There's no such thing as boilerplate, the way I look at it. Legal documents have consequences, and need to be drafted with reference to the situation at hand. I have actually submitted an amicus brief, and a revised amicus brief, in this very case,
Great! We can we can just cut-n-paste yours and fill it in with our own points.
Only to someone too caught up in his own preoccupation with Cray to be bothered to read closely. Let's illustrate:
But I'll note that Seymour didn't invent vector computing,
No one here has said THAT either. But you are so caught up in your own issues with the man that you read that into what I wrote too.
Cray the company did not go out of business. It got acquired a spun off and acquired again.
Gee, I had nooooo idea. NOT. If you had thought for half a second you would have realized that since Cray Research is still around in some form or another than it was a good bet that I must have been talking about some other Cray when I said "when Cray was still alive." How you can note such an obvious discrepancy and still think the quote "only makes sense" if you read it in the way that does not jibe with the facts can only be explained by you being blinded to basic reading comprehension because of your fixation.
Well, that's your opinion. I simply think it's unwise to ignore the lessons history teaches.
Yeah that's true, it is unwise to ignore the lessons history teaches, but you know what else is unwise? Inserting random tangents into a discussion and then using them as strawmen. Atari is still "alive" today and Nolan Bushnell doesn't deserve any of the credit for that either.
You're making the mistake of equating a company's products with one person. It doesn't work that way.
No, YOU are making that mistake. It was quite clear from my original wording that I was talking about Seymour Cray.
I wrote:A GPU is very much like the vector processor of Cray-style supercomputing (when Cray was still alive that is)
I use the word 'alive' because I'm talking about a person -- by my detailed follow-up with information not contained in wikipedia it should be obvious that I was quite aware that a company with the name Cray still exists
If I were talking about a company, what sense would it make to exclude the kind of computers the company made after it was defunct? Name one company that not only manufactures but designs new computers after it has gone out of business.
And let's be a little more accurate with our history (this is directed to all of us). Seymour Cray had many more failures than successes.
You clearly have a bug up your ass about Cray and your entire contribution to this thread has been to show off that bug, to the point of making an ass of yourself.
I don't buy used games on principle. (Wait... so I'm paying someone for a game and simultaneously not giving the content creators any money? Why not just pirate it and spend more money on new games if I'm not going to pay the creators?)
Except that when you buy used your money IS going to the creator (or at least his publisher). It goes to the publisher by proxy of the original purchaser who may not have considered the original selling price to be reasonable without the ability to resell it and recoup some of that cost. Similarly for all additional sales on down the line until the game eventually ends up in somebody's trash can.
But even if I wasn't against the concept of used games I still don't see the financial incentive. Gamestop will pay me less than the parking fee to go in and sell them a game.
Even if your characterization of Gamestop's pricing is accurate, they are by no means the only way to buy and sell used games (or used books, or used CDs, etc).
If you aren't going to buy it new you might as well just pirate it and save the money going to Wal-Mart.
Wal-mart provides a service - they get paid for that service, just as a book publisher provides a service to an author. You don't think that YOU personally are responsible for the money that goes to the authors that you publish do you? That would be the height of hubris - you provide them distribution and revenue handling in exchange for a fee. Kind of like the way Wal-mart, et al, provide buyers the service of distributing used copies.
Either you buy into the artificial scarcity of copyright or you don't, but don't think you can justly have the best of both the copyright-scarcity model and the non-scarce freedom of speech model without the downsides of either.
I'll pass this feedback along to the design guys, but do you *really* want to scroll through 4,000 words and 50-some charts, rather than looking at just the pages you're interested in reading?
Yes, I do. I can scroll just fine thank you and I can also use the browser's built in word search to find specific words anywhere in the current page, but I can't do that and stay sane at the same time if I have to click 15 times and search 15 times for each word I might want find.
Surely the length would be a bigger problem if there wasn't an index, right?
Put the index in a sidebar or at the top of the single page. HTML has had document internal anchor points since pretty much day 1.
