I consider stoning adulterers to be barbaric. But my name is not George Bush--it is not my role to change a government (or a system of law) solely because I do not like it.
My objection to "Bid'ah law" stems from the inherent ignorance and/or dishonesty that forms the foundation for such law. The word "Bid'ah" means "innovation," and religious innovation is considered a sin in Islam. Those who are religious or political leaders in Islam, yet who propagate "innovative" actions that are contrary to Islam, are guilty of Bid'ah.
Were Muslims to actually follow Sharia, there would never again be a "Muslim" suicide bomber. Such actions are a flagrant violation of Sharia.
At some point in the line, personally identifiable info must be used. It can be "hidden" in a database, but they have to have the username and email address to set up the account. Even if they immediately anonymize the records, the original identifiable info must be kept available somewhere.
I'd have no objection to Iran applying Shariah law. My objection is that they go far over and above Shariah, subverting Shariah and instead practicing "Bid'ah law."
Not quite invalid (though I quite agree that abiding by robots.txt would impair functionality). "Cannot access page to scan for malicious content" is also a valid response--one that leaves to the user whether or not they access the page.
Is [the Web] still the Web if you can't navigate directly to specific content?
That's why web documents have internal hyperlinks... and have since Berners-Lee's original ENQUIRE prototype.
Is it still the Web if the content can't be indexed and searched?
The Web (1980) predates the first search engine (Archie in 1990, Wandex in 1993) by at least a decade.
Is it still the Web if you can only view the application on certain clients or devices?
What, like a web-browser? Remember, a browser is a "certain [class of] clients": though they are ubiquitous now, they weren't always.
Is it still the Web if you can't view source?
Viewing source code has never been the primary interest of most users.
In short, it sounds like the author is saying "ZOMG! The Web has changed." Well, guess what, bucky--the Web (and computers in general) changes every single day. Old technologies give way to newer ones--sometimes a good thing, sometimes a bad thing, but it happens.
Correction: "The important questions here are "Does the AVG spider ignore the robots.txt rules?" and "Do they try to hide/distribute their IP addresses?" If the answer to either of these questions is "Yes," then we have a problem--if not, however, we have only umbrage."
But how many times does Google go to the site? About once a day, if even that.
That's not what I've seen at the sites I've administrated, but those were webforums where the content is added to daily, and I have no idea how Google sets up spidering (frequency, number of agents at one time, etc). I do know that when we get spidered, even if it's just by one search engine, we can have 20+ "guests" all from the domain doing the searching. And yes, they spider every frikkin page.
Being spidered is all part of being on the internet. Google at least is honest enough to do so openly from their domain (though, IIRC, they also disguise their UA). The important questions here are "Does the AVG spider follow the robots.txt rules?" and "Do they try to hide/distribute their IP addresses?" If the answer to either of these questions is "Yes," then we have a problem--if not, however, we have only umbrage.
I could agree with it being called a DDoS attack if the intent was to actually deny service. It's not--the intent is to index pages for malware as part of their version of McAffey's SiteAdvisor.
If one wants to call such a thing a DDoS attack, then one must also condemn Google every time they index the website.
I'd missed that one--and it probably tips the percentage up, considering that Microsoft is offering "Try before you buy" demos on most new big-box computers.
What about copies installed on home PCs of telecommuters, provided by their employers?
No, I'd tend to think of that as "Business," even if a lot of them get used for personal stuff as much (or more) than for business.
I would assume that "home use" is a fraction of the business market--I don't have hard figures, but I'd be surprised if home installs of MS Office equals 10% of the market.
Sorry, I should have specified--legitimate home installs, not counting pirated copies. But of course, no one here knows about pirated software.:D
I can understand wanting something like that, but again, we're discussing getting the basic standards working correctly first. would be incredibly useful (indeed, you may want to check out MathML), but it's not part of the actual HTML standard.
Slashdot Mirror
I consider stoning adulterers to be barbaric. But my name is not George Bush--it is not my role to change a government (or a system of law) solely because I do not like it.
My objection to "Bid'ah law" stems from the inherent ignorance and/or dishonesty that forms the foundation for such law. The word "Bid'ah" means "innovation," and religious innovation is considered a sin in Islam. Those who are religious or political leaders in Islam, yet who propagate "innovative" actions that are contrary to Islam, are guilty of Bid'ah.
