Angelo95210
Sep 13, 06:07 PM
I am looking for a friendly team, but I can't join F@H because I am using Boinc...
lordonuthin
May 16, 02:04 PM
Thought I would post here instead of starting a new thread. How do I get bonus points, all I am reading is -advmethods and setting up a passkey. Would it be worth it on a i7 720qm at 1.66ghz? Would it complete a wu in 4 days?
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
This passkey sounds like a big deal should I be using it on all me machines?
With the console client for windows, is there a way I can close the window with out it stopping folding, kind of pointless having the window constantly open. Surely it can fold in the background?
Thanks guys :)
On an i7 720 you won't get bigadv units done in time to get bonus points also I have an i7 980x that hasn't gotten any bigadv units even though I have it set up to get them. I suspect some recent changes on the server end are allowing only certain cpu's to get bigadv units and i7's probably aren't getting them. as far as the passkey I'm not sure it makes any difference for someone like you, I don't think there are any other wu's that get a bonus...
You can minimize the window and it will keep folding...
SiliconAddict
Nov 16, 07:41 PM
I'd have to disagree with that.
A better statement would be your average user doesn't care about chip brand as long as the computer is relatively fast, and you get good battery life.
if this does happen would apple finaly consider leting there Os's on ur standart hp compaqs etcs ?
No.
A better statement would be your average user doesn't care about chip brand as long as the computer is relatively fast, and you get good battery life.
if this does happen would apple finaly consider leting there Os's on ur standart hp compaqs etcs ?
No.
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 06:28 AM
Don't know what is more ridiculous, the pat down of the little girl or the mother asking for a re-scan. I op out every single time I travel. It is not evident (and the TSA flunkies don't really know) whether a given device is a backscatter scanner or a an active or passive terahertz wave scanner. There is currently no long term evidence that backscatter or active terahertz wave scanners do not have side effects, especially for frequent travelers. Unless they switch all scanners to passive terahertz wave scanners, I will continue to opt out and if they ever make these scans mandatory without the opt out option, I will refuse to fly.
Lennholm
Apr 16, 09:09 AM
People talk about a so-called 'reality distortion field' about Steve Jobs and yet everyday we get people blatantly ignoring truth because it doesn't fit with their own personal world view.
Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.
You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.
No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.
You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.
No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.
Surely
Apr 5, 05:36 PM
Wait....does the app have ads?
Someone let me know if there's a paid ad-free version........
Someone let me know if there's a paid ad-free version........
juststranded
Oct 17, 09:33 AM
Being completely serious, the porn industry has a lot to do with it.
VHS vs. BETAMAX, BETAMAX was teh better product, but the porn industry went with VHS and thus forced it into production more than BETAMAX.
Bluray vs. HD DVD, Bluray is better, and teh porn industry has gone with Blueray. I think between all teh competitors and the porn industry Bluray will stick this one out and win it.
Apple may also just be waiting it out a little longer to see which one is looking stronger. Yes, putting Bluray in Macs would help Bluray to win, but if they put them in, and HD DVD wins, there's a few millions Macs out there with onsolete drives in them that can't play the standard HD format disc.
I'll give it 6 months befre Apple chooses one or the other officially to put into their machines.
VHS vs. BETAMAX, BETAMAX was teh better product, but the porn industry went with VHS and thus forced it into production more than BETAMAX.
Bluray vs. HD DVD, Bluray is better, and teh porn industry has gone with Blueray. I think between all teh competitors and the porn industry Bluray will stick this one out and win it.
Apple may also just be waiting it out a little longer to see which one is looking stronger. Yes, putting Bluray in Macs would help Bluray to win, but if they put them in, and HD DVD wins, there's a few millions Macs out there with onsolete drives in them that can't play the standard HD format disc.
I'll give it 6 months befre Apple chooses one or the other officially to put into their machines.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
flopticalcube
Apr 18, 07:30 PM
As a sinister lefty, I take umbrage in the comparison of persecution of homosexuals and that of left handed people. We are looking at orders of magnitude difference, particularly in the last 2 millennia.
World Citizen
Mar 24, 03:35 PM
Keep on going and open op some more bags of ideas!
iStudentUK
Mar 17, 09:58 AM
This thread has 4 groups of people:
1. The op
2. People who think it is unethical to knowingly steal
3. People who are defending him, who have likely done a similar thing in the past and therefore feel attacked by 2s criticism
4. Philosophy students
Can I had another? Law students- don't know about the US but in the UK there is a case for theft here (depends on the OP's state of mind though).
However, I'm thinking this is a
D
N
I
W
OP just wants to stir.
1. The op
2. People who think it is unethical to knowingly steal
3. People who are defending him, who have likely done a similar thing in the past and therefore feel attacked by 2s criticism
4. Philosophy students
Can I had another? Law students- don't know about the US but in the UK there is a case for theft here (depends on the OP's state of mind though).
However, I'm thinking this is a
D
N
I
W
OP just wants to stir.
AtariMac
Mar 24, 04:54 PM
My OS X Public Beta folder still sits proudly on my desk at work. 10.0 was pretty lacking and ssssssssllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwww. 10.1 was a huge improvement speed-wise.
10.3 was probably the first really usable version that I no longer needed to dual boot into OS 9. Oh, and I still have my Panther Dog Tags they gave out at the Apple Store to us idiots who stood inline for hours.
Happy Birthday old friend!
10.3 was probably the first really usable version that I no longer needed to dual boot into OS 9. Oh, and I still have my Panther Dog Tags they gave out at the Apple Store to us idiots who stood inline for hours.
Happy Birthday old friend!
FrankBlack
Jan 12, 07:22 PM
While I also have some level of disappointment over the lack of any new Mac hardware, or even a progress report on 10.5, I suspect there was a reason for it. I think the reason may very well have been to emphasize Apple's move from being just a computer and iPod maker, to a maker of high-end consumer electronic products. The iPhone (assuming that they get to keep this name) is probably just the first of these products.
steviem
Apr 13, 12:54 PM
I started my first full-time job recently so I'm not covered by my parents' insurances anymore which is why I got some own ones:
http://www.risikolebensversicherungvergleich.de/logos/asstel_full.jpg
Asstel: When you just got's ta get that booty...
http://www.risikolebensversicherungvergleich.de/logos/asstel_full.jpg
Asstel: When you just got's ta get that booty...
McBeats
Oct 6, 04:49 PM
No the add is right. To many people drool over apple so they go with ATT. If you picked AT&T for the iPhone and knew the service was spotty in your area you loose all right to complain about it.
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
David G.
Jan 11, 07:19 PM
Ban. Them. Now.
gugy
Aug 8, 12:15 PM
I have an old 23" monitor and it's flawless.
I heard about people having issues, but I guess I am a lucky guy.
I heard about people having issues, but I guess I am a lucky guy.
CalBoy
Apr 21, 10:09 PM
So same system but without the down vote button at all?
arn
Yes, I think that would be better as well if we're going to have ratings.
I think a purely numerical system will just encourage all of the negative aspects of the ratings system.
arn
Yes, I think that would be better as well if we're going to have ratings.
I think a purely numerical system will just encourage all of the negative aspects of the ratings system.
Doctor Q
Jan 5, 08:35 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).If they tried to offer a live audio stream, would that produce the same simultaneous usage problem, even though the bandwidth would be reduced?
applekid
Mar 23, 11:20 AM
Hahaha! Wow! I thought I would never have a reason to share my media on a 360, but for security purposes, I should :) That is amazing and stupid on your neighbor's part. See, there's reason to invest in the $100 WiFi dongle. :D
Please do keep us posted. That may not enough for a warrant, but maybe having a cop visit either homes may be enough for someone to break. It is only down to two houses after all.
Wow, stealing WiFi AND a X-Box 360? Any laws in your area about stealing an internet connection? :D
Please do keep us posted. That may not enough for a warrant, but maybe having a cop visit either homes may be enough for someone to break. It is only down to two houses after all.
Wow, stealing WiFi AND a X-Box 360? Any laws in your area about stealing an internet connection? :D
localoid
May 3, 03:12 PM
Two points...
(1) I just checked, and I find that I can still download the app "Wireless Tether" (which only works on rooted phones) on Market.
(2) But since there's an even better app on Market -- that enables tethering on my non-rooted Android phone -- I wouldn't care all that much if "Wireless Tether" wasn't available.
(1) I just checked, and I find that I can still download the app "Wireless Tether" (which only works on rooted phones) on Market.
(2) But since there's an even better app on Market -- that enables tethering on my non-rooted Android phone -- I wouldn't care all that much if "Wireless Tether" wasn't available.
flopticalcube
Apr 22, 11:08 AM
whoops, I forgot america is slowly turning into france
Longer, healthier lives with more time to spend with family? Sounds horrendous.
Longer, healthier lives with more time to spend with family? Sounds horrendous.
dsnort
Aug 1, 03:32 PM
Do not act as stupid ass consumers with no brain. It is your right when you by music to listen to i where ever you want it too.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
You payed for it didn't you so now it is yours ....
DRM is ******** and it takes away your rights as a consumers.
Act now stop that ********.
One more thing. At least we have the freedom and our goverment tries too help.
I don't FEEL ignorant and stupid. Maybe that's because I took the time to READ and UNDERSTAND the limitations imposed on me by iTunes/iPod before I BOUGHT in. And maybe because I understand that what I am BUYING is a DIGITAL DATA FILE that must be interpreted by a certain APPLICATION to become music, and that this was EXPLAINED to me before I BOUGHT. That I don't OWN the MUSIC, and that there are LIMITATIONS to what I can do with it. ( And if you think I'm wrong on that last point, let a copyright holder catch you using their music for commmercial gain. Write back to us and describe the world of hurt that descends on you)!
The fact of the matter is that reasonable DRM's protect the artists who are the source of the music. And Apples DRM is one the most reasonable in the industry, both protecting the artist, and allowing fair use by the customer.
QCassidy352
May 3, 10:57 PM
really good ad. This series in reminiscent of the "think different" ad campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment