With all the ISPs I've been with here in Australia upstream either isn't metered or counts towards your downstream cap. The I always thought ISPs encouraged you to upload since it puts them in a better position to bargain about peering deals.
The ISP I'm switching to at the moment (for the higher speeds) even gives you a static IP address, surely not something they would do if they didn't want you running a server.
When consumers have to buy their upgrades/repairs off you, you can afford to perhaps charge less to get them hooked. There's a bit of a conflict of interest there, isn't there?
I also think that the PlayStation 1 fanboys are starting to grow out of it, and the PS2 didn't generate nearly as many fanboys, so Sony doesn't have a so much of a free ride as they had with the PS2.
Of course one could argue that "understanding" is a result of evolutionary process and emergence. And that survival of the fittest requires a species that understands how to avoid such things as meteor impacts and even such things of deaths of their stars. No.. It requires that genetic variation within a population makes some organisms better at surviving meteor strikes than others, and that meteor strikes occur regularly enough to cause selection of those genes.
Would these genes manifest themselves as making dinosaurs understand meteors? No, to survive they would only have to understand "bright light+load sound = get in water/underground/cave".
These same dinosaurs that might evolve to run from meteors might find the thought that meteors are just rocks highly unintuitive; evolution doesn't favor understanding but survival.
Evolution doesn't allow for understanding to emerge just in case a cataclysm occurs in the distant future either. If it can't occur gradually it can't evolve, so how do you evolve to withstand a black hole or meteor impact?
Are you saying that you can't discover new technologies using quantum mechanics because it doesn't follow common sense?
Or worse; are you saying science isn't worthwhile as a search for truth, and that scientific pursuits are only worthwhile when it helps create new products for consumption?
You might be interested to read about David Bohm's interesting theory - though a lot of people think it's garbage, it does illuminate the lengths you must go to to fashion a theory that is consistent with quantum mechanics yet doesn't completely shred your common sense notions of reality. What does common sense have to do with anything? The way we experience the world wasn't set up to be able to understand it, but to survive in it.
When we see an insect being tricked into thinking an orchid is a female insect we think "That orchid doesn't look anything like an insect, what a strange mistake to make", and a bat might use echo location and see us being aroused by something that simply has the texture and shape of a piece of paper which doesn't resemble the texture or shape of a female human and wonder how we could make such a mistake.
Our common sense and intuition don't necessarily tell us what's true, especially when it doesn't relate the world we evolved in, so we have to rely on experiments, and quantum theory constantly makes accurate predictions. If it's beyond our common sense and intuition then that's too bad for us.
Iran has no control over uranium in the event of embargoes, but it does have control over its oil reserves.
Can you give me a reference for that 3000% difference? Does it include the price of reactors, enrichment facilities and waste disposal? I always thought oil was a cheap but dirty fuel which is why some governments are subsidizing nuclear. (I'm fairly pro-nuclear incidentally, so let's not bring anti- agendas into the discussion.)
To paraphrase Jesus; the Spectrum was made for the Z80, not Z80 for the Spectrum. The Z80 was made about 5 years before the first Spectrum, and the Spectrum was by no means its first or only use by a long shot.
That's a rather huge if, he came across like someone who is desperate to make his idea work long after everyone has realized it won't. I wrote this just after having seen his Google talk so I won't rewrite it:
I watched the whole thing though I'm sad to say; what a waste of time. In a nutshell:
Fusion is simple and elegant, it powers the stars, just take a look at the sun to see it work!
The Tomakak is just a problem on top of a problem, it's going nowhere fast.
So we had this ingenious idea for making charged particles go into the center of a load of magnets oriented in a certain way which would solve all the Tomakak's problems.
The first one we tried the particles escaped onto the metal welds which bring the magnets together.
The second one didn't have metal welds, but the particles escaped onto the magnets themselves.
The third one had insulated magnets, but the particles escaped onto the metal stands.
For the nth one we insulated everything, and on *the day* before we lost all funding and had to close the lab down we achieved some fusion! We now know exactly what we're going to do!
