Even the best law enforcement agencies have criminals within the organization. And the more power they are given, the more damage those criminals within the system can do. If the system itself becomes more corrupt than honest (as has happened in countless countries) you end up with little more than a gang of untouchable thugs.
If they pull you over for speeding, beat you up, take your watch, and then toss you in jail for a week without access to a lawyer or phone, then drive you out to the outskirts of town and dump you in a ditch -- what are you going to do about it? Call the police?
Or, for example, if a cop is allowed to obtain wiretapping and video surveilance without a warrant to 'facilitate the search for terrorists' what stops a stalker wiretapping and video-surveiling his "girlfriend"?
The police *are* necessary evil. And it is 'literal' evil that we need to empower a group of individuals to operate with enhanced powers, powers of arrest, surveilance, that can trespass into a home if they have 'subjective' grounds, that can interrogate, hold people for hours without charging them, etc. All men are equal under the law... the police are a little 'more equal than the rest of us' though.
But yes, given that their are 'flaws in human nature' we need police, but some of those flaws will be represented within the police itself and that is a most dangerous combination.
He says the most dangerous criminals are government law enforcement agents. You say you need police, and that they are a necessary evil.
Ok. So what's your disagreement with him exactly? He's not suggesting dismantling the police.
However the trend of giving them ever expanding power to make it easier and more efficient to catch criminals only sets us up for an abusive and corrupt haven for criminals that is effectively untouchable. But recognizing that means we need to keep their power in check... not dismantle them altogether. Its patently obvious that we need law enforcement. The question is what should they be allowed to do, and how do we ensure they only do what is allowed.
1) I have a 1080p screen and at that resolution the PS3's graphics are much better.
Really? By what measure?
2) If you play online games the PS3 is much cheaper over several years.
Yup. No question. As someone who doesn't play online games much, but likes to have the ability, XBL is a complete waste. I think XBL may be the better server (given it been around since xbox 1 and even the 360 has a 1 year head start, this is no surprise... for the amount I play, XBL isn't worth it.
3) Cross platform games are better on the PS3.
Really. Most reviews seem to be giving the nod to the 360.
4) PS3 games have much more to work with aka a HDD, more processing power etc.
Fair enough on the HD. But the cpu power is a non-starter. Most professional analysts conclude that the the PS3 can't realize most of its potential even in ideal circumstances, and that games are not remotely ideal circumstances. The PS3 is effectively crippled. The 360 has less theoretical power, but its able to use most of it, and its architecture is in line with the needs of games.
5) Blue-Ray
And I'm unconvinced yet that its worth the money. By the time that it IS worth the money, BR players will be more affordable and having it lumped in with your console is less of an issue.
6) Up scaling DVD's
Better off buying a decent upscaler, then ALL your devices benefit. Better still buying a TV with a good upscaler, and then you don't even need a separate upscaler. But ok.... its still a good feature. Then again the 360 can do this too.
7) It plays enough PS2 games that I don't need a PS2 but I still need the Xbox for a lot of old games.
I don't buy 600 consoles to play last generation games of the most successful console. I mean who doesn't already have a PS2? And if you want PS2 games, a PS2 is cheap. I mean, Wii backwards compatibility is kind of cool... lots of people don't have cubes, so buying a Wii really does open up a whole extra library.
8) It upgrades the graphics on old PS2 games. (So it's better than just backwards compatible.)
Its not upgrading the graphics, its just upscaling them. If you had a decent upscaler (either standalone or in your tv) this would be a non-issue.
9) The PS3 has a longer lifespan. (Xbox 1 came out a year after PS2 but the 360 came out a year before the PS3. People are still buying more PS2's than 360's.)
People are still buying more PS2's than PS3's too.
I will often add people I have just met because I hope that I will get to know them better in the future (possibly through Facebook).
Really... you go to a friends house a 1000 miles away, and he has his buddy over for like an hour one night, and you'd add him to your friends list... so you know if you ever wanted to call him up you could... or if you wanted to show him pictures of your vacation you could... or because you wanted to check out his vacation pictures... or the pictures of his kids (who you didn't meet) playing soccer?
I mean come on...
Sure if you meet someone and you hit it off and you genuinely want to pursue a friendship... sure go for it... add away... but when you are sitting their adding people you barely know who you'll never see again... whats the point...?
Or if you've been doing this for a few months now, rationalizing that "you'll get to know them better in the future", and your adding another 'friend' while looking at the list of 150 other people you added for exactly the same reason, none of whom you ever called. And even if you wanted to get to know them better well the logistics don't work... you only have 4 free nights a week... so even if you did something 'meaningful' with one every available night... it would still take over 2 years to get through the list...once. And that's if you stop adding people now.
I have better things to do than facebook. Like hang out with my friends.
In those future worlds of several of Heinlein's novels, it's simply the normal backdrop.
If it were the backdrop, it wouldn't spend so much time on the forefront. If its the forefront than it should have a narrative purpose, but it doesn't.
That's my criticism in a nutshell.
Heinlein's backdrop of sexual liberty doesn't grate on me... its the fact that it spends so much time in the forefront serving little to no narrative purpose that I'm critical of.
It's as if you were reading Dune and reacted to the protagonists reading future events with "knowing the future is impossible" at every step. It just can't work.
In Dune, the premise of being able to read the future was a crucial part of the story, and every foretelling had narrative consequences. We didn't have to endure anyone foretelling their next bowel movement, or what their next meal would be, or which hat they'd wear.
But no, again, its not the 'suspension of taboo' I have difficulty with it. Its that the taboo, in terms of the narrative, is really irrelevant. If Heinlein wants to set his plot in a sexually liberated world, ok... but since it really doesn't affect the plot, it should be little more than a background flavor.
You said it yourself:
It doesn't need developing, as it's the steady state.
Indeed, it's only worth mentioning because it's part of the development of characters and their inter-relationships.
Except that it really is only worth *mentioning*. It is the *steady state*. That's how these people interact, right? That's the backdrop you've claimed. Ok. I'm good with that.
You only need to occasionally mention it to tie the narrative to this backdrop. But Heinlein didn't "mention" it he needlessly focuses on it, at seemingly every opportunity.
If sexual liberty is the steady state, then each encounter is barely worth mentioning.
The programming editor technology we're using today is still very primitive. That's why coding styles are 80 columns.
Primitive maybe, but also versatile. You can send a code fragment in email, post it on the web, print it in a book, etc. The screen may be capable of wider, and your laser printer can shrink it, but overall 80 is a good system. On modern displays, you have room at the sides for additional stuff, which is incredibly useful.
