Then the product will have few customers because most people aren't willing to spend thousands of dollars/euros to move to "a geographically suitable place."
Umm... the nature of geographically suitable places is that they are also more populous... providing for more customers...
Let's not forget his belief that "750,000 bps" = 1 Mbps, not 7.5Mbs (or closer to 1MB/sec, not 1Mb...) . And to your point, there's a reason closed betas are closed. In addition to latency due to distance, this is also still a beta - you can be assured that they are tweaking for performance and other issues on a regular basis. Any numbers you get from such a beta are pretty meaningless.
Think of it instead as just a portable node in a grid -- it can connect to any other node (including display nodes such as those glasses you're wearing) and draw on their processing power; or it can wokr on its own to deliver reminders and information to you.
The form factor as we consider it today is pretty limiting, but it doesn't mean that there's no potential there when approached from a different perspective.
Corporations and unions have been given the right to buy who ever they want without any back alley deals...as long as the money doesn't go directly to or is coordinated by candidate.
They've already been doing that. Now they have the right to advertise about it.
Yes, I'm sure that the Union's will be able to match the corporations contributionsActually, what will probably happen is that Unions will be made illegal after all of the government is bought and paid for.
I think you seriously underestimate both the influence and affluence of unions. When you have thousands (or more) employees at a given place, and all of them are REQUIRED to tithe to you for the privilege of working... it adds up fast.
It's pretty normal for support personnel to have access to production systems in order to provide support.
Indeed. I have full access to millions of credit card accounts -- but you can bet I don't even think of looking at even my own outside of the context of production support. It's not worth my job (or my freedom, as could very easily be the case in the financial industry). This article is an interesting read, but the summary reads as if written by someone who's still out looking for a first job...
Seems to me that if one doesn't open unknown documents from untrusted sources, one is probably pretty well protected from this. Though if you leave the default settings in place - to allow documents to be opened inside of your web browser- then you'd be vulnerable via iframes and malicious advert content. (Actually... is that still the default setting in IE?)
Several would have been the better choice, but perhaps "in any tests" would have been more what you meant -- that is "more than 0"?
That said - I still wish they'd just give us the numbers in a usable format instead of spreading it across 10 pages with three charts each.
PS: and it's just like you furriners, claiming the language is too hard iffn yer not unnerstood! Why can't yous just talk good English like us reglar folk!;)
Now, I am really surprised to see that Debian Linux 32 bits is actually faster than Debian Linux 64 bits in many tests !
I'm not so surprised to see that somebody didn't read the graphs very well. 32 bit was faster in only 4 out of 25 tests (16%). Further, 2 of those were only marginally faster to the point where they barely count as a clear lead. Conversely in the majority of cases, 64 bit was not only faster but significantly faster. To the point where I wonder if there were other configuration differences -- for example I don't understand why you'd see a much higher hard drive TPS rate under 64 bit (something like 4x) -- unless they're using a different IO scheduler...
All that said, is it really so unreasonable to ask for results to be laid out in a simple grid for all tests? Raw data is what we like here... (To answer my own question - of course it is. That would mean fewer page hits...)
. Advertisements have only been an attempt to carry the newspaper model (low or free in price, high advert content ) over to the Internet. There is a massive industry built around this -- this selling back and forth of impressions and click-throughs that add absolutely no value for anybody except the middle man .
Even the whole debacle about data privacy is an extension of this. People will pay tons of money to know what you do -- so that they can advertise to you in a way that makes you more likely to purchase.
Personally, I much prefer a company with a solid business plan - selling a product that has value (original, well-written content) in exchange for actual money. Not in exchange for a chance that I might give my attention, money or information to a third party brokered via a fourth party and provided through the first party's content delivery mechanism.
I think as time goes on, more and more people will be willing to pay a reasonable price in order to escape the massive caterwauling cacophony that comprises most of the free web.
An excellent bit of writing. I think it won't be a popular view here, but it raises many valid points.
People tend to focus on the distribution being cheap/free (and it's not - but the cost is spread out to such a level that it's transparent to anyone not hosting content themselves) that they seem to forget that creating actual, original content that people want to see/listen to/read takes time and effort. In order for the Michelangelos, Dickinsons, Whitmans, FF Coppolas, Led Zeppelins and Mozarts... even the Steven Kings* and Nora Roberts* of the world to do what they do, they need to be able to make a living from it. Perhaps even to make a damned good living from it, for a relative few.
