Slashdot Mirror

Well, this is strange. It looks to me like the post is back up. Anybody care to confirm?

apk says he’s BUSY AS HELL:

FIRST: What gives you the idea I was stalking you? Buddy - I work, and am finishing off another degree: My days? Are actually BUSY AS HELL - I have things to do (make ca$h, AND, getting another bachelor's degree in CSC (A.A.S. part's done, 92 credits into the 120 towards the bachelors after this semester's done in fact, in CSC to go along with my MIS/B.S. Business too, both related & perfectly along what I do for a living for 16++ yrs. now professionally - Information Systems work (Databasing really)).

gee you sure could’ve fooled me

Well, this is strange. It looks to me like the post is back up. Anybody care to confirm?

apk says he’s BUSY AS HELL:

FIRST: What gives you the idea I was stalking you? Buddy - I work, and am finishing off another degree: My days? Are actually BUSY AS HELL - I have things to do (make ca$h, AND, getting another bachelor's degree in CSC (A.A.S. part's done, 92 credits into the 120 towards the bachelors after this semester's done in fact, in CSC to go along with my MIS/B.S. Business too, both related & perfectly along what I do for a living for 16++ yrs. now professionally - Information Systems work (Databasing really)).

gee you sure could’ve fooled me

Well if you're really intent on blocking an image, there's this new (pain in the ass) Chrome blocking feature:

http://i40.tinypic.com/9r2b14.png

Honestly, I don't see the point. I can't ever remember wanting to block a specific image. Literally, never. And with a hosts file, I've only seen maybe ~100 ads in the last three years. I usually manually add those that aren't blacklisted.

Why start at 1800? We can try to verify tree rings a lot further back than that, using ice cores as well as other proxies. It turns out the tree rings show a completely different pictures compared to the other proxies - a very flat picture. No MMW, no LIA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFbUVBYIPlI (see the very end for sources)

To be frank, tree ring proxies (especially merging a lot of them together to hide how wildly different they are even from each other) are the only ones that can be used to show the handle of a hockey stick.

To get the blade, you need to switch away from the proxies again and graft direct temperature measurements to the end.

( ... and to be REALLY frank, you also need to modify the temperature measurements so you can minimize the warmth of the 30s and the cooling in the 60/70s.)

Here's the shocker: We HAVE earlier temperature data. That data does not agree with the tree proxies, and it gives the concept of AGW dubious support if any.

http://i45.tinypic.com/kqbd4.jpg

Or at least: the statement about Dems not keeping out of your wallet is the actual flamebait. This graph shows how, over the last eighty years, the Democratic Party has generated more wealth for the country than the GOP. Even if you ignore Herbert Hoover, it's not even close. When broken down by State as shown by this graph, eighteen states pay more in Federal taxes than they receive in Federal spending. Only one is Republican (Texas), and it doesn't even hit the top 15. The reason the Tax Foundation (a libertarian-leaning think tank) gives is that the more urban Blue states supplement the more rural red states. This shows through to the local level too. "What is most clear is that on a per capita basis the transfer of tax dollars through the state’s fiscal system flows from rich to poorer places and from urban to rural places. This is consistent with the results by analysts from other states who examine the distribution of state government finances" were the findings from this in-depth study (page B:7, 9 of 12, PDF). The urban Democratic areas are the ones paying out of their wallets, whether it's at the local, state or national level. If your opinion is different, then you believe in something that isn't fact-based. It really is as simple as that. The numbers don't care what your political leanings are.

Or at least: the statement about Dems not keeping out of your wallet is the actual flamebait. This graph shows how, over the last eighty years, the Democratic Party has generated more wealth for the country than the GOP. Even if you ignore Herbert Hoover, it's not even close. When broken down by State as shown by this graph, eighteen states pay more in Federal taxes than they receive in Federal spending. Only one is Republican (Texas), and it doesn't even hit the top 15. The reason the Tax Foundation (a libertarian-leaning think tank) gives is that the more urban Blue states supplement the more rural red states. This shows through to the local level too. "What is most clear is that on a per capita basis the transfer of tax dollars through the state’s fiscal system flows from rich to poorer places and from urban to rural places. This is consistent with the results by analysts from other states who examine the distribution of state government finances" were the findings from this in-depth study (page B:7, 9 of 12, PDF). The urban Democratic areas are the ones paying out of their wallets, whether it's at the local, state or national level. If your opinion is different, then you believe in something that isn't fact-based. It really is as simple as that. The numbers don't care what your political leanings are.

All I use for Chrome are these two gems:

FlashBlock extension
Dan Pollock's hosts file

FlashBlock images:
http://i43.tinypic.com/29f73vs.png (syfy.com -- one of the worst sites on the Internet)
http://i43.tinypic.com/29f73vs.png (FlashBlock options page)

Maybe once a month an ad slips through, but then I permanently block it.

Ditto for Flash. I think I have maybe seen 3 sites total that bypassed that extension somehow.

