What's wrong with FF as it is? Let's hope they don't fuck it up the ass, like Google have fucked gmail. Designers design, coders code, managers manage, and not always when it's necessary or even useful to do so.
The platform on which Cameron and his coalition were elected included "winding back Big Brother" and the steady reduction of civil liberties under Labor. Predictably, that is now all forgotten.
A war with Iran would not at all be like the invasion of Iraq. Iran is a geographically huge, relatively developed country with money, technology and enormous military resources. Invading Iran would not work out well. That is why the US hasn't done it and probably never will.
The point of war is not to die for your side, but to make the other guy die for his.
Not quite right. The point of war is to maim and wound the other side's guys, not kill. This is because every maimed and wounded soldier sucks up many times his own resources in being evacuated and cared for. There are figures for this and it came up not long ago on/..
The following analogy occurs to me. The most effective disease does not kill its host, at least not too quickly, before it can spread to new hosts while burning out the original host's resources. So the best (worst) war is an effective disease.
George Lucas (Verb) Lucasing, Lucased (a) The act of committing graphics overkill.
The definition in your sig neglects to mention drowning stilted dialog (and the audience) in the endless, overbearing, overloud strains of John William's pompous maudlin violins.
To be honest I get surprised by the big reaction to something like soldier's urinating on the corpses of dead enemies. They are trained to be worked into a killing frenzy and to hate the enemy. The corpse does not know it is being urinated on and coiuld not care less and it is not surprising soldiers would vent their rage in this harmless way. So it's not "nice". It's a lot nicer than killing the enemy in the first place. To me this seems one of those bizarre double standards that with which the whole idea of war is riddled.
Dulce et decorem est pro patria mori.... or not.
Satire aside, the US also produced huge lumps of the world's best culture of the 18-20C, though it's true some it was produced by European emigres who moved to America. The US displays a talent for absorbing foreign forms and re-working these into things of great energy and popularity and engaging in cross-pollination of art and music with the Old World.
Anything at all to do with sex will utterly ruin a politician's career in the US. But in continental Europe and many other places at least until quite recently it's been pretty much expected as par for the course that powerful people such as politicians have mistresses, do oral sex with interns, whatever. We are talking about the Continent after all. Look at Silvio Berlusconi - it's taken a lot for a backlash against corruption to catch up with him. Allegedly using an underage prostitute, where "underage" is older than the age of consent in Italy (and without any accusation or support whatsoever for the prosecution from the alleged victim), is another excuse to nail him. They'll get him over something or other eventually, he's earned himself too many enemies. But using debauchery as a strategy for crucifixion, in an unfortunate trend, has been imported from the moralizing, repressed US. His real crime is corruption.
Urging people to be conservative with their content is all well and good, but at some point we should look around and say "You know what, the real problem is that people aren't handling all this new information in a sane manner." We should be attacking with equal fervor people who use the information in extreme and/or inappropriate ways.
But we don't, do we. The FTC just slaps Facebook on the wrist for lying to use about its so-called privacy policy. That's it. No criminal charges, no massive crippling fines. The Europeans may be our last hope.
These are all straw man arguments. No-one is saying that Facebook isn't fun or doesn't have its uses. They are saying that it is also a global tracking system that accumulates vast amounts of data about *you* in order to generate profit for people you don't even know. And this is all data that Facebook apparently still holds forever and can be exploited in ways we can't even imagine yet. Worse, so-called regulatory bodies like the FTC are proving to be impotent when they just slap Facebook on the wrist for lying to us all.
But: when anyone tries to explain to Jane and Joe Normal Intelligence just why it is not a good idea to have a Facebook account, Jane and Joe (a) look at the explainer like he or she is nuts ("where's the tin foil hat?") and/or (b) assume the explainer has something to hide.
Being on Facebook is increasingly just the expected norm and not being on Facebook is regarded as antisocial/eccentric/suspicious/paranoid. I don't know what could turn this around. Even when Facebook commits egregious privacy violations and then baldfaced lies about it, nobody cares. Is there a way to turn this around?
Ghostery is still blocking it on/. though it is no longer supposed to exist. What FB gathers about non-FB users would be interesting to know. Is this a good citation for this?
