Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Perhaps we should have a specific board on IHub to post about when SI is down (ETA for restoration if known etc.) and a board on SI to report the same information about IHub.
Is something up with Silicon Investor?
Every time I try to display a page there I get
-------------
Server Error in '/' Application.
Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.
Details: To enable the details of this specific error message to be viewable on remote machines, please create a <customErrors> tag within a "web.config" configuration file located in the root directory of the current web application. This <customErrors> tag should then have its "mode" attribute set to "Off".
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="Off"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
Notes: The current error page you are seeing can be replaced by a custom error page by modifying the "defaultRedirect" attribute of the application's <customErrors> configuration tag to point to a custom error page URL.
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="RemoteOnly" defaultRedirect="mycustompage.htm"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
Could the links in Favorites be changed to normal links rather than java script links, so that one can right click and open in a new tab, or open in a new window?
The link doesn't work
In the case of government employees we really don't have another choice (well I suppose you could leave the country, or leave the state if its state government, but most people won't unless things get REALLY bad).
With private service employees we have less ability to take advantage of lower costs elsewhere because services aren't as easily tradeable, still you have things like tech support centers in India, and even "medical tourism". I guess with lawyers you would have a problem because their are legal restrictions on who can provide legal advice.
Is "earning too much" defined as earning more than in other countries?
The price of doing business true, but that doesn't make it a good thing, or attempts to reduce the amount of form filling that needs to be done a bad thing.
I crossposted the issue over here
http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/subject.aspx?subjectid=55439
And one person brought up the point that government deciding that certain unwanted events are mistakes that should not be paid for will be a trigger for a malpractice suit and be used as evidence in such a suit.
Nominal - Cut in number of dollars, not adjusted for inflation.
Real - Adjusted for inflation.
Cut based on what was planned - Difference between planned future increases, and actual increases. (I personally would not consider this a cut, but many people call it that.)
If the budget is 100 in year one, its planned to go to 110 in year two, but things change and the budget stays the same at 100, and inflation is 5%
In nominal terms there is no cut. In real terms there is about a 4.8% cut (many people would say 5%, but 100 is about 95.238% of 105). But at the same time many people would talk about a cut of 9% (100/110 is .90909...) or even 10% (because 110 is 10% more than 100, even if 100 isn't 10% less than 110).
Tim
That's six years without an increase. And unless Congress acts, doctors face a 10% cut in reimbursements in 2008, and a 40% cut by 2016.
Is that a cut in nominal reimbursement, real reimbursement, or a cut in what reimbursements where planned to have been?
I understand that, but even if you use compatible memory, and do the upgrade properly, you warranty can be voided.
I always thought the idea was a bit unreasonable. Desktops are designed to be upgraded fairly easily, and a RAM upgrade is pretty simple.
I understand that car warranties are usually only voided if it can be shown that the upgrade caused problems.
Thanks for replying. I knew that all the RAM would run at the lowest speed. I just wondered how much difference a higher RAM speed would make.
My guess is not enough to make it a priority in terms of upgrades. Perhaps not even enough to bother with after priority upgrades have been done.
More memory should help for some programs, or with heavy multitasking, but probably isn't crucial considering I already have 2GB.
My top priority upgrade is a video upgrade. I have 2 GB of RAM , and a quite adequate processor (Athlon 64X2 5200), but I only have on board video.
How much of a performance difference would you typically get by replacing 2GB of PC2-4200 with PC2-5300 or PC2-6400?
I'm guessing not a whole lot. I wouldn't even consider it if RAM had not gotten so cheap. I might just add 2GB of higher speed RAM, but I'm not sure that adding and replacing would be all that beneficial compared to just adding.
I agree with what I see as the main point of the article. If you include "rationing by price" as a form of rationing, then any scarce good, will need to be rationed in some way and that health care is no exception to this general rule.
As for "and gets relatively mediocre outcomes. Life expectancy is not only lower in the U.S. than in all three of those countries, it's below average for all industrialized countries. In short, the rest of the industrialized world does a better job of rationing health care than we do."
I'm not really sure that that statement is correct. Life expectancy is determined by many things besides the health care system. Also an extended life expectancy is only one of the benefits of improved health care. So if all you have is that country X has a lower life expectancy than country Y, you can't reasonably conclude that country Y has better health care, particularly if the life expectancy differences as modest.
Unlike a free market the rationed items do not go up in price.
Which is typically a bad thing. When items are in short supply you want the prices to go up, which will tend to reduce demand and often increase supply.
I was in the RVN in 72-73 when cigarettes and booze were rationed.
These are "essentials"?
Is SI still down? I can't get to it.
I thought it was supposed to be down for "a few hours during the morning"
SI Down
Server Error in '/' Application.
Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.
Details: To enable the details of this specific error message to be viewable on remote machines, please create a <customErrors> tag within a "web.config" configuration file located in the root directory of the current web application. This <customErrors> tag should then have its "mode" attribute set to "Off".
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="Off"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
Notes: The current error page you are seeing can be replaced by a custom error page by modifying the "defaultRedirect" attribute of the application's <customErrors> configuration tag to point to a custom error page URL.
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="RemoteOnly" defaultRedirect="mycustompage.htm"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
12/1/06 4 PM Eastern time
If someone as antagonistic towards the site as Greg has been can't find the door, I believe we have every right to show it to them.
Every right sure. But that doesn't make it a good thing. He's been somewhat antagonistic about one issue for maybe one week. He hasn't been antagonistic enough to be a real problem for people using I-Hub, and eventually he moved his complaints to a board created for that purpose, with only his sig mentioning it elsewhere.
I think his objections might be a little over the top ("secret police" etc.), but I also think summarily booting him off the site was also over the top.
OT
One of the car magazines (I forget which one - maybe Automobile or Road and Track) tested the new Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 and the Jeep was faster through the slalom, faster on the skid pad, and faster in acceleration.
I think it was a Cayenne or Cayenne S
Porhse sells the Cayenne,Cayenne S, Cayenne Turbo, and for 2006 the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/cayenne_turbo.asp
Of course the turbo models are much more expensive than any Cherokee.
OT
They are seperate companies. There is no parent company.
But -
" Der Spiegel has reported that Porsche is preparing to purchase 20 percent of Volkswagen AG shares to become the main shareholder in the company.
The main reason behind this? Porsche wants to protect their technological investment in the joint platforms that Porsche has co-developed with Volkswagen AG like the Cayenne/Touareg platform and also their hybrid systems.
These deals for joint-platforms would be endangered if someone engages in a takeover of Volkswagen AG, which is currently in crisis. With this stake purchase, a hostile takeover would be prevented with the combined shareholding of Lower Saxony (18.2%), Volkswagen’s own holding (13.1%) and Porsche’s shares (20%) making up the majority.
This deal would be worth approximately 3 billion euro."
http://paultan.org/archives/2005/09/25/porsche-to-buy-20-stake-in-volkswagen-ag/
he Wash rule is one of many idiotic tax regulations. If I sell an equity for a loss, that loss has been realized whether I buy the equity back 5 minutes later or 5 years later. The government will eventually get my taxes back as I've just lowered my dollar cost average and will eventually sell sometime in the future.
I agree
"This image removed due to high bandwith useage."
Edit- Never mind, it was like that for a few minutes but it appears to be back to normal
---------------
Not really an I-Hub issue but -
SI shows
Server Error in '/' Application.
Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.
Details: To enable the details of this specific error message to be viewable on remote machines, please create a <customErrors> tag within a "web.config" configuration file located in the root directory of the current web application. This <customErrors> tag should then have its "mode" attribute set to "Off".
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="Off"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
Notes: The current error page you are seeing can be replaced by a custom error page by modifying the "defaultRedirect" attribute of the application's <customErrors> configuration tag to point to a custom error page URL.
<!-- Web.Config Configuration File -->
<configuration>
<system.web>
<customErrors mode="RemoteOnly" defaultRedirect="mycustompage.htm"/>
</system.web>
</configuration>
I don't think Intel will go to $37 either, but I would certainly take the 1000 to one odds. I'd then sell some Intel calls with strike prices of close to $37, for more then enough to cover the "one". No way I can lose other then you not paying off the bet (in which case I could lose my shirt if Intel goes over $40) or Intel zooming so high that selling those calls is 1000 to one loser.