All I use for Chrome are these two gems:

FlashBlock extension
Dan Pollock's hosts file

FlashBlock images:
http://i43.tinypic.com/29f73vs.png (syfy.com -- one of the worst sites on the Internet)
http://i43.tinypic.com/29f73vs.png (FlashBlock options page)

Maybe once a month an ad slips through, but then I permanently block it.

Ditto for Flash. I think I have maybe seen 3 sites total that bypassed that extension somehow.

Actually I went to Buffalo one time to try to get a picture of this occurring to put on the wikipedia page. Its harder than you'd think since the skyline isnt that huge and buffalo do alot of nothing most of the time. But here's one of Buffalo buffalo about to buffalo Buffalo buffalo that's thinking about buffaloing Buffalo buffalo.

http://tinypic.com/r/xcqa06/5

this and this prove how wrong you are about that. so bring it on, asshole.

And this shows very clearly who, exactly, obviously has no worth and posts on slashdot all day and nite long.

p.s. I’ll be unable to respond to your harassing posts for a few hours; unlike you, I have a life.

p.p.s. I’ll say it again. Stop stalking my profile and posting harassing replies to all of my posts, and stop illegally bypassing Slashdot’s “you must wait longer before using this resource” message by changing your digital identity to trick the system into thinking you’re a different person.

this and this prove how wrong you are about that. so bring it on, asshole.

And this shows very clearly who, exactly, obviously has no worth and posts on slashdot all day and nite long.

p.s. I’ll be unable to respond to your harassing posts for a few hours; unlike you, I have a life.

p.p.s. I’ll say it again. Stop stalking my profile and posting harassing replies to all of my posts, and stop illegally bypassing Slashdot’s “you must wait longer before using this resource” message by changing your digital identity to trick the system into thinking you’re a different person.

this and this prove how wrong you are about that. so bring it on, asshole.

And this shows very clearly who, exactly, obviously has no worth and posts on slashdot all day and nite long.

p.s. I’ll be unable to respond to your harassing posts for a few hours; unlike you, I have a life.

p.p.s. I’ll say it again. Stop stalking my profile and posting harassing replies to all of my posts, and stop illegally bypassing Slashdot’s “you must wait longer before using this resource” message by changing your digital identity to trick the system into thinking you’re a different person.

I’ll let you decide whether he is apk, or (as he claims) multiple people who definitely are not apk but who all agree that apk’s opinions are the best thing to hit the internet since Algore invented it.

http://i40.tinypic.com/25f6kxy.jpg

Nope, I changed my sig so that I could get nice screenshots (like the following) of APK claiming he could see a sig that didn’t exist anymore. It’s pretty hilarious, really.

http://i42.tinypic.com/xn9oya.png

p.p.s luckily paypal can count, because I wouldn’t even dream of asking you to add $9,842.76 plus $15,000.00.

http://i40.tinypic.com/oh4aw9.jpg

I haven't seen one in a modern PC since 1990

My PC's pretty modern (a year old) and it has one:

http://i41.tinypic.com/24mt7ic.jpg

Note the shiny icon Windows 7 applies to it!

Sadly for me the BIOS only supports one floppy drive for some reason. As I don't have a 5.25" USB floppy drive - it has to be that one.

Hey apk... could you do me a big favour and count my pocket change for me? I won’t get a job because I can’t count because I didn’t get a degree, like you have said many times (well, that’s all according to you really, since I never said anything like it). It’s really irritating to not be able to count your own pocket change as I’m sure you can understand and I know you’ll be happy to count it for me. thanks.

http://i40.tinypic.com/1ytuva.jpg

p.s. don’t even think of taking any of it, I know it’s more money than you’ll see in a whole month but it’s mine and you can’t have any of it.

http://i40.tinypic.com/29m55i9.png

*beep* *beep*

http://i44.tinypic.com/117wj80.jpg

Maybe the creators of Street Fighter 2 had it right in choosing M. Bison to be the head of Thailand...

You mean Vega, not Bison.

You can also do that with Visual Studio, right there in your code.

/// <summary>
/// You'll see this in intellisense
/// </summary>
/// <param name="x">Intellisense info about what 'x' is</param>
/// <returns>Intellisense info about what is being returned</returns>
public string MyFunction(int x)
{
//do some stuff
}

See the intellisense

The tricky part comes when introducing new language constructs, not just new classes/functions etc. Try using LINQ in VS 2003. It's just not gonna happen... the IDE doesn't know what to do with it.

You can also do that with Visual Studio, right there in your code.

/// <summary>
/// You'll see this in intellisense
/// </summary>
/// <param name="x">Intellisense info about what 'x' is</param>
/// <returns>Intellisense info about what is being returned</returns>
public string MyFunction(int x)
{
//do some stuff
}

See the intellisense

The tricky part comes when introducing new language constructs, not just new classes/functions etc. Try using LINQ in VS 2003. It's just not gonna happen... the IDE doesn't know what to do with it.

Someone has added an x-rated photo titled "Example of pushing limits". Did you added it to the Auzi monstrous! wiki?

