Barcelona is a different architecture from K8 (the architecture of the current X2s). It's overclocking performance is currently unknown. Just as Intel's overclocking potential improved as it went from Pentium -> Core 2 Duo, Barcelona may increase or decrease AMD's overclocking potential.
This is clearly OT, but in the "old" method of moderation, you had to select the choices and then hit the "moderate" button at the bottom of the page. So if you picked wrong, you could re-correct. My other issue with it is that if I go through an article, pick 5 nice posts, and then see a 6th post, I can't take one of the first moderations and give it to the new post instead.
Except that having a trojan (Storm is actually a trojan, not a virus) on board your computer is precisely the scenario AV software and security updates seek to prevent. With Storm on your computer, the hacker has the ability to install keyloggers, read your files, etc. Having a trojan on your computer means that you don't own it anymore.
Correct, but high-speed interconnects don't really matter for its applications.
Sending spam is a fully parallel operation.
Distributed Denial of Service is equally parallel. Once a bot has the instructions, it can run indefinitely (or until caught)
Encryption cracking can be relatively parallel, especially with PGP - tell each computer to take a certain set of prime combinations to check.
Click fraud is also distributable (tell bots to click on ads on site X once a day)
Additionally, many botnet operations don't involve the whole botnet. A few members of the botnet may be used for warez or pr0n storage, and which only involves computers working together to achieve redundancy. Also, the use of a botnet to allow for misdirection in tracking a hacker only requires the bots to be used serially.
ISPs won't do that because they have no real incentive to do that. ISPs only do the policing they have to do. The DMCA demands that they respond to takedown requests, so they do. Massive amounts of traffic means they try to shape P2P. But spam and botnets on their network generally affect somone else's network, and so is not their problem.
In addition to the complexity of the Storm worm, most zombies are set to be self-patching, for exactly the reason you mention. Many trojans, worms, and viruses actually remove other threats (using a pirated version of Kaspersky's software) and generally install patches. Once the hacker has stolen your computer, he doesn't want someone else stealing it away from him.
Yeah. Generally, a few days before an Apple event, stock analysts predict about ten announcements, and only half of them come true. As a result, every Apple event is a "let-down", because Apple only updated the iPods and dropped the iPhone price. They didn't announce a deal with the Beatles, drop an ultra-portable Mac or announce the Leopard ship date, announce European iPhone dates, or sell a million iPhones yet. Granted, expecting all of that is pretty ludicrous, but analysts are generally worse than rumor site posters.
Of course, it's also possible that they inflated the initial sale price a little to allow for the steep drop. This would seem like a good way to make a little extra money and reinforce the exclusivity of iPhone ownership, but dropping the price now has to piss off existing customers, who must feel like they've been had.
Bingo! Basically, they figured that they'd sell a metric butt-load for the first two weeks regardless of price, so they decided to price them ludicrously to take advantage of that. It's economics 101. Early adopters pay through the nose - especially in consumer electronics. The same thing happened with the Razr - it came out at $400 or something crazy (with a contract), was super-popular, and then when the rage started to die down, the price started dropping. The iPhone is a slightly more extreme example of this, but it's not a new concept, especially in the fast moving mobile phone market.
For those of you who don't already know, Sony will shortly be releasing a virtual reality MMO called Home for their PS3 console. Home is a revolutionary game that will turn the console world upside down with its innovative features. On top of that, Home is totally free for PS3 owners!!
Astroturf much? I mean, seriously, which idiot modded this up? No one with more than basic English skills would have been confused by that title (which is a surprising rarity for Slashdot) in the way you describe, and all you do is promote a PS3 feature in an anti-Sony article. Sorry if this is harsh, but "Home" is neither revolutionary nor innovative (although it is unique to consoles), and it is completely irrelevant to this story (at least until next month, when we find Sony using it to disable PS3s of people they don't like).
You're right, I should have specified that I was talking only about this situation (the MS OOXML farce). I can obviously understand "Yes, with comments" in a normal setting. But in this setting, if the national bodies think those comments will addressed, they're dreaming. MS has no intention of radically altering the spec, because they're already using it in the wild. There are already thousands of.docx and.xlsx files out there, and MS can't abandon compatibility for them, but listening to most of the comments would require them to break compatibility (fix the date system for instance).
The real problem that no one has really said anything about is that even if Microsoft fails, the whole process cheapens ISO to the point that when MS tries to make its own de facto standards, they'll point at ISO and say "But even the open source people have said nasty things about it" and focus on its newly undermined legitimacy.
