Just another note to say "kudos" for posting these editorials. There are a lot of people who are overjoyed that CmdrTaco is having open discussions with "the common people," so to speak. I think these editorials of yours have the potential to really help out the Slashdot community.
7. The Geekery Times reports a decline in proper anchor texting.
Linking just The Geekery Times implies that it's a link to The Geekery Times' home page, not a story. CmdrTaco's solution, decline in proper anchor texting implies that it's something about a decline in proper anchor texting, but it could just as easily be a link to CNN.com. For example, how would you link:
"NASA reports a decline in space tourists."
What if the link is to NASA's web site? What if it's a link to a blog talking about NASA's report? What if it's a link to CNN.com with a AP story about NASA?
Currently, I think CmdrTaco would just link decline in space tourists in all three scenarios, which IMHO is a little confusing sometimes.
I think most people don't mind dupes, but some people really really really do. The solution is clear: have a way to mark a particular story as a dupe (perhaps a "Dupe" button and if enough readers click the button the story is counted as a dupe), and then in a reader's preferences, have an option that says "Hide all duped stories."
I personally would have it show all duped stories because half the time I didn't see the original. (Or the original was from, say, two years ago.) The "Dupe" button would give all the dupe-hating readers something to do instead of clogging up the discussion with "This is a dupe, lolz cmdrtaco you r teh sux0r!!11" and those who still wanted to participate in the discussion the second time around would be free to do so.
I do think that "Plain Old Text" (as it's called now, where tags are allowed and linebreaks are linebreaks) should be the default for all comments. That at least seems like an easy change.
The book reads like the front page of Slashdot, skipping quickly from topic to topic, though sticking to the general theme, insuring that the reader must never get bored.
How about a free Vi plugin that doesn't suck? (There's only one vi plugin that I know of, it costs money, and it basically sucks.)
If anyone's interested, I'm wanting to write one. I've got the Java skills, but I don't have the Eclipse-plugin-writing skills. Let me know if you can help out.
I use pine + screen for 99% of my email needs. Works great! Long lasting taste satisfaction. (And I have squirrelmail installed for the rare occasion that [a] I'm on a computer that doesn't have ssh, or [b] I want to view an attachment.)
My bad, I think they're all JAR/ZIP files except the Windows one, which is a CAB file. Not like unzip or cabextract is going to get you anywhere regardless:-/
Here's the direct link to the video file, although I still don't know of a Linux player that can handle it
I've done some digging around and unfortunately it looks like:
1) The.viv file is some sort of propriety format 2) There's a Java archive (jar) on the page that is automatically selected for Windows or OS X that has a file extension of.jpeg[1] 3) Inside the Java archive is a Java applet, PlayerApplet.class, that apparently does nothing but act as a proxy for another file inside the class, a DLL file in the Windows version, probably something similar in the Linux version
Indeed. I have some ideas of how to fix the sort of problem that I pointed out here with the linguistics entries, which is to classify a lot of articles currently labeled as "linguistics" with another term: "traditional grammar." However, actually doing that would be a lot of work; and potentially most of it would be thankless maintenance work (i.e., explaining time after time to the latest newcomers why they shouldn't prominently label an article on, say, Contraction as "linguistics."
I just moved "Contraction" to the Grammar category from the Linguistics category. Took me all of about thirty seconds. My guess is that you could go through all of the pages that you feel should be moved thusly in about five minutes or so. A few of them might be moved back, but my guess is that most of them will stay in their new "Grammar" category, and if you care you can discuss the change on the talk pages of the others.
I guess with the vast number of people trying out Wikipedia, some just happen across a thornier part of the Wikipedia pond. It's not all like that. I promise.:-)
I thought WinDirStat looked cool so I checked it out, and lo and behold it's based on a similar Linux (KDE) application: kdirstat. Downloaded it just now... very cool.
This is illegal in the United States... see the mp3.com court case for their "Instant Listening Service". Despite the fact that users owned an actual, physical copy of the CDs in question (not even a lost or damaged copy), it was still seen to be copyright infringement because the copy being made wasn't of the user's copy, it was of mp3.com's copy.
Similar logic applies in your case--since you're not making a copy of your own CD, the courts would likely find it to be illegal and not fair use.
OpenOffice's format is SXW, not OpenDocument. However, with the most recent version of OpenOffice, they have changed to save by default to OpenDocument (.odt) files rather than their native.sxw files. So the idea that OpenDocument is OpenOffice's is, as Tim Bray doesn't seem to want to say, bullshit.
