Sorry to be a bit knee jerk. After reading/. for a while one tends not to give ambiguous statements the benefit of the doubt they might deserve. ^_^ It's a good observation to say that there might be some benefit from the content provider being on the same network...but even that is debatable.
Sure, it should work that way. But my ping to some of @home's servers are worse than my pings to other states most of the time. Just because its the same network doesn't mean the designers have had the forsight to actually manage the traffic.;)
I think that is why the MS promotion is rather insidious; they aren't directly appealing to resellers as much as they are appealing to their employees. Dell might not want to tick off a major buyer, but all it takes is a report by anyone in the supply chain and MS has the info they want.
You're only partly correct. They cite the site license mistake specifically, but they are in fact interested in any volume purchase.
Even companies that are legally purchasing naked PCs to run other OS on can be subject to audits, and may in fact lose a lot of money due to mistakes in other areas of their IT departments.
An audit is threatening to almost/any/ business, regardless of how compliant they are trying to be...so the threat of such is a potentially powerful one. I think an argument exists that gathering information to (potentially) request an audit on businesses that choose not to buy Windows creates a chilling effect.
There is a lot of anti-MS FUD on/., and this article in particular was poorly presented. That doesn't mean there isn't a real story in there.
"MSN will be tuned to work really well for the Xbox" Like have low ping times and lots of bandwidth?
"A darker side to that theory is that MSN customers mighthave a rough time connecting a PS2 through the MSN network. " Nice karma grab.
MS isn't going to do the first, because any minor improvements they might make through optimization are going to be eaten away by the thousands of general computing users who don't use Xbox. They sure as hell aren't going to do the second, which would be clearly recognizable and get them in a lot of hot water both legally and with the public.
>>Yes, I am. Those points are irrelevant unless
>>you can show that they actually have anything
>>to do with sex crimes.
>I dont have to know that. It's been shown
>before. Read up on psychology and sexual
>behavior.
Actually, the point is that lots of people "know" things that are patently false...there is a lot of pseudoscience out there, and a lot of prominent (read: mediagenic) psychologists have gotten burned with silly ideas. (superpredators?)
If you want to make an argument by authority, you need to cite the source so that readers can see if it is a qualified authority.
While I will concede that some percentage of people are capable of being negatively influenced by porn, you've done nothing to bolster your assertion that even the most "degrading, abusive" examples of such have an effect on the average person.
Also, what about agressive team sports like tackle football, hockey, etc. These sports actively encourage real world violence, but I haven't heard much about banning them.
(firewall: I don't have a problem with these sports, I've played them and I think they are a lot of fun. My point is that everything in the environment can contribute to a person's psyche, and it's stupid to blame small parts of it for the total person's behavior)
AC is making a good point. If you are going to go out on a limb and say something like "X is a factor" you need to provide some evidence. I know plenty of people that both enjoy pornography and are sickened by the amount of sexual violence in the world.
2. This is also not a change, but you are still quite protected because the design of freenet makes it hard to assert that you are, in fact, breaking the law. (and thus hard to obtain a warrant)
3. Not going to happen in the U.S.--the right to anonymous expression of your 1st Amendment rights is constitutionally protected.
4. I don't think it is possible in the U.S. to declare something like freenet illegal, because you can't demonstrate that it is without redeeming value. You can shut down gnutella nodes or napster mainservers that are shown to be trafficing in illegal products, but I doubt these products could be made illegal because they have non-infringing uses.
I'm afraid I know nothing about the law in other countries, although I would suspect the rights of citizens are weak in the UK and China. That's all the more reason, though, to proliferate freenet...the real purpose behind it is not so much for the lucky people whose freedom of speech is unabdriged but for those who are otherwise unable to speak.
What's really bad is that it has become such a cliche with Hemos. _Every single @#$$@ article_ that refers to windows software comes with this holier-than-though editorial addition. Even if he/doesn't/ have any Windows boxen it's just self righteousness at this point--and I that's something that we have quite enough of already.
90% of the time it is cooler with the case open. That's probably because the average person doesn't have some fancy $150 case that was "designed with airflow in mind"...more than likely they have a $50 case designed with the bottom line in mind.
Well, of course they are. Existing packages are searched when deemed suspicious, and may be forwarded to customs or the DEA as appropriate.
In fact, postal inspectors can open any package they feel like...no probable cause is necessary, you've given up that right by entrusting your parcel to them.
As noted in this story. Seems like invasions of privacy are becoming more and more common as the laws designed to protect individuals become outdated.