As for proportional type. Pass. I actually saw that in use on a SmallTalk system, and it was awful. Code has a natural symmetry to it that proportional fonts utterly mangle. Its not prose, don't treat it like prose. 0x00100234 and 0x11101134 should be the same width in code, always. It helps catch typos. Its easier to skim vertically. Its easier to move the cursor vertically.
Yeah, coke zero really impressed me for taste, and c2 is even better at approximating real coke... but what about the aspartame... its seems to have a perpetual cancer spectre hanging over it that it can't shake.
I'll take tooth decay and high blood pressure over cancer. Although I'd really prefer to dodge both all 3. Its too bad I love cola.
The "Wonders of the World" are about tourism. There is nothing wrong with that. That are selected from sites that would be good to SEE isn't a bad thing.
If you want to create another list of amazing and important accomplishments that would make for a lousy world trip, nobody is stopping you. Oh wait... you did.;)
You can always count on criticizing Heinlein to stir people up. Micro-godwin.;)
In Farnham's Freehold, there was little alternative, they were cooped up in a bomb shelter for years! What had to happen, happened. You can't just switch it off, you know --- there was no "supposed" reluctance, it was unmitigated zeal alright! And entirely normal, very human, and honest.
No. We are mostly hardwired to find incestuous reproduction distasteful and repugnant. For a good biological reason.
But you know what, living in a bomb shelter for years, as you noted, yes, that would be an incredible and unique strain. And if Heinlein had delved into the transformation from repugnance to acceptance, perhaps I would be siding with you, perhaps even calling it a brilliant character study, and hard SF at its finest, in the spirit of "The Cold Equations" where the protagonist ultimately murders a young girl out of necessity, while rationalizing (correctly) that although it was him pushing her out the airlock to her death, the physics and other factors of the situation had sealed her fate the moment she stepped aboard. Yet he is still stricken with guilt and remorse. It is tragic, coldy realistic, and brilliant.
But Heinlein's work doesn't play out that way, where the isolation, and confinement, and perception of necessity lead them, even force them to accept incest - no, they simply hopped into the sack with enthusiasm with barely a nod to the transformation that would need to take place for this to be normal. The reader is left with the sense that no transformation took place at all, but rather, these two individuals were in perpetual heat and would have done this anyway if opportunity had arisen. Indeed, I suspect that is how Heinlein viewed these characters.
I can see where your interpretation comes from, but it's completely incorrect, and simply stems from your own inhibitions and lack of belief that people like him can be decoupled from them.
Boggle. Seriously. You misunderstand me. I have no trouble at all beleiving the fact that he had these beliefs, they are patently transparent. And personally I don't even take issue with the fact that he has these beleifs. I take issue that he pontificated these beleifs so frequently and transparently in his work, to the point I felt I was being lectured from a pulpit on the obvious correctness of this lifestyle choice -- instead of being drawn into a complex hard SF novel by a master storyteller.
He was. I am. You're not. We exist, in billions! Welcome to the real world, not the PC fiction.:-)
Get off your soapbox. I couldn't care less whether you think kissing is an unclean sin or you think fucking monkeys is a wild party (unless the monkeys object). However, if all your hard SF novels are overloaded with your 'honesty' about how great it is to fuck monkeys, and the novel has nothing do with monkey fucking then you're doing a disservice to the novel. And the novel deserves criticism. And you deserve criticism for writing it. Note that I'm not critical of your 'honest beleifs', I'm critical of the fact that your sexual views and preferences have taken the front seat in your novel, distracting from the actual plot, and putting the real story solidly into the back seat.
If you want to write an essay, feel free. If you want to explore how monkey fucking would impact society in the context of a hard sf novel - I'll read that too. But don't stuff a novel that has nothing to do with monkey fucking full of monkey fucking for no good reason.
If its hard SF then show me how all this incest and promiscuity has the slighest bearing on the story at all. Quite simply - it doesn't. And its in there in bucketloads. Why exactly?
Asimov's novels were largely asexual. This didn't reflect Asimov's underlying beleif that people should live the life of a quaker... but rather it reflected the reality that for the most part they contributed nothing whatsoever to the larg
"I Will Fear No Evil" is my favorite Heinlein novel. Clearly what you look for in a good Heinlein novel isn't what I look for in a good Heinlein novel.
Clearly. What you look for in Heinlein novels isn't good.;)
Think about what that should mean in the context of "Hard SF".
Its not that he wouldn't make such an extrapolation, its that he would have treated it differently if was a true hard sf extrapolation. HardSF is creating a setting and then carrying the plot within its confines keeping it as 'scienntifically sound' as is reasonable, and where the confines of the setting drive the plot, help define it, and utlimately form a crucial part of it.
This is what separates HardSF from Star Wars.
Arthur C. Clarkes rendezvous with Rama is almost a feasibility study in interstellar spacecraft design. Asimov's Robot novels postulates robots and the rules of robotics and finds out what that might lead to in various situations. Philip K. Dick in Minority Report figures out how to commit murder in a world where the police have precognitive ability to find murderers. (The movie utterly botched translating the book, btw.)
Heinlein, given the amount of paper he dedicated to his characters sexual acrobatics, desires, and so on managed to do very very little real *consideration* of the subject of the impact this might have on his worlds. It didn't didn't constrain the plot. It was just THERE.
Conversely, if Heinlein meant to explore other issues, and merely put the different sexual mores in as a background - then why did he dedicate so much paper to it, and why is it in practically every novel?
It would be like reading Asimov's work, and noting that the characters were vegetarian, constantly talked about being vegetarian, and described how delicious each vegetarian meal was, all the ways beets, tofu, and beans could be prepared... and this all in "Robots and Empire" which really has nothing to do about vegetarians.
Then you read The Stars Like Dust, and find more rabid again. Odd you might say, maybe he's just extrapolating from current attitudes towards cruelty towards animals - but then why isn't this important to the plot? This is hardSF after all. The setting is important! Then you read Fantastic Voyage... and lo... more vegetarians, then Nemesis, then Nightfall, then Tales of the Black Widowers -- (all unchanged from their current overall form, except all filled with enthusiastic vegetarians).
No, that's not 'extrapolation' anymore, that's just pontificating about vegetarianism.
Heinlein wrote a great deal of interesting stuff. But many recurrent themes in his work are merely a reflection of the man, and don't get explored at all in his novels. All authors do this, but in heinlein's case they are particularly jarring because well.. an enthusiastic acceptance or even fetish for recreational incest is a little more unusual that the usual stuff you see.
If he'd explored it, you could argue it was part of the SF, and it might be an interesting read, but he doesn't really, in the vast majority of his work. Its just there. A reflection of the man behind the novels. (And that may be interesting too... if you are studying Heinlein, the man, but it really has no bearing on the meaning of the novel, and ultimately detracts from them, IMO.
And indeed it is OK to sleep with your mom (and with all your other family members who might yield offspring too), once technology removes the danger of genetic mishaps.
1) While you might think that makes it 'ok', Heinlein didn't have that requirement. Farnham's Freehold postulated incest for reproduction, and with unmitigated zeal too, rather than any sort of reluctance at the supposed 'necessity'.
2) Its one thing for an author to explore a 'taboo', particularly in hard SF. However, Heinlein explored incest a little more zealously. To the point it was pretty much a given in anything he wrote as he got older that wasn't aimed explicitly at kids.
It wasn't -just- Time Enough For Love. It was Time Enough for Love, The Number of the Beast, Farnham's Freehold, To Sail Beyond the Sunset, Job, The Cat who Walks Through Walls, All You Zombies... etc...
Titles like "I will fear no evil" which could have been (should have been) a brilliant study of the nature of identity, age, gender, and law -- starts out well, but devolved into a sordid series of loosely connected vignettes about an aging lech who seduces and enthusiastically fucks everything he encounters with his new sexy body, while 'melding souls' with its previous owner.
It is also somewhat telling that practically ALL of his female characters were relentlessly promiscuous, and even in his books aimed at a younger audience his female characters were unfailingly sexually precocious when you consider their age.
But most importantly, Heinlein didn't explore sexuality, its meaning, its effects on people, on relationships. He didn't vary it from setting to setting, or contrast it with other lifestyles. Over a couple dozen novels his characters just did it, enthusiastically and without restraint, with anything that moved, and it was implictly correct, and delivered with a sense of superiority - that anyone who might disagree is just unenlightened.
That's not an element of Hard SF. At best its a case of the author's own bias and proclivities 'showing through'. At worst its pontificating, plain and simple. In Heinlein's case I'm inclined to believe the latter. Far too much plot, and effort were dedicated to it in title after title after title for it to be merely inadvertantly 'showing through'.
This may be unpopular, but how can numbers possibly be a significant enough threat to land one in prison? (A digital image file is a very large number.)
Same goes for an email I sent commanding an underling to execute your brother. It shouldn't be allowed as evidence... just a number.
Same goes for the pdf printout of active covert agents complete with pictures, and current assignments I'm selling on CD over ebay. Nothing illegal here... just a number.
Same goes for the programs on my computer that I was using to operate my botnet that I use to spam, and phish bank accounts. That's not a evidence... yup... just a number.
These aren't merly numbers. They are numbers that mean something.
Yes, by all means, find the people who perpetrated the original crime of your term child abuse
I would suggest that:
1) Images depicting child pornography are evidence of (usually multiple) serious crimes. It is illegal to knowingly and intentionally suppress evidence of a crime. In effect possession of child porn makes you an accessory to the act.
2) Images depicting child pornography perpetrate the crime and further victimize the victims. Its bad enough that your father raped you. But then to live on knowing that their are strangers freely exchanging those images for their erotic amusement, with no possible recourse is further victimization.
Not to mention, if possession of the images is legalised - then bullies at school or elsewhere can confront you with the images with relative impunity. A google search of your name may well turn up those images.
It think it is in societies interest to be compassionate and respect and protect the victims of crimes, particularly sex crimes, from this sort of perpetual humiliation and victimization.
However, once a society makes owning a number a crime, it makes it very easy to "frame" people who hold unpopular-but-not-illegal beliefs: just push some child pornography into their computer, or easier, "find" some photos in their car.
Its very nearly just as easy to plant any other type of criminal evidence if you are looking to frame someone.
Would anyone really prefer a world without albums like Sgt. Pepper, What's Goin' On, It Takes a Nation of Millions To Hold Us Back, Electric LadyLand, Dark Side of The Moon, Kind of Blue, Purple Rain, etc, to be replaced by a bunch of singles?
Have you heard the other 14 tracks on the last [insert pop sensation here]'s album?
That sort of music doesn't need an album. Period. So albums, for that group of people is going to disappear. Big loss. The next generations Britney Spears doesn't get a record deal, she gets her 6 singles over 4 years, and then we never hear from her again.
But you are mistaken if you think its going to stop the likes of David Bowie, Alice Cooper, Pink Floyd, Prince, Nine Inch Nails,... hell even the likes of Eminem or the Fugees from releasing full albums, or concept albums. The market will bear those albums.
You are assuming that there is equal demand for Java and C# developers, but a lesser supply of C# developers.
Not quite. I am *projecting* that if people start sounding off that c# has been 'dealt a death blow' while pronouncing that 'java is growing bigger everyday' that the supply of new c# coders will dry up, while the supply of new java coders will boom.
From my own looking around, the average offered pay for Java developers is higher than for.Net developers, which in theory means that Java has a higher demand/supply ration than C#.
That is true today. I'm am looking at the future. I suspect that in this case the elasticity of supply exceeds the elasticity of demand. If Java is the 'big thing', than it will become supply flooded fairly quickly...
I don't think either or going anywhere anytime soon. But the flipside to your post is that if Java becomes that ubiquitous it will be easy to get a job, but hard to get paid well because the market will be flooded with Java guys/gals. The C# guys will get paid more because of the relative supply constraints.;)
People with pacemakers tend to have issues with the 'beat now' signal reaching their heart at the correct time. They tend to have irregular heartbeats, skip beats, etc.
The body is already providing all the power that is needed, its just got a signalling problem. The pacemaker merely provides a steady signal.
In many respects its very similiar to the spark system in a car.
They're doing the same thing with Holmes on Homes, on HGTV.
Actually that's a good candidate. Its a show that is part informative, but mostly just fluff punctuated by pointless scenes of banging, sawing, pouring concrete, or carrying wood, etc. I find the content of the show interesting enough, but all I want is the 6 minutes that are acutally relevant...
1) What the situation is. 2) What was done. 3) Why/How it was done. 4) The finished product
I don't want or need to see the poor homeowner moan at the start about her life, or jump up and down all giddy at the end. And I don't need all the busywork. And above all I especially don't need to see what's "coming up after the commercial break" immediately before the commercial break. Nor am I a retarded moron that needs to be reminded of what I saw previously in the same half hour episode every 4 minutes. I can easily see watching an episode in 5-6 minutes.
Mythbusters, is just as bad. As are most 'project' or 'infotainment' shows.
