(english is not my native language, sorry)
But acids and bases are NOT exceptions to the game! The wonderful world of chemistry is that everything can react with everything, but it might be very unstable. That is why Sodium Hydroxide doesn't just stay Sodium (s) in something close to water. It CAN be, but it won't, simply because it's unstable. If you'd extract all forms of energy from it, it'd stay Sodium (aq) + Hydroxide (aq)
This game is just a way for the boy to earn money. Oh, and his ego gets a facelift too. Let me refer to the irritating use of "IQ" in his game: http://www.elementeo.com/thegame . "Brain power". Hah!
The idea of learning while playing is once again great, but, as always, in a wrong form.
This card game is just what it is: a card game. Yeah, the cards are given names and "explainations", but it's just a (simple) card game which has a periodic table included.
So what do you learn from them? Well, elements. It's just a list of elements. There is (looking at the cards themselves) no reason why silver would "react" with bromine.
If he told me only that he had made a card game, I'd expect explainations about how salts work, physically. What are electrodes? How come oil doesn't mix with water? How is sodium hydroxide made? What is an organic compound?
If you WANT, you can learn any child the periodic table. It's not about whether it's a game or not. Children have enough free time, and as long as you tell it with a lot of exitement and "ohh!" feeling, they will listen and remember.
Not that it's useful... but... a cardgame isn't gonna help much.
HOLY FUCK!!!
I posted an objective opinion about what will happen next. This was considered troll, score -1, while ChameleonDave's opinion (which might be based on false facts!) was considered 5, informative?
There's a lot of stuff good on this site, but this freedom-of-speech-screwing moderation in nonsense!
This moderation act was just based on the moderator being irritated by Zango's business!
NOT sorry for the swearing.
If it is correct that it literally says "developers judge to be spyware", then your point is correct. Though, I have not read this on the main page. It might be deeper, but the court should investigate this.
But don't support frivolous lawsuits.
Stop. I don't "support" the lawsuit. I only say that Zango might be correct in its opinion. If I were to choose, I would love to judge Zango to be incorrect. But, legally, if Spyware Doctor does not mention that "spyware" is considered as "those tools which our developers judge as spyware" in any route to removing such spyware, then Zango is correct.
Wait a minute. Zango. That's the new 180solutions. Let me recall that that was not a spyware company! I don't know if anything changed, but as far as I know, it only distributes programs which people make spyware out of.
The so-called spyware Zango made is this: https://www.zangocash.com/programs/gateway.html
(please read the page before responding)
Now, let me quote from this page: "Users who do not have Zango cannot access your Gateway-protected content. They must install Zango to get permission - and you get paid for every install generated from countries we credit for."
Obviously, other people make spyware because they get money from Zango for this. But, this program is NOT spyware itself!
Therefore, the lawsuit is not ungrounded. Zango can say every one of their Gateway clients have legally let people install the Zango software. Now that the anti-spyware company is uninstalling the Zango application, they have the right to say they're taking clients away (they might even win the lawsuit).
There might be a different situation, I don't know all this for sure, but if spyware doctor does nothing except uninstall Zango Gateway, and that is what this lawsuit is all about, then Zango is in their right, and Spyware Doctor should at least notice what it is doing to its users.
No. It's not incorrect. Ever hear of cron? On just about every UNIX system I've used, every user could have their own crontab by default. Windows has the task scheduler, which regular users can use to start programs at bootup. Both cron in unix and the task scheduler in Windows can be restricted to only administrators, but by default they are available to users.
Let me rephrase it. I actually meant "any properly designed unix system". A normal user cannot use cron in unix at all. Plus, in windows, you'll get administrator rights when using the "cron"-like feature in some ways.
You have a lot to learn about both Windows and UNIX. Most of what you think you know is wrong.
Please talk using arguments, not using your high degrees in nonsense studies.
Pretty much all users have the right to do this is various ways. The same applies to Linux, *BSD and OS X too BTW.
Lol, that is highly incorrect. On any properly installed unix system, normal users don't have any rights unless root have given them. It's the other way around on windows.
you'll need to work on your writing skills to do so.;)
Please let me make clear that english is not my native language and make some mistakes every now and then.
The proper way to set up student labs that run Windows is not to deploy stupid policy hack like disabling the control panel, because as I said, policies do not necessarily equate to security.
Now, this is an unclear thing in windows. A lot of people (including my school's sysadmins) don't know the difference, really. On *nix, it's all the same thing: no access to wireless hardware devices means, obviously, no damaging access to its configuration applications, because they are just an apllication apart from the kernel layers.
I personally totally don't like the idea of web applications, as well as its friends AJAX and Flash. Let me explain why.
In the beginning of the computer world and, primarily, internet, everything was fine. You would only do common development. There was no such thing as shared documents. The reports you make are written on either a typewriter or on a single PC. Internet just wasn't ready for transferring documents.
Nowadays, it totally is. That brings up a new problem: compatability problems. The programs and files you use on one machine don't run on another one (linux and friends mac os 10 windows). It's primarily about file distribution. Emailing yourself the files you need on a different box is nice, but not practical, because you'll need to login a hundred times for those sort of things. FTP servers are good, but specifically "noobs" don't even know what FTP can do. I can list a hundred examples, but it just comes down to this: there is no good fully integrated file transfer system which anyone can use.
So how do we solve this? Well, for example, google documents is a good approach. In this philosophy, the file should not be transferred at all (well, technically, it is, but it is always on a central server). Google's web applications are very useful in these ages, because they can be used on any OS by users of any level. Their other solutions, like gmail (a form of webmail), google calendar or gtalk, are good because of the same reasons: you can have your own environment, thus easy access, without explicitly transferring files (once again, technically, files ARE moved, but they are kept central).
Now, this might seem very good, but I doubt this is a good development. Because, first of all, there is little choice so far, in the types of a certain application (for example a document editor). Also, internet is not the fastest medium possible. It still takes time to get connected into a service. Javascript is obviously slow, and imagine what would happen if your latest most-important-ever company document should be printed on the day your company's network is down?
This approach is just not the way to get the file transferring compatible. What we should have is one standard in any form for every OS. Obviously, this is hard, because microsoft would have to be forced to integrating into a certain protocol, which is a thing they obviously won't within the next 5 years.
Thus, it might seem hard to get a common protocol for file transfers and common editing of as much types of documents as possible. Microsoft would have to invest time in new ideas instead of new themes for their window manager. But let's keep it simple: it's worth it. Once we would have something close to a standard, there is nothing like it needed. With a bit of thinking, the protocol (thus, a big piece of the application which should open it) could even be enclosed in the document itself, which means you only need a clear protocol and a decent interpreter to be able to load any common file! (please not that this is far from impossible!)
Developing web applications instead of a good operating system is nonsense, it's just working around the problem, thus keeping the situation like it is. Development of clear protocols, and _really_ pushing towards wide integration of them is way more efficient.
Seriously, what's so hard about these articles? The power of wikipedia is in its linking system, when you don't understand a phrase or subject, just click it, or if no link is there, search for it, and you'll learn all about it. I read and understood these articles perfectly, while i only had a little bit of theory about DNA and microbiology. What's so hard about them? What can't be understood? Yes, you have to take your time to read them, to understand what they're saying. That's wyh we call it Rtfm. Read it, not look at it (also, ltfm would sound bad:p). Ok, i can't tell you everything they said in the article right now, but that's because i'm too lazy to remember everything. If you don't understand these articles, you don't need to know what's in them.
Then let me show you another couple of examples:
When i've been using my dad's pc (which i've set to use dvorak on my account too), dad will have trouble logging in if the system is not rebooted. how come the keyboard layout is not reset? it should be
plus, it's pretty easy to let an application start on boot even when you don't own any rights to do so. you can do a lot like these things, no matter the permissions you got.
afaik, sysadmins are bad, generally.
Though, every sysadmin on this site who responds to me is NOT a bad sysadmin. sysadmins are the low-levelled idiots who couldn't pass onto a study or even serious education. And yes, they ARE stupid. There's about 5 of them on my school. I installed a different keyboard layout, and because they took all the rights to unset it, they blamed me for doing so and HAD TO INSTALL A NEW COPY OF WINDOWS.
DUDE!
A DIFFERENT KEYBOARD LAYOUT.
