No, the new interactive pages allow a person with a fairly limited machine can now communicate more directly with the server therfore redcing the need for a large pipe, which is currently the major limitation on applications.
This is such a "corporate" move. The beliefe that you must control every bit of every sector. Why not let some chickenshit company like MSN have this market. Even Yahoo admits that they can't beat google, so why not let the Chinese suffer along with some third rate search engine. Even in a communist country, the people's crys will eventually be heard. After being stuck with crappy search results for too long, they'll be rioting in the streets for the freedom to use Google (Well maybe not rioting). If there's one company that can afford to tell the Chinese to stuff it it's Google. I doubt this decision would have been made prior to going public.
This is great! And for those of you wondering if it will work on the non-mobile versions of Pocket PC, it appears to on my Axim X30 running PPC 2003. This is so much faste than the PIE. There are certainly still things to fix. I can't copy or paste in the bookmark manager, and the open in new window doesn't seem to be working yet. I'll keep an eye on this one though!
The reason that there aren't more sites directed at mobile devices is that there are not really any good mobile browsers. Once some decent browsers are made available, mobile borwsing will be used more often and more sites will be directed at this audience. The sites will follow, once there is an audience.
Get over it, big companies, (or anyone who is willing to pay more per word) are going to get shown more frequently. That's just basic economics. I'm sorry to burst the Open Source Free love bubble, but money does still have a role in many everyday transactions.
I guess you'll just have to accept that.
Re:All this dynamic stuff requires a server
on
The Future of HTML
·
· Score: 1
OK, dynamic content should be blocked!? I really hope that I'm misunderstanding you. Dynamic content is what makes the web worthwhile. If we had to go back to static pages being updated by hand we'd be back in the stoneage. If you're talking about dynamic in the browser, you have somewhat more of a point, but I still think there is a very useful place for dynamic client-side interfaces. With all of the data that is available from the server through database connections and web services, the user interface must advance in behind the scenes complexity in order to remove the user complexity and confusion from the user. The only efficient way to do that is with embedded JavaScript or something along the lines of AJAX. It's a must for the web to advance and remain accessible. In my opinion.
OK, I was just geeking out reading about the new release of the original A&A game, apparently came it was revised sometime in 2004. It got me all syched up to go and play some more. Then I remembered the trouble with long board games that often get played in several sittings. Now that I have three young children, leaving it setup and unattended for more than 10 minutes seems like lunacy. Also me war gaming friends are all in the same boat and our chances to "geek out" over a game and a beer are fewer and fewer.
I own the Hasbro game that came out about 5 years ago and it was a real disappointment. It did allow you to play over the Internet, but the game play itself was full of bugs and just not very user friendly (no undo for mistaken moves to name one). I would love to be able to play an electronic version with the new rules, board, and units. Something that I could get together with people in person or online and when the parenting duties call we could call it a night and start up where we left off later without writing positions down and picking it all up.
So, have there been any rumblings of a new electronic version coming out? Is Avalon Hill still leary after the last debacle? I know just write one yourself. I'm a programmer, but not a game writer and I just don't have the time (see above about the three kids). If it was out there I would definetly buy it. Love to hear about any projects working toward this.
Of course this is a moral judgement! I oppose it because it is against my morals. The fact that it currently appears unneccessary should make it a desirable option for those that want to study stem cells and have the same morals, as well as those who simply want to avoid the political pitfalls of using emryos in research. If adult stem cells hits a dead end I would encourage looking for another alternative.
In my mind embryonic life holds the same value that full-born life does. I'm not crazy about the embryos that are left over after fertility processes, either, but I think it's a harder moral line to draw.
You may be correct? I honestly don't know how many embryos it takes to do the research involved. I just see this market forming as a realy possibility. Why deal with the parents of these 400,000 who have obviously kept them for some reason when you can go hire someone to generate some with no strings attached?
You may be correct. I'm no stem cell researcher. But to me it seems that the simplest way for this research to move forward is to grab one of the various alternative methods of obtaining stem cells and run with that rather than enter the politically charged and morally ambiguise area of embryonic stem cells. There has been a lot written about adult stem cells. Why not use that source were you have a willing and legally consenting group?
The distinction is that the sole puprpose of creating embryos for research is for their destruction. I'm not going defend in-vitro fertilization. With the huge surplus of children up for adoption both here and abroad there are plenty of ways to raise a child without in-vitro. That said, I can certainly understand why people do it and I AM more sympathetic and forgiving of that use than of creating embryos purely for the purpose of destroying them. Sure it's a bit two sided, but motive does have something to do with the validity of an idea.
Well, what I was saying really doesn't make any moral judgements, but rather just states the potential "slippery slope" that federally funding embryonic research creates.
I don't think that embryos should be used for research in any case. There have been very encouraging steps taken using adult stem cells that I think it would be more productive to spend the time and money using that resource of willing donors than fighting this moral battle over embryos.