Seriously, what's the point of "yes, with comments"? I mean, if the standard is endorsed, what are the odds that the comments will be addressed? It's a completely toothless vote, and it might as well be a straight-up "Yes" vote. Whoever sold those countries the idea that "Yes, with comments" is different from "Yes" sold them a bill of goods.
Journal entries accepted as articles don't count in the same manner as submissions. Look at the front page - he's had an average of 1 anti-MS article daily for a week or two now. And he has that Erris proxy (check the writing style, they're identical, word-for-word)
While your point is valid, I don't think that's the ultimate issue. Even if Twitter's rants were useful/interesting (and some of them are), the editors still need to get control over this. If I wanted the Twitter show, I'd read his blog. I mean, Slashdot has a large problem if a single writer is manipulating the front page for his own ends. I don't mind so much when someone gets a lot of stories by writing well about something popular (NewYorkCountryLawyer, for instance), but sock-puppetry has to be dealt with.
Not that I don't 100% agree with you, but in the context of smaller bands, time is sort of relative. From my experience (and I've worked with dozens of small bands and researched many more), "Formed in 1999" (assuming Wikipedia is accurate) could mean a wide variety of things. I know of many bands that "formed" 3-4 years ago, but only now have enough material to make an EP. Just saying...
There's an argument to be made for the goofy "code names". However, they are just that, code names. As far as version numbers, they make about as much sense as any. Higher versions get bigger numbers. 8.04 is a later version than 7.04. 7.10 is going to be a later version than 7.04, but behind 8.04.
What exactly is so confusing about it?
It's actually better than that. The code names are Year.Month. 7.10 is "October 2007", which is the the targeted release date. They're on a six month schedule, so the release months are usually either 04 (April) or 10 (October). The exception was the most recent (and first) LTS release, which was 6.06. Apparently this was because making it LTS was not proposed until part-way through the dev-cycle.
It only could possibly occur (under the FSF theory) if someone redeems a voucher for a SUSE distro that includes GPLv3 software. Now, as it happens, that's gonna probably happen soon, since a lot of the GNU software (bash, gcc, etc.) is moving to v3 for newer software. The FSF's goal is to either force SUSE to fork everything from the older GPLv2 code, or else distribute GPLv3 code. If Microsoft is involved in "conveying" said code (and "conveying" code versus "distributing" it was a distinction created largely for this sort of a reason), then they surrender their right to enforce patents against it or its derivative works, or something to that effect. This would presumably knock out a non-trivial number of the patents MS is threatening Linux with. Microsoft is basically now trying to retroactively make the vouchers not valid for GPLv3, or avoid being considered "conveying" the code.
He couldn't check the web to see if broadband was available? 18 months ago, I moved from a large city to rural Indiana (town population - 500) and guess what, I knew that broadband was not available because I checked before moving. It is a surprise, because ISPs don't tell you. They generally only make public statistics based on ZIP code. My parents (and I, for 4 months of the year) live in a ZIP code that's half-way covered by cable, but they can't get it at their house. In fact, the cable company actually sends them flyers saying "get cable! It's in your area", but when they try to schedule, the cable co says "We don't cover there".
I think that "voluntarily" is implied in "Anyone still running D1 is a sucker", since one can not be forced to be a sucker. Since you are not running IE6/7 voluntarily, you are not a sucker according to this statement
However, more generally, I would agree with the admins that anyone in the/. audience who chooses to run IE knowing the problems is (if not necessarily a sucker) certainly being silly.
Now the 9th has a hard-earned reputation as avant-garde [nutjobs]. This is an astounding ruling. The binding arbitartion clause is pure boilerplate found in many, many contracts. For the 9th to toss it out changes many contracts.
So? That's a good thing. These binding arbitration clauses are very bad. They completely bypass customers' rights to take the company to court. Especially since these arbitrators receive their business from the big companies, and therefore probably see things their way most of the time.
Perhaps this is in connection with unequal power consumer level contracts.
A normal contract is a tit-for-tat agreement. EULAs make demands of the customer while offering only the promise not to sue for using the product they bought legally. By definition, an EULA is not a fair contract.
And if it isn't because the Legislature hasn't seen fit to include DSL as a regulated service, then I'm not sure the courts can or should interfere.
If the courts waited on the legislature to act, we'd still have segregation in schools and colored bathrooms. The entire Civil Rights movement came about because Brown vs. Board of Education was decided by the courts. The courts went against Congressional (and state government) inaction on the segregation not once, not twice, but three times (Brown, Brown II, Green) in order to force progress. If the Warren Court hadn't been progressive here and in several other cases, we'd be waiting on Congressional change that would never come.
This is backwards. Companies which are buying hardware are buying hardware because they already have a successful business model (or one they expect to be successful). The differentiator between successful and unsuccessful companies isn't how much hardware they buy, it's the viability of their business plan/product.
The claims made against us were that we were "stealing" all the good students from the public schools, meaning, apparently, that students are not in school to learn, but they are in school to make their schools look better.
It's a pretty significant difference. I graduated HS a few years ago, and I and a few other people I know would have had the option of going to a charter school, but we didn't want to for social reasons (2 hour drive, no thanks). When I figure our school's average SAT and work out those 3 or 4 scores, it drops a few points. When I look at Newsweek's stupid AP test/student ratio thing that they rank schools on, I (personally, individually) account for at least a half-dozen ranks in that standing in my junior and senior years (we were in the mid-700s nationwide), since I took 10 AP tests my senior year and 6 my junior year.
I was in a tracking system in 5th grade. It worked out pretty well. There were actually two systems. We took most subjects with our "class", which was (semi) random.
English was split according to a test given at the beginning of the year and split for the whole year. I would say this worked out OK, despite the lack of mobility. Students who needed extra help were in the "slower" class and could get it, while students who excelled could be challenged in the advanced class. There was also a third middle class.
In math, we were divided into three groups roughly bi-weekly depending on our scores on pre-tests. I think this was best, because it allowed students some mobility, and let someone who excelled in one area but was weaker in another be dealt with appropriately.
In my high school, we didn't have formal tracking, but we had Academic, Honors, and AP classes in each subject. Despite the lack of tracking, I think that there was definite a tier of students who were in all Honors/AP classes, and a tier who took virtually none.
Even blog web sites tend to have a few software engineers behind em, the bloggers don't make the engine.
Wordpress.com or Blogger.com have software engineers behind them, but Joe Blogger who rents a $10 virtual server and a TB of bandwidth from $HOSTING_PROVIDER (there are at least 5 with similar plans) and then follows the WP or Drupal install directions, is probably at his limit setting the default font to purple. He uses easy-to-install modules to meet his needs, and his ads come from copy-paste of code from the ad provider. Same goes for some people who run vBulletin or SMF forums. It takes minimal technical skill to run one, which is a good thing, but which has some results like this from time to time.
I just want to briefly say that "screenful of code" and "Stupidly easy" are antonyms, not synonyms, in this day and age. Since many sites are run by people for whom HTML is a challenge and Javascript latin (people who install Wordpress/Movable Type/whatever), these sorts of problems go unsolved.
I'm not flaming bloggers by saying (or at least not intentionally). What I mean is that the bar for web publication has been lowered (and by and large it's a good thing, too) so that anyone with more than basic computer skills can get a blog. On the whole, this is great for the web, the Marketplace of Ideas, and society at large, but it does result in problems like this. Specifically, website creators delegate the idea of working out the details of the ads to the ad-provider, and just copy-paste in the ad code. Admittedly, if I had a blog (and I may get one soon), I'd probably start out doing the same thing until I felt more comfortable with the HTML/CSS/JS required.
Slashdot Mirror
Which means that Boondock Saints narrowly beats it with 246.
Barcelona is a different architecture from K8 (the architecture of the current X2s). It's overclocking performance is currently unknown. Just as Intel's overclocking potential improved as it went from Pentium -> Core 2 Duo, Barcelona may increase or decrease AMD's overclocking potential.
This is clearly OT, but in the "old" method of moderation, you had to select the choices and then hit the "moderate" button at the bottom of the page. So if you picked wrong, you could re-correct. My other issue with it is that if I go through an article, pick 5 nice posts, and then see a 6th post, I can't take one of the first moderations and give it to the new post instead.
Except that having a trojan (Storm is actually a trojan, not a virus) on board your computer is precisely the scenario AV software and security updates seek to prevent. With Storm on your computer, the hacker has the ability to install keyloggers, read your files, etc. Having a trojan on your computer means that you don't own it anymore.
Additionally, many botnet operations don't involve the whole botnet. A few members of the botnet may be used for warez or pr0n storage, and which only involves computers working together to achieve redundancy. Also, the use of a botnet to allow for misdirection in tracking a hacker only requires the bots to be used serially.
ISPs won't do that because they have no real incentive to do that. ISPs only do the policing they have to do. The DMCA demands that they respond to takedown requests, so they do. Massive amounts of traffic means they try to shape P2P. But spam and botnets on their network generally affect somone else's network, and so is not their problem.
