So, it can't be that they're targeting their own service people with this change to solve the problem of stripped screw heads. It MUST be that they're trying to screw over DIY consumers?
That makes no sense. A DIY consumer stayed home and replaced their battery. They didn't bring their phone to the Apple store and end up with new screws. This policy self selects against DIYers.
Seems more likely to me that they are trying to avoid paying a royalty for the new angular torx that is designed for tiny screws, so they used this instead. There isn't a regular torx this small.
Go back and read that again, to let it sink in once you get past the "OMG this guy is just trolling" knee-jerk.
If there can't be secrecy in negotiations, the people we try to persuade to change or deal will instead pack up their toys and go home.
Quite frequently, the entire key to a diplomatic deal is exactly that it doesn't appear as it seems. Hell, that's made clear in these leaked documents. They make it perfectly clear, for example, that the situation with Libya would be much worse if things weren't done in secret. Since they explicitly made concessions in exchange for asking that we say something nice about them in public.... They couldn't have even asked for that if we had total transparency. So what would we have had to give them instead?
Maybe Assange is a tactical genius, and selectively revealed only the documents that he knew wouldn't cause war. Or maybe he's lucky. The stuff he released could easily have sparked World War 3, between the middle-east and korean/chinese revelations. We may never know which (or we might still end up at war in Korea).
So be careful before you lump everybody who stands up and calls for his head together with Sarah Palin. She's not always fundamentally wrong. She's just not sophisticated enough to understand the details, and she sensationalizes stuff 'cause she's a politician. She doesn't understand the consequences or side-effects of "using cyber tools to permanently disable WikiLeaks", but the overall sentiment is sound. Namely, we need to shut Assange up, and we need to shut his sources up, and we need to get control of the information that passes through our embassies. We just need to do it intelligently instead of invoking terms that we don't understand that amount to cries to nuke stuff from orbit.
I hate to say it, but Hillary seems to be handling this very well (and seems to agree with Palin on the basics).
The chances of you being caught with an illegal lock pick are, for all practical purposes, zero, unless you're using the lockpick to break some other law.
All bets are off if you decide to keep them in your car on a public road though.
So, yes it may be illegal, but no, you won't go to jail.
But they won't, because people don't want what's best, they want what's cheapest that still carries the "right" name.
MLC is sufficiently cheap that it works out better to buy multiple drives and install them with redundancy than it does to buy the more expensive and more reliable drive. It's not about what name is right, it's about achieving your goal for the least outlay possible. The X-25E exists merely to fill a niche. You need some specific constraint in order to justify spending more to buy a more reliable drive than achieving reliability through redundancy with cheaper drives.
Your servers that require frequent writes should be using a storage array anyway.
Professional administrators should care about two things: redundancy, and warranty. Since you seem to be trying to come across as somebody who actually manages a lot of hardware, you should already be aware that your spinning discs fail at a per-year rate relative to their age and operating temperature. Even if you've only got a piddly few hundred drives, you should be able to get a good sense of which models (yes, models. Not brands) fail, and how frequently they fail at a certain age. You should also know that your hard drives will be obsolete and probably replaced due to obsolescence after 5 years.
Pick a model with a sufficient warranty, set up your storage array for redundancy, and let the manufacturer worry about whether the advertised failure rate is correct or not.
Alternatively, you could continue with your holier-than-thou attitude, and be behind the technology curve by a decade.
The problem is that it is hard to imagine a company that hates its customers more than Sony.
Comcast?
Microsoft? (depending on whether you consider their customers to be end-users, or Dell/HP/Developers)
And some of your examples are just silly. Protecting you from bricking your PSP by preventing you from running out of power mid-flash? Yeah.. That's really anti-customer. How DARE they prevent you from breaking your console.
Really, why don't you quit making a fool of yourself on the internet and go play your Xbox 360 that prevented you from doing all this stuff you're complaining about Sony having "taking away" in the first place.
