Slashdot Mirror

Also, fwiw, it was posted on an fbi site in 2004 as well: http://waybackmachine.org/20041115000000*/http://foia.fbi.gov/hottel_guy/hottel_guy_part01.pdf

The greatness that is APK...

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20050207062122/http://www.pixelstation.com/APKWeb/software.html

You claimed that Phoenix was about killing IE, while the actual people who started the project stated they did because Mozilla was bloated and slow.

The charter they published said otherwise. Some quotes:

Mozilla Firebird grew out of the desire to make the best browser for Microsoft Windows.

The goal was, and is not to have more or less features than any other client (Mozilla included) but to have the right set of features to let people get their jobs done.

The target market for Mozilla Firebird includes all users who are sufficiently sophisticated in computer skill as to be able to download and install their own browser. This includes a large number of intermediate-to-advanced folk who are currently using Internet Explorer.

For the record, I long believed the same thing as you.

You can't just rewrite history in your mind, because it's inconvenient to your worldview ("mozilla was fast! it was awesome! everyone loved it!").

I'm not the one rewriting history here. I never said everyone loved Mozilla either.

I've used Mozilla since 1.2 on an old Pentium II 233 Mhz. It was fast, and got even faster.

Phoenix in the beginning was very fast because it barely had any UI. But once they started to add things, it only got slower.

Afghanistan seems like kind of a low bar for the "elevators to combat robots" metric, since it has been a mixture of tribal infighting and superpower proxy wars at least since the British showed up(and had a lousy time... and then the Russians showed up, and had a lousy time... and the Americans showed up...); but it is, nevertheless, something of a dramatic shift.

What I'm not looking forward to is what will happen when(if ever) the demand for military combat robots slackens a bit and the producers thereof start seriously targeting the home market. Through a combination of military contractors trying to avoid being vulnerable to having only a single customer and direct transfers of military hardware from the DoD(you may throw an SSL warning if your browser doesn't trust DoD certs) military hardware generally has a way of coming home. Even random sheriffs are burnishing their toys collection(it's a wayback machine link because, for reasons that are completely inexplicable, the broader response to the 'The Peacemaker' was perhaps less favorable than anticipated...) I know, from observing one of their training exercises, that the supply of m16s maintained by the police force in the unbelievably boring and low crime bedroom community where I work is much higher than I would have expected.

This suggests that it is only a matter of time before we can expect to see surplussed predators and such 'protecting and serving' here at home.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." -John Adams

Nuclear power has one thing going for it:

• * High Energy Density

Nuclear power also has several strikes:

• * High maintenance - everything has to work all the time so that your plant doesn't explode and make hundreds of square miles uninhabitable
• * High initial cost
• * High shutdown costs
• * stuck with billion-dollar boiling water reactors and pressurized water reactors

Even if a superior reactor design comes along, there's an incredible financial incentive to stick with the technology that was first developed and deployed (see the Wired story on thorium).

The best argument in favor of nuclear power is that "it may have problems, but it's all we've got". Nuclear advocates rightly point out that, compared to coal, oil, natural gas, and even hydropower (complicated), perhaps nuclear isn't so bad. Coal is abundant but dirty, oil is expensive and dirty, natural gas is cleaner but still poisons the ocean with CO2, and hydropower has it's own challenges.

But the one "black swan" that never gets talked about is "disruptive technology" that changes the entire energy equation.

One example: I've mentioned Global Resource Corporation's Microwave here before. This device uses specific microwave frequencies to release gaseous and liquid hydrocarbons from solids, such as coal (diesel, propane, butane). The company had a prototype that worked on tires, but they fell apart before they could get commercial versions of their technology to market. Luckily archive.org has a copy of their website: http://waybackmachine.org/*/http://www.GlobalResourceCorp.com. I remember reading about a cool patent that used Magnetic Resonance to figure out what specific microwaves a given sample of "trash" would need to be broken down...

GRC's site talked about applying the technology to tar sands, to coal mining, breaking down hundreds of millions of used tires piled everywhere... How would the energy equation change if harvesting coal and tar sands didn't require massive amounts of energy?