It will solve world hunger, create a stable economy, enable space travel, make ethanol viable, stop the oil wars, cure cancer, etc.
It's all in this paper I wrote, it doesn't actually have any formulas or concrete evidence in it "but it does talk about it".
Now all we need is $200M funding to build the final thing *cough*and solve the crippling engineering problems*cough*. Questions?
If you want to prove that you're not full of it why not rebuild the last machine you built, which would be relatively cheap, to recreate the results you got the day before you had to close the labs down?
- Well the $200M will build ones which will be 50x better, one of them will be a dodecahedron.
It looks like the military thought exactly the same thing by the way, hence the much smaller amount of funding.
Why is no-one funding you?
- No-one thinks outside the box. If you let me choose who goes on the panel who gets to decide whether it's worthwhile I'll pick some people who can think outside the box. There are lots of people in China and other countries who can think outside the box, and if I don't get funding here in America I'll give my patents to China for free and you wouldn't want that. (I'm not making this up, he literally threatened the audience with giving the tech to China for free)
How do you get the helium waste products out?
- We have a grid on the outside which lets the helium slowly come to a stop, we haven't tried this yet but it's an engineering problem. There are also serious problems with arcing due to the high voltages, but these are merely engineering problems not physics problems.
It disturbs me that this politician is being quoted as saying that Iran is dead-set on developing a nuclear weapon when there is absolutely no proof that is happening. That would be like saying that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions.
It always seemed strange to me that one of the most oil rich nations in the world would want to develop civilian nuclear power.
With Iran lots of people think "Iraq 2", but it's quite a different country. Dissent is allowed, the system of government is quite different, the leader doesn't live in a palace but lives a moderate life, and they actually are working towards weapons-grade uranium unlike Iraq (you can argue that they'll stop when they can enrich it enough for nuclear energy, but you can't argue that they aren't progressing towards weapons-grade enrichment).
The question is will consumer demand for better chips be enough to drive Intel to excel, or will AMD being less of a competitor make Intel kick its feet up and rake it in without innovation.
When I use GNU/Linux I expect it to work one way, a Windows user might expect it another way, a Mac user might expect it another way. GNU/Linux often does a good job of compromising, e.g. with Synaptic as a front end for apt.
Personally when I use a BSD based machine I expect a consistent UNIX filesystem structure, a software manager for automated installation of open source software, and the ability to have more than 10 people connect to me without having to pay for a much more expensive license.
Mac OS X does not do what I expect.
Then could you explain what the difference is between censorship laws and censorship by the back door because the press don't want to loose their privileged access to the president? At least with censorship laws you know that you can't trust the press. I find the voluntary censorship of the US press far more insidious. Great point, because the media never criticizes Bush.
blah blah blah blood for oil media enslavement American dream state of fear blah blah blah.
If it takes months and months why not just go with OEMs?
Personally I'm trying to wean myself off Dell's ridiculously expensive cartridges and refill them myself.
There seems to be a chip in the cartridge that reports how many pages are left though, so even after a refill it reports the same page number. The only question is what will happen when the counter reaches zero, and how much sooner will the printer die thanks to the refills.
Today AMD reported huge losses due to increasing competition against rival Intel.
In other news, AMD has started to release overclocked processors which increase the speed at the expense of power consumption, but with no R&D cost at all. I now totally cannot remember what the first news piece was.
Requiring administrative/root privileges to install software is the whole point. You are installing programs that are to be used system-wide. You need root privileges (granted to you via sudo) to do that. It's not a security hole when implemented properly. The point is that, unlike many Windows desktop, you're not running with 'root' privileges all the time. This is exactly what most Windows XP desktops are doing. You never need to be prompted for a 'root'/admin password when doing that, because you're always admin! That's insecure.
I think Linux distros would benefit a lot from making it possible to install apps under a user account. I always do this with custom compiled software, it seems logical to do it for possibly dubious (i.e universe repository) software that doesn't need to install things as admin. It would be reassuring to know that non-dependency/library, single user, non-system software never has admin permissions.
So you wake up, groggily stumble out of bed and tread on your alarm clock, which is basically a half-roller-skate, you slip and your forehead smashes your china lamp...