* cough * configuration panel * cough *
but... no, they disabled the configuration panel "because of security issues". dude... have you ever wondered how i switched the layout? there is no such security on windows, as long as the registry is wide open for writing. but they didn't really know how they actually set it all (i guess they hired a company), so they couldn't access the control panel (* cough * administrator passwords should be written down * cough *).
hm? server down?
well...
just wait a week, so that your salary goes up, then hire a company to fix it.
"what's a server anyway"...
i nmapped the server (got router ip using ipconfig/a). appeared to be a Cent OS box. it also ran an empty apache server. i asked a sysadmin what the apache did over there: "How do you know it's a decent OS?" (no typos)
the guys in my school are plain idiots. they might know a little bit about what a motherboard is, or what the latest nvidia card is, but that's where it ends. oh, they also know how to order PC's at dell.
the major amount of sysadmins are idiots, who are sysadmin because the suck even more at other jobs. the sysadmins reading this message are good. they are actually interested in PCs, which is a thing the sysadmins i know lack.
Now, let's start off by complaining that you've said that there's no malware for OS X twice, but the same is true for linux. selinux can perfectly help sandboxing your applications. There is no point is some kind of sophisticated interface for it on windows, as that would mean you'd mean to choose before running an application, which most people don't care about, thus just enable everything. the system is wrong at the core. i'm typing this message from a school PC. there's no illusion on it (too poor? i guess so...), so they've "taken" all my rights, practically. That just means you have no access to the control panel. I type in dvorak, and i can only switch the keyboard layout using dvassist. that is just some small program i'v put on my usb stick and run as user with nearly any rights. dvassist changes the layout, deletes qwerty layouts (i don't really like that part, but meh), and even after rebooting, the pc is still set to dvorak (though there's a feature in dvassist to switch back, happily). to make things clear: some small program anyone can download from sourceforge works around the security model and writes directly into the windows registry. now, is that a good thing?
windows' security system is wrong at the core, not the interface
There once was a guy, "dad", who lived at the national telephony company until his late 50th birthday. He left (because the company had some internal trouble and was offered a high pension). Ok, it wasn't exactly IT, but it was very close. He now works as a construction worker at a friend's building contractor company and enjoys it. That is, as mentioned above, a bare hands job in which you are still constructing. He still has some light IT jobs using his own llc, but he is not really busy in that area anymore. So... indeed, constructing is a very good idea, so it seems.
I'm not at that stage yet, but I'd stay into the creative branch. It would mean that you are still developing, still putting things and basic materials into something more complex. It's like coding with wood, the compiler is your saw:)
don't forget that you need to have windows for those tools, whichs costs 600 dollars these days. and, honoustly, i haven't ever got a COMPLETE product on any CD on any hardware in my whole life.
I have the strong feeling that adobe wants to stop developing flash. A few days ago, they said they might add ads to the player. Now, they're open sourcing major parts of flash technology. I think these steps lean towards quitting development of flash.
Slashdot Mirror
(english is not my native language, sorry) But acids and bases are NOT exceptions to the game! The wonderful world of chemistry is that everything can react with everything, but it might be very unstable. That is why Sodium Hydroxide doesn't just stay Sodium (s) in something close to water. It CAN be, but it won't, simply because it's unstable. If you'd extract all forms of energy from it, it'd stay Sodium (aq) + Hydroxide (aq) This game is just a way for the boy to earn money. Oh, and his ego gets a facelift too. Let me refer to the irritating use of "IQ" in his game: http://www.elementeo.com/thegame . "Brain power". Hah! The idea of learning while playing is once again great, but, as always, in a wrong form.
This card game is just what it is: a card game. Yeah, the cards are given names and "explainations", but it's just a (simple) card game which has a periodic table included.
So what do you learn from them? Well, elements. It's just a list of elements. There is (looking at the cards themselves) no reason why silver would "react" with bromine.
If he told me only that he had made a card game, I'd expect explainations about how salts work, physically. What are electrodes? How come oil doesn't mix with water? How is sodium hydroxide made? What is an organic compound?
If you WANT, you can learn any child the periodic table. It's not about whether it's a game or not. Children have enough free time, and as long as you tell it with a lot of exitement and "ohh!" feeling, they will listen and remember.
Not that it's useful... but... a cardgame isn't gonna help much.
