Please think about that. If they showed an average, and that average was better than the peak, then....wait, does that make an sense?
Uhm... you misread that. Benchmarks are used for comparisons. The GP's point was that AMD's average benchmark was better than Intel's. Hence AMD chose to use the average benchmark in its marketing.
So I can just make up rights, and unless they're explicitly denied in the Constitution, they exist? Do I have a right to a 10-hour workweek? After all, it's not explicitly denied in the Constitution.....
Of course you do. Without that right, you couldn't go out and get a part-time job.
Okay, I can see where you're coming from. But if this is "genetically ingrained" or something to that effect, why aren't I afraid of Bigfoot? I mean, although these myths are common among different cultures, it seems that only a vocal minority of humans seriously believe in ape men. Similarly, why aren't I a racist?
We in the U.S. are our own worst enemies; while our corporations labor under a host of rules and regulations that are often contradictory and sometimes counter-productive, companies in places like China are charging full steam ahead, eating our lunch. It riles me to read about yet another strike for "fair pay and working conditions" or another city trying to levy new taxes on its local industries even as overseas firms proceed to take over nearly every manufacturing sector but military related.
Yeah, what do we need "rights" for, anyway? We should all be slaves to corporate interests just to keep up with the (Chinese) Jones's.
Hint: We should be looking for a sustainable standard of living instead of maximal profits at the expense of our freedoms. The Chinese might be "eating our lunch", but 3/4 of their population is still agricultural. The rest pay for the largest army in the world to oppress them.
You seem perfectly reasonable, and I enjoy discussing these matters with reasonable people, so I'll expand what I mean. Strictly speaking, 'conformism' isn't the right word. It is, however, related to what I mean.
Modern culture has a favorable self-image. When this self-image is divorced from reality, people become docile with self-satisfaction. I've done this, as I am sure you have. As much as I want to wander the world and heroically help anyone I can, I know it will probably never happen.
Keep in mind: the American economy requires roughly 10% of the population to live below the poverty line. Even if wages increase across the board, the cost of living would rise similarly. The economy is not self-sustaining. But people think that with enough work, each and every one of those people can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and thus do nothing to help. Worse yet, their belief is 'confirmed' by their relative success -- they see themselves as people who, through hard work, have become successful. But they work no harder than millions of people making minimum wage. You see this line of thought over and over again, especially on Slashdot.
It seems like a perfectly rational course of action for those who have bought into the American dream, but it is in reality cold and callous. If you push your train of thought above far enough (and I've probably given you the ammunition to do so), you could claim that I praise car jackers as noble rebels. Maybe. For now I'll say that outside of a few sociopaths, most criminals are driven to crime by economic forces that cannot be mitigated unless there is radical change.
So if I'm accusing you of anything, it is of buying into the shared distorted image of American life and culture.
Eventually -- I'm sure once they get the hardware they'll have a little bit of trouble dealing with the new BIOS. Once it boots it should be smooth sailing.
Fair use isn't a set of rules to follow. It's all the ways of using a copyrighted work that are fair to both the consumer and producer. When people buy their media, they have an expectation to be able to use it as they see fit, so long as it is fair to everyone involved.
Few people have sued for it -- the Sony rootkit scandal was one of the first mercantibility lawsuits I've heard of regarding IP.
My willingness to pay my mortgagor and Vonage doesn't make me a conformist. Niether does my expecting the same from everyone else.
Actually, your expecting the same from everyone else does.
PS - I am an American.
Mod me down or mod me up, at least I got you thinking, even if your thinking, "man, that guy is an ASS!". Well I usually make a real effort not to be a jerk, but it must be my nature.
Evidently. Why presume we need your help to "get thinking"? Dipshit.
I don't mean to be insulting, but there's no way she could comprehend anything for which she would require security clearances. OK, I suppose it's logically possible, but if she had the mathematics background necessary to it, she wouldn't need your advice for sources of information. Just take her to a university library and look for books in the field from the "Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics" (also called "UTM"s) by the Springer-Verlag publishing house. If she doesn't get that, she's in over her head.
I got the point. And I disagree. TV and radio advertisers have no interest in subsidizing your entertainment. They just want to buy your eyes and ears. Just as early spammers had no interest in subsidizing your favorite websites. They just wanted to buy your e-mail address. In any event, this has absolutely nothing to do with whether an $11 billion fine is equitable. I still say it isn't.
Re:I read the first half of the article...
on
Rounding Algorithms
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This is what significant digits are for, though significant digit arithmetic uses probability to lower rounding error instead of forcing the user to do it himself.
Lets sue all advertisers then. It takes me about a second to delete a spam e-mail. It takes me 20-30 times as long to not watch a TV commercial. By that metric, they should pay 220-330 billion dollars for each commercial (assuming it shows 12 times a day and 20 million people see it each time). You can't even delete magazine advertisements without damaging the magazine. They should obviously pay trillions for the inconvenience.