News could benefit too. All those teaser "Coming up next" or "Is Cheerios killing your dog? Stay tuned and find out after this..." segments have turned me off the watching TV news.
However, it should be pointed out that this is a feature designed to protect the user.
It eliminates the risk of someone poisoning dns to redirect windows update somewhere else. It also prevents windows update from failing simply because dns is down.
Windows update can easily be turned off by the user, and a decent firewall can also trivially block it. This isn't a 'conspiracy' or 'malicious' at all.
There is a difference between "not having any issues with" and "actually benefitting from".
My RAM usage rarely cracks 1.5GB. Would having 4GB and x64 make my life measurably better? Of course not. It wouldn't make it worse... but that's hardly a reason to upgrade!
Get 4GB with x64! It won't make life worse! And hey, 1% of you might actually benefit!!
A bit of googling can resolve that whole "can't use unsigned drivers in Vista x64" thing as well.
I was pointing out that Microsofts whole WHQL certification push is a bit of a farce given how many drivers aren't certified.
Now you say a bug needs to be addressed in COH to make it run right on Vista x86. As I understand it, it isn't a bug with the software, it's simply running into a limitation of 32-bit computing.
Except that it also runs on Windows 98, ME, 2000, and XP (x32).
If it was running into a "limitation of 32-bit computing" that was insurmountable, then really, it should only be supported under XP x64 and Vista x64. Clearly that is not the case.
If its crashing under Vista x32 then there is either a bug in Vista or a bug in CoH. But there is clearly not some 'fundamental limitation of 32-bit computing' at issue here if Win98 and Win2000 are supported platforms.
Unless your argument is that it is not POSSIBLE to increase the care of others without decreasing the care of a few, then you have no point here.
At any given price point, yes, that is the tradeoff. Only if you put more money into the system it is possible of increasing the care of some without decreasing anyone elses care.
In Canada, for overall care to increase, taxes have to increase. Obviously there must be a balance between taxes and care.
In the US how does overall care improve? More people have to have more money to afford care. How exactly is that going to happen? And if it does happen, wouldn't prices just go up?
And some people get WORSE care.
Unfortunately yes.
You care more about "overall,"
I care about myself.
Why should I care more about the rich elite?
Why should anyone, except of course the rich elite?
If everyone simply thinks about *themself* then the Canadian system would get more votes, because it benefits more people. Isn't that how democracy is supposed to work?
but to most Americans, it is not acceptable to harm the few for the sake of the many, if there are other alternatives.
Oh Really?
Why is that?
That American's have a system that favors the few over the many simply represents a good con job by that few. Its no coincidence that the country is run by the same elite group that benefits most from the current system.
Its right out of Orwell or Huxley... the proles and the gamma's... the elite tell them the system is for their own best interests, and they beleive it... despite being little more than slaves.
I think if 'most american's' were actually properly informed of what their situation is and what it would be under each system, most american's would choose a Canadian style system in their own self-interest.
In a system 200 people eat caviar, 2000 people eat mcdonalds, and 20,000 people don't eat. And you propose a system where 22,200 people all have to eat mcdonalds what do think is going happen? 2000 people will vote depending on whether they think they are close to joining the 200 or closer to joining the 200000. The 20000 hungry votes for the new system - they benefit. 200 against it - they don't.
The only reason this hasn't happened in america is that 200 control the media, politics, and everything else, and have convinced the 20000 that 'socialized' health care won't work or simply refuse to discuss it at all. And since they run the country if they don't talk about it, it doesn't get talked about.
You can't get a 32bit driver WHQL certified anymore unless there is a 64bit version.
Most of the 3rd party hardware I own still isn't WHQL certified. If the drivers aren't bundled with windows I pretty much expect to hit "continue anyway" at least once.
Who needs 64bit? Today, all Vista users that are gamers.
Most gamers aren't even convinced they need Vista, nevermind Vista x64.
Company of Heroes (for non gamers out there it's a RTS set in ww2 that is a Games For Windows game and it won a ton of Game of the Year 2006 awards-It's a pretty big fully windows designed game, not just some weird exception to the rule nobody plays that I've found.)
Good point. It also runs just fine on Windows 98 though, which suggests that Vista x64 is hardly a requirement.
will actually run out of Virtual Address space and crash in Vista when CoH worked fine on the exact same system using XP drivers!
As I said, it also works fine on Windows 98. That its crashing on Vista x32 while it runs on x64 is not an indication that we all need x64, but rather that there is a bug somewhere that needs to be addressed.
Frankly, I've heard FAR more complaints about games in x64 than x32. Granted that's really primarily a result of the x64 driver situation, but the reason is irrelevant -- gamers by and large are better off on x32. Actually... they are still better off on XP right now.
Every new computer should have a 64bit OS now.
Why? Seriously. Why? Why do we need to shift an OS/platform whose only advantage is support for more RAM than 99% of users have, when even 99% of new computers still ship with 2GB or LESS? We need IPv6 a hell of a lot more than we need x64.
MS might be able to use its market power and sheer brute force to make us move to x64 (and that's really a 'bad thing'), but we don't need it yet. Not by a long shot.
It's sold as "Windows XP Professional x64 edition". That strongly implies that it's a subset/variant of "Windows XP Professional", which *is* listed.
It is a variant. But its a platform variant not a feature variant. What else should they call it? It *IS* windows XP profressional after all. If MS had released an Itanium edition, or a G5 edition you wouldn't automatically assume it would work, right? Same thing here.
I probably wouldn't, but I think a lot of people would, and I wouldn't blame them for that.
I agree I don't really blame people for being confused about x32 vs x64 especially as they can run on the same chips and x64 is largely backwards compatible. I also agree that Apple should probably have a disclaimer "no it doesn't work with x64 windows yet". Its a confusing situation they are used to coping with what with concurrently supporting PPC and Intel CPUs right now. They could be handling this better.
BUT, in the case of x64, I think if you are running x64 you sort of take it on yourself to know what you are getting into and to do proper diligence. x64 edition is not a mainstream platform/OS marketed to Joe Consumer, so Joe Consumer really shouldn't have it. And if he does, then he went out of his way to get it, and he should be aware of what he's gotten himself into, and should take some ownership over the issue of trying to ascertain compatibility when buying new hardware/software.
Slashdot Mirror
Law enforcement *is* the most dangerous criminal.
Even the best law enforcement agencies have criminals within the organization. And the more power they are given, the more damage those criminals within the system can do. If the system itself becomes more corrupt than honest (as has happened in countless countries) you end up with little more than a gang of untouchable thugs.