I'd like to do the same thing for Linux but haven't found any good software for entering scores... Noteworthy Composer is the best one I've used for quickly entering scores (keyboard-only input is a must) on Windows, but I haven't found anything similar for Linux. Anyone have suggestions?
"isiZulu" is simply the word for the Zulu language in Zulu itself. Likewise "isiXhosa" is the name for the Xhosa language in Xhosa itself. (The "isi-" is a grammatical prefix that distinguishes the adverb from, say, a Zulu or Xhosa person.)
So it really makes more sense to either say "Zulu and Xhosa" or "isiZulu and isiXhosa". I'd recommend the former, since "isiZulu" and "isiXhosa" aren't really English words.
Very good point, but just FYI, you'll be a lot more credible if you simply point out that "trading music illegally" is, in fact, illegal in the United States. But just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's anything like stealing gin. It's definitely not considered theft under US law. In fact, it's considered a civil (rather than criminal) offense for sufficiently small quantities (whereas if you pilfer even a single bottle of gin, it's likely a criminal offense in whatever country you may hail from).
Just a friendly note to help your real point be heard (namely, that "trading music illegally" is still illegal even if it actually makes the RIAA money). Such a point is a lot harder for the Slashbots to shout down.
How many copies of windows out there are pirated copies, in your opinion?
I assure you that the numbers exceed by a factor of at least 3, the number of legally purchased copies.
That's certainly true, and it undoubtedly helps Microsoft in a lot of ways, but Microsoft makes at least more than token efforts to discourage piracy of Windows--they certainly don't go around encouraging it.
So why should Apple be any different? Marketshare isn't everything. Microsoft has repeatedly said that their biggest competitor is themselves--i.e., previous versions of Windows. Why would Apple want to deliberately flood the market with free copies of their software that they then have to compete against? It would possibly make them the dominant desktop, but would it make them gobs of money? It seems unlikely.
Time to expand - or die.
Apple has been a niche player for decades. People having saying that for years--and still Apple survives as a niche player, and makes a considerable amount of cash doing it. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect they can keep doing it for at least another half dozen years or so.
I'm still not sure of the details, but I think getting a bootable version of OS X into a few millions extra hands per quarter can only be good for the Mac platform.
If OS X doesn't work as flawlessly and beautifully in those "few million extra hands" as it does on proprietary Mac hardware, then that's not only not "good for the Mac platform," it's a serious blow to Apple and OS X's image.
What you're imagining is millions of people experiencing OS X, loving it, and going out and buying expensive Mac boxes. Instant profit for Apple! Right?
Nope. You're far more likely to see one of the following two scenarios:
1) iPod OS X doesn't work nearly as well on commodity Intel boxes as it does on Apple's closed hardware. People use it, see that iPod OS X has many of the same problems that plague Windows, and have no desire to switch operating systems. Apple's image suffers.
2) iPod OS X works nearly as well as "the real thing"; users switch to using it and buy crappy cheap hardware instead of purchasing the entire "Apple experience". Net profit to Apple? Zero.
Even getting #2 is a huge risk for Apple, a nightmare to support, and lots of development dollars. Making that gamble to get nothing but market share seems unlikely at best, ridiculous at worst.
Dlugar
Apple can't give away OS X
on
Has Google Peaked?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The big draw of OS X, and one of the big reasons why it rocks and Windows sucks, is compatibility. Getting device drivers to work, and to work well with each other, is the biggest nightmare to stability and ease of use ever invented.
I can't imagine that these people who continually suggest that Apple get OS X working on commodity Intel boxes have ever really used Macs. Apple doesn't sell a computer--they sell a user experience. Seriously. From the moment you plug the computer in, you're in a little Apple dream world, full of eye candy and "everything works" and stuff that's easy to use. Do you think replicating that experience on commodity Intel boxes is easy, much less even possible? Do you think that Apple would want to risk their image on such an outrageous gamble? Not a chance.
It's better to object to it on the grounds that it will never work. If you want the person to be able to view the content, then they can copy it. Simple as that.
Furthermore, inventing != inventing in a very important sense of the word. Not much of the technology in iPods was very novel or interesting--we'd seen all the technological pieces in other places before. Apple didn't "invent" the iPod in the sense that they came up with some new innovative way to play mp3s, or to fit that much player in such a small size, or even a great user interface. Those things had all been done in other places at other times to varying degrees of success.
