That is their property. Nobody has a right to take a snapshot of it, store it, or recreate it.
Or do we need patents on website content? Copywrites? Or can we trust people to not steal?
It is only because of copyright that people do not have the right to recreate it. There is no "stealing" involved.
Should people judge her based on who she used to be, what she did to survive within a specific context of existance?
Websites don't judge, people judge.
She published her nekkid pictures to the public, and the public can have a long memory. That people might mis-judge her is part of the cost of her doing business on the net. There is a reason nekkid pics bring in money, and the risk of social stigma is part of it.
Which all leads to the fact that it's time for the Congress to enact a Corporation Control Act that would finally put a leash on these rabid idiots.
However, knowing the people in Congress, such a "Corporation Control Act" would not serve to control corporations. Instead it would give ultimate control of the country to corporations. It's all in how you read the title.
It's in the original article of this thread. If you can't even figure that out, then clearly it is a tool too dangerous for you to use. Here's a hint, read up on "CPU Dispatch."
Simple fact is, this has ZERO to do with testing! Say it with me! "This has ZERO to do with test!"
At least get your grammar right when you try to bullshit people.
I'm a professional developer...so on and so on...
Clearly not one who knows sznit about support, a far too common situation.
You can go on and on asserting your point of view as fact, but that doesn't make it so.
As Intel has provided the mechanism (see the previously mentioned CPU Dispatch functionality using the __intel_cpu_indicator global variable) for a developer to force the use of fastpath code on any processor which they want to your position is clearly contradicted by the facts.
The proper behavior for runtime code path selection is... yada, yada, yada
I see you have about zero experience supporting commercial software too. In a perfect world, that's what would happen. But the world ain't perfect, it is full of all kinds of workarounds and glitches and bugs. You only support what you've tested, doing anything else is a potential infinite drain on your bank account.
And A-FREAKING-GAIN, Intel provides the option for the developer to force the desired behaviour if they really, really want to. The default is the safe(r) behaviour but if you know what you are doing, it is easy enough to make the compiler do exactly what you've described. Defaults are for dummies, options are for experts.
You haven't done much commercial software testing have you? Anyone who has, knows that you do your utmost to test any and all supported configurations but you don't waste resources testing unsupported platforms. If non-Intel CPUs are not supported, then the software won't be tested on them. Its a matter of convenience that ICC-compiled code doesn't just abort on unsupported platforms.
As people have already shown in this thread and elsewhere, Intel has provided a way to force the compiler to emit code that runs the fastpath on non-Intel CPUs. It is a simple, documented, compile-time option. If you are serious developer, you know about this option. If you are not a serious developer, then you are unlikely to be able to handle what happens when the fastpath runs on unsuppported hardware and subtly failures (wrong answers, random results, data corruption, etc) and thus defaulting to the reliable slowpath is perfectly acceptable.
Hey, I love AMD more than the average slashdothead, but when this news came to light, what a year ago? in comp.arch, it was no big deal. Anyone with a professional background in software implementation and test will understand why Intel does it that way.
Re:the bell curve has a left lobe
on
Improving Education?
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
She cannot read a map. Period.
Welcome to the female gender. There are two things that women, as a group, can't do:
1) Read a map (which is why they feel no shame about stopping at the nearest gas station and asking for directions). 2) Drive in reverse, even for short distances.
Sure, there are women who can do these things - my mom, for example. But, damn was she a bad role model - since she could do those things, I used to think all women could do them (or at least as well as all men can).
I can't count how many silly fights I got into with girlfriends while driving - I'd hand them a map and ask them to navigate and none of them would do it, and none would say flat out that they couldn't do it either. Holy shit, something like that can really ruin your day. Took my a few girls and a lot of fights to figure out how that bit of female brain chemistry works.
So, what's my point? Nothing much really besides a sexist, but surprisingly commonplace, story.
I don't quite get why people get upset about DVDs getting released multiple times. When you bought the DVD initially, were you happy with it?
