This is true. Ubuntu suggested an upgrade, so I went ahead. Now the computer won't boot at all.
I don't have time for this nonsense. I'm just going to install a Windows server instead. Because despite it's problems, I know that it will boot and the upgrades it suggests will be well-tested.
Most (all now?) graphics cards are hardware accelerated for the Windows GDI, for things like drawing fonts, arcs, ellipses, fills, etc.
For whatever reason, Linux drivers have NEVER taken advantage of this, and that is why Linux often looks clunky compared to Windows on the same hardware.
In order to have it NOT WORK on an Atom CPU, you have to actively scan the CPU, determine it's an Atom and then block the remainder of your code. Intel CPUs are remarkably compatible otherwise.
Remember that books are licensed, not outright purchased...
Or at least they were, until the courts struck it down with the First Sale Doctrine...
In 1908, in Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, 210 U.S. 339 (1908), the first-sale doctrine was established. In a later opinion (Quality King v. L'Anza) (see below), the Court described this opinion:
“ In that case, the publisher, Bobbs-Merrill, had inserted a notice in its books that any retail sale at a price under $1.00 would constitute an infringement of its copyright. The defendants, who owned Macy’s department store, disregarded the notice and sold the books at a lower price without Bobbs-Merrill’s consent. We held that the exclusive statutory right to "vend" applied only to the first sale of the copyrighted work...
Also, a judge just struck down that idea in the AutoDesk case:
In 2008, in Timothy S. Vernor v. Autodesk Inc.[6], a U.S. Federal District Judge in Washington rejected a software vendor's argument that it only licensed copies of its software, rather than selling them, and that therefore any resale of the software constituted copyright infringement. Judge Richard A. Jones cited first-sale doctrine when ruling that a reseller was entitled to sell used copies of the vendor's software regardless of any licensing agreement that might have bound the software's previous owners because the transaction resembled a sale and not a temporary licensing arrangement[7].
Moral of the story is, you can't believe everything you read in a EULA.
It would be great for ISPs, where each of their user instances have files in common. Also, for a backup drive for user PCs, where each user has the OS and probably a lot of documents in common.
And worse...What happens when you go through a set of files A and change a single IP Address in each of them, defeating the duplication, while filesets B & C still point to the same set. Now, you have just increased your disk space usage by 200% while not increasing the "size" of the files at all.
This will be extremely counter-intuitive when you run out of disk space by globally changing "192.168.1.1" to "192.168.1.2" in a huge set of files.
Exactly. I never turn "off" my DVR. I just turn off the TV and let it run. That does lead to some interesting times. The other night, I fell asleep watching something on HDNet. I semi-woke up and it took a while to groggily realize that some British dude was in New Mexico or somewhere interviewing the inhabitants of a mustang ranch. This is not something I would typically watch. The show then ended abruptly as British dude got back on the road.
The question is, does this count as watched? My DVR was on. It played all the way through (including commercials, which I rarely watch because I have seen most of them 20 times already). I activated the remote as soon as the show ended (just by random chance). It would seem to me that if the DVR were aggregating what I had watched, it might count, even though I didn't watch it at all.
If so, it's no wonder viewership is up 10% across the board. I'm surprised it's not up more than that.
At one point I signed up for Nielsen ratings through my TiVo, so yes, they are definitely making deals with the providers to count ratings and "datamine" DVRs.
Creationists believe in Natural Selection. They just don't believe that molecules turned into a man. They don't believe that anyone has proven a mutation that resulted in better DNA. Sometimes the result might be better (resistance to medicine or freezing), but the DNA is more corrupt overall.
We don't need that, because instead of quality journalists, we have quantity journalists.
Who broke most of the stories that have been big lately?
AT&T spying... Blogger
Sony rookit... Blogger
Heck, on the 2 stories above alone, it took WEEKS for the salaried journalists to even NOTICE that there was a story.