Yes, I know I'm taking you entirely too literally. I do that sometimes...
Tim
I don't have proof that it will matter eventually, but I also can't prove that the sun will come up tomorrow. True the sun not rising tomorrow is even less likely than 64 bit computing not taking over across personal computers and servers, but neither is very likely.
Besides, software incompatibility didn't kill Jaguar (IMO)
Software incompatibility didn't kill Jaquar as much as lack of available software. If gret Jaguar games were widely available at a decent price it would probably have at least established a niche.
Ad for IBM's OS/2 and 3DNow
OS/2 never had anywhere close to the software and driver support that Windows had. And IBM seemed particuarly inept in marketing it (even other IBM divisions didn't support it, or in may cases offer it).
3DNow is in many millions of chips and is still around today. In that sense it didn't fail. Of course it wasn't the main reason that most of these chips were sold and you don't get a lot of people putting effort in to coding for it, but than MMX wasn't a huge deal either despite the fact that Intel was and is much larger then AMD and that other companies (including AMD) adopted MMX.
64bit is a much bigger deal than MMX or 3DNow. It probably doesn't matter as much in the average laptop as the average desktop right now, and it matters much less in either than on servers, but eventually it will take over all 3.
Another big difference is that Intel has adopted AMD's 64 bit scheme. Its not a scheme only pushed by a relatively small chip maker, like 3DNow. If Intel had put out a 64bit extention of x86 that was incompatible with AMD64 and if the market starting using it than AMD64 would be like 3DNow, or even be in a worse situation, because chips that support 3DNow can also support MMX2.
The fact is also a difference of AMD64 from OS/2. Microsoft played lip service to OS/2 for awhile but they never really supported it. Eventually they dropped the lip service. Intel and Microsoft both support AMD64 even if they don't call it that.
I don't think customers are going to pay a lot more for their laptops to have AMD64, and they won't accept poor performance or other problems in order to get AMD64, it just ins't a big enough deal for most customers to put up with such things. But they don't have to put up with them. AMD has reasonably priced high performance chips. And customers of PCs (including laptops) are getting more and more choices that include AMD chips.
I don't think that AMD is going to dominate the laptop market or anything close to that. But they have a more competitive product now than what they had last year so I think they will gain marketshare even while Intel continues to get the lions share of the sales.
Tim
Even if 0% of the laptop market cares about 64bits, the fact that AMDs 64bit chips run the old 32 bit software means your Jaguar analogy is very faulty.
I imagine that more than 10% of the market already cares about 64bits but most of the market doesn't care very much yet. If everything else is equal 64bit is a selling point for well over 10% of the laptop market but it might not be a very big selling point for more than a few percent.
Or in other words more thant 10% of the market CARES about 64bits, but less than, perhaps much less than, 10% of the market REQUIRES 64bit computing.
Tim
For some reason I-Hub doesn't keep me logged in when I close my browser (Mozilla 1.7.3). I don't have the same problem with other sites, including SI. (And yes cookie are enabled and I do check the box to keep me logged in)
Tim
I understand the overall point that you are concerned about but innovations like AMD64 and HT were created by higher R&D budgets not lower. Also I think they are more beneficial then disruptive and they aren't just being used by AMD. HT is a standard that many companies are adopting for different purposes, and Intel cloned AMD64. So I don't see either AMD64 or Hyptertransport as a problem, and even if they were a problem lower R&D budgets would not increase such "problems" but rather decrease them. Lower R&D budgets might easily cause a problem of less inovation and product improvement but AMD64 and HT are examples of inovation and product improvement so they are poor examples of problems supposedly created by lower R&D budgets (because they aren't problems and they were not created by a lowering of R&D budgets).
It takes a large R&D budget in order to move the market.
Not always. Sometimes good ideas don't take a lot of money to develop. Other times ideas that cost a huge amount of money to develop don't go anyware. To the extent that Intel moves the market with money its more a case of a huge marketing budget, and enormous production capability.