There is a fine line between (A) holding back on the quality and/or features on a first release and (B) improving the quality and adding features on a second release.
People tend to get pissed when they feel that the studio is doing (A) just so as to trick people into buying the same product multiple times.
If not, why did you buy it?
Because, at the time, it was the only version available and there was no indication that it would be sold in any other form or from any other supplier. Monopolies encourage artificial scarcity and customers realize that the title may just as easily go out of print as be re-released. In fact, there is a sort of reverse self-fullfilling prophecy about that - the less the first release sells, the less chance it will be re-released and more chance it will go OOP.
(Nevermind that in this digital age with JIT manufacturing NOTHING should EVER go out of print - that's just more of what happens when monopolies are involved.)
This what we have to look forward to - TVs that will decide if your other devices are authorized to be seen
No, it is the other way around. The device decides if it will display to the TV. The TV will display anything it is fed - video in the clear, or properly encrypted.
Topical, My Shiny Metal Ass!
on
Sci-Fi on the Cheap
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
From the article: The most important element of a Sci Fi film, Mr. Badish said, "is a topical film that has relevance to our audience. In a film coming up," he added, "stem cells are key to the plot; in another, it's mad cow disease.
No, no, no, no!
The MOST important element of a SciFi film is STORY.
Topicality is about last on the list. I can not express how fucking sick and tired I am of shows that decide to do a "war on drugs" episode, or "child molester" or "euthanasia" or "terrorist" or "ebola" or "flesh-eating mold" or "song lyrics/video game inspires teens to kill" show. They are either totally dull, or so wacked out beyond reasonable that there is no way to willingly suspend disbelief.
If you must do topical, do something that hasn't hit mainstream consciousness yet. Be pre-topical. At least that way, chances are that the BS you make up for the story won't be so obvious.
Otherwise, just focus on the story and give me something to think about, not something that makes my bullshit-detector go off so loud that I can't concentrate on the show.
$50 for 13 episodes? That's plenty bad. Lost which is around 24 episodes is $60 MSRP and while BSG won't be discounted, Lost will be (I've pre-ordered it for $23 during a recent sale at FYE).
That's like saying - When I drive, I don't use my turn signal to change lanes anymore because the last two times I did, the guy in the other land sped up to block me out.
there is the occasional Timothy McVeigh (and yes, he was a former soldier...at my former duty station, no less). But the chance of a terrorist actually posing as a soldier in uniform, wife in tow, with a forged military ID is small enough
Give me 3 years and I can turn any middle-eastern guy into a white-skinned, blonde and blue-eyed corn-fed mid-westerner. Blue contacts for the eyes, bleach and straightener for the hair and most of the 3 years applying benequin cream to remove all pigment from his skin, and speech lessons to get him talking like an Okie.
On not setting off the metal detector, my favorite kitchen knives are ceramic with plastic handles - i.e. no metal at all and ten times sharper than the sharpest metal blades.
The other half of why "profiling" is a bad idea is that if exceptions are built into the system, invariably they will be made for the people who most directly influence the system -- the first thing congress does whenever they pass a law is exempt themselves (for example, minimum wage, equal opportunity and social security all do not apply to people working on capital hill). So, you end up with the very people making life more difficult for the rest of us being exempted from the effects of it. They won't have to experience the stupidity first hand and are thus less likely to ever do anything to fix it.
What was interesting, though, was the water cooler talk. If Costco or Walmart broke street, they didn't get the intimidating phone call. While the little guys couldn't afford to lose Disney, Disney couldn't afford to lose Costco and Walmart.
It has gone even further than that.
Best Buy gets to "break street date" by a couple of months on such series as: Battlestar Galactica and Space: Above and Beyond and charge full MSRP too -- why wouldn't they when they don't have to worry about competition for months?
Also, putting a sign up is not social engineering as others have pointed out. As the word "engineering" implies, usually more thought and cleverness is required before people consider something to be social hacking or social manipulation.
