And Google also provides these snippits for free. They do not sell them.
That's ridiculous naive. Google is absolutely not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing it because tracking what books people read from helps build a better "consumer profile" which they do sell for vast profits through adsense and other means (don't forget - they bought doubleclick).
Just took a look. They have 4 choices for a 16-core opteron listen:
AMD Opteron 6262 HE Interlagos...
It's worse than that. The submitter is talking about doing single-precision floating point. Interlagos only has 1 floating point unit for every 2 integer cores. So, for his purposes, it's only 8 cores per cpu.
"They" (the cablecos) aren't making that argument in public. The article is written by an industry analyst who is cutting through the bullshit and getting to the heart of the matter.
And yet I have the pretty much the reverse experience with FF on ubuntu. I leave it running for weeks at a time. I even run multiple copies - not just multiple windows, but completely separate profiles for specific tasks. And with every iteration its become more stable and more efficient, or at least no worse than before, even with roughly 20 extensions installed in my main profile. I used to regularly run into swap on my 4GB system due to having 100+ tabs open. That hasn't happened for a couple of months now.
I leave the menu-bar turned on and for all intents and purposes FF8 looks no more like chrome than FF3.6x did.
Misfits kicks the ass of all those shows. But it's from the UK. I think it might be on Hulu - I watch it on AARGH - the piracy channel myself. Being Human is pretty good too - UK or American remake, both have their strengths.
Thanks dude. There has been a stunning amount of ignorance regarding the operation of credit card charges posted in response to this story. If you hadn't written that I would have tried to come up with my own version.
I just wanted to point out one further item - if anon is stealing credit card information, that means a whole host of bad guys have probably already got their hands on it. If anon weren't exploiting that info, someone else would sooner or later anyway.
Drugs come from... drug companies, not from universities, because drug companies have the billions of dollars to put a compound through clinical trials and the expertise to make the drugs usable.
This is textbook suppression. It doesn't matter who does it, or even the particular mechanism, but if the delisting from all (or even just some) web search engines doesn't qualify as an attempt to suppress, I don't know what does.
FWIW, X386 was included in SLS distributions with kernels in the 0.9x range. I was running X386 on SVR4 on my office machine at the time (circa 1992) and was dual-booting into linux with X386 with no problem.
Anyone else think this is probably being overhyped on a slow news day?
Isn't the big problem with "killer viruses" that they actually kill their hosts? If you are dead its a lot harder to transmit a disease to someone else. Thus the spread of such a plague becomes self-limiting.
It's hard to argue with "free" and "freedom", so I give it the thumbs up. But in this day and age it feels like going from a Ducati Panigale to a 1950's Triumph Bonneville.
Lots of people said basically the same thing back when the linux kernel was still numbered 0.9x.
Having heavy physical security around nuclear weapons can't guarantee one won't be stolen and used, should we just not bother even locking them away at night?
Context, dude, context. Start with asking yourself - what is the price to society at large of having heavy physical security at nuke sites?
The story is basically anti-immigration trolling. A statistically unverified, anecdotally reported "increasing number" of anti-evolution Muslims making their way into the gold-paved halls of med school and thus upper society = OMG TEH BRITANNIA IZ BEING OVERRUN BY SALADIN'S HORDES. OUR PRECIOUS FISH AND CHIPZ WILL BE REPLACED BY HUMMUS.
Indeed. The very first thing I thought upon reading the summary was, "What about all the other muslim med students who don't have a problem at all with studying evolution? Why are they focusing on a tiny minority of fundos rather than the vast majority of regular mos?"
At the core of the problem is that security is a tradeoff between convenience and security.
This is a little oblique to your point, but what you wrote is a pet peeve of mine having worked on (using and developing) secure systems for a about a decade or so.
I'd say that the core of the problem is the belief that security is a tradeoff between convenience and security. It's a widespread belief to be sure, but it is wrong-headed and self-defeating.
Good security implementations put usability foremost. The goal should be to make it as easy as possible for the user to do their job in a secure fashion - make the path of least resistance be the secure path. When security hinders usability that encourages users to try to circumvent which is the worst possible result. Especially because the people most likely to figure out how to circumvent security are the ones who work with the system day in and day out.
You can argue all you like about rights and what makes just law, but the fact is such events tend to drive the national mood squarely towards security over civil liberty.
While true, I don't think appeasement is the right way to handle the problem. For one thing, no matter the sales hype, there is no way that this system can guarantee there won't be any more major attacks (hell, their own promotional example relies on the bad guy being stupid enough to get a speeding ticket, as if a dedicated terrorist won't be doing everything he can be appear to be law abiding).