If they pull you over for speeding, beat you up, take your watch, and then toss you in jail for a week without access to a lawyer or phone, then drive you out to the outskirts of town and dump you in a ditch -- what are you going to do about it? Call the police?
Or, for example, if a cop is allowed to obtain wiretapping and video surveilance without a warrant to 'facilitate the search for terrorists' what stops a stalker wiretapping and video-surveiling his "girlfriend"?
The police *are* necessary evil. And it is 'literal' evil that we need to empower a group of individuals to operate with enhanced powers, powers of arrest, surveilance, that can trespass into a home if they have 'subjective' grounds, that can interrogate, hold people for hours without charging them, etc. All men are equal under the law... the police are a little 'more equal than the rest of us' though.
But yes, given that their are 'flaws in human nature' we need police, but some of those flaws will be represented within the police itself and that is a most dangerous combination.
Who watches the watchers?
He says the most dangerous criminals are government law enforcement agents.
You say you need police, and that they are a necessary evil.
Ok. So what's your disagreement with him exactly? He's not suggesting dismantling the police.
However the trend of giving them ever expanding power to make it easier and more efficient to catch criminals only sets us up for an abusive and corrupt haven for criminals that is effectively untouchable. But recognizing that means we need to keep their power in check... not dismantle them altogether. Its patently obvious that we need law enforcement. The question is what should they be allowed to do, and how do we ensure they only do what is allowed.
1) I have a 1080p screen and at that resolution the PS3's graphics are much better.
Really? By what measure?
2) If you play online games the PS3 is much cheaper over several years.
Yup. No question. As someone who doesn't play online games much, but likes to have the ability, XBL is a complete waste. I think XBL may be the better server (given it been around since xbox 1 and even the 360 has a 1 year head start, this is no surprise... for the amount I play, XBL isn't worth it.
3) Cross platform games are better on the PS3.
Really. Most reviews seem to be giving the nod to the 360.
4) PS3 games have much more to work with aka a HDD, more processing power etc.
Fair enough on the HD. But the cpu power is a non-starter. Most professional analysts conclude
that the the PS3 can't realize most of its potential even in ideal circumstances, and that games are not remotely ideal circumstances. The PS3 is effectively crippled. The 360 has less theoretical power, but its able to use most of it, and its architecture is in line with the needs of games.
5) Blue-Ray
And I'm unconvinced yet that its worth the money. By the time that it IS worth the money, BR players will be more affordable and having it lumped in with your console is less of an issue.
6) Up scaling DVD's
Better off buying a decent upscaler, then ALL your devices benefit. Better still buying a TV with a good upscaler, and then you don't even need a separate upscaler. But ok.... its still a good feature. Then again the 360 can do this too.
7) It plays enough PS2 games that I don't need a PS2 but I still need the Xbox for a lot of old games.
I don't buy 600 consoles to play last generation games of the most successful console. I mean who doesn't already have a PS2? And if you want PS2 games, a PS2 is cheap. I mean, Wii backwards compatibility is kind of cool... lots of people don't have cubes, so buying a Wii really does open up a whole extra library.
8) It upgrades the graphics on old PS2 games. (So it's better than just backwards compatible.)
Its not upgrading the graphics, its just upscaling them. If you had a decent upscaler (either standalone or in your tv) this would be a non-issue.
9) The PS3 has a longer lifespan. (Xbox 1 came out a year after PS2 but the 360 came out a year before the PS3. People are still buying more PS2's than 360's.)
People are still buying more PS2's than PS3's too.
I will often add people I have just met because I hope that I will get to know them better in the future (possibly through Facebook).
Really... you go to a friends house a 1000 miles away, and he has his buddy over for like an hour one night, and you'd add him to your friends list... so you know if you ever wanted to call him up you could... or if you wanted to show him pictures of your vacation you could... or because you wanted to check out his vacation pictures... or the pictures of his kids (who you didn't meet) playing soccer?
I mean come on...
Sure if you meet someone and you hit it off and you genuinely want to pursue a friendship... sure go for it... add away... but when you are sitting their adding people you barely know who you'll never see again... whats the point...?
Or if you've been doing this for a few months now, rationalizing that "you'll get to know them better in the future", and your adding another 'friend' while looking at the list of 150 other people you added for exactly the same reason, none of whom you ever called. And even if you wanted to get to know them better well the logistics don't work... you only have 4 free nights a week... so even if you did something 'meaningful' with one every available night... it would still take over 2 years to get through the list...once. And that's if you stop adding people now.
I have better things to do than facebook. Like hang out with my friends.
In those future worlds of several of Heinlein's novels, it's simply the normal backdrop.
If it were the backdrop, it wouldn't spend so much time on the forefront.
If its the forefront than it should have a narrative purpose, but it doesn't.
That's my criticism in a nutshell.
Heinlein's backdrop of sexual liberty doesn't grate on me... its the fact that it spends so much time in the forefront serving little to no narrative purpose that I'm critical of.
It's as if you were reading Dune and reacted to the protagonists reading future events with "knowing the future is impossible" at every step. It just can't work.
In Dune, the premise of being able to read the future was a crucial part of the story, and every foretelling had narrative consequences. We didn't have to endure anyone foretelling their next bowel movement, or what their next meal would be, or which hat they'd wear.
But no, again, its not the 'suspension of taboo' I have difficulty with it. Its that the taboo, in terms of the narrative, is really irrelevant. If Heinlein wants to set his plot in a sexually liberated world, ok... but since it really doesn't affect the plot, it should be little more than a background flavor.
You said it yourself:
It doesn't need developing, as it's the steady state.
Indeed, it's only worth mentioning because it's part of the development of characters and their inter-relationships.
Except that it really is only worth *mentioning*. It is the *steady state*. That's how these people interact, right? That's the backdrop you've claimed. Ok. I'm good with that.
You only need to occasionally mention it to tie the narrative to this backdrop. But Heinlein didn't "mention" it he needlessly focuses on it, at seemingly every opportunity.
If sexual liberty is the steady state, then each encounter is barely worth mentioning.
I have a bad connection with packet loss and packet ordering issues... all I got was...
I came average of 12 packet a day...
my massive post Really hurts...
Sorry your wrist suffering.
The programming editor technology we're using today is still very primitive. That's why coding styles are 80 columns.
Primitive maybe, but also versatile. You can send a code fragment in email, post it on the web, print it in a book, etc. The screen may be capable of wider, and your laser printer can shrink it, but overall 80 is a good system. On modern displays, you have room at the sides for additional stuff, which is incredibly useful.
As for proportional type. Pass. I actually saw that in use on a SmallTalk system, and it was awful. Code has a natural symmetry to it that proportional fonts utterly mangle. Its not prose, don't treat it like prose. 0x00100234 and 0x11101134 should be the same width in code, always. It helps catch typos. Its easier to skim vertically. Its easier to move the cursor vertically.
just my 0.02
Yeah, coke zero really impressed me for taste, and c2 is even better at approximating real coke... but what about the aspartame... its seems to have a perpetual cancer spectre hanging over it that it can't shake.
I'll take tooth decay and high blood pressure over cancer. Although I'd really prefer to dodge both all 3. Its too bad I love cola.
The "Wonders of the World" are about tourism. There is nothing wrong with that. That are selected from sites that would be good to SEE isn't a bad thing.
;)
If you want to create another list of amazing and important accomplishments that would make for a lousy world trip, nobody is stopping you. Oh wait... you did.
Pass. I'll see the tourist ones.
You can always count on criticizing Heinlein to stir people up. Micro-godwin. ;)
:-)
... but rather it reflected the reality that for the most part they contributed nothing whatsoever to the larg
In Farnham's Freehold, there was little alternative, they were cooped up in a bomb shelter for years! What had to happen, happened. You can't just switch it off, you know --- there was no "supposed" reluctance, it was unmitigated zeal alright! And entirely normal, very human, and honest.
No. We are mostly hardwired to find incestuous reproduction distasteful and repugnant. For a good biological reason.
But you know what, living in a bomb shelter for years, as you noted, yes, that would be an incredible and unique strain. And if Heinlein had delved into the transformation from repugnance to acceptance, perhaps I would be siding with you, perhaps even calling it a brilliant character study, and hard SF at its finest, in the spirit of "The Cold Equations" where the protagonist ultimately murders a young girl out of necessity, while rationalizing (correctly) that although it was him pushing her out the airlock to her death, the physics and other factors of the situation had sealed her fate the moment she stepped aboard. Yet he is still stricken with guilt and remorse. It is tragic, coldy realistic, and brilliant.
But Heinlein's work doesn't play out that way, where the isolation, and confinement, and perception of necessity lead them, even force them to accept incest - no, they simply hopped into the sack with enthusiasm with barely a nod to the transformation that would need to take place for this to be normal. The reader is left with the sense that no transformation took place at all, but rather, these two individuals were in perpetual heat and would have done this anyway if opportunity had arisen. Indeed, I suspect that is how Heinlein viewed these characters.
I can see where your interpretation comes from, but it's completely incorrect, and simply stems from your own inhibitions and lack of belief that people like him can be decoupled from them.
Boggle. Seriously. You misunderstand me. I have no trouble at all beleiving the fact that he had these beliefs, they are patently transparent. And personally I don't even take issue with the fact that he has these beleifs. I take issue that he pontificated these beleifs so frequently and transparently in his work, to the point I felt I was being lectured from a pulpit on the obvious correctness of this lifestyle choice -- instead of being drawn into a complex hard SF novel by a master storyteller.
He was. I am. You're not. We exist, in billions! Welcome to the real world, not the PC fiction.
Get off your soapbox. I couldn't care less whether you think kissing is an unclean sin or you think fucking monkeys is a wild party (unless the monkeys object). However, if all your hard SF novels are overloaded with your 'honesty' about how great it is to fuck monkeys, and the novel has nothing do with monkey fucking then you're doing a disservice to the novel. And the novel deserves criticism. And you deserve criticism for writing it. Note that I'm not critical of your 'honest beleifs', I'm critical of the fact that your sexual views and preferences have taken the front seat in your novel, distracting from the actual plot, and putting the real story solidly into the back seat.
If you want to write an essay, feel free. If you want to explore how monkey fucking would impact society in the context of a hard sf novel - I'll read that too. But don't stuff a novel that has nothing to do with monkey fucking full of monkey fucking for no good reason.
If its hard SF then show me how all this incest and promiscuity has the slighest bearing on the story at all. Quite simply - it doesn't. And its in there in bucketloads. Why exactly?
Asimov's novels were largely asexual. This didn't reflect Asimov's underlying beleif that people should live the life of a quaker
"I Will Fear No Evil" is my favorite Heinlein novel. Clearly what you look for in a good Heinlein novel isn't what I look for in a good Heinlein novel.
;)
Clearly. What you look for in Heinlein novels isn't good.
Why wouldn't he make such an extrapolation?
Think about what that should mean in the context of "Hard SF".
Its not that he wouldn't make such an extrapolation, its that he would have treated it differently if was a true hard sf extrapolation. HardSF is creating a setting and then carrying the plot within its confines keeping it as 'scienntifically sound' as is reasonable, and where the confines of the setting drive the plot, help define it, and utlimately form a crucial part of it.
This is what separates HardSF from Star Wars.
Arthur C. Clarkes rendezvous with Rama is almost a feasibility study in interstellar spacecraft design. Asimov's Robot novels postulates robots and the rules of robotics and finds out what that might lead to in various situations. Philip K. Dick in Minority Report figures out how to commit murder in a world where the police have precognitive ability to find murderers. (The movie utterly botched translating the book, btw.)
Heinlein, given the amount of paper he dedicated to his characters sexual acrobatics, desires, and so on managed to do very very little real *consideration* of the subject of the impact this might have on his worlds. It didn't didn't constrain the plot. It was just THERE.
Conversely, if Heinlein meant to explore other issues, and merely put the different sexual mores in as a background - then why did he dedicate so much paper to it, and why is it in practically every novel?
It would be like reading Asimov's work, and noting that the characters were vegetarian, constantly talked about being vegetarian, and described how delicious each vegetarian meal was, all the ways beets, tofu, and beans could be prepared... and this all in "Robots and Empire" which really has nothing to do about vegetarians.
Then you read The Stars Like Dust, and find more rabid again. Odd you might say, maybe he's just extrapolating from current attitudes towards cruelty towards animals - but then why isn't this important to the plot? This is hardSF after all. The setting is important! Then you read Fantastic Voyage... and lo... more vegetarians, then Nemesis, then Nightfall, then Tales of the Black Widowers -- (all unchanged from their current overall form, except all filled with enthusiastic vegetarians).
No, that's not 'extrapolation' anymore, that's just pontificating about vegetarianism.
Heinlein wrote a great deal of interesting stuff. But many recurrent themes in his work are merely a reflection of the man, and don't get explored at all in his novels. All authors do this, but in heinlein's case they are particularly jarring because well.. an enthusiastic acceptance or even fetish for recreational incest is a little more unusual that the usual stuff you see.
