Good ole Slashdot editors. Just as incompetent as ever.
To be honest, this is a new low. Can't remember seeing a misspelling in a headline, particularly of an extremely common 4 letter word that isn't a homonym with anything.
The expected answer means we will have cryptographic security available indefinitely. We may have to keep switching algorithms, but in principle there will always be an algorithm out there that can't be quickly bypassed. Evidence that P = NP (or one is a subset of the other) means all cryptography is doomed to fail.
More seriously, I'm wondering if you could get the patent office to approve such a patent with the explicit goal of embarrassing the office and hopefully getting some of its grant happy officers fired.
...to have a watered down version of Photoshop Elements included as a gateway to the more expensive Photoshop proper. Done correctly it would be a win for both companies and consumers.
Roundabouts take more physical space (about 4 times as much space) than a straight intersection and don't work well for more than a lane per direction. Besides, we could do better than roundabouts - there's also cloverleaf intersections, but those use roughly a full square mile and require a bridge be built. It just isn't practical for every intersection to have them.
It's really quite ridiculous we don't have more of them in the US instead of four-way stops and traffic lights.
It's not ridiculous at all - it's a simple space issue. A round about takes more space than a simple intersection with a traffic light. A cloverleaf intersection is even safer and faster than a round about, but it takes even more space and also requires the building of bridge.
Cities already devote enormous amounts of space to the movement of cars. They can't spare any more, at least in the downtown areas. Using round abouts more frequently in the suburbs would make sense though.
The United States lost any and all of the credibility it had earned over the years when they "elected" Trump and his disgusting evangelical buddies to ruin the country.
My worry is that if I took up the offer to work from home I'd start to hermit. I need the social time and to get out and be among other human beings, otherwise I fear I'd stay single forever.
Just a reminder: the gravity waves (waves resulting from gravity restoring an equilibrium) discussed in the article are different from gravitational waves (wave functions describing gravity itself).
In layman's terms it's the difference between waving at someone, and having a seizure. One is an external phenomena caused by gravity, the other is an internal (sorta) phenomena of gravity.
What kind of data are you displaying where it doesn't matter if you show it as a 10x10 grid (aka, a table of 10 rows and 10 columns) or as a list (aka, a table of 1 column and an infinite number of rows, which in this case I guess would be 100.)?
The context I meant for "data" above was all the data of the page. Navigation elements in headers, footers and asides. Currently these are positioned using floats and they have to be present in the HTML dom in a certain order for this to work. With grids (and to a lesser extent flexbox) the order the information appears in the DOM isn't relevant.
The example you gave of a 10x10 table isn't the same - it's just a table, not a web document that may need to have its data's presentation optimized for several environments. And yeah, you can set elements to display none and/or double send elements and turn on the one you want for a given view context but that's a waste of bandwidth.
I don't see grids replacing tables where tables make sense. Tables don't make sense as a layout grid mechanism. CSS Grids don't make sense as a table replacement either.
Do you earn money for the page you developed in 2000?
That'd be like The Walt Disney Company earning money for short films it produced in 1928. Or like Gershwin Enterprises earning money for a musical piece written in 1924.
Oh wait, those are still the case because of the three-generation copyright regime.
How stupid are you? Seriously. The problems of copyright law are entirely off topic and the mediums could not be more different. There's no legitimate comparison to be drawn here so you're coming off as a prattling moron.
One thing I liked more about Chrome than IE is that it was closer to being standard. It didn't change every version and was almost always backwards compatible with previous versions.
This non-standard CSS Grid Layout, which, may be a great idea, is completely useless unless it is a standard used by all browsers.
If I recall correctly CSS Grid was a Microsoft proposal. It is already in Edge, just disabled by default, and Safari is expected to support it with it's next release this fall. That leaves Firefox, but I'm pretty sure they aren't too far behind. This particular segment of CSS4 has been in the works for nearly 3 years.
"In fact, with Chrome's regular additions and changes, developers have to keep up to ensure they are taking advantage of everything available. "
Uh, no. You don't. The page you developed yesterday (or in 2000) should display just the same if you did it right in the first place. If not it's the browsers fault, not yours for "not keeping up". It's a fucking web browser.
Do you earn money for the page you developed in 2000? Cause trust me, if you are still using table based layouts you are going to have a hard time getting a job, or even avoiding being laughed at during interviews.
Either keep up with the latest techniques, or lose jobs to people who do. This is true in all industries.
Remember 15-20 years ago when we had <table> based layouts? And then they invented CSS because that was such a terrible idea. Then we spend 10 years trying inventing css grid systems (ie bootstrap's grid, 960, etc) to replicate what we used to do with tables until they just finally gave up and made CSS Grid and Flexbox? That was sure fun.
No, not tables, not by a long shot. CSS grid, like CSS in general, decouples presentation rules from the data being presented. So you can take content and display it on a grid on desktop using cssgrid, or as a list on a phone. The order of the columns and rows can be swapped out according to the dimensions of the screen which is impossible with tables.
I've been doing this since 1996, so I'm quite aware of what table based layout involves and its limitation. While there is some passing similarity, the two are very different in what they can be used for.
The table tag itself needs to just become semantic but that's unlikely to happen since all the browsers have to support legacy behaviors associated with the tag.
Mind you, he's wrong about that. If Hillary is elected, she can pardon herself quite legally, and there is ZERO chance of the Senate impeaching her.
The Senate doesn't impeach anyone. The House does. The Senate holds a trial to determine if the impeachment has merit and if it does it removes the offender from office.
It also paves the way for solar satellites to harvest solar power and send it to non-polluting power stations on Earth, which can provide far more energy than is available from fossil fuels or fusion, and far more safely than fission.
Uh, solar power is simply redirected fusion. That is, after all, how the sun works.
It continues to amaze me that people keep repeating this easily proven false talking point. The date/time something is stamped 'classified' is irrelevant!
The constitution has this little clause called ex post facto. Look it up.
Thiis isn't going to stop the clickbait headlines. This will however stop the article structure of having one sentence of content or a picture surrounded by 100 ads on the page with a tiny next page button hidden among a bunch of links to other sites. Frankly, I wish Facebook would simply block sites that structure their pages that way.
99.99% of the time such data is only used in aggregate. There's just too much of it to act on it on a per individual basis. When it does get acted on that way, it's scary, and laws of what is and isn't allowed need to catch up to reality. Nothing you submit to Facebook is private - nothing. Operate under that assumption at all times.
Slashdot Mirror
Good ole Slashdot editors. Just as incompetent as ever.
To be honest, this is a new low. Can't remember seeing a misspelling in a headline, particularly of an extremely common 4 letter word that isn't a homonym with anything.
I guess amend that to "hit by a bus when you are a fly" ?
The expected answer means we will have cryptographic security available indefinitely. We may have to keep switching algorithms, but in principle there will always be an algorithm out there that can't be quickly bypassed. Evidence that P = NP (or one is a subset of the other) means all cryptography is doomed to fail.
Then all of you will owe me big time!
More seriously, I'm wondering if you could get the patent office to approve such a patent with the explicit goal of embarrassing the office and hopefully getting some of its grant happy officers fired.
...to have a watered down version of Photoshop Elements included as a gateway to the more expensive Photoshop proper. Done correctly it would be a win for both companies and consumers.
Roundabouts take more physical space (about 4 times as much space) than a straight intersection and don't work well for more than a lane per direction. Besides, we could do better than roundabouts - there's also cloverleaf intersections, but those use roughly a full square mile and require a bridge be built. It just isn't practical for every intersection to have them.
It's really quite ridiculous we don't have more of them in the US instead of four-way stops and traffic lights.
It's not ridiculous at all - it's a simple space issue. A round about takes more space than a simple intersection with a traffic light. A cloverleaf intersection is even safer and faster than a round about, but it takes even more space and also requires the building of bridge.
Cities already devote enormous amounts of space to the movement of cars. They can't spare any more, at least in the downtown areas. Using round abouts more frequently in the suburbs would make sense though.
Walled-garden Edition. Also rhymes with ME, another colossal MS failure.
The United States lost any and all of the credibility it had earned over the years when they "elected" Trump and his disgusting evangelical buddies to ruin the country.
Fixed that for you.
My worry is that if I took up the offer to work from home I'd start to hermit. I need the social time and to get out and be among other human beings, otherwise I fear I'd stay single forever.
I'm not paying $3500 for $1500 worth of PC.
Seriously.
Just a reminder: the gravity waves (waves resulting from gravity restoring an equilibrium) discussed in the article are different from gravitational waves (wave functions describing gravity itself).