So, we install Big Brother, a major attack still eventually gets through and now the baseline for new crazy draconian abuses is just that much higher to start with. But in the mean-time before that all goes down, our entire society suffers the knock-on effects of living in a surveillance state.
We elected the politicians, we put them in office, we empowered them to look out for Corporations...
We may have elected them, but before that they were selected by those very same corporations. When every candidate is a corporate tool, you can't blame the electorate for picking a corporate tool.
I suppose you're the sort of person who accepts that something is a great deal because the salesman told you so.
No, actually I am pretty much the opposite of that. I am extremely skeptical and I like to think that I am a very savvy shopper. I never watch commercials on television and I adblock everywhere I go on the web. I'm really good at spotting astro-turf campaigns and other kinds of shills. I also know how to research the shit out a product.
But you know what I've discovered? It's fucking exhausting. It is not reasonable to expect regular people with regular lives to invest as much effort as I do to combat the pernicious influence of million dollar marketing budgets. In the ideal world that the free market concept is predicated on, being a fully informed consumer would be a reasonable option for everyone. But in the real world marketing budgets are actively spent to ruin that premise. It isn't a free market when they fuck with customers' ability to be fully informed.
Like the other poster I think you are using the term "marketing" in far too narrow a sense, I've already mentioned NDA's for defective product settlements, but there are other forms of "marketing" like exclusivity agreements with vendors to artificially constrain consumer choice and secret kickbacks to salesmen (aka commissions like what happens with most mobile phone sales).
But yes I do blame marketers - they sure take the credit for increasing sales. Your belief that people choose to "allow" themselves to be influenced is seductively Randian. In the real world there are practical limitations on consumers' ability to fully evaluate the marketplace and most marketing practices explicitly seek to pollute that process rather than improve it.
Slashdot Mirror
And Google also provides these snippits for free.
They do not sell them.
That's ridiculous naive. Google is absolutely not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing it because tracking what books people read from helps build a better "consumer profile" which they do sell for vast profits through adsense and other means (don't forget - they bought doubleclick).
Theres a saying ive seen on here, around the net
First they came for the Communists,
but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists,
but I was neither, so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Jews,
but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.
Martin Niemoller
Just took a look. They have 4 choices for a 16-core opteron listen:
AMD Opteron 6262 HE Interlagos ...
It's worse than that. The submitter is talking about doing single-precision floating point. Interlagos only has 1 floating point unit for every 2 integer cores. So, for his purposes, it's only 8 cores per cpu.
Asking people to pay for what they use doesn't seem like *that* radical a concept to me.
Why is Internet use seen differently?
Maybe because bandwidth hogs are not the primary cause of congestion.
Figure out what the top 10% of users use, draw a line there and say it's an extra $5 each month you surpass it.
Except, it turns out that the "problem" is not bandwidth hogs.
"They" (the cablecos) aren't making that argument in public. The article is written by an industry analyst who is cutting through the bullshit and getting to the heart of the matter.
And yet I have the pretty much the reverse experience with FF on ubuntu. I leave it running for weeks at a time. I even run multiple copies - not just multiple windows, but completely separate profiles for specific tasks. And with every iteration its become more stable and more efficient, or at least no worse than before, even with roughly 20 extensions installed in my main profile. I used to regularly run into swap on my 4GB system due to having 100+ tabs open. That hasn't happened for a couple of months now.
I leave the menu-bar turned on and for all intents and purposes FF8 looks no more like chrome than FF3.6x did.
Misfits kicks the ass of all those shows.
But it's from the UK. I think it might be on Hulu - I watch it on AARGH - the piracy channel myself.
Being Human is pretty good too - UK or American remake, both have their strengths.
Thanks dude. There has been a stunning amount of ignorance regarding the operation of credit card charges posted in response to this story. If you hadn't written that I would have tried to come up with my own version.
I just wanted to point out one further item - if anon is stealing credit card information, that means a whole host of bad guys have probably already got their hands on it. If anon weren't exploiting that info, someone else would sooner or later anyway.
Drugs come from... drug companies, not from universities, because drug companies have the billions of dollars to put a compound through clinical trials and the expertise to make the drugs usable.
And don't forget, they've got twice as much money for advertising those drugs as they have for researching those drugs and running those clinical trials.
A judge ruling in favor of a company seeking to protect their trademarks is not government censorship.
Since when does "government" have anything to do with it?
to suppress or delete as objectionable
Merriam-Webster
This is textbook suppression. It doesn't matter who does it, or even the particular mechanism, but if the delisting from all (or even just some) web search engines doesn't qualify as an attempt to suppress, I don't know what does.
FWIW, X386 was included in SLS distributions with kernels in the 0.9x range.
