Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (
More info?)
"Dan" <d@d.com> wrote in message
news:41be266e$0$16588$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
>
>
>
> "I think I will switch to pci-e when my current motherboard, cpu and ram
are
> obsolete."
> -----------------------------------------------------
> By that time you won't have any other choice.
>
> DaveL
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Then we'll have something else being forced upoun us just to help Intel
sell
> more chipsets
And M$ itching to force you to "upgrade" your OS by refusing to patch
support for newer hardware (doesn't stop it from happening...), releasing
insecure products for job security's sake, and moving towards a subscription
model with central content delivery and full remote auditing capability,
just like any media mogul's wet dream...
And this is how it looks on a social scale, the Supreme Court at work
sweeping BS under the rug, eroding the Constitution, and allowing for
fascism:
In other action Monday, the court:
Refused to clarify when police can use deadly force to stop fleeing criminal
suspects but said a lower court got it wrong in allowing a lawsuit against
an officer in Washington state who shot a burglary suspect. Instead, the
court issued an unsigned opinion that found only that the 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals in San Francisco erred in ruling that the officer, Rochelle
Brosseau, clearly violated the suspect's constitutional rights.
Put restrictions on companies that want to voluntarily clean up their
polluted land and sue former owners to share the costs. The court ruled 7-2
against a company that in 1981 bought land in Texas that had been used for
aircraft engine maintenance businesses and then went to court to recover
some of the $5 million it spent cleaning up pollution there. The justices
said the company improperly tried to use the Superfund law to sue because
the government had not demanded that the cleanup be done.
Ruled that police have authority to arrest suspects on charges that later
fall apart, so long as officers had a second, valid reason for the
detention. The 8-0 ruling set aside a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
ruling in favor of Jerome Alford. Two Washington State Patrol officers had
arrested him for tape recording their conversation during a traffic stop in
November 1997. During the traffic stop, Alford told the officers he had case
law showing the taping was legal, but police arrested him anyway partly for
separate reasons, which they did not tell him, that he appeared to be
impersonating a police officer.
The point? Nobody says you have to buy into it...these things are "forced"
only to the degree that the masses allow...
> Dan
I am thinking about ust going to PCI 
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram