also, consider this: google is supposed to be the web company. full of young, talented people. now look at the sites they churn out. you will not find a single piece of loving crafting, or elegant code, or even just something that looks like it has been made by people with eyes in the head. sterile, mediocre crap, an endless swamp of "products" of it, fawned over by (hopefully sterile) mediocre people. I'm fucking sick of it. I am amazed it took me so long to realize it and finally loose patience, too.
also, there can be more than one microsoft. I propose the "part of the problem" dichotomy: you're either a whore for power, collateral damage (they fooled you, they broke you, bye), or a human being that can be salvaged. that's my new worldview, enter Web Hate.Point.Zero haha.
right. because the only reason one would be against nazis is because one is a commie, and vice versa.
invasion? where did all the google and apple fanboys come from? I don't care about allegiance, I care about the fucking stupidity of it. all of you, just jump into a pit and die already.
If you'd like to continue discussing this with me, please adopt a less aggressive tone and language, and I'll be happy to continue
are you kidding? I'm not even reading your response. I'm not interested in rehashes of your opinions -- you made those quite clear, and it's just the usual shallow, spineless garbage.
no, I'm barking at you, telling you to go and fuck yourself. so do that, or don't, but don't tell me about it.
I guess the truly selfless thing to do would be to make all of Google's tracking opt-in, rather than opt-out, but that's probably too much to hope for -- and it may even be that the world is better off this way, because if Google is right about the value of mass personalization we'd probably never know because hardly anyone will opt in.
and if they're not? I see not a single serious problem this solves. it just puts people into little bowls where they no longer can get a clear picture of what the rest of the world sees. apart from the whole privacy stuff.
In any case, making it all opt in would almost certainly be very damaging to Google's business.
no. missing out on additional profits you could have had by being a fucking whore is not the same as suffering damage. that's not even a nice try, and shame on you for even attempting to pull that one.
The current approach is significantly less risky,
risky to whom? see? holy fucking shit... you may be a good coder or something, but your thinking just sucks.
I don't give a flying fuck what other people do. in my books, google went from being cool to being "meh" to being "bah, that's what I was referring to, and that is 100% correct. they overdosed on their shiny stupid stuff -- they are now lying dead in an alley, covered in piss. what their situation is in your world is none of my concern.
"people" is short for "eyeballs", which is correct - and understood by just about anyone except you. so spend less time hoping for the "meme" to die, and more time understanding what it actually means ^^
what's your point? it's hard, it's not perfect, so let's not even try? do you have the faintest idea how many ways there are to kill, steal or defraud?
war is "armed conflict". I cannot see "killing people" anywhere in any definition, and you yourself fall back to "or property" in the next paragraph, so there;) and information is more and more becoming important property. and not just recently, think "enigma code", or even "theoretical physics", if you catch my drift.
and hey.. let's say, if you could create a virus that would make another nation mindless slaves, without killing anyone, that wouldn't be war why, exactly? after all it'd just be skipping to the end result, annexiation. so yeah, I kinda doubt your definition... but I cannot argue this in detail because wikipedia is on strike today ^^
though I surely can agree that taking down a website is 100% meaningless. here's my gut ranking:
1. peace (always best) 2. funny and insightful defacements 3. silent infection and real evil things 4. leaking sensitive data, or its complete destruction (including backups which is more or less impossible I guess), depending on what the data is 5. JUST ABOUT ANYTHING 6. making a website inaccessible from the outside.
you call that serious? as someone already pointed out, what you're describing is war, not cyberwar. and re: war, they're kinda already doing that. doing it on another level doesn't take away from that, it's supposed to have some kind of synergy effect (of suffering and stupidity, but that's besides the point).
lastly, data is not virtual or imagined: it takes time and resources to collect/compute, and has real-life uses and implications I cannot even be arsed to enumerate right now, because really, just heh...
Such "personalized letters" are a horrible, heartless, dumb idea even with pen and paper. But this? YOU should be paying THEM for wasting even a drop of ink on such bullshit:/
but the OP said "I have held the line" -- by making the page ages ago, then never improving on it, huh -- so that's essentially putting it next to modern websites.. as if websites are generally going downhill, while he kept it oldschool and efficient. but it just happens to have next to no content, and zero design (or even userfriendlyness), so it doesn't weigh much.. big deal. I'm sorry, but he was asking for it. it's like saying the chair he nailed to a piece of wood doesn't use any fuel, unlike cars.
green links on dark blue was something people could get away with, yeah... but that's it. it never was more, and nobody with taste would have done that other than a joke at any moment in time. the page says to me "hi there, I didn't give a shit when I made this page, and I still don't".
also, saying "it's an old site" simply doesn't apply: http://www.cuug.ab.ca/branderr/hawaii11/ -- made today, and as you said, it doesn't exactly live up to today's standards. I mean sure, kudos for not using wordpress et all, but *no* kudos for not even trying to make it somewhat decent with whatever he used. and it's not like the interwebs isn't full of great examples, or as if learning from them take much more than pressing ctrl+f3. no, I insist, this is an abomination, and I protest.