Four out of nine justices just ruled that they don't believe the bill of rights applies to state laws in their ruling on gun control in Chicago.
If the 14th amendment doesn't mean what the people who wrote it intended it to mean, then let's just throw the constitution out the window. States in the south can re-institute segregation, the 1st amendment can be over-ridden on a state by state basis, states can start controlling abortions along with handguns...
The ACLU may pursue only truly libertarian issues, but their left-wing bias is apparent in their case selection. There are plenty of worthy civil liberties cases which need an organization like the ACLU to stand up fight that they ignore because it would help right-wing agendas. Examples: Property rights, Gun rights, various Tax issues...
It's easy to say that the republicans are in the pockets of some big company.
The Republicans and the Democrats are in the same people's pockets. If some big aerospace factories close, thousands of people lose jobs, and the local representative doesn't get re-elected. The difference between the Republican and the Democrat is that the Republican thinks it's the big company's responsibility to give those people a job, and the Democrat thinks it's the government's responsibility to make sure those workers don't need to worry about whether they have a job or not.
Bottom line, it's always about the voters. Except that most of our citizens of voting age are so cynical about the process, and think it's all about the "money/power/big companies/cronyism" that they stay home and dilute the real power base.
Get off your ass and go vote.
Better yet. Understand what the people you're voting for actually stand for before you go vote. Otherwise you'll be surprised when the guy you voted for to change things starts supporting revoking Miranda rights, and sends more troops to the wars you don't support, and keeps an infamous prison open, and supports off-shore drilling, and signs a massive health care welfare bill into law just like the last guy did, and generally acts like a re-incarnation of George W. Bush, even though the writing was on the wall before the election, and everybody who pointed it out was routinely censored by the internet community.
Your post is mostly spot on, however you blew it when you brought child mortality into the picture.
You see, Americans with "Cadillac Health Plans" have more coverage for fertility services than any other country in the world. Thus far more of our women who would be outside of normal child bearing age are able to get pregnant, and those pregnancies have higher complications.
The fact that we had *better* care than the rest of the world in that regard generated a lovely statistic to use to show how bad our health care is.
The new system will solve the problem though. Expensive and exotic fertility treatments will only be covered by highly taxed plans soon, and business that provided those plans will pick cheaper plans to avoid the tax. (This was, in fact, Obama's stated goal for the tax.) The expensive fertility treatments will go away. Women in their 40s will be less likely to get pregnant, and the child mortality rate will drop. We'll declare success!
But like capacity, speed is also irrelevant in many situations.
However, how fast of a hard drive do I need to watch a movie or listen to music?
You don't even need a computer to do those things, so that's a silly argument.
When I say they're worth it, I assume you're doing actual work with your PC. If you're just going for music, games and movies, get yourself an iPod and an XBox.
How much for a hard drive that's as fast as that $125 SSD?
The 1TB Seagate hard drive that I recently tested gets random 4k read rates in the ~1MB/second range. My 80GB Intel X25-M gets ~38MB/second.
That's about 40 times more performance for THE SAME PRICE!
Storage capacity is irrelevant in many situations.
A 40GB SSD is more than sufficient for your average manager/executive. They'd almost certainly prefer opening Outlook and Power Point in a tenth of the time it used to take to having an extra thousand gigabytes of unused space on their laptop.
The 80 GB drive I have in my system was the best upgrade I ever bought. Kernel compiles are crazy fast, and all of the media I need can be streamed off the network (sharing a single one of those 1.5TB drives with a dozen or so other people).
And every single one of them tells you up front what the total feature set is and which you get for your money.
Would you feel the same way about it if your enterprise software vendors didn't tell you about the other features until after you paid for what you thought was the complete product? Especially if the features were explicitly shaved off to cause just the right pain-point to wring some extra dollars out of you after you thought you already knew what the full cost of the solution was? After all, it's only a few extra bucks, and you can't get the money you already spent back now that you know some key feature is missing.
If you didn't think BioShock 2 by itself was a good deal why did you pay for it?
