It's important to mention that according to current methods of managing domains, you can essentially hold the domain on loan for I think 14 days with no charge. Because of that, of course spammers have no qualm asking to test drive a million new domain names every day. Of those, 999,995 will probably be returned.
I propose a new Internet Law: "Godwin's Law, The Second."
It goes like this, "As a discussion increases in volume, the probability of someone creating an analogy between the subject and RIAA or MPAA increases to 1." And using them as part of your argument should immediately discredit it.
The Ebola virus and the Marburg virus are probably the 'dumbest' in that they both kill their host far, far too rapidly to allow widespread contamination. There are other viruses that cause similar symptoms, hemorrhagic fever and the like, and they're all fairly dumb. Had either virus affected a major airport, the contamination would have been huge. We're extremely fortunate (well, we are... the people affected, not so much) that so far outbreaks have been in small villages where relatively few people are affected. Ebola and Marburg are also really easy to detect symptoms for, which makes it a lot easier to avoid the affected. First there's the whole sweating thing, then the bleeding from every orifice.
Because there are two ways to beat the latency problem. One is to get the information closer to the chip (cache) and the other is to allow the chip to do something else, or several something elses at the same time (multiple cores, multiple execution units of various kinds, etc.) If you haven't noticed, the latest Intel chips sport ridiculously large caches (they're up to 12-16MiB now) and have 4 cores.
So... they're still using a lot of real estate for cache.
What measurements? Most of the tests I've seen performed* have placed Vista and XP pretty much at the same capability, within their margin of error. Unless you count that one test I read in which XP consistently tested 1% better (all but one test,) XP and Vista seem to be relatively the same in capability. It's true the kernel eats up more space, which sucks, but on the other hand, the process scheduler is more efficient and caching is greatly improved. Have you considered that those enhancements may be helping keep the larger Vista kernel on-par with the XP/2003 kernels?
* other than those using the still-somewhat-beta ATI/nVidia drivers for graphics comparison. The DWM is pretty lightweight so it's easy to do, but I've heard of some games running more slowly because the drivers aren't quite there yet. nVidia drivers still occasionally crash, etc.
The offloading of graphics handling to the GPU decreases the load on the CPU and main memory. And, what do you know, 90% or more of all current PCs that you can buy have a motherboard with an integrated video solution that supports that GPU acceleration. In addition, I didn't have to shell out any bucks to get my computer to run Vista. And even if yours lacks a shiny new video chipset, don't worry, there's a non-Aero GUI for the soon to be 5% of you who don't have integrated video.
Given that... I think it's quite reasonable, given what you've said, to think that you're an idiot. What I'm worried about is that you idiots <em>do</em> seem to come in bunches.
Hey, when should I schedule that for? My calendar has been on the fritz because of this Daylight Saving Time thing, and I don't know what your time zone settings are.
Wind is just an extremely long frequency wave resulting from large regions of different pressure. The wave of course, won't be merely a sign wave, because the wind can be affected by the surroundings, other pressure regions, particulate in the air, etc.
Yet that film is still, often, printed from a digital print that is at 2K (roughly equivalent to 1080P HDTV,) 4K (twice the resolution in both directions,) or even 6K (three times the resolution in both directions.)
It's still damned high quality film. That's why it can cost hundreds per reel.
I'm not an expert, but I did take AP Chemistry... It depends on whether or not the liquid is polar. Oils are almost always nonpolar covalent, whereas water is polar covalent. In the presence of an ion, water tends to self-ionize and split into two ions itself. And where there be ions, there be a conducting path.
That's not the problem, the problem is, when you buy a X GB drive, you don't know what you're getting until you find the fine print. Some manufacturers provide different sizes of the same labeled drive, differing only in whether it's "1 GB = 1,000,000 KB" or "1 GB = 1,000,000,000 B"
So if you buy a set for RAID one day, the next day they may no longer stock the drive you need and your vital information is put at unnecessary risk because... what, because the hard drive manufacturers can't decide whether they want to screw you out of 7% (using 1 GB = 1 billion bytes) or 5% (using 1 GB = 1 million kilobytes, which they curiously agree on equaling 1024 billion bytes. What a coincidence that KB is 2^10, but GB is 10^9?)
Think about that for a moment before you lambast the argument for proper labeling of drives.
Film is ridiculously expensive. Think about any time you've ever bought camera film.
A movie can be over a mile of film, it's actually a pretty close ratio at roughly a mile of film for every hour. The film runs through the projector at about 1.022 miles per hour.
So for, say the recent release, Zodiac, that's about 2.6 miles of film, over 230,000 frames of film in all.
Larger theatre chains can of course bargain down a lot of prices, but nevertheless, the production cost is very real.
Because digital projectors and servers can cost hundreds of thousands to install.
By the time digital is widespread, so to will be the 'loans' (they aren't called that, but essentially theatres get a loan from industry companies to go digital.) And that means they'll still end up paying an arm and a leg for digital film.
Eventually prices may go down, but why would you expect them to go down so soon? Right now there are very few digital projectors being installed nationwide.
Slashdot Mirror
Can they be one or zero? I'm a little short on one bits at the moment but I can spare a bid of two zero bits.
It's important to mention that according to current methods of managing domains, you can essentially hold the domain on loan for I think 14 days with no charge. Because of that, of course spammers have no qualm asking to test drive a million new domain names every day. Of those, 999,995 will probably be returned.
Hey, you insensitive clod, us code monkeys sling (and fling) other things too!
Apple Care will suddenly put $2000 back in my pocket for all that RAM? Or am I not getting part of your proselytizing?