Tim
I think if we fractionalize this market we'll all lose.
Perhaps. But that wasn't what I was talking about. I was, and still am asking how lower R&D budgets would make this problem worse.
I was replying to your statement - " Two fumbling companies will not produce the enormous R&D required to enable new technologies and standards that have kept this market in gear for ages. Without that you have two disparate architectures going in different directions. "
The prospect of AMD having 30% MS anytime soon is unreasonable, including next year.
I guess it depends on how yo udefine anytime soon. If you mean this year or next I certainly agree.
The potential of AMD high volume production is worrisome.
I would think it would be worrisome for Intel but I don't see why it would be a owrry for AMD. AMD would not be a "fumbleing company" if it can continue to expand its share.
Two fumbling companies will not produce the enormous R&D required to enable new technologies and standards that have kept this market in gear for ages. Without that you have two disparate architectures going in different directions.
I don't see how lower R&D budgets would make AMD's and Intels technologies and architectures closer together. If anything if they companies have more money to spend on R&D they would be more likely to move apart.
Tim
Or if someone would set up a test with 2 graphics cards it would be more likely to make the CPU the bottleneck.
http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=115105584
AMD's share is 1.35%
Who can measure 1.35%?
AMD's revenue share increase is 1.35% (probably can't be measured that precisely so it might be better to use a less precise sounding One and third percent, or even 1% if you want its almost definitely at least that). That 1.35% (or 1 to 1.5% to include a fudge factor), represents a lot of money.
Believe me, nothing has changed!
That depends on what scale you are measuring things. If you are looking at the Q to Q CPU profitability for AMD that extra bit will help a lot. Does it mean that Intel is doomed or AMD has become the top dog? Not even close. The change is at the margin not a major flip in market position. If such growth can continue for awhile AMD will be in a good position, but it is still just about impossible for AMD to overtake Intel in market share any time soon. It doesn't have the capacity and even if it did such changes take a long time (and often don't happen at all)
Tim
Maybe I'm wrong, but since Intel has 90% of the revenue market, if you divide 21% by 10 you get 2.1%, so Intel must have increased it's revenues by 2X over AMD. So AMD must have lost share, no?
Since Intel has much more than twice as much revenue as AMD, if
both companies increase revenue and Intel increases its revenue twice as much as AMD than Intel is losing revenue share to AMD.
An example of the principle using simple numbers that aren't the actual numbers for either company.
If AMD's revenue was 10 and Intels was 90, and AMD added 200 while Intel added 400, Intel would go from 90% revenue share to about 70% of revenue share. I'm using huge increases to make the effect obvious. The real % increases where much smaller for both companies but that just makes for a smaller Intel revnue share loss not an Intel share gain.
Tim
fpg, Re: This tool is not just going to be trivially replaced by some equally effective alternative, as you so strenuously argue. Crackers are significantly weaker in a world protected by NX.
Famous last words.
"Significantly weaker", doesn't mean "not a danger". Personally I think it might be more like "moderately weaker".
I wouldn't trust my business to that thinking, however, and you won't find any businesses trusting "Advanced Virus Protection", either.
If by "trusting" you mean having that be the only protection against viruses, then I think you are pretty much right. Only an idiot would have it be their only protection against viruses and worms.
OTOH it is a useful tool that protects against some serious threats, so its not a scam or gimmick.
Tim
Because a massive impact on 80% of PCs (and maybe 95% of x86 servers) does more damage with less effort then a weaker attack on 100% of PC.
OT -
Can anyone explain what the "keep" link at the bottom of a message does?
Tim
I am simply stating the obvious, that NX is not a panacea for security
I think we all agree with that. No one system or technique is a panacea for security. All NX does is block a very important security weakness that has been used to create a lot of damage very quickly. It shores up one of the weakest points in the security of many servers. But it isn't, couldn't be, and was never meant to be a panacea for security.
Tim
So in your opinion is getting direct physical access to a server a work around for firewalls? And if it is does the possibility that someone might get direct physical access to the computer make firewalls useless?
Tim