The only reason Microsoft has DX10 for vista and why DX10 adds almost nothing (few shader effects and as you note its not groundbreaking like DX8-> DX9. or DX7->DX8) is because it enables graphics memory virtualization which is a hotbed of patent issues right now (see: novel microsoft patent issues).
I personally feel that People use XP because its easily pirated and not a complete memory hog (and almost no games run on Linux well as of yet still) and only UT and quake are the only "masses" games that run natively & well. People with an intermediate computer knowledge typically have been asking me how to convert to linux, thinking it will be more complicated, and are usually set at ease with the simple installation/wealth of software available. Overall if Linux worked for gaming, I don't think windows would be used at all as there would be heavy consumer pressure away from it.
as an individual who has worked with multiple independant music labels I can tell you that 10 grand gets you closer than necessary to the "super fidelity sound". Just need to use the money smart. People just want the expensive things to make crappy artists sound good...so yes, you are correct in some ways, but I find it hard to agree with your amounts on the recording.
I see neumann u87's for 3 grand. How many of those suckers you think you need? 30? You don't need much more than that and a well set computer system if you know what you are doing, of course effort involved will be greater.
Wow umm, it looks pretty nice, but....how is performance capability? It seems the same curse as all laptops: smaller you get, less performance capability to an exponential decrease. I mean design wise nice looking but isn't it like...2-3 grand for that thing? I imagine on the go for just browsing the web it beats hands down any PDA or smartphone (since 99% of those can't play flash/etc)....but at what price are you paying for your extreme mobility in this case?
I agree 20" is big for a laptop from a "wow thats kinda big" perspective but 13? If you ever use that thing without an external display you're going to need a magnifying glass. I could stare at 1680x1050 on a 20" monitor no problem. Care to imagine what 1680x1050 would look like a 13? Yes, 13" laptops are light, very much so due to cheap design and are crammed with low power components. I admit my C90 is not as light, but also materials used play a factor in that regardless of size. However a 13" is a nightmare for maintenance; 15.4 and above is like working with a micro atx mobo, 13 is like a pico atx. Something fails on a 13 and one of the options considered has to be throwing it out. It's not so hard to deal with a 15.4 or a 20.
Laptops are meant to be able to be moved from place to place, that I agree; weight and size preferences being subjective as to affecting yours and my own definitions of mobility.
I see a laptop more along the lines of a shuttle XPC box, since you're never going to use a laptop strictly on battery power anyway (and/or limited battery life - what, 4 hours on the lowest power laptops?). At some point it has the same tether as a desktop, just you have your display connected as well so only need 1 power outlet essentially. However wouldn't a 20" lappie be rather comfortable for the neck? Also I remember people saying most laptops that don't have sufficient exhaust fans like mine and so tend to overheat from extended periods of use..
So you sir, what is your thoughts of what is "mobile"?
maybe if decent laptops were purchased, I imagine some of these issues would be nonexistent. I would love to use my Asus c90 for work, but it ends up being used for lans....and I know at my workplace people have absolute crap like 13" laptops or something....screens so small its painful, I'll take 1680x1050 on a 15.4" over what they have anyday.
Also, laptops are not that bad to deal with, just learning a different route. But once you know how to unscrew them, it isn't all that different from a desktop as far as replacing components (except the screens can be a bitch to replace). Of course the C90 is 1000x easier but any other laptop is not that bad if you have the screwdrivers needed.
I felt the same. Intel is trying to push, this seems a definite hype, plus we all know breakthrough generations of new processors are unstable/crap (first dual cores/socket...what, what was that, 975?). I look forward to AMD's next gen of desktop processors, if that happens soon (note, what is next from AMD as far as desktop? my memory fails on that).
Although I understand where you're going with this, why should they settle for what they don't want? If I felt a program was collecting more information than I felt safe giving it then hell I should get rid of it at a minimum, and at a maximum someone out there should sue for damages if its more than just a personal problem is is something that borders on illegal. Hell, lawsuits are about the only thing a company feels since the rest is just business as usual.
The problem is since you as a consumer share the views of many other consumers, unless you band together in a lawsuit, nobody listens or cares. You're just a drop in the bucket. So while blizzard (I don't know that its the case on this or not) may be doing something wrong on a large scale, unless a lot of people come forward they won't notice. Lots of new customers are gained and old ones lost every day. It would just be a "hmm we had a little bigger pop drop than normal".
Also, lesser evils compared to others = no. If I don't like something I'm not going to use it unless there's absolutely no way around it. People stand for what they believe, even though sometimes it can be nuts (bible thumpers etc). What if someone told you to kill someone because it was lesser than killing 2 people etc (extreme scenario)....kinda doesn't hold up water.
Hmm, I agree that people can/would do this, but do you suspect that ALL the vote counting officials would do this? And/or what solutions are we starting to have? You can't trust a computer, you can trust people, so where's the fairness/answer?
its a bit harder to do something shady with 50 people staring you down to hold you accountable.
Blaming the computer for an error, in whatever fashion/manipulatable method, is a bit different, and all accountability is now gone: "It isn't me its an inanimate object(computer)" goes to "it wasn't the object its the owner of said object's fault" goes to "it's not the owner, of said object, he just bought it from XYZ company" seeing as that would be a corporation, means that there is 0 accountability whatsoever. Any corporation that pays a penalty in terms of a monetary fine doesn't have any accountability, thats just a business expense. That's the problem with the power of corporations nowadays. Even if you fined IBM 10% of the total company's assets they'd take a huge hit sure, but where would be the accountability for example? Same with microsoft. So they lay off some people, business would go on as usual.
Isn't Dvorak the guy who talks down google, open source, and anything he can sensationalize?? I'm sure people would like the features of smartphones if they weren't 500$ and/or excessively crippled on a cheaper phone.
If I remember correctly from the brief days of my programming, isn't it possibly to copy an entire program into a text copy of the executable simply by mirroring the source output from an exe into a separate text file, which can even be done in things such as pascal? Doesn't this trump the whole "you can't seeeeee that" false sense of security?
So why is it that people think that not being able to look would be more secure when you really can't lock it out? Isn't it also a fact that when a vulnerability is abused in open source that it can be fixed just as fast?
So therefore, because crime went up some year that tinted windows were more common, tinted windows caused crime? Do you get my drift here? Or because encrypted torrents increased, it was because of piracy? What if maybe we don't feel its our ISP's right to throttle our own internet connection maybe because it violates common carrier, even if we have 0 other ISP's to choose?
Please be careful with associations, they are not what you think they are.
Your farmer friend seems to have misunderstood trademark versus copyright. If you are selling the same type of product as him in a misleading fashion, then its trademark. However, "thesimpledog" would not pass any form of moron in a hurry test, so it would be an easily refuted copyright as well. Basically you have nothing to worry but you are in for a legal battle.Enjoy! (sarcasm).
Look at comments below, making available is not illegal, RIAA wrote in jury instructions that it was,while witholding evidence. I don't care about "what she did", your opinion and my opinion = 0. Law doesn't care about how we "feel", it is there strictly for fact.
What happened is like writing a jury instruction that says murder is legal (within a murder trial even). Kinda incorrect, no? However "making available is illegal" with no legal precedent supporting that is part of the felony. There is precedence that making available doesn't constitute infringement, this case is trying to rewrite law with fake info.
I think this woman was retarded. Anyone who uses Kazaa in this day and age definitely has a bad idea going. However, that doesn't make it illegal.
See above to the post above your own. How else can you email for abuse, etc if there is no email address? Lots of bogus sites are forced to register an email address for whois but don't have an email on their website anywhere. Face it, people can make it tougher and tougher to reach someone but if you can't find aways to contact someone at all that can be real problems (such as when people use like a shadow corporation for all their addresses - Kazaa style anyone? Beyond incompetence of investigators it was hard for them to even find kazaa in the first place)
There are ways to deal with bad intentions, use mailfilters, etc. However, if you can't contact someone that will cause rediculously rampant amounts of abuse (how can you prove someone is typosquatting 20 domain names to block something if you can't see who owns them). Say someone gets google.com, but its squatted, and you cannot even find out who to contact because the info isn't there. So instead of contacting them immediately with contact information provided, you have to go through a legal process and get approval, etc. And with the number of websites on the web, don't you think such a process MIGHT become a bottleneck? So instead of getting your site back in 3 days, you get it back in a week?
Or lets say you want to let the host know of a DNS problem, to help them out...well who are you going to let know now?
Somehow I didn't exactly think my plan through that far. Definitely not. Something about "gettin jiggy with it" I have a hard time visualizing in this case, it seems more like T-Rex from Orgasmo.
I answered your question within my own post, which you misread. The reason FOR freedom of speech includes objectionable ideas, thoughts, etc. I am just saying that the counterpoint is that people use freedom of speech for racism/facism and/or suppress it in the same way.
I do understand your point and agree with it, however. The problem is, the distinction of illegal action would include racism, so thats kinda tough to dance between.
I agree except replace "probably" with hopefully. I agree the concern is the weight change (if any), the rest just sounds like efficiency, although I do wonder how powerful of a charge they are talking about here.
Welcome to the unfortunate truth of unbiased free speech. Everyone really does deserve the same freedoms as the press. The problem is, exactly as the judge put it, the content. As much as I'd like to see the world speaking freely we can all imagine where fascism and racism would come into play if such a blanket protection came around. Ad Nauseum, etc.
I mean seriously, whats wrong with a random blogger writing about whatever they feel that would discredit it compared to a press individual? Wasn't there the part of freedom of speech that involves objectionable ideas, etc?
Just the obvious lack of logic in a filename of.p2p will be lapped up by the RIAA and MPAA instantly as implications and take years to correct in court.
Slashdot Mirror
It'd be a lot easier for most that don't use video/graphical related items to use linux anyway, although I do understand.
The only reason Microsoft has DX10 for vista and why DX10 adds almost nothing (few shader effects and as you note its not groundbreaking like DX8-> DX9. or DX7->DX8) is because it enables graphics memory virtualization which is a hotbed of patent issues right now (see: novel microsoft patent issues).
I personally feel that People use XP because its easily pirated and not a complete memory hog (and almost no games run on Linux well as of yet still) and only UT and quake are the only "masses" games that run natively & well. People with an intermediate computer knowledge typically have been asking me how to convert to linux, thinking it will be more complicated, and are usually set at ease with the simple installation/wealth of software available. Overall if Linux worked for gaming, I don't think windows would be used at all as there would be heavy consumer pressure away from it.
Hi Raven,
as an individual who has worked with multiple independant music labels I can tell you that 10 grand gets you closer than necessary to the "super fidelity sound". Just need to use the money smart. People just want the expensive things to make crappy artists sound good...so yes, you are correct in some ways, but I find it hard to agree with your amounts on the recording.
I see neumann u87's for 3 grand. How many of those suckers you think you need? 30? You don't need much more than that and a well set computer system if you know what you are doing, of course effort involved will be greater.
Wow umm, it looks pretty nice, but....how is performance capability? It seems the same curse as all laptops: smaller you get, less performance capability to an exponential decrease. I mean design wise nice looking but isn't it like...2-3 grand for that thing? I imagine on the go for just browsing the web it beats hands down any PDA or smartphone (since 99% of those can't play flash/etc)....but at what price are you paying for your extreme mobility in this case?
I agree 20" is big for a laptop from a "wow thats kinda big" perspective but 13? If you ever use that thing without an external display you're going to need a magnifying glass. I could stare at 1680x1050 on a 20" monitor no problem. Care to imagine what 1680x1050 would look like a 13? Yes, 13" laptops are light, very much so due to cheap design and are crammed with low power components. I admit my C90 is not as light, but also materials used play a factor in that regardless of size. However a 13" is a nightmare for maintenance; 15.4 and above is like working with a micro atx mobo, 13 is like a pico atx. Something fails on a 13 and one of the options considered has to be throwing it out. It's not so hard to deal with a 15.4 or a 20.