In addition to the complexity of the Storm worm, most zombies are set to be self-patching, for exactly the reason you mention. Many trojans, worms, and viruses actually remove other threats (using a pirated version of Kaspersky's software) and generally install patches. Once the hacker has stolen your computer, he doesn't want someone else stealing it away from him.
Yeah. Generally, a few days before an Apple event, stock analysts predict about ten announcements, and only half of them come true. As a result, every Apple event is a "let-down", because Apple only updated the iPods and dropped the iPhone price. They didn't announce a deal with the Beatles, drop an ultra-portable Mac or announce the Leopard ship date, announce European iPhone dates, or sell a million iPhones yet. Granted, expecting all of that is pretty ludicrous, but analysts are generally worse than rumor site posters.
Bingo! Basically, they figured that they'd sell a metric butt-load for the first two weeks regardless of price, so they decided to price them ludicrously to take advantage of that. It's economics 101. Early adopters pay through the nose - especially in consumer electronics. The same thing happened with the Razr - it came out at $400 or something crazy (with a contract), was super-popular, and then when the rage started to die down, the price started dropping. The iPhone is a slightly more extreme example of this, but it's not a new concept, especially in the fast moving mobile phone market.
Astroturf much? I mean, seriously, which idiot modded this up? No one with more than basic English skills would have been confused by that title (which is a surprising rarity for Slashdot) in the way you describe, and all you do is promote a PS3 feature in an anti-Sony article. Sorry if this is harsh, but "Home" is neither revolutionary nor innovative (although it is unique to consoles), and it is completely irrelevant to this story (at least until next month, when we find Sony using it to disable PS3s of people they don't like).
You're right, I should have specified that I was talking only about this situation (the MS OOXML farce). I can obviously understand "Yes, with comments" in a normal setting. But in this setting, if the national bodies think those comments will addressed, they're dreaming. MS has no intention of radically altering the spec, because they're already using it in the wild. There are already thousands of .docx and .xlsx files out there, and MS can't abandon compatibility for them, but listening to most of the comments would require them to break compatibility (fix the date system for instance).
The real problem that no one has really said anything about is that even if Microsoft fails, the whole process cheapens ISO to the point that when MS tries to make its own de facto standards, they'll point at ISO and say "But even the open source people have said nasty things about it" and focus on its newly undermined legitimacy.
Seriously, what's the point of "yes, with comments"? I mean, if the standard is endorsed, what are the odds that the comments will be addressed? It's a completely toothless vote, and it might as well be a straight-up "Yes" vote. Whoever sold those countries the idea that "Yes, with comments" is different from "Yes" sold them a bill of goods.
Journal entries accepted as articles don't count in the same manner as submissions. Look at the front page - he's had an average of 1 anti-MS article daily for a week or two now. And he has that Erris proxy (check the writing style, they're identical, word-for-word)
While your point is valid, I don't think that's the ultimate issue. Even if Twitter's rants were useful/interesting (and some of them are), the editors still need to get control over this. If I wanted the Twitter show, I'd read his blog. I mean, Slashdot has a large problem if a single writer is manipulating the front page for his own ends. I don't mind so much when someone gets a lot of stories by writing well about something popular (NewYorkCountryLawyer, for instance), but sock-puppetry has to be dealt with.
Not that I don't 100% agree with you, but in the context of smaller bands, time is sort of relative. From my experience (and I've worked with dozens of small bands and researched many more), "Formed in 1999" (assuming Wikipedia is accurate) could mean a wide variety of things. I know of many bands that "formed" 3-4 years ago, but only now have enough material to make an EP. Just saying...
What exactly is so confusing about it?
It's actually better than that. The code names are Year.Month. 7.10 is "October 2007", which is the the targeted release date. They're on a six month schedule, so the release months are usually either 04 (April) or 10 (October). The exception was the most recent (and first) LTS release, which was 6.06. Apparently this was because making it LTS was not proposed until part-way through the dev-cycle.
It only could possibly occur (under the FSF theory) if someone redeems a voucher for a SUSE distro that includes GPLv3 software. Now, as it happens, that's gonna probably happen soon, since a lot of the GNU software (bash, gcc, etc.) is moving to v3 for newer software. The FSF's goal is to either force SUSE to fork everything from the older GPLv2 code, or else distribute GPLv3 code. If Microsoft is involved in "conveying" said code (and "conveying" code versus "distributing" it was a distinction created largely for this sort of a reason), then they surrender their right to enforce patents against it or its derivative works, or something to that effect. This would presumably knock out a non-trivial number of the patents MS is threatening Linux with. Microsoft is basically now trying to retroactively make the vouchers not valid for GPLv3, or avoid being considered "conveying" the code.