The objection is that if the use of these aborted embryos for stem cell research is allowed then the demand for them will rise sharply. What then happens when all of the "natural" embryos are used up? There will be money, possibly federal money, available to entice someone into creating more embryos. Now the embryos are not just a byproduct that would have been thrown away anyway, but the product itself. Therein lies the problem. It's currently a byproduct because there is no market for it, but if the market is built the system will be abused.
The objection is that if the use of these embryos for stem cell research is allowed then the demand for them will rise sharply. What then happens when all of the "natural" embryos are used up? There will be money, possibly federal money, available to entice someone into creating more embryos. Now the embryos are not just a byproduct that would have been thrown away anyway, but the product itself. Therein lies the problem. It's currently a byproduct because there is no market for it, but if the market is built the system will be abused.
I don't want to sound like I'm in denial too much, but could there be anohter reason for the rise in earth temperature? Could it be the earth (ground) itself that is heating up from some internal source? I really have no idea if this is even a remote possibility. Does anyone with actual knowledge on these sort of things have any thoughts about this?
I haven't seen your site (although there are those in this discussion that have found it, mwahaha), but if you haven't already, you may want to consider a database driven site. All of the supporting documents that relate to your main file could be uploaded to the database and pulled out dynamically as needed. I've done quite a few implementations of this where we take word documents and save them to the database using a tool called fckeditor. It has a function for pasting in content from Word docs. We then save that to the database, create the relationships, and wa-la! It's done.
FCKeditor is open source, but if you ned any help getting it up and running let me know.
That kind of plan could easily backfire into a "Why do we need the freaking space program anyway. If they can't even do these simple things right, let's just forget the whole thing." mode of thinking. Not feeling in the least, but it certainly could be one outcome of this mission with all of it's "problems".
IN THE ARTICLE, they state that this research is based on 35 year old production techniques! The submitter conveniently overlooked that bit of information though, because, if it's not hydrogen and fuel cells it must not be good enough. TFA goes on to say that based on the latest information released from the USDA, Ethanol produces 67% more energy than is needed to create it. I pass this along, only so the common/.er who doesn't have time (doesn't care) to read the article will be better informed.
That's a good illustration of how the ROE changes over the years. The production costs of corn will only go down as yields are improved, and the cost to refine it will only go down as the economies of scale kick in and new techniques become available.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the new interactive pages allow a person with a fairly limited machine can now communicate more directly with the server therfore redcing the need for a large pipe, which is currently the major limitation on applications.
and we all know how clean and appealing power plants are.
This is such a "corporate" move. The beliefe that you must control every bit of every sector. Why not let some chickenshit company like MSN have this market. Even Yahoo admits that they can't beat google, so why not let the Chinese suffer along with some third rate search engine. Even in a communist country, the people's crys will eventually be heard. After being stuck with crappy search results for too long, they'll be rioting in the streets for the freedom to use Google (Well maybe not rioting). If there's one company that can afford to tell the Chinese to stuff it it's Google. I doubt this decision would have been made prior to going public.
This is great! And for those of you wondering if it will work on the non-mobile versions of Pocket PC, it appears to on my Axim X30 running PPC 2003. This is so much faste than the PIE. There are certainly still things to fix. I can't copy or paste in the bookmark manager, and the open in new window doesn't seem to be working yet. I'll keep an eye on this one though!
Thanks again.
So when can I get opera for my Pocket PC? Or any other decent browser for that matter.
The reason that there aren't more sites directed at mobile devices is that there are not really any good mobile browsers. Once some decent browsers are made available, mobile borwsing will be used more often and more sites will be directed at this audience. The sites will follow, once there is an audience.
That's outrageous!
Get over it, big companies, (or anyone who is willing to pay more per word) are going to get shown more frequently. That's just basic economics. I'm sorry to burst the Open Source Free love bubble, but money does still have a role in many everyday transactions.
I guess you'll just have to accept that.
OK, dynamic content should be blocked!? I really hope that I'm misunderstanding you. Dynamic content is what makes the web worthwhile. If we had to go back to static pages being updated by hand we'd be back in the stoneage. If you're talking about dynamic in the browser, you have somewhat more of a point, but I still think there is a very useful place for dynamic client-side interfaces. With all of the data that is available from the server through database connections and web services, the user interface must advance in behind the scenes complexity in order to remove the user complexity and confusion from the user. The only efficient way to do that is with embedded JavaScript or something along the lines of AJAX. It's a must for the web to advance and remain accessible. In my opinion.
So they're going to promote their product to people who haven't heard of it...by showing videos on their website. Am I missing something here?
or just go to digg.com
was on a smith corona word processor that had a version of visicalc built into it. It let me do things in a spreadsheet that made me go crazy.
OK, I was just geeking out reading about the new release of the original A&A game, apparently came it was revised sometime in 2004. It got me all syched up to go and play some more. Then I remembered the trouble with long board games that often get played in several sittings. Now that I have three young children, leaving it setup and unattended for more than 10 minutes seems like lunacy. Also me war gaming friends are all in the same boat and our chances to "geek out" over a game and a beer are fewer and fewer.
