So in that case, if the R520 (and its associated H.264) is aimed at low-to-midrange systems, why is the article saying that it'll possibly surpass the speed of the new NVidia offering? Is it going to both be fast and cheap? That'd be nice.
That's not quite a good analogy. The hackers are "pointing out" that things are insecure the same way that thieves "pointed out" that automotive side-window glass is easily breakable, giving access to the entire vehicle, even though I locked the doors. Everybody is responsible, you can't point a finger anywhere. The software writers are responsible for writing shoddy code, the hackers are responsible for taking advantage of the shoddy code, and the users are responsible for both buying the shoddy software and letting the hackers at it. Why do people feel the need to pin the blame 100% on someone, it's dumb.
That's how patents work though. I could take that a step further and say "So they admit they haven't invented anything, but they got a patent because of an amazingly innovative combination of 1's and 0's, which have been public-domain for years". New combinations of things are a staple of engineering, and science (and patents).
Here's what I've found to last long, in my own experience with a very small sample of data:
Abit motherboards are good. I have a Slot-1 that keeps on chugging. I've got 1 gig of memory on it, and just recently put on one of those Socket 370-to-Slot 1 adapters on it, with a 1.4 GHz PIII. It keeps chugging right along, and runs pretty much anything I want to do, including some really decent games. I used to play Warcraft III when I had my PII-400 on it. It's now my sister's machine.
Maxtor hard drives - In highschool, we had a "slut drive" that we'd pass around with all the latest games on it (before broadband). It rode around unprotected in backpacks, in the weather, in the hot and cold, and I still have it in my computer to this day. I think it's like a ~1.2 gig. It whines a bit, but no bad sectors at all.
I work at a company that deals with motherboards from all makes and models. ECS are fairly notorious around the office for being craptastic. They share a lot of boards with "PC Chips" which are probably one of the most common boards that come in with "random problems" which usually turn out to be hardware failures on the board (bad caps, bad power regulators, or not being able to use fast memory).
They probably see more than that, but you've got to remember that they need to purchase the vehicles to cart around the people in, the gasoline for said vehicles, rent/buy the space to house the technicians at a central location, etc, etc. Running a business is expensive. It's not always big mean corporate big-wigs that suck away all the money from the people doing the actual work.
Yes, that was my mistake, I mis-scanned the article. This is actually an even more retarded article about running unknown software you downloaded from a semi-anonymous source... Great guys, keep running those executables you get through the e-mail.
If you are running questionable software that you downloaded BY ANY CHANNEL, not just bittorrent, you're an idiot and deserve any spyware you get. It is a re-hashing, and doesn't need to be brought up over and over.
I do admit that I did just scan the article and misread some things. It isn't about clients being full of crap, it's about downloading unknown software AND THEN RUNNING IT, WHICH IS EVEN MORE STUPID than my initial thoughts, because it actually requires the user to run the malware; the same problem that has plagued idiots in businesses who click on everything in their e-mail for years.
Then that's your own damn fault for not being aware of what you're downloading, same as with any file transfer that has ever existed at any point in history for all time, and at all points in the future.
It's not bittorrent that has the spyware, it's crappy spyware-infested clients. A client can contain other malicious code obviously (as seen in Kazaa, etc). Bittorrent itself is just a file type with special download methods. How you download it is up to you. If you don't use a crappy client, and don't run.exe files that you don't remember downloading, you're all set, jesus-h-christ, how many times does this have to be re-hashed.
Is there anything that you can do back that isn't illegal itself? Kind of like being able to defend yourself from an attacker with a weapon of your own? (I know I'm being vague about the law, but just for the sake of argument).
No, that's not my argument. My complaint is that people are complaining that Google calls their services "Beta", not that people will complain about the quality of the services. Complain about google maps all day long, just don't specifically whine that they still use the moniker "beta". Get it?
What, pray-tell would they be liable for? You can't sue them because their maps are wrong, there's disclaimers for that on every map site.