I didn't. But why are other people getting so upset by this? Easy answer. It's usually suspected that the developers of a game held bits back to sell them to you as add-ons later, but there was always plausible deniability. Buy putting the add-on right on the disc ahead of time, then selling it later as "post-release" content is a tacit admission of what could only be assumed before.
It's the difference between having a little bit of power, and rubbing your face in it.
Additionally, it means that you never know how much a whole game will cost. It says $59.99 on the package, but how much will they charge for the bits they decided to leave out? How many little pieces would they break them up into. I'll happily just not buy games like that. There are plenty of games on the market. None of them are good enough to put up with this stuff. (Nor are any of them good enough to 'pre-order'. If it's good enough to play, it'll be good enough to play a couple weeks after the release.)
To be fair, DRM is always in waves. You create game 1 with how new DRM system X! It is cracked in a day. You create game 2 with an updated version of DRM system X! It is cracked in two days. You careate game 3 with an updated version of DRMX... etc.
Game 3 doesn't bring you to the logical conclusion you seem to be suspecting.
You create game 3 with an updated version of DRMX, and the crackers have a shell script that automatically cracks the game for them, and a relationship with the latest trendy reviewer to get the hacked copy out on the net a week before it's released.
What are they going to do when they can't use this as proof that a pirated copy is a lost sale? Most of the people pirating these games are almost certainly 13-16 year old kids that don't have $60 to blow on a game anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
So, it can't be that they're targeting their own service people with this change to solve the problem of stripped screw heads. It MUST be that they're trying to screw over DIY consumers?
That makes no sense. A DIY consumer stayed home and replaced their battery. They didn't bring their phone to the Apple store and end up with new screws. This policy self selects against DIYers.
Seems more likely to me that they are trying to avoid paying a royalty for the new angular torx that is designed for tiny screws, so they used this instead. There isn't a regular torx this small.
Nobody intelligent believes in full transparency.
Go back and read that again, to let it sink in once you get past the "OMG this guy is just trolling" knee-jerk.
If there can't be secrecy in negotiations, the people we try to persuade to change or deal will instead pack up their toys and go home.
Quite frequently, the entire key to a diplomatic deal is exactly that it doesn't appear as it seems. Hell, that's made clear in these leaked documents. They make it perfectly clear, for example, that the situation with Libya would be much worse if things weren't done in secret. Since they explicitly made concessions in exchange for asking that we say something nice about them in public.... They couldn't have even asked for that if we had total transparency. So what would we have had to give them instead?
Maybe Assange is a tactical genius, and selectively revealed only the documents that he knew wouldn't cause war. Or maybe he's lucky. The stuff he released could easily have sparked World War 3, between the middle-east and korean/chinese revelations. We may never know which (or we might still end up at war in Korea).
So be careful before you lump everybody who stands up and calls for his head together with Sarah Palin. She's not always fundamentally wrong. She's just not sophisticated enough to understand the details, and she sensationalizes stuff 'cause she's a politician. She doesn't understand the consequences or side-effects of "using cyber tools to permanently disable WikiLeaks", but the overall sentiment is sound. Namely, we need to shut Assange up, and we need to shut his sources up, and we need to get control of the information that passes through our embassies. We just need to do it intelligently instead of invoking terms that we don't understand that amount to cries to nuke stuff from orbit.
I hate to say it, but Hillary seems to be handling this very well (and seems to agree with Palin on the basics).
If he uses electric heat for his house anyway, and needs to light the room anyway, the first law of thermodynamics disagrees with you.
People don't like FOX because FOX is populated by lying sacks of shit.
You're fooling yourself.
People love Fox.
He's talking about Austin, not about sane parts of Texas.
The chances of you being caught with an illegal lock pick are, for all practical purposes, zero, unless you're using the lockpick to break some other law.
All bets are off if you decide to keep them in your car on a public road though.
So, yes it may be illegal, but no, you won't go to jail.
But they won't, because people don't want what's best, they want what's cheapest that still carries the "right" name.
