Can't figure out a way to Private Message, I guess Slashdot doesn't have a system for that. Would be curious if you have any recommended ActionScript reading/reference? Or would the nearest O'Reilly book do? (Yes, I could google, but personal inquiry is the shortest distance to a quality resource; google could give me anything.) Was not aware that ActionScript had those features.
Re:A Flash animation writer wouldn't be far off
on
Adobe's iPhone Hail Mary
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Adobe controls the spec. They keep on adding on new functionality in a way that has to be reverse engineered, so that there is a lag time between when they have developer tools for it and the free software makers have developer tools for it. That has a direct impact on first to market opportunity for new functionality for developers, meaning that the free software version is mostly irrelevant if developers want to stay competitive.
Does that sound possible?
I agree with most of your skepticism of this article.
Sorry, but there's a big difference between an AJAX app and a native app.
Certainly, this is true, but that doesn't mean the technologies of an AJAX app can't be used to develop an app on a native platform. Appcelerator's Titanium is a platform that specifically compiles down javascript, css, and html into an application that can run on the Android or the IPhone, with promises for more platforms on the way. I actually found that to be a glaring omission in this article, though it did throw a bone to Rhomobile's Rhodes framework. I'm sure there are many other types of cross platform mobile frameworks out there though that seek to minimize the amount of relearning that individuals have to do. It sounds like you anticipate Flash taking a similar role.
I often hack into my neighbors microwave and ruin his TV dinners. He tells everyone about it in his tin foil hat but no one believes him. It's only a matter of time before he goes insane...
Re:The guys behind EXTJS are terrible
on
Learning Ext JS
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Mod parent up.
The LGPL debacle was a single instance. Many people put way too much weight on it than necessary - if you look at the entire history of the company, they have been extremely responsive and credible. My company's story shares many commonalities with the above. I have worked with extJS back when it was called yui-ext, so named because it was an set of add ons to the Yahoo User Interface libraries. Jack Slocum was a responsive, dedicated developer back then, and remains so to this day. For a long time he developed widgets in his spare time, and once demand was high enough and he wasn't getting compensated for his time enough he decided to monetize it. As with any business, there are growing pains and mistakes that get made, but to describe the licensing change as a stab in the back is hardly accurate.
As an example of a company crippling its games, I heard Windows 7 will include Micropayments for it's classic games. For instance:
Soltaire, Spider Solitaire, and FreeCell come with only half a deck. 99cents for a full one per game.
Minesweeper has only the small board. 99cents for the medium and large ones each.
Pinball, in an effort to be more true to life, will charge you 50cents per game.
Knowing Microsoft this will probably expanded to other areas of the operating system. Maybe, we can pay 2.00 to have images display on our screens, or 1.00 per hour for use of the windows calculator. Start menu clicks going for 5 cents each for a limited time!
I'm confused how this got modded insightful. Microsoft still has their blacklist, the suggestion is to ADD Google's list. If anything, they suffer from the single point of failure problem now more than if they took the writer's suggestion to add on a backup source.
This post was generally full of speculation, but made me aware that there's a lot more I could be doing to add on protections to my general surfing.
"at any given time, 50,000 predators are on the Internet prowling for children."
In this case, cited by Alberto Gonzalez, who references Dateline as his source. This statistic is incredibly spurious, and everyone here on Slashdot should understand why.
Sex offenders are real, but the debate is particularly muddied by misinformation.
It's an appalling piece of legislation for a number of reasons:
1. It makes forgetting your decryption key/passphrase/whatever illegal. Yes, seriously. The burden of proof is on the accused to show that they can no longer decrypt the data - how the hell do you prove you don't have something?
2. The people who it was originally intended to inconvenience - the real terrorists, if you like - aren't going to be even remotely concerned by it. They know full well that there is a risk they'll be caught and spend time in jail. If it's a choice between "reveal the decryption key, thus providing the police with the only evidence they're likely to find which implicates you and a number of others for so many criminal activities you'll be in prison for 20 years and when you get out you'll get a bullet in the head for the people who you dropped in it" or "keep your mouth shut, go to prison for two years", I wonder which one they'll chose?