If he'd explored it, you could argue it was part of the SF, and it might be an interesting read, but he doesn't really, in the vast majority of his work. Its just there. A reflection of the man behind the novels. (And that may be interesting too... if you are studying Heinlein, the man, but it really has no bearing on the meaning of the novel, and ultimately detracts from them, IMO.
And indeed it is OK to sleep with your mom (and with all your other family members who might yield offspring too), once technology removes the danger of genetic mishaps.
1) While you might think that makes it 'ok', Heinlein didn't have that requirement. Farnham's Freehold postulated incest for reproduction, and with unmitigated zeal too, rather than any sort of reluctance at the supposed 'necessity'.
2) Its one thing for an author to explore a 'taboo', particularly in hard SF. However, Heinlein explored incest a little more zealously. To the point it was pretty much a given in anything he wrote as he got older that wasn't aimed explicitly at kids.
It wasn't -just- Time Enough For Love. It was Time Enough for Love, The Number of the Beast, Farnham's Freehold, To Sail Beyond the Sunset, Job, The Cat who Walks Through Walls, All You Zombies... etc...
Titles like "I will fear no evil" which could have been (should have been) a brilliant study of the nature of identity, age, gender, and law -- starts out well, but devolved into a sordid series of loosely connected vignettes about an aging lech who seduces and enthusiastically fucks everything he encounters with his new sexy body, while 'melding souls' with its previous owner.
It is also somewhat telling that practically ALL of his female characters were relentlessly promiscuous, and even in his books aimed at a younger audience his female characters were unfailingly sexually precocious when you consider their age.
But most importantly, Heinlein didn't explore sexuality, its meaning, its effects on people, on relationships. He didn't vary it from setting to setting, or contrast it with other lifestyles. Over a couple dozen novels his characters just did it, enthusiastically and without restraint, with anything that moved, and it was implictly correct, and delivered with a sense of superiority - that anyone who might disagree is just unenlightened.
That's not an element of Hard SF. At best its a case of the author's own bias and proclivities 'showing through'. At worst its pontificating, plain and simple. In Heinlein's case I'm inclined to believe the latter. Far too much plot, and effort were dedicated to it in title after title after title for it to be merely inadvertantly 'showing through'.
I strongly disagree with you.
This may be unpopular, but how can numbers possibly be a significant enough threat to land one in prison? (A digital image file is a very large number.)
Same goes for an email I sent commanding an underling to execute your brother. It shouldn't be allowed as evidence... just a number.
Same goes for the pdf printout of active covert agents complete with pictures, and current assignments I'm selling on CD over ebay. Nothing illegal here... just a number.
Same goes for the programs on my computer that I was using to operate my botnet that I use to spam, and phish bank accounts. That's not a evidence... yup... just a number.
These aren't merly numbers. They are numbers that mean something.
Yes, by all means, find the people who perpetrated the original crime of your term child abuse
I would suggest that:
1) Images depicting child pornography are evidence of (usually multiple) serious crimes. It is illegal to knowingly and intentionally suppress evidence of a crime. In effect possession of child porn makes you an accessory to the act.
2) Images depicting child pornography perpetrate the crime and further victimize the victims. Its bad enough that your father raped you. But then to live on knowing that their are strangers freely exchanging those images for their erotic amusement, with no possible recourse is further victimization.
Not to mention, if possession of the images is legalised - then bullies at school or elsewhere can confront you with the images with relative impunity. A google search of your name may well turn up those images.
It think it is in societies interest to be compassionate and respect and protect the victims of crimes, particularly sex crimes, from this sort of perpetual humiliation and victimization.
However, once a society makes owning a number a crime, it makes it very easy to "frame" people who hold unpopular-but-not-illegal beliefs: just push some child pornography into their computer, or easier, "find" some photos in their car.
Its very nearly just as easy to plant any other type of criminal evidence if you are looking to frame someone.
I use 3-ply you insensitive clod. Technically it has 18 sides.
Would anyone really prefer a world without albums like Sgt. Pepper, What's Goin' On, It Takes a Nation of Millions To Hold Us Back, Electric LadyLand, Dark Side of The Moon, Kind of Blue, Purple Rain, etc, to be replaced by a bunch of singles?
Have you heard the other 14 tracks on the last [insert pop sensation here]'s album?
That sort of music doesn't need an album. Period. So albums, for that group of people is going to disappear. Big loss. The next generations Britney Spears doesn't get a record deal, she gets her 6 singles over 4 years, and then we never hear from her again.
But you are mistaken if you think its going to stop the likes of David Bowie, Alice Cooper, Pink Floyd, Prince, Nine Inch Nails,... hell even the likes of Eminem or the Fugees from releasing full albums, or concept albums. The market will bear those albums.
Economics 101: Price = Demand/Supply
;)
.Net developers, which in theory means that Java has a higher demand/supply ration than C#.
The world is more complex than Ec 101
You are assuming that there is equal demand for Java and C# developers, but a lesser supply of C# developers.
Not quite. I am *projecting* that if people start sounding off that c# has been 'dealt a death blow' while pronouncing that 'java is growing bigger everyday' that the supply of new c# coders will dry up, while the supply of new java coders will boom.
From my own looking around, the average offered pay for Java developers is higher than for
That is true today. I'm am looking at the future. I suspect that in this case the elasticity of supply exceeds the elasticity of demand. If Java is the 'big thing', than it will become supply flooded fairly quickly...
-cheers
I don't think either or going anywhere anytime soon. But the flipside to your post is that if Java becomes that ubiquitous it will be easy to get a job, but hard to get paid well because the market will be flooded with Java guys/gals. The C# guys will get paid more because of the relative supply constraints. ;)
People with pacemakers tend to have issues with the 'beat now' signal reaching their heart at the correct time. They tend to have irregular heartbeats, skip beats, etc.
The body is already providing all the power that is needed, its just got a signalling problem. The pacemaker merely provides a steady signal.
In many respects its very similiar to the spark system in a car.
They're doing the same thing with Holmes on Homes, on HGTV.
Actually that's a good candidate. Its a show that is part informative, but mostly just fluff punctuated by pointless scenes of banging, sawing, pouring concrete, or carrying wood, etc. I find the content of the show interesting enough, but all I want is the 6 minutes that are acutally relevant...
1) What the situation is.
2) What was done.
3) Why/How it was done.
4) The finished product
I don't want or need to see the poor homeowner moan at the start about her life, or jump up and down all giddy at the end. And I don't need all the busywork. And above all I especially don't need to see what's "coming up after the commercial break" immediately before the commercial break. Nor am I a retarded moron that needs to be reminded of what I saw previously in the same half hour episode every 4 minutes. I can easily see watching an episode in 5-6 minutes.