Laptops are meant to be able to be moved from place to place, that I agree; weight and size preferences being subjective as to affecting yours and my own definitions of mobility.
I see a laptop more along the lines of a shuttle XPC box, since you're never going to use a laptop strictly on battery power anyway (and/or limited battery life - what, 4 hours on the lowest power laptops?). At some point it has the same tether as a desktop, just you have your display connected as well so only need 1 power outlet essentially. However wouldn't a 20" lappie be rather comfortable for the neck? Also I remember people saying most laptops that don't have sufficient exhaust fans like mine and so tend to overheat from extended periods of use..
So you sir, what is your thoughts of what is "mobile"?
maybe if decent laptops were purchased, I imagine some of these issues would be nonexistent. I would love to use my Asus c90 for work, but it ends up being used for lans....and I know at my workplace people have absolute crap like 13" laptops or something....screens so small its painful, I'll take 1680x1050 on a 15.4" over what they have anyday.
Also, laptops are not that bad to deal with, just learning a different route. But once you know how to unscrew them, it isn't all that different from a desktop as far as replacing components (except the screens can be a bitch to replace). Of course the C90 is 1000x easier but any other laptop is not that bad if you have the screwdrivers needed.
I felt the same. Intel is trying to push, this seems a definite hype, plus we all know breakthrough generations of new processors are unstable/crap (first dual cores/socket...what, what was that, 975?). I look forward to AMD's next gen of desktop processors, if that happens soon (note, what is next from AMD as far as desktop? my memory fails on that).
identity fraud. The way the throttling works they impersonate both the sender and receiver and send both a reset flag impersonated as from the other
Although I understand where you're going with this, why should they settle for what they don't want? If I felt a program was collecting more information than I felt safe giving it then hell I should get rid of it at a minimum, and at a maximum someone out there should sue for damages if its more than just a personal problem is is something that borders on illegal. Hell, lawsuits are about the only thing a company feels since the rest is just business as usual.
The problem is since you as a consumer share the views of many other consumers, unless you band together in a lawsuit, nobody listens or cares. You're just a drop in the bucket. So while blizzard (I don't know that its the case on this or not) may be doing something wrong on a large scale, unless a lot of people come forward they won't notice. Lots of new customers are gained and old ones lost every day. It would just be a "hmm we had a little bigger pop drop than normal".
Also, lesser evils compared to others = no. If I don't like something I'm not going to use it unless there's absolutely no way around it. People stand for what they believe, even though sometimes it can be nuts (bible thumpers etc). What if someone told you to kill someone because it was lesser than killing 2 people etc (extreme scenario)....kinda doesn't hold up water.
and one ring to rule them all!
Hmm, I agree that people can/would do this, but do you suspect that ALL the vote counting officials would do this? And/or what solutions are we starting to have? You can't trust a computer, you can trust people, so where's the fairness/answer?
its a bit harder to do something shady with 50 people staring you down to hold you accountable.
Blaming the computer for an error, in whatever fashion/manipulatable method, is a bit different, and all accountability is now gone: "It isn't me its an inanimate object(computer)" goes to "it wasn't the object its the owner of said object's fault" goes to "it's not the owner, of said object, he just bought it from XYZ company" seeing as that would be a corporation, means that there is 0 accountability whatsoever. Any corporation that pays a penalty in terms of a monetary fine doesn't have any accountability, thats just a business expense. That's the problem with the power of corporations nowadays. Even if you fined IBM 10% of the total company's assets they'd take a huge hit sure, but where would be the accountability for example? Same with microsoft. So they lay off some people, business would go on as usual.
Isn't Dvorak the guy who talks down google, open source, and anything he can sensationalize?? I'm sure people would like the features of smartphones if they weren't 500$ and/or excessively crippled on a cheaper phone.
If I remember correctly from the brief days of my programming, isn't it possibly to copy an entire program into a text copy of the executable simply by mirroring the source output from an exe into a separate text file, which can even be done in things such as pascal? Doesn't this trump the whole "you can't seeeeee that" false sense of security?