I was running X386 on SVR4 on my office machine at the time (circa 1992) and was dual-booting into linux with X386 with no problem.
Anyone else think this is probably being overhyped on a slow news day?
Isn't the big problem with "killer viruses" that they actually kill their hosts? If you are dead its a lot harder to transmit a disease to someone else. Thus the spread of such a plague becomes self-limiting.
It's hard to argue with "free" and "freedom", so I give it the thumbs up. But in this day and age it feels like going from a Ducati Panigale to a 1950's Triumph Bonneville.
Lots of people said basically the same thing back when the linux kernel was still numbered 0.9x.
Having heavy physical security around nuclear weapons can't guarantee one won't be stolen and used, should we just not bother even locking them away at night?
Context, dude, context. Start with asking yourself - what is the price to society at large of having heavy physical security at nuke sites?
Indeed. Why should I worry about the tiny minority of suicide bombers rather than the vast majority of the nice co-travelers?
Woooosh!
The story is basically anti-immigration trolling. A statistically unverified, anecdotally reported "increasing number" of anti-evolution Muslims making their way into the gold-paved halls of med school and thus upper society = OMG TEH BRITANNIA IZ BEING OVERRUN BY SALADIN'S HORDES. OUR PRECIOUS FISH AND CHIPZ WILL BE REPLACED BY HUMMUS.
Indeed. The very first thing I thought upon reading the summary was, "What about all the other muslim med students who don't have a problem at all with studying evolution? Why are they focusing on a tiny minority of fundos rather than the vast majority of regular mos?"
At the core of the problem is that security is a tradeoff between convenience and security.
This is a little oblique to your point, but what you wrote is a pet peeve of mine having worked on (using and developing) secure systems for a about a decade or so.
I'd say that the core of the problem is the belief that security is a tradeoff between convenience and security. It's a widespread belief to be sure, but it is wrong-headed and self-defeating.
Good security implementations put usability foremost. The goal should be to make it as easy as possible for the user to do their job in a secure fashion - make the path of least resistance be the secure path. When security hinders usability that encourages users to try to circumvent which is the worst possible result. Especially because the people most likely to figure out how to circumvent security are the ones who work with the system day in and day out.
You can argue all you like about rights and what makes just law, but the fact is such events tend to drive the national mood squarely towards security over civil liberty.
While true, I don't think appeasement is the right way to handle the problem. For one thing, no matter the sales hype, there is no way that this system can guarantee there won't be any more major attacks (hell, their own promotional example relies on the bad guy being stupid enough to get a speeding ticket, as if a dedicated terrorist won't be doing everything he can be appear to be law abiding).
So, we install Big Brother, a major attack still eventually gets through and now the baseline for new crazy draconian abuses is just that much higher to start with. But in the mean-time before that all goes down, our entire society suffers the knock-on effects of living in a surveillance state.
Yes we should force our employees to swim through toxic water so that production doesn't slip this quarter.
Get a grip. It's called a drysuit.
Jesus Christ. If that ain't the gold-standard of examples for why american business is fucked I don't know what is - productivity vs rent-seeking.
Why do you think they want to privatize everything? Its not about money.
Oh, its about money too. That's what they call a twofer.
We elected the politicians, we put them in office, we empowered them to look out for Corporations...
We may have elected them, but before that they were selected by those very same corporations.
When every candidate is a corporate tool, you can't blame the electorate for picking a corporate tool.
I suppose you're the sort of person who accepts that something is a great deal because the salesman told you so.
No, actually I am pretty much the opposite of that. I am extremely skeptical and I like to think that I am a very savvy shopper. I never watch commercials on television and I adblock everywhere I go on the web. I'm really good at spotting astro-turf campaigns and other kinds of shills. I also know how to research the shit out a product.
But you know what I've discovered? It's fucking exhausting. It is not reasonable to expect regular people with regular lives to invest as much effort as I do to combat the pernicious influence of million dollar marketing budgets. In the ideal world that the free market concept is predicated on, being a fully informed consumer would be a reasonable option for everyone. But in the real world marketing budgets are actively spent to ruin that premise. It isn't a free market when they fuck with customers' ability to be fully informed.
Like the other poster I think you are using the term "marketing" in far too narrow a sense, I've already mentioned NDA's for defective product settlements, but there are other forms of "marketing" like exclusivity agreements with vendors to artificially constrain consumer choice and secret kickbacks to salesmen (aka commissions like what happens with most mobile phone sales).
But yes I do blame marketers - they sure take the credit for increasing sales. Your belief that people choose to "allow" themselves to be influenced is seductively Randian. In the real world there are practical limitations on consumers' ability to fully evaluate the marketplace and most marketing practices explicitly seek to pollute that process rather than improve it.