Yes, all true! (*Groan*). How I dread hearing someone with an MBA announce "I'm heading that up" and proceed to schedule needless meetings to assure everyone of their self-importance. And the very young do it as well.
Yep. So I'm speaking from my own experience. One can improve in some important ways as one gets past 45. And if you don't believe in the ability of people to change for the better, then please don't work in education, social work, psychology or the criminal justice system. You might as well turn anyone over 40 into Soylent Green.
I admit this made me laugh, having known a few merciless 50yo+ in business and government. On a serious note, there are many historical examples of late bloomers who develop or show exceptional skills (other than treachery, that is!) post-40yo and even considerably older. And there are so many callous, clumsy dumb youths running around. There are outliers for every set of numbers.
Except: grandparents, for example, have been shown to have highly valuable supporting functions in raising young, and so do contribute to maximizing their genetic representation in subsequent generations well after they cease to have their own direct offspring. This means older people, should they survive, do have functions that make sense in terms of evolution. It's possible that the decline in testosterone, which makes older men more feminine in some ways than they used to be, also makes them better able to contribute to caregiving for young, on average that is.
Before someone shouts "that's group selection!", let me point out that group selection, originally part of Darwinian theory before it was dumped, has again found favor with evolutionary biologists.
Also, one word: EXERCISE. Regular exercise has a measurable impact on cognitive abilities which is not surprising since people who exercise regularly are physiologically 20 years younger than their slobby peers.
Slashdot Mirror
After a few days of this, and confirming it wasn't a fluke, but rather Firefox, I installed Chromium.
I doubt the sluggishness you experienced has much at all to do with the UI design.
What's wrong with FF as it is? Let's hope they don't fuck it up the ass, like Google have fucked gmail. Designers design, coders code, managers manage, and not always when it's necessary or even useful to do so.
But BushAmerica was the same. ObamaAmerica = BushAmerica.
The platform on which Cameron and his coalition were elected included "winding back Big Brother" and the steady reduction of civil liberties under Labor. Predictably, that is now all forgotten.
A war with Iran would not at all be like the invasion of Iraq. Iran is a geographically huge, relatively developed country with money, technology and enormous military resources. Invading Iran would not work out well. That is why the US hasn't done it and probably never will.
The point of war is not to die for your side, but to make the other guy die for his.
Not quite right. The point of war is to maim and wound the other side's guys, not kill. This is because every maimed and wounded soldier sucks up many times his own resources in being evacuated and cared for. There are figures for this and it came up not long ago on /..
The following analogy occurs to me. The most effective disease does not kill its host, at least not too quickly, before it can spread to new hosts while burning out the original host's resources. So the best (worst) war is an effective disease.
George Lucas (Verb) Lucasing, Lucased (a) The act of committing graphics overkill. The definition in your sig neglects to mention drowning stilted dialog (and the audience) in the endless, overbearing, overloud strains of John William's pompous maudlin violins.
To be honest I get surprised by the big reaction to something like soldier's urinating on the corpses of dead enemies. They are trained to be worked into a killing frenzy and to hate the enemy. The corpse does not know it is being urinated on and coiuld not care less and it is not surprising soldiers would vent their rage in this harmless way. So it's not "nice". It's a lot nicer than killing the enemy in the first place. To me this seems one of those bizarre double standards that with which the whole idea of war is riddled. Dulce et decorem est pro patria mori .... or not.
Satire aside, the US also produced huge lumps of the world's best culture of the 18-20C, though it's true some it was produced by European emigres who moved to America. The US displays a talent for absorbing foreign forms and re-working these into things of great energy and popularity and engaging in cross-pollination of art and music with the Old World.
Cookies are absolutely not the problem, the vast array of sites installing facebook tracking scripts on their pages is the problem.
In which case, use http://www.ghostery.com/ to block trackers.
Too bad I will have to share their faith.
I think you mean: share their *fate*?
Web pages, I'm not so sure about. Things like Facebook and MySpace grew quickly, but they still account for a tiny fraction of the total web.
