Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Here's the real reason for Nvidia's complaints (Score 4, Insightful) 58

Yeah, but their beef isn't about the cost, it is about the speed comparisons. Intel never has tried to compete in the GPU performance space - they are happy with being in the low cost space. If you just compare what you get for a certain cost I have no idea, but I'm guessing having so many more Intel chips in your cluster will add significant power and space requirements at the very least. You may actually be better off with the nVidia solution in the long run.

Comment Re:Why is it hype? (Score 1) 90

I'm still waiting for 4G, so I'm not sure what they're comparing to. Current "4G LTE" is actually 3G technology with some 4G stuff bolted on and doesn't actually meet the requirements for 4G. When LTE advanced is formally implemented, it will be marketed as "True 4G" (it may be in some areas, I know I don't have that option). If it is 100x faster than True 4G, a stationary modem would send and receive at up to 100Gbits/second and a mobile one I think 10Gbits (fairly sure the 4G spec says 1Gbit for stationary and 100Mbit for mobile - LTE fails this miserably). If it is 100x faster than 4G LTE, it could be barely faster than True 4G.

Comment Re:Because terrorists, right? (Score 1) 446

This is why the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States actually exists. The government was supposed to have no standing army and depend on a militia so that the government would fear the people. The Constitution literally restricts having a standing army to 2 years for this reason. Having a standing army for more than 2 years is Unconstitutional.

Comment Re:Toll please, consumer (Score 1) 136

To be fair, in 1991 there was no commercial web. Some commercial entities were allowed to connect to the internet as early as 1989, but full commercial internet didn't start until 1995.

  I remember using the WWW in 1991 or 1992 before dropping out of school for a while and thinking how inferior the technology was to gopher (everything was text like in the example page). The browser I used was something cobbled together by some students and was more like a shitty version of lynx (all text based because the entire university was terminal based UNIX and some non-UNIX VAX computing back then). I had some internet access while out of school through the library dial up (certainly not legal - some friends hacked it), so I discovered Mosiac in 1993 and really liked it - a huge improvement over my first experience. That server was newer and running an XServer, so connecting to it through Slackware I could see graphics, but it was very slow (my modem was shit - 14.4 probably). When I returned to school in 1994 they even gave me space to create a web page. Netscape changed everything not long after that (which I beta tested and may have gotten an alpha release).

Comment Re:"treason" "terrorism" (Score 4, Insightful) 236

The current government only prosecutes peons and gives themselves exception, so they will never face trial. Hell when the White House itself committed treason a few years back for violating the same law as Snowden (the Espionage Act of 1917) by releasing a CIA agent's name and it was pretty much laughed off as a mistake. Pretty much the same thing happened in Plamegate.

Comment Re:Remember, it's because people aren't marrying (Score 1) 531

Um, not even close to 60%, even at the peak in the 1970s.

The divorce rate by all measurements is actually down. Also the divorce trend is down, so even the projected numbers that say 40-50% are probably bad. This is based on a measurement called a Cohort rate, which determines a trend by the current group being studied (so basically a statistical guess over the lifetime of the marriage). Baby boomers had a hideously high divorce rate, which is why that number is so high, but later generations are getting divorced far less, so even 40% is probably a pessimistic number. By another statistic, about 2% of marriages end in divorce every year (the short game measurement - keep in mind that includes remarriage and divorce, or you'd have 40% in 20 years).

Comment Re:if you think Hitlary will be any different... (Score 1) 531

I wish that were true. I know several people that will vote for Trump because they perceive "Shillary" or "Crooked Hillary" as the worse option. They say with Trump you may get a misogynist bigot, but at least you know what you're getting. With Shillary you get a two-faced weasel that will stab you in the back the second she gets elected.

And yes, that is what they honestly believe. Telling them Trump is the biggest lying weasel in politics won't sway their opinion (going by Polifact). In any case, I won't vote for either of them. Two sides of the same coin bought and owned by Corporate America(TM). Whatever it takes to keep the oligarchy strong, right?

Comment Re:if you think Hitlary will be any different... (Score 1) 531

There still are scientist superstars - Stephen Hawking and Jane Goodall are pretty much household names. You could throw in a few that AFAIK don't have any major discoveries but are well known celebrity scientists like Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson, as well.

That said, I think what you mean is that people worship celebrity more than intellect these days, and that I completely agree with. Reagan was an early example of that, and turned out to be a decent leader, despite some flawed principles (trickle down economics being the one I like to skewer). I certainly wouldn't ever have picked Reagan for my Quiz Bowl team, though.

Comment Re:Even if it is money, I get it.... (Score 4, Informative) 150

I believe the correct answer is not only do you not change the money, you are obliged to contact the police and report the person. Knowingly changing the money could make you an accessory to a crime (I believe they have to tell you the crime they intend to commit).

Incidentally, Bitcoin probably can't be considered legal tender - it would violate the Constitution, which allows only Congress to print money and denies states the right to have their own currency. It does fall into a category not thought of by the founding fathers, though, which is non-printed money (so Bitcoin basically is a loophole).

Comment Re:Thanks to (Score 3, Interesting) 369

On the other hand, I could post stuff as AC that might get me in legal trouble if they traced it to me, say by posting information about illegal government surveillance (ala Snowden). I have done this myself, but not for anything as serious as that (a possible NDA violation having no ramifications on anyone at this time since the product was released years ago and already shelved, but the the NDA was technically perpetual).

Comment Re: Unfettered capitalism (Score 1) 639

Actually, that need further refinement - socialism is only state ownership in the communist form of government. Socialism as its own doctrine refers to the economic system where the workers own the factory and not a factory owner (the proletariat owning vs the bourgeoisie owning in Marxist theory). In Marx's version of communism (which is good enough for this argument), the socialist workers give excess production to the state for distribution and eliminate money. This means socialism inextricable from communism but communism is not inextricable from socialism. Put another way, a raven is a bird, but not all birds are ravens.

Comment Re:Unfettered capitalism (Score 2) 639

You're referring to anarchy the state (as in no government), not anarchy as a form of government focusing on the economic system. There are actually anarchy forms of government such as anarcho-syndicalism, individualist anarchism, and platformism. Anarchism in this sense refers to the government, but the economic system runs by other rules. Think of it this way - if you and your neighbors all agree to where each one lives and what laws to live by and even who polices those laws, do you need a government? The people are the government. It is really extreme Libertarianism. A true democracy could run in an anarchic state. Furthermore, a true "individualist anarchy" may not give a shit if you shoot your neighbor, but a platformist would, so anarchy in this sense does not necessarily mean society without any rules.

  I like to use the Monty Python and the Holy Grail example of the "anarcho-syndicalist commune." That one has the workers organized into syndicates (unions, basically) by industry and the "government" exists to ensure private ownership of land. They reject the "worker-state" (government-economic) idea of communism, saying that tying those two together leads to corruption (and frankly, I agree with them on that point). Put another way, if the farm syndicate ruled the government, would not the farm syndicate try to make everything as favorable to farmers as possible? They would be fools not to, but in doing so prove that power corrupts.

Comment Re: The Taste must have been fired also (Score 2) 474

Seems endemic. Right after 9/11 my US company did exactly the same thing - fire half the workforce and gave upper management massive bonuses and raises. They then hired massive amounts of replacement workers in India with no idea what the fired people actually did. That anchor actually dragged down the ship as far as the main business went, but they managed to spin us off so their stock wouldn't go junk so my division actually survived and rehired some of the critical engineers those idiots fired. The same events probably would have played out in the 2008 recession if a German company hadn't snapped us up in 2007.

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 165

Yeah, the Espionage Act of 1917 pretty much says that accessing classified data that you are not supposed to have is espionage, even if you are an ally. Kind of funny that sharing a password violates the CFAA, which used the Espionage Act as a template, and accessing that data likely violates the Espionage Act itself (for sure if any of it is classified).

Slashdot Top Deals

Mathematicians stand on each other's shoulders. -- Gauss

Working...