Some people are natural journalists the way others are natural hackers. They just GOTTA WRITE THE NEWS. They tend to be very good and get VERY pissed off at hack editors and publishers. They've been watching Wikinews with keen interest.
This is why they do nightlys. Whereas compiling Mozilla or Firefox for yourself is extremely laborious, you can use this device to generate crashers, reduce them to test cases, see which nightlys they break and file the bug reports and talkbacks.
This could be the greatest Mozilla stability enhancement tool yet seen!
Wikipedia doesn't object to reuse of its content - that's what open content is for. We do like credit, though, and webster-dictionary.org not only states that the article's from Wikipedia and is available under the GFDL, it links back to the original article.
Fact-index.com not only puts up Wikipedia content with Google ads, it's actually started making substantial financial donations to Wikipedia!
X.org has learnt this the hard way when they encountered the exact problem you describe: Xft wouldn't work properly if the right font stuff wasn't on the server, so adoption was poor; so Xft2 will drop back to blasting a bitmap across if the right extension isn't present on the server.
Remember that Jim Gettys was one of the original designers of X from its inception; he's REALLY BIG on backward compatibility, and wants to still be able to proudly declare that 2004's X clients will still display properly on a 1987 MicroVAX running the same protocol.
"In this experiment, I painted graffiti on the walls of the local school. It's not plain vandalism, though, because I'm blogging about it. It was just to test the response times of the janitorial staff. I suggest you all try what I did to prove it for yourself."
I've heard the buzz around Transgaming about this. The CEO has had a rush of blood to the head and gone control-freak. He actually walks around the office frothing about "PIRATES PIRATES PIRATES!!!@" Many employees are putting their resumes about.
Software creation is not something that can be effectively Taylorised; it's more akin to designing factories than working in one. However, the fallacy that all jobs can be Taylorised into a procedure is popular with bosses who resent what they do not understand. So it'll sell. Microsoft is expert at selling this sort of thing, even when it doesn't work. c.f. the common MCSE.
A full explication of the disaster anyone buying this line of insane bullshit is setting themselves up for is detailed in The Programmer's Stone by Alan G. Carter (and here are the appendices.
Most of that was a severe case of Netscape. They wanted the Bazaar, then ran it like a Cathedral to a great extent. That a browser got out at all is amazing.
I did write a feature request to Gmail saying that there shouldn't be anything I can do with Thunderbird that I can't do with Gmail. The ideal would be for people to use Gmail because they want to, not because they're locked in.
The usual answer is: the articles people care about get a lot of scrutiny; the ones that get no scrutiny, no-one cares about. So the article no-one cares about may have inaccuracies, but since no-one cares it's not much of a problem.
The last time someone even suggested putting ads on Wikipedia, the Spanish-language version promptly forked. So I think the suggestion has already been categorised "worst. ideas. ever."
What tends to happen in an edit war is that either (a) a compromise is approached and the article stabilised (b) someone beats the participants upside the head and locks the article until (a) is achieved. Severely antisocial participants can get banned from editing, though this is avoided as long as possible.
There's the little detail that the Samba guys appear to have a deeper and better understanding of how SMB actually works than anyone left working on it at Microsoft;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I can now see why Kate NEVER EVER emerges from her heavily-armed bunker in Oxfordshire.
Some people are natural journalists the way others are natural hackers. They just GOTTA WRITE THE NEWS. They tend to be very good and get VERY pissed off at hack editors and publishers. They've been watching Wikinews with keen interest.
As long as stupid people use the internet, it will be used stupidly.
1. Get it compiling on your system.
2. See if you can help with a bug that's in the system already (a crasher or even a misrendering).
3. Find the Gecko hackers and pick their brains.
This could be the greatest Mozilla stability enhancement tool yet seen!
Whitby? Right, that's it. We tell the goths and they're meat come October.
If it's with acknowledgement and the GFDL, that's just fine - because Wikipedia is a site that Slashdots itself, and the less users the better ;-)
Fact-index.com not only puts up Wikipedia content with Google ads, it's actually started making substantial financial donations to Wikipedia!
Remember that Jim Gettys was one of the original designers of X from its inception; he's REALLY BIG on backward compatibility, and wants to still be able to proudly declare that 2004's X clients will still display properly on a 1987 MicroVAX running the same protocol.
"In this experiment, I painted graffiti on the walls of the local school. It's not plain vandalism, though, because I'm blogging about it. It was just to test the response times of the janitorial staff. I suggest you all try what I did to prove it for yourself."
I believe that was included in Hamilton 95.
I've heard the buzz around Transgaming about this. The CEO has had a rush of blood to the head and gone control-freak. He actually walks around the office frothing about "PIRATES PIRATES PIRATES!!!@" Many employees are putting their resumes about.
Linux is Microsoft's Vietnam.
A full explication of the disaster anyone buying this line of insane bullshit is setting themselves up for is detailed in The Programmer's Stone by Alan G. Carter (and here are the appendices.
Most of that was a severe case of Netscape. They wanted the Bazaar, then ran it like a Cathedral to a great extent. That a browser got out at all is amazing.
I did write a feature request to Gmail saying that there shouldn't be anything I can do with Thunderbird that I can't do with Gmail. The ideal would be for people to use Gmail because they want to, not because they're locked in.
The usual answer is: the articles people care about get a lot of scrutiny; the ones that get no scrutiny, no-one cares about. So the article no-one cares about may have inaccuracies, but since no-one cares it's not much of a problem.
The last time someone even suggested putting ads on Wikipedia, the Spanish-language version promptly forked. So I think the suggestion has already been categorised "worst. ideas. ever."
What tends to happen in an edit war is that either (a) a compromise is approached and the article stabilised (b) someone beats the participants upside the head and locks the article until (a) is achieved. Severely antisocial participants can get banned from editing, though this is avoided as long as possible.
There are lots of interviews with Jimbo Wales, the guy who pays the bills. I'd like to see some with the MediaWiki admins and developers.
New articles are routinely checked for copyright violation. There's a page that lists all new articles.
Of course, I still hope to see John Peel let loose as a music director. Just for a week.
JWZ wasn't an executive, he was the project technical lead.
There's the little detail that the Samba guys appear to have a deeper and better understanding of how SMB actually works than anyone left working on it at Microsoft ;-)
The BSD TCP/IP stack is quite reusable. Most code isn't.