Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:ARM is the new Intel (Score 1) 28

by Penguinisto (#46770811) Attached to: Intel Pushes Into Tablet Market, Pushes Away From Microsoft

I thought Windows 8.1 was the defecto standard.

Never have I seen a more apt typo - funny thing is, I saw a commercial last night for one of those PC repair/registry/whatever apps that practically shouted about how "Microsoft is using fear to make you buy Windows 8" (as opposed to your beloved XP box, natch.)

It all ties back to why Intel is now (should say, now more than ever) casting about, looking for new markets for their chips... PCs ain't selling, server lifecycles are getting longer (VMWare pretty much helped stretch that out), and there's not much outside of those two which would encourage PC sales.

(I wonder if Intel will ever stop navel-gazing at tablets and fire up their now-dead Digital Home Group again; they had a fairly decent idea with the chip-in-a-TV thing. Fun group of guys to work with as well...)

Comment: Re:Militia, then vs now (Score 2) 792

by Penguinisto (#46770493) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment

Terrifying. Unaccountable quasi-military organizations that tend to be high on ideology and low on reason. What happens if they were to try and pull the same shit to enforce their own rules (like they effectively did here) beyond just allowing a freeloader to not pay for grazing rights?

They've been peaceful the whole time, and did nothing more than provide a presence and protest. The only difference between them and Occupy $location is the presence of firearms - none of which were brandished by the protesters, let alone used in a threatening manner.

Honest question: Are you terrified because they don't share your ideology, or what?

Managing land to keep it from being destroyed like it was during the Dust Bowl is important and costs money.

The Dust Bowl was caused by a trifecta of over-farming, monoculture (wheat), and a massive drought - not grazing. It was also caused by activities performed primarily on private land, so the comparison is invalid on two fronts. Methinks you're reaching too much for hyperbole to support an otherwise somewhat valid point. Also, why does the federal government have to supply this management, instead of by the state whose borders encompass the land in question?

Comment: Re:The problem is that too much of it is state bas (Score 1) 132

by the gnat (#46770379) Attached to: U.S. Biomedical Research 'Unsustainable' Prominent Researchers Warn

This is the thing. Its like the abortion debate. MY body.

Again, you're not understanding my point. I'm not arguing with patient choice, I'm against companies marketing snake oil, which is one of the specific reasons that the FDA exists. The difference between these drugs and most other phony cures is that the drugs can actually kill you. I feel the same way about tobacco - I think people should be allowed to do anything they want as long as they don't harm anyone else, but I'm totally in favor of bans on cigarette ads. The distinction is between allowing potentially unsafe behavior, versus encouraging it.

Comment: Re:Militia, then vs now (Score 3, Interesting) 792

by Penguinisto (#46770363) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment

Which is a scary thought since the lesson of the Nevada event is that if you have good PR and enough armed people, officials who do not want bloodshed will back down and allow you to continue.

Really? Because if the government wanted the tax money bad enough (which IIRC the rancher paid to the state of Nevada instead), they could have simply put a lien against the rancher's property and taken it quietly, instead of forming a wall of heavily-armed paramilitary intimidation.

It doesn't help that the senior senator from Nevada (Harry Reid) is egging things on and swaggering the whole time about how the feds will crush anyone that gets in the way.

Microsoft

Microsoft Brings Office Online To Chrome OS; Ars Reviews Windows Phone 8.1 31

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the worst-frenemies dept.
SmartAboutThings (1951032) writes "While we are still waiting for the official Windows 8.1 touch-enabled apps to get launched on the Windows Store, Microsoft went and decided that it's time to finally bring the Office online apps to the Chrome Web Store, instead. Thus, Microsoft is making the Web versions of its Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote apps available to users through the Chrome Web Store and also improving all of them with new features, along with several bug fixes and performance improvements." More on the Microsoft front: an anonymous reader wrote in with a link to Ars Technica's review of the upcoming Windows Phone 8.1 release: "It is a major platform update even if it is just a .1 release. Updates include the debut of Cortana, using the same kernel as Windows 8.1 and the Xbox One, a notebook reminder app, inner circle friend management, IE 11, Nokia's camera app by default, lock screen and background customizations, a much improved email client with calendar support, more general Windows 8.1 API inclusion for better portability, and a notification center. Ars rated it more of a Windows Phone 9 release than .1 update."

Comment: Re:Militia, then vs now (Score 2, Insightful) 792

by ackthpt (#46767859) Attached to: Retired SCOTUS Justice Wants To 'Fix' the Second Amendment

At the time there were limited arms (you took about 2 minutes to reload) vs able to empty a couple clips in that same amount of time, now.

Further, rifle, cannon and naval mines were about all there were. The most literal interpretation of that 2nd amendment means I could possess nuclear weapons, bacterial weapons, chemical weapons, and were I wealthy enough, my own tanks, APCs, fighter jets, bombers, etc. In short, the 2nd amendment favors the rich because they can arm themselves to the hilt, should they wish. Not very equal, is it?

Comment: Picky details (Score 1) 105

by overshoot (#46767509) Attached to: Bill Gates Patents Detecting, Responding To "Glassholes"

I haven't seen the application yet, but I'd be quite surprised if it contains enough information to actually detect cameras -- given, after all, that a camera doesn't necessarily look like anything in particular, nor emit a signal declaring "I am a camera."

More likely, Gates et al are doing the old trick of patenting the idea of detecting a camera and then planning to fill in the blanks as the technology improves. Jerry Lemelson was the grand master of this trick and made billions (yes, with a "B") with it. On numerous occasions he actually sued, and prevailed, against the people who actually invented the technology that he incorporated in revised patent applications because his application predated their invention.

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.

Working...