So the guy didn't update his page. There are a few errors. Big deal.
it is a big deal though when that site is cited as an example, and a reason to be "smug".
this is the official ranking of how good website is, because I say so:
worst: websites that give you eye cancer. better: websites that don't give you eye cancer, but are bloated. now we're talking: websites that don't give you eye cancer and aren't bloated.
you see, long loading times are criticized because desirable content uhm, takes long to load. when the content is not desirable -- because it induces eye cancer -- loading times are completely irrelevant.
if you seriously defend green links on dark blue background, please hand in your eyes.. you don't need them, they're pretty much lying to you.
I don't have an opinion either way, I just noticed you make a bald assertion and pointed that out...
"Your reply is not really worth replying to as it has no substance but what the hell, I was here."
that's correct, it merely consists in pointing out the voidness of your post. you replied, but you didn't refute me, at all. thanks for the confirmation I guess ^^
1. We're hooked on fossil fuels, we're producing nuclear waste, but hey, at least now while we jog we can listen to a mp3 player which we never have to recharge because that's *such* a hassle in the big scheme of things. The only bit that isn't fucking daft about this is that it's basically stating that people are now equal to water in pipelines: we're approaching something resembling honesty it seems.
2. Oh noes, passwords, what a horrible nuisance! I'd rather be cattle than to have to remember passwords.
3. Good. Use it on politicians. Use it on those who use the technology to more comfortably murder millions of people, IBM. But that would be scary, wouldn't it -- you turds.
4. Connected to what? To facebook and google and doubleplusblackbox? There may be more people on the web, but they are less web literate -- the "big players" couldn't care less, and more gizmos will not help with that either. I'm not saying cheap access isn't great, because at least it's *possible* for people to educate themselves. But educate themselves, they still have to do that, because the "digital divide", the one that actually means shit, consists of wizard screens and the ones who code them. Or in other words, tech monkeys on leashes funneling zombies into shopping carts of advertisers. That is the spineless, worthless new world we're on the verge of.
5. Go fuck yourself. Or actually, go find a wall and put yourself up against it.
Slashdot Mirror
also, consider this: google is supposed to be the web company. full of young, talented people. now look at the sites they churn out. you will not find a single piece of loving crafting, or elegant code, or even just something that looks like it has been made by people with eyes in the head. sterile, mediocre crap, an endless swamp of "products" of it, fawned over by (hopefully sterile) mediocre people. I'm fucking sick of it. I am amazed it took me so long to realize it and finally loose patience, too.
also, there can be more than one microsoft. I propose the "part of the problem" dichotomy: you're either a whore for power, collateral damage (they fooled you, they broke you, bye), or a human being that can be salvaged. that's my new worldview, enter Web Hate.Point.Zero haha.
right. because the only reason one would be against nazis is because one is a commie, and vice versa.
invasion? where did all the google and apple fanboys come from? I don't care about allegiance, I care about the fucking stupidity of it. all of you, just jump into a pit and die already.
what if someone else is on gmail and refuses to switch?
it's not like google only gets to see their sent mail, you know.
are you kidding? I'm not even reading your response. I'm not interested in rehashes of your opinions -- you made those quite clear, and it's just the usual shallow, spineless garbage.
no, I'm barking at you, telling you to go and fuck yourself. so do that, or don't, but don't tell me about it.
and if they're not? I see not a single serious problem this solves. it just puts people into little bowls where they no longer can get a clear picture of what the rest of the world sees. apart from the whole privacy stuff.
no. missing out on additional profits you could have had by being a fucking whore is not the same as suffering damage. that's not even a nice try, and shame on you for even attempting to pull that one.
risky to whom? see? holy fucking shit... you may be a good coder or something, but your thinking just sucks.
I don't give a flying fuck what other people do. in my books, google went from being cool to being "meh" to being "bah, that's what I was referring to, and that is 100% correct. they overdosed on their shiny stupid stuff -- they are now lying dead in an alley, covered in piss. what their situation is in your world is none of my concern.
bye bye, google. seems like the spineless clowns who made you OD'ed at last.
