Actually, he invented it a very long time ago. It's called "Windows". He handed it off to Bill Gates, who proceeded to make millions marketing it before handing it off to that idiot Ballmer. I have no clue on how Ballmer plans to react to the imminent catastrophe; neither does he.
You can just Tools->Options (or Edit->Preferences) and then Privacy tab->Cookies->Keep until I close Firefox. You can then use the exceptions button or even the "site info" dialog box to decide who gets to give you permanent cookies. No extension needed!
What if you run a web server and don't feel like wiping your logs and rebooting four times a year, and don't have the money to: 1)Fix the problems 2)Be concerned about (criminal) hackers since you're not a big business, hence the crackers don't have an incentive to attack you (they could more easily attack/dev/random/corporation)
Define "morality". Now do so in a way equitable to everyone, including these folks. If you do that, maybe we'll listen to you. Until then, you're just saying "my definition of morality sounds good to me, so it must be right!" If you don't see why that's wrongheaded, I'd recommend a position in politics for you.
sheer agony == failure of Acid# tests for a much longer period of time than could possibly be reasonable. See also: crappy interface (the tabs are huge!), imitator (IIRC Opera invented the tab), general slowness, and vendor lock-in by E.E.E. (not Eee).
Fuck professional entertainment. The truth is that the most revenue you can garner from the internet is via unobtrusive (text) ads, and that perfect DRM will NEVER exist without draconian laws (like the DMCA). The "professionals" will either have to make their money at live concerts, or make money selling branded/autographed stuff (T-shirts etc.). OTOH, the indie music scene has been growing for some time now. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with decentralization of entertainment. Then the only people left in the equation are the telcos, and as long as they follow net-neutrality (either by law or by competition), there won't be a problem.
On a sad note, you'll notice that there is very little interest in following this interpretation of constitutional power. I'm afraid that the prevailing view now is that "constitutional" is synonymous with "it's necessary and proper".
Slashdot Mirror
If the patent consists of this it's entirely unremarkable.
Apple has lawyers and money. Does W3C?
Less pedantic comment: Even then you'll have to do a reboot if it applies a kernel update.
I believe there are programs/methods to circumvent that need.
Obama just got elected, remember?
(Don't "whoosh!" me. I did recognize the The Princess Bride reference, I just chose to ignore it)
Nor did he have modern China as an example.
Actually, he invented it a very long time ago. It's called "Windows". He handed it off to Bill Gates, who proceeded to make millions marketing it before handing it off to that idiot Ballmer. I have no clue on how Ballmer plans to react to the imminent catastrophe; neither does he.
The "someone" you mention isn't an AdBlockPlus user.
You can just Tools->Options (or Edit->Preferences) and then Privacy tab->Cookies->Keep until I close Firefox. You can then use the exceptions button or even the "site info" dialog box to decide who gets to give you permanent cookies. No extension needed!
Seconded. NoScript also provides perfect clickjacking protection (but it's open source so don't sue if the author is wrong).
They're forcing a particular .sig? They're changing the email you send?? Who the fuck thought that was a good idea???
What if you run a web server and don't feel like wiping your logs and rebooting four times a year, and don't have the money to: /dev/random/corporation)
1)Fix the problems
2)Be concerned about (criminal) hackers since you're not a big business, hence the crackers don't have an incentive to attack you (they could more easily attack
Woosh!
And I told the truth about it when they asked.
What about your Miranda rights ("you have the right to remain silent...")?
IANAL.
That more or less sums up Wikipedia's reasoning for not censoring anything: If you don't want to see it, don't view its article.
Define "morality". Now do so in a way equitable to everyone, including these folks. If you do that, maybe we'll listen to you. Until then, you're just saying "my definition of morality sounds good to me, so it must be right!" If you don't see why that's wrongheaded, I'd recommend a position in politics for you.
Because primaries are controlled by radicals.
Execs want pricing to make sense to the consumer, even if in reality it's total bullshit.
sheer agony == failure of Acid# tests for a much longer period of time than could possibly be reasonable.
See also: crappy interface (the tabs are huge!), imitator (IIRC Opera invented the tab), general slowness, and vendor lock-in by E.E.E. (not Eee).
Wait... you thought I missed the joke?
Woosh!
Fuck professional entertainment. The truth is that the most revenue you can garner from the internet is via unobtrusive (text) ads, and that perfect DRM will NEVER exist without draconian laws (like the DMCA). The "professionals" will either have to make their money at live concerts, or make money selling branded/autographed stuff (T-shirts etc.).
OTOH, the indie music scene has been growing for some time now. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with decentralization of entertainment. Then the only people left in the equation are the telcos, and as long as they follow net-neutrality (either by law or by competition), there won't be a problem.
[snip]
On a sad note, you'll notice that there is very little interest in following this interpretation of constitutional power. I'm afraid that the prevailing view now is that "constitutional" is synonymous with "it's necessary and proper".
There, fixed that for you.
Of course, although the Ninth amendment says there are other rights, you have the Elastic clause on the other side of the issue. And IANAL.
Actually, you're mistaken.
They're not commonly exercised in the U.S., and IANAL, but I'd say invasion of privacy laws apply here.
Careful about using the term "Wiki"; a lot of people think "Wiki" == "Wikipedia" || "Wiki" == "Wikipedia article".
In other other words, if you use Windows and expect things which need HTML-rendering to be even slightly secure, you're fucked.