Yeah, I figured it was because of TSMC sucking on the 32/28nm process, but that's a hurdle that Nvidia has also had to jump, although I'm not sure how dependent their plans have been on the die shrink. The GTX 500 line is what the 400 line should've been and it's handing AMD's ass to them on a platter.
Honestly, this is kind of disappointing. The 5870 spanked Nvidia's ass for months while the Fermi hit more and more delays, and even when the GTX 480 came out, the 5870 still had the major advantage of not burning your house to the ground and eating far less power than the competition, and it was only a bit slower for a lot less money. Now, all AMD really has is...nothing, really. It's priced about the same as a GTX 570 with about the same performance and the power consumption/heat gap is pretty well gone. It feels like AMD blew their advantages and now their new line isn't nearly as compelling as the old.
Oh well, I guess it means the 5870s will keep getting cheaper and I can snag one soon...
Right. The guy who processes cash transactions for products over which he has no control is responsible and should be badgered. Yes, the cashier should be held to stand for the crime because the store in which he works happens to sell something that COULD harm people. Don't put the blame on the shooters, blame the minimum wage worker who is doing his job! Hey, that guy killed three people with a hammer! Let's find a cashier who works at the store that sold it and chew him out because it's obviously his fault!
Are you really this much of a retarded asshole or does it take effort?
So they'll pick a bunch of low-hanging fruit and call it a day to send a message to the others. They don't have to put 10,000 people on trial. 100 or so is enough to send a message.
I can remember a number of online "documentaries" such as Zeitgeist or Loose Change that did just fine without massive corporate backing. Zeitgeist has some valid points buried under paranoid crapola and Loose Change is 99% pure, uncut horseshit, but they are two big examples of how you do NOT have to spend tons of money to reach millions of people. Last I knew, the makers of Zeitgeist weren't being shipped off to Gitmo and Dylan Avery (who, Loose Change or not, is a staggeringly monstrous douche) wasn't thrown in a dark hole.
I agree with Mike and Samantha. You're an imbecile who desperately wants to believe things are that bad for your own pathetic self-importance and self-validation. It takes very little money to get something out there for millions of people to see. Money helps, but it's not a necessity.
Getting jailed for hate speech? That's FAR more likely to happen in many European countries than in the US. You have to do a LOT to get jailed for hate speech around here.
Wow, why don't you just start sucking on Chavez's nutsack? Right, there are always justifications for grotesque restrictions of the freedom of speech...oh, wait, THERE AREN'T. Chavez is doing this to keep his power, plain and simple. No dissent! No criticism! You will embrace our glorious leader! And yeah, it's just because of those dogs in the West! We have to do it to shut them up! Would you say the same if Bush and co did something like this post-911? And don't quote me the Patriot Act. Ugly as that was, it was nothing compared to what Chavez has done.
And DDoSing is CERTAINLY going to get more people to join and will absolutely sway public opinion, right? Oops, no, it just makes Wikileaks and its supporters look like a bunch of crooks. You're right, a proper protest needs to break the law! Because the best press is when protests turn violent and people start smashing in storefront windows, right?
Anonymous has had the spotlight plenty of times before. This is hardly the first time they've been in the news.
Um, yeah, because people never swap kiddie porn on 4chan. Doing nefarious deeds via a proxy now results in a tougher jail sentence, and that might have been due in part to Mr. Palin Email Hacker, who was a 4chan regular and spread the word of what he did via 4chan.
If you think that skiddies and life ruination by 4chan hasn't played a part in people talking about the evils of the internet on capitol hill then you're quite deluded. They may not be the only reason, but oh man, are they ever trying to be a big one.
Re:Good idea, crappy implementation ..... and
on
Angles On Anonymous
·
· Score: 1
And that still means that Wikileaks isn't getting money from Paypal. Furthermore, did it take a DDoS to do that or just bad press and a lot of angry emails?
Sending cash, mirroring the site, and even reading the documents are deemed illegal, and thus give the politicians reasons to clamp down on the internet. Should they all send letters of disapproval?
DDoSing is not the answer. You know what options are left? KEEPING WIKILEAKS ALIVE. Help get mirrors up and maintained. Make sure that info has somewhere to go and that the public can access it. Support sites like OpenLeaks that do largely the same thing. That's how you can show the politicians that their efforts will not succeed, because enough people will support these sites to keep them going and that the flow of information will not stop.
Re:Good idea, crappy implementation ..... and
on
Angles On Anonymous
·
· Score: 1
How is a DDoS a good idea? It's a bad idea, and it's WORSE than doing nothing because:
A) It does absolutely nothing to help Wikileaks. It's just a revenge tactic. The decisions have been made.
B) It makes Wikileaks and their supporters look like a bunch of hooligans.
