I run a P4 3.8GHz single core system as my main desktop, even though I do development with it. Switching to a newer Core i5 system will make it run 10 times as fast, but as the runtime on my huge (tuned) code base is under 5 minutes already, it really won't save me *that* much time compared to *editing* the code. It will save on build time, which is a boon to me, but even that savings is only due to the nature of my build process -- I do full instead of incremental builds.
I do plan on buying a new machine in a few months when I've saved the money, but my main point is that the hardware we use has been "good enough" for a good decade. It is the crappy software the people shovel out that drives hardware upgrades nowadays, not the actual need for faster hardware.
So it is to the hardware manufacturer's benefit that as much software as possible be absolutely incompetently written crap so that people will buy the latest shiny-shiny because their old one is "too slow."
What would be fitting is for all those "settlements" to be automatically overturned and the troll forced to refund the money.
But I know it doesn't work that way. If you wuss out and pay the toll, there is no getting your money back from the troll.
Do you comprehend the difference between the old 32-bit SPARC processors and the ones Oracle sells now?
I thought not.
Turn in your geek card.
Even a megapixel display at 24 bits required 3MB per frame... and a megapixel display has been "low end" for a lot of years now!
Seriously, though -- why does everyone sneer at the fact that not everyone is a gamer? Why are gamers so god damned fucking ARROGANT about their "my dick is bigger than yours" hardware?
The point is to write a "feel good" letter because "we tried to stop them."
Besides, everyone knows the US military and it's mega corp providers are probably the biggest researchers in this area, probably have been for 50+ years, and are unlikely to ever give up their funding just because a bunch of people with degrees think they should do so.
As the letter points out, the technology needed is widely available. That means that even Joe Blow in his basement could work on such AI systems. From there it's just a matter of connecting the AI to a weapons system, and there is no shortage of remotely-controllable weapon systems already. (Drones, anyone?)
Personally I applaud the letter writers for trying. They're incredibly naive to think their letter will have any impact on the decision makers, but they did try!
It amazes me how many rappers are gang-bangers first, and "musicians" second. So many of them put their loyalty to "the gang life" above everything else.
Not everyone wants the noise of an add-on video card. Some of us don't game, and only need "good enough" graphics to drive the display manager requirements. Add on a dollar or two saved on the power bill per year, less money spent on the power supply, and the money saved for the no-longer-necessary add-on graphics card, and built-in CPU graphics sounds like a "win" to me.
I might keep on using my fanless NVidia card on my next box, but I'm going to wait and see whether I can saturate my drive IOs while putting up with the shared memory of the built-in GPU first. If I can saturate the drive, I'll save the power load and stick with the built-in graphics. Besides, Intel has a better reputation for their drivers on Linux than NVidia does. Not that I've ever had problems with the NVidia drivers myself, but in theory they can be a problem.
There are a number of websites that try to push interstitials to the desktop. When I get those blank pages with AdBlock Plus installed, I just close the browser tab. The story or photos are NEVER interesting enough to put up with that kind of shit.
If Windows won't roll back to a working install, it kind of moots the point of taking recovery snapshots before installing updates, doesn't it?
The lawyers from Hood's office flat out admit that they're expecting the MPAA and the major studios to have its media arms run a coordinated propaganda campaign of bogus anti-Google stories. One email reads: "Media: We want to make sure that the media is at the NAAG meeting. We propose working with MPAA (Vans), Comcast, and NewsCorp (Bill Guidera) to see about working with a PR firm to create an attack on Google (and others who are resisting AG efforts to address online piracy). This PR firm can be funded through a nonprofit dedicated to IP issues. The "live buys" should be available for the media to see, followed by a segment the next day on the Today Show (David green can help with this). After the Today Show segment, you want to have a large investor of Google (George can help us determine that) come forward and say that Google needs to change its behavior/demand reform. Next, you want NewsCorp to develop and place an editorial in the WSJ emphasizing that Google's stock will lose value in the face of a sustained attack by AGs and noting some of the possible causes of action we have developed."
As Google notes in its legal filing about this email, the "plan" states that if this effort fails, then the next step will be to file the subpoena (technically a CID or "civil investigatory demand") on Google, written by the MPAA but signed by Hood. This makes it pretty clear that the MPAA, studios and Hood were working hand in hand in all of this and that the subpoena had no legitimate purpose behind it, but rather was the final step in a coordinated media campaign to pressure Google to change the way its search engine works.