This is all very retarded. Even services that aren't in beta (hotmail, mapquest, etc) have disclaimers in their policy to let you know that they aren't liable if you drive off a cliff, or don't get your e-mail. Would you all be more happy if Google didn't call their in-testing things "beta" and instead released buggy stuff to the masses without any warning (like MS)? hmmm?
All of the complaint posts about Google using "beta" are beyond retarded. If you don't like it, don't use it.
Gmail has only been released for just over a year now. That is probably longer than most Betas, but not unheard of by any means. It's in beta, because there are still bugs being worked out. That's why it is invite-only, to keep a lid on the amount of people that signed up for it.
I'm under the impression that dumb people like yourself misunderstand the meaning of the word "beta" it means it's not ready to use for something that matters yet, just for testing.
They do have many other services that aren't in beta (some on that page are beta, but most aren't) that you are free to use that have been tested and brought out of beta, just like the current beta offerings will be changed to once the kinks have been worked out.
They'd put a small scrollwheel within the touchpad on the mouse, then I could scroll around inside of large forms in a window that I'm scrolling around with.
I believe they also only support 256 (or some other low value) different colors in PNGs. I know that PNGs look totally low-resolution in IE, but not in FF, last time I checked (a while ago, admittedly, but when was the last time IE was updated?).
That's hilarious, because IE barely supports PNGs at all, but they apparently are vulnerable to them nonetheless. If you don't know of the png problem, they just don't display the colors right and/or won't do transparencies right at all.
Slashdot Mirror
So in that case, if the R520 (and its associated H.264) is aimed at low-to-midrange systems, why is the article saying that it'll possibly surpass the speed of the new NVidia offering? Is it going to both be fast and cheap? That'd be nice.
-Jesse
That's not quite a good analogy. The hackers are "pointing out" that things are insecure the same way that thieves "pointed out" that automotive side-window glass is easily breakable, giving access to the entire vehicle, even though I locked the doors. Everybody is responsible, you can't point a finger anywhere. The software writers are responsible for writing shoddy code, the hackers are responsible for taking advantage of the shoddy code, and the users are responsible for both buying the shoddy software and letting the hackers at it. Why do people feel the need to pin the blame 100% on someone, it's dumb.
-Jesse
That's how patents work though. I could take that a step further and say "So they admit they haven't invented anything, but they got a patent because of an amazingly innovative combination of 1's and 0's, which have been public-domain for years". New combinations of things are a staple of engineering, and science (and patents).
-Jesse
Here's what I've found to last long, in my own experience with a very small sample of data:
Abit motherboards are good. I have a Slot-1 that keeps on chugging. I've got 1 gig of memory on it, and just recently put on one of those Socket 370-to-Slot 1 adapters on it, with a 1.4 GHz PIII. It keeps chugging right along, and runs pretty much anything I want to do, including some really decent games. I used to play Warcraft III when I had my PII-400 on it. It's now my sister's machine.
Maxtor hard drives - In highschool, we had a "slut drive" that we'd pass around with all the latest games on it (before broadband). It rode around unprotected in backpacks, in the weather, in the hot and cold, and I still have it in my computer to this day. I think it's like a ~1.2 gig. It whines a bit, but no bad sectors at all.
-Jesse
I work at a company that deals with motherboards from all makes and models. ECS are fairly notorious around the office for being craptastic. They share a lot of boards with "PC Chips" which are probably one of the most common boards that come in with "random problems" which usually turn out to be hardware failures on the board (bad caps, bad power regulators, or not being able to use fast memory).
-Jesse
They probably see more than that, but you've got to remember that they need to purchase the vehicles to cart around the people in, the gasoline for said vehicles, rent/buy the space to house the technicians at a central location, etc, etc. Running a business is expensive. It's not always big mean corporate big-wigs that suck away all the money from the people doing the actual work.
-Jesse
And spelling too, time to hire another proof-reader to correct the grammar.