Not many people outside of the UK have noticed, but recently there has been a huge hullabaloo over there about "knife crime" - to the point of were they are seriously considering banning (if they haven't already done so) anything much more dangerous than a butterknife.
I think we should we can count on them taking this BBC report to heart and once the dangers of knife-crime have been eliminated, they will move on to ban bananas so that people can be spared the terror and suffering of banana-crimes.
Uhh...Cray is still very much alive. And doing vectors. And threads. And multicore. All long before Intel/AMD.
Seymour Cray was killed by a speeding redneck in a trans-am in 1996.
The company currently known as Cray as formerly known as TERA, which bought the assets of Cray Research from SGI who acquired Cray Research after Seymour had left to form Cray Computer which is also defunct.
Seymour was never significantly involved in multi-core or multi-threaded processors or NUMA. In fact, he specifically avoided designs even hinting of that sort of complexity because he felt that simplicity in design made it easier to fully utilize the maximum performance of the hardware.
Does it matter? Linux is not anywhere close to the target market,
Linux support for CUDA matters hugely, Linux boxes are head and shoulders above any other market for CUDA-based software. That's because linux is the OS for supercomputing nowadays and CUDA's biggest niche is the exact same kind of number crunching that is typically associated with supercomputer workloads.
In fact, these GPUs are yet another example of how there is nothing new under the sun. A GPU is very much like the vector processor of Cray-style supercomputing (when Cray was still alive that is) aka SIMD (single instruction, multiple data).
He's not talking about how long the app itself runs, but how long each subroutine that runs on the GPU runs before returning something back to the app on the CPU side. If that subroutine takes too long to complete windows gets unhappy. I don't remember if it was a watchdog timer thing or a bus-locking thing or something else. I don't even know if its been fixed or not.
MySpace and Facebook are just as bad. They teach people, even adults, to give up personal information without a second thought.
You do understand the difference between giving information willingly and having it forced out of you?
The issue is not if the OP understands, it is how well the general populace understands.
As it is now, lots of people can easily rationalize the government keeping such a database by saying things like, "People put all that info on myspace everyday, what's the big deal if it goes into a governement database too?" They look at you funny and think you are just a crazy privacy nut, completely out of touch with the real world.
However, if myspace, facebook, et al weren't so prevalent you would have a lot more people willing to question such policies rather than agree to them without any critical thinking.
If you buy food from a supermarket and it's normal but not to your taste, you don't get to take it back for a refund.
Plenty of super-markets have return policies that accept returns under exactly those circumstances. They do so in order to encourage spontaneous purchases which tend to be the most profitable of all sales.
Lisa technologies DID change the world, they were just renamed to Macintosh for the 2.0 release (or 1.1 release depending on your perspective.
Similarly, Itanium REALLY changed the world - killing off PA-RISC, MIPS and Alpha. The type of change wasn't what was promised in the PR, but you can be sure that Intel management (and some of HP management) are 100% happy with the results.
Link not munged, read the contents at the end of the link. They explain the naming difference - that article better explains the specific part of author's rights relevant to my point and how, while Canada calls it moral rights, everybody else calls it author's rights.
The problem I have is that I don't think a person that's supposed to be working on the behalf of their constituents should be able to claim copyrights on what they did while working in that capacity.
Unlike the copyright you are familiar with droits d'auteur are not transferable, they rest permanently with the creator.
This is very disturbing, parody, satire, and political statements should be expressly legal under any sane copyright system. Especially for non-commercial use.
He's probably referring to droits d'auteur which is a continental thing (vs common law) - we don't really have it in the US, Canada does have it to some degree due to their legal system's french influence. One part of such "author's rights" is the right to not have the creation used in a way contradictory to the creator's wishes such as to misrepresent what the creator intended to present. It's pretty ambiguous and the concept of fair use may not even apply, depending on the circumstances.
That's not to say that I disagree with your point, just to explain where the rationalization is coming from since we don't really have the same concept in US copyright law.
Microsoft must have paid the appropriate people really well in advance of the Windows 7 reviews because franly their's NO business incentive to upgrade from XP.
Indeed, the marketing campaign for Win7 has been brilliant. Brill-fucking-ant. Somebody on Madison Ave is going to buy an island with the money they've earned on this.
I am well aware of the privacy implications of posting that information on my website. However, until now, the only people who seemed to visit my website were people who already knew me personally. If I was worried about people finding that information, I wouldn't have posted,
That's the thing about privacy, once you give it away it is nearly impossible to get back. So just because you think you are "well aware of the privacy implications" doesn't mean you really are, you just haven't had a truly "educational experience" yet, like someone using that information to impersonate you to drain your bank account, or use it as a cover identity when they get arrested so that your record will show an arrest, not theirs.
I don't think doing damage is mutually exclusive with resulting in damage.
Oh great, you've got the same brainfart going on as he does.
Listen closely. I never said they were mutually exclusive. I said he keeps asserting one as if it were as factual as the other. It ain't. If he, or anyone else for that matter, think otherwise, bring on the credible citations.
Sure, if he can repeatedly assert that child porn does damage rather than child porn being a result of damage, I think being pedantic is entirely fair.
And only on slashdot would someone be moronic enough to think equating an inbound call center with a telemarketer is as bad as being a baby axe murder.
That page is loaded with stuff no one in their right mind would put up on a totally public web page. Talk about spectacularly poor judgement. I think there is something wrong with the guy.
The post you are responding to never accused you of cold calling.
You need to understand that warm calling is so close to indistinguishable from cold calling that nobody really cares about the difference except for people like you who need a way to rationalize their actions and thus think it makes all the difference in the world.
Just look online for all the people bitching about Omaha Steaks - you buy one thing from them and they are all over you. Someone sends you a gift through them and if the sender was stupid enough to give them your phone number, they are all over you too.
Still don't believe me? Just consider how miserable your life would be if every single merchant you've ever done business with started warm-calling you. Repeatedly. You would have no time left for your own life.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no such thing as boilerplate, the way I look at it. Legal documents have consequences, and need to be drafted with reference to the situation at hand. I have actually submitted an amicus brief, and a revised amicus brief, in this very case,
Great! We can we can just cut-n-paste yours and fill it in with our own points.
No, it wasn't.
Only to someone too caught up in his own preoccupation with Cray to be bothered to read closely. Let's illustrate:
But I'll note that Seymour didn't invent vector computing,
No one here has said THAT either. But you are so caught up in your own issues with the man that you read that into what I wrote too.
Cray the company did not go out of business. It got acquired a spun off and acquired again.
Gee, I had nooooo idea. NOT. If you had thought for half a second you would have realized that since Cray Research is still around in some form or another than it was a good bet that I must have been talking about some other Cray when I said "when Cray was still alive." How you can note such an obvious discrepancy and still think the quote "only makes sense" if you read it in the way that does not jibe with the facts can only be explained by you being blinded to basic reading comprehension because of your fixation.
Well, that's your opinion. I simply think it's unwise to ignore the lessons history teaches.
Yeah that's true, it is unwise to ignore the lessons history teaches, but you know what else is unwise? Inserting random tangents into a discussion and then using them as strawmen. Atari is still "alive" today and Nolan Bushnell doesn't deserve any of the credit for that either.
You're making the mistake of equating a company's products with one person. It doesn't work that way.
No, YOU are making that mistake. It was quite clear from my original wording that I was talking about Seymour Cray.
I wrote:A GPU is very much like the vector processor of Cray-style supercomputing (when Cray was still alive that is)
And let's be a little more accurate with our history (this is directed to all of us). Seymour Cray had many more failures than successes.
You clearly have a bug up your ass about Cray and your entire contribution to this thread has been to show off that bug, to the point of making an ass of yourself.
I don't buy used games on principle. (Wait... so I'm paying someone for a game and simultaneously not giving the content creators any money? Why not just pirate it and spend more money on new games if I'm not going to pay the creators?)
Except that when you buy used your money IS going to the creator (or at least his publisher). It goes to the publisher by proxy of the original purchaser who may not have considered the original selling price to be reasonable without the ability to resell it and recoup some of that cost. Similarly for all additional sales on down the line until the game eventually ends up in somebody's trash can.
But even if I wasn't against the concept of used games I still don't see the financial incentive. Gamestop will pay me less than the parking fee to go in and sell them a game.
Even if your characterization of Gamestop's pricing is accurate, they are by no means the only way to buy and sell used games (or used books, or used CDs, etc).
If you aren't going to buy it new you might as well just pirate it and save the money going to Wal-Mart.
Wal-mart provides a service - they get paid for that service, just as a book publisher provides a service to an author. You don't think that YOU personally are responsible for the money that goes to the authors that you publish do you? That would be the height of hubris - you provide them distribution and revenue handling in exchange for a fee. Kind of like the way Wal-mart, et al, provide buyers the service of distributing used copies.
Either you buy into the artificial scarcity of copyright or you don't, but don't think you can justly have the best of both the copyright-scarcity model and the non-scarce freedom of speech model without the downsides of either.
So? Cray != Seymour. In fact the most successful Cray machines were not designed by Seymour.
So? A company can not be alive.
I'll pass this feedback along to the design guys, but do you *really* want to scroll through 4,000 words and 50-some charts, rather than looking at just the pages you're interested in reading?
Yes, I do. I can scroll just fine thank you and I can also use the browser's built in word search to find specific words anywhere in the current page, but I can't do that and stay sane at the same time if I have to click 15 times and search 15 times for each word I might want find.
Surely the length would be a bigger problem if there wasn't an index, right?
Put the index in a sidebar or at the top of the single page. HTML has had document internal anchor points since pretty much day 1.
Not many people outside of the UK have noticed, but recently there has been a huge hullabaloo over there about "knife crime" - to the point of were they are seriously considering banning (if they haven't already done so) anything much more dangerous than a butterknife.
I think we should we can count on them taking this BBC report to heart and once the dangers of knife-crime have been eliminated, they will move on to ban bananas so that people can be spared the terror and suffering of banana-crimes.
Uhh...Cray is still very much alive. And doing vectors. And threads. And multicore. All long before Intel/AMD.
Seymour Cray was killed by a speeding redneck in a trans-am in 1996.
The company currently known as Cray as formerly known as TERA, which bought the assets of Cray Research from SGI who acquired Cray Research after Seymour had left to form Cray Computer which is also defunct.
Seymour was never significantly involved in multi-core or multi-threaded processors or NUMA. In fact, he specifically avoided designs even hinting of that sort of complexity because he felt that simplicity in design made it easier to fully utilize the maximum performance of the hardware.
Does it matter? Linux is not anywhere close to the target market,
Linux support for CUDA matters hugely, Linux boxes are head and shoulders above any other market for CUDA-based software. That's because linux is the OS for supercomputing nowadays and CUDA's biggest niche is the exact same kind of number crunching that is typically associated with supercomputer workloads.
In fact, these GPUs are yet another example of how there is nothing new under the sun. A GPU is very much like the vector processor of Cray-style supercomputing (when Cray was still alive that is) aka SIMD (single instruction, multiple data).
He's not talking about how long the app itself runs, but how long each subroutine that runs on the GPU runs before returning something back to the app on the CPU side. If that subroutine takes too long to complete windows gets unhappy. I don't remember if it was a watchdog timer thing or a bus-locking thing or something else. I don't even know if its been fixed or not.
MySpace and Facebook are just as bad. They teach people, even adults, to give up personal information without a second thought.
You do understand the difference between giving information willingly and having it forced out of you?
The issue is not if the OP understands, it is how well the general populace understands.
As it is now, lots of people can easily rationalize the government keeping such a database by saying things like, "People put all that info on myspace everyday, what's the big deal if it goes into a governement database too?" They look at you funny and think you are just a crazy privacy nut, completely out of touch with the real world.
However, if myspace, facebook, et al weren't so prevalent you would have a lot more people willing to question such policies rather than agree to them without any critical thinking.