No matter what your ideology would have you believe, the amount of money you can make giving things away for free is very small indeed (negative for most people). And without full-time time and dedication, many of the people most capable of creating the content that others feel entitled to have for free simply won't have the opportunity to create it.
Of course there are exceptions - many greats have done creative works in their spare time and saw little if any return -- yet they continue on. (Usually ending in an alcohol- or drug-sodden death;) But the number of those in comparison to both " greats" and "mediocre talent that people love anyway" who actually make a living doing what they do -- who could not do it otherwise -- is vanishingly small.
* Examples chosen specifically because they're not universally identified as greats -- and yet people keep buying what they create in droves.
Alright, I've got my flame resistant suit on. Bring it on...
People fill that crap out trading their privacy for an increase in an arbitrary value in some shitty "app".
On the other hand, the fact that so many are doing it would seem to indicate that they see value for themselves in this. However, this belief is founded on the assumption that people are aware of how their data is used in the first place; or that they think it's significant. For most Internet users, neither is true.
too broken and too securely in the pocket of deeply vested interests
the only morally valid thing to do is to completely ignore, circumvent, and undermine ip law
This is perhaps the only justification I've heard for access to copyrighted content that makes sense to me. It helps that it's based on something other than a variant of "I want now and don't want to pay". I think this is so because it actually acknowledges the rights of the creator or transferee to license use of the works (ie make money off of the creation) for a period of time, unlike nearly all other justifications I've heard. (Though personally I'd put that time at 18 years and not 10.)
Great! Now, please, can someone write a PDF renderer in JS + HTML5 Canvas, so we can get rid of the browser killer plugin that is any PDF viewer out there?
Hopefully you've disabled embedded PDF viewing a long time ago, given the potential security issues..
If they've identified the IP ranges, why not just block them? You can do it at the router or TCP level (drop packets), or just throw up a 403 Forbidden.
That's a good temporary solution -- but unfortunately as Bing continues to gain market share, blocking them will cost you. For this particular site it's probably not a big deal, but that's not really practical for other sites hammered by Bing (my own included: I've had problems with it ignoring robots, and frequently re-indexing the same unchanged pages - regularly consuming over twice the bandwidth that googlebots have in the same time.)
After talking to the student, it was decided about 1 p.m. to evacuate the school as a precaution while the item was examined.
So they get there, the kid tells them what's going on.... THEN they decide to evacuate and examine it with a bomb robot (which takes two more hours). If that was a bomb and the kid wanted to use it, they were now four hours too late. Other than that, nice to show some faith/confidence in the kids.
Now, the kid is "quite shaken"... and quite possibly will stop doing this kind of work on his own. Well done.
Funny
I installed Windows 7-64 in my son's computer (no sound - WinXP had sound, All versions of SuSE had and PCLINUXOS too), and I fired IE in order to download firefox. IE asked nothing about search providers. It just used BING.
That's odd. You didn't get a 'choose your features' page or prompt? I've done a handful of win7 installs and several IE8 upgrades and have always seen that when first launching IE (to download firefox). I usually click through it because it's in my way, but it's definitely there.
They could change their registered device back and forth - as long as someone doesn't have a ton of registered devices I'm not going to be too worried about it. However, only one at a time can be considered "valid".
This is primarily because it's rather lenient but still protects my interests to a reasonable degree, without becoming invasive. That said, I also think this use case is not going to be among the most common -- most folks with two devices will have a work device (locked down, no games) and a personal device. If I'm proven wrong, I may change this to allow up to two concurrent installations.
That may be the case on IE8, but in most organisations running older versions of IE, it is not so straightforward, and these browsers direct to bing. At my work I have run several bing searches purely by accident by mistyping the url.
There's some truth to that, but I don't think that was what was under discussion. (In my case, I am stuck with IE6 at work, and have checked "Do not search from address bar" - so I don't actually know if the default behavior would take me to Bing otherwise.)
Besides that, though, I wouldn't expect them to update older versions of IE to add it. As long as it doesn't disappear in future versions , I'm happy. (Well, technically, I don't actually care since I use FF except for places where it won't work on our intranet, and from home on HP's crappy support site because it doesn't work there either. But I digress... )
Slashdot Mirror
Then the product will have few customers because most people aren't willing to spend thousands of dollars/euros to move to "a geographically suitable place."