Absolutely correct.
To qualify as "social engineering" the sign would need to be misleading such as: "DANGER Do Not Open, Contains Ebola Virus!"
Of course then there might be a problem getting people to open the boxes after the release date too.
That assumes you only use passwords on the web. Some people have lives outside of the web. Some even have lives outside of their computers (ATM PIN, password on bank accounts, utility accounts, etc).
Depending on the bank it can cost more than $20 to stop payment on a check. OP didn't say what size the checks were, but it seems unlikely they were much more than that. For such a case it would be reasonable to expect Eired to be an honest dealer and simply destroy or return the duplicate check.
I can not for the life of me understand how ANYBODY could buy into a system where you pay to recieve calls. What are you thinking?
You do not have to ANSWER your phone just because it rings. If I don't recognize the caller-id, off to voice-mail they go. Plus, it is a crime (felony?) for telemarketers to call cell-phones in the USA.
Don't forget that by making the code BSD, it will become usable in MANY projects for which the GPL is not, therey becoming available to a much larger number of users.
The problem with that reversal of phrase is that most projects that can't take GPL code can't do so because they are closed. By definition, being closed is a dead-end, the code can not propogate to other projects outside of the "owner."
So, the first generation of distribution population is definitely larger for BSD, but second and all further generations, if there even are any, are much smaller for BSD.
So, in my mind, it creates an unacceptable exposure for anyone who wants to develop software but not adopt the GPL.
So, in your mind, what is so hard to understand about, "don't link with GPL libraries if you don't want to GPL your code?" Static or dynamic, it don't make a whit of difference.
Slashdot Mirror
That is their property. Nobody has a right to take a snapshot of it, store it, or recreate it.
Or do we need patents on website content? Copywrites? Or can we trust people to not steal?
It is only because of copyright that people do not have the right to recreate it. There is no "stealing" involved.
Should people judge her based on who she used to be, what she did to survive within a specific context of existance?
Websites don't judge, people judge.
She published her nekkid pictures to the public, and the public can have a long memory. That people might mis-judge her is part of the cost of her doing business on the net. There is a reason nekkid pics bring in money, and the risk of social stigma is part of it.
(my appologies to my fellow jews, just couldn't resist)
You aren't jewish, else you would have written that in yiddish. You just said that to get mod'd up instead of down like that first goy er, guy.
Pethetic at best.
Dude, what is wrong with you?
You keep fucking up your insults, first grammar and now spelling. You are showing all the traits of a phanboi.
Intel has specifically picked a slow execution path for known compatible CPU's
So, if it has NOTHING to do with testing, then how do they know non-Intel cpus are compatible? Just because someone outside of the company says so?
Which all leads to the fact that it's time for the Congress to enact a Corporation Control Act that would finally put a leash on these rabid idiots.
However, knowing the people in Congress, such a "Corporation Control Act" would not serve to control corporations. Instead it would give ultimate control of the country to corporations.
It's all in how you read the title.
It's in the original article of this thread. If you can't even figure that out, then clearly it is a tool too dangerous for you to use. Here's a hint, read up on "CPU Dispatch."
Simple fact is, this has ZERO to do with testing! Say it with me! "This has ZERO to do with test!"
At least get your grammar right when you try to bullshit people.
I'm a professional developer...so on and so on...
Clearly not one who knows sznit about support, a far too common situation.
You can go on and on asserting your point of view as fact, but that doesn't make it so.
As Intel has provided the mechanism (see the previously mentioned CPU Dispatch functionality using the __intel_cpu_indicator global variable) for a developer to force the use of fastpath code on any processor which they want to your position is clearly contradicted by the facts.
The proper behavior for runtime code path selection is ... yada, yada, yada
I see you have about zero experience supporting commercial software too. In a perfect world, that's what would happen. But the world ain't perfect, it is full of all kinds of workarounds and glitches and bugs. You only support what you've tested, doing anything else is a potential infinite drain on your bank account.
And A-FREAKING-GAIN, Intel provides the option for the developer to force the desired behaviour if they really, really want to. The default is the safe(r) behaviour but if you know what you are doing, it is easy enough to make the compiler do exactly what you've described. Defaults are for dummies, options are for experts.
You haven't done much commercial software testing have you? Anyone who has, knows that you do your utmost to test any and all supported configurations but you don't waste resources testing unsupported platforms. If non-Intel CPUs are not supported, then the software won't be tested on them. Its a matter of convenience that ICC-compiled code doesn't just abort on unsupported platforms.
As people have already shown in this thread and elsewhere, Intel has provided a way to force the compiler to emit code that runs the fastpath on non-Intel CPUs. It is a simple, documented, compile-time option. If you are serious developer, you know about this option. If you are not a serious developer, then you are unlikely to be able to handle what happens when the fastpath runs on unsuppported hardware and subtly failures (wrong answers, random results, data corruption, etc) and thus defaulting to the reliable slowpath is perfectly acceptable.
Hey, I love AMD more than the average slashdothead, but when this news came to light, what a year ago? in comp.arch, it was no big deal. Anyone with a professional background in software implementation and test will understand why Intel does it that way.
She cannot read a map. Period.
Welcome to the female gender.
There are two things that women, as a group, can't do:
1) Read a map (which is why they feel no shame about stopping at the nearest gas station and asking for directions).
2) Drive in reverse, even for short distances.
Sure, there are women who can do these things - my mom, for example. But, damn was she a bad role model - since she could do those things, I used to think all women could do them (or at least as well as all men can).
I can't count how many silly fights I got into with girlfriends while driving - I'd hand them a map and ask them to navigate and none of them would do it, and none would say flat out that they couldn't do it either. Holy shit, something like that can really ruin your day. Took my a few girls and a lot of fights to figure out how that bit of female brain chemistry works.
So, what's my point? Nothing much really besides a sexist, but surprisingly commonplace, story.
I don't quite get why people get upset about DVDs getting released multiple times. When you bought the DVD initially, were you happy with it?
There is a fine line between (A) holding back on the quality and/or features on a first release and (B) improving the quality and adding features on a second release.
People tend to get pissed when they feel that the studio is doing (A) just so as to trick people into buying the same product multiple times.
If not, why did you buy it?
Because, at the time, it was the only version available and there was no indication that it would be sold in any other form or from any other supplier. Monopolies encourage artificial scarcity and customers realize that the title may just as easily go out of print as be re-released. In fact, there is a sort of reverse self-fullfilling prophecy about that - the less the first release sells, the less chance it will be re-released and more chance it will go OOP.
(Nevermind that in this digital age with JIT manufacturing NOTHING should EVER go out of print - that's just more of what happens when monopolies are involved.)
This what we have to look forward to - TVs that will decide if your other devices are authorized to be seen
No, it is the other way around. The device decides if it will display to the TV. The TV will display anything it is fed - video in the clear, or properly encrypted.
From the article:
The most important element of a Sci Fi film, Mr. Badish said, "is a topical film that has relevance to our audience. In a film coming up," he added, "stem cells are key to the plot; in another, it's mad cow disease.
No, no, no, no!
The MOST important element of a SciFi film is STORY.
Topicality is about last on the list. I can not express how fucking sick and tired I am of shows that decide to do a "war on drugs" episode, or "child molester" or "euthanasia" or "terrorist" or "ebola" or "flesh-eating mold" or "song lyrics/video game inspires teens to kill" show. They are either totally dull, or so wacked out beyond reasonable that there is no way to willingly suspend disbelief.
If you must do topical, do something that hasn't hit mainstream consciousness yet. Be pre-topical. At least that way, chances are that the BS you make up for the story won't be so obvious.
Otherwise, just focus on the story and give me something to think about, not something that makes my bullshit-detector go off so loud that I can't concentrate on the show.
