Actually, you're the one who's wrong. The programmer still has to figure out how to write his application in a way that allows for multiple threads. Apple just took out the part where the programmer has to create the threads. The OS doesn't break down the tasks on its own.
"It creates and manages threads on its own, even in applications that are not written to be threaded."
No, it doesn't. The programmer still has to break up his app into threadable work units. GCD does nothing on apps that are not designed to be threaded.
Pssst! It's not supposed to be that slow. Something is wrong with your particular machine.
I almost never reboot my desktop and my laptop pretty much is either in hibernate or suspend when I'm not using it. Both run Windows 7 and I don't have any performance issues with them.
I'm always curious as to what the hell people do on their websites that is so hard for them to get to work on all browsers. I've never run into such problems.
It's not a matter of having a program that can read ebooks. PDF's work find for that. It's a matter of the textbook publishers A) not releasing digital versions of their books, B) charging ridiculously stupid prices for the books that are digital, and C) usually time limiting the PDF's to 3-6 months.
The time limit thing is what makes the prices ridiculous. $60 for an ebook that lasts 3 months? For that price I should be getting it forever. If you want to limit it to 3 months, try $10-15.
They all have an interest in their respective employers being profitable. So yes, I think that the RIAA does reflect the views of most of the people that they represent.
"All those thousands of people are entitled to vote. One vote per person, just like you and I get. They are not entitled to send emissaries to Washington with deep pockets."
The Supreme Court disagrees with your opinion, and frankly, their opinion is the one that matters. There's nothing preventing you and group of people who agrees with your from doing the same thing that corporations do. Well, nothing except poor organization and a lack of a common goal.
I've seen too many papers where the students just put in quotes because they needed a certain number of citations, or they put citations because they didn't want to be accused of plagiarizing.
I've also seen too many professors who warn students that they'll be kicked out of the school if they fail to cite their sources. It misses the point of citations.
So the thousands of people who work for and manage the various companies that work for the RIAA have no votes? You're being ridiculous.
When you factor in all the people involved in media (music, movies, books, etc) production, they probably number in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions. That's a lot of voters.
Instead of busting them for plagiarism, simply tell them that you don't buy the conclusion in their paper because they didn't present you with any verifiable evidence. F
I think schools and universities have the focus on the wrong thing when they talk about citing sources. It shouldn't be about proving that you didn't plagiarize something, but showing that you have some evidence to support whatever your point was. In other words, I'm more interested in where you found your information vs where you found the wording.
The same terrible resolve that brought Linux to dominate the desktop, right?
The funny thing about Linux advocates is that they have this odd idea that there is some giant, unified Linux community that would stand up to Microsoft and whoever else. The truth is that the Linux community is fragmented and preoccupied with internal disputes about pithy bullshit. If Microsoft did decide to start a patent war (if their patents actual exist and are enforceable), Linux wouldn't stand a chance.
I'm pretty sure that the copyright holders that you speak of are voters, taxpayers, and citizens too. And whether or not these people have incorporated is irrelevant to the argument.
Article: "It causes memory pages mapped above the 2GB level to be accessed with read or read/write privileges by user-space programs running in a Guest operating system."
Me: "Then you have to get them to open an executable (or exploit some other vulnerability to get onto the system)"
I mean, talk about small targets. I highly doubt that any hacker would find it worth his time to attempt to exploit this. I mean, first you have to find someone running XP mode. Then you have to get them to open an executable (or exploit some other vulnerability to get onto the system) on the guest OS instead of the host OS. Then the person still has to have more than 2 gigs of RAM and be utilizing more than 2 gigs at once. Then, after all that, you only have access to the XP VM, which may or may not have anything of worth on it.
I'm not surprised that MS shrugged it off for now.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you're the one who's wrong. The programmer still has to figure out how to write his application in a way that allows for multiple threads. Apple just took out the part where the programmer has to create the threads. The OS doesn't break down the tasks on its own.
"It creates and manages threads on its own, even in applications that are not written to be threaded." No, it doesn't. The programmer still has to break up his app into threadable work units. GCD does nothing on apps that are not designed to be threaded.
Pssst! It's not supposed to be that slow. Something is wrong with your particular machine.