I am not a lawyer.
I think that "voluntarily" is implied in "Anyone still running D1 is a sucker", since one can not be forced to be a sucker. Since you are not running IE6/7 voluntarily, you are not a sucker according to this statement
/. audience who chooses to run IE knowing the problems is (if not necessarily a sucker) certainly being silly.
However, more generally, I would agree with the admins that anyone in the
So? That's a good thing. These binding arbitration clauses are very bad. They completely bypass customers' rights to take the company to court. Especially since these arbitrators receive their business from the big companies, and therefore probably see things their way most of the time.
Perhaps this is in connection with unequal power consumer level contracts.
A normal contract is a tit-for-tat agreement. EULAs make demands of the customer while offering only the promise not to sue for using the product they bought legally. By definition, an EULA is not a fair contract.
And if it isn't because the Legislature hasn't seen fit to include DSL as a regulated service, then I'm not sure the courts can or should interfere.
If the courts waited on the legislature to act, we'd still have segregation in schools and colored bathrooms. The entire Civil Rights movement came about because Brown vs. Board of Education was decided by the courts. The courts went against Congressional (and state government) inaction on the segregation not once, not twice, but three times (Brown, Brown II, Green) in order to force progress. If the Warren Court hadn't been progressive here and in several other cases, we'd be waiting on Congressional change that would never come.
This is backwards. Companies which are buying hardware are buying hardware because they already have a successful business model (or one they expect to be successful). The differentiator between successful and unsuccessful companies isn't how much hardware they buy, it's the viability of their business plan/product.
The claims made against us were that we were "stealing" all the good students from the public schools, meaning, apparently, that students are not in school to learn, but they are in school to make their schools look better.
It's a pretty significant difference. I graduated HS a few years ago, and I and a few other people I know would have had the option of going to a charter school, but we didn't want to for social reasons (2 hour drive, no thanks). When I figure our school's average SAT and work out those 3 or 4 scores, it drops a few points. When I look at Newsweek's stupid AP test/student ratio thing that they rank schools on, I (personally, individually) account for at least a half-dozen ranks in that standing in my junior and senior years (we were in the mid-700s nationwide), since I took 10 AP tests my senior year and 6 my junior year.
I was in a tracking system in 5th grade. It worked out pretty well. There were actually two systems. We took most subjects with our "class", which was (semi) random.
English was split according to a test given at the beginning of the year and split for the whole year. I would say this worked out OK, despite the lack of mobility. Students who needed extra help were in the "slower" class and could get it, while students who excelled could be challenged in the advanced class. There was also a third middle class.
In math, we were divided into three groups roughly bi-weekly depending on our scores on pre-tests. I think this was best, because it allowed students some mobility, and let someone who excelled in one area but was weaker in another be dealt with appropriately.
In my high school, we didn't have formal tracking, but we had Academic, Honors, and AP classes in each subject. Despite the lack of tracking, I think that there was definite a tier of students who were in all Honors/AP classes, and a tier who took virtually none.
Even blog web sites tend to have a few software engineers behind em, the bloggers don't make the engine.
Wordpress.com or Blogger.com have software engineers behind them, but Joe Blogger who rents a $10 virtual server and a TB of bandwidth from $HOSTING_PROVIDER (there are at least 5 with similar plans) and then follows the WP or Drupal install directions, is probably at his limit setting the default font to purple. He uses easy-to-install modules to meet his needs, and his ads come from copy-paste of code from the ad provider. Same goes for some people who run vBulletin or SMF forums. It takes minimal technical skill to run one, which is a good thing, but which has some results like this from time to time.
I just want to briefly say that "screenful of code" and "Stupidly easy" are antonyms, not synonyms, in this day and age. Since many sites are run by people for whom HTML is a challenge and Javascript latin (people who install Wordpress/Movable Type/whatever), these sorts of problems go unsolved.
I'm not flaming bloggers by saying (or at least not intentionally). What I mean is that the bar for web publication has been lowered (and by and large it's a good thing, too) so that anyone with more than basic computer skills can get a blog. On the whole, this is great for the web, the Marketplace of Ideas, and society at large, but it does result in problems like this. Specifically, website creators delegate the idea of working out the details of the ads to the ad-provider, and just copy-paste in the ad code. Admittedly, if I had a blog (and I may get one soon), I'd probably start out doing the same thing until I felt more comfortable with the HTML/CSS/JS required.