps need to research a bit before you make claims to the contrary.
I never said there aren't legitimate businesses that need the fastest CPUs for something other than games... I said they are a limited market, and compared to the consumer CPU market, they pale in comparison. You just can't ship tens of millions of processors to render farms around the world... there aren't enough of them.
Did you just not bother to read what I wrote, are you intetionally obtuse or is it just your natural state of beign? I normally can tell when someone is being obtuse intentionally, but it appears you have a knack for making it look like it's a natural function of your daily activity.
/. so that the adults can have reasonable conversations with you interjecting your ill-informed opinions that you pull out of your ass.
Your obtusness aside, though... Let me restate what I said in perhaps simpler terms that you might be able to comprehend.
Lets start with your statements about IBM, Motorola, Apple and SUN. They do not sell fast chips to businesses. Their primary sale are of the middle of the road chips. The high end processors are sold by those companies in startlingly limited quantities when compared to "yesterdays" processors. The fastest CPUs are not needed for 95% of the markets those companies you mention sell to. The ones that DO need the fastest/latest/greatest/highest power chips do NOT buy in quantities approaching anything NEAR what the gaming market buys.
See, the problem with Slashdot is indeed pimply faced school-children... but you are a shining example of why even those not in school are complete degenerates who have no idea, not even the vaguest shred of a clue, as to what drives the industry you think you're so into. I've been working in this industry for over 20 years now, and I started with building my own Hazeltine computer. I certainly don't need a fallicious lecture from a pimply-faced schoolkid like yourself to tell me what actually drives the industry.
You have NO idea what you are talking about. It's painfully clear to anyone with even a few years experience in this industry that you are a snot nosed brat who likes to talk a lot of crap, but has nothing to back it up. Please stop posting on
Thank you, and please drive through.
The reasons those CPUs didn't get benchmarked (aside from the time and effort it would take) is because they really aren't that relevant to the article. No one used those CPUs for any gaming, and gaming is what drives the CPU market. Not business apps, not scientific apps, and certainly not Mom and Dad word processing or desktop publishing their way to fame and fortune.
:) ) and it still wouldn't add up to one year of the dollar value of the x86 game market.
Games drive consumer CPU advances, plain and simple, and the CPUs you mentioned had virtually nothing (comparitively) to offer in terms of games, and thus they are really irrelevant to the comparison.
Are they nice CPUs? Yes. Are they innovative? Yes. Are they for niche markets? Yes. I know Mac, Amiga, or anything but x86 people don't like to be relegated to a "niche" market, but in terms of $$ expenditure and mindshare, the x86 is (obviously) the primary game platform for computers, far, far, FAR outstripping EVERY OTHER CPU EVER MADE COMBINED. You could put the dollar value of non x86 games together from the beginning of time (that was a Tuesday in 1970, wasn't it?
I've had one of the most popular Sourceforge projects for a number of years now (the popularity is waning now, for obvious reasons... but I was in the top 10 for awhile) - My project is ShowEQ. We had a code split with SINS, and SINS developed in conjunction with ShowEQ for a time.
We did incorporate a lot of SINS stuff back into ShowEQ, because I did believe some of the directions that SINS headed in were good, but the overall direction I did not believe was what was needed for the community. However, the code was not a drop in replacement into ShowEQ for current fuctions (or to add new functionality, etc...) so we used the SINS code as a starting point and wrote the SEQ code with SINS as a base idea.
Regardless, the point is that Open Source and GPL are meant to do exactly this. There is _NOTHING_ unethical/immoral about taking bits and pieces of code from other projects and using them in your own. That's exactly what SHOULD be happening. The maintainer of SINS contacted me about using some of the code/ideas from SINS and asked me to give him credit in ShowEQ, which I had neglected to do since we didn't take the code directly and drop it in to the SEQ codebase... but I agreed that giving SINS credit within SEQ was the right thing to do... so in your case, I would definitely attribute portions of the code to the other guys project, even thank him. But there is certainly nothing what so ever immoral about what you are doing with GPL code.
Whoever the guy is that said that is the immoral asshole for even suggesting that... especially if he is the one that forked the code base to begin with and is using other peoples code himself.
I had similar questions about a computer... so I went ahead and build this:
http://dctournament.com/wcpc/firstpc
I think it came out excellent, considering it was my first time building something this elaborate.
That guy that complained needs to be taken out an beaten. Rental cars? Please... if the customers of rental cars don't like the service so much, and find it so obscene, then they don't rent from that rental company any more.
/sigh
Listening to Satellite radio is a CHOICE. You can't "accidentally" listen to it. You have to actively and willfully make an attempt to listen to it, and thus the FCC has absolutely NO grounds to censor it.