So why is it that people think that not being able to look would be more secure when you really can't lock it out? Isn't it also a fact that when a vulnerability is abused in open source that it can be fixed just as fast?
So therefore, because crime went up some year that tinted windows were more common, tinted windows caused crime? Do you get my drift here? Or because encrypted torrents increased, it was because of piracy? What if maybe we don't feel its our ISP's right to throttle our own internet connection maybe because it violates common carrier, even if we have 0 other ISP's to choose?
Please be careful with associations, they are not what you think they are.
Your farmer friend seems to have misunderstood trademark versus copyright. If you are selling the same type of product as him in a misleading fashion, then its trademark. However, "thesimpledog" would not pass any form of moron in a hurry test, so it would be an easily refuted copyright as well. Basically you have nothing to worry but you are in for a legal battle.Enjoy! (sarcasm).
Look at comments below, making available is not illegal, RIAA wrote in jury instructions that it was,while witholding evidence. I don't care about "what she did", your opinion and my opinion = 0. Law doesn't care about how we "feel", it is there strictly for fact.
What happened is like writing a jury instruction that says murder is legal (within a murder trial even). Kinda incorrect, no? However "making available is illegal" with no legal precedent supporting that is part of the felony. There is precedence that making available doesn't constitute infringement, this case is trying to rewrite law with fake info.
I think this woman was retarded. Anyone who uses Kazaa in this day and age definitely has a bad idea going. However, that doesn't make it illegal.
Any reasons?
See above to the post above your own. How else can you email for abuse, etc if there is no email address? Lots of bogus sites are forced to register an email address for whois but don't have an email on their website anywhere. Face it, people can make it tougher and tougher to reach someone but if you can't find aways to contact someone at all that can be real problems (such as when people use like a shadow corporation for all their addresses - Kazaa style anyone? Beyond incompetence of investigators it was hard for them to even find kazaa in the first place)
There are ways to deal with bad intentions, use mailfilters, etc. However, if you can't contact someone that will cause rediculously rampant amounts of abuse (how can you prove someone is typosquatting 20 domain names to block something if you can't see who owns them). Say someone gets google.com, but its squatted, and you cannot even find out who to contact because the info isn't there. So instead of contacting them immediately with contact information provided, you have to go through a legal process and get approval, etc. And with the number of websites on the web, don't you think such a process MIGHT become a bottleneck? So instead of getting your site back in 3 days, you get it back in a week?
Or lets say you want to let the host know of a DNS problem, to help them out...well who are you going to let know now?
Somehow I didn't exactly think my plan through that far. Definitely not. Something about "gettin jiggy with it" I have a hard time visualizing in this case, it seems more like T-Rex from Orgasmo.
I always knew 360 degree camera porn was coming
I answered your question within my own post, which you misread. The reason FOR freedom of speech includes objectionable ideas, thoughts, etc. I am just saying that the counterpoint is that people use freedom of speech for racism/facism and/or suppress it in the same way.
I do understand your point and agree with it, however. The problem is, the distinction of illegal action would include racism, so thats kinda tough to dance between.
I agree except replace "probably" with hopefully. I agree the concern is the weight change (if any), the rest just sounds like efficiency, although I do wonder how powerful of a charge they are talking about here.
Welcome to the unfortunate truth of unbiased free speech. Everyone really does deserve the same freedoms as the press. The problem is, exactly as the judge put it, the content. As much as I'd like to see the world speaking freely we can all imagine where fascism and racism would come into play if such a blanket protection came around. Ad Nauseum, etc.
I mean seriously, whats wrong with a random blogger writing about whatever they feel that would discredit it compared to a press individual? Wasn't there the part of freedom of speech that involves objectionable ideas, etc?
Just the obvious lack of logic in a filename of .p2p will be lapped up by the RIAA and MPAA instantly as implications and take years to correct in court.
weird, I was skeptical in the first place but when I had typed it in I got no response. Hmm.