He's talking about a bomb placed ON the space shuttle prior to launch... we'd notice someone else's shuttle anyway. Still, if it were an attack, it was a pointlessly timed one, so...
Well, the uppclassmen here at RPI got T30s this year, with crappy dim 10x7 resolution screens. These are not ultraportibles, and yet my Dell Inspiron 8200, with GF4go and a larger, brighter, 16x12 screen has SIGNIFICANTLY longer battery life left than most of the T30s, after just a semester...
The very concept of a "person" with a subset of real person's rights is a farce. In the Consitution, you will find that people have a set of inalienable rights, not that some have a subset of the subsequently enumerated rights. Thus if a corporations "rights" step even slightly on that of the populace, the corporation must be brought back in check, the people should make no sacrifices of their TRUE rights for them. If a corporations "right" to bribe officials causes issues for the people, the people's rights supercede those of the corporation, and the corporations actions are unconstitutional, not the actions of the government to bring it back in line.
It is the government's job to ensure that the free market works. This requires that the playing field is level. I'm sure business school does teach that raising the barriers to entry is a good thing. However, the airwaves are limited, and the government controls them in the end, whether you like it or not. If they want diversity, it is their prerogative to force ClearChannel to allow it.
Calling any restriction on a business "communism" is disingenuous in the extreme, as capitalism is based on competition, and as soon as you destroy it you may no longer beg that the free market is ruling. Deal with it.
Lack of humility does not imply wide academic acknowledgement, merely that he has faith in his knowledge of the subject, which he very well may, thus his not so humble opinion. Whether you respect that is a different matter, but you're trumpeting your horn louder than he his.
FUCKHEAD! First you claim you never said he said that the PowerMac should be quoted at double speed, and then you immediately go ahead and try to explain why it isn't so, even though he never claimed that. All that was claimed is that dual processors, given that OSX is designed for it, will help counteract the lower speed of each individual CPU. That is not up for discussion, it is a fact.
Now, further, in "embarassingly" parallel computation, X + X CAN = 2X, although this is admittedly rare. However, in any case where Intel's precious HT helps, dual CPUs help MORE. For practical applications, neither will double your speed. However, the original poster never claimed this, so your subtle sarcasm in pointing out that you can't add the speed of the two CPUs is completely irrelevant, and senseless arguing.
I definitely agree on that point, and I agree that both have their purposes, in fact I'm hoping I can manage a 17" Powerbook as my next machine. Now I'm glad I didn't make my reply as biting as I had thought originally...
Where did he say the PowerMac should be called 2.84GHz? That's right, he didn't. What he did say was that the fact that it's dual should be taken into account, as it does result in an increase in speed. That increase is significantly more real than HT, which at best will enable an Intel chip to use all its cycles more effectively, but do not result in any additional cycles to play with.
Also, 2.4 * 2 * 2 = 9.6, not 16.8. Not only is it invalid, as you said, but incorrect mathematically.
Sure you can, of course, but if you compare the PowerMac of the time with the prebuilt x86 machines of the time, guess what, the Apple had SCSI, the x86 didn't.
.09% of whatever it is while you're actually doing it. Of course, a linear falloff isn't perfectly accurate, but the mere existence of the decay of probability the parent referred to does not imply starting at 100%.
Just as a point, he said people, but not all people. They ARE talking about putting specifically American people in prison, but the poster's lack of specifying that doesn't imply they intend to put everyone in the world who file shares in prison. I just wanted to say that, improper interpretation of logic bothers me.
Re:Not to mention the pummelings
on
Superbowl XXXVII
·
· Score: 1
Not all athletes are assholes, that's as pointless as prejudice as all others. Whether you find the game boring is one thing, but to base it on some people you knew is cutting yourself off from an awful lot of good.
Re:Forgive the obvious question...
on
Superbowl XXXVII
·
· Score: 1
Hey, I'm a nerd and I was watching it with the non-bitchy half of the cheerleading team... Quality use of time by my count.
Slashdot Mirror
They're still making DVD burners, which I imagine the *AAs are even less happy about.
In one of the Tony Hawk games on N64, if you just keep scrolling the character selection it crashes every time.
He's talking about a bomb placed ON the space shuttle prior to launch... we'd notice someone else's shuttle anyway. Still, if it were an attack, it was a pointlessly timed one, so...
Well, the uppclassmen here at RPI got T30s this year, with crappy dim 10x7 resolution screens. These are not ultraportibles, and yet my Dell Inspiron 8200, with GF4go and a larger, brighter, 16x12 screen has SIGNIFICANTLY longer battery life left than most of the T30s, after just a semester...
Correct, now go ahead a back it up, this is a discussion forum, so discuss.
And Open Source is likened to communism, you can liken anything you like to anything else you like, that doesn't make it a valid comparison.
The very concept of a "person" with a subset of real person's rights is a farce. In the Consitution, you will find that people have a set of inalienable rights, not that some have a subset of the subsequently enumerated rights. Thus if a corporations "rights" step even slightly on that of the populace, the corporation must be brought back in check, the people should make no sacrifices of their TRUE rights for them. If a corporations "right" to bribe officials causes issues for the people, the people's rights supercede those of the corporation, and the corporations actions are unconstitutional, not the actions of the government to bring it back in line.
Calling any restriction on a business "communism" is disingenuous in the extreme, as capitalism is based on competition, and as soon as you destroy it you may no longer beg that the free market is ruling. Deal with it.
Patents are discoverable, but pending patents are not, and that's how RAMBUS did it.
Lack of humility does not imply wide academic acknowledgement, merely that he has faith in his knowledge of the subject, which he very well may, thus his not so humble opinion. Whether you respect that is a different matter, but you're trumpeting your horn louder than he his.
The parts of the SDRAM standard they claim to own are also present in DDR.
Now, further, in "embarassingly" parallel computation, X + X CAN = 2X, although this is admittedly rare. However, in any case where Intel's precious HT helps, dual CPUs help MORE. For practical applications, neither will double your speed. However, the original poster never claimed this, so your subtle sarcasm in pointing out that you can't add the speed of the two CPUs is completely irrelevant, and senseless arguing.
I definitely agree on that point, and I agree that both have their purposes, in fact I'm hoping I can manage a 17" Powerbook as my next machine. Now I'm glad I didn't make my reply as biting as I had thought originally...
Also, 2.4 * 2 * 2 = 9.6, not 16.8. Not only is it invalid, as you said, but incorrect mathematically.
Sure you can, of course, but if you compare the PowerMac of the time with the prebuilt x86 machines of the time, guess what, the Apple had SCSI, the x86 didn't.
He said "this next" which means fall/winter 2003, which is still 6 months off but not as bad as fall/winter 2004.
Dann werd' ich Deutsch sprechen, und alles werd' gut sein!
.09% of whatever it is while you're actually doing it. Of course, a linear falloff isn't perfectly accurate, but the mere existence of the decay of probability the parent referred to does not imply starting at 100%.
Just as a point, he said people, but not all people. They ARE talking about putting specifically American people in prison, but the poster's lack of specifying that doesn't imply they intend to put everyone in the world who file shares in prison. I just wanted to say that, improper interpretation of logic bothers me.
Not all athletes are assholes, that's as pointless as prejudice as all others. Whether you find the game boring is one thing, but to base it on some people you knew is cutting yourself off from an awful lot of good.
Hey, I'm a nerd and I was watching it with the non-bitchy half of the cheerleading team... Quality use of time by my count.
I want references for that, saying it's impossible for a teenager to think rationally. A lot don't but that's upbringing, not biology. That's absurd.
I picked a box off the shelf, handed the clerk money, got a receipt for purchase, it's MINE.
The driver IS the issue, you said it yourself in your second sentence here, and the issue doesn't exist at all in Windows, so its not the hardware.
All the driver revisions in the world can't make up for good programmers, just remember that.