Here's something else: according to an old story on money.cnn.com, the largest single use of electricity in southern California is pumping water. And very large amount of water is used to generate electricity.

So, with these twin issues... What if Raphial Morgado's MYT (Mighty) pump really is as good as he says it is? Suppose you could get 25% more water pumped for the same amount of electricity, or generate 25% more electricity with the same amount of steam?

Whereas Global Resource Corp's special microwaves haven't reached market because it was torpedo'd by mismanagement (or maybe there's a technical problem - I'm pretty certain that the science is sound), Morgado's pump is in limbo because he hasn't yet found anyone who'd lend him $4-million or $10-million to build a factory. He has plenty of offers to buy the technology outright, but he has the audacity to presume that he should be the one to profit from his invention.

Imagine if the demand for energy suddenly plunged by more than 25%. Oil is only going for $100/barell because demand roughly matches supply. If supply exceeds demand by a significant percentage, we'd be back to $1/gallon gas in a heartbeat.

These are just the two technologies that

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=254000146591&topic=16411

That is a copy of this site that seems to have gone offline recently:
http://www.suppressedscience.net/

Suppressed? :-) At the very least by marketplace forces? :-(

See also:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090308132014/http://suppressedscience.net/physics.html
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090309114648/http://suppressedscience.net/

Stuff I wrote building on those ideas:
http://www.pdfernhout.net/to-james-randi-on-skepticism-about-mainstream-science.html

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=254000146591&topic=16411

That is a copy of this site that seems to have gone offline recently:
http://www.suppressedscience.net/

Suppressed? :-) At the very least by marketplace forces? :-(

See also:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090308132014/http://suppressedscience.net/physics.html
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090309114648/http://suppressedscience.net/

Stuff I wrote building on those ideas:
http://www.pdfernhout.net/to-james-randi-on-skepticism-about-mainstream-science.html

the wayback machine has more information, but you have to go way back to get it. here's a link.

1st: Where's your ALLEGED "research data" then? See subject-line, because it's nearly EXACTLY what you asked for & I provided it.

NO, seems all you have is "the oldest 'troll trick' in the world (off topic english critiques along w/ ad hominem attacks, so where's your PHD in English, expert? Fantasyland, along with your 'research'?)

"You make no sense, it's really hard to understand what the heck you're trying to say"by Tom (822) on Wednesday March 30, @07:00AM (#35664726) Homepage

See above, & "your honor, I rest my case", lol... you make it EASY for me on THAT account, w/ your off topic b.s. english writing critique (is there such a section of this forums? No)...

Additionally, it also seems you read my points FINE, despite your transparent off topic 'critiques' of my writing style (of which this forums has no such section, nor is this topic about that mind you) & replied, fine, on YOUR end to my points (though I blow you away on each of your replies here, easily, lol!)

Sso it shows that's just another "troll trick" (lol, won't work on me - I've been trolled by the BEST of them, & won everytime... how? FACTS my boy, facts! The thing that blows trolls doors off everytime!)

---

"I fail to see the relevance of that. This is a discussion about spam, and so far Android systems aren't known as a major source of spam." - by Tom (822) on Wednesday March 30, @07:00AM (#35664726) Homepage

They're a LINUX, Tom... & proof of a "portent of things to come" for Linux, on "things security"...

(Especially about the b.s. I have seen, for YEARS here no less, of "LINUX IS MORE SECURE THAN WINDOWS"... funny, but the data I show is showing QUITE otherwise, easily (& so does ANDROID)).

---

"Yeah, right. That was 10 years ago, today is today and OS X has a market share of 15% in many places of the world, that is considerably more than nobody." - by Tom (822) on Wednesday March 30, @07:00AM (#35664726) Homepage

Aha, KNEW IT: You "fell for my trap", & yes, "jedi mind tricks" do WORK ON YOU

See, by way of comparison, especially compared to Windows "share-of-market"? They are so LOW on the totem poll, it's not even funny!

Hell, MS is SO FAR AHEAD in 1st place, there practically isn't a 2nd place winner... lol!

