I'm with you on this. It took me a while to get a good feel for valid XHTML strict. But I like the tight specification, because it makes the markup very consistent. (Ex: lowercase only, quotes for values assigned to parameters, closing slash on unclosable tags. Such as .) I've been seeing some HTML5 examples which seem to lack that same OCD level of control and it kinda makes me twitch. More user friendly, yes, but I've come to enjoy consistency. That's my preference and it's what works for me.
Most of the new elements in HTML5 look like alternatives to div's with unique ID's ( vs
) and I can see where it would make style sheets a little cleaner, and the intended layout of a document a bit more clear. But it seems to be, as you say, messy. Advantageous, though.
The kludge comes from new capabilities that formerly required Javascript. I rather prefer the static-ness of HTML and reliance on a script for the dynamic-ness, but times are changing, and dynamic pages are where it's at. Might as well simplify their development.
The "norm" in this context is acceptance of the fact that the death penalty happens as punishment for murder. Maybe not very often, but it happens. That's all.
My statement was not an opinion, and it was not directed to be in favor of, nor against the death penalty. I wish you could have realized that before taking it upon yourself to chastise and insult me.
I was merely drawing from the sad (but true) reality of American society. The death penalty is a very real thing and it is practiced as punishment for crimes such as murder, whether we like it or not. We see it happen. So to see somebody say that another person deserves to be killed for a crime less than murder is strange, unusual, out of the norm, and thus there is something terribly wrong with that picture.
My choice of words in the OP was admittedly poor, but it was not intended to state my stance on the death penalty.
As I am having to explain to the other dozen people who have already said this exact same thing to me, I am comparing this situation to the sad reality of American society. The death penalty is real. It exists. And it is practiced. And it is seen typically as the punishment for homicide. So to see death be the implied punishment for anything less than that is out of the norm, and thus there is something wrong with that picture.
I didn't intend for people to read that as my opinion of the death penalty; it is't even the heart of this whole subject.
I never meant to imply that I am for or against the death penalty. I am simply voicing what society has shaped. I didn't intend to spark a heated debate of the righteousness of the death penalty. The fact of the matter is that the death penalty is real. It exists. And it is typically exercised on murderers. And to see the penalty of death be imposed on somebody who hasn't done something so wrong as murder, is very much out of the norm.
Treating unsubstantiated beliefs as sacred and taboo will always be a bad thing because you can't challenge a good or bad interpretation with logic and clearly any and all belief systems set up by man for various agendas will have downsides - some more than others.
Not to mention, any time that a death penalty is suggested for anything less than homicide, there's something terribly wrong with the picture.
Strange as it sounds, sticky rice with apples and peanut butter (and perhaps some cinnamon) is quite delicious as well. I'll be putting the mango on my to-try list, though...
I'm all for competition, but when so many competitors start to cross the line of market saturation it really just sets us back to where we started.
I mean, I like the idea of having the iPhones and Androids and Palm Pre's duking it out for domination of the mobile phone market but when you have dozens of other types of phone OS's all trying to get in on the action then suddenly we're back to where we started. Hundreds of phones and no real consistency between them.
And before Slashdotters inevitably decide that it's necessary to coldly argue or otherwise patronize me for this post, please bear in mind that it's my own opinion, resultant of my own experience.
Though "man" is only as useful as the manpage written for a given program. I've seen a number of instances where manpages are either incomplete, spartan, poorly written, lacking in useful examples, or non-existent all together!
In fact this brings us back to the issue described in the article: I think it falls under the same category of "Linux flaws" (open source in general, really) where while the software and documentation makes perfect sense to geeks, it's not-so-friendly for the not-so-geeks.
I've had to fall back on Google a number of times in order to get a full list of a *nix program's parameters that should have been in the manual to begin with. (Forgive my inability to provide examples... coffee hasn't finished brewing yet.) =)
Cue the characteristic Slashdot flavor of older-than-you elitism! Oh wait, I'm too late...
But seriously, completely irrelevant age differences aside: There's a reason why Microsoft catches flak for security holes, and also a very good reason for why they so adamantly encourage people to update their OS as often as possible. Microsoft (and certainly your full comprehension of the vulnerability of the OS) are far from infallible; their software is extremely complicated and will always present new bugs and design flaws, and this is why they take so many measures to patch their security holes. This is true of any major software developer.
So unless your machine is not exposed to any sort of network, or unless you're running an old version of Windows that has (since 2003) had it support discontinued by Microsoft, then I argue that you don't know what you're doing.
Give us a free netbook at the cost of seeing ads? You're forgetting one thing: Chrome OS is Linux at its heart, and we're a bunch of Linux geeks. We'd have those ads hacked out of it faster than you could say "/etc/hosts.deny".
Slashdot Mirror
And of course, I forgot to post that as plain old text. So my tags were rendered. Blah.
/>.)
(Ex: lowercase only, quotes for values assigned to parameters, closing slash on unclosable tags. Such as <br
Most of the new elements in HTML5 look like alternatives to div's with unique ID's ( <header> vs <div id="header">)
I'm with you on this. It took me a while to get a good feel for valid XHTML strict. But I like the tight specification, because it makes the markup very consistent. (Ex: lowercase only, quotes for values assigned to parameters, closing slash on unclosable tags. Such as
.) I've been seeing some HTML5 examples which seem to lack that same OCD level of control and it kinda makes me twitch. More user friendly, yes, but I've come to enjoy consistency. That's my preference and it's what works for me.