Were Muslims to actually follow Sharia, there would never again be a "Muslim" suicide bomber. Such actions are a flagrant violation of Sharia.
At some point in the line, personally identifiable info must be used. It can be "hidden" in a database, but they have to have the username and email address to set up the account. Even if they immediately anonymize the records, the original identifiable info must be kept available somewhere.
"We have to filter P2P to solve network congestion"--Bell Canada.
I'd have no objection to Iran applying Shariah law. My objection is that they go far over and above Shariah, subverting Shariah and instead practicing "Bid'ah law."
I weigh more than a duck you insensitive clod!
God gets mod points? We're screeeewed!
Not quite invalid (though I quite agree that abiding by robots.txt would impair functionality). "Cannot access page to scan for malicious content" is also a valid response--one that leaves to the user whether or not they access the page.
Is [the Web] still the Web if you can't navigate directly to specific content?
That's why web documents have internal hyperlinks ... and have since Berners-Lee's original ENQUIRE prototype.
Is it still the Web if the content can't be indexed and searched?
The Web (1980) predates the first search engine (Archie in 1990, Wandex in 1993) by at least a decade.
Is it still the Web if you can only view the application on certain clients or devices?
What, like a web-browser? Remember, a browser is a "certain [class of] clients": though they are ubiquitous now, they weren't always.
Is it still the Web if you can't view source?
Viewing source code has never been the primary interest of most users.
In short, it sounds like the author is saying "ZOMG! The Web has changed." Well, guess what, bucky--the Web (and computers in general) changes every single day. Old technologies give way to newer ones--sometimes a good thing, sometimes a bad thing, but it happens.
Correction: "The important questions here are "Does the AVG spider ignore the robots.txt rules?" and "Do they try to hide/distribute their IP addresses?" If the answer to either of these questions is "Yes," then we have a problem--if not, however, we have only umbrage."
Sorry. Momentary braino.
But how many times does Google go to the site? About once a day, if even that.
That's not what I've seen at the sites I've administrated, but those were webforums where the content is added to daily, and I have no idea how Google sets up spidering (frequency, number of agents at one time, etc). I do know that when we get spidered, even if it's just by one search engine, we can have 20+ "guests" all from the domain doing the searching. And yes, they spider every frikkin page.
Being spidered is all part of being on the internet. Google at least is honest enough to do so openly from their domain (though, IIRC, they also disguise their UA). The important questions here are "Does the AVG spider follow the robots.txt rules?" and "Do they try to hide/distribute their IP addresses?" If the answer to either of these questions is "Yes," then we have a problem--if not, however, we have only umbrage.
I could agree with it being called a DDoS attack if the intent was to actually deny service. It's not--the intent is to index pages for malware as part of their version of McAffey's SiteAdvisor.
If one wants to call such a thing a DDoS attack, then one must also condemn Google every time they index the website.
Are you counting Microsoft Office Home and Student?
I'd missed that one--and it probably tips the percentage up, considering that Microsoft is offering "Try before you buy" demos on most new big-box computers.
What about copies installed on home PCs of telecommuters, provided by their employers?
No, I'd tend to think of that as "Business," even if a lot of them get used for personal stuff as much (or more) than for business.
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080623
I would assume that "home use" is a fraction of the business market--I don't have hard figures, but I'd be surprised if home installs of MS Office equals 10% of the market.
Sorry, I should have specified--legitimate home installs, not counting pirated copies. But of course, no one here knows about pirated software. :D
I'm setting up a massive stockpile of unobtanium against the day that it becomes useful.
As the GP notes, they were not running "away." They were running (obliquely) towards.
It all goes back to Grover. "I'm near! I'm far!"
I can understand wanting something like that, but again, we're discussing getting the basic standards working correctly first. would be incredibly useful (indeed, you may want to check out MathML), but it's not part of the actual HTML standard.
+1. What good are fancy new features when the core functionality is buggy or broken?
...a keyboard that has keys that are displays?
http://www.artlebedev.com/everything/optimus/
"For The Win," but that works, too. :)
And where are my mod points when I need them!
+1 Funny (Unofficial). FurtiveGlancer FTW.
Anybody have any figures on what percentage of autism patients have the TSC gene?
Mars owns Mars? I for one welcome our chocolate-producing overlords!
Good plan, but needs a laser in there somewhere....
"cannabinoid OR cannabinoids" is redundant in a Google search string--Google understands regular English plurals.