MLC is sufficiently cheap that it works out better to buy multiple drives and install them with redundancy than it does to buy the more expensive and more reliable drive. It's not about what name is right, it's about achieving your goal for the least outlay possible. The X-25E exists merely to fill a niche. You need some specific constraint in order to justify spending more to buy a more reliable drive than achieving reliability through redundancy with cheaper drives.
Your servers that require frequent writes should be using a storage array anyway.
Professional administrators should care about two things: redundancy, and warranty. Since you seem to be trying to come across as somebody who actually manages a lot of hardware, you should already be aware that your spinning discs fail at a per-year rate relative to their age and operating temperature. Even if you've only got a piddly few hundred drives, you should be able to get a good sense of which models (yes, models. Not brands) fail, and how frequently they fail at a certain age. You should also know that your hard drives will be obsolete and probably replaced due to obsolescence after 5 years.
Pick a model with a sufficient warranty, set up your storage array for redundancy, and let the manufacturer worry about whether the advertised failure rate is correct or not.
Alternatively, you could continue with your holier-than-thou attitude, and be behind the technology curve by a decade.
So your point is.... That you couldn't get lint to let you write bad code?
int main() {
printf("Hello world!");
return 0;
}
$ lint helloworld.c
Finished checking --- no warnings
Just because something functions as intended, doesn't mean it's written properly.
The problem is that it is hard to imagine a company that hates its customers more than Sony.
Comcast?
Microsoft? (depending on whether you consider their customers to be end-users, or Dell/HP/Developers)
And some of your examples are just silly. Protecting you from bricking your PSP by preventing you from running out of power mid-flash? Yeah.. That's really anti-customer. How DARE they prevent you from breaking your console.
Really, why don't you quit making a fool of yourself on the internet and go play your Xbox 360 that prevented you from doing all this stuff you're complaining about Sony having "taking away" in the first place.
Obscene material isn't sold to kids in RL, so it shouldn't be available to them online so easily as it is today.
So don't let them have unfettered access to your internet connection.
The federal government shouldn't have to babysit children.
Four out of nine justices just ruled that they don't believe the bill of rights applies to state laws in their ruling on gun control in Chicago.
If the 14th amendment doesn't mean what the people who wrote it intended it to mean, then let's just throw the constitution out the window. States in the south can re-institute segregation, the 1st amendment can be over-ridden on a state by state basis, states can start controlling abortions along with handguns...
This is total bullshit.
The ACLU may pursue only truly libertarian issues, but their left-wing bias is apparent in their case selection. There are plenty of worthy civil liberties cases which need an organization like the ACLU to stand up fight that they ignore because it would help right-wing agendas. Examples: Property rights, Gun rights, various Tax issues...
No. In the context of the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade is the analogue.
Sorry, but it can't be summed up in six words.
It's easy to say that the republicans are in the pockets of some big company.
The Republicans and the Democrats are in the same people's pockets. If some big aerospace factories close, thousands of people lose jobs, and the local representative doesn't get re-elected. The difference between the Republican and the Democrat is that the Republican thinks it's the big company's responsibility to give those people a job, and the Democrat thinks it's the government's responsibility to make sure those workers don't need to worry about whether they have a job or not.
Bottom line, it's always about the voters. Except that most of our citizens of voting age are so cynical about the process, and think it's all about the "money/power/big companies/cronyism" that they stay home and dilute the real power base.
Get off your ass and go vote.
Better yet. Understand what the people you're voting for actually stand for before you go vote. Otherwise you'll be surprised when the guy you voted for to change things starts supporting revoking Miranda rights, and sends more troops to the wars you don't support, and keeps an infamous prison open, and supports off-shore drilling, and signs a massive health care welfare bill into law just like the last guy did, and generally acts like a re-incarnation of George W. Bush, even though the writing was on the wall before the election, and everybody who pointed it out was routinely censored by the internet community.
Your post is mostly spot on, however you blew it when you brought child mortality into the picture.
