The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, although somewhat scandal-ridden, has a toll-free phone # and accepts online complaints. Good luck after that, although you might find success.
Dissonance can be percussive, it can connote tension, but it can also be a modulation as heard of a root note or sound. That modulation "beats" on the fundamental note, not so much damaging it, but giving it difficult to perceive pitch.
Silky textures of music are somewhat easy to make. The modulations aren't heard much in nature or in voice/vocals. When pronounced, dissonant modulation becomes punctuation, percussion.
Dissonance as modulation, and the "beating" discerned, can give character, or in contrast, destroy it. What does destruction sound like? Ask my late father.
Windows 8 is a very disciplined direction. Doesn't mean: a good direction, but a unified GUI and an answer to ARM-based tablets was the strategy. Good? The market will decide.
Geller's advocacy of extreme measures oddly mimes some of the more extreme orthodox factions of other beliefs. Hitchens case is comparatively unknown to me.
Should the SPLC investigate? Perhaps. Indicate, indict, or exonerate.
Not sure the outcome in these cases. Skepticism isn't prejudice. Prejudice is prejudice.
Self-slur is neither uplifting or accurate. People use self-demeaning words all of the time. Doesn't make it better or give them respect; they're labels. My personal experience says that when people use demeaning self-labels, they're depressed or on the offensive about being defensive. There is no real pride there. They're somehow admitting to be different in a derogatory categorization. I find nothing wrong with any race, mixed race, browner than you, lighter than me. I don't really care about another's sexuality as it has no context for me. Gay? Bi? Trans? Str8? Fine. Have a nice day. Context, the negative type, then allows people to perpetuate mythological connotation to the nature. Queer? Swings both ways? Chick with a dick? Dude without one? Makes no real different but the terminology is negative, and potentially abusive-- and prejudicial.
Discuss the words? Fine. The context for this entire post is the geo-location of tweets that are derogatory in nature. These weren't fellowship, kinship tweets.
Of Hitchins, I can't comment as I don't have sufficient information. Geller, however, is indeed a hater. But she's one of many. The SPLC has made a few mistakes along the way, but no one is perfect. Not me, not you, not them. I don't excuse the misgivings I see, rather, I applaud them for what they've done. There is much more that needs to be done to bring civility to a fearful society.
We knew nothing of the intentions of the speaker until they spoke, using words and vocabulary, inference, inflections, and other linguistic keys to understand their utterances.
Words can demean, save that those they target may not be demeaned by them. While Carlin used speech loosely and for great humor and insight, this particular choice poises Eddie Murphy dropping to a low common denominator of reference. Carlin may be no racist, but the term is demeaning nonetheless.
Language is tricky. You can be what you want to be. My doubts about the nature of your posts has to do with your seeming self-reviling. You describe yourself in terms that don't connote pride, they connote self-loathing, which shouldn't be the case.
Along thru this thread, I've told you that you can use any words that you want; they're protected speech. Your inference, however, is that you seem to despise these things. Being of mixed race, part of the LGBTQ rainbow, these are who you are as an individual. I respect individuals. I don't respect negative labels.
For English, there is no real language police. There is, however, the semantical choices made by English speakers that contextually infer their contexts, and their meanings. Describe yourself in any way you see fit, but don't believe that others want to use the negative inference you've used as well. Indeed, these words are used to subjugate you by labeling you in negative terms. Those negative terms are viable. But they do little good.
That you may be perceived by others negatively is their misfortune. For you to do so, however, validates their negativity and prejudice. Be proud. Pride is a positive quality, and eschews the negative.
Somehow a meme developed whereby people of color could use the N-word and believed that to be ok. I believe the use of the word carries negative implication no matter who uses it, any any context. It's protected speech.
So also is the f-word.
Your status as a bi-sexual of mixed-race is dubious in my mind, or you wouldn't be actively disrespecting yourself, and others that might be similar to you. Why hate yourself and allow that to propagate? You can be proud. This is 2012. Time to stand up and be counted for being human, no matter the color, no matter the sexual orientation. You presume me to be white and str8. This presumption is part of the problem. By labeling, we do injustice, by pre-judging, hence prejudice.