Still, considering that Apple put out B.S. loaded commercials that stated in essence & iirc, literally even, that "Windows is less secure than a PC" here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdF5IsyOxU4

AND THEIR HOMEPAGE SAID "no viruses" too here:

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090303015013/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

?

Please... malware IS malware!

(& yes, MacOS X has seen its share, despite the "marketing-droidz" b.s. shown above).

(Fact is, I can show SLEWS of it happening, just ask... I will provide it, unlike YOU, though you demanded proof of others... you got it, see my 1st post you replied to and "Read 'em & WEEP")

HOWEVER, here is where you HELP my case:

As you say in fact, when MacOS X's market-share/user mind-share went up... (makes sense - as malware makers/hackers-cracker are like pickpockets!)

E.G.-> Like pickpockets, the hacker/cracker crowd ARE criminal largely, & they do NOT operate on "crowds of 1" only, they target LARGE crowds (like Windows has), in order to "maximize their ROI" on efforts expended in code. Think about it like a shotgun - you target the largest body you can, not just 1 bird when you hunt for birds!

---

"I have no idea what kind of thought processes you have, but they appear confused at the very least." - by Tom (822) on Wednesda

About criticism being mounted when the motion picture version of The two Towers was coming out... E.g. waybackmachine.org/../twotowerprotest.org

We believe that Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema's actions are in fact hate speech. The movie is intentionally being named The Two Towers in order to capitalize on the tragedy of September 11. Clearly, you cannot deny the fact that this falls under hate speech.

AppStore is not the search term I used

But the one you should have used.

I used "App Store" as used by Apple.

Except that's not what they're suing over.

Search engines return exact matches

No they don't.

Your citation isn't as authoritative as you might think, since that web page in not on the Internet Archive prior to September 15, 2008;

That would be true if the 'internet archive' were a 100% perfect snapshot, which it isn't.

Prior use of the term does not prevent or invalidate registration, and I do not know if this evidence of one prior use would be sufficient to convince a judge that the term is generic.

I wasn't suggesting that, I was refuting this claim:
It is entirely possible that they actually did coin the term - so yes, seriously.
The certainly didn't coin the term.

AppStore is not the search term I used, I used "App Store" as used by Apple. Search engines return exact matches, and my statements were true and complete. Your citation isn't as authoritative as you might think, since that web page in not on the Internet Archive prior to September 15, 2008; however, I found that eWeek had a citation for the press release from 2007 that's valid. I was cautious about accepting your URL, only because I have seen "press releases" altered before.

SalesForce used the term AppExchange on their website and the search for "Appstore" on their website is rather telling: It appears that they used AppStore internally and in press releases in a manner similar to the way Microsoft used Chicago as the working name for Windows 95, but they never used the term in commercial manner (product or service). It is telling that they did not feel the need to clarify "Apple App Store" in the many references to "App Store" and "AppStore" which refer to purchasing Iphone/iPod applications from Apple. Prior use of the term does not prevent or invalidate registration, and I do not know if this evidence of one prior use would be sufficient to convince a judge that the term is generic.

AppStore is not the search term I used, I used "App Store" as used by Apple. Search engines return exact matches, and my statements were true and complete. Your citation isn't as authoritative as you might think, since that web page in not on the Internet Archive prior to September 15, 2008; however, I found that eWeek had a citation for the press release from 2007 that's valid. I was cautious about accepting your URL, only because I have seen "press releases" altered before.

SalesForce used the term AppExchange on their website and the search for "Appstore" on their website is rather telling: It appears that they used AppStore internally and in press releases in a manner similar to the way Microsoft used Chicago as the working name for Windows 95, but they never used the term in commercial manner (product or service). It is telling that they did not feel the need to clarify "Apple App Store" in the many references to "App Store" and "AppStore" which refer to purchasing Iphone/iPod applications from Apple. Prior use of the term does not prevent or invalidate registration, and I do not know if this evidence of one prior use would be sufficient to convince a judge that the term is generic.

Want to go back to simple HTML:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/19961114151757/http://scifi.com/
(look how fast it loads)

It loads fast because it's not doing much. I write new HTML almost every day that performs just as well because it's not overly-complex.