If you buy food from a supermarket and it's normal but not to your taste, you don't get to take it back for a refund.
Plenty of super-markets have return policies that accept returns under exactly those circumstances. They do so in order to encourage spontaneous purchases which tend to be the most profitable of all sales.
Lisa technologies DID change the world, they were just renamed to Macintosh for the 2.0 release (or 1.1 release depending on your perspective.
Similarly, Itanium REALLY changed the world - killing off PA-RISC, MIPS and Alpha. The type of change wasn't what was promised in the PR, but you can be sure that Intel management (and some of HP management) are 100% happy with the results.
Link not munged, read the contents at the end of the link. They explain the naming difference - that article better explains the specific part of author's rights relevant to my point and how, while Canada calls it moral rights, everybody else calls it author's rights.
The problem I have is that I don't think a person that's supposed to be working on the behalf of their constituents should be able to claim copyrights on what they did while working in that capacity.
Unlike the copyright you are familiar with droits d'auteur are not transferable, they rest permanently with the creator.
This is very disturbing, parody, satire, and political statements should be expressly legal under any sane copyright system. Especially for non-commercial use.
He's probably referring to droits d'auteur which is a continental thing (vs common law) - we don't really have it in the US, Canada does have it to some degree due to their legal system's french influence. One part of such "author's rights" is the right to not have the creation used in a way contradictory to the creator's wishes such as to misrepresent what the creator intended to present. It's pretty ambiguous and the concept of fair use may not even apply, depending on the circumstances.
That's not to say that I disagree with your point, just to explain where the rationalization is coming from since we don't really have the same concept in US copyright law.
Microsoft must have paid the appropriate people really well in advance of the Windows 7 reviews because franly their's NO business incentive to upgrade from XP.
Indeed, the marketing campaign for Win7 has been brilliant. Brill-fucking-ant. Somebody on Madison Ave is going to buy an island with the money they've earned on this.
I am well aware of the privacy implications of posting that information on my website. However, until now, the only people who seemed to visit my website were people who already knew me personally. If I was worried about people finding that information, I wouldn't have posted,
That's the thing about privacy, once you give it away it is nearly impossible to get back. So just because you think you are "well aware of the privacy implications" doesn't mean you really are, you just haven't had a truly "educational experience" yet, like someone using that information to impersonate you to drain your bank account, or use it as a cover identity when they get arrested so that your record will show an arrest, not theirs.
So, it appears they have finally sorted out whether open source beats proprietary.
I don't think doing damage is mutually exclusive with resulting in damage.
Oh great, you've got the same brainfart going on as he does.
Listen closely. I never said they were mutually exclusive. I said he keeps asserting one as if it were as factual as the other. It ain't. If he, or anyone else for that matter, think otherwise, bring on the credible citations.
The mouse is gonna get nailed for violating John Cage's copyright on 4'33"
Sure, if he can repeatedly assert that child porn does damage rather than child porn being a result of damage, I think being pedantic is entirely fair.
And only on slashdot would someone be moronic enough to think equating an inbound call center with a telemarketer is as bad as being a baby axe murder.
Really? I haven't seen it yet.
Dude, you don't even need to be a reputable company -- the guy has invited everyone to call him:
Telephone (if you are bored, give me a call, whether i know you or not):
That page is loaded with stuff no one in their right mind would put up on a totally public web page.
Talk about spectacularly poor judgement. I think there is something wrong with the guy.
The post you are responding to never accused you of cold calling.
You need to understand that warm calling is so close to indistinguishable from cold calling that nobody really cares about the difference except for people like you who need a way to rationalize their actions and thus think it makes all the difference in the world.
Just look online for all the people bitching about Omaha Steaks - you buy one thing from them and they are all over you. Someone sends you a gift through them and if the sender was stupid enough to give them your phone number, they are all over you too.
Still don't believe me? Just consider how miserable your life would be if every single merchant you've ever done business with started warm-calling you. Repeatedly. You would have no time left for your own life.