The correct question isn't who is going to break all these stories. The correct question is which of the million bloggers is going to break one important story today.
Slashdot and Techdirt and related sites don't break stories, they filter them, thereby raising awareness of the important ones.
Yes, because there couldn't possibly be an extra-dimensional being watching us that we cannot detect, but chooses to communicate with us in small but substantial ways on occasion.
You are right. Clearly logic says that if we cannot detect him at will, he does not exist.
BTW, do you believe in America? Because until 1492, it couldn't be detected by anyone, so by your logic it does not exist.
How about Pluto? It doesn't exist either, since we couldn't detect it until 1930.
I have some logic for the atheists on here:
Take the following atheist test. Pray this: God, I don't believe in you, but if you exist, make yourself so real to me that I cannot deny you.
Since God does not exist, nothing will happen to you at all...
Stalin absolutely killed people because Atheism told him it was OK. If he had the power to kill people, then he was "fitter", so therefore he should be allowed to go ahead and do it. Too bad if you don't like it, because you're just a blade of grass in his lawnmower, as far as he was concerned...
While the religious have sometimes erred on the side of killing one "witch" that wasn't, that pales completely to the mass genocides of the irreligious...
Slashdot Mirror
I had the opposite (I refuse to refer to myself in the 3rd person)...
2 Vista to Win7 in-place upgrades at work (only annoying Cell card problems)
Upgraded Server 2008 64 to Server 2008 R2 64 (had to uninstall/reinstall 2 applications)
Upgraded wife's XP 32 to Win7 32 using LapLink's PCMover Upgrade Assistant (had to uninstall/reinstall 1 application)
Jaunty to Karmic (black flashing screen of death)
Ran the upgrade. It crashed with a blinking text screen.
I am a 20-year Windows developer, but I have been using Ubuntu since 2006.
Understand that you were lucky.
This is true. Ubuntu suggested an upgrade, so I went ahead. Now the computer won't boot at all.
I don't have time for this nonsense. I'm just going to install a Windows server instead. Because despite it's problems, I know that it will boot and the upgrades it suggests will be well-tested.
Yeah, more than Linux. Weird, hunh?
Firefox with NoScript is really the only protection you need now.
FTFY
On that note, if a virus did sit idly doing nothing for years on end, why would I care that I had it?
That would already make it 10X better than running McAfee to avoid getting it.
Because viruses do not typically sit idly doing nothing for years on end...
You don't need a virus if you have Linux. Just upgrade to the next version. That will take down your machine way quicker than getting a virus...
Um, wasn't Seven Samurai made on a budget of about half a million dollars?
And actors need to make 10's of millions each because...
And studio execs need to make 100's of millions because...
Most (all now?) graphics cards are hardware accelerated for the Windows GDI, for things like drawing fonts, arcs, ellipses, fills, etc.
For whatever reason, Linux drivers have NEVER taken advantage of this, and that is why Linux often looks clunky compared to Windows on the same hardware.
Security Essentials uses about 1% of any modern CPU/HDD. It's a far cry from McAfee and Norton.
In order to have it NOT WORK on an Atom CPU, you have to actively scan the CPU, determine it's an Atom and then block the remainder of your code. Intel CPUs are remarkably compatible otherwise.
Remember that books are licensed, not outright purchased...
Or at least they were, until the courts struck it down with the First Sale Doctrine...
In 1908, in Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, 210 U.S. 339 (1908), the first-sale doctrine was established. In a later opinion (Quality King v. L'Anza) (see below), the Court described this opinion:
“ In that case, the publisher, Bobbs-Merrill, had inserted a notice in its books that any retail sale at a price under $1.00 would constitute an infringement of its copyright. The defendants, who owned Macy’s department store, disregarded the notice and sold the books at a lower price without Bobbs-Merrill’s consent. We held that the exclusive statutory right to "vend" applied only to the first sale of the copyrighted work...
