At my University, you had to dial 91 to get to an outside line. So to dial a full long distance call you dialed 91-1-(xxx)-xxxx. So when you would go home, out of habit, you would dial 911 and then the number. They finally changed it after getting several complaints.
Well, I may have discovered your problem. Where are you buying these cards? A quick google search turned up a 256 MB GeForce 6600 for $40 and the 320MB 8800 for less than $300. The 640MB 8800 was around $350.
I have no idea why you are hyping your point of view so strongly. Maybe it's because you really want to spend less on a graphics card, but you just can't handle the idea of spending less than $200.
I have no problem spending money on entertainment. However, I beleive that most people will get the same level of entertainment out of a game at a slightly lower resolution and with some of the textures turned down. I like to play games for the game, not the graphics. To me, a good game is still a good game even if all of the shadows and smoke etc aren't rendered to perfection. I'm sure that for some people the extra eye candy worth the extra money. I also think that some people just get off on saying they spent X amount of money on their video card regardless of whether it actually increases their enjoyment of the games.
I figure it's like audiophiles. Some people feel like they need to spend thousands of dollars and have their audio system precisely engineered for their room. Personally, I've heard some of these systems and they sound good, but I am just as happy listening to my music in my car or on my relatively inexpensive surround sound system at home. I have no problem with other people spending as much as they want on audio equipment or gaming systems. I just don't get a proportional amount of extra enjoyment by spending more so why do it?
Are you being paid by nVidia or ATI? No, I can't run at 1920x1200, but that is extreme. I'm talking more like 1280x1024. But then again, I don't really get off on going around telling people how high my frame rates and resolution are. I haven't bought any brand new games recently, but as I said I never paid more than $40 for a video card and I have always been able to play current games (ie new games available when I bought the card) on them.
I've never paid more than $40 for a graphics card, and I've never found a game I couldn't play comfortably (high res, good frame rates). I buy a new $30-40 card every couple of years. Is there really any benefit to spending $500 on a card? I doubt I spent that much on my entire current PC.
You know, I have a theory that most people's opinions fall just slightly to one side or the other of an issue and when you really start to get into details, it turns out that they all mostly agree. Of course, there are always nutjobs with extreme opinions.
Fact is that the climate changes all the time. We have global cooling and enter ice ages and then we have global warming to get us out. Sometimes we cool form within an ice age and warm we are not in one. It's 100% natural.
No, it is not.
Huh?!!! It isn't? So the climate was exactly the same from the time the earth formed until the last 150 years or so? Wow!!!
Besides, RTFA is about the possibility that the main source of heat in our solar system may be responsible for all this heat. Why is that such a far fetched idea?
Why is it such a far fetched idea that gases that trap heat locally (a process known to science since the 19th centruy), if released in sufficient quantities globally might have the same effect globally?
How about this? Why don't we all admit that we don't know. Because we don't. Most likely it is a little of both plus some other effects we have never considered. Until we do know, we should not do anything drastic. By drastic, I mean we shouldn't do anything that will have dramatic impact on society (ie the economy, standard of living etc) or worse anything to try to alter the climate ourselves. I shudder anytime I hear someone saying we should try to directly interfere with the climate.
Uh... Maybe they think that because the plan is called UNLIMITED. Why would anyone think that a plan that is called UNLIMITED would, in fact, have rather restrictive LIMITS.
The third has to do with accessing VOIP over wifi, so it would only affect that specific technology, which they could no longer support without affecting most of their users.
In the sixties, old people didn't like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. In the seventies, old people didn't like Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath or disco for that matter. In the eighties, old people didn't like Metallica or Guns n' Roses or Run DMC. In the nineties, old people didn't like Nirvana and Pearl Jam or Dr. Dre or NWA. Congratulations!!! It's 2007 and you're an old person!!!
The real problem back in the those days was that you had to walk uphill both ways to get to the internet. These kids today don't know how good they have it.
On/. we obey the laws of thermodynamics. You are absolutely, 100% using more energy running your headlights in your car. ALL of the energy used by your car comes from the gasoline that you put into it (with the small exception of any charge already in the battery when it was installed). Therefore, you are using more gasoline with your headlights on than you would if they were off. It might be too small to easily measure, but the difference is there.
If you want some tangible proof of this, find a small hand cranked generator and hook it up to a blinking light bulb. You can actually feel the crank get harder to turn when the light is lit and become easier when it goes off. So the more electricity used by your car, the more gasoline you use or your battery goes dead.
