(except for the part about people with bear arms, awesome.)
No, no, no... it has nothing to do with people having the forelimbs of an ursoid... It's the right of the people to -bare- arms... you know, wear a wife-beater and show off those gnarly tats...
A method of processing text entered into a personal computing device with a pointing device, the method comprising:
receiving a partial text entry;
obtaining a dynamically generated list of completion candidates based on the partial text entry;
displaying the list of candidates in a search list within a graphical user interface;
receiving a user input signal associated with the pointing device;
if the user input signal corresponds to a first type of user selection with the pointing device, deactivating the search list; and
if the user input signal corresponds to a second type of user selection with the pointing device, replacing the partial text entry with a completion candidate from the search list.
Bah,/. doesn't support the ordered list type attribute. The second ordered list should be a-f not 1-6
Since we already had our car analogy in this thread, I'll use a different analogy... One that actually applies to copyright.
Say I write a book whose sole purpose was to comment/critique/debunk/build upon the ideas written about in a book by a different author... I don't directly quote a single word of the original text, but my book is meaningless without the ideas proffered in the other book...
Applying the same logic that is being put forth here, my book would be considered a derivative work of the original author...
Additionally, if you were using 4 pixels each capable of rendering (2^6)^3 or 2^18 (262,144) colors and you used 4 of them to represent a color, wouldn't you have the capability to render (2^18)^4 or 2^72 colors? That would be 4,722,366,482,869,645,213,696 or 4 sextillion colors.
Caveat: I'm not an expert on exactly how the TiVo operates below the basic bash and web server add-ons that I use on my Series 1
With my semi-informed viewpoint, I can see why TiVo did what they did.
TiVo wasn't really ever in the hardware business, they provide subscription services. If I can modify the kernel I can intercept the low level calls that retrieve the unit number and steal the service by providing a different one.
Then the next step is to let you run a modified kernel, but not let you use the service any longer. I have a feeling that there would still be a tarring and feathering in the works should someone suggest that.
Building out the infrastructure to counter theft of service on the TiVo side of the connection would probably be cost-prohibitive.
TiVo was an awesome product... I still love my TiVo. I would hate to have squashed it before it began because they couldn't afford to counter theft of service.
We weren't talking about US or Soviet spacecraft. We were discussing an episode of Battlestar Galactica, an armored spacecraft in which a set of blast doors were explosively jetisoned with unprotected people in the compartment behind them. The link to NASA was to bring in an authoritative explanation of what happens to humans upon exposure to vacuum.
Well, since I'm not an astrophysicist here's what one has to say. Ask an Astrophysicist
from the article:
Various minor problems (sunburn, possibly "the bends", certainly some [mild, reversible, painless] swelling of skin and underlying tissue) start after ten seconds or so. I certainly agree that labeling 20 seconds to be "extreme exposure" is a tad.... well, extreme, and hopefully nobody tried to hold their breath, but we're talking about no protection at all and explosive decompression.
When it's all over, that's why they call it science fiction.
It would also be due to the same effects that divers experience when depressurizing too rapidly... the bends. Gasses in their blood coming out of solution due to the rapid drop in pressure.
I have never seen a site where registration required "10 seconds and a few keystrokes". Even so, it's a needless barrier to entry.
My mistake... I just went to Wikipedia and registered. It took 20 seconds and about 40 keystrokes. The 10 seconds I was originally speaking of was in reference to logging in at a later date to preform additional contributions and/or edits.
Most people will make one or two edits to Wikipedia, ever. There's no audit trail in either case.
You're right, if the vandal only vandalises a single page then there is no audit trail. If on the other hand, it's some bored dweeb vandalising multiple pages then that audit trail becomes invaluable in terms of correcting the damage.
So if I want to mess around with people on the internet, I will never, ever create an account?
Sure you will, but it's more inconvenient. If [random jerk] wants to create a disposable account for the purposes of vandalism, he/she'll also have to go create a throw-away email address for the password email.
So if I am a person who actually has things to do with his time, Wikipedia is better off without me?
If you consider 10 seconds and a few keystrokes far too inconvenient to warrant sharing your valuable expertise then I would have to say "Yes." You obviously feel that it is important enough for/.
People who are actual experts in a field actually have things to do with their time, and if they are faced with useless tasks before being allowed to contribute, they more likely than not will not bother, and will do something else constructive instead.
And here's a thought back to you: How do you verify that the expert is in fact the expert you think they are if you don't have them authenticate. How do you propose to differentiate those experts from "lolsters?"
Final thought: If I require a "lolster" to authenticate in some manner, I then have an audit trail. If I discover that they have defaced a page, I can go back and look at everything that they've done across the whole site. As it is now, that discovery is limited to only those things that people notice.
You probably do. If you don't, chances are a) you don't give a crap, b) don't have anything worth taking/vandalising, or c) live in a Utopia.
-- Security is never convenient.
Obviously from the discussion in this thread people feel that Wikipedia is a valuable resource and there is a problem with vandalism. Heck they're only asking you to put your key in the lock when you want to change things.
If you're too inconvenienced with having to log into Wikipedia to contribute, then the community is probably better off without you.
Slashdot Mirror
(except for the part about people with bear arms, awesome.)
No, no, no... it has nothing to do with people having the forelimbs of an ursoid... It's the right of the people to -bare- arms... you know, wear a wife-beater and show off those gnarly tats...