That guy is just a chump and can't compete in the market place, so he wants big brother to step in and fight his battles for him. People like that need to be removed from the gene pool.
I'm so SICK AND TIRED of being told what I can and can't watch/hear by other people. I wish there was someplace left on this earth I could go start my own nation.
Those nice phone fees are where the legs of this fee grow from. The FCC line fee was introduced, and then increased under the same pretense -- "long distance rates will continue to fall, so even with increased FCC Line Fee you will see reduction of your overall bill". The hell it did.
You must be fairly young... at least compared to me. I remember when long distance, to another city in your same state, was close to $1.00/min. International calls were multi-dollar a minute propositions. I can call from one side of the country to the other for 3 - 4 cents a minute... if I really shop around, even cheaper than that.
Long distance rates have fallen dramatically over the past two decades. In fact, they've fallen so far that they/it has become a commodity item... just look at a vending machine with a bunch of calling cards in it.
Don't get me wrong, I think those line taxes are totally bogus... and it's one of the many reasons I don't have a land line phone (I refuse to pay all those ridiculous taxes, which literally double my bill). I agree 100% that they are bogus... but long distance rates have fallen, and fallen a lot. I expect long distance rates to be a thing of the past within the next 5 years or so. We already see the beginning of it with some of the bigger players offering flat fee long distance plans. As VoIP starts to move faster, flat fee LD, and then eventually LD will not even exist as a concept within the US... you just place a call like any other.
Top notch compared to what? A box of raisins? Maybe, but that's pushing it.
The last two Nokia phones I had were on AT&T and Cellular One (I think it was, was awhlie ago) They sucked.
I work with every new cellular handset that comes out for Sprint, Nokia's included... and they all suck. Every last one of them. All my co-workers agree as well. We laugh at the poor saps that have to test the Nokias out.
I'd love to know what iPod transfers 2100 songs in 15 minutes... because it sure as hell isn't my brand new 20GB iPod.
2100 songs in 15 minutes? I don't think so...
You are so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.
Shortmail was used concurrently with Sprints SMS service. There was no web-based product that was required to be used, regardless of whether you were using shortmail or sms; it was transparent to the user.
Regardless of the complexity of the back end authentication, the user experience was that of being able to send and receive SMS messages, and the user has been able to do that for the past several years. So the original posters premise is totally false, as is yours. Web based text messaging was not a *requirement* to send sms.
It's unfortunate your entire post is one giant lie. Sprint has had two way SMS for the past 5 years (or more). I have no clue as to where you got the idea you had to use a WAP page for sending text messages. *boggle.
Nokia phones are the lowest reliability phones on the market. They are literally the crappiest phones you can buy. If they "treatet you well," I would hate to see what treats you poorly.
Sprint also has had a PTT solution similar to Nextels for over a year now. Eh.
No mod points :( Someone needs to mod the parent of this reply up.
We all new they would eventually turn upon themselves, when they have nothing *new* left to feed upon.
It seems the day of reckoning may be seeing it's first light of dawn. Here's to hoping they all devour each other in a darwinistic orgy of competition. Maybe, in the end, each company competing will be the best form of Spyware removal tools a user could ask for.
Let the programs compete until there's a winner, then shoot the winner. Problem solved.
I believe that's what they coined the term "pwned" for.
I sent this letter to the parentstv.org email address. Maybe send them similar letters?
Hello,
I'm not sure who I might be addressing at editor@parentstv.org, so I apologize for the lack of personalization.
I am somewhat curious about your organization and why it exists. I realize you probably get all sorts of crank emails, spam, etc... So I expect this email to most likely get ignored.
I don't like most of what's shown on TV today... I rarely watch TV as a matter of fact. However, I find that trying to prevent other people from doing so is a) futile and b) wrong. I am wondering why your organization thinks it's ok to dictate what other people do in the privacy of thier own homes?
I understand you are working under a "save the children" banner, and that's fine. But is it not more logical for a parent to parent, as opposed to expecting the government or TV and radio stations to do it for them? Why does your organization feel that it's acceptable to deny programming to people who may find it funny/interesting/worth watching? Why do you feel that your "rights" override other's "rights" to watch what they please?
As I said, I have no real agenda; I don't watch the TV shows you label as "Bad" nor do I watch the ones you label as "Good." If either or both of them are cancled or taken off the air, I don't really care one whit. What I do care about is your organizations internal justification for censoring programming because parents can't be bothered to actually monitor what their children watch. I have a very real problem with organizations like yours dictating to others what's "right" and what isn't.
It's time to stop blaming TV, Radio, Newspaper and other media for the poor condition some children find themselves in, and it's time to start looking at the parents. I know it's hard to accept responsibilty for the majority of parents that are part of your organization, but the very real facts of the matter are that any parent that joins your organization is a poor parent and is obviously incapable of taking care of a child in an appropriate manner. They rely on the TV to babysite or educate then children, when that is a job for the parents themselves, not to be shunned off on the anonymous TV screen.