I know its a fine line between protecting privacy and letting criminals go unhindered, but especially with the developments in the U.K. it's a bit scary.
I think that its too bad that economics have been so politically polarized. Sure Rep/Dem have agendas, but it seems like we're locked in a battle between taxing the rich and creating loopholes for them to escape from, instead of having some actual dialog on what taxes should be like for various income brackets.
If tax law were simplified it would be a lot easier to see where the money was really coming from, and it would end the existence of loopholes that exist only for those rich enough to pay CPAs to exploit them.
Ultimately this should be fairer--it will eliminate the gap between ostensible and actual taxation.
Exactly. Sure, B&W will run on a PII-400 with a TNT...but it won't run the way you want it to. It hums along much better on an Athlon 1 GHz/TNT2, but I could see it really rocking on a 1.5GHz Athlon/Geforce2 Pro. With the LoD it offers, its hard to say that any resolution would be too much. Add in all of the behind-the-scenes calculations with the physics engine, gesture recognition, creature growth, etc, and you have the potential to use a lot of hardware.
I think that the average user might be sated with current offerings, but there is still a significant demographic who needs the new hardware.
Try reading the article. The point is not that caches are bad on random access, the point was that due to the fetch algorithms employed by the P4 it used four times the bandwidth to transfer the same amount of data.
The implications for this are significant if you are running software that essentially accesses data randomly (accessing large data sets with few repeats). The problem is exacerbated, perhaps fatally, when you start scaling the number of CPUs, as this post pointed out.
Without having access to some good equipment it is hard to say, but I would guess that the thermal inertia of the sink is low enough that you could cycle rapidly...it wouldn't be a sudden, sustained drop after a few minutes.
For all the low C/W modern fan-heatsinks have, you'll note that there really isn't much to them when you compare it to a nice 0.5 C/W passive sink. This is fine for cooling if you have a fan, but the inertia of the sink isn't affected by the fan.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry to be a bit knee jerk. After reading /. for a while one tends not to give ambiguous statements the benefit of the doubt they might deserve. ^_^ It's a good observation to say that there might be some benefit from the content provider being on the same network...but even that is debatable.
;)
Sure, it should work that way. But my ping to some of @home's servers are worse than my pings to other states most of the time. Just because its the same network doesn't mean the designers have had the forsight to actually manage the traffic.
I think that is why the MS promotion is rather insidious; they aren't directly appealing to resellers as much as they are appealing to their employees. Dell might not want to tick off a major buyer, but all it takes is a report by anyone in the supply chain and MS has the info they want.
You're only partly correct. They cite the site license mistake specifically, but they are in fact interested in any volume purchase.
/any/ business, regardless of how compliant they are trying to be...so the threat of such is a potentially powerful one. I think an argument exists that gathering information to (potentially) request an audit on businesses that choose not to buy Windows creates a chilling effect.
/., and this article in particular was poorly presented. That doesn't mean there isn't a real story in there.
Even companies that are legally purchasing naked PCs to run other OS on can be subject to audits, and may in fact lose a lot of money due to mistakes in other areas of their IT departments.
An audit is threatening to almost
There is a lot of anti-MS FUD on
Oh please.
"MSN will be tuned to work really well for the Xbox" Like have low ping times and lots of bandwidth?
"A darker side to that theory is that MSN customers mighthave a rough time connecting a PS2 through the MSN network. " Nice karma grab.
MS isn't going to do the first, because any minor improvements they might make through optimization are going to be eaten away by the thousands of general computing users who don't use Xbox. They sure as hell aren't going to do the second, which would be clearly recognizable and get them in a lot of hot water both legally and with the public.
>>Yes, I am. Those points are irrelevant unless
>>you can show that they actually have anything
>>to do with sex crimes.
>I dont have to know that. It's been shown
>before. Read up on psychology and sexual
>behavior.
Actually, the point is that lots of people "know" things that are patently false...there is a lot of pseudoscience out there, and a lot of prominent (read: mediagenic) psychologists have gotten burned with silly ideas. (superpredators?)
If you want to make an argument by authority, you need to cite the source so that readers can see if it is a qualified authority.
While I will concede that some percentage of people are capable of being negatively influenced by porn, you've done nothing to bolster your assertion that even the most "degrading, abusive" examples of such have an effect on the average person.
Also, what about agressive team sports like tackle football, hockey, etc. These sports actively encourage real world violence, but I haven't heard much about banning them.
