When has Intel ever lowered prices without needing to?

It's more likely that instead of putting the screws to AMD, Intel is worried about Bobcat and Bulldozer coming out pretty soon and factoring that into their prices (to gain market share before AMD chips get out). On merit Bobcat CPUs should dominate the low-end laptop/netbook market with low power use and real integrated graphics. Bulldozer should do well in the high-end server market again with low-power and more cores... basically where intel CPUs have hyperthreading, Bulldozer has another actual core (for integer instructions).

The really funny thing is that in practice all generics really need to do is prevent you from having to repeat casts everywhere, catch errors moderately soon, and aid in documentation. Which is what these do. The real 'trap' here is thinking that something has to be theoretically perfect to be useful or convenient.

Go to the local mass-market store like Lowes or even Target and look for a CFL bulb with the most lumens per watt. Also look for bulbs that have a curiously long life rating since these will not have any circuitry to use more power at startup to warm the bulb up. It doesn't matter if it says "instant on" or not (all slow-starting CFLs say "instant on")... in fact if the packaging is really loud about being "instant on!!!" then that's a good one to buy since it's guaranteed to take forever to get fully bright.

Now you have a bulb that will take 5+ minutes to reach full brightness even pointed upward. Then get a cheap clip-on lamp and a wall outlet timer. Set the timer to turn the light on say 15 minutes before your alarm. If the 5+ minutes it takes to get fully bright is still too fast for you, point it downward so the bulb heats up more slowly (but this will lower the life of the bulb significantly if you leave it on). You're done. Total cost ~$20.

So next time you play "CFL roulette" and get a really bad one you'll have a use for it. And since the really bad CFLs last for freaking ever (just to spite you) you'll soon have a huge stockpile of replacement bulbs for the time when all CFLs are actually instant on (yeah right...).

Why is that marked funny? Last I checked Google is making huge profits even despite massive spending, so they're basically doing the same thing. If anything Google is taking significantly more profit percentage-wise from actual content producers than Apple is.

What a crock of shit. Touch a halogen bulb and you'll end up in the hospital, but they are much more energy efficient than a regular tungsten incandescent. CFLs are usually just warm to the touch mostly because they have many times the surface area of an incandescent bulb (and more mass so they heat up more slowly). Try grabbing one of the fully enclosed glass CFL bulbs (glass to filter out the UV which everybody forgets about until it destroys plastic or bleaches colors) and it'll still burn your hand.

If Google really cared about net neutrality, they'd put a link on all their properties "Support net neutrality" with a little colored ribbon of some kind instead of pimping Chrome every change they get.

It gives the FCC authority to retroactively look at a specific company's actions and make them stop, after the fact. Which means basically companies will do whatever they want to, and only if what they are doing is so terribly egrigious, and there is a democratic administration, will anything be done. And that will be a slap on the wrist at most.

So basically, no FCC authority under Google's proposal.

Because it's patently obvious that humans are the cause of it. It's just an absurd proposition that there is any other significant cause of climate change. Yes, you would have to be some kind a slack-jawed right-wing gun toting idiot, or equivalent, to think otherwise.

You know all this mess in the gulf that people are hysterical about? Imagine 15,000 other deep water oil leaks of the same size spread out across the oceans, and what kind of hell that would be. Because that's the amount of oil we are burning each year. The idea that burning it all instead of letting it leak makes it all but harmless is madness. Less directly harmful that letting it leak, probably, but still plenty bad.

Just being uneducated wouldn't even be enough to explain it. Take a look at yourself for instance. You "haven't made a final decision yet"? Science doesn't make "final decisions". If new facts come up, scientists change the 'decision'; there is no 'final'. The evidence is so overwhelming right now that really the only way to deny it is to un-scientifically hold out for an absolute... well we can't be 100.0% sure so reserve judgment. Mathematics and religion works on absolutes, not science. So it's not even a question of education or intelligence, it's really a question of whether you have to courage to face the facts or not.

I think really the problem is that the scale of human activity is simply too great for many people to comprehend. People that haven't ever left their own town and aren't worldly just don't have the resources or motivation or fortitude to even contemplate it. So I don't hold out much hope for society to change before it's too late. And it's not too late, yet, but we'll need massive infrastructure changes or something drastic like say a solar shield to keep anything resembling our current climate.

What's worse is that not only are there error returns codes (by convention), but there are multiple return codes. Which means you could return two error codes, or no error codes, or whatever. What a mess.

Rust actually tries to solve some future/current problems, like garbage collection on hundred-core CPUs for instance. You can't just stop every CPU while you collect garbage, like Go does since it has no concept of separate domains of data.

And the lack of parenthesis is also annoying. You can't just design a language based on what you theorize is good. Visual grouping helps people to read code. Too many parenthesis are bad (LISP) and too few are bad (Go).

That God exists and he's Rule 110.

Also knock it up a notch with View -> Page Style -> No Style.

This works really well for sites that put stories into tiny columns or use unreadable fonts.

That's a false choice. What's better is voting. Vote in every election for every office, from President to sanitation commissioner. If you've every missed an election because you were too lazy to get off your ass then you are the problem.

But what's better still is voting for somebody good that can also win. That means voting for a Republican or Democrat for higher office, and voting Libertarian or Green for local offices.

Not really. The problem is that just one site going pay will just kill their readership, but if all the sites went pay at once they would be all better off for it. They would be getting the money instead of Google.

It's a similar situation to unions. If just a couple people get together to form a union they just get fired and replaced, but if everybody at once forms the union then they have collective bargaining power and are generally better off.

So there's good reason for Murdoch to be whining. Google is skirting copyright laws and stealing his revenue and the solution is not something he can do by himself. Frankly I side with Murdoch on this, because newspapers and magazines actually create value whereas Google News just exploits the work of others.

SIGSTOP is handled by KAOS.
SIGCONT is handled by CONTROL.

SIGHUP? It's handl#`%${NO CARRIER

/wrists for making a no carrier joke

That's not really true though, that you have to download "all of the data" before you can see it, is it? For instance with JPEG2000 you can see the entire image with just a fraction of the file downloaded because the rest of the file is a series of refinements on what came before it.

For instance if the game is running at 30 fps, but the local display box is displaying at 60 fps then the stream can be encoded as one small packet to give your eye the gist of the scene followed by fuller details of the same game frame. So in this case you only have to download "half of it" before you can show it.

Shills notwithstanding of course.