It might be a good idea to check that What We Need site against the Unmaintained Projects site. That way, useful but unmaintained projects could be easily identified and reopened, so a little effort is wasted as possible.
It's on a method of implementation. It doesn't matter, for example, whether the cotton gin was made of plastic, wood, or titanium, as long as it works like the patent says it's covered by the patent. On the other hand, if somebody had invented a different way of doing whatever the hell a cotton gin does (spin thread?), that wouldn't be covered.
If you think about it, in the Christian Bible, references like Kings 5:10 (not sure if that one's valid) are a lot like URLs. But the division of Biblical books into smaller sections actually happened kind of late. The Old Testament books specifically did not have that organization at first, and it is sort of arbitrarily applied to the Epistles, too.
But it was one of the most annoying registration screens I've ever used. Evening telephone number??!??
I thought requiring the user's title was classic. Why do they want to know my title, of all things? (It would be Mr., BTW, since I have no other title). The country list was also quite fun: 5 entries for parts of the UK, and "other". And people accuse Americans of being ethnocentric!
...of the attempt to enforce a patent on browser status bars a few years ago? That fell through, and this will, too. We have nothing to fear from this. The government wouldn't dare enforce this, because there's too much money invested in the Internet right now.
Which is a problem, if you think about it. The government will only pay attention to freedoms on the web whule there's money in it. And that's why the economic downturn among the dotcoms is bad (along with the unemployment it will cause, of course). As soon as it doesn't look like the Internet is creating multimillionaires capable of donating large amounts of cash to campaigns, and they can't be accused of stifling business opportunities (the businesses having already stifled themselves, and the opportunities having dried up), Congress will move to establish as much control as possible.
is it just me, or is it a LOT easier to program a GIF decoder
That's what MNG-VLC (Very Low Complexity) is for. It takes out a lot of the complicated features that would be hard to program, like JNG, delta-PNG, and some forms of looping.
Mind you, when the file refuses to load anyway (assuming you're using a decent viewer) or contains incomprehensible garbage, that might be a clue that "hey, something's wrong".
Of course, the signature is there so the decoder can tell that the file is corrupted before it loads the rest of the image. That way, it can abort and not waste bandwidth downloading, or cycles displaying, an image that is obviously screwed up.
You can't click through on TV adds. Banner adds. can still be used as a marketing tool even if the user does not click through. They can do this by creating brand recogition just as in tv.
Exactly. There is no equivalent to clickthrough in TV ads, magazine ads, billboards, etc. Web-based companies have gotten so caught up in the idea of instant gratification that they've forgotten that creating brand recognition requires time no matter what medium you're using.
They have been depending on the equivalent of impulse buying. This which works all right for selling small items like candy bars and tabloids at the supermarket checkout counter, but isn't quite as effective for anything larger.
Who hasn't seen the VA Linux adds on slashdot.
Anyone running an ad blocker, that's who! And there's the point: clickthrough is not a useful statistic, but unique loads (the number of different people who load--and therefore supposedly see--a banner ad) is. Just like how billboards and TV ads work. An advertisement should advertise a product, it shouldn't be thought of as part of the store.
I would not like it but companies could also create a full page add that forwards the user to the actual information. I.e. NY Times you go to the home page click on an article link it takes you to an add. page which then after a few seconds forwards you to the actual article.
This new format will just be another Beta vs. VHS thing, I'm sure of it.
The only thing that will blow the MP3 away is something which has vastly better compression and comparable sound quality. Anything else is doomed to obsolesence.
Even that's not a guarantee. Remember, Beta was actually a superior format to VHS. It was just cheaper.
Fortunately, Vorbis is already cheaper: no royalties required for implementation, and a free-as-in-beer-AND-speech reference implementation.
Well you do make a good point. However I'm wondering if X86 is faster than KDE, or should I just stick with Gnome and not worry about all this new stuff. Also if I switch will it still be compatible with Perl??
Um, I think you're thinking of XFree86. This discussion is about the x86 family of CPUs.
I could not, for instance, distribute binaries that are linked against non-GPL libraries... unless (and this is a big unless) those libraries are a common, standard part of the OS. And this *is* an important point.
You can use GPL software on a Solaris box, where everything is linked against libc... even though libc is proprietary, closed-source Sun code.
It has nothing to do with whether the code is part of the OS or not.
As I understand it, there's nothing in the GPL that prevents the GPL'd program from linking against proprietary libraries. The libraries are not considered a derivative work. However, if a closed-source program links against GPL'd code, such as a GPL'd library (not LGPL'd), that is illegal. The restrictions are one-way.
Not fraud at all. The GPL is just a "General Public License". In fact, the FSF encourages people to use the fully qualified term "GNU GPL" to avoid this exact problem.
Now, if somebody released something under a modified GPL and called it the "GNU GPL", I'd be pretty wary.
Actually, there are quite a few parallels between Mozilla and Emacs (although the ones you list are debatable:) Think about it: both are available for multiple platforms, both are primarily interpreters for well-defined languages (Lisp for Emacs, HTML/XML+JS+CSS for Mozilla), and both natively implement only the most basic functionality specific to their general application space (managing text buffers for Emacs; parsing and laying out HTML/XML, standard communications protocols for Mozilla).
While Mozilla isn't as strict about separating basic functionality and added features, the net result is the same--a powerful applications platform. Just check out Fabula!
No, you don't understand! He's not writing IT as in the acronym for Information Technology, he's writing IT ("it" in all caps) as in the giant pulsating brain that controls the planet Camazotz. He's under IT's control!
Writing Mozilla to use skins takes less code than writing it without. The UI is defined in XML, so it can reuse the XML layout code instead of needing extra code for the UI.
And skin switching is just linking in a stylesheet and forcing a reflow. The difficulty was preserving state in the viewport. This is so switching stylesheets wouldn't reset the scrollbars or form elements, and would have to be programmed in anyways so the same problem wouldn't happen with pages embedded in a webpage through FRAME or OBJECT elements when the parent page is manipulated via the stylesheet DOM.
This isn't bloat here, people.
--- Zardoz has spoken!
Re:What we really *really* need is...
on
Linux BIOS
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
It might be a good idea to check that What We Need site against the Unmaintained Projects site. That way, useful but unmaintained projects could be easily identified and reopened, so a little effort is wasted as possible.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
It's on a method of implementation. It doesn't matter, for example, whether the cotton gin was made of plastic, wood, or titanium, as long as it works like the patent says it's covered by the patent. On the other hand, if somebody had invented a different way of doing whatever the hell a cotton gin does (spin thread?), that wouldn't be covered.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
If you think about it, in the Christian Bible, references like Kings 5:10 (not sure if that one's valid) are a lot like URLs. But the division of Biblical books into smaller sections actually happened kind of late. The Old Testament books specifically did not have that organization at first, and it is sort of arbitrarily applied to the Epistles, too.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
You're sort of right, and sort of wrong. Patents are on ways of implementing ideas. Specific implementations are covered by copyright.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
I thought requiring the user's title was classic. Why do they want to know my title, of all things? (It would be Mr., BTW, since I have no other title). The country list was also quite fun: 5 entries for parts of the UK, and "other". And people accuse Americans of being ethnocentric!
---
Zardoz has spoken!
...of the attempt to enforce a patent on browser status bars a few years ago? That fell through, and this will, too. We have nothing to fear from this. The government wouldn't dare enforce this, because there's too much money invested in the Internet right now.