Mythbusters, is just as bad. As are most 'project' or 'infotainment' shows.
News could benefit too. All those teaser "Coming up next" or "Is Cheerios killing your dog? Stay tuned and find out after this..." segments have turned me off the watching TV news.
However, it should be pointed out that this is a feature designed to protect the user.
It eliminates the risk of someone poisoning dns to redirect windows update somewhere else.
It also prevents windows update from failing simply because dns is down.
Windows update can easily be turned off by the user, and a decent firewall can also trivially block it. This isn't a 'conspiracy' or 'malicious' at all.
Now I'm running 4GB on Vista x64 and loving it,
There is a difference between "not having any issues with" and "actually benefitting from".
My RAM usage rarely cracks 1.5GB. Would having 4GB and x64 make my life measurably better? Of course not. It wouldn't make it worse... but that's hardly a reason to upgrade!
Get 4GB with x64! It won't make life worse! And hey, 1% of you might actually benefit!!
A bit of googling can resolve that whole "can't use unsigned drivers in Vista x64" thing as well.
I was pointing out that Microsofts whole WHQL certification push is a bit of a farce given how many drivers aren't certified.
Now you say a bug needs to be addressed in COH to make it run right on Vista x86. As I understand it, it isn't a bug with the software, it's simply running into a limitation of 32-bit computing.
Except that it also runs on Windows 98, ME, 2000, and XP (x32).
If it was running into a "limitation of 32-bit computing" that was insurmountable, then really, it should only be supported under XP x64 and Vista x64. Clearly that is not the case.
If its crashing under Vista x32 then there is either a bug in Vista or a bug in CoH. But there is clearly not some 'fundamental limitation of 32-bit computing' at issue here if Win98 and Win2000 are supported platforms.
Unless your argument is that it is not POSSIBLE to increase the care of others without decreasing the care of a few, then you have no point here.
At any given price point, yes, that is the tradeoff. Only if you put more money into the system it is possible of increasing the care of some without decreasing anyone elses care.
In Canada, for overall care to increase, taxes have to increase. Obviously there must be a balance between taxes and care.
In the US how does overall care improve? More people have to have more money to afford care. How exactly is that going to happen? And if it does happen, wouldn't prices just go up?
And some people get WORSE care.
Unfortunately yes.
You care more about "overall,"
I care about myself.
Why should I care more about the rich elite?
Why should anyone, except of course the rich elite?
If everyone simply thinks about *themself* then the Canadian system would get more votes, because it benefits more people. Isn't that how democracy is supposed to work?
but to most Americans, it is not acceptable to harm the few for the sake of the many, if there are other alternatives.
Oh Really?
Why is that?
That American's have a system that favors the few over the many simply represents a good con job by that few. Its no coincidence that the country is run by the same elite group that benefits most from the current system.
Its right out of Orwell or Huxley... the proles and the gamma's... the elite tell them the system is for their own best interests, and they beleive it... despite being little more than slaves.
I think if 'most american's' were actually properly informed of what their situation is and what it would be under each system, most american's would choose a Canadian style system in their own self-interest.
In a system 200 people eat caviar, 2000 people eat mcdonalds, and 20,000 people don't eat. And you propose a system where 22,200 people all have to eat mcdonalds what do think is going happen? 2000 people will vote depending on whether they think they are close to joining the 200 or closer to joining the 200000. The 20000 hungry votes for the new system - they benefit. 200 against it - they don't.
The only reason this hasn't happened in america is that 200 control the media, politics, and everything else, and have convinced the 20000 that 'socialized' health care won't work or simply refuse to discuss it at all. And since they run the country if they don't talk about it, it doesn't get talked about.
You can't get a 32bit driver WHQL certified anymore unless there is a 64bit version.
Most of the 3rd party hardware I own still isn't WHQL certified. If the drivers aren't bundled with windows I pretty much expect to hit "continue anyway" at least once.
Who needs 64bit? Today, all Vista users that are gamers.
Most gamers aren't even convinced they need Vista, nevermind Vista x64.
Company of Heroes (for non gamers out there it's a RTS set in ww2 that is a Games For Windows game and it won a ton of Game of the Year 2006 awards-It's a pretty big fully windows designed game, not just some weird exception to the rule nobody plays that I've found.)
Good point. It also runs just fine on Windows 98 though, which suggests that Vista x64 is hardly a requirement.
will actually run out of Virtual Address space and crash in Vista when CoH worked fine on the exact same system using XP drivers!
As I said, it also works fine on Windows 98. That its crashing on Vista x32 while it runs on x64 is not an indication that we all need x64, but rather that there is a bug somewhere that needs to be addressed.
Frankly, I've heard FAR more complaints about games in x64 than x32. Granted that's really primarily a result of the x64 driver situation, but the reason is irrelevant -- gamers by and large are better off on x32. Actually... they are still better off on XP right now.
Every new computer should have a 64bit OS now.
Why? Seriously. Why? Why do we need to shift an OS/platform whose only advantage is support for more RAM than 99% of users have, when even 99% of new computers still ship with 2GB or LESS? We need IPv6 a hell of a lot more than we need x64.
MS might be able to use its market power and sheer brute force to make us move to x64 (and that's really a 'bad thing'), but we don't need it yet. Not by a long shot.
It's sold as "Windows XP Professional x64 edition". That strongly implies that it's a subset/variant of "Windows XP Professional", which *is* listed.
It is a variant. But its a platform variant not a feature variant. What else should they call it? It *IS* windows XP profressional after all. If MS had released an Itanium edition, or a G5 edition you wouldn't automatically assume it would work, right? Same thing here.
I probably wouldn't, but I think a lot of people would, and I wouldn't blame them for that.
I agree I don't really blame people for being confused about x32 vs x64 especially as they can run on the same chips and x64 is largely backwards compatible. I also agree that Apple should probably have a disclaimer "no it doesn't work with x64 windows yet". Its a confusing situation they are used to coping with what with concurrently supporting PPC and Intel CPUs right now. They could be handling this better.
BUT, in the case of x64, I think if you are running x64 you sort of take it on yourself to know what you are getting into and to do proper diligence. x64 edition is not a mainstream platform/OS marketed to Joe Consumer, so Joe Consumer really shouldn't have it. And if he does, then he went out of his way to get it, and he should be aware of what he's gotten himself into, and should take some ownership over the issue of trying to ascertain compatibility when buying new hardware/software.