In layman's terms it's the difference between waving at someone, and having a seizure. One is an external phenomena caused by gravity, the other is an internal (sorta) phenomena of gravity.
What kind of data are you displaying where it doesn't matter if you show it as a 10x10 grid (aka, a table of 10 rows and 10 columns) or as a list (aka, a table of 1 column and an infinite number of rows, which in this case I guess would be 100.)?
The context I meant for "data" above was all the data of the page. Navigation elements in headers, footers and asides. Currently these are positioned using floats and they have to be present in the HTML dom in a certain order for this to work. With grids (and to a lesser extent flexbox) the order the information appears in the DOM isn't relevant.
The example you gave of a 10x10 table isn't the same - it's just a table, not a web document that may need to have its data's presentation optimized for several environments. And yeah, you can set elements to display none and/or double send elements and turn on the one you want for a given view context but that's a waste of bandwidth.
I don't see grids replacing tables where tables make sense. Tables don't make sense as a layout grid mechanism. CSS Grids don't make sense as a table replacement either.
Do you earn money for the page you developed in 2000?
That'd be like The Walt Disney Company earning money for short films it produced in 1928. Or like Gershwin Enterprises earning money for a musical piece written in 1924.
Oh wait, those are still the case because of the three-generation copyright regime.
How stupid are you? Seriously. The problems of copyright law are entirely off topic and the mediums could not be more different. There's no legitimate comparison to be drawn here so you're coming off as a prattling moron.
One thing I liked more about Chrome than IE is that it was closer to being standard. It didn't change every version and was almost always backwards compatible with previous versions.
This non-standard CSS Grid Layout, which, may be a great idea, is completely useless unless it is a standard used by all browsers.
If I recall correctly CSS Grid was a Microsoft proposal. It is already in Edge, just disabled by default, and Safari is expected to support it with it's next release this fall. That leaves Firefox, but I'm pretty sure they aren't too far behind. This particular segment of CSS4 has been in the works for nearly 3 years.
"In fact, with Chrome's regular additions and changes, developers have to keep up to ensure they are taking advantage of everything available. "
Uh, no. You don't. The page you developed yesterday (or in 2000) should display just the same if you did it right in the first place. If not it's the browsers fault, not yours for "not keeping up". It's a fucking web browser.
Do you earn money for the page you developed in 2000? Cause trust me, if you are still using table based layouts you are going to have a hard time getting a job, or even avoiding being laughed at during interviews.
Either keep up with the latest techniques, or lose jobs to people who do. This is true in all industries.
Remember 15-20 years ago when we had <table> based layouts? And then they invented CSS because that was such a terrible idea. Then we spend 10 years trying inventing css grid systems (ie bootstrap's grid, 960, etc) to replicate what we used to do with tables until they just finally gave up and made CSS Grid and Flexbox? That was sure fun.
No, not tables, not by a long shot. CSS grid, like CSS in general, decouples presentation rules from the data being presented. So you can take content and display it on a grid on desktop using cssgrid, or as a list on a phone. The order of the columns and rows can be swapped out according to the dimensions of the screen which is impossible with tables.
I've been doing this since 1996, so I'm quite aware of what table based layout involves and its limitation. While there is some passing similarity, the two are very different in what they can be used for.
The table tag itself needs to just become semantic but that's unlikely to happen since all the browsers have to support legacy behaviors associated with the tag.
... can it run Crysis?
The Senate doesn't impeach anyone. The House does. The Senate holds a trial to determine if the impeachment has merit and if it does it removes the offender from office.
Seig Heil!!
It also paves the way for solar satellites to harvest solar power and send it to non-polluting power stations on Earth, which can provide far more energy than is available from fossil fuels or fusion, and far more safely than fission.
Uh, solar power is simply redirected fusion. That is, after all, how the sun works.
The constitution has this little clause called ex post facto. Look it up.
Thiis isn't going to stop the clickbait headlines. This will however stop the article structure of having one sentence of content or a picture surrounded by 100 ads on the page with a tiny next page button hidden among a bunch of links to other sites. Frankly, I wish Facebook would simply block sites that structure their pages that way.
Certainly.
99.99% of the time such data is only used in aggregate. There's just too much of it to act on it on a per individual basis. When it does get acted on that way, it's scary, and laws of what is and isn't allowed need to catch up to reality. Nothing you submit to Facebook is private - nothing. Operate under that assumption at all times.