I'm confused. It looks like you were arguing with "there is no approval for apps". But what they said is "there is no PRE-approval for apps", that is, getting approval before submitting the app. I don't see anything in your links or in your rebuttal about pre-approval, despite the quote you're responding to.
I'm 28, but my vision is pretty bad already. I run a 24" screen at 1280x768, which is its native res. I'd much rather have a lower resolution primarily display than run a higher res display below spec, because a pixel-based display is much sharper (hence easier to see!) at its native res. For me, it's not so much "tolerating" blockiness, as much as "appreciating" it!
I think my DPI is 62. Pretty bad, right? But I have two much higher DPI displays available if I need them--I just rarely find that I do. For coding, I use two tall rxvts that split the screen in half, with fixed as my font. It is sharp (no anti-aliasing!) and easy for me to read with my poor vision. When I am on a higher DPI display, I have to use a larger font, and I have yet to find one that is as good for coding--though I'd appreciate suggestions!
My point was that you're trusting them not to renege on "only text or graphics", when management could change their mind at a future date without notice as soon as someone waves a few dollars in their face. Technical solutions eventually require some trust, which I do not place in them.
Yours is the second comment I've seen on this article with a stipulation similar to "until they start guaranteeing their ads free of such issues". I'm surprised. What guarantee could they possibly make that would be both convincing and immutable? I say "immutable" because any guarantee they offer now, technical or otherwise, could easily be discarded without notice by future management.
It is wise to consider the ad companies untrusted, and decide when the risk is justified by the potential benefit. Right now, that's looking something like zero percent of cases for the foreseeable future. It only took one malware-infested PDF ad to convince me.
I'm stunned that people are defending what is basically incompetence. In Larry Wall's terminology, we're talking about False Laziness--it saves you effort up front, but in the end may cost you more than you've saved.
Mozilla may not build if some tools are installed at a path that contains spaces or other breaking characters such as pluses, quotation marks, or meta characters. The Visual C++ tools may be installed in a directory which contains spaces (the default install location is preferred).
People are just trying to needle Google for "being evil". Setting aside the minor semantic point of whether it was their "mission statement" (does anyone at a corporation ever care about their "mission statement" other than overpaid execs?), don't you think "they never promised they wouldn't be evil" is a pretty weak defense to "they're evil"?
All this is a separate question from "are they evil", which I have no interest in weighing in on here.
They're both references to Flatland, actually. They both mention it explicitly, and they're hardly the first two to build off the popular work by reference, so I think "copied" is a bit harsh.
I had a Windows box compromised, because I foolishly had Adobe's PDF reader installed, which was up-to-date but had Javascript enabled. (At the time, I had no idea PDFs even had Javascript support. Blecch.) A website served an ad containing a PDF, which popped up Adobe's application. The window closed itself a fraction of a second later, but I saw it, and figured out what happened.
I'd put "uses Adobe Reader" on the list of high-risk activities, to be avoided when at all possible.
The C++-style comments aren't the only thing that will prevent it from being compiled as ANSI C--the code being written in C++ might prevent it, as well:-)
Last year I started getting well over 10,000 per day. Panix dealt with it fine, though they did make me fix my configuration invoking Spamassassin twice per message (which was accidental--whoops!). But since that happened, I've changed to discarding all messages marked as spam, rather than skimming the subject lines each day of only 200-300 messages or so for false positives. Sigh.
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply I wouldn't give the movie a chance. I'm just pessimistic--I'm not actually deciding in advance whether I like the movie.
Oh, yes, and attempts to cash in on popular books by writing official fan fiction have produced such amazing works of art in the past--just look at the Dune prequels! *shudders*
Slashdot Mirror
I'm confused. It looks like you were arguing with "there is no approval for apps". But what they said is "there is no PRE-approval for apps", that is, getting approval before submitting the app. I don't see anything in your links or in your rebuttal about pre-approval, despite the quote you're responding to.
Well, no, they didn't. But did you really expect to be the only one? Seems like at least 80% of the replies.
I'm 28, but my vision is pretty bad already. I run a 24" screen at 1280x768, which is its native res. I'd much rather have a lower resolution primarily display than run a higher res display below spec, because a pixel-based display is much sharper (hence easier to see!) at its native res. For me, it's not so much "tolerating" blockiness, as much as "appreciating" it!