As I said, of course I do not expect this letter to be given any serious thought by the people of your organization. It's often hard, if not impossible to convince a zealot that they are misguided and doing harm rather than good. It's a very sad state of affairs and a very sad day for the nation when people with misguided political agendas are able to influence freedom of speech and democracy. Shame on your ogranization for further erroding our right to free speech and freedom of expression. Your ogranization is part of the problem, not a part of the solution.
Thank you for your time,
XXXXXX
It's a trap!
I just love how they talk about encryption, and how they are going to prevent pirates, blah blah blah.
When are people going to realize that in things like this, encryption/obfuscation/etc... will only keep honest people honest. The pirates and people who have extra time will break ANYTHING they can put on a disc.
Why is this?
The answer is so simple, which is why it flabbergasts me that people put so much time and effort into copy protection.
The decrypted content is IN THE HANDS OF THE END USER. Right there, that simple fact is why every possible method of copy protection will fail. If the end user has the decrypted content, it is possible to (obviously) retrieve that content by the end user (I know that's circular). Because of this, you can NOT protect a DVD or whatever from being copied, no matter what.
It's appalling the kind of money and time that goes into trying to keep content from the user, when in the end, it's doomed to fail and it's obvious to anyone with half a brain.
On my home computer, I've got 500+ MB worth of results from simulations that I would like to back up but there's just no affordable way to do that.
Dude, you need to check out this if you need to back up that much data. I use it all the time to back stuff up:
Back up device 1
If you want to look towards the future, you can drop a few more bucks now and buy this, it will handle your data backup needs for a long time to come I suspect:
Back up device 2
Keep this hush hush though... this technology is bleeding edge and if there's a lot of people using these, the RIAA might get wind of it and start sueing people. It would be ugly. The MPAA might get involved in the second link's hardware as well.
So keep it on the DL brother, but I feel your backup pain. 500MB is a lot of Metal AE downloads.
Hahahaha Steam is so slashdotted...
Oh wait... maybe it's not slashdot, I suppose it's *MAYBE* possible it's the million people trying to download multimegabyte files to activate HL2?
Naaa... gotta be slashdot.
The only bullshit here is you.
I'm not pretending anything, you ignorant fuck. If it came down to the wire, I could produce the receipts/serial numbers... but the fact is, I'm not going to keep jewel cases or paperwork around and handy. If you can't believe that, that's your own narrow minded pathetic problem... but don't lump me in with your ignorant ilk, because I won't have anything to do with slime sucking pieces of shit like you. In fact, I'll be happy to go to court over it, and when I produce the required documentation, you get to pay my court fees, how about that? Oh... what's that? You are a poor high school kiddie without a clue as to how the real world works, and thus couldn't afford the court fees? Waaaa, I feel bad for you.
Another good example is ALL of my windows machines at work have warez serial numbers for the install. I have EVERY single copy licensed (and we have MSDN)... but I'm not about to go look for the serial numbers when installing Windows. It would take 15 minutes to track one down, when it would take 30 seconds to grab it off of #serialz. So why should I spend 15 minutes looking for something I don't need to?
So in other words, shut your pie hole, because it's obvious you have no clue (and never had) what you're talking about. Waaaa, now go cry me a river about pirated software in your parents basement (or is it a dorm room?)... because you see, adults actual have lives and places to store shit, instead of on our floor or stuffed in a closet, like you.
Now go back to your Sims online, and leave the adult discussions to the adults... this isn't for the kiddies to pipe up with their ill formed opinions.
PS -
You also have a reading comprehension problem, you might want to go back to Jr. High to work on that (or are you still in Jr. High?) - I didn't say I lost my registrations, I said it's easier to grab the serial numbers off of #serialz... no mention was made of anything being lost. If I thought I had LOST the registrations, I would email the company for a duplicate. Once again, another example of the total lack of a clue vending machine near your house.
... assuming that the file is a true warez copy that was never paid for? I have a number of (in fact, I'd say the majority) programs that have "warez" registrations... yet I own perfectly legitimate copies of the software. Why? Because it's easier to grab the serial numbers off of #serialz than it is for me to find the #@#$%#@ serial number on the CD jewl case which I may or may not have any longer... or god forbid it was on a piece of paper, because that son of a bitch is LONG gone.
I'm not saying MS or whoever did this has a legit copy of SF, but it's perfectly feasible and quite possible that they have a legit copy and are using a warez serial, simply because it's easier than keeping track of your "legit" serial every time you have to reinstall.
Haha oops...
I actually was starting to type "lack of humility," and somehow ended up with hubris in it's place instead.