I might even believe you if you hadn't tagged the end of your post with:
"...especially processing conducted by faggots."
Maybe you are mixed, maybe not. Your post infers the prejudice with those words. I know the vocabulary, I understand the malice and fear behind them. Sadly, I live not far from where the KKK was founded and there are a lot of scared people of many races here. Each of them has racial "power" that's actually the flipside of fear. In my book: all are individuals, some better than others on their own merits.
The SPLC does in deed execute their honorable mission. Go to http://truthy.indiana.edu/ for other meme propagation and dissemination graphics so you can see that this is one lens to the output of a much larger engine.
Although there is the sampling rate to consider, there are also the second- and third-order harmonics that tubes seem to "enrich". I wonder if I miss these in the super-accuracy of great samples. A2D then D2A reacts in a digital way to the outputs that go to the voice coils in speakers. Clamping current is higher, and there's less slewing distortions-- to a point.
D goes to A, then gets fed to fat transistors backed by humongous caps. There is no transformer-based core current saturation.
But then, I might be imagining this, having been trained in the tube era. People spend stunning amounts of $$ to get these effects that are non-obvious. For me, I just play and sometimes I get paid. Not often.
I want to say that a high-sampling rate A-D convertor with a good bit of software at a high clock/slewing rate ought to do the job. I've heard these things do a good job.
And I have an amp with 4) 6L6GC tubes in push-pull with a huge fat transformer and a king-hell power supply shred the living crap out of the tastiest solid-state amp I've used. It has a damnable spring reverb in it that sounds far, far better than the high-slew rate Line6 amps I've used.
I'm not so sure that we're getting the analog-digital conversion process right. My ear, old as it is, can still tell the difference, blindfolded, in an A-B test. I don't want to; I want to believe that digital does it right and is vastly more flexible; it is more flexible but analog systems can still sound very good. Maybe it's audio memory in my brain that wants to hear the analog nuances instead of ostensible digital perfection. I wonder often if that's the case. Lossy codecs are bad for us, I think.
It's a nasty trick, but apparently it can be turned off although I haven't tried this yet; see thread below.
What's more evil, IMHO, is that the ads give location and context to users and invade their privacy, and potentially open the software being used to infection or manipulation vectors. Users didn't ask for their privacy to be given up, and it means that the apps have holes, perhaps big ones, to be manipulated by malware.
I understand the need for revenue, but this seems over the top.
Support is always valuable, but when the mail box is filling up with often the same problems, you have to make a value judgment.
Sometimes it's the fact that Microsoft training is somewhat rigorous and people *tend* to apply AD settings according to a well known set of formulas. I find that a lot of serious professionals lacking AD training depend on SAMBA documentation to try to make AD run, thus creating chasms linking OpenLDAP, SAMBA, and AD structures, and they're different beasts.
Yes, it's great to have backup support, but while SAMBA can work very reliably, Microsoft's cooperation has been mercurial despite all the litigation. My advice would be to stick to AD homogeneously, or SAMBA homogeneously, or stick to a common denominator of NTLM-ish authentication for things like NAS devices, and other non-AD peripherals. Sure, it's supposed to work. Mine works. But I've also seen any number of installations that became exception-handling missions. RedHat, Oracle, Novell, and other support mechanisms can help cure the problem, but it requires making sure that the people supporting you know the ins-and-outs of your specific installation, as there are very few 'generic' cures to problems, especially in storage add-on devices-- because they're often driven by OEM implementations with difficult-to-track implementation qualities.
Don't even get me started on regime-change problems.
There is an app, data, settings, permissions, and code. Examining each of these items can help move it onto a new target system, but it should be done by someone familiar with real Unix and the target system's needs.
If it's x86 code, maybe it can become a virtual machine, using some of the methods described upthread, but it means that filesystem must be supported, and you can get to it via tty devices, if there are terminals rather than host sessions. SSH2 wasn't around back then, so some kind of terminal emulation is likely to be needed, and there are any number of vt100 emulators that might be constructed to vector the terminals/tty1-N.
Printers are something else again. Modem links, or other items might also need re/indirection to other outputs.
It takes examination, and reworking the functionality if virtualized or ported to a new host. I don't know that there's an easy fix here.
A dozen years ago, Windows 2000 Server was going to work on MIPS, and other processors. Ports were done. In the end, Intel dominated. But I'm not surprised that Microsoft wants to run on a 64-bit ARM architecture. There are a number of vendors with eyes on low-power, highly flexible architectures. How low would the power be? Still unknown because there are only engineering samples out in the field.
No one is optimized on ARM-64, because it's so new.
The original poster has the qualities of a shill. The open system actually feeds Google's app control needs, and allows Google to continue its privacy-robbing policies, and total location and usage context control of users of the platform.
Yes, Apple does this, too.
It's why I'm hoping for BootGecko, and other "smartphone" operating systems that aren't built on business models that retain way too much customer information. Even Canonical with Unity is starting to bow to the Dark Side.
It's really been confined to their own stuff. Imagine all of the money they could have made evolving their fabs towards building *anyone's* chips. But they didn't do that. They didn't evolve and market great semiconductor fab/architectural software. They didn't make a zillion dollars from memory.
AMD is a quirk, just like Cyrix, IBM, and others were. ARM is killing them. They should have considered what a 6502-based design scheme could do: undercut them both in costs in ideological development imagination.
I read the book. I see them not-dominating, not-getting original, making and squandering acquisitions, and generally living off the oil well in the basement called x86.
Tablets, smartphones, device control, embedded systems, graphics subsystems, all go some place called: not Intel. Innovation? Snore.
Slashdot Mirror
The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, although somewhat scandal-ridden, has a toll-free phone # and accepts online complaints. Good luck after that, although you might find success.
Dissonance can be percussive, it can connote tension, but it can also be a modulation as heard of a root note or sound. That modulation "beats" on the fundamental note, not so much damaging it, but giving it difficult to perceive pitch.
Silky textures of music are somewhat easy to make. The modulations aren't heard much in nature or in voice/vocals. When pronounced, dissonant modulation becomes punctuation, percussion.
Dissonance as modulation, and the "beating" discerned, can give character, or in contrast, destroy it. What does destruction sound like? Ask my late father.
You won't see much good of it until you get the tablet or the phone.
Windows 8 is a very disciplined direction. Doesn't mean: a good direction, but a unified GUI and an answer to ARM-based tablets was the strategy. Good? The market will decide.
Geller's advocacy of extreme measures oddly mimes some of the more extreme orthodox factions of other beliefs. Hitchens case is comparatively unknown to me.
Should the SPLC investigate? Perhaps. Indicate, indict, or exonerate.
Not sure the outcome in these cases. Skepticism isn't prejudice. Prejudice is prejudice.
Self-slur is neither uplifting or accurate. People use self-demeaning words all of the time. Doesn't make it better or give them respect; they're labels. My personal experience says that when people use demeaning self-labels, they're depressed or on the offensive about being defensive. There is no real pride there. They're somehow admitting to be different in a derogatory categorization. I find nothing wrong with any race, mixed race, browner than you, lighter than me. I don't really care about another's sexuality as it has no context for me. Gay? Bi? Trans? Str8? Fine. Have a nice day. Context, the negative type, then allows people to perpetuate mythological connotation to the nature. Queer? Swings both ways? Chick with a dick? Dude without one? Makes no real different but the terminology is negative, and potentially abusive-- and prejudicial.
Discuss the words? Fine. The context for this entire post is the geo-location of tweets that are derogatory in nature. These weren't fellowship, kinship tweets.
Of Hitchins, I can't comment as I don't have sufficient information. Geller, however, is indeed a hater. But she's one of many. The SPLC has made a few mistakes along the way, but no one is perfect. Not me, not you, not them. I don't excuse the misgivings I see, rather, I applaud them for what they've done. There is much more that needs to be done to bring civility to a fearful society.
Think it through. There are two sides to every coin.
We knew nothing of the intentions of the speaker until they spoke, using words and vocabulary, inference, inflections, and other linguistic keys to understand their utterances.
Words can demean, save that those they target may not be demeaned by them. While Carlin used speech loosely and for great humor and insight, this particular choice poises Eddie Murphy dropping to a low common denominator of reference. Carlin may be no racist, but the term is demeaning nonetheless.
Not at all.
Language is tricky. You can be what you want to be. My doubts about the nature of your posts has to do with your seeming self-reviling. You describe yourself in terms that don't connote pride, they connote self-loathing, which shouldn't be the case.
Along thru this thread, I've told you that you can use any words that you want; they're protected speech. Your inference, however, is that you seem to despise these things. Being of mixed race, part of the LGBTQ rainbow, these are who you are as an individual. I respect individuals. I don't respect negative labels.
For English, there is no real language police. There is, however, the semantical choices made by English speakers that contextually infer their contexts, and their meanings. Describe yourself in any way you see fit, but don't believe that others want to use the negative inference you've used as well. Indeed, these words are used to subjugate you by labeling you in negative terms. Those negative terms are viable. But they do little good.
That you may be perceived by others negatively is their misfortune. For you to do so, however, validates their negativity and prejudice. Be proud. Pride is a positive quality, and eschews the negative.
Somehow a meme developed whereby people of color could use the N-word and believed that to be ok. I believe the use of the word carries negative implication no matter who uses it, any any context. It's protected speech.
So also is the f-word.
Your status as a bi-sexual of mixed-race is dubious in my mind, or you wouldn't be actively disrespecting yourself, and others that might be similar to you. Why hate yourself and allow that to propagate? You can be proud. This is 2012. Time to stand up and be counted for being human, no matter the color, no matter the sexual orientation. You presume me to be white and str8. This presumption is part of the problem. By labeling, we do injustice, by pre-judging, hence prejudice.
I might even believe you if you hadn't tagged the end of your post with:
"...especially processing conducted by faggots."
Maybe you are mixed, maybe not. Your post infers the prejudice with those words. I know the vocabulary, I understand the malice and fear behind them. Sadly, I live not far from where the KKK was founded and there are a lot of scared people of many races here. Each of them has racial "power" that's actually the flipside of fear. In my book: all are individuals, some better than others on their own merits.
The SPLC does in deed execute their honorable mission. Go to http://truthy.indiana.edu/ for other meme propagation and dissemination graphics so you can see that this is one lens to the output of a much larger engine.
Lucky for you, free speech covers your spew. Posting AC doesn't allow us to revile you as thoroughly as we should, but we'll remember your hate.
There's an expert for you: Chris Rock.
Nice job of distraction. There's a job waiting for you in political disinformation.
Although there is the sampling rate to consider, there are also the second- and third-order harmonics that tubes seem to "enrich". I wonder if I miss these in the super-accuracy of great samples. A2D then D2A reacts in a digital way to the outputs that go to the voice coils in speakers. Clamping current is higher, and there's less slewing distortions-- to a point.
D goes to A, then gets fed to fat transistors backed by humongous caps. There is no transformer-based core current saturation.
But then, I might be imagining this, having been trained in the tube era. People spend stunning amounts of $$ to get these effects that are non-obvious. For me, I just play and sometimes I get paid. Not often.
I want to say that a high-sampling rate A-D convertor with a good bit of software at a high clock/slewing rate ought to do the job. I've heard these things do a good job.
And I have an amp with 4) 6L6GC tubes in push-pull with a huge fat transformer and a king-hell power supply shred the living crap out of the tastiest solid-state amp I've used. It has a damnable spring reverb in it that sounds far, far better than the high-slew rate Line6 amps I've used.
