Sun's Project Niagra chip, with 8 cores * 4 threads per core for a 32-way computer on single chip
Doesn't mean a damn thing unless software is written to take advantage of it. Damn PC developers can't write software to take advantage of HT (with some exceptions, I know), but hopefully this chip's power can be realized fully.
See, that's funny. I could have sworn I had my PC plugged into a router. I wonder why I think that? Oh yeah, that's cause I FUCKING DID. Next time, try asking, know-it-all...
Consider yourself lucky. I have been using Windows since 3.1 and have never had a problem until this past summer. I got hit with Blaster even though I run Norton. I never opened an email attachment, etc, and dont know how I got it.
The point is, viruses often precede their fixes/patches/etc, and there is always a window of opportunity for infection. You are lucky to have been passed over thus far.
If you drove a Ford Taurus and you found out there was an excellent chance your engine would explode while you drove, would you not go and find another car to drive ASAP?
Thanks for the tip - I am thinking as soon as I reformat, I am going to make the change. Where do I find drivers for my devices? Just need to make sure my sound card, etc will work fine. Toms Hardware ran a good feature on this a while back.
Personally, I find this scary as shit. I think virii like this are going to be the reasons to compel a lot of middle-ability users to switch to Linux. Hell, I might cast off Windows now once and for all...
I meant that the Beatles were around making music during multiple decades, not a period span of decades - sorry, I realize that was unclear. I think Beatles music is perhaps "dated," but I challenge you to name a more influential band in so many genres. Pop? Rock? Boy bands? Beatles were arguably the modern definitions of all these (with an obvious nod to Elvis).
If the Beatles had somehow stayed together (and I don't see how they could have), are you saying they would have turned out more classics? Because, frankly, I doubt it.
I *do* think they would have churned out more hits were it not for the tumult that was brewing within the group. As for the solo stuff, I think most of it is good, albeit a tad self-serving, but solid nonetheless. You raise good points, but in the end, I stick by what I said.
I know the HP part is a joke, and I am hoping the same for the Nirvana part. Nirvana wasn't around long enough to make a shitty album...if they had more time, they would have. The Beatles were around decades, and constantly reinvented themselves unlike any other band could do.
They said they wouldn't do anything where the main objective was music. Can't they say the main point of iTMS is to encourage use of iTunes or increase sales of portable storage devices (iPods)?
Granted, a bit of a stretch, but leave it to the lawyers to pull it off...
Honestly, makes it tough to choose who to root for. The greatest band of all time, or everyone's fave iPod maker? Guess it'll have to come down to objectivity...
Honestly, maybe I am just ignorant or naive, but I do not see the point of this lawsuit. I cannot see any obvious conflict of interest. It is not as though anyone buys an iPod and thinks the money is going to the Beatles or anything. Can anyone explain this? The article was a little thin on details.
Agreed. Give me the sfx in Independence Day over these any day. People are running around with boners over these cause they look "retro" or some shit...
I agree - this is an excellent idea. Something such as if the top 40 songs on mp3.com paid out to their artists would have worked well. However, if you introduce fees, then you are no longer competing with other free sources and downloading, but also online music stores. Unfortunately, even though people like you and I would pay for something like this to actually get good music, the vast majority would rather spend the money on a Napster streaming subscription to get their precious Britney and such.
Lamenting what it is while expressing a wish that it were something entirely different, especially since you have apparently not seen it, is hatred (prejudiced hostility).
Look, I understand where you are coming from, and you make good arguments. However, last time I checked, Slashdot was an Open Forum (TM) for discussion, and if I think SCatWoT will suck, then let me say so! You obviously saw it and I didn't, so you can say for sure. I base my opinion off of pure conjecture, but it is my opinion nevertheless. Therefore, if you do not agree with what I have to say, make your argument against mine, and move along. It is not personal. Unless you directed the damn movie, settle down. If you had put me on this "foe" list (which I don't even know what it is), would it be for good reason? Because I disagree with you and actually take the time to refute things you say?
I'm sure most posters roll over and let you flame all you want, but honestly, stop for a second, and re-evaluate what you are arguing about. Is it for the movie or against me? My view on the movie is indeed prejudiced, I will give you that. But hatred? Bit of a stretch aint it? Well, anyways, thanks for listening...I'm going to go burn Sky Captain movie posters and picket outside the theaters.
You are getting me all wrong. I am not posting to declare a hatred for this movie, but rather a lament for the fact that it could have been so much more. So many times I have gone to the movies this year to be viscerally amazed, but mentally repulsed.
Agreed. We covet "innovation" so much, yet we rarely see it, so we attribute the title to things that do not warrant it. Ground-altering, maybe, but groundbreaking is a word thrown around way too much.
Yes, FX can be groundbreaking. However, the inclusion of said effects does not make for a groundbreaking MOVIE.
As for the plot, why does a movie with special effects have to be a pulp? Why not run with the great effects and make a movie like Minority Report? Yes, I understand that not all movies have to be serious, but just because a movie has a thin, cheesy veil of a plot, does not mean I am going to defend it. Kill Bill went for that type of pulp plot and succeeded. Sky Captain does not try for it, but rather stumbles onto it - not the same thing at all.
I think the only problem with this is having a crap-filter. I love smaller, indie bands, but in a system like this, there will be no way of separating the crap from the good, outside of the recommendations of others. Just doesn't sound like anything that hasn't been done before to me. Agree?
Tuesday night I attended a sneak preview of Kerry Conran's groundbreaking film
The plot, which hurtles across maps of the world Indiana Jones style, definitely take a back seat to the effects. The character interactions are all predictable. But all of that is consistent with the genre
Is this a little contradictory? Special effects are not ground-breaking. Give me a movie with effects like these and a plot that doesn't insult me. Then, we can call it "groundbreaking."
Re:They promote free music, not just filesharing!
on
NYT Promotes File Sharing
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I have become a big fan of "alternative" bands that have been making it to the radio scene as of late (Secret Machines, Velvet Revolver, and Modest Mouse to name a few). Modest Mouse allows the taping and distribution of their live performances and it's apparent that the Secret Machines don't have much of a problem with getting their sound out there. Nothing gets me more interested in purchasing tickets to see a show than when the bands distribute their music for free.
Better make sure the bands you cite share your ideals. What about Velvet Revolver's copy-protected CD?
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't mean a damn thing unless software is written to take advantage of it. Damn PC developers can't write software to take advantage of HT (with some exceptions, I know), but hopefully this chip's power can be realized fully.
See, that's funny. I could have sworn I had my PC plugged into a router. I wonder why I think that? Oh yeah, that's cause I FUCKING DID. Next time, try asking, know-it-all...
MS issued the Blaster fix after the worm came out...
The point is, viruses often precede their fixes/patches/etc, and there is always a window of opportunity for infection. You are lucky to have been passed over thus far.
If you drove a Ford Taurus and you found out there was an excellent chance your engine would explode while you drove, would you not go and find another car to drive ASAP?
Thanks for the tip - I am thinking as soon as I reformat, I am going to make the change. Where do I find drivers for my devices? Just need to make sure my sound card, etc will work fine. Toms Hardware ran a good feature on this a while back.
Personally, I find this scary as shit. I think virii like this are going to be the reasons to compel a lot of middle-ability users to switch to Linux. Hell, I might cast off Windows now once and for all...
I meant that the Beatles were around making music during multiple decades, not a period span of decades - sorry, I realize that was unclear. I think Beatles music is perhaps "dated," but I challenge you to name a more influential band in so many genres. Pop? Rock? Boy bands? Beatles were arguably the modern definitions of all these (with an obvious nod to Elvis).
If the Beatles had somehow stayed together (and I don't see how they could have), are you saying they would have turned out more classics? Because, frankly, I doubt it.