(firewall: I don't have a problem with these sports, I've played them and I think they are a lot of fun. My point is that everything in the environment can contribute to a person's psyche, and it's stupid to blame small parts of it for the total person's behavior)
AC is making a good point. If you are going to go out on a limb and say something like "X is a factor" you need to provide some evidence. I know plenty of people that both enjoy pornography and are sickened by the amount of sexual violence in the world.
1. As you say, this isn't a change
2. This is also not a change, but you are still quite protected because the design of freenet makes it hard to assert that you are, in fact, breaking the law. (and thus hard to obtain a warrant)
3. Not going to happen in the U.S.--the right to anonymous expression of your 1st Amendment rights is constitutionally protected.
4. I don't think it is possible in the U.S. to declare something like freenet illegal, because you can't demonstrate that it is without redeeming value. You can shut down gnutella nodes or napster mainservers that are shown to be trafficing in illegal products, but I doubt these products could be made illegal because they have non-infringing uses.
I'm afraid I know nothing about the law in other countries, although I would suspect the rights of citizens are weak in the UK and China. That's all the more reason, though, to proliferate freenet...the real purpose behind it is not so much for the lucky people whose freedom of speech is unabdriged but for those who are otherwise unable to speak.
What's really bad is that it has become such a cliche with Hemos. _Every single @#$$@ article_ that refers to windows software comes with this holier-than-though editorial addition. Even if he /doesn't/ have any Windows boxen it's just self righteousness at this point--and I that's something that we have quite enough of already.
Your mirror appears slashdotted as well.
90% of the time it is cooler with the case open. That's probably because the average person doesn't have some fancy $150 case that was "designed with airflow in mind"...more than likely they have a $50 case designed with the bottom line in mind.
Well, of course they are. Existing packages are searched when deemed suspicious, and may be forwarded to customs or the DEA as appropriate.
In fact, postal inspectors can open any package they feel like...no probable cause is necessary, you've given up that right by entrusting your parcel to them.
I guess merely by posting you are not only ominous but also onymous. ^_^
As noted in this story. Seems like invasions of privacy are becoming more and more common as the laws designed to protect individuals become outdated.
I know its a fine line between protecting privacy and letting criminals go unhindered, but especially with the developments in the U.K. it's a bit scary.
Changing them changing parts of the meaning
/.'s anonymous cowards?
eh?? You don't find anything amusing about an onymous coward in the context of
Kind of ironic, really:
onymous: bearing a name
That is, the opposite of anonymous.
I think that its too bad that economics have been so politically polarized. Sure Rep/Dem have agendas, but it seems like we're locked in a battle between taxing the rich and creating loopholes for them to escape from, instead of having some actual dialog on what taxes should be like for various income brackets.
If tax law were simplified it would be a lot easier to see where the money was really coming from, and it would end the existence of loopholes that exist only for those rich enough to pay CPAs to exploit them.
Ultimately this should be fairer--it will eliminate the gap between ostensible and actual taxation.
Does anyone else have any good hindsight on how techies can / should approach their tax forms?
With a 10 foot pole?
I hate to say this, but even the best body armor isn't likely to offer much protection from a true sniper rifle.
Exactly. Sure, B&W will run on a PII-400 with a TNT...but it won't run the way you want it to. It hums along much better on an Athlon 1 GHz/TNT2, but I could see it really rocking on a 1.5GHz Athlon/Geforce2 Pro. With the LoD it offers, its hard to say that any resolution would be too much. Add in all of the behind-the-scenes calculations with the physics engine, gesture recognition, creature growth, etc, and you have the potential to use a lot of hardware.
I think that the average user might be sated with current offerings, but there is still a significant demographic who needs the new hardware.
Umm...you might as well ask "Were the Baby Boomers the only baby boom?" It's just a term. Don't get all worked up about it.
The FSM veterans maintain their own extensive Web site at www.fsm-a.org/.
-nt-
Try reading the article. The point is not that caches are bad on random access, the point was that due to the fetch algorithms employed by the P4 it used four times the bandwidth to transfer the same amount of data.
The implications for this are significant if you are running software that essentially accesses data randomly (accessing large data sets with few repeats). The problem is exacerbated, perhaps fatally, when you start scaling the number of CPUs, as this post pointed out.
Without having access to some good equipment it is hard to say, but I would guess that the thermal inertia of the sink is low enough that you could cycle rapidly...it wouldn't be a sudden, sustained drop after a few minutes.
For all the low C/W modern fan-heatsinks have, you'll note that there really isn't much to them when you compare it to a nice 0.5 C/W passive sink. This is fine for cooling if you have a fan, but the inertia of the sink isn't affected by the fan.