And you want to help? Want to make a difference? Work to get more mirrors of Wikileaks up. Keep the information out there and make sure that new info has a place to go. What you can do is show these organizations that their attempts to shut down Wikileaks will not succeed. DDoSing is nothing more than a revenge tactic. It solves NOTHING.
So DDoSing a few websites will do...what, exactly? Nothing. Nothing at all. It's not a "protest". It's flagrantly illegal. A few websites deal with DDoS attacks, they come to and end after a short time, and the ONLY thing it does is make Wikileaks look even worse because now the supporters of this site are making themselves look like a bunch of criminal hooligans. It doesn't even take opportunistic political asshats thumping their chests to do that.
People have every right to protest sites that have trying to screw Wikileaks. They have every right to boycott and criticize the hell out of them. They do not have the right to DDoS these sites. When they do, they cross the boundaries of the law, and that doesn't exactly make them look rosy to the public at large.
Because DDoSing people over Wikileaks is the only nefarious thing that Anonymous has ever done, right? Newsflash, pal: Most of what Anonymous has done (at least outside that cancerous rectal cavity known as 4chan) has not been any kind of "free speech".
I'm not saying that Wikileaks isn't giving politicians rationalizations, but they're a recent development. Anonymous has been giving them rationalizations and excuses on a silver platter for years now, and very little of it was any kind of rational dissent.
Because DDoSing people over Wikileaks is the only nefarious thing that Anonymous has ever done, right?
Politicians will try to screw with everything, but Anonymous has done PLENTY over the past few years to hand them excuses and rationalizations on a silver platter. This isn't about awareness. For the vast majority of Anons, this is about hopping on the bandwagon to do some damage. That's it, really.
Good idea, crappy implementation. All this does to the public perception of Wikileaks and their supports is make them look like a bunch of hackers and deviant cybercrooks. It won't make a damned difference in the long run.
I've always found it sadly ironic that Anonymous, who very much wants to keep online anonymity alive, is doing more than almost anyone to destroy it. Their antics just keep giving politicians reasons to clamp down on the internet. Way to go, idiots!
Re:The most successful trolls
on
Angles On Anonymous
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The second most successful part of their trolling is convincing people that they're actually some kind of hacker group when 99% (at least) are nothing more than skiddies with no empathy and a healthy dose of misogyny.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I figured it was because of TSMC sucking on the 32/28nm process, but that's a hurdle that Nvidia has also had to jump, although I'm not sure how dependent their plans have been on the die shrink. The GTX 500 line is what the 400 line should've been and it's handing AMD's ass to them on a platter.
Honestly, this is kind of disappointing. The 5870 spanked Nvidia's ass for months while the Fermi hit more and more delays, and even when the GTX 480 came out, the 5870 still had the major advantage of not burning your house to the ground and eating far less power than the competition, and it was only a bit slower for a lot less money. Now, all AMD really has is...nothing, really. It's priced about the same as a GTX 570 with about the same performance and the power consumption/heat gap is pretty well gone. It feels like AMD blew their advantages and now their new line isn't nearly as compelling as the old.
Oh well, I guess it means the 5870s will keep getting cheaper and I can snag one soon...
Right. The guy who processes cash transactions for products over which he has no control is responsible and should be badgered. Yes, the cashier should be held to stand for the crime because the store in which he works happens to sell something that COULD harm people. Don't put the blame on the shooters, blame the minimum wage worker who is doing his job! Hey, that guy killed three people with a hammer! Let's find a cashier who works at the store that sold it and chew him out because it's obviously his fault!
Are you really this much of a retarded asshole or does it take effort?
Ah, but you can ride that freaky-as-hell abandoned clown train in Pripyat!
So...lousy business decisions justify criminal actions?
That's some fine thinkin' there, Lou.
So they'll pick a bunch of low-hanging fruit and call it a day to send a message to the others. They don't have to put 10,000 people on trial. 100 or so is enough to send a message.
Doubtful. Is it so hard to believe that there are some /b/tards who are vehemently pro-Wikileaks?
You vastly overestimate the intelligence of the average /b/tard.
I can remember a number of online "documentaries" such as Zeitgeist or Loose Change that did just fine without massive corporate backing. Zeitgeist has some valid points buried under paranoid crapola and Loose Change is 99% pure, uncut horseshit, but they are two big examples of how you do NOT have to spend tons of money to reach millions of people. Last I knew, the makers of Zeitgeist weren't being shipped off to Gitmo and Dylan Avery (who, Loose Change or not, is a staggeringly monstrous douche) wasn't thrown in a dark hole.
I agree with Mike and Samantha. You're an imbecile who desperately wants to believe things are that bad for your own pathetic self-importance and self-validation. It takes very little money to get something out there for millions of people to see. Money helps, but it's not a necessity.