What Apple did was create a beautiful device, something that was more of a fashion accessory than a geek toy. That was the revolution; that was what Apple "invented"; and that's why even though you can buy a similar mp3 player with more functionality for less money, iPods remain king. Apple didn't invent any one piece of the technology--they brought together existing technology in a functionally beautiful way, and wrapped it all up in an aesthetically beautiful package.
Properly tab comments Make sure comments are tabbed out to the line they are referencing. Additionally, make sure similar comment types align when tabbed.
Both those who prefer indenting with tabs and those who prefer indenting with spaces tend to agree: use spaces for alignment. Otherwise when somebody with a different tabstop comes along, your comments will be all out of whack.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually meant for everyone, since most people don't know about that posting mode but want to use it. But thanks anyway :)
Ditto. n/t
Just another note to say "kudos" for posting these editorials. There are a lot of people who are overjoyed that CmdrTaco is having open discussions with "the common people," so to speak. I think these editorials of yours have the potential to really help out the Slashdot community.
:)
Thanks!
My "correct" anchoring would be:
7. The Geekery Times reports a decline in proper anchor texting.
Linking just The Geekery Times implies that it's a link to The Geekery Times' home page, not a story. CmdrTaco's solution, decline in proper anchor texting implies that it's something about a decline in proper anchor texting, but it could just as easily be a link to CNN.com. For example, how would you link:
"NASA reports a decline in space tourists."
What if the link is to NASA's web site? What if it's a link to a blog talking about NASA's report? What if it's a link to CNN.com with a AP story about NASA?
Currently, I think CmdrTaco would just link decline in space tourists in all three scenarios, which IMHO is a little confusing sometimes.
Dlugar
I think most people don't mind dupes, but some people really really really do. The solution is clear: have a way to mark a particular story as a dupe (perhaps a "Dupe" button and if enough readers click the button the story is counted as a dupe), and then in a reader's preferences, have an option that says "Hide all duped stories."
I personally would have it show all duped stories because half the time I didn't see the original. (Or the original was from, say, two years ago.) The "Dupe" button would give all the dupe-hating readers something to do instead of clogging up the discussion with "This is a dupe, lolz cmdrtaco you r teh sux0r!!11" and those who still wanted to participate in the discussion the second time around would be free to do so.
I do think that "Plain Old Text" (as it's called now, where tags are allowed and linebreaks are linebreaks) should be the default for all comments. That at least seems like an easy change.
Is this "Desktop" Cold Fusion like the ENIAC is a Desktop PC?
Hahahahaha! Nice one!
How about a free Vi plugin that doesn't suck? (There's only one vi plugin that I know of, it costs money, and it basically sucks.)
If anyone's interested, I'm wanting to write one. I've got the Java skills, but I don't have the Eclipse-plugin-writing skills. Let me know if you can help out.
Dlugar
I use pine + screen for 99% of my email needs. Works great! Long lasting taste satisfaction. (And I have squirrelmail installed for the rare occasion that [a] I'm on a computer that doesn't have ssh, or [b] I want to view an attachment.)
Dlugar
My bad, I think they're all JAR/ZIP files except the Windows one, which is a CAB file. Not like unzip or cabextract is going to get you anywhere regardless :-/
:-)
Oh, and thanks
Dlugar
1) The
2) There's a Java archive (jar) on the page that is automatically selected for Windows or OS X that has a file extension of
3) Inside the Java archive is a Java applet, PlayerApplet.class, that apparently does nothing but act as a proxy for another file inside the class, a DLL file in the Windows version, probably something similar in the Linux version
Looks like we're out of luck.
Dlugar
[1] There are actually four files which you can find here:
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/p
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/p
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/p
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/p
They're each JAR files (which are basically just zip files) so the more enterprising can download them and figure out exactly what they do.
I guess with the vast number of people trying out Wikipedia, some just happen across a thornier part of the Wikipedia pond. It's not all like that. I promise.
Dlugar
I thought WinDirStat looked cool so I checked it out, and lo and behold it's based on a similar Linux (KDE) application: kdirstat. Downloaded it just now ... very cool.
Dlugar
This is illegal in the United States ... see the mp3.com court case for their "Instant Listening Service". Despite the fact that users owned an actual, physical copy of the CDs in question (not even a lost or damaged copy), it was still seen to be copyright infringement because the copy being made wasn't of the user's copy, it was of mp3.com's copy.
Similar logic applies in your case--since you're not making a copy of your own CD, the courts would likely find it to be illegal and not fair use.