Where I work we just switched to XP from Windows 2000 less than 2 years ago. We won't switch to Vista anytime in the near future (my guess is three years at least). This isn't a story, it's standard practice. In order to upgrade, you need to do a lot of testing and updating software, especially in-house apps. If they were using Linux, they wouldn't update the kernel as soon as it was available either.
Go to a dermatologist and ask them to prescribe fluorouracil. It is a skin cancer medication. I went to the dermatologist and had a plantar wart frozen 5 times before they finally gave me the fluorouracil. Used it for two days and it was gone with no pain.
If your work only has value because of government protection, then forgive me for not being too impressed.
Perhaps you can see why I am confused, as copyright is government protection of the value of artistic/creative work. From your posts above, you sure sound like someone who thinks that copyright should be abolished. I apologize if I was mistaken
Hurt as it might, that is what copyright is. It is the exclusive right of the holder to make copies (ie distribute) his/her work. The only way to ensure that a producer of copyrighted material is compensated is to make sure that they control the distribution.
From the American Heritage Dictionary:
Copyright: The legal right granted to an author, composer, playwright, publisher, or distributor to exclusive publication, production, sale, or distribution of a literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic work.
So you don't listen to music, read books, use software etc? If you do, then you obviously get some value out of them. The point of copyright is that the creators of intellectual property should be the ones who decide how their work is distributed. Has it gotten out of control in some areas? Yes, but that doesn't mean you get to unilaterally decide to do whatever you want. If the creators want to give their work away for free that is their right. It's also their right not to. If you don't agree with their decision, you don't listen, read or use their work. You don't go out and get it for free.
In my original post, I was using "natural selection" to refer to the large scale trends, but as you point out there is still a lot of randomness involved in that. The parent of my original post is the one who makes the claim that natural selection is not random (and was modded +5 insightful for it).
You're right though, despite my Nick, I do occasionally agree with people. It's not as much fun as disagreeing though.
You're saying the same thing as me. Natural selection is the "emergent phenomenon" you mention. But the real randomness in evolution lies in the mutation in the DNA and, of course, in the environmental conditions which may make one trait advantageous over another.
Mutations happen all the time. Most mutations in the genetic code do nothing, some are bad for the organism and it dies, some have an effect, but the effect has no evolutionary advantage, and finally some have an effect and under evolutionary pressure, provide an advantage to the creature. This is why it appears that mutations come in spurts, most just go unnoticed.
Slashdot Mirror
Even more ironically I agree with you.
...Something about history... Doomed to repeat...I don't know.
At my University, you had to dial 91 to get to an outside line. So to dial a full long distance call you dialed 91-1-(xxx)-xxxx. So when you would go home, out of habit, you would dial 911 and then the number. They finally changed it after getting several complaints.
Well, I may have discovered your problem. Where are you buying these cards? A quick google search turned up a 256 MB GeForce 6600 for $40 and the 320MB 8800 for less than $300. The 640MB 8800 was around $350.
I have no idea why you are hyping your point of view so strongly. Maybe it's because you really want to spend less on a graphics card, but you just can't handle the idea of spending less than $200.
I have no problem spending money on entertainment. However, I beleive that most people will get the same level of entertainment out of a game at a slightly lower resolution and with some of the textures turned down. I like to play games for the game, not the graphics. To me, a good game is still a good game even if all of the shadows and smoke etc aren't rendered to perfection. I'm sure that for some people the extra eye candy worth the extra money. I also think that some people just get off on saying they spent X amount of money on their video card regardless of whether it actually increases their enjoyment of the games.
I figure it's like audiophiles. Some people feel like they need to spend thousands of dollars and have their audio system precisely engineered for their room. Personally, I've heard some of these systems and they sound good, but I am just as happy listening to my music in my car or on my relatively inexpensive surround sound system at home. I have no problem with other people spending as much as they want on audio equipment or gaming systems. I just don't get a proportional amount of extra enjoyment by spending more so why do it?
Are you being paid by nVidia or ATI? No, I can't run at 1920x1200, but that is extreme. I'm talking more like 1280x1024. But then again, I don't really get off on going around telling people how high my frame rates and resolution are. I haven't bought any brand new games recently, but as I said I never paid more than $40 for a video card and I have always been able to play current games (ie new games available when I bought the card) on them.
I've never paid more than $40 for a graphics card, and I've never found a game I couldn't play comfortably (high res, good frame rates). I buy a new $30-40 card every couple of years. Is there really any benefit to spending $500 on a card? I doubt I spent that much on my entire current PC.