>>>Protip: WebGL is not part of the HTML5 standard nor is it a W3C or WHATWG standard

Brain hurt.
Want to go back to simple HTML:
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/19961114151757/http://scifi.com/
(look how fast it loads)

The Genesis of Postscript (1981)

By Jim Bowery
Version 20010406
Copyright 2001
The author grants the right to copy, without modification.

The Challenge

From 2001 through 2007 I offered, with no takers, $500 to the first person who could document the existence of a Xerox PARC communication concerning post-fix notation for page description languages prior to my visit to that facility in November 1981 in my capacity as Manager of Interactive Architectures for Viewdata Corporation of America, the videotex joint venture between AT&T and Knight-Ridder News. Communiques regarding "JaM" were disqualified unless they specifically use the term "page description language", "typesetting language" or some equivalent phrase, and are appropriately dated.

The History

What was the true genesis of the Postscript?

Here’s a perspective out of left field:

It started with the first scientific pocket calculator ever produced -- the Hewlett-Packard 35 -- and its reverse polish "postfix" notation.

I saw an HP-35 advertised in Scientific American during my senior year in high school, in 1972, and thought:

"I want one."

That's why I worked all summer with "Shorty" the ex-convict, driving garbage trucks with 18 gears I was never properly trained to use and drinking beers so as to Lorenz-contract the days that were punctuated with hot steaming maggots down my neck as bemused debs reclined in their back yards nurturing their future basal cell carcinomas. When I started at the University of Iowa, I forked over my saved up $495 to Hewlett-Packard and instead of a slide-rule on my belt, I had this neat little black pouch that could do it all while flashing tiny red light-emitting-diode numbers -- reverse polish operation. I found only one other person on campus who had one -- a chemistry professor.

Well, OK, I lied.

What really happened was that while I was working as a garbage man to earn enough money for my HP-35, many mornings at 6AM they would tell me they didn't need me that day, which is when I would head over to Drake University and wait for my brother to get out of class at noon. That was almost 6 hours away, and I needed some way to pass the time. After poking around a bit on campus, I found this little old 2 story house that had a "Mathematics Department" sign. Inside, off to the left, was a long room. In that room was a desk-top Hewlett-Packard calculator with a flat-bed pen plotter hooked to it. It had more buttons than you could shake a stick at and this little magnetic card you could insert to record the buttons you were pressing, which included comparison and conditional branch buttons. You could program it to not only do calculations, but to move the pen around on the plotter bed that held the paper down with static. It was really cool. I could finally use a lot of that worthless junk about polynomials and stuff I had learned in high school and draw lots of neat op-art patterns with a pseudo-3D look to them.

That desk calculator (I don't recall the model number), of course, also used reverse polish notation -- postfix -- to drive its plotter.

By the time I got my HP-35 that fall, postfix operations were second nature to me. When the HP-35 fell in price by a factor of two later that year, it taught me my first lesson of consumerism in the early stages of Moore's Shockwave, b

The Genesis of Postscript (1981)

By Jim Bowery
Version 20010406
Copyright 2001
The author grants the right to copy, without modification.

The Challenge

From 2001 through 2007 I offered, with no takers, $500 to the first person who could document the existence of a Xerox PARC communication concerning post-fix notation for page description languages prior to my visit to that facility in November 1981 in my capacity as Manager of Interactive Architectures for Viewdata Corporation of America, the videotex joint venture between AT&T and Knight-Ridder News. Communiques regarding "JaM" were disqualified unless they specifically use the term "page description language", "typesetting language" or some equivalent phrase, and are appropriately dated.

The History

What was the true genesis of the Postscript?

Here’s a perspective out of left field:

It started with the first scientific pocket calculator ever produced -- the Hewlett-Packard 35 -- and its reverse polish "postfix" notation.

I saw an HP-35 advertised in Scientific American during my senior year in high school, in 1972, and thought:

"I want one."

That's why I worked all summer with "Shorty" the ex-convict, driving garbage trucks with 18 gears I was never properly trained to use and drinking beers so as to Lorenz-contract the days that were punctuated with hot steaming maggots down my neck as bemused debs reclined in their back yards nurturing their future basal cell carcinomas. When I started at the University of Iowa, I forked over my saved up $495 to Hewlett-Packard and instead of a slide-rule on my belt, I had this neat little black pouch that could do it all while flashing tiny red light-emitting-diode numbers -- reverse polish operation. I found only one other person on campus who had one -- a chemistry professor.