I'm not so sure that we're getting the analog-digital conversion process right. My ear, old as it is, can still tell the difference, blindfolded, in an A-B test. I don't want to; I want to believe that digital does it right and is vastly more flexible; it is more flexible but analog systems can still sound very good. Maybe it's audio memory in my brain that wants to hear the analog nuances instead of ostensible digital perfection. I wonder often if that's the case. Lossy codecs are bad for us, I think.
It's a nasty trick, but apparently it can be turned off although I haven't tried this yet; see thread below.
What's more evil, IMHO, is that the ads give location and context to users and invade their privacy, and potentially open the software being used to infection or manipulation vectors. Users didn't ask for their privacy to be given up, and it means that the apps have holes, perhaps big ones, to be manipulated by malware.
I understand the need for revenue, but this seems over the top.
Support is always valuable, but when the mail box is filling up with often the same problems, you have to make a value judgment.
Sometimes it's the fact that Microsoft training is somewhat rigorous and people *tend* to apply AD settings according to a well known set of formulas. I find that a lot of serious professionals lacking AD training depend on SAMBA documentation to try to make AD run, thus creating chasms linking OpenLDAP, SAMBA, and AD structures, and they're different beasts.
Yes, it's great to have backup support, but while SAMBA can work very reliably, Microsoft's cooperation has been mercurial despite all the litigation. My advice would be to stick to AD homogeneously, or SAMBA homogeneously, or stick to a common denominator of NTLM-ish authentication for things like NAS devices, and other non-AD peripherals. Sure, it's supposed to work. Mine works. But I've also seen any number of installations that became exception-handling missions. RedHat, Oracle, Novell, and other support mechanisms can help cure the problem, but it requires making sure that the people supporting you know the ins-and-outs of your specific installation, as there are very few 'generic' cures to problems, especially in storage add-on devices-- because they're often driven by OEM implementations with difficult-to-track implementation qualities.
Don't even get me started on regime-change problems.
There is an app, data, settings, permissions, and code. Examining each of these items can help move it onto a new target system, but it should be done by someone familiar with real Unix and the target system's needs.
If it's x86 code, maybe it can become a virtual machine, using some of the methods described upthread, but it means that filesystem must be supported, and you can get to it via tty devices, if there are terminals rather than host sessions. SSH2 wasn't around back then, so some kind of terminal emulation is likely to be needed, and there are any number of vt100 emulators that might be constructed to vector the terminals/tty1-N.
Printers are something else again. Modem links, or other items might also need re/indirection to other outputs.
It takes examination, and reworking the functionality if virtualized or ported to a new host. I don't know that there's an easy fix here.
Not so fast.
A dozen years ago, Windows 2000 Server was going to work on MIPS, and other processors. Ports were done. In the end, Intel dominated. But I'm not surprised that Microsoft wants to run on a 64-bit ARM architecture. There are a number of vendors with eyes on low-power, highly flexible architectures. How low would the power be? Still unknown because there are only engineering samples out in the field.
No one is optimized on ARM-64, because it's so new.
One side of me says:
Prosecute the fuckers, no matter who they are.
The other, more dark side says:
Same old stuff, different day.
The original poster has the qualities of a shill. The open system actually feeds Google's app control needs, and allows Google to continue its privacy-robbing policies, and total location and usage context control of users of the platform.
Yes, Apple does this, too.
It's why I'm hoping for BootGecko, and other "smartphone" operating systems that aren't built on business models that retain way too much customer information. Even Canonical with Unity is starting to bow to the Dark Side.
It's really been confined to their own stuff. Imagine all of the money they could have made evolving their fabs towards building *anyone's* chips. But they didn't do that. They didn't evolve and market great semiconductor fab/architectural software. They didn't make a zillion dollars from memory.
AMD is a quirk, just like Cyrix, IBM, and others were. ARM is killing them. They should have considered what a 6502-based design scheme could do: undercut them both in costs in ideological development imagination.
I read the book. I see them not-dominating, not-getting original, making and squandering acquisitions, and generally living off the oil well in the basement called x86.
Tablets, smartphones, device control, embedded systems, graphics subsystems, all go some place called: not Intel. Innovation? Snore.
One. Trick. Pony.