"people" is short for "eyeballs", which is correct - and understood by just about anyone except you. so spend less time hoping for the "meme" to die, and more time understanding what it actually means ^^
what's your point? it's hard, it's not perfect, so let's not even try? do you have the faintest idea how many ways there are to kill, steal or defraud?
the project is no longer maintained, so yeah, something like that -- but not that.
that just breaks my heart. recursively. :P
fuck that. strike breaker.
war is "armed conflict". I cannot see "killing people" anywhere in any definition, and you yourself fall back to "or property" in the next paragraph, so there ;) and information is more and more becoming important property. and not just recently, think "enigma code", or even "theoretical physics", if you catch my drift.
and hey.. let's say, if you could create a virus that would make another nation mindless slaves, without killing anyone, that wouldn't be war why, exactly? after all it'd just be skipping to the end result, annexiation. so yeah, I kinda doubt your definition... but I cannot argue this in detail because wikipedia is on strike today ^^
though I surely can agree that taking down a website is 100% meaningless. here's my gut ranking:
1. peace (always best)
2. funny and insightful defacements
3. silent infection and real evil things
4. leaking sensitive data, or its complete destruction (including backups which is more or less impossible I guess), depending on what the data is
5. JUST ABOUT ANYTHING
6. making a website inaccessible from the outside.
two words for you: false dichotomy.
you call that serious? as someone already pointed out, what you're describing is war, not cyberwar. and re: war, they're kinda already doing that. doing it on another level doesn't take away from that, it's supposed to have some kind of synergy effect (of suffering and stupidity, but that's besides the point).
lastly, data is not virtual or imagined: it takes time and resources to collect/compute, and has real-life uses and implications I cannot even be arsed to enumerate right now, because really, just heh...
"when elephants do battle, the grass suffers." -- african proverb
=/
stop being a whore and a doormat for greedy imbeciles -- just walk away. your whining is irrelevant already forgotten either way.
"Having lived in some high-crime neighborhoods, the actual feature (versus the patent) sounds like a great idea to me"
oh yeah? and how would such a device help in that situation -- other than not plotting routes from or to your home?
Such "personalized letters" are a horrible, heartless, dumb idea even with pen and paper. But this? YOU should be paying THEM for wasting even a drop of ink on such bullshit :/
but the OP said "I have held the line" -- by making the page ages ago, then never improving on it, huh -- so that's essentially putting it next to modern websites.. as if websites are generally going downhill, while he kept it oldschool and efficient. but it just happens to have next to no content, and zero design (or even userfriendlyness), so it doesn't weigh much.. big deal. I'm sorry, but he was asking for it. it's like saying the chair he nailed to a piece of wood doesn't use any fuel, unlike cars.
green links on dark blue was something people could get away with, yeah... but that's it. it never was more, and nobody with taste would have done that other than a joke at any moment in time. the page says to me "hi there, I didn't give a shit when I made this page, and I still don't".
also, saying "it's an old site" simply doesn't apply: http://www.cuug.ab.ca/branderr/hawaii11/ -- made today, and as you said, it doesn't exactly live up to today's standards. I mean sure, kudos for not using wordpress et all, but *no* kudos for not even trying to make it somewhat decent with whatever he used. and it's not like the interwebs isn't full of great examples, or as if learning from them take much more than pressing ctrl+f3. no, I insist, this is an abomination, and I protest.
merry christmas anyway :)
it is a big deal though when that site is cited as an example, and a reason to be "smug".
this is the official ranking of how good website is, because I say so:
worst: websites that give you eye cancer.
better: websites that don't give you eye cancer, but are bloated.
now we're talking: websites that don't give you eye cancer and aren't bloated.
you see, long loading times are criticized because desirable content uhm, takes long to load. when the content is not desirable -- because it induces eye cancer -- loading times are completely irrelevant.
if you seriously defend green links on dark blue background, please hand in your eyes.. you don't need them, they're pretty much lying to you.
I don't have an opinion either way, I just noticed you make a bald assertion and pointed that out...
"Your reply is not really worth replying to as it has no substance but what the hell, I was here."
that's correct, it merely consists in pointing out the voidness of your post. you replied, but you didn't refute me, at all. thanks for the confirmation I guess ^^
if that is arguable, the argue for it.
no, you assume, without any basis whatsoever. big difference.
if you outlaw killer viruses, only outlaws will have killer viruses, or something.
me, I'm just thinking "why the fuck did they do that in the first place?", and "Captain Trips".
1. We're hooked on fossil fuels, we're producing nuclear waste, but hey, at least now while we jog we can listen to a mp3 player which we never have to recharge because that's *such* a hassle in the big scheme of things. The only bit that isn't fucking daft about this is that it's basically stating that people are now equal to water in pipelines: we're approaching something resembling honesty it seems.
2. Oh noes, passwords, what a horrible nuisance! I'd rather be cattle than to have to remember passwords.
3. Good. Use it on politicians. Use it on those who use the technology to more comfortably murder millions of people, IBM. But that would be scary, wouldn't it -- you turds.
4. Connected to what? To facebook and google and doubleplusblackbox? There may be more people on the web, but they are less web literate -- the "big players" couldn't care less, and more gizmos will not help with that either. I'm not saying cheap access isn't great, because at least it's *possible* for people to educate themselves. But educate themselves, they still have to do that, because the "digital divide", the one that actually means shit, consists of wizard screens and the ones who code them. Or in other words, tech monkeys on leashes funneling zombies into shopping carts of advertisers. That is the spineless, worthless new world we're on the verge of.
5. Go fuck yourself. Or actually, go find a wall and put yourself up against it.