Dlugar
OpenOffice's format is SXW, not OpenDocument. However, with the most recent version of OpenOffice, they have changed to save by default to OpenDocument (.odt) files rather than their native .sxw files. So the idea that OpenDocument is OpenOffice's is, as Tim Bray doesn't seem to want to say, bullshit.
Dlugar
I'd like to do the same thing for Linux but haven't found any good software for entering scores ... Noteworthy Composer is the best one I've used for quickly entering scores (keyboard-only input is a must) on Windows, but I haven't found anything similar for Linux. Anyone have suggestions?
Dlugar
"isiZulu" is simply the word for the Zulu language in Zulu itself. Likewise "isiXhosa" is the name for the Xhosa language in Xhosa itself. (The "isi-" is a grammatical prefix that distinguishes the adverb from, say, a Zulu or Xhosa person.)
So it really makes more sense to either say "Zulu and Xhosa" or "isiZulu and isiXhosa". I'd recommend the former, since "isiZulu" and "isiXhosa" aren't really English words.
Dlugar
Very good point, but just FYI, you'll be a lot more credible if you simply point out that "trading music illegally" is, in fact, illegal in the United States. But just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's anything like stealing gin. It's definitely not considered theft under US law. In fact, it's considered a civil (rather than criminal) offense for sufficiently small quantities (whereas if you pilfer even a single bottle of gin, it's likely a criminal offense in whatever country you may hail from).
Just a friendly note to help your real point be heard (namely, that "trading music illegally" is still illegal even if it actually makes the RIAA money). Such a point is a lot harder for the Slashbots to shout down.
Dlugar
So why should Apple be any different? Marketshare isn't everything. Microsoft has repeatedly said that their biggest competitor is themselves--i.e., previous versions of Windows. Why would Apple want to deliberately flood the market with free copies of their software that they then have to compete against? It would possibly make them the dominant desktop, but would it make them gobs of money? It seems unlikely.
Apple has been a niche player for decades. People having saying that for years--and still Apple survives as a niche player, and makes a considerable amount of cash doing it. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect they can keep doing it for at least another half dozen years or so.
Dlugar
What you're imagining is millions of people experiencing OS X, loving it, and going out and buying expensive Mac boxes. Instant profit for Apple! Right?
Nope. You're far more likely to see one of the following two scenarios:
1) iPod OS X doesn't work nearly as well on commodity Intel boxes as it does on Apple's closed hardware. People use it, see that iPod OS X has many of the same problems that plague Windows, and have no desire to switch operating systems. Apple's image suffers.
2) iPod OS X works nearly as well as "the real thing"; users switch to using it and buy crappy cheap hardware instead of purchasing the entire "Apple experience". Net profit to Apple? Zero.
Even getting #2 is a huge risk for Apple, a nightmare to support, and lots of development dollars. Making that gamble to get nothing but market share seems unlikely at best, ridiculous at worst.
Dlugar
The big draw of OS X, and one of the big reasons why it rocks and Windows sucks, is compatibility. Getting device drivers to work, and to work well with each other, is the biggest nightmare to stability and ease of use ever invented.
I can't imagine that these people who continually suggest that Apple get OS X working on commodity Intel boxes have ever really used Macs. Apple doesn't sell a computer--they sell a user experience. Seriously. From the moment you plug the computer in, you're in a little Apple dream world, full of eye candy and "everything works" and stuff that's easy to use. Do you think replicating that experience on commodity Intel boxes is easy, much less even possible? Do you think that Apple would want to risk their image on such an outrageous gamble? Not a chance.
Dlugar
It's better to object to it on the grounds that it will never work. If you want the person to be able to view the content, then they can copy it. Simple as that.
Dlugar
Furthermore, inventing != inventing in a very important sense of the word. Not much of the technology in iPods was very novel or interesting--we'd seen all the technological pieces in other places before. Apple didn't "invent" the iPod in the sense that they came up with some new innovative way to play mp3s, or to fit that much player in such a small size, or even a great user interface. Those things had all been done in other places at other times to varying degrees of success.
What Apple did was create a beautiful device, something that was more of a fashion accessory than a geek toy. That was the revolution; that was what Apple "invented"; and that's why even though you can buy a similar mp3 player with more functionality for less money, iPods remain king. Apple didn't invent any one piece of the technology--they brought together existing technology in a functionally beautiful way, and wrapped it all up in an aesthetically beautiful package.
Dlugar
Dlugar