HOLY FUCK!!!
I posted an objective opinion about what will happen next. This was considered troll, score -1, while ChameleonDave's opinion (which might be based on false facts!) was considered 5, informative?
There's a lot of stuff good on this site, but this freedom-of-speech-screwing moderation in nonsense!
This moderation act was just based on the moderator being irritated by Zango's business!
NOT sorry for the swearing.
Stop. I don't "support" the lawsuit. I only say that Zango might be correct in its opinion. If I were to choose, I would love to judge Zango to be incorrect. But, legally, if Spyware Doctor does not mention that "spyware" is considered as "those tools which our developers judge as spyware" in any route to removing such spyware, then Zango is correct.
Wait a minute. Zango. That's the new 180solutions. Let me recall that that was not a spyware company! I don't know if anything changed, but as far as I know, it only distributes programs which people make spyware out of. The so-called spyware Zango made is this: https://www.zangocash.com/programs/gateway.html (please read the page before responding) Now, let me quote from this page: "Users who do not have Zango cannot access your Gateway-protected content. They must install Zango to get permission - and you get paid for every install generated from countries we credit for." Obviously, other people make spyware because they get money from Zango for this. But, this program is NOT spyware itself! Therefore, the lawsuit is not ungrounded. Zango can say every one of their Gateway clients have legally let people install the Zango software. Now that the anti-spyware company is uninstalling the Zango application, they have the right to say they're taking clients away (they might even win the lawsuit). There might be a different situation, I don't know all this for sure, but if spyware doctor does nothing except uninstall Zango Gateway, and that is what this lawsuit is all about, then Zango is in their right, and Spyware Doctor should at least notice what it is doing to its users.
I personally totally don't like the idea of web applications, as well as its friends AJAX and Flash. Let me explain why. In the beginning of the computer world and, primarily, internet, everything was fine. You would only do common development. There was no such thing as shared documents. The reports you make are written on either a typewriter or on a single PC. Internet just wasn't ready for transferring documents. Nowadays, it totally is. That brings up a new problem: compatability problems. The programs and files you use on one machine don't run on another one (linux and friends mac os 10 windows). It's primarily about file distribution. Emailing yourself the files you need on a different box is nice, but not practical, because you'll need to login a hundred times for those sort of things. FTP servers are good, but specifically "noobs" don't even know what FTP can do. I can list a hundred examples, but it just comes down to this: there is no good fully integrated file transfer system which anyone can use. So how do we solve this? Well, for example, google documents is a good approach. In this philosophy, the file should not be transferred at all (well, technically, it is, but it is always on a central server). Google's web applications are very useful in these ages, because they can be used on any OS by users of any level. Their other solutions, like gmail (a form of webmail), google calendar or gtalk, are good because of the same reasons: you can have your own environment, thus easy access, without explicitly transferring files (once again, technically, files ARE moved, but they are kept central). Now, this might seem very good, but I doubt this is a good development. Because, first of all, there is little choice so far, in the types of a certain application (for example a document editor). Also, internet is not the fastest medium possible. It still takes time to get connected into a service. Javascript is obviously slow, and imagine what would happen if your latest most-important-ever company document should be printed on the day your company's network is down? This approach is just not the way to get the file transferring compatible. What we should have is one standard in any form for every OS. Obviously, this is hard, because microsoft would have to be forced to integrating into a certain protocol, which is a thing they obviously won't within the next 5 years. Thus, it might seem hard to get a common protocol for file transfers and common editing of as much types of documents as possible. Microsoft would have to invest time in new ideas instead of new themes for their window manager. But let's keep it simple: it's worth it. Once we would have something close to a standard, there is nothing like it needed. With a bit of thinking, the protocol (thus, a big piece of the application which should open it) could even be enclosed in the document itself, which means you only need a clear protocol and a decent interpreter to be able to load any common file! (please not that this is far from impossible!) Developing web applications instead of a good operating system is nonsense, it's just working around the problem, thus keeping the situation like it is. Development of clear protocols, and _really_ pushing towards wide integration of them is way more efficient.