I think my DPI is 62. Pretty bad, right? But I have two much higher DPI displays available if I need them--I just rarely find that I do. For coding, I use two tall rxvts that split the screen in half, with fixed as my font. It is sharp (no anti-aliasing!) and easy for me to read with my poor vision. When I am on a higher DPI display, I have to use a larger font, and I have yet to find one that is as good for coding--though I'd appreciate suggestions!
My point was that you're trusting them not to renege on "only text or graphics", when management could change their mind at a future date without notice as soon as someone waves a few dollars in their face. Technical solutions eventually require some trust, which I do not place in them.
Yours is the second comment I've seen on this article with a stipulation similar to "until they start guaranteeing their ads free of such issues". I'm surprised. What guarantee could they possibly make that would be both convincing and immutable? I say "immutable" because any guarantee they offer now, technical or otherwise, could easily be discarded without notice by future management.
It is wise to consider the ad companies untrusted, and decide when the risk is justified by the potential benefit. Right now, that's looking something like zero percent of cases for the foreseeable future. It only took one malware-infested PDF ad to convince me.
You're often encouraged to eat more after surgery, to aid in healing properly. I'm curious what a surgeon would say about your advice.
I'm stunned that people are defending what is basically incompetence. In Larry Wall's terminology, we're talking about False Laziness--it saves you effort up front, but in the end may cost you more than you've saved.
Mozilla's build script has this flaw, incidentally:
Sexting with kin? Now your incest can have more manboobular visuals? What?
People are just trying to needle Google for "being evil". Setting aside the minor semantic point of whether it was their "mission statement" (does anyone at a corporation ever care about their "mission statement" other than overpaid execs?), don't you think "they never promised they wouldn't be evil" is a pretty weak defense to "they're evil"?
All this is a separate question from "are they evil", which I have no interest in weighing in on here.
It's the positive ones that always catch me by surprise.
Ah, just so. Thank you for pointing that out. Confusion might have arisen!
They're both references to Flatland, actually. They both mention it explicitly, and they're hardly the first two to build off the popular work by reference, so I think "copied" is a bit harsh.
Whoosh. (It's a pun.)
As a particularly geeky product of the public school system, I'm really, really NOT surprised that there was no intervention.
As of this moment, the Japanese tweets are after the "More" link, and all the tweets on the first page of results are Chinese.
Ahh, the fencepost error. I made a fencepost error on the C64 when I was four years old. It was a little different than yours. Mine looked like this:
10 ++++++++++++++++++++++
The fence program didn't do very much, sadly, due to this error ;-(
Not only does it make you sick after a while, but it also made you sick after a while.
I had a Windows box compromised, because I foolishly had Adobe's PDF reader installed, which was up-to-date but had Javascript enabled. (At the time, I had no idea PDFs even had Javascript support. Blecch.) A website served an ad containing a PDF, which popped up Adobe's application. The window closed itself a fraction of a second later, but I saw it, and figured out what happened.
I'd put "uses Adobe Reader" on the list of high-risk activities, to be avoided when at all possible.
Guaranteed invalid? No. ~$ telnet 0.0.0.0 22
Trying 0.0.0.0...
Connected to 0.0.0.0.
Escape character is '^]'.
SSH-1.99-OpenSSH_5.0 NetBSD_Secure_Shell-20080403-hpn13v1
^]cl
telnet> cl
Connection closed.
The C++-style comments aren't the only thing that will prevent it from being compiled as ANSI C--the code being written in C++ might prevent it, as well :-)
Simply: I wonder what they find so hard about writing tests.
Last year I started getting well over 10,000 per day. Panix dealt with it fine, though they did make me fix my configuration invoking Spamassassin twice per message (which was accidental--whoops!). But since that happened, I've changed to discarding all messages marked as spam, rather than skimming the subject lines each day of only 200-300 messages or so for false positives. Sigh.
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply I wouldn't give the movie a chance. I'm just pessimistic--I'm not actually deciding in advance whether I like the movie.
Oh, yes, and attempts to cash in on popular books by writing official fan fiction have produced such amazing works of art in the past--just look at the Dune prequels! *shudders*
What exactly is it about a text mode email client that "makes you wonder"? What do you wonder?