Both republicans AND democrats are pushing for this. No one is really on "freedom's" side but the libertarians.
As a country, we need to have not only smarter representation, but smarter voters.
The system I have right now is pretty quiet and zippy for both programming and gaming. 1GB RAM, Athlon 64 3000+, 6150 motherboard, low profile Geforce 6600 really good stuff for the 1024x768 monitor of mine. I can play the latest stuff at the native resolution of the screen with reasonable quality, or some slightly older games with 4xAA/16x AF. And there is a zalman on both the CPU and GPU.
It's whisper-quiet, extremely tiny and wicked fast.
Best advice? Get a case that is well-ventilated (a la antec minuet ii) and base the system on the athlon 64, not the pentium 4 / D. Avoid graphics cards with whiny fans. And stick to quiet 7200RPM drives like the seagates or the latest offerings from western digital and maxtor. Get SATA drives to minimize airflow interference, and route all cables cleverly out of airflow areas. This way, the fans can work at the lowest speed possible and still adequately cool the components, even in the highest load situations.
Speedfan is good software for software-controlling fans hooked into the mobo. Alternatively, you could attach a resistor or zalman fan mate to slow the fan down the "old fashioned" way.
I used to always feel bad for most of the geek types (including myself) and thier inability to get women, but then I realized that maybe certain types of people just weren't meant to attract the other gender in the first place. Obviously women are more turned on by the "player" types and eventually settle down with them, and while geek types may eventually get a women they tend to lack certain...prerequisites.
I feel this is somewhat of an evolutionary path, i.e. not everyone needs to reproduce to help the species/society as a whole. There are a lot of scientists/world leaders who helped humanity greatly and did not have any children. For those looking to only marry for companionship or whatever, that's cool, but most people marry because they want to have a family.
The only thing that's worrying about this trend is the extinction of geek-like people. Or maybe it's a constant, i.e. the a minimal amount manage to reproduce, thus keeping the geek population normal. And of course even in the wildest of families there tends to be the more intellectual types.
It's possible to be somewhat geek and very outward, but those people are rare. And it's hard because socializing burns a LOT of time, time that those who are not social spend pondering about the stars, coding, etc, eventually finding that "AH HAH!" moment that moves humanity forward another 20 years.
I know it sounds sad but maybe some people weren't really meant to find women. Here's a clue...if you don't really miss not having a significant other, drop it. It'll either come or you'll just put yourself through a lot of pain and misery that you can live without.
For people who really want but don't have the skills, I feel sorry for you. It's kind of my situation, I want one but none of the 15 or so I've asked out accepted. I think I'm reasonably sociable but something just doesn't come across right. I do also have this back in the head feeling whenever socializing that I'm wasting time even though on the outside I look like I'm having fun..which may contribute to it. I dunno. It just seems like I'm putting in a lot of effort for no output.
Evolution is tough, and certain people get excluded from participating. Life's a bitch, life's not fair, but that's just the way it is. World wouldn't be real otherwise.
This country is run by a bunch of megalomaniac nuts who need to get booted. In fact, more and more countries are. There needs to be a world revolution or something. Hmm...
all merge, then the minimum value of the whole company would be $265 billion. I would guess a minimum of $300 billion, making the new ma bell the third or fourth largest company in the world.
I think it's really a matter of what people want. Do they want almost 100% guaranteed, unbroken access? Then a government-granted monopoly is necessary. Do they want more competition? Well, strip monopoly rights and watch phone service sometimes get interrupted due to one company losing money or another company taking over here, there, and everywhere. It's really a question of what people want.
If people really want the latter scenario, they must be willing to accept that there will be upheaval. Examined closely, neither scenario is more right or wrong than the other unless the government is corrupt.
that there are plenty of folks here who fear industry consolidation like an elephant fears mice, this is actually a good move. A nationalized phone company will reunite the parts that were broken apart pointlessley, much to national duress, in the 80s. The way to manage a phone company is to have a government-regulated monopoly, not a bunch of oligopolies competing with each other artifically and making it hard as hell to call from one region to another.
a bane to subscribers if implemented the way traditional fee-based text message services are? For instance, on my phone, all text messages, solicited or not, I pay for. While it is a screwed feeling, it doesn't hurt the people sending it.
Why is it that people always think that parents should look over their kids' shoulders all the time? Isn't that big brother too, just in a smaller form? The sign of truly good parenthood is the ability to trust that children will either not access material or understand the nature of the material when they access it. "Blocking" will always cause a curious child to figure ways around the block. Well-educated and well-brought up children do not need any filtering software - they can be trusted.