Seriously, what's so hard about these articles? The power of wikipedia is in its linking system, when you don't understand a phrase or subject, just click it, or if no link is there, search for it, and you'll learn all about it. I read and understood these articles perfectly, while i only had a little bit of theory about DNA and microbiology. What's so hard about them? What can't be understood? Yes, you have to take your time to read them, to understand what they're saying. That's wyh we call it Rtfm. Read it, not look at it (also, ltfm would sound bad :p). Ok, i can't tell you everything they said in the article right now, but that's because i'm too lazy to remember everything. If you don't understand these articles, you don't need to know what's in them.
Then let me show you another couple of examples: When i've been using my dad's pc (which i've set to use dvorak on my account too), dad will have trouble logging in if the system is not rebooted. how come the keyboard layout is not reset? it should be plus, it's pretty easy to let an application start on boot even when you don't own any rights to do so. you can do a lot like these things, no matter the permissions you got.
afaik, sysadmins are bad, generally. Though, every sysadmin on this site who responds to me is NOT a bad sysadmin. sysadmins are the low-levelled idiots who couldn't pass onto a study or even serious education. And yes, they ARE stupid. There's about 5 of them on my school. I installed a different keyboard layout, and because they took all the rights to unset it, they blamed me for doing so and HAD TO INSTALL A NEW COPY OF WINDOWS. DUDE! A DIFFERENT KEYBOARD LAYOUT. * cough * configuration panel * cough * but... no, they disabled the configuration panel "because of security issues". dude... have you ever wondered how i switched the layout? there is no such security on windows, as long as the registry is wide open for writing. but they didn't really know how they actually set it all (i guess they hired a company), so they couldn't access the control panel (* cough * administrator passwords should be written down * cough *). hm? server down? well... just wait a week, so that your salary goes up, then hire a company to fix it. "what's a server anyway"... i nmapped the server (got router ip using ipconfig /a). appeared to be a Cent OS box. it also ran an empty apache server. i asked a sysadmin what the apache did over there: "How do you know it's a decent OS?" (no typos)
the guys in my school are plain idiots. they might know a little bit about what a motherboard is, or what the latest nvidia card is, but that's where it ends. oh, they also know how to order PC's at dell.
the major amount of sysadmins are idiots, who are sysadmin because the suck even more at other jobs. the sysadmins reading this message are good. they are actually interested in PCs, which is a thing the sysadmins i know lack.
Now, let's start off by complaining that you've said that there's no malware for OS X twice, but the same is true for linux.
selinux can perfectly help sandboxing your applications. There is no point is some kind of sophisticated interface for it on windows, as that would mean you'd mean to choose before running an application, which most people don't care about, thus just enable everything.
the system is wrong at the core. i'm typing this message from a school PC. there's no illusion on it (too poor? i guess so...), so they've "taken" all my rights, practically. That just means you have no access to the control panel. I type in dvorak, and i can only switch the keyboard layout using dvassist. that is just some small program i'v put on my usb stick and run as user with nearly any rights. dvassist changes the layout, deletes qwerty layouts (i don't really like that part, but meh), and even after rebooting, the pc is still set to dvorak (though there's a feature in dvassist to switch back, happily).
to make things clear: some small program anyone can download from sourceforge works around the security model and writes directly into the windows registry. now, is that a good thing?
windows' security system is wrong at the core, not the interface
There once was a guy, "dad", who lived at the national telephony company until his late 50th birthday. He left (because the company had some internal trouble and was offered a high pension). Ok, it wasn't exactly IT, but it was very close. He now works as a construction worker at a friend's building contractor company and enjoys it. That is, as mentioned above, a bare hands job in which you are still constructing. He still has some light IT jobs using his own llc, but he is not really busy in that area anymore. So... indeed, constructing is a very good idea, so it seems. I'm not at that stage yet, but I'd stay into the creative branch. It would mean that you are still developing, still putting things and basic materials into something more complex. It's like coding with wood, the compiler is your saw :)
don't forget that not every noob in this world buys his pc at dell
don't forget that you need to have windows for those tools, whichs costs 600 dollars these days. and, honoustly, i haven't ever got a COMPLETE product on any CD on any hardware in my whole life.
I have the strong feeling that adobe wants to stop developing flash. A few days ago, they said they might add ads to the player. Now, they're open sourcing major parts of flash technology. I think these steps lean towards quitting development of flash.
Vista = BSOD