I almost never reboot my desktop and my laptop pretty much is either in hibernate or suspend when I'm not using it. Both run Windows 7 and I don't have any performance issues with them.
No, you're just being an ass.
That's fine for a textbook...I usually end up losing more than $15 when I sell them back after the term is over. I rarely keep them.
What is special about the Kindle?
Why is this flamebait? He said that he had a bad experience with Opera, but his going to try it again. Seems like a decent post.
I'm always curious as to what the hell people do on their websites that is so hard for them to get to work on all browsers. I've never run into such problems.
"forefront of web technologies and open standards"
"Russia"
Something doesn't fit here.
It's not a matter of having a program that can read ebooks. PDF's work find for that. It's a matter of the textbook publishers A) not releasing digital versions of their books, B) charging ridiculously stupid prices for the books that are digital, and C) usually time limiting the PDF's to 3-6 months.
The time limit thing is what makes the prices ridiculous. $60 for an ebook that lasts 3 months? For that price I should be getting it forever. If you want to limit it to 3 months, try $10-15.
"for that to happen in a big way then the thing they're pushing has to be technically superior."
Or they could be ideologues and what they're pushing might just be the only option.
There is no such thing as a "drain" on the economy. Goods and money simply move around.
They all have an interest in their respective employers being profitable. So yes, I think that the RIAA does reflect the views of most of the people that they represent.
"All those thousands of people are entitled to vote. One vote per person, just like you and I get. They are not entitled to send emissaries to Washington with deep pockets."
The Supreme Court disagrees with your opinion, and frankly, their opinion is the one that matters. There's nothing preventing you and group of people who agrees with your from doing the same thing that corporations do. Well, nothing except poor organization and a lack of a common goal.
I've seen too many papers where the students just put in quotes because they needed a certain number of citations, or they put citations because they didn't want to be accused of plagiarizing.
I've also seen too many professors who warn students that they'll be kicked out of the school if they fail to cite their sources. It misses the point of citations.
So the thousands of people who work for and manage the various companies that work for the RIAA have no votes? You're being ridiculous.
When you factor in all the people involved in media (music, movies, books, etc) production, they probably number in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions. That's a lot of voters.
Instead of busting them for plagiarism, simply tell them that you don't buy the conclusion in their paper because they didn't present you with any verifiable evidence. F
I think schools and universities have the focus on the wrong thing when they talk about citing sources. It shouldn't be about proving that you didn't plagiarize something, but showing that you have some evidence to support whatever your point was. In other words, I'm more interested in where you found your information vs where you found the wording.
"plagiarism detection software tends to be regarded as a bad thing by the best educational institutions" [Citation Needed]
If the patents are valid and Linux indeed infringes on those patents, a billion dollars won't matter.
"Msft already tried to fight a proxy war with linux through SCO and lost" [Citation Needed]
"SCO should be a lesson to anyone willing to be Microsoft's proxy"
Conspiracy theory much?
The same terrible resolve that brought Linux to dominate the desktop, right?
The funny thing about Linux advocates is that they have this odd idea that there is some giant, unified Linux community that would stand up to Microsoft and whoever else. The truth is that the Linux community is fragmented and preoccupied with internal disputes about pithy bullshit. If Microsoft did decide to start a patent war (if their patents actual exist and are enforceable), Linux wouldn't stand a chance.
I'm pretty sure that the copyright holders that you speak of are voters, taxpayers, and citizens too. And whether or not these people have incorporated is irrelevant to the argument.
They are not.
RTFA and re-read what I said:
Article: "It causes memory pages mapped above the 2GB level to be accessed with read or read/write privileges by user-space programs running in a Guest operating system."
Me: "Then you have to get them to open an executable (or exploit some other vulnerability to get onto the system)"
I mean, talk about small targets. I highly doubt that any hacker would find it worth his time to attempt to exploit this. I mean, first you have to find someone running XP mode. Then you have to get them to open an executable (or exploit some other vulnerability to get onto the system) on the guest OS instead of the host OS. Then the person still has to have more than 2 gigs of RAM and be utilizing more than 2 gigs at once. Then, after all that, you only have access to the XP VM, which may or may not have anything of worth on it.
I'm not surprised that MS shrugged it off for now.