Umm... the nature of geographically suitable places is that they are also more populous ... providing for more customers...
Let's not forget his belief that "750,000 bps" = 1 Mbps, not 7.5Mbs (or closer to 1MB/sec, not 1Mb...) . And to your point, there's a reason closed betas are closed. In addition to latency due to distance, this is also still a beta - you can be assured that they are tweaking for performance and other issues on a regular basis. Any numbers you get from such a beta are pretty meaningless.
The form factor as we consider it today is pretty limiting, but it doesn't mean that there's no potential there when approached from a different perspective.
Corporations and unions have been given the right to buy who ever they want without any back alley deals...as long as the money doesn't go directly to or is coordinated by candidate.
They've already been doing that. Now they have the right to advertise about it.
Yes, I'm sure that the Union's will be able to match the corporations contributionsActually, what will probably happen is that Unions will be made illegal after all of the government is bought and paid for.
I think you seriously underestimate both the influence and affluence of unions. When you have thousands (or more) employees at a given place, and all of them are REQUIRED to tithe to you for the privilege of working... it adds up fast.
It's pretty normal for support personnel to have access to production systems in order to provide support.
Indeed. I have full access to millions of credit card accounts -- but you can bet I don't even think of looking at even my own outside of the context of production support. It's not worth my job (or my freedom, as could very easily be the case in the financial industry). This article is an interesting read, but the summary reads as if written by someone who's still out looking for a first job...
Seems to me that if one doesn't open unknown documents from untrusted sources, one is probably pretty well protected from this. Though if you leave the default settings in place - to allow documents to be opened inside of your web browser- then you'd be vulnerable via iframes and malicious advert content. (Actually ... is that still the default setting in IE?)
That said - I still wish they'd just give us the numbers in a usable format instead of spreading it across 10 pages with three charts each.
PS: and it's just like you furriners, claiming the language is too hard iffn yer not unnerstood! Why can't yous just talk good English like us reglar folk! ;)
Now, I am really surprised to see that Debian Linux 32 bits is actually faster than Debian Linux 64 bits in many tests !
I'm not so surprised to see that somebody didn't read the graphs very well. 32 bit was faster in only 4 out of 25 tests (16%). Further, 2 of those were only marginally faster to the point where they barely count as a clear lead. Conversely in the majority of cases, 64 bit was not only faster but significantly faster. To the point where I wonder if there were other configuration differences -- for example I don't understand why you'd see a much higher hard drive TPS rate under 64 bit (something like 4x) -- unless they're using a different IO scheduler...
All that said, is it really so unreasonable to ask for results to be laid out in a simple grid for all tests? Raw data is what we like here... (To answer my own question - of course it is. That would mean fewer page hits...)
. Advertisements have only been an attempt to carry the newspaper model (low or free in price, high advert content ) over to the Internet. There is a massive industry built around this -- this selling back and forth of impressions and click-throughs that add absolutely no value for anybody except the middle man .
Even the whole debacle about data privacy is an extension of this. People will pay tons of money to know what you do -- so that they can advertise to you in a way that makes you more likely to purchase.
Personally, I much prefer a company with a solid business plan - selling a product that has value (original, well-written content) in exchange for actual money. Not in exchange for a chance that I might give my attention, money or information to a third party brokered via a fourth party and provided through the first party's content delivery mechanism.
I think as time goes on, more and more people will be willing to pay a reasonable price in order to escape the massive caterwauling cacophony that comprises most of the free web.
An excellent bit of writing. I think it won't be a popular view here, but it raises many valid points.
People tend to focus on the distribution being cheap/free (and it's not - but the cost is spread out to such a level that it's transparent to anyone not hosting content themselves) that they seem to forget that creating actual, original content that people want to see/listen to/read takes time and effort. In order for the Michelangelos, Dickinsons, Whitmans, FF Coppolas, Led Zeppelins and Mozarts... even the Steven Kings* and Nora Roberts* of the world to do what they do, they need to be able to make a living from it. Perhaps even to make a damned good living from it, for a relative few.
No matter what your ideology would have you believe, the amount of money you can make giving things away for free is very small indeed (negative for most people). And without full-time time and dedication, many of the people most capable of creating the content that others feel entitled to have for free simply won't have the opportunity to create it.