I managed to take a snapshot of your crime :) http://i43.tinypic.com/11mgtvr.jpg

(See the history if you cannot see it)

It will have the same effect cars did on walking a dog

The military investigation that followed this event found that there were no AK-47s and no RPGs, just cameras with long lenses.

As was pointed out at 3:45 - 3:46 in the short video and a capture posted by another person: http://i41.tinypic.com/343tb0j.jpg -- that's either an RPG or a collapsed tripod with a conical camera on top.

Nobody in the group had RPGs or anything that looked remotely like them.

You sure about that?
From the air [tinypic.com]
On the ground [tinypic.com]

Certainly looks like weapons to me ... And the guy crouching and peering behind a corner looking at a convoy coming down the road ... Yup, does not look suspicious one bit. /sarcasm

Implanting yourself within an insurgent group to get photographs may be hazardous to your health.

Nobody in the group had RPGs or anything that looked remotely like them.

You sure about that?
From the air [tinypic.com]
On the ground [tinypic.com]

Certainly looks like weapons to me ... And the guy crouching and peering behind a corner looking at a convoy coming down the road ... Yup, does not look suspicious one bit. /sarcasm

Implanting yourself within an insurgent group to get photographs may be hazardous to your health.

watch the actual video. When they started shooting the people they shot at had nothing in their hands except one guy with a camera.

You sure about that?
From the air
On the ground

watch the actual video. When they started shooting the people they shot at had nothing in their hands except one guy with a camera.

You sure about that?
From the air
On the ground

This guy. http://i41.tinypic.com/343tb0j.jpg Please read the link below it where the anigif zoomed capture is from. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201889.php

they were armed but that doesn't suit your goals so you all ignore it. http://i41.tinypic.com/343tb0j.jpg zoomed in gif of one of them with an rpg7 I know you all want to claim it's a tripod for a camera but it's got the rpg at the top and the second grip is also visible as he turns plus the one he's holding. If it's a tripod I'm sure the great /. can show me a tripod that comes to a point bulges out then shrinks down the a single cylinder then expands a again has two handles and is solid at it's base. Just admit you hate the US and it's military and will do anything to create a negative story to disgrace and belittle them from your comfy homes. here a photo of an rpg7 looks exactly like item in his hands to me. http://xbradtc.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/rpg7a6dm.jpg

I can trace this idea back to 19th January 2008. Can anyone beat that? The poster removed the pic on a certain forum saying "Sorry guys, taken this down until I finish talking to the patent attorneys." Thankfully I had already seen it and saved a copy of the image. View his concept here: http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=koh11&s=5

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

Which IE version is this? IE8 AFAIK asks you on the initial setup. And to change it later, it's on the first option pane.

As for changing anything else in IE, I think I can answer this. It's the signal:noise ratio. Chrome purposely limits the amount of options, resulting in a very 'clean' look. IE has a bazillion configurable option choices, resulting in a major clusterfuck appearance. It takes minutes just to find one option in particular.

Compare these.

Google Chrome: 1 2 3 4 5

Internet Explorer: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Chrome is a good example of why less is more when it comes to UI creation. Microsoft could still learn a thing or two from Apple, it seems.

I am sorry, I can't put this any more politely. You just might be an idiot.

Chrome Options pane

It doesn't get any easier than that. Stop implying that Chrome's advanced page is akin to the other browsers.

My post's parent talked about Chrome, obviously, and therefore so did mine.

Here's a screenshot of Chrome 5.0.342.7 beta, on Mac. It's in Croatian, but the option I'm talking about is the second visible checkbox, the one unchecked and which reads "Koristite uslugu prijedloga kao pomoc pri popunjavanju pretrazivanja i URL-ova unesenih u traci adrese". When translated, this is approximately "Use the suggestion service as help when typing searches and URLs in the address bar". Sorry, but it's a bit late and I couldn't be bothered to find language switch.

So, by unchecking this single checkbox I don't seem to be getting any more suggestions. The firewall seems to agree -- and when I turn that option back on, there's definitely some traffic to a server that's reverse-DNS-resolving to something in .google.com.

In before Wol Smoth

Mr President?
>Yes?
An internet user in New Orleans posted some scathing commentary on the current elected officials!
>SHUT
>DOWN
>EVERYTHING

http://i34.tinypic.com/2cesq4k.jpg
Pandemic, wee

Google already partnered with some utilities, and a few device makers (about 7 months ago). Most utilities are slow to provide opt-in to their customers. But anyone can install and watch their whole house power and consumption.

For example, the TED installs at your house main. It happens to send data to Google PowerMeter in the cloud (an App Engine application it seems.)

Right now, it is only one-way. Simply provides monitoring. Nothing can be controlled. You see your 10-minute average power in an iGoogle Gadget. As well as weekly and monthly total consumption, with a couple basic comparisons. In fact, the TED had an API, so anyone can read the second-by-second power readings and build your own charting application, or load a spreadsheet, or use the built-in browser to see gauges of power, etc. So, to make it easier for device manufactures to provide usage data (probably not just electric, but gas and water as well), why not a chip that can be embedded into your device designs.

For those who have not seen Google PowerMeter, tinypic sample here.