Because true patriots turn a blind eye when their own government begins violates the fundamental human rights that they criticize other governments of violating.
Quick! Look over there! A politician in another country is being bribed!
The part where you go off about the speed of the parts and the die size, without considering such things as the experience of the designers in avoiding inevitable bugs.
You said it yourself; the Chinese have been doing this processor business for about 9 years, while Intel has been doing it for about 30. What on earth makes you think that the people with 3x the experience are stupider? If a veteran company such as Intel can make terrible mistakes like FDIV or the more recent Sandy Bridge recall, what makes you think some relative noobs won't make such mistakes?
At least in the US, when Intel gets nailed, we hear about it in the press. Do you think the repressive Chinese government would let the media know that their country's national processor has a flaw?
There's so much more to processors than process and clock speed. Processors are multi-core now; how much do you trust Chinese cache coherency? Do you trust that their VLSI folks won't screw up with something like an FDIV bug or worse?
I will honestly be surprised if they can surpass Intel or AMD. How much of Longsoon's success is made possible only because Intel and AMD wrote the book on processors?
The lack of competition allows an oligopoly to manipulate the market and artificially inflate the cost of a service by four orders of magnitude. But you're a good little customer, paying whatever your corporate masters think you should pay for a service, instead of what the market actually prices the service at. You even go so far as to be thankful that they retroactively applied some lube to the ass-raping they gave you with per-message fees. Then you justify this abuse with the straw man that "everyone needs to make a profit", even though my argument was never that companies should not make a profit on anything.
It makes me wonder what you think about banning drug reimportation. I would bet that you side with the ban, believing that Big Pharma has a right to their profit, even though consumers ought to have the right to get their drugs from wherever they want. So much for a free market.
The only reasonable price for this bandwidth is $0. It gets used whether or not you text. Why should it cost you extra to put meaningful information into the payload, as opposed to random garbage?
Every time your phone pings a cell phone tower, it transmits a packet of data to and from the tower. This packet of data has some spare space at the end. This bit of room is where the put the text message data.
Your phone is using the text message's bandwidth whether or not you're sending or receiving a text message.
Quite the racket they've got going, making you pay to make use of bandwidth that you're already consuming regardless of the use of text messages.
I would like to thank you for your thoughtful reply to my comment.
That aside, it's naught much more than angsty rhetoric (borne of poor reasoning) to call them tyrants
That line was a quote from Law and Order: SVU, which is I believe a quote from Aesop's Fables. And it wouldn't apply to all judges, obviously, but having the power to imprison and fine people who don't show you enough respect...that's the power of a tyrant. Certainly, the fallible nature of humans ensures some of them shall abuse their privilege. Of those...how many do you think would try to find some pretext of the law in order to justify whatever outcome they wanted personally? How many of them would use their personal feelings in order to aggravate or mitigate the outcomes of their rulings while staying within the boundaries of the law?
Judges are simply people, some of them are unscrupulous, others incorruptible, some are stupid, others are virtually sages, but like any group of people most of them lie in the middle. They're neither angels nor devils. [...] There is no reason beyond sophistry to pretend that they are in some way egregiously deficient in comparison to other human constructs, or individually inferior in both utility and character to other human beings.
Be careful of the straw man. Ask not why judges are inferior...ask why judges are superior. Indeed, we agree that judges are like all other people in terms of character and utility.
My argument is, specifically, why should a person who creates nothing for society be allowed to imprison and/or fine another person for refusing to use an honorary? What makes them superior to all the other people who at least make something that's actually useful? Why do they deserve those gigantic buildings that are kept in immaculate shape at taxpayer expense more than a fire department driving an old fire truck?
I do not believe that the justice system is unnecessary, however flawed it may be. I merely question why they should be so much more important than a guy who saves lives every day. Your doctor would get mad if you don't call him Dr., but he can't throw you in jail.
You say a Judge has a position of honor in our society. For what reason should we honor them?
Do they build homes or cars?
Do they design electronics or circuits?
Do they use medicine to heal people or animals?
Do they educate the young?
Do they put their lives on the line to protect us from crime or fire?
Do they make great discoveries that advance human knowledge?
They create nothing to help the people of this nation. The only reason they deserve any "honor" is because they can forcibly put you in a jail cell for the words that come out of your mouth. The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny.
If it weren't for assholes like you who wish to keep a patient's own data from them, perhaps more people would understand these things. Maybe if the doctors actually TALKED TO THEIR PATIENTS instead of just treating them like some lab animal, more people would understand these things. Maybe, just maybe, people aren't as dumb as you think they are.
He made a big post quoting Senator Inhofe that there are still some emails that "warranted further investigation". That line was taken out of context, and one of his commenters added the next sentence to the quote, which totally changed the nature and tone.
“In our own review of all 1,073 CRU emails, we found eight emails which, in our judgment, warranted further examination to clarify any possible issues involving the scientific integrity of particular NOAA scientists or NOAA’s data. As a result, we conducted interviews with the relevant NOAA scientists regarding these eight emails, and have summarized their responses and explanations in the enclosure.”
That's taken so badly out of context that this guy should look into getting a job at Fox News. The very next sentence of the quote disproves the entire allegation made by the headline.
I support the right to free speech. However, these rights have limitations (fire in a crowded theater, etc). Harassment is one such limitation. Going to funerals and waving signs celebrating the loss of life with the intent on causing emotional distress for their specifically selected targets is definitely harassment and does not deserve free speech protections.
They can sit in their church and preach all the hate they want, and I will support their right to do that. They can post as much hate as they want on their blog, and I will support their right to do that. But when they take the step of going to a funeral with the specific intention of inflicting emotional harm on the family of the deceased...I do not support that.
Constant war is a constitutionally required function of the government? Perhaps the "Department of Defense" would be more aptly named the "Department of Foreign Military Intervention."
I also didn't know that warrantless surveillance by the NSA was a constitutionally required function of government; quite the contrary, such warrantless surveillance ought to be illegal due to the Fourth Amendment.
For instance, Nintendo happens to sign your save game files with a per-console key. This allows developers the option to lock their game's saves to the console, preventing you from moving them from one machine to the next. Certain homebrew applications were created that allowed you to actually back up your save file.
This hit me when I bought Ghost Squad. I unlocked a bunch of guns, and wanted to take the game to a friend's house to play on his Wii. I tried to copy my save file to the SD Card, and it told me no. That's some balls, telling me that I can't copy my own save file. WTF?
Slashdot Mirror
Because true patriots turn a blind eye when their own government begins violates the fundamental human rights that they criticize other governments of violating.
Quick! Look over there! A politician in another country is being bribed!
It's one thing to copy someone else's successful designs, and a whole different thing to make your own.
The part where you go off about the speed of the parts and the die size, without considering such things as the experience of the designers in avoiding inevitable bugs.
Whoa there, watch the straw men.
You said it yourself; the Chinese have been doing this processor business for about 9 years, while Intel has been doing it for about 30. What on earth makes you think that the people with 3x the experience are stupider? If a veteran company such as Intel can make terrible mistakes like FDIV or the more recent Sandy Bridge recall, what makes you think some relative noobs won't make such mistakes?
At least in the US, when Intel gets nailed, we hear about it in the press. Do you think the repressive Chinese government would let the media know that their country's national processor has a flaw?
1999 called and they want their MHz myth back.
There's so much more to processors than process and clock speed. Processors are multi-core now; how much do you trust Chinese cache coherency? Do you trust that their VLSI folks won't screw up with something like an FDIV bug or worse?
I will honestly be surprised if they can surpass Intel or AMD. How much of Longsoon's success is made possible only because Intel and AMD wrote the book on processors?
That's because he used 0.0001s = 100us in his post. The math was good; the units were bad.
The lack of competition allows an oligopoly to manipulate the market and artificially inflate the cost of a service by four orders of magnitude. But you're a good little customer, paying whatever your corporate masters think you should pay for a service, instead of what the market actually prices the service at. You even go so far as to be thankful that they retroactively applied some lube to the ass-raping they gave you with per-message fees. Then you justify this abuse with the straw man that "everyone needs to make a profit", even though my argument was never that companies should not make a profit on anything.
It makes me wonder what you think about banning drug reimportation. I would bet that you side with the ban, believing that Big Pharma has a right to their profit, even though consumers ought to have the right to get their drugs from wherever they want. So much for a free market.
When I make a phone call, there are further routing and carrier handoffs. Those aren't free, and yet I'm not charged per phone call, but per minute.
The only reasonable price for this bandwidth is $0. It gets used whether or not you text. Why should it cost you extra to put meaningful information into the payload, as opposed to random garbage?
"basically" nothing?
Every time your phone pings a cell phone tower, it transmits a packet of data to and from the tower. This packet of data has some spare space at the end. This bit of room is where the put the text message data.
Your phone is using the text message's bandwidth whether or not you're sending or receiving a text message.
Quite the racket they've got going, making you pay to make use of bandwidth that you're already consuming regardless of the use of text messages.
I would like to thank you for your thoughtful reply to my comment.
That line was a quote from Law and Order: SVU, which is I believe a quote from Aesop's Fables. And it wouldn't apply to all judges, obviously, but having the power to imprison and fine people who don't show you enough respect...that's the power of a tyrant. Certainly, the fallible nature of humans ensures some of them shall abuse their privilege. Of those...how many do you think would try to find some pretext of the law in order to justify whatever outcome they wanted personally? How many of them would use their personal feelings in order to aggravate or mitigate the outcomes of their rulings while staying within the boundaries of the law?
Be careful of the straw man. Ask not why judges are inferior...ask why judges are superior. Indeed, we agree that judges are like all other people in terms of character and utility.
My argument is, specifically, why should a person who creates nothing for society be allowed to imprison and/or fine another person for refusing to use an honorary? What makes them superior to all the other people who at least make something that's actually useful? Why do they deserve those gigantic buildings that are kept in immaculate shape at taxpayer expense more than a fire department driving an old fire truck?
I do not believe that the justice system is unnecessary, however flawed it may be. I merely question why they should be so much more important than a guy who saves lives every day. Your doctor would get mad if you don't call him Dr., but he can't throw you in jail.
You say a Judge has a position of honor in our society. For what reason should we honor them?
Do they build homes or cars?
Do they design electronics or circuits?
Do they use medicine to heal people or animals?
Do they educate the young?
Do they put their lives on the line to protect us from crime or fire?
Do they make great discoveries that advance human knowledge?
They create nothing to help the people of this nation. The only reason they deserve any "honor" is because they can forcibly put you in a jail cell for the words that come out of your mouth. The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny.
So freedom of speech stops at the court room door, huh?
If it weren't for assholes like you who wish to keep a patient's own data from them, perhaps more people would understand these things. Maybe if the doctors actually TALKED TO THEIR PATIENTS instead of just treating them like some lab animal, more people would understand these things. Maybe, just maybe, people aren't as dumb as you think they are.
I looked at his web site. He looks like a kinder, gentler climate denier, but still full of propaganda.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/24/inspector-general-finds-noaa-climategate-emails-warrant-further-investigation/#comment-607154
He made a big post quoting Senator Inhofe that there are still some emails that "warranted further investigation". That line was taken out of context, and one of his commenters added the next sentence to the quote, which totally changed the nature and tone.
“In our own review of all 1,073 CRU emails, we found eight emails which, in our judgment, warranted further examination to clarify any possible issues involving the scientific integrity of particular NOAA scientists or NOAA’s data. As a result, we conducted interviews with the relevant NOAA scientists regarding these eight emails, and have summarized their responses and explanations in the enclosure.”
That's taken so badly out of context that this guy should look into getting a job at Fox News. The very next sentence of the quote disproves the entire allegation made by the headline.
I didn't realize that Courage to Resist is supported by Anonymous. Does CtR even *want* Anonymous' support?
I suppose if Anonymous suddenly starts supporting, say, eBay, then by your argument PayPal should stop handling funds for eBay.
In fact, maybe that would be their next plan of attack. Just start supporting people that they want PayPal to stop handling funds for.
Actually, "misguided" means "Jim Crow called and he wants his racism back."
They are a business, they have the right to refuse service to someone.
Can PayPal refuse to offer service to African Americans?
And I would think that if his lawyers were lying, people would be plastering such evidence all over the Internet.
I was under the impression that Sweden gave him permission to leave the country. How could he skip town if they let him leave?
No political fallout at all. None.
I support the right to free speech. However, these rights have limitations (fire in a crowded theater, etc). Harassment is one such limitation. Going to funerals and waving signs celebrating the loss of life with the intent on causing emotional distress for their specifically selected targets is definitely harassment and does not deserve free speech protections.
They can sit in their church and preach all the hate they want, and I will support their right to do that. They can post as much hate as they want on their blog, and I will support their right to do that. But when they take the step of going to a funeral with the specific intention of inflicting emotional harm on the family of the deceased...I do not support that.
Can I get a receipt for that change?
Constant war is a constitutionally required function of the government? Perhaps the "Department of Defense" would be more aptly named the "Department of Foreign Military Intervention."
I also didn't know that warrantless surveillance by the NSA was a constitutionally required function of government; quite the contrary, such warrantless surveillance ought to be illegal due to the Fourth Amendment.
...they don't abuse the power.
For instance, Nintendo happens to sign your save game files with a per-console key. This allows developers the option to lock their game's saves to the console, preventing you from moving them from one machine to the next. Certain homebrew applications were created that allowed you to actually back up your save file.
This hit me when I bought Ghost Squad. I unlocked a bunch of guns, and wanted to take the game to a friend's house to play on his Wii. I tried to copy my save file to the SD Card, and it told me no. That's some balls, telling me that I can't copy my own save file. WTF?