Damn Microsoft! We need to know what patches are being applied so we know what may fail. We need full disclosure!
Damn Microsoft! Their full disclosure is allowing hackers to write exploits; don't tell the hackers how to hack my system!
Damn Microsoft! They're kinda going half way in a vain attempt to stop people flaming, as if I'm going to stop doing that! Stick with one or the other, we'll flame you whatever you do anyway.
I'm not against weapons for "personal defense". If I had a shot gun, I could have calmly waited for them to knock the door in, and picked them off as they entered. There's a different perspective for you. ... Unless they had guns too of course.
The number of guns going around in countries which don't have so many deluded people like you have gone way down after being banned. When was the last high school shooting in Australia, Sweden, Canada, England, anywhere other than America?
It's more complicated than "easy access to guns means more school shootings", but easy access to guns does kinda help you know?
I know "Guns don't kill people, people kill people", right? But I think the gun helps
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe if they were a public company with some cash they would have been be the ones to buy InnoDB, instead of Oracle.
With all the ISPs I've been with here in Australia upstream either isn't metered or counts towards your downstream cap. The I always thought ISPs encouraged you to upload since it puts them in a better position to bargain about peering deals.
The ISP I'm switching to at the moment (for the higher speeds) even gives you a static IP address, surely not something they would do if they didn't want you running a server.
When consumers have to buy their upgrades/repairs off you, you can afford to perhaps charge less to get them hooked. There's a bit of a conflict of interest there, isn't there?
I also think that the PlayStation 1 fanboys are starting to grow out of it, and the PS2 didn't generate nearly as many fanboys, so Sony doesn't have a so much of a free ride as they had with the PS2.
Would these genes manifest themselves as making dinosaurs understand meteors? No, to survive they would only have to understand "bright light+load sound = get in water/underground/cave". These same dinosaurs that might evolve to run from meteors might find the thought that meteors are just rocks highly unintuitive; evolution doesn't favor understanding but survival.
Evolution doesn't allow for understanding to emerge just in case a cataclysm occurs in the distant future either. If it can't occur gradually it can't evolve, so how do you evolve to withstand a black hole or meteor impact?
Are you saying that you can't discover new technologies using quantum mechanics because it doesn't follow common sense?
Or worse; are you saying science isn't worthwhile as a search for truth, and that scientific pursuits are only worthwhile when it helps create new products for consumption?
When we see an insect being tricked into thinking an orchid is a female insect we think "That orchid doesn't look anything like an insect, what a strange mistake to make", and a bat might use echo location and see us being aroused by something that simply has the texture and shape of a piece of paper which doesn't resemble the texture or shape of a female human and wonder how we could make such a mistake.
Our common sense and intuition don't necessarily tell us what's true, especially when it doesn't relate the world we evolved in, so we have to rely on experiments, and quantum theory constantly makes accurate predictions. If it's beyond our common sense and intuition then that's too bad for us.
Iran has no control over uranium in the event of embargoes, but it does have control over its oil reserves.
Can you give me a reference for that 3000% difference? Does it include the price of reactors, enrichment facilities and waste disposal? I always thought oil was a cheap but dirty fuel which is why some governments are subsidizing nuclear. (I'm fairly pro-nuclear incidentally, so let's not bring anti- agendas into the discussion.)
To paraphrase Jesus; the Spectrum was made for the Z80, not Z80 for the Spectrum. The Z80 was made about 5 years before the first Spectrum, and the Spectrum was by no means its first or only use by a long shot.
That's a rather huge if, he came across like someone who is desperate to make his idea work long after everyone has realized it won't. I wrote this just after having seen his Google talk so I won't rewrite it:
I watched the whole thing though I'm sad to say; what a waste of time. In a nutshell:
If you want to prove that you're not full of it why not rebuild the last machine you built, which would be relatively cheap, to recreate the results you got the day before you had to close the labs down?
- Well the $200M will build ones which will be 50x better, one of them will be a dodecahedron.
It looks like the military thought exactly the same thing by the way, hence the much smaller amount of funding.
Why is no-one funding you?
- No-one thinks outside the box. If you let me choose who goes on the panel who gets to decide whether it's worthwhile I'll pick some people who can think outside the box. There are lots of people in China and other countries who can think outside the box, and if I don't get funding here in America I'll give my patents to China for free and you wouldn't want that. (I'm not making this up, he literally threatened the audience with giving the tech to China for free)
How do you get the helium waste products out?
- We have a grid on the outside which lets the helium slowly come to a stop, we haven't tried this yet but it's an engineering problem. There are also serious problems with arcing due to the high voltages, but these are merely engineering problems not physics problems.
It always seemed strange to me that one of the most oil rich nations in the world would want to develop civilian nuclear power.
With Iran lots of people think "Iraq 2", but it's quite a different country. Dissent is allowed, the system of government is quite different, the leader doesn't live in a palace but lives a moderate life, and they actually are working towards weapons-grade uranium unlike Iraq (you can argue that they'll stop when they can enrich it enough for nuclear energy, but you can't argue that they aren't progressing towards weapons-grade enrichment).
The question is will consumer demand for better chips be enough to drive Intel to excel, or will AMD being less of a competitor make Intel kick its feet up and rake it in without innovation.
When I use GNU/Linux I expect it to work one way, a Windows user might expect it another way, a Mac user might expect it another way. GNU/Linux often does a good job of compromising, e.g. with Synaptic as a front end for apt.
Personally when I use a BSD based machine I expect a consistent UNIX filesystem structure, a software manager for automated installation of open source software, and the ability to have more than 10 people connect to me without having to pay for a much more expensive license.
Mac OS X does not do what I expect.
blah blah blah blood for oil media enslavement American dream state of fear blah blah blah.
If it takes months and months why not just go with OEMs?
Personally I'm trying to wean myself off Dell's ridiculously expensive cartridges and refill them myself.
There seems to be a chip in the cartridge that reports how many pages are left though, so even after a refill it reports the same page number. The only question is what will happen when the counter reaches zero, and how much sooner will the printer die thanks to the refills.
Today AMD reported huge losses due to increasing competition against rival Intel.
In other news, AMD has started to release overclocked processors which increase the speed at the expense of power consumption, but with no R&D cost at all. I now totally cannot remember what the first news piece was.
Why not just buy a good book?
Now that would be terrifying.
Requiring administrative/root privileges to install software is the whole point. You are installing programs that are to be used system-wide. You need root privileges (granted to you via sudo) to do that. It's not a security hole when implemented properly. The point is that, unlike many Windows desktop, you're not running with 'root' privileges all the time. This is exactly what most Windows XP desktops are doing. You never need to be prompted for a 'root'/admin password when doing that, because you're always admin! That's insecure.
I think Linux distros would benefit a lot from making it possible to install apps under a user account. I always do this with custom compiled software, it seems logical to do it for possibly dubious (i.e universe repository) software that doesn't need to install things as admin. It would be reassuring to know that non-dependency/library, single user, non-system software never has admin permissions.I stand corrected
This is about Aero; now that there are some moderately priced DX10 cards out there Aero isn't just for rich gamers.
So you wake up, groggily stumble out of bed and tread on your alarm clock, which is basically a half-roller-skate, you slip and your forehead smashes your china lamp...
Coffee for me I think. (ahahar)
Damn Microsoft! We need to know what patches are being applied so we know what may fail. We need full disclosure!
Damn Microsoft! Their full disclosure is allowing hackers to write exploits; don't tell the hackers how to hack my system!
Damn Microsoft! They're kinda going half way in a vain attempt to stop people flaming, as if I'm going to stop doing that! Stick with one or the other, we'll flame you whatever you do anyway.
... Unless they had guns too of course.
The number of guns going around in countries which don't have so many deluded people like you have gone way down after being banned. When was the last high school shooting in Australia, Sweden, Canada, England, anywhere other than America?
It's more complicated than "easy access to guns means more school shootings", but easy access to guns does kinda help you know?
I know "Guns don't kill people, people kill people", right? But I think the gun helps