Tiny is arguable. Facebook, with over 800 million users, has succeeded in walling off a significant chunk of the web where AOL and MSN failed.
Anything at all to do with sex will utterly ruin a politician's career in the US. But in continental Europe and many other places at least until quite recently it's been pretty much expected as par for the course that powerful people such as politicians have mistresses, do oral sex with interns, whatever. We are talking about the Continent after all. Look at Silvio Berlusconi - it's taken a lot for a backlash against corruption to catch up with him. Allegedly using an underage prostitute, where "underage" is older than the age of consent in Italy (and without any accusation or support whatsoever for the prosecution from the alleged victim), is another excuse to nail him. They'll get him over something or other eventually, he's earned himself too many enemies. But using debauchery as a strategy for crucifixion, in an unfortunate trend, has been imported from the moralizing, repressed US. His real crime is corruption.
Urging people to be conservative with their content is all well and good, but at some point we should look around and say "You know what, the real problem is that people aren't handling all this new information in a sane manner." We should be attacking with equal fervor people who use the information in extreme and/or inappropriate ways.
But we don't, do we. The FTC just slaps Facebook on the wrist for lying to use about its so-called privacy policy. That's it. No criminal charges, no massive crippling fines. The Europeans may be our last hope.
These are all straw man arguments. No-one is saying that Facebook isn't fun or doesn't have its uses. They are saying that it is also a global tracking system that accumulates vast amounts of data about *you* in order to generate profit for people you don't even know. And this is all data that Facebook apparently still holds forever and can be exploited in ways we can't even imagine yet. Worse, so-called regulatory bodies like the FTC are proving to be impotent when they just slap Facebook on the wrist for lying to us all.
At least on Twitter you can use a pseudonym. Or you could last time I checked.
But: when anyone tries to explain to Jane and Joe Normal Intelligence just why it is not a good idea to have a Facebook account, Jane and Joe (a) look at the explainer like he or she is nuts ("where's the tin foil hat?") and/or (b) assume the explainer has something to hide.
Being on Facebook is increasingly just the expected norm and not being on Facebook is regarded as antisocial/eccentric/suspicious/paranoid. I don't know what could turn this around. Even when Facebook commits egregious privacy violations and then baldfaced lies about it, nobody cares. Is there a way to turn this around?
Correction: Is *there* a good citation for this?
"like" buttons are never gathering information on my browsing habits.
Facebook Beacon gathered information about what FB users did on sites other than Facebook. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Beacon#Privacy_concerns
Ghostery is still blocking it on /. though it is no longer supposed to exist. What FB gathers about non-FB users would be interesting to know. Is this a good citation for this?
Yes, all true! (*Groan*). How I dread hearing someone with an MBA announce "I'm heading that up" and proceed to schedule needless meetings to assure everyone of their self-importance. And the very young do it as well.
Yep. So I'm speaking from my own experience. One can improve in some important ways as one gets past 45. And if you don't believe in the ability of people to change for the better, then please don't work in education, social work, psychology or the criminal justice system. You might as well turn anyone over 40 into Soylent Green.
I admit this made me laugh, having known a few merciless 50yo+ in business and government. On a serious note, there are many historical examples of late bloomers who develop or show exceptional skills (other than treachery, that is!) post-40yo and even considerably older. And there are so many callous, clumsy dumb youths running around. There are outliers for every set of numbers.
Except: grandparents, for example, have been shown to have highly valuable supporting functions in raising young, and so do contribute to maximizing their genetic representation in subsequent generations well after they cease to have their own direct offspring. This means older people, should they survive, do have functions that make sense in terms of evolution. It's possible that the decline in testosterone, which makes older men more feminine in some ways than they used to be, also makes them better able to contribute to caregiving for young, on average that is.
Before someone shouts "that's group selection!", let me point out that group selection, originally part of Darwinian theory before it was dumped, has again found favor with evolutionary biologists.
I imagine it also depends on how many bucket bongs per day the subject has on waking. I assume the study controlled for bucket bongs?
Also, one word: EXERCISE. Regular exercise has a measurable impact on cognitive abilities which is not surprising since people who exercise regularly are physiologically 20 years younger than their slobby peers.