Please?
$50 for 13 episodes? That's plenty bad.
Lost which is around 24 episodes is $60 MSRP and while BSG won't be discounted, Lost will be (I've pre-ordered it for $23 during a recent sale at FYE).
That's like saying - When I drive, I don't use my turn signal to change lanes anymore because the last two times I did, the guy in the other land sped up to block me out.
That's not breaking street.
Yeah, that's why I put it in quotes.
there is the occasional Timothy McVeigh (and yes, he was a former soldier...at my former duty station, no less). But the chance of a terrorist actually posing as a soldier in uniform, wife in tow, with a forged military ID is small enough
Give me 3 years and I can turn any middle-eastern guy into a white-skinned, blonde and blue-eyed corn-fed mid-westerner. Blue contacts for the eyes, bleach and straightener for the hair and most of the 3 years applying benequin cream to remove all pigment from his skin, and speech lessons to get him talking like an Okie.
As for the wife in tow - female suicide bombers are becoming more and more common.
On not setting off the metal detector, my favorite kitchen knives are ceramic with plastic handles - i.e. no metal at all and ten times sharper than the sharpest metal blades.
The other half of why "profiling" is a bad idea is that if exceptions are built into the system, invariably they will be made for the people who most directly influence the system -- the first thing congress does whenever they pass a law is exempt themselves (for example, minimum wage, equal opportunity and social security all do not apply to people working on capital hill). So, you end up with the very people making life more difficult for the rest of us being exempted from the effects of it. They won't have to experience the stupidity first hand and are thus less likely to ever do anything to fix it.
What was interesting, though, was the water cooler talk. If Costco or Walmart broke street, they didn't get the intimidating phone call. While the little guys couldn't afford to lose Disney, Disney couldn't afford to lose Costco and Walmart.
It has gone even further than that.
Best Buy gets to "break street date" by a couple of months on such series as: Battlestar Galactica and Space: Above and Beyond and charge full MSRP too -- why wouldn't they when they don't have to worry about competition for months?
Also, putting a sign up is not social engineering as others have pointed out. As the word "engineering" implies, usually more thought and cleverness is required before people consider something to be social hacking or social manipulation.
Absolutely correct.
To qualify as "social engineering" the sign would need to be misleading such as:
"DANGER Do Not Open, Contains Ebola Virus!"
Of course then there might be a problem getting people to open the boxes after the release date too.
That's the oldest there is, everything else before that was just "rights management".
And all are just simply, "restrictions."
That assumes you only use passwords on the web.
Some people have lives outside of the web.
Some even have lives outside of their computers (ATM PIN, password on bank accounts, utility accounts, etc).
Depending on the bank it can cost more than $20 to stop payment on a check. OP didn't say what size the checks were, but it seems unlikely they were much more than that. For such a case it would be reasonable to expect Eired to be an honest dealer and simply destroy or return the duplicate check.
I can not for the life of me understand how ANYBODY could buy into a system where you pay to recieve calls. What are you thinking?
You do not have to ANSWER your phone just because it rings. If I don't recognize the caller-id, off to voice-mail they go. Plus, it is a crime (felony?) for telemarketers to call cell-phones in the USA.
Don't forget that by making the code BSD, it will become usable in MANY projects for which the GPL is not, therey becoming available to a much larger number of users.
The problem with that reversal of phrase is that most projects that can't take GPL code can't do so because they are closed. By definition, being closed is a dead-end, the code can not propogate to other projects outside of the "owner."
So, the first generation of distribution population is definitely larger for BSD, but second and all further generations, if there even are any, are much smaller for BSD.
So, in my mind, it creates an unacceptable exposure for anyone who wants to develop software but not adopt the GPL.
So, in your mind, what is so hard to understand about, "don't link with GPL libraries if you don't want to GPL your code?" Static or dynamic, it don't make a whit of difference.
> Which IT department is that?
The one with a secretary.