Also, a judge just struck down that idea in the AutoDesk case:
In 2008, in Timothy S. Vernor v. Autodesk Inc.[6], a U.S. Federal District Judge in Washington rejected a software vendor's argument that it only licensed copies of its software, rather than selling them, and that therefore any resale of the software constituted copyright infringement. Judge Richard A. Jones cited first-sale doctrine when ruling that a reseller was entitled to sell used copies of the vendor's software regardless of any licensing agreement that might have bound the software's previous owners because the transaction resembled a sale and not a temporary licensing arrangement[7].
Moral of the story is, you can't believe everything you read in a EULA.
It would be great for ISPs, where each of their user instances have files in common. Also, for a backup drive for user PCs, where each user has the OS and probably a lot of documents in common.
And worse...What happens when you go through a set of files A and change a single IP Address in each of them, defeating the duplication, while filesets B & C still point to the same set. Now, you have just increased your disk space usage by 200% while not increasing the "size" of the files at all.
This will be extremely counter-intuitive when you run out of disk space by globally changing "192.168.1.1" to "192.168.1.2" in a huge set of files.
And if they don't, someone will...
Noscript is set to allow Google to be trusted in many areas that others are not. It makes some sense, as Google has been fairly trustworthy until now.
What's a "Hulu"?
Is that the thing that used to work on my PS3?
Can't say as how I even remember anymore...
Exactly. I never turn "off" my DVR. I just turn off the TV and let it run. That does lead to some interesting times. The other night, I fell asleep watching something on HDNet. I semi-woke up and it took a while to groggily realize that some British dude was in New Mexico or somewhere interviewing the inhabitants of a mustang ranch. This is not something I would typically watch. The show then ended abruptly as British dude got back on the road.
The question is, does this count as watched? My DVR was on. It played all the way through (including commercials, which I rarely watch because I have seen most of them 20 times already). I activated the remote as soon as the show ended (just by random chance). It would seem to me that if the DVR were aggregating what I had watched, it might count, even though I didn't watch it at all.
If so, it's no wonder viewership is up 10% across the board. I'm surprised it's not up more than that.
At one point I signed up for Nielsen ratings through my TiVo, so yes, they are definitely making deals with the providers to count ratings and "datamine" DVRs.
Creationists believe in Natural Selection. They just don't believe that molecules turned into a man. They don't believe that anyone has proven a mutation that resulted in better DNA. Sometimes the result might be better (resistance to medicine or freezing), but the DNA is more corrupt overall.
We don't need that, because instead of quality journalists, we have quantity journalists.
Who broke most of the stories that have been big lately?
AT&T spying... Blogger
Sony rookit... Blogger
Heck, on the 2 stories above alone, it took WEEKS for the salaried journalists to even NOTICE that there was a story.
The correct question isn't who is going to break all these stories. The correct question is which of the million bloggers is going to break one important story today.
Slashdot and Techdirt and related sites don't break stories, they filter them, thereby raising awareness of the important ones.
Yes, because there couldn't possibly be an extra-dimensional being watching us that we cannot detect, but chooses to communicate with us in small but substantial ways on occasion.
You are right. Clearly logic says that if we cannot detect him at will, he does not exist.
BTW, do you believe in America? Because until 1492, it couldn't be detected by anyone, so by your logic it does not exist.
How about Pluto? It doesn't exist either, since we couldn't detect it until 1930.
I have some logic for the atheists on here:
Take the following atheist test. Pray this: God, I don't believe in you, but if you exist, make yourself so real to me that I cannot deny you.
Since God does not exist, nothing will happen to you at all...
Stalin absolutely killed people because Atheism told him it was OK. If he had the power to kill people, then he was "fitter", so therefore he should be allowed to go ahead and do it. Too bad if you don't like it, because you're just a blade of grass in his lawnmower, as far as he was concerned...
While the religious have sometimes erred on the side of killing one "witch" that wasn't, that pales completely to the mass genocides of the irreligious...