The job falls on the parents to properly teach their children values and trust. The job does not fall on the government to widespreadly ban fundamental freedom of expression on the internet.
Bush has lost a lot on his domestic agenda, see his failed (and now muted) social security privatization. He has to please his supporters somehow, and this is the way. Is it illegal? Yes, this is abuse of power. Will it be prosecuted? Probably not, if any of you have noticed any notion of the executive branch not being above the law is plain silly.
"I don't know, Google...it's just not working out. I mean, you're cute and all, but that insider stock selling is just going too far. You play with lego bricks and then screw shareholders out of billions. Now these oddball positions. You're not warm anymore, goog, you're all steely-eyed and Evil(TM)(C)(R)(K). Sorry googie, you're out..."
The thing is, youth can always upscale their language when talking to older people or those with more conservative ways of talking. At least the more educated ones, that is.
A lot of people fail to realize that once they were young, too, and that they've degenerated into bitter old people who deplore change.
Implanting an RFID chip in everybody with a unique address makes it a very easy way of tracking people...and explains why IPv6 is being pushed so hard even though it is unnecessary. Sure, NAT will handle boatloads of expansion to come, but it offers a layer of anonymity to computers behind the NAT...security through obscurity...how many 192.168.x.x addresses are out there? This way, a unique IP can be given to each computer, more unique even than MAC addresses. And it can be reached around the world.
If Those Above get their way through, I see computers eventually having hardcoded IP addresses. And RFID implants with a unique IP address for everybody.
My old university was already forced into that. A Windows cluster. A friend of mine who helped put the thing together regarded it as "regrettable but necessary."
If this isn't m$ hegemony, I don't know what is.
The matter here is that google is an American company, with American ideals. Supporting a nation that runs counter to your belief system, profitable or not, is unethical and self-destructive.
Slashdot Mirror
The memory chips also use the PCB as cooling. Since the PCB is cooler, less airflow is required over the ram chips.
Both republicans AND democrats are pushing for this. No one is really on "freedom's" side but the libertarians. As a country, we need to have not only smarter representation, but smarter voters.
The system I have right now is pretty quiet and zippy for both programming and gaming. 1GB RAM, Athlon 64 3000+, 6150 motherboard, low profile Geforce 6600 really good stuff for the 1024x768 monitor of mine. I can play the latest stuff at the native resolution of the screen with reasonable quality, or some slightly older games with 4xAA/16x AF. And there is a zalman on both the CPU and GPU.
It's whisper-quiet, extremely tiny and wicked fast.
Best advice? Get a case that is well-ventilated (a la antec minuet ii) and base the system on the athlon 64, not the pentium 4 / D. Avoid graphics cards with whiny fans. And stick to quiet 7200RPM drives like the seagates or the latest offerings from western digital and maxtor. Get SATA drives to minimize airflow interference, and route all cables cleverly out of airflow areas. This way, the fans can work at the lowest speed possible and still adequately cool the components, even in the highest load situations.
Speedfan is good software for software-controlling fans hooked into the mobo. Alternatively, you could attach a resistor or zalman fan mate to slow the fan down the "old fashioned" way.
Artificial Intelligence.
I used to always feel bad for most of the geek types (including myself) and thier inability to get women, but then I realized that maybe certain types of people just weren't meant to attract the other gender in the first place. Obviously women are more turned on by the "player" types and eventually settle down with them, and while geek types may eventually get a women they tend to lack certain...prerequisites. I feel this is somewhat of an evolutionary path, i.e. not everyone needs to reproduce to help the species/society as a whole. There are a lot of scientists/world leaders who helped humanity greatly and did not have any children. For those looking to only marry for companionship or whatever, that's cool, but most people marry because they want to have a family. The only thing that's worrying about this trend is the extinction of geek-like people. Or maybe it's a constant, i.e. the a minimal amount manage to reproduce, thus keeping the geek population normal. And of course even in the wildest of families there tends to be the more intellectual types. It's possible to be somewhat geek and very outward, but those people are rare. And it's hard because socializing burns a LOT of time, time that those who are not social spend pondering about the stars, coding, etc, eventually finding that "AH HAH!" moment that moves humanity forward another 20 years. I know it sounds sad but maybe some people weren't really meant to find women. Here's a clue...if you don't really miss not having a significant other, drop it. It'll either come or you'll just put yourself through a lot of pain and misery that you can live without. For people who really want but don't have the skills, I feel sorry for you. It's kind of my situation, I want one but none of the 15 or so I've asked out accepted. I think I'm reasonably sociable but something just doesn't come across right. I do also have this back in the head feeling whenever socializing that I'm wasting time even though on the outside I look like I'm having fun..which may contribute to it. I dunno. It just seems like I'm putting in a lot of effort for no output. Evolution is tough, and certain people get excluded from participating. Life's a bitch, life's not fair, but that's just the way it is. World wouldn't be real otherwise.
Editors are supposed to sensationalize stuff to get ad revenue. At least, that's the way it works in practice
'nuff said. Impossible to maintain idealistic statements only serve one entity: that of those spewing the rhetoric.
This country is run by a bunch of megalomaniac nuts who need to get booted. In fact, more and more countries are. There needs to be a world revolution or something. Hmm...
all merge, then the minimum value of the whole company would be $265 billion. I would guess a minimum of $300 billion, making the new ma bell the third or fourth largest company in the world.
The fact that the baby bells were called "regional bell operating companies" says a lot about how much they actually competed against each other.
I think it's really a matter of what people want. Do they want almost 100% guaranteed, unbroken access? Then a government-granted monopoly is necessary. Do they want more competition? Well, strip monopoly rights and watch phone service sometimes get interrupted due to one company losing money or another company taking over here, there, and everywhere. It's really a question of what people want. If people really want the latter scenario, they must be willing to accept that there will be upheaval. Examined closely, neither scenario is more right or wrong than the other unless the government is corrupt.
that there are plenty of folks here who fear industry consolidation like an elephant fears mice, this is actually a good move. A nationalized phone company will reunite the parts that were broken apart pointlessley, much to national duress, in the 80s. The way to manage a phone company is to have a government-regulated monopoly, not a bunch of oligopolies competing with each other artifically and making it hard as hell to call from one region to another.
a bane to subscribers if implemented the way traditional fee-based text message services are? For instance, on my phone, all text messages, solicited or not, I pay for. While it is a screwed feeling, it doesn't hurt the people sending it.
It's Butters!
Why is it that people always think that parents should look over their kids' shoulders all the time? Isn't that big brother too, just in a smaller form? The sign of truly good parenthood is the ability to trust that children will either not access material or understand the nature of the material when they access it. "Blocking" will always cause a curious child to figure ways around the block. Well-educated and well-brought up children do not need any filtering software - they can be trusted.
The job falls on the parents to properly teach their children values and trust. The job does not fall on the government to widespreadly ban fundamental freedom of expression on the internet.
Bush has lost a lot on his domestic agenda, see his failed (and now muted) social security privatization. He has to please his supporters somehow, and this is the way. Is it illegal? Yes, this is abuse of power. Will it be prosecuted? Probably not, if any of you have noticed any notion of the executive branch not being above the law is plain silly.
"I don't know, Google...it's just not working out. I mean, you're cute and all, but that insider stock selling is just going too far. You play with lego bricks and then screw shareholders out of billions. Now these oddball positions. You're not warm anymore, goog, you're all steely-eyed and Evil(TM)(C)(R)(K). Sorry googie, you're out..."
The thing is, youth can always upscale their language when talking to older people or those with more conservative ways of talking. At least the more educated ones, that is.
A lot of people fail to realize that once they were young, too, and that they've degenerated into bitter old people who deplore change.
Change is essence, it is what gives life life.
...er, I mean, curse those French Fries!
Implanting an RFID chip in everybody with a unique address makes it a very easy way of tracking people...and explains why IPv6 is being pushed so hard even though it is unnecessary. Sure, NAT will handle boatloads of expansion to come, but it offers a layer of anonymity to computers behind the NAT...security through obscurity...how many 192.168.x.x addresses are out there? This way, a unique IP can be given to each computer, more unique even than MAC addresses. And it can be reached around the world. If Those Above get their way through, I see computers eventually having hardcoded IP addresses. And RFID implants with a unique IP address for everybody.
My old university was already forced into that. A Windows cluster. A friend of mine who helped put the thing together regarded it as "regrettable but necessary." If this isn't m$ hegemony, I don't know what is.
That's not the Google concept. They prefer all data to be kept and analyzed for demographic purposes.
Either way it's cheap. Additionally worrying is the covert tripling of defense spending this year. China is not as benign as a lot of people think...
The matter here is that google is an American company, with American ideals. Supporting a nation that runs counter to your belief system, profitable or not, is unethical and self-destructive.