Which is a problem, if you think about it. The government will only pay attention to freedoms on the web whule there's money in it. And that's why the economic downturn among the dotcoms is bad (along with the unemployment it will cause, of course). As soon as it doesn't look like the Internet is creating multimillionaires capable of donating large amounts of cash to campaigns, and they can't be accused of stifling business opportunities (the businesses having already stifled themselves, and the opportunities having dried up), Congress will move to establish as much control as possible.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
cypherpunk (password: cypherpunk) works.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
The bugzilla report is here.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
That's what MNG-VLC (Very Low Complexity) is for. It takes out a lot of the complicated features that would be hard to program, like JNG, delta-PNG, and some forms of looping.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Of course, the signature is there so the decoder can tell that the file is corrupted before it loads the rest of the image. That way, it can abort and not waste bandwidth downloading, or cycles displaying, an image that is obviously screwed up.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Since when is Photoshop a MS product? There's a reason it's called Adobe Photoshop.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Post a list of links
Hoping for moderation
Just a gigolo
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Exactly. There is no equivalent to clickthrough in TV ads, magazine ads, billboards, etc. Web-based companies have gotten so caught up in the idea of instant gratification that they've forgotten that creating brand recognition requires time no matter what medium you're using.
They have been depending on the equivalent of impulse buying. This which works all right for selling small items like candy bars and tabloids at the supermarket checkout counter, but isn't quite as effective for anything larger.
Anyone running an ad blocker, that's who! And there's the point: clickthrough is not a useful statistic, but unique loads (the number of different people who load--and therefore supposedly see--a banner ad) is. Just like how billboards and TV ads work. An advertisement should advertise a product, it shouldn't be thought of as part of the store.
This would be fairly easy to circumvent.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Even that's not a guarantee. Remember, Beta was actually a superior format to VHS. It was just cheaper.
Fortunately, Vorbis is already cheaper: no royalties required for implementation, and a free-as-in-beer-AND-speech reference implementation.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Why is this still at 0? Moderate it up!
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Um, I think you're thinking of XFree86. This discussion is about the x86 family of CPUs.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
It has nothing to do with whether the code is part of the OS or not.
As I understand it, there's nothing in the GPL that prevents the GPL'd program from linking against proprietary libraries. The libraries are not considered a derivative work. However, if a closed-source program links against GPL'd code, such as a GPL'd library (not LGPL'd), that is illegal. The restrictions are one-way.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Not fraud at all. The GPL is just a "General Public License". In fact, the FSF encourages people to use the fully qualified term "GNU GPL" to avoid this exact problem.
Now, if somebody released something under a modified GPL and called it the "GNU GPL", I'd be pretty wary.
Of course, IANAL.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Actually, there are quite a few parallels between Mozilla and Emacs (although the ones you list are debatable :) Think about it: both are available for multiple platforms, both are primarily interpreters for well-defined languages (Lisp for Emacs, HTML/XML+JS+CSS for Mozilla), and both natively implement only the most basic functionality specific to their general application space (managing text buffers for Emacs; parsing and laying out HTML/XML, standard communications protocols for Mozilla).
While Mozilla isn't as strict about separating basic functionality and added features, the net result is the same--a powerful applications platform. Just check out Fabula!
---
Zardoz has spoken!
No, you don't understand! He's not writing IT as in the acronym for Information Technology, he's writing IT ("it" in all caps) as in the giant pulsating brain that controls the planet Camazotz. He's under IT's control!
---
Zardoz has spoken!
That last one should be:
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Clint Eastwood was the mayor
Do you feel lucky?
There, now it has the correct number of syllables.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Writing Mozilla to use skins takes less code than writing it without. The UI is defined in XML, so it can reuse the XML layout code instead of needing extra code for the UI.
And skin switching is just linking in a stylesheet and forcing a reflow. The difficulty was preserving state in the viewport. This is so switching stylesheets wouldn't reset the scrollbars or form elements, and would have to be programmed in anyways so the same problem wouldn't happen with pages embedded in a webpage through FRAME or OBJECT elements when the parent page is manipulated via the stylesheet DOM.
This isn't bloat here, people.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Yeah, sure, why not?
---
Zardoz has spoken!
You heard it here first
Go to Haiku forum here
You know you want to
Haiku on Slashdot
Popular these last few days
Inevitable
Haiku-only board
As long as five-seven-five
No offtopic mods
---
Zardoz has spoken!
No, that was quite good
And, just because I can...But next time format better
Or the joke is lost
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Home of Clint Eastwood
Do you feel lucky?
---
Zardoz has spoken!