With all of the improvements in RAM, on-die cache and processor speed, the bottleneck in performence is HD speed. Anything that helps boot that is a welcome improvement.
$100 quadrillion... fair enough. But I think it would be more accurate to describe the $20 trillion as not only more concentrated than almost any source still accessible on earth, but where there are issues regarding getting to it in the first place, by the time you are able to get there actually refining it would be a minor issue and there are a few things like disposing of the waste that are no issue at all. So, more accurate to say that it is $20 trillion that could be feasibly recovered. Personally that is worth far more than $100 quadrillion unreachable dollars. Not to mention all the tech we would develop on the way.
Well, yes, if everybody means the same Europeans that it helped. Latin America is still paying for the exploitation.
And in slightly more related grounds, the wealth also destroyed Spain in the end, leading to an economy of bankers and people living the rich life on nothing but credit. There is a reason Spain isn't exactly on the forefront of the world economy anymore. In a very real way, the only people to benefit from all that gold in more than the short term were the British. They used the wealth they got to develop their own economy and make the big steps in technology that made them a world power.
Re:Do we have evidence that Intel coerced...
on
AMD Subpoenas Skype
·
· Score: 1
"If, I want to bundle my stereo system with a certain type of car because that car company has paid me to do so or vice versa or has some other mutually beneficial deal, that is perfectly acceptible"
This would be true. However if, as the company controling 3/4 of the market, you paid a car company to make it so that their cars would only support subs or suround sound made by your company, that would be a whole differnt thing.
On the other hand, that took place in 1992/93. What version would that have been, Photoshop 2.0? 3.0? Comparing that to a modern piece of software, even one like the GIMP which isn't quite up to industry standards, is like comparing OSX to Windows 3.1
"I'm sure that they'd sell many more than a few hundred copies to the Linux market. Maybe even a thousand."
See, right there is why it will never happen. I would be suprised if 1000 copies even recouped the cost in time and effort of Adobe porting over their creative suite. They have no incentive. Anyone who needs the tools that they offer has no issue using either OSX or Windows profesionaly, and the people who refuse to use anything but Linux as part of the open source movement are never going to use a comercial product like Adobe produces anyways.
Wait, are you suggesting that the United States change their way of doing things in order to... wait for it... fit in with the rest of the world?!? Come on, you are talking about the only country in the world still using the imperial system of measurement.
On the other hand, it is the rare farm worker, landscaper, road construction crew, secretary, or food server, etc. that has taken a minimum of 4 years of expensive education. I am not one to knock the trades, I have done a couple of the jobs above myself in order to pay for the previously mentioned education bit, but to try and compare the two as far as expectations go is silly.
And for that matter, some of the road crews I ahve seen are treated with more respect and better conditions than many of the IT workers I have seen thanks to their unions.
Interest in being a CS major has dropped because there is a well known stereotype about IT workers being the most overworked and underappreciated and underpaid people in any business. The fact that this is often the truth does not help matters.
... It does this through the use of a ruthlessly addictive old school techno track that somehow manages to find its way almost everywhere. If you have ever wondered why, now you know. The DOD is to blame.
No, Christian ideas can't be scientific. That is not to say that they can't be right, but that they can't be scientific. For something to be 'scientific', it needs to pass a couple of standards. Possably the most important of these is the ability to be tested and provenright or wrong. This is the ability to define some form of test that, if either failed or passed, can prove or disprove the theory. There is no such test, and can be no such test for a religion. That is part of what makes it religion.
There is room for both to exist and reasons both are important, but neither can be a substitute for the other.
Fair enough, but part of the problem with this is that these things are tools, not tasks. They are not built with a specific end result in mind, but rather to provide a general set of options and controls to the user. The same tool that you might commonly and exclusivly use for a specific task, someone else might make regular use of for a completly differnt purpose, the same way that a hammer is not made to only hammer one type of nail, and only when building a house. If you are looking for task specific tools, investigate the 'consumer level' programs like Elements and I think you might find a lot of what you are looking for, as well as their being far less expensive. Photoshop and its kind are profesional tools and are intended for a profesional user.
From the article
"You want to make the picture more vibrant, get rid of red-eye, remove an object from the scene, and maybe swap the heads of the people in the picture"
After all, all these things are easy to describe, so they must be easy to make as a one-click tool, right?
ha!
As someone who uses Photoshop for a wide variety of things, the very thought of trying to boil down any one of these, with the possible exception of the red-eye, to a simple one or two step tool is ludicrous
You want to make the picture more vibrant? Well, what type of colour range exists? What part of the picture are you trying to emphasize? What colour standard (RGB, CMYK, etc) is it in? These are a half dozen different tools for this for a reason, a different situation calls for a different tool.
Remove an object from the scene? Well, what types of objects are around it? What is behind it? How do the shadows affect the rest of the image? The very thought of approaching this without a dozen different tools is silly. A half dozen selection tools alone. See, in Star Trek they can hit the 'delete things' button, the computer magically makes up background, but this is real life. Ditto for the 'let's swap heads'. After all, you saw a kid doing it in a computer commercial once, so it has to be easy. Almost all the same problems, and a couple more as well.
Yes, it would be nice, but at some point the skills are necessary. If you want a more basic package Adobe and a handful of others make things like Adobe Elements which take care of a lot of this, but are still a more complex level of program. However, this is one of those things that where how complex the process is and how complicated the end result looks have nothing to do with each other. Get off it and learn the tools for the job.
The day that we see megabroadcasters fire up a gigawatt transmiter that plasters a broadband range with religious TV broadcasting across the entire country, you'll understand the problem.
I think it is interesting that you assume that the first abuse is going to be by religious groups. Personally, I think whichever large company can scare up the hardware first would be the culprit. After all, you can charge a whole lot more for advertising if you are drowning out the competition. Not to say that the religious groups wouldn't get in on the act along with everyone else, but money talks first.
I admit that I wouldn't go out of my way to:)
On the other hand, if they came out with an intersting enough product, I would do my research into their more recent history before I dismissed them out of hand.
I note the bit about it being a 486 board. If you are still judging a company by the products they made 10 years ago, well... I am not sure what it makes you, but I can't thing of anything good to put in that blank.
That is not to say that they have automaticly improved, but I think you should at least look at some more moden benchmarks or reports before writing them off.
Personally, splintering is a bad way to describe the Ultimate line. In a lot of ways, it is almost the opposite. They have taken all of the 'splinters' of the original Marvel universe and coalesced them into a single, cohesive whole. Some things have changed, some have not, but all in all, a much more readable and understandable version of the characters and relationships.
Some of the specific examples are job specific in this case, but I think this is good advice for anyone in a professional environment. Software engineers don't have the monopoly on bad managment.
See, if you could use it as intentional FTP space or some such, there might be a use, but really, a 30 GB e-mail service is no differnt than a 250 MB e-mail service for 99.9% of people out there, including me. Most mail systems limit attachment size somewhere around the 5 MB mark, so it is not like you can either expect or send large files to use that space. Nice advertising gimic, but no real use.
I am seeing a lot of people snickering, but I already want one.
not the revolution, although that would be nice
I want the controler. For my computer. For the type of design I do, the simplicity appeals to me imensily.
Slashdot Mirror
The division of 'male' and 'female' into separate groups for the purpose of study are divisions 'created arbitrarily' ?
Returned it? Where did you buy it that they let you return an opened game? This would be good to know.
"especially given that this is a US-centric site"
On the other hand, the artical was not posted for Slashdot. Shalshdot simply picked up the story.
With all of the improvements in RAM, on-die cache and processor speed, the bottleneck in performence is HD speed. Anything that helps boot that is a welcome improvement.
$100 quadrillion... fair enough. But I think it would be more accurate to describe the $20 trillion as not only more concentrated than almost any source still accessible on earth, but where there are issues regarding getting to it in the first place, by the time you are able to get there actually refining it would be a minor issue and there are a few things like disposing of the waste that are no issue at all.
So, more accurate to say that it is $20 trillion that could be feasibly recovered. Personally that is worth far more than $100 quadrillion unreachable dollars. Not to mention all the tech we would develop on the way.
Well, yes, if everybody means the same Europeans that it helped. Latin America is still paying for the exploitation.
And in slightly more related grounds, the wealth also destroyed Spain in the end, leading to an economy of bankers and people living the rich life on nothing but credit. There is a reason Spain isn't exactly on the forefront of the world economy anymore. In a very real way, the only people to benefit from all that gold in more than the short term were the British. They used the wealth they got to develop their own economy and make the big steps in technology that made them a world power.
"If, I want to bundle my stereo system with a certain type of car because that car company has paid me to do so or vice versa or has some other mutually beneficial deal, that is perfectly acceptible"
This would be true. However if, as the company controling 3/4 of the market, you paid a car company to make it so that their cars would only support subs or suround sound made by your company, that would be a whole differnt thing.
On the other hand, that took place in 1992/93. What version would that have been, Photoshop 2.0? 3.0? Comparing that to a modern piece of software, even one like the GIMP which isn't quite up to industry standards, is like comparing OSX to Windows 3.1
See, right there is why it will never happen. I would be suprised if 1000 copies even recouped the cost in time and effort of Adobe porting over their creative suite. They have no incentive. Anyone who needs the tools that they offer has no issue using either OSX or Windows profesionaly, and the people who refuse to use anything but Linux as part of the open source movement are never going to use a comercial product like Adobe produces anyways.