That seems to describe the majority of people born in the past 30 years...
Bah,
This is what he was thinking when he said "One of these days Alice.... Bang, Zoom, to the Moon!"
Since we already had our car analogy in this thread, I'll use a different analogy... One that actually applies to copyright.
Say I write a book whose sole purpose was to comment/critique/debunk/build upon the ideas written about in a book by a different author... I don't directly quote a single word of the original text, but my book is meaningless without the ideas proffered in the other book...
Applying the same logic that is being put forth here, my book would be considered a derivative work of the original author...
Bulls***!
Whose "objective, external reality" are you referring to? Our wonderfully objective media? All of the oh-so objective Slashdotters?
There is no such thing as an "objective, external reality". All things viewed and/or reported by a human being are subjective.
No text
Except that the true definition of giga is 1000^3, not 1024^3, hence the additional GiB definition to represent 1024^3 bytes.
Additionally, if you were using 4 pixels each capable of rendering (2^6)^3 or 2^18 (262,144) colors and you used 4 of them to represent a color, wouldn't you have the capability to render (2^18)^4 or 2^72 colors? That would be 4,722,366,482,869,645,213,696 or 4 sextillion colors.
Time to learn binary my friend. A 6 bit binary number can only represent the values 0 through 63.
Suppose his nickname when using the webcam is mx_HAARD ?
The beauty of Open Source is that you can go see....
Caveat: I'm not an expert on exactly how the TiVo operates below the basic bash and web server add-ons that I use on my Series 1
With my semi-informed viewpoint, I can see why TiVo did what they did.
TiVo wasn't really ever in the hardware business, they provide subscription services. If I can modify the kernel I can intercept the low level calls that retrieve the unit number and steal the service by providing a different one.
Then the next step is to let you run a modified kernel, but not let you use the service any longer. I have a feeling that there would still be a tarring and feathering in the works should someone suggest that.
Building out the infrastructure to counter theft of service on the TiVo side of the connection would probably be cost-prohibitive.
TiVo was an awesome product... I still love my TiVo. I would hate to have squashed it before it began because they couldn't afford to counter theft of service.
Just my $.02
-Pyrroc
It dates back to even before ancient Egypt to the mountains of western Iran
That would violate copyright.
Read the thread.
We weren't talking about US or Soviet spacecraft. We were discussing an episode of Battlestar Galactica, an armored spacecraft in which a set of blast doors were explosively jetisoned with unprotected people in the compartment behind them. The link to NASA was to bring in an authoritative explanation of what happens to humans upon exposure to vacuum.
Why is Lunar dust so different than "normal" dust and/or sand that we breathe and/or eat every day?
from the article: Various minor problems (sunburn, possibly "the bends", certainly some [mild, reversible, painless] swelling of skin and underlying tissue) start after ten seconds or so. I certainly agree that labeling 20 seconds to be "extreme exposure" is a tad.... well, extreme, and hopefully nobody tried to hold their breath, but we're talking about no protection at all and explosive decompression.
When it's all over, that's why they call it science fiction.
Ummm, the *vast* majority of bullets are made from lead and copper... not magnetic...
It would also be due to the same effects that divers experience when depressurizing too rapidly... the bends. Gasses in their blood coming out of solution due to the rapid drop in pressure.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
I have never seen a site where registration required "10 seconds and a few keystrokes". Even so, it's a needless barrier to entry.
My mistake... I just went to Wikipedia and registered. It took 20 seconds and about 40 keystrokes. The 10 seconds I was originally speaking of was in reference to logging in at a later date to preform additional contributions and/or edits.
Most people will make one or two edits to Wikipedia, ever. There's no audit trail in either case.
You're right, if the vandal only vandalises a single page then there is no audit trail. If on the other hand, it's some bored dweeb vandalising multiple pages then that audit trail becomes invaluable in terms of correcting the damage.
So if I want to mess around with people on the internet, I will never, ever create an account?
/.
Sure you will, but it's more inconvenient. If [random jerk] wants to create a disposable account for the purposes of vandalism, he/she'll also have to go create a throw-away email address for the password email.
So if I am a person who actually has things to do with his time, Wikipedia is better off without me?
If you consider 10 seconds and a few keystrokes far too inconvenient to warrant sharing your valuable expertise then I would have to say "Yes." You obviously feel that it is important enough for
People who are actual experts in a field actually have things to do with their time, and if they are faced with useless tasks before being allowed to contribute, they more likely than not will not bother, and will do something else constructive instead.
And here's a thought back to you: How do you verify that the expert is in fact the expert you think they are if you don't have them authenticate. How do you propose to differentiate those experts from "lolsters?"
Final thought: If I require a "lolster" to authenticate in some manner, I then have an audit trail. If I discover that they have defaced a page, I can go back and look at everything that they've done across the whole site. As it is now, that discovery is limited to only those things that people notice.
Sorry, this was a reply to Goaway.
You probably do. If you don't, chances are a) you don't give a crap, b) don't have anything worth taking/vandalising, or c) live in a Utopia.
-- Security is never convenient.
Obviously from the discussion in this thread people feel that Wikipedia is a valuable resource and there is a problem with vandalism. Heck they're only asking you to put your key in the lock when you want to change things.
If you're too inconvenienced with having to log into Wikipedia to contribute, then the community is probably better off without you.