Of course there are exceptions - many greats have done creative works in their spare time and saw little if any return -- yet they continue on. (Usually ending in an alcohol- or drug-sodden death ;) But the number of those in comparison to both " greats" and "mediocre talent that people love anyway" who actually make a living doing what they do -- who could not do it otherwise -- is vanishingly small.
* Examples chosen specifically because they're not universally identified as greats -- and yet people keep buying what they create in droves.
Alright, I've got my flame resistant suit on. Bring it on...
Do you really believe a 32 bit OS uses half the power of your 64-bit CPU?
THe other half of the CPU gets turned off doesn't it?
As far as whether it's trustworthy or not, I haven't been able to track down yet...
Well that's different!
Alternatively, it's a government getting possessive (over its citizen's data). Not quite the same thing...
People fill that crap out trading their privacy for an increase in an arbitrary value in some shitty "app".
On the other hand, the fact that so many are doing it would seem to indicate that they see value for themselves in this. However, this belief is founded on the assumption that people are aware of how their data is used in the first place; or that they think it's significant. For most Internet users, neither is true.
too broken and too securely in the pocket of deeply vested interests the only morally valid thing to do is to completely ignore, circumvent, and undermine ip law
This is perhaps the only justification I've heard for access to copyrighted content that makes sense to me. It helps that it's based on something other than a variant of "I want now and don't want to pay". I think this is so because it actually acknowledges the rights of the creator or transferee to license use of the works (ie make money off of the creation) for a period of time, unlike nearly all other justifications I've heard. (Though personally I'd put that time at 18 years and not 10.)
In the USA too, as of 2003 I believe.
While I agree in part with your sentiment, it's worth noting that Doyle's actual writings *are* in the public domain.
Great! Now, please, can someone write a PDF renderer in JS + HTML5 Canvas, so we can get rid of the browser killer plugin that is any PDF viewer out there?
Hopefully you've disabled embedded PDF viewing a long time ago, given the potential security issues..
If they've identified the IP ranges, why not just block them? You can do it at the router or TCP level (drop packets), or just throw up a 403 Forbidden.
That's a good temporary solution -- but unfortunately as Bing continues to gain market share, blocking them will cost you. For this particular site it's probably not a big deal, but that's not really practical for other sites hammered by Bing (my own included: I've had problems with it ignoring robots, and frequently re-indexing the same unchanged pages - regularly consuming over twice the bandwidth that googlebots have in the same time.)
And that, folks, is why so many open-source projects never get finished, or improved.
He *should* just start working on WINE. Just because he can do whatever he wants, doesn't meant that his choices are good.
His choices are good for him. What does your opinion have to do with it?
After talking to the student, it was decided about 1 p.m. to evacuate the school as a precaution while the item was examined.
So they get there, the kid tells them what's going on.... THEN they decide to evacuate and examine it with a bomb robot (which takes two more hours). If that was a bomb and the kid wanted to use it, they were now four hours too late. Other than that, nice to show some faith/confidence in the kids.
Now, the kid is "quite shaken"... and quite possibly will stop doing this kind of work on his own. Well done.
Funny I installed Windows 7-64 in my son's computer (no sound - WinXP had sound, All versions of SuSE had and PCLINUXOS too), and I fired IE in order to download firefox. IE asked nothing about search providers. It just used BING.
That's odd. You didn't get a 'choose your features' page or prompt? I've done a handful of win7 installs and several IE8 upgrades and have always seen that when first launching IE (to download firefox). I usually click through it because it's in my way, but it's definitely there.
This is primarily because it's rather lenient but still protects my interests to a reasonable degree, without becoming invasive. That said, I also think this use case is not going to be among the most common -- most folks with two devices will have a work device (locked down, no games) and a personal device. If I'm proven wrong, I may change this to allow up to two concurrent installations.
That may be the case on IE8, but in most organisations running older versions of IE, it is not so straightforward, and these browsers direct to bing. At my work I have run several bing searches purely by accident by mistyping the url.
There's some truth to that, but I don't think that was what was under discussion. (In my case, I am stuck with IE6 at work, and have checked "Do not search from address bar" - so I don't actually know if the default behavior would take me to Bing otherwise.)
Besides that, though, I wouldn't expect them to update older versions of IE to add it. As long as it doesn't disappear in future versions , I'm happy. (Well, technically, I don't actually care since I use FF except for places where it won't work on our intranet, and from home on HP's crappy support site because it doesn't work there either. But I digress... )