Well, OK, I lied.

What really happened was that while I was working as a garbage man to earn enough money for my HP-35, many mornings at 6AM they would tell me they didn't need me that day, which is when I would head over to Drake University and wait for my brother to get out of class at noon. That was almost 6 hours away, and I needed some way to pass the time. After poking around a bit on campus, I found this little old 2 story house that had a "Mathematics Department" sign. Inside, off to the left, was a long room. In that room was a desk-top Hewlett-Packard calculator with a flat-bed pen plotter hooked to it. It had more buttons than you could shake a stick at and this little magnetic card you could insert to record the buttons you were pressing, which included comparison and conditional branch buttons. You could program it to not only do calculations, but to move the pen around on the plotter bed that held the paper down with static. It was really cool. I could finally use a lot of that worthless junk about polynomials and stuff I had learned in high school and draw lots of neat op-art patterns with a pseudo-3D look to them.

That desk calculator (I don't recall the model number), of course, also used reverse polish notation -- postfix -- to drive its plotter.

By the time I got my HP-35 that fall, postfix operations were second nature to me. When the HP-35 fell in price by a factor of two later that year, it taught me my first lesson of consumerism in the early stages of Moore's Shockwave, b

Of the top of my head, all Apple says is that it doesn't get PC viruses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdF5IsyOxU4. "There are a 114,000 known viruses for PCs." "PCs, not Macs." If a customer believes that means Macs don't get viruses or malware, it's their own fault. Right?' Though...

"A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part."
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/better-os/ ...funny, I thought what would prevent Windows viruses from running on OS X is plain incompatibility.

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from PC viruses and malware. Likewise, it won’t slow you down with constant security alerts and sweeps. Every Mac is secure right out of the box, so you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090627142552/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from viruses and malware. Likewise, it isn’t inundated by never-ending security dialogs. So you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption. And easy-to-use parental controls let you manage what your kids can do on the computer and when they can do it."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090303015013/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Freedom’s not just another word for nothing left to lose. Strong security ensures your ability to conduct your business unhampered. Mac OS X delivers the highest level of security through the adoption of industry standards, open software development and wise architectural decisions. Combined, this intelligent design prevents the swarms of viruses and spyware that plague PCs these days."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20060203234931/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/security/

Interesting. I wonder why they started to qualify their statements by inserting 'PC'.

Of the top of my head, all Apple says is that it doesn't get PC viruses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdF5IsyOxU4. "There are a 114,000 known viruses for PCs." "PCs, not Macs." If a customer believes that means Macs don't get viruses or malware, it's their own fault. Right?' Though...

"A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part."
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/better-os/ ...funny, I thought what would prevent Windows viruses from running on OS X is plain incompatibility.

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from PC viruses and malware. Likewise, it won’t slow you down with constant security alerts and sweeps. Every Mac is secure right out of the box, so you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090627142552/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from viruses and malware. Likewise, it isn’t inundated by never-ending security dialogs. So you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption. And easy-to-use parental controls let you manage what your kids can do on the computer and when they can do it."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090303015013/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Freedom’s not just another word for nothing left to lose. Strong security ensures your ability to conduct your business unhampered. Mac OS X delivers the highest level of security through the adoption of industry standards, open software development and wise architectural decisions. Combined, this intelligent design prevents the swarms of viruses and spyware that plague PCs these days."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20060203234931/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/security/

Interesting. I wonder why they started to qualify their statements by inserting 'PC'.

Of the top of my head, all Apple says is that it doesn't get PC viruses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdF5IsyOxU4. "There are a 114,000 known viruses for PCs." "PCs, not Macs." If a customer believes that means Macs don't get viruses or malware, it's their own fault. Right?' Though...

"A Mac isn’t susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers. That’s thanks to built-in defenses in Mac OS X that keep you safe, without any work on your part."
http://www.apple.com/why-mac/better-os/ ...funny, I thought what would prevent Windows viruses from running on OS X is plain incompatibility.