I don't like advertising invading every sphere. But we need to let the punishment fit the crime.
So can 'affect,' as in "The soldiers seen on television had been carefully chosen for blandness of affect." ("The soldiers... were chosen for their bland facial emotional manifestations")
Slashdot Mirror
Uhm... you misread that. Benchmarks are used for comparisons. The GP's point was that AMD's average benchmark was better than Intel's. Hence AMD chose to use the average benchmark in its marketing.
You mean confusing "RAM" with "Disk space"? Disk space is computer memory. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_storage, for example.
Of course you do. Without that right, you couldn't go out and get a part-time job.
Who cares if they suffer? I just want my millions.
Okay, I can see where you're coming from. But if this is "genetically ingrained" or something to that effect, why aren't I afraid of Bigfoot? I mean, although these myths are common among different cultures, it seems that only a vocal minority of humans seriously believe in ape men. Similarly, why aren't I a racist?
No, it doesn't.
Yeah, what do we need "rights" for, anyway? We should all be slaves to corporate interests just to keep up with the (Chinese) Jones's.
Hint: We should be looking for a sustainable standard of living instead of maximal profits at the expense of our freedoms. The Chinese might be "eating our lunch", but 3/4 of their population is still agricultural. The rest pay for the largest army in the world to oppress them.
Modern culture has a favorable self-image. When this self-image is divorced from reality, people become docile with self-satisfaction. I've done this, as I am sure you have. As much as I want to wander the world and heroically help anyone I can, I know it will probably never happen.
Keep in mind: the American economy requires roughly 10% of the population to live below the poverty line. Even if wages increase across the board, the cost of living would rise similarly. The economy is not self-sustaining. But people think that with enough work, each and every one of those people can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and thus do nothing to help. Worse yet, their belief is 'confirmed' by their relative success -- they see themselves as people who, through hard work, have become successful. But they work no harder than millions of people making minimum wage. You see this line of thought over and over again, especially on Slashdot.
It seems like a perfectly rational course of action for those who have bought into the American dream, but it is in reality cold and callous. If you push your train of thought above far enough (and I've probably given you the ammunition to do so), you could claim that I praise car jackers as noble rebels. Maybe. For now I'll say that outside of a few sociopaths, most criminals are driven to crime by economic forces that cannot be mitigated unless there is radical change.
So if I'm accusing you of anything, it is of buying into the shared distorted image of American life and culture.
Eventually -- I'm sure once they get the hardware they'll have a little bit of trouble dealing with the new BIOS. Once it boots it should be smooth sailing.
In the sense that any material that has been released must allow fair uses? Yes. Certainly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_warranty_of_m erchantability
Fair use isn't a set of rules to follow. It's all the ways of using a copyrighted work that are fair to both the consumer and producer. When people buy their media, they have an expectation to be able to use it as they see fit, so long as it is fair to everyone involved.
Few people have sued for it -- the Sony rootkit scandal was one of the first mercantibility lawsuits I've heard of regarding IP.
I was sincere. Thank you.
Agreed. I do this too. I learned to do it at an early age, so who knows if I would have inadequate tear production otherwise.
My willingness to pay my mortgagor and Vonage doesn't make me a conformist. Niether does my expecting the same from everyone else. Actually, your expecting the same from everyone else does. PS - I am an American.
Evidently. Why presume we need your help to "get thinking"? Dipshit.
I don't mean to be insulting, but there's no way she could comprehend anything for which she would require security clearances. OK, I suppose it's logically possible, but if she had the mathematics background necessary to it, she wouldn't need your advice for sources of information. Just take her to a university library and look for books in the field from the "Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics" (also called "UTM"s) by the Springer-Verlag publishing house. If she doesn't get that, she's in over her head.
I'd be surprised if Apple didn't trademark the name. What's the dealie?
I got the point. And I disagree. TV and radio advertisers have no interest in subsidizing your entertainment. They just want to buy your eyes and ears. Just as early spammers had no interest in subsidizing your favorite websites. They just wanted to buy your e-mail address. In any event, this has absolutely nothing to do with whether an $11 billion fine is equitable. I still say it isn't.
Banker's rounding is just a naive implementation of significant digit arithmetic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significance_arithmet ic
This is what significant digits are for, though significant digit arithmetic uses probability to lower rounding error instead of forcing the user to do it himself.
The window isn't what makes it expensive. What makes it expensive is the fact that it's the fastest non-SCSI drive available.
Boo fucking hoo. If you weren't misinforming people, I wouldn't have had to correct your dumb ass.
Spam obviously pays for something. Otherwise spammers wouldn't spam. Don't kid yourself: it's all advertising.
I don't like advertising invading every sphere. But we need to let the punishment fit the crime.
So can 'affect,' as in "The soldiers seen on television had been carefully chosen for blandness of affect." ("The soldiers... were chosen for their bland facial emotional manifestations")
'Affect' is a noun as well as a verb. Indeed, 'effect' is a noun and a verb as well.