Cave troll indeed!
I propose a new Internet Law: "Godwin's Law, The Second."
It goes like this, "As a discussion increases in volume, the probability of someone creating an analogy between the subject and RIAA or MPAA increases to 1." And using them as part of your argument should immediately discredit it.
Time cube creates four simultaneous 24 hour days.
360 is one fourth of 90!
You see his user ID? He doesn't have much long left.
Hush now and respect your elders, even if they are hell bent on self-destruction.
Whoosh, much?
The Ebola virus and the Marburg virus are probably the 'dumbest' in that they both kill their host far, far too rapidly to allow widespread contamination. There are other viruses that cause similar symptoms, hemorrhagic fever and the like, and they're all fairly dumb. Had either virus affected a major airport, the contamination would have been huge. We're extremely fortunate (well, we are... the people affected, not so much) that so far outbreaks have been in small villages where relatively few people are affected. Ebola and Marburg are also really easy to detect symptoms for, which makes it a lot easier to avoid the affected. First there's the whole sweating thing, then the bleeding from every orifice.
Because there are two ways to beat the latency problem. One is to get the information closer to the chip (cache) and the other is to allow the chip to do something else, or several something elses at the same time (multiple cores, multiple execution units of various kinds, etc.) If you haven't noticed, the latest Intel chips sport ridiculously large caches (they're up to 12-16MiB now) and have 4 cores.
So... they're still using a lot of real estate for cache.
What measurements? Most of the tests I've seen performed* have placed Vista and XP pretty much at the same capability, within their margin of error. Unless you count that one test I read in which XP consistently tested 1% better (all but one test,) XP and Vista seem to be relatively the same in capability. It's true the kernel eats up more space, which sucks, but on the other hand, the process scheduler is more efficient and caching is greatly improved. Have you considered that those enhancements may be helping keep the larger Vista kernel on-par with the XP/2003 kernels? * other than those using the still-somewhat-beta ATI/nVidia drivers for graphics comparison. The DWM is pretty lightweight so it's easy to do, but I've heard of some games running more slowly because the drivers aren't quite there yet. nVidia drivers still occasionally crash, etc.
FUD, simply put.
The offloading of graphics handling to the GPU decreases the load on the CPU and main memory. And, what do you know, 90% or more of all current PCs that you can buy have a motherboard with an integrated video solution that supports that GPU acceleration. In addition, I didn't have to shell out any bucks to get my computer to run Vista. And even if yours lacks a shiny new video chipset, don't worry, there's a non-Aero GUI for the soon to be 5% of you who don't have integrated video.
Given that... I think it's quite reasonable, given what you've said, to think that you're an idiot. What I'm worried about is that you idiots <em>do</em> seem to come in bunches.
In other words, you want to turn your old ball mouse upside down?
OH! Now I see why nanotechnology is necessary: We're taking insect fingerprints!
Sucks to be the aliens that decide to fly near the Jedi solar system!
Hey, when should I schedule that for? My calendar has been on the fritz because of this Daylight Saving Time thing, and I don't know what your time zone settings are.
Maxtor released two sets of 160GB drives, each with different capacities.
And they aren't the only ones to do it.
What the hell? I swore that I wrote a reply to chastise myself. Maybe I didn't wait the 15 seconds or minutes or somesuch though.
Wind is just an extremely long frequency wave resulting from large regions of different pressure. The wave of course, won't be merely a sign wave, because the wind can be affected by the surroundings, other pressure regions, particulate in the air, etc.
Some of us don't speak your puny earth languages, you insensitive clod!
Yet that film is still, often, printed from a digital print that is at 2K (roughly equivalent to 1080P HDTV,) 4K (twice the resolution in both directions,) or even 6K (three times the resolution in both directions.)
It's still damned high quality film. That's why it can cost hundreds per reel.
I'm not an expert, but I did take AP Chemistry... It depends on whether or not the liquid is polar. Oils are almost always nonpolar covalent, whereas water is polar covalent. In the presence of an ion, water tends to self-ionize and split into two ions itself. And where there be ions, there be a conducting path.
That's not the problem, the problem is, when you buy a X GB drive, you don't know what you're getting until you find the fine print. Some manufacturers provide different sizes of the same labeled drive, differing only in whether it's "1 GB = 1,000,000 KB" or "1 GB = 1,000,000,000 B"
So if you buy a set for RAID one day, the next day they may no longer stock the drive you need and your vital information is put at unnecessary risk because... what, because the hard drive manufacturers can't decide whether they want to screw you out of 7% (using 1 GB = 1 billion bytes) or 5% (using 1 GB = 1 million kilobytes, which they curiously agree on equaling 1024 billion bytes. What a coincidence that KB is 2^10, but GB is 10^9?)
Think about that for a moment before you lambast the argument for proper labeling of drives.
Film is ridiculously expensive. Think about any time you've ever bought camera film.
A movie can be over a mile of film, it's actually a pretty close ratio at roughly a mile of film for every hour. The film runs through the projector at about 1.022 miles per hour.
So for, say the recent release, Zodiac, that's about 2.6 miles of film, over 230,000 frames of film in all.
Larger theatre chains can of course bargain down a lot of prices, but nevertheless, the production cost is very real.
Because digital projectors and servers can cost hundreds of thousands to install.
By the time digital is widespread, so to will be the 'loans' (they aren't called that, but essentially theatres get a loan from industry companies to go digital.) And that means they'll still end up paying an arm and a leg for digital film.
Eventually prices may go down, but why would you expect them to go down so soon? Right now there are very few digital projectors being installed nationwide.