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from PC viruses and malware. Likewise, it won’t slow you down with constant security alerts and sweeps. Every Mac is secure right out of the box, so you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090627142552/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Designed with security in mind, Mac OS X isn’t plagued by constant attacks from viruses and malware. Likewise, it isn’t inundated by never-ending security dialogs. So you can safely go about your work — or play — without interruption. And easy-to-use parental controls let you manage what your kids can do on the computer and when they can do it."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090303015013/http://www.apple.com/getamac/whymac/

"Freedom’s not just another word for nothing left to lose. Strong security ensures your ability to conduct your business unhampered. Mac OS X delivers the highest level of security through the adoption of industry standards, open software development and wise architectural decisions. Combined, this intelligent design prevents the swarms of viruses and spyware that plague PCs these days."
http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20060203234931/http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/security/

Interesting. I wonder why they started to qualify their statements by inserting 'PC'.

...linking to those links?

It was an imported GE (who are "a company like BP": info) reactor. Also, a design from the '60s -- newer ones are safer.

Of course, especially given the benefit of hindsight, you could argue that if the Japanese wouldn't decommission this obsolete design and replace/upgrade it, what chance do we have.

You're close: this was a substandard US reactor design. It doesn't really matter who does the bad job at designing, if the job was done wrong then it's done wrong. Somehow people forget that there must be quite a few of those Mark I BWRs out there still running. They have known flaws. To top it off, the reactor manufacturer (GE) colluded with operators of the Japanese plant in question and have a disturbing track record of lying through their teeth (mirror here).

Sounds like an issue with their marketing, then. They did say it, though, e.g.:

FAIRFAX, VA – MAY 18, 2005... ...
“I have always been a big fan of Games Workshop and Warhammer and I am thrilled that we are now able to work on one of the world’s greatest and most enduring fantasy gaming brands,” said Mark Jacobs, CEO and President of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. “Our goal for this first of what we hope will be many Warhammer-based games is to create the single-greatest RvR-based MMORPGs in the industry.”

Consequently, this is why I avoided it as well. I did try to get into the beta, just to see how deep it would go, because 'based' could mean a lot of things. But they kept on saying things like, "There will be no 'kill ten rats quests', everything will support the war effort." Having played a lot of PvP-style RPGs, I know well that something as simple as selecting the wrong server or class can completely ruin any hopes of enjoying it.

The best way to make a product people want it is to have them make a prototype themselves and submit it. However most things cannot be prototyped but a regular Joe. But tshirts can.

Perhaps Threadless has stolen designs in the past. Can you cite a non-anecdotal instance of this theft by them? Searches for "Threadless stole my design" return zero results. THe phrase ""Threadless stole my design" has nothing about this (but is does return results about people who steal from Threadless). And searches for "Threadless stole my idea" only returned one deliciously ironic result. If it's happening often (or at all) nobody is hurt enough to talk about it online.

And are aware of how easily dismissible your claim of having your punchline 'stolen' is? Even if you had a million-dollar-an-hour law firm behind you, the claim would be laughed out of court. A short turn of phrase or other idiom, cannot be copywrited (source). It can be trademarked, but that only applies if the phrase is used to sell a product or promote an organization. Your punchline 'I hate your children', and the gag of hating 'trendy' children's names, was not at all new...even in 2004. What's more, the Gawker shirt didn't even take the exact phrase...and they added artwork. How long after you posted you strip did it appear on Gawker. From what I can tell it was years later (source). Do you really think someone stumbled across your strip and submitted it to Gawker? That reasoning seems really thin. Unless, of course, you have some kind of source...

It is an open book. However, having dealt with a number of design contracts, there may have been a written agreement between the designer and the campaign that nobody else would use that site design, which this would violate to some extent. Nonetheless, there are ways around that: posting screen shots with commentary, for example, or just quoting the text.

I'd also expect Angle to contact The Wayback Machine if she doesn't want old copies of her site online...