Wait, are you suggesting that the United States change their way of doing things in order to... wait for it... fit in with the rest of the world?!? Come on, you are talking about the only country in the world still using the imperial system of measurement.
You, sir, have obviously never made use of a large enough catapult.
On the other hand, it is the rare farm worker, landscaper, road construction crew, secretary, or food server, etc. that has taken a minimum of 4 years of expensive education. I am not one to knock the trades, I have done a couple of the jobs above myself in order to pay for the previously mentioned education bit, but to try and compare the two as far as expectations go is silly.
And for that matter, some of the road crews I ahve seen are treated with more respect and better conditions than many of the IT workers I have seen thanks to their unions.
Interest in being a CS major has dropped because there is a well known stereotype about IT workers being the most overworked and underappreciated and underpaid people in any business. The fact that this is often the truth does not help matters.
... It does this through the use of a ruthlessly addictive old school techno track that somehow manages to find its way almost everywhere. If you have ever wondered why, now you know. The DOD is to blame.
I love the fact that a post about killing lawers and politicians gets modded up as intersting and Insightful , but not a single vote for funny.
Us slashdotters are really twisted people
No, Christian ideas can't be scientific. That is not to say that they can't be right, but that they can't be scientific. For something to be 'scientific', it needs to pass a couple of standards. Possably the most important of these is the ability to be tested and provenright or wrong. This is the ability to define some form of test that, if either failed or passed, can prove or disprove the theory. There is no such test, and can be no such test for a religion. That is part of what makes it religion.
There is room for both to exist and reasons both are important, but neither can be a substitute for the other.
Fair enough, but part of the problem with this is that these things are tools, not tasks. They are not built with a specific end result in mind, but rather to provide a general set of options and controls to the user. The same tool that you might commonly and exclusivly use for a specific task, someone else might make regular use of for a completly differnt purpose, the same way that a hammer is not made to only hammer one type of nail, and only when building a house. If you are looking for task specific tools, investigate the 'consumer level' programs like Elements and I think you might find a lot of what you are looking for, as well as their being far less expensive. Photoshop and its kind are profesional tools and are intended for a profesional user.
From the article
"You want to make the picture more vibrant, get rid of red-eye, remove an object from the scene, and maybe swap the heads of the people in the picture" After all, all these things are easy to describe, so they must be easy to make as a one-click tool, right?
ha!
As someone who uses Photoshop for a wide variety of things, the very thought of trying to boil down any one of these, with the possible exception of the red-eye, to a simple one or two step tool is ludicrous
You want to make the picture more vibrant? Well, what type of colour range exists? What part of the picture are you trying to emphasize? What colour standard (RGB, CMYK, etc) is it in? These are a half dozen different tools for this for a reason, a different situation calls for a different tool.
Remove an object from the scene? Well, what types of objects are around it? What is behind it? How do the shadows affect the rest of the image? The very thought of approaching this without a dozen different tools is silly. A half dozen selection tools alone. See, in Star Trek they can hit the 'delete things' button, the computer magically makes up background, but this is real life. Ditto for the 'let's swap heads'. After all, you saw a kid doing it in a computer commercial once, so it has to be easy. Almost all the same problems, and a couple more as well.
Yes, it would be nice, but at some point the skills are necessary. If you want a more basic package Adobe and a handful of others make things like Adobe Elements which take care of a lot of this, but are still a more complex level of program. However, this is one of those things that where how complex the process is and how complicated the end result looks have nothing to do with each other. Get off it and learn the tools for the job.
I admit that I wouldn't go out of my way to :)
On the other hand, if they came out with an intersting enough product, I would do my research into their more recent history before I dismissed them out of hand.
I note the bit about it being a 486 board. If you are still judging a company by the products they made 10 years ago, well... I am not sure what it makes you, but I can't thing of anything good to put in that blank. That is not to say that they have automaticly improved, but I think you should at least look at some more moden benchmarks or reports before writing them off.
Personally, splintering is a bad way to describe the Ultimate line. In a lot of ways, it is almost the opposite. They have taken all of the 'splinters' of the original Marvel universe and coalesced them into a single, cohesive whole. Some things have changed, some have not, but all in all, a much more readable and understandable version of the characters and relationships.
Some of the specific examples are job specific in this case, but I think this is good advice for anyone in a professional environment. Software engineers don't have the monopoly on bad managment.
See, if you could use it as intentional FTP space or some such, there might be a use, but really, a 30 GB e-mail service is no differnt than a 250 MB e-mail service for 99.9% of people out there, including me. Most mail systems limit attachment size somewhere around the 5 MB mark, so it is not like you can either expect or send large files to use that space. Nice advertising gimic, but no real use.
I am seeing a lot of people snickering, but I already want one. not the revolution, although that would be nice I want the controler. For my computer. For the type of design I do, the simplicity appeals to me imensily.