You know, I have a theory that most people's opinions fall just slightly to one side or the other of an issue and when you really start to get into details, it turns out that they all mostly agree. Of course, there are always nutjobs with extreme opinions.
Huh?!!! It isn't? So the climate was exactly the same from the time the earth formed until the last 150 years or so? Wow!!!
How about this? Why don't we all admit that we don't know. Because we don't. Most likely it is a little of both plus some other effects we have never considered. Until we do know, we should not do anything drastic. By drastic, I mean we shouldn't do anything that will have dramatic impact on society (ie the economy, standard of living etc) or worse anything to try to alter the climate ourselves. I shudder anytime I hear someone saying we should try to directly interfere with the climate.
Flamebait for the pointless swearing and predictable bush jokes. The point about Google was a good one.
Uh... Maybe they think that because the plan is called UNLIMITED. Why would anyone think that a plan that is called UNLIMITED would, in fact, have rather restrictive LIMITS.
The third has to do with accessing VOIP over wifi, so it would only affect that specific technology, which they could no longer support without affecting most of their users.
Pay close attention to the winky emoticon. It actually means something. ;)
In the sixties, old people didn't like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. In the seventies, old people didn't like Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath or disco for that matter. In the eighties, old people didn't like Metallica or Guns n' Roses or Run DMC. In the nineties, old people didn't like Nirvana and Pearl Jam or Dr. Dre or NWA. Congratulations!!! It's 2007 and you're an old person!!!
The real problem back in the those days was that you had to walk uphill both ways to get to the internet. These kids today don't know how good they have it.
On /. we obey the laws of thermodynamics. You are absolutely, 100% using more energy running your headlights in your car. ALL of the energy used by your car comes from the gasoline that you put into it (with the small exception of any charge already in the battery when it was installed). Therefore, you are using more gasoline with your headlights on than you would if they were off. It might be too small to easily measure, but the difference is there.
If you want some tangible proof of this, find a small hand cranked generator and hook it up to a blinking light bulb. You can actually feel the crank get harder to turn when the light is lit and become easier when it goes off. So the more electricity used by your car, the more gasoline you use or your battery goes dead.
Tagging: HAHA, DefectiveByDesign, ItsATrap...
Wait, this is about linux?!!!
Retagging: Troll, FUD, Flamebait.
Where I work we just switched to XP from Windows 2000 less than 2 years ago. We won't switch to Vista anytime in the near future (my guess is three years at least). This isn't a story, it's standard practice. In order to upgrade, you need to do a lot of testing and updating software, especially in-house apps. If they were using Linux, they wouldn't update the kernel as soon as it was available either.
Go to a dermatologist and ask them to prescribe fluorouracil. It is a skin cancer medication. I went to the dermatologist and had a plantar wart frozen 5 times before they finally gave me the fluorouracil. Used it for two days and it was gone with no pain.
Perhaps you can see why I am confused, as copyright is government protection of the value of artistic/creative work. From your posts above, you sure sound like someone who thinks that copyright should be abolished. I apologize if I was mistaken
Hurt as it might, that is what copyright is. It is the exclusive right of the holder to make copies (ie distribute) his/her work. The only way to ensure that a producer of copyrighted material is compensated is to make sure that they control the distribution.
From the American Heritage Dictionary:
So you don't listen to music, read books, use software etc? If you do, then you obviously get some value out of them. The point of copyright is that the creators of intellectual property should be the ones who decide how their work is distributed. Has it gotten out of control in some areas? Yes, but that doesn't mean you get to unilaterally decide to do whatever you want. If the creators want to give their work away for free that is their right. It's also their right not to. If you don't agree with their decision, you don't listen, read or use their work. You don't go out and get it for free.
In my original post, I was using "natural selection" to refer to the large scale trends, but as you point out there is still a lot of randomness involved in that. The parent of my original post is the one who makes the claim that natural selection is not random (and was modded +5 insightful for it).
You're right though, despite my Nick, I do occasionally agree with people. It's not as much fun as disagreeing though.
You're saying the same thing as me. Natural selection is the "emergent phenomenon" you mention. But the real randomness in evolution lies in the mutation in the DNA and, of course, in the environmental conditions which may make one trait advantageous over another.
Mutations happen all the time. Most mutations in the genetic code do nothing, some are bad for the organism and it dies, some have an effect, but the effect has no evolutionary advantage, and finally some have an effect and under evolutionary pressure, provide an advantage to the creature. This is why it appears that mutations come in spurts, most just go unnoticed.