I *do* think they would have churned out more hits were it not for the tumult that was brewing within the group. As for the solo stuff, I think most of it is good, albeit a tad self-serving, but solid nonetheless. You raise good points, but in the end, I stick by what I said.
I know the HP part is a joke, and I am hoping the same for the Nirvana part. Nirvana wasn't around long enough to make a shitty album...if they had more time, they would have. The Beatles were around decades, and constantly reinvented themselves unlike any other band could do.
Granted, a bit of a stretch, but leave it to the lawyers to pull it off...
Honestly, makes it tough to choose who to root for. The greatest band of all time, or everyone's fave iPod maker? Guess it'll have to come down to objectivity...
Honestly, maybe I am just ignorant or naive, but I do not see the point of this lawsuit. I cannot see any obvious conflict of interest. It is not as though anyone buys an iPod and thinks the money is going to the Beatles or anything. Can anyone explain this? The article was a little thin on details.
Yikes! Apparently it deletes the ability to recognize faults in grammar as well! :)
Simple. $20 = case of beer.
Thanks for the correction...sorry for the mess up.
How do you feel that you will do against Green Party candidate Nader and why?
Agreed. Give me the sfx in Independence Day over these any day. People are running around with boners over these cause they look "retro" or some shit...
I agree - this is an excellent idea. Something such as if the top 40 songs on mp3.com paid out to their artists would have worked well. However, if you introduce fees, then you are no longer competing with other free sources and downloading, but also online music stores. Unfortunately, even though people like you and I would pay for something like this to actually get good music, the vast majority would rather spend the money on a Napster streaming subscription to get their precious Britney and such.
Look, I understand where you are coming from, and you make good arguments. However, last time I checked, Slashdot was an Open Forum (TM) for discussion, and if I think SCatWoT will suck, then let me say so! You obviously saw it and I didn't, so you can say for sure. I base my opinion off of pure conjecture, but it is my opinion nevertheless. Therefore, if you do not agree with what I have to say, make your argument against mine, and move along. It is not personal. Unless you directed the damn movie, settle down. If you had put me on this "foe" list (which I don't even know what it is), would it be for good reason? Because I disagree with you and actually take the time to refute things you say?
I'm sure most posters roll over and let you flame all you want, but honestly, stop for a second, and re-evaluate what you are arguing about. Is it for the movie or against me? My view on the movie is indeed prejudiced, I will give you that. But hatred? Bit of a stretch aint it? Well, anyways, thanks for listening...I'm going to go burn Sky Captain movie posters and picket outside the theaters.
You are getting me all wrong. I am not posting to declare a hatred for this movie, but rather a lament for the fact that it could have been so much more. So many times I have gone to the movies this year to be viscerally amazed, but mentally repulsed.
Agreed. We covet "innovation" so much, yet we rarely see it, so we attribute the title to things that do not warrant it. Ground-altering, maybe, but groundbreaking is a word thrown around way too much.
As for the plot, why does a movie with special effects have to be a pulp? Why not run with the great effects and make a movie like Minority Report? Yes, I understand that not all movies have to be serious, but just because a movie has a thin, cheesy veil of a plot, does not mean I am going to defend it. Kill Bill went for that type of pulp plot and succeeded. Sky Captain does not try for it, but rather stumbles onto it - not the same thing at all.
I think the only problem with this is having a crap-filter. I love smaller, indie bands, but in a system like this, there will be no way of separating the crap from the good, outside of the recommendations of others. Just doesn't sound like anything that hasn't been done before to me. Agree?
The plot, which hurtles across maps of the world Indiana Jones style, definitely take a back seat to the effects. The character interactions are all predictable. But all of that is consistent with the genre
Is this a little contradictory? Special effects are not ground-breaking. Give me a movie with effects like these and a plot that doesn't insult me. Then, we can call it "groundbreaking."
Better make sure the bands you cite share your ideals. What about Velvet Revolver's copy-protected CD?