Getting jailed for hate speech? That's FAR more likely to happen in many European countries than in the US. You have to do a LOT to get jailed for hate speech around here.
Wow, why don't you just start sucking on Chavez's nutsack? Right, there are always justifications for grotesque restrictions of the freedom of speech...oh, wait, THERE AREN'T. Chavez is doing this to keep his power, plain and simple. No dissent! No criticism! You will embrace our glorious leader! And yeah, it's just because of those dogs in the West! We have to do it to shut them up! Would you say the same if Bush and co did something like this post-911? And don't quote me the Patriot Act. Ugly as that was, it was nothing compared to what Chavez has done.
Rot in hell, you apologist fuck.
He only needed to get legitimately elected once, and even then that "legitimate" title is debatable.
And DDoSing is CERTAINLY going to get more people to join and will absolutely sway public opinion, right? Oops, no, it just makes Wikileaks and its supporters look like a bunch of crooks. You're right, a proper protest needs to break the law! Because the best press is when protests turn violent and people start smashing in storefront windows, right?
Anonymous has had the spotlight plenty of times before. This is hardly the first time they've been in the news.
Um, yeah, because people never swap kiddie porn on 4chan. Doing nefarious deeds via a proxy now results in a tougher jail sentence, and that might have been due in part to Mr. Palin Email Hacker, who was a 4chan regular and spread the word of what he did via 4chan.
If you think that skiddies and life ruination by 4chan hasn't played a part in people talking about the evils of the internet on capitol hill then you're quite deluded. They may not be the only reason, but oh man, are they ever trying to be a big one.
And that still means that Wikileaks isn't getting money from Paypal. Furthermore, did it take a DDoS to do that or just bad press and a lot of angry emails?
Sending cash, mirroring the site, and even reading the documents are deemed illegal, and thus give the politicians reasons to clamp down on the internet. Should they all send letters of disapproval?
[citation needed]
DDoSing is not the answer. You know what options are left? KEEPING WIKILEAKS ALIVE. Help get mirrors up and maintained. Make sure that info has somewhere to go and that the public can access it. Support sites like OpenLeaks that do largely the same thing. That's how you can show the politicians that their efforts will not succeed, because enough people will support these sites to keep them going and that the flow of information will not stop.
How is a DDoS a good idea? It's a bad idea, and it's WORSE than doing nothing because:
A) It does absolutely nothing to help Wikileaks. It's just a revenge tactic. The decisions have been made.
B) It makes Wikileaks and their supporters look like a bunch of hooligans.
So tell me how that's a good thing, please.
And you want to help? Want to make a difference? Work to get more mirrors of Wikileaks up. Keep the information out there and make sure that new info has a place to go. What you can do is show these organizations that their attempts to shut down Wikileaks will not succeed. DDoSing is nothing more than a revenge tactic. It solves NOTHING.
So DDoSing a few websites will do...what, exactly? Nothing. Nothing at all. It's not a "protest". It's flagrantly illegal. A few websites deal with DDoS attacks, they come to and end after a short time, and the ONLY thing it does is make Wikileaks look even worse because now the supporters of this site are making themselves look like a bunch of criminal hooligans. It doesn't even take opportunistic political asshats thumping their chests to do that.
People have every right to protest sites that have trying to screw Wikileaks. They have every right to boycott and criticize the hell out of them. They do not have the right to DDoS these sites. When they do, they cross the boundaries of the law, and that doesn't exactly make them look rosy to the public at large.
Because DDoSing people over Wikileaks is the only nefarious thing that Anonymous has ever done, right? Newsflash, pal: Most of what Anonymous has done (at least outside that cancerous rectal cavity known as 4chan) has not been any kind of "free speech".
I'm not saying that Wikileaks isn't giving politicians rationalizations, but they're a recent development. Anonymous has been giving them rationalizations and excuses on a silver platter for years now, and very little of it was any kind of rational dissent.
Because DDoSing people over Wikileaks is the only nefarious thing that Anonymous has ever done, right?
Politicians will try to screw with everything, but Anonymous has done PLENTY over the past few years to hand them excuses and rationalizations on a silver platter. This isn't about awareness. For the vast majority of Anons, this is about hopping on the bandwagon to do some damage. That's it, really.
Good idea, crappy implementation. All this does to the public perception of Wikileaks and their supports is make them look like a bunch of hackers and deviant cybercrooks. It won't make a damned difference in the long run.
I've always found it sadly ironic that Anonymous, who very much wants to keep online anonymity alive, is doing more than almost anyone to destroy it. Their antics just keep giving politicians reasons to clamp down on the internet. Way to go, idiots!
The second most successful part of their trolling is convincing people that they're actually some kind of hacker group when 99% (at least) are nothing more than skiddies with no empathy and a healthy dose of misogyny.