Any agreement they had does not trump copyright law, and fair use has not yet been completely gutted. I'm somewhat suspicious of the collection of information submitted by users, but I haven't seen any evidence that the data was actually collected and saved anywhere. Other than that, it seems like fair use for political purposes. They are showing people exactly what she was saying, and there can be no claim that any of it was taken out of context, because all of the context is right there.

It is an open book. However, having dealt with a number of design contracts, there may have been a written agreement between the designer and the campaign that nobody else would use that site design, which this would violate to some extent. Nonetheless, there are ways around that: posting screen shots with commentary, for example, or just quoting the text.

I'd also expect Angle to contact The Wayback Machine if she doesn't want old copies of her site online...

"Duh! Here's more content"

With the broadband market now including a minimum of 25% of home users, and up to maybe 40%, though I haven't looked at those numbers in some time, would be a contributing factor to the fact that yes, web pages are getting bigger.

One way to see proof of this is using the wayback machine.
http://www.waybackmachine.org/

I took a quick sampling of the NYTimes homepage, and noticed that the number has increased by a few kilobytes per year, from 56K in 2001, to 67K in 2003, to 83K in 2005. That's not even counting images. They've added more ad banners since the old days. If you google search, I'm sure you will find stuff.

Ad banners have increased in size, and complexity over time. Streaming content, is another addition, as well as more services running over the network.

You probably have a number of contributing factors happening to your bandwidth, in addition to web pages.
- Unless you have an internal instant messenging environment, you may have many ppl chatting away on services having to use your bandwidth.
- Email for personal use. Jokes, funny attachments, and worms clogging up things.

Here are a couple of suggestions to try and improve traffic:
- block services that shouldn't be run at the office like streaming music content.
- block websites that you see can have an impact on traffic, that you believe users should not be visiting. ie: quicktime movies.
- block your daytrading slacker coworkers.
- block ad servers entirely! this should drastically improve your situation, and be the easiest to implement.
- switch to an internal instant messenging service, if you haven't done so already.
- disable unnecessary services.
- ensure that you have an internet policy that prohibits the users from using their work companies for personal use.
- cache often used content.

OMG! You just made me realise that I have been reading /. for way over 4 years now. I remembered the story immediately, but seeing that it's over 2 years old really shocked me. I've changed countries and jobs twice since, but I'm still reading here and I'm actually remembering most of the stuff...

/. Dupes - The WayBackMachine for your head.

....I wonder if you can still read the site via the http://www.waybackmachine.org/ ;) I bet you can at least get the content without the images.

According to the Wayback machine, file size doesn't seemed to have changed (or reduced) that much. This old version from July 2004 is actually smaller (33.95kb) than the current one which is 40.55kb. Note that this is from Firefox's "View Page Info" which does not take the total size of the images, etc into account (I think).

But then there are several factors other than raw filesize leading to slower load times.

It's nice to see webpage developers at Microsoft aware of standards, and trying to adhere to them. From this comment:

At 6:29pm on 1 Feb 2005, Venkat Narayanan wrote:
Guys,
I work on the MSN.com Homepage team. Thanks for all of this feedback.
We know that there are still some validation errors. There are still some accessibility issues. We will be working to fix those issues as soon as possible. Please let us know what you think.

I think it only needs standards awareness from a few of the low-level developers to bring about a change. Even if the high level management/QA may not know or care about standards, a developer could make the work standards friendly without foregoing any of the performance/features. It would help, though to have management promote standards awareness, and devote resources to make sure they're complied with. Good for Microsoft if they're doing this. On the other hand, it may only be these few standards aware developers trying to do the right job.

Kinda funny, if you look at the site in the wayback machine, the site hasn't been altered since their first cache in 1998.

FYI and a bit OT:

The Wayback Machine

Enter a website into its search engine and it will pull up snapshots of the website from several time periods. Looks like they've been getting into some other media, too, since last I looked.

SharkJumper

What was the problem again?

Another study, published in January, found that 40 percent to 50 percent of the URLs referenced in articles in two computing journals were inaccessible within four years

besides if you want to see old pages just go the the the wayback machine. Between that and backup tapes, everything you ever wrote still lives (in many cases I wish it didn't !).

Also see this article