You see, Americans with "Cadillac Health Plans" have more coverage for fertility services than any other country in the world. Thus far more of our women who would be outside of normal child bearing age are able to get pregnant, and those pregnancies have higher complications.
The fact that we had *better* care than the rest of the world in that regard generated a lovely statistic to use to show how bad our health care is.
The new system will solve the problem though. Expensive and exotic fertility treatments will only be covered by highly taxed plans soon, and business that provided those plans will pick cheaper plans to avoid the tax. (This was, in fact, Obama's stated goal for the tax.) The expensive fertility treatments will go away. Women in their 40s will be less likely to get pregnant, and the child mortality rate will drop. We'll declare success!
My Intel X25-M on Newegg only cost $119.
But like capacity, speed is also irrelevant in many situations.
However, how fast of a hard drive do I need to watch a movie or listen to music?
You don't even need a computer to do those things, so that's a silly argument.
When I say they're worth it, I assume you're doing actual work with your PC. If you're just going for music, games and movies, get yourself an iPod and an XBox.
How much for a hard drive that's as fast as that $125 SSD?
The 1TB Seagate hard drive that I recently tested gets random 4k read rates in the ~1MB/second range. My 80GB Intel X25-M gets ~38MB/second.
That's about 40 times more performance for THE SAME PRICE!
Storage capacity is irrelevant in many situations.
A 40GB SSD is more than sufficient for your average manager/executive. They'd almost certainly prefer opening Outlook and Power Point in a tenth of the time it used to take to having an extra thousand gigabytes of unused space on their laptop.
The 80 GB drive I have in my system was the best upgrade I ever bought. Kernel compiles are crazy fast, and all of the media I need can be streamed off the network (sharing a single one of those 1.5TB drives with a dozen or so other people).
The advantage of Diablo was how long Blizz supported it with patches. What are the odds Bethesda will fix any [...] issues [...] after release?
None. Fixed that for you too.
And every single one of them tells you up front what the total feature set is and which you get for your money.
Would you feel the same way about it if your enterprise software vendors didn't tell you about the other features until after you paid for what you thought was the complete product? Especially if the features were explicitly shaved off to cause just the right pain-point to wring some extra dollars out of you after you thought you already knew what the full cost of the solution was? After all, it's only a few extra bucks, and you can't get the money you already spent back now that you know some key feature is missing.
If you didn't think BioShock 2 by itself was a good deal why did you pay for it?
I didn't. But why are other people getting so upset by this? Easy answer. It's usually suspected that the developers of a game held bits back to sell them to you as add-ons later, but there was always plausible deniability. Buy putting the add-on right on the disc ahead of time, then selling it later as "post-release" content is a tacit admission of what could only be assumed before.
It's the difference between having a little bit of power, and rubbing your face in it.
Additionally, it means that you never know how much a whole game will cost. It says $59.99 on the package, but how much will they charge for the bits they decided to leave out? How many little pieces would they break them up into. I'll happily just not buy games like that. There are plenty of games on the market. None of them are good enough to put up with this stuff. (Nor are any of them good enough to 'pre-order'. If it's good enough to play, it'll be good enough to play a couple weeks after the release.)
Part of the announcement was that, yes, you will be able to play online with PC users.
To be fair, DRM is always in waves. You create game 1 with how new DRM system X! It is cracked in a day. You create game 2 with an updated version of DRM system X! It is cracked in two days. You careate game 3 with an updated version of DRMX... etc.
Game 3 doesn't bring you to the logical conclusion you seem to be suspecting.
You create game 3 with an updated version of DRMX, and the crackers have a shell script that automatically cracks the game for them, and a relationship with the latest trendy reviewer to get the hacked copy out on the net a week before it's released.
Most insightful comment in the thread.
What are they going to do when they can't use this as proof that a pirated copy is a lost sale? Most of the people pirating these games are almost certainly 13-16 year old kids that don't have $60 to blow on a game anyway.