as I've been really wanting to set up a Solaris box at home, this could be just the excuse I needed. Actually, being a bit of a Mac freak (amongst other things), I've been looking forward to Eazel's software - sadly, I haven't been too up on it as of late (5 month old kid and all), but hearing this really seems to be a good thing. If Eazel's product weren't worth it, I doubt we'd be seeing 2 big companies announcing their use of it.
Are you sure you wouldn't want a million Exanode beowulf cluster of 9.99 x 10^(100 x 10^(100 x 10^99999) Exahertz Processors,
2 x 10^1000000 way SMP? That would be a lot better, IMHO.
Well, yeah... but, don't you think that might be overkill?
Until someone can put together a 400-way SMP of 9.5 PetaHertz processors, and do it for under $2500, I'll just keep on waiting... of course, I'll need to cryo freeze myself for several hundred years at least, but that's beside the point.
Hey! I think you're onto something with this SMBP idea. Just don't let one of them become known as "The One" and he suddenly takes control of a robotic arm . ..
I see an opportunity here... if we can just adjust the thing to handle really big bags of refuse - think of all the landfills that could be replaced if we could squish the bejeezees out of all our trash and stick it in a big tunnel!
Hot damn! Someone who actually thinks the way me and my wife do. My athiest friend would sh*t a brick over this - not to mention your very excellent point, that many athiests take their "belief" on "faith", and many tend to be very zealous about it, too.
Ya know, if marketed properly, anything that looks like barf could sell quite well. Think of all the gag companies making fake barf... now think of a laptop that looked literally like barf - who the hell would steal that? Might be the perfect security solution!
As a musician, the one thing that I constantly find amusing is people thinking of music/songs as "information". Generally, I think of songs as art and/or entertainment. We need to stop insisting that music in mere information and begin to see the bigger picture - outside the box of the RIAA and buisnesses. Does music want to be free: who cares? What needs to be taken into consideration here is what is the intent of the music. If we see a song from a purely entertainment point of view, then the purpose of the song may be strictly "give and take" - I give you song, you give me compensation. If the music is more on the artistic side, then it serves its own purpose. I either of these cases, it is up to the artist to determine if they desire compensation for their work. If I spend hours working on a song, developing harmonies, arranging parts, recording the song, etc. then its entirely up to me to decide what to do with it: if I give it away, then its a free-for-all - come and get it; if I feel the need to be compensated for my work, my vision, then its up to me to find a way to be compensated.
To get back to Mr. Petreley's article - he is absolutely right, information does not want to be free, people want it. Just as there is a big upsurge in people that want music to be free. Music wants nothing - it is not a person, a thing - it is a concept, an idea, a form of expression, a form of entertainment. The people that make music, well, as I've attempted to say, its up to them whether or not they want their music to be free or not.
Personally, I don't care one way or the other. I don't create music to make a living, I do it because I enjoy it. Likewise, I am in no way in foavor of the RIAA's lawsuit - that's just old-school thinking... I hope that one day soon they'll see the light. Do I care for the buisness model operated by so much of the recording industry - no. The power should lie with the musicians. And on that note, the musicians need to take a real stand in the midst of all this.
Enough of my ranting - as unintelligable as it may be... I've got things to see, people to do.
Slashdot Mirror
anyway, you now have my trivial opinion. Enjoy!
Just wondering.
Well, yeah... but, don't you think that might be overkill?
That would rule!
Not that I would ever be sarcastic or anything...
Hot damn! Someone who actually thinks the way me and my wife do. My athiest friend would sh*t a brick over this - not to mention your very excellent point, that many athiests take their "belief" on "faith", and many tend to be very zealous about it, too.
Ya know, if marketed properly, anything that looks like barf could sell quite well. Think of all the gag companies making fake barf... now think of a laptop that looked literally like barf - who the hell would steal that? Might be the perfect security solution!
To get back to Mr. Petreley's article - he is absolutely right, information does not want to be free, people want it. Just as there is a big upsurge in people that want music to be free. Music wants nothing - it is not a person, a thing - it is a concept, an idea, a form of expression, a form of entertainment. The people that make music, well, as I've attempted to say, its up to them whether or not they want their music to be free or not.
Personally, I don't care one way or the other. I don't create music to make a living, I do it because I enjoy it. Likewise, I am in no way in foavor of the RIAA's lawsuit - that's just old-school thinking... I hope that one day soon they'll see the light. Do I care for the buisness model operated by so much of the recording industry - no. The power should lie with the musicians. And on that note, the musicians need to take a real stand in the midst of all this.
Enough of my ranting - as unintelligable as it may be... I've got things to see, people to do.