I own the Hasbro game that came out about 5 years ago and it was a real disappointment. It did allow you to play over the Internet, but the game play itself was full of bugs and just not very user friendly (no undo for mistaken moves to name one). I would love to be able to play an electronic version with the new rules, board, and units. Something that I could get together with people in person or online and when the parenting duties call we could call it a night and start up where we left off later without writing positions down and picking it all up.
So, have there been any rumblings of a new electronic version coming out? Is Avalon Hill still leary after the last debacle? I know just write one yourself. I'm a programmer, but not a game writer and I just don't have the time (see above about the three kids). If it was out there I would definetly buy it. Love to hear about any projects working toward this.
Of course this is a moral judgement! I oppose it because it is against my morals. The fact that it currently appears unneccessary should make it a desirable option for those that want to study stem cells and have the same morals, as well as those who simply want to avoid the political pitfalls of using emryos in research. If adult stem cells hits a dead end I would encourage looking for another alternative.
In my mind embryonic life holds the same value that full-born life does. I'm not crazy about the embryos that are left over after fertility processes, either, but I think it's a harder moral line to draw.
You may be correct? I honestly don't know how many embryos it takes to do the research involved. I just see this market forming as a realy possibility. Why deal with the parents of these 400,000 who have obviously kept them for some reason when you can go hire someone to generate some with no strings attached?
You may be correct. I'm no stem cell researcher. But to me it seems that the simplest way for this research to move forward is to grab one of the various alternative methods of obtaining stem cells and run with that rather than enter the politically charged and morally ambiguise area of embryonic stem cells. There has been a lot written about adult stem cells. Why not use that source were you have a willing and legally consenting group?
The distinction is that the sole puprpose of creating embryos for research is for their destruction. I'm not going defend in-vitro fertilization. With the huge surplus of children up for adoption both here and abroad there are plenty of ways to raise a child without in-vitro. That said, I can certainly understand why people do it and I AM more sympathetic and forgiving of that use than of creating embryos purely for the purpose of destroying them. Sure it's a bit two sided, but motive does have something to do with the validity of an idea.
Well, what I was saying really doesn't make any moral judgements, but rather just states the potential "slippery slope" that federally funding embryonic research creates.
I don't think that embryos should be used for research in any case. There have been very encouraging steps taken using adult stem cells that I think it would be more productive to spend the time and money using that resource of willing donors than fighting this moral battle over embryos.
The objection is that if the use of these aborted embryos for stem cell research is allowed then the demand for them will rise sharply. What then happens when all of the "natural" embryos are used up? There will be money, possibly federal money, available to entice someone into creating more embryos. Now the embryos are not just a byproduct that would have been thrown away anyway, but the product itself. Therein lies the problem. It's currently a byproduct because there is no market for it, but if the market is built the system will be abused.
The objection is that if the use of these embryos for stem cell research is allowed then the demand for them will rise sharply. What then happens when all of the "natural" embryos are used up? There will be money, possibly federal money, available to entice someone into creating more embryos. Now the embryos are not just a byproduct that would have been thrown away anyway, but the product itself. Therein lies the problem. It's currently a byproduct because there is no market for it, but if the market is built the system will be abused.
I don't want to sound like I'm in denial too much, but could there be anohter reason for the rise in earth temperature? Could it be the earth (ground) itself that is heating up from some internal source? I really have no idea if this is even a remote possibility. Does anyone with actual knowledge on these sort of things have any thoughts about this?
I haven't seen your site (although there are those in this discussion that have found it, mwahaha), but if you haven't already, you may want to consider a database driven site. All of the supporting documents that relate to your main file could be uploaded to the database and pulled out dynamically as needed. I've done quite a few implementations of this where we take word documents and save them to the database using a tool called fckeditor. It has a function for pasting in content from Word docs. We then save that to the database, create the relationships, and wa-la! It's done.
FCKeditor is open source, but if you ned any help getting it up and running let me know.
That kind of plan could easily backfire into a "Why do we need the freaking space program anyway. If they can't even do these simple things right, let's just forget the whole thing." mode of thinking. Not feeling in the least, but it certainly could be one outcome of this mission with all of it's "problems".
Oh my god! You're arguing about the difference between .2% and 1%!?! Opera has so little market share that it just plain isn't worth caring about!
IN THE ARTICLE, they state that this research is based on 35 year old production techniques! The submitter conveniently overlooked that bit of information though, because, if it's not hydrogen and fuel cells it must not be good enough. TFA goes on to say that based on the latest information released from the USDA, Ethanol produces 67% more energy than is needed to create it. I pass this along, only so the common /.er who doesn't have time (doesn't care) to read the article will be better informed.
That's a good illustration of how the ROE changes over the years. The production costs of corn will only go down as yields are improved, and the cost to refine it will only go down as the economies of scale kick in and new techniques become available.