Most of the new elements in HTML5 look like alternatives to div's with unique ID's ( vs
) and I can see where it would make style sheets a little cleaner, and the intended layout of a document a bit more clear. But it seems to be, as you say, messy. Advantageous, though.
The kludge comes from new capabilities that formerly required Javascript. I rather prefer the static-ness of HTML and reliance on a script for the dynamic-ness, but times are changing, and dynamic pages are where it's at. Might as well simplify their development.
Not sure what the point of this post was, but eh.
The "norm" in this context is acceptance of the fact that the death penalty happens as punishment for murder. Maybe not very often, but it happens. That's all.
My statement was not an opinion, and it was not directed to be in favor of, nor against the death penalty. I wish you could have realized that before taking it upon yourself to chastise and insult me.
I was merely drawing from the sad (but true) reality of American society. The death penalty is a very real thing and it is practiced as punishment for crimes such as murder, whether we like it or not. We see it happen. So to see somebody say that another person deserves to be killed for a crime less than murder is strange, unusual, out of the norm, and thus there is something terribly wrong with that picture.
My choice of words in the OP was admittedly poor, but it was not intended to state my stance on the death penalty.
As I am having to explain to the other dozen people who have already said this exact same thing to me, I am comparing this situation to the sad reality of American society. The death penalty is real. It exists. And it is practiced. And it is seen typically as the punishment for homicide. So to see death be the implied punishment for anything less than that is out of the norm, and thus there is something wrong with that picture.
I didn't intend for people to read that as my opinion of the death penalty; it is't even the heart of this whole subject.
I never meant to imply that I am for or against the death penalty. I am simply voicing what society has shaped. I didn't intend to spark a heated debate of the righteousness of the death penalty. The fact of the matter is that the death penalty is real. It exists. And it is typically exercised on murderers. And to see the penalty of death be imposed on somebody who hasn't done something so wrong as murder, is very much out of the norm.
I can literally do everything I can do on a laptop on my phone just slightly slower.
But can you open zipped attachments?
=)
Treating unsubstantiated beliefs as sacred and taboo will always be a bad thing because you can't challenge a good or bad interpretation with logic and clearly any and all belief systems set up by man for various agendas will have downsides - some more than others.
Not to mention, any time that a death penalty is suggested for anything less than homicide, there's something terribly wrong with the picture.
Strange as it sounds, sticky rice with apples and peanut butter (and perhaps some cinnamon) is quite delicious as well. I'll be putting the mango on my to-try list, though...
I figured it was all those poor squids they had to milk that made ink such a rare commodity.
I'm more concerned that this is a slashvertisment for Linux. Slashdot used to be about news for nerds, stuff that mattered! How far it has fallen.
Um. Slashdot has been reporting new updates to the Linux kernel since almost day one.
Peppermint OS One integrates video sites like YouTube and Hulu right into the desktop experience.
...but does it play these smoothly in full screen?
That's pretty fucking cool.
I'd throw the thing in a dryer. Not just as an act of rebellion, but to confuse the hell out of them.
Ubuntu dumps the brown
I'm an accomplished adult and yet I can only barely resist the urge to make a poo joke.
Thank you, Digg. ...er, I mean, Slashdot.
The bigger you are, the harder you fail.
I'm all for competition, but when so many competitors start to cross the line of market saturation it really just sets us back to where we started.
I mean, I like the idea of having the iPhones and Androids and Palm Pre's duking it out for domination of the mobile phone market but when you have dozens of other types of phone OS's all trying to get in on the action then suddenly we're back to where we started. Hundreds of phones and no real consistency between them.
And before Slashdotters inevitably decide that it's necessary to coldly argue or otherwise patronize me for this post, please bear in mind that it's my own opinion, resultant of my own experience.
Though "man" is only as useful as the manpage written for a given program. I've seen a number of instances where manpages are either incomplete, spartan, poorly written, lacking in useful examples, or non-existent all together!
In fact this brings us back to the issue described in the article: I think it falls under the same category of "Linux flaws" (open source in general, really) where while the software and documentation makes perfect sense to geeks, it's not-so-friendly for the not-so-geeks.
I've had to fall back on Google a number of times in order to get a full list of a *nix program's parameters that should have been in the manual to begin with. (Forgive my inability to provide examples... coffee hasn't finished brewing yet.) =)
For each copy of Vista replaced by Windows 7 during November, more than six copies of XP were swapped out.
Well duh! That's because there are more than six XP users per each Vista user!
So you're delivering faulty logic and sidestepping the need to explain it.
That says enough. Moving on...
Your machine, by contrast, is probably as stable as a two legged cow. However it's most likely fully patched
This statement is confusing. Care to explain?
Cue the characteristic Slashdot flavor of older-than-you elitism! Oh wait, I'm too late...
But seriously, completely irrelevant age differences aside: There's a reason why Microsoft catches flak for security holes, and also a very good reason for why they so adamantly encourage people to update their OS as often as possible. Microsoft (and certainly your full comprehension of the vulnerability of the OS) are far from infallible; their software is extremely complicated and will always present new bugs and design flaws, and this is why they take so many measures to patch their security holes. This is true of any major software developer.
So unless your machine is not exposed to any sort of network, or unless you're running an old version of Windows that has (since 2003) had it support discontinued by Microsoft, then I argue that you don't know what you're doing.
Just make the damn thing behave exactly the same way in every browser and I'll be sound as a pound!
Give us a free netbook at the cost of seeing ads? You're forgetting one thing: Chrome OS is Linux at its heart, and we're a bunch of Linux geeks. We'd have those ads hacked out of it faster than you could say "/etc/hosts.deny".