-Jesse
I saw a flock... of moosen!
:)
That's Linspire Boxen to you
-Jesse
Merchants are wary of selling a computing product that is all-but-unknown to the public at large? You don't say!
-Jesse
Yes, that was my mistake, I mis-scanned the article. This is actually an even more retarded article about running unknown software you downloaded from a semi-anonymous source... Great guys, keep running those executables you get through the e-mail.
-Jesse
If you are running questionable software that you downloaded BY ANY CHANNEL, not just bittorrent, you're an idiot and deserve any spyware you get. It is a re-hashing, and doesn't need to be brought up over and over.
I do admit that I did just scan the article and misread some things. It isn't about clients being full of crap, it's about downloading unknown software AND THEN RUNNING IT, WHICH IS EVEN MORE STUPID than my initial thoughts, because it actually requires the user to run the malware; the same problem that has plagued idiots in businesses who click on everything in their e-mail for years.
-Jesse
Then that's your own damn fault for not being aware of what you're downloading, same as with any file transfer that has ever existed at any point in history for all time, and at all points in the future.
-Jesse
It's not bittorrent that has the spyware, it's crappy spyware-infested clients. A client can contain other malicious code obviously (as seen in Kazaa, etc). Bittorrent itself is just a file type with special download methods. How you download it is up to you. If you don't use a crappy client, and don't run .exe files that you don't remember downloading, you're all set, jesus-h-christ, how many times does this have to be re-hashed.
-Jesse
Is there anything that you can do back that isn't illegal itself? Kind of like being able to defend yourself from an attacker with a weapon of your own? (I know I'm being vague about the law, but just for the sake of argument).
-Jesse
antibiotics
No, that's not my argument. My complaint is that people are complaining that Google calls their services "Beta", not that people will complain about the quality of the services. Complain about google maps all day long, just don't specifically whine that they still use the moniker "beta". Get it?
-Jesse
What, pray-tell would they be liable for? You can't sue them because their maps are wrong, there's disclaimers for that on every map site.
This is all very retarded. Even services that aren't in beta (hotmail, mapquest, etc) have disclaimers in their policy to let you know that they aren't liable if you drive off a cliff, or don't get your e-mail. Would you all be more happy if Google didn't call their in-testing things "beta" and instead released buggy stuff to the masses without any warning (like MS)? hmmm?
All of the complaint posts about Google using "beta" are beyond retarded. If you don't like it, don't use it.
-Jesse
Gmail has only been released for just over a year now. That is probably longer than most Betas, but not unheard of by any means. It's in beta, because there are still bugs being worked out. That's why it is invite-only, to keep a lid on the amount of people that signed up for it.
-Jesse
I'm under the impression that dumb people like yourself misunderstand the meaning of the word "beta" it means it's not ready to use for something that matters yet, just for testing.
They do have many other services that aren't in beta (some on that page are beta, but most aren't) that you are free to use that have been tested and brought out of beta, just like the current beta offerings will be changed to once the kinks have been worked out.
-Jesse
I think the word you're looking for is "whopping", unless you have whooping cough, or are getting your ass whooped.
-Jesse
They'd put a small scrollwheel within the touchpad on the mouse, then I could scroll around inside of large forms in a window that I'm scrolling around with.
-Jesse
I believe they also only support 256 (or some other low value) different colors in PNGs. I know that PNGs look totally low-resolution in IE, but not in FF, last time I checked (a while ago, admittedly, but when was the last time IE was updated?).
-Jesse
That's hilarious, because IE barely supports PNGs at all, but they apparently are vulnerable to them nonetheless. If you don't know of the png problem, they just don't display the colors right and/or won't do transparencies right at all.
-Jesse
Man, I can't wait. Riding out that change is going to be fun.
-Jesse
Well yeah... But do it again, and build a base there this time, and use newer, faster, better, cheaper technology. Baby steps.
-Jesse