The government said today it does not know their fate.
and
GCHQ didn't immediately respond to a request for further information on the convictions. The Home Office said NTAC does not know the outcomes of the notices it approves.
I entirely disagree with your opinion.
I think it is very heroic for them to sue the police department and hold accountable the two buffoons that created a more distressing situation for them. It gives me hope that I myself will not have to deal with a situation in the future because police departments will adopt policies to more strictly protect evidence and prevent these exposures from happening.
[do] something less destructive with it in her name.
You don't think holding inept police department officials accountable is constructive?
I think the tone of the article shows they realized fighting the internet is a losing battle and have given up. While those on Slashdot might know it's a losing battle, a family in a tragic situation unfamiliar with the internet might not be so wise. And who can blame them? Acting on emotions is human. But the article leaves things with this thought:
"In a perfect world, I would push a button and delete every one of the images," says Lesli. In the real world, she finds some comfort in working to change the laws, so that photos of some future family's dead child might stay locked away, leaving only smiling, lively images to remember.
In relation to this, it is amazing to me how many sites are able to set the tone for the conversation without having a forum/comment section on their own site.
Pitchfork Media has some of the most controversial music reviews. I still don't think you can leave a comment directly on their pages. Compare that to NME, where the first review I opened had a comment section.
From the political isle: Instapundit Glenn Reynolds and Matt Drudge's Druge Report. These two pages set the tone for many (not all) conversations in the conservative blogosphere, yet no direct comment section. Same for the conservative magazine National Review. I'm wearing my political beliefs on my sleeve here. I invite someone to post a liberal site sans comments, I can't think of one on the top of my head.
The effect of removing a comment section forces the reader to search out if someone has a counterpoint to your opinion, which while it may not be terribly difficult via google, is something people simply are not accustomed to doing. This has two effects. It protects your reputation, since it is possible that someone reading your page would never know an opposing opinion. As an extension of that, since your reputation is far cleaner than a page with potential detracting comments, your message is securely delivered - whether it is that pitchfork thinks band x is good and they are also sponsoring a music festival featuring band x that you should purchase tickets for (no direct conflict of interest there!), or that you think policy y position is a good one and that you have friends that would benefit if policy y is advanced (Larry Kudlow at NRO here).
It may not necessarily be a mark of cowardice to not have direct comments on your site, but the inclusion of it is definitely a mark of bravery.
It doesn't seem like anyone force him to say March 29. There was a large failure of communication here, and those who oppressed his message of possible disaster are at fault. But he's not entirely in the clear. It's a hard situation when someone yells "Fire in 10 minutes!" and stuff starts burning a week later.
I would like to know if anyone has some translations of his actual predictions and not what Time has translated. It seems incredible to me that a scientist would put so much stake on a particular date. Of course, I can imagine it is hard to find his predictions since they forced him to wipe them out.
A parent asking for advice about filtering software by no means implies that they are not living up to their responsibilities and your entire post presuming such is in bad taste.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear B&N,
Please partner with us.
Sincerely,
Thomas' English Muffins Inc.
Can't figure out a way to Private Message, I guess Slashdot doesn't have a system for that. Would be curious if you have any recommended ActionScript reading/reference? Or would the nearest O'Reilly book do? (Yes, I could google, but personal inquiry is the shortest distance to a quality resource; google could give me anything.) Was not aware that ActionScript had those features.
Adobe controls the spec. They keep on adding on new functionality in a way that has to be reverse engineered, so that there is a lag time between when they have developer tools for it and the free software makers have developer tools for it. That has a direct impact on first to market opportunity for new functionality for developers, meaning that the free software version is mostly irrelevant if developers want to stay competitive. Does that sound possible?
Certainly, this is true, but that doesn't mean the technologies of an AJAX app can't be used to develop an app on a native platform. Appcelerator's Titanium is a platform that specifically compiles down javascript, css, and html into an application that can run on the Android or the IPhone, with promises for more platforms on the way. I actually found that to be a glaring omission in this article, though it did throw a bone to Rhomobile's Rhodes framework. I'm sure there are many other types of cross platform mobile frameworks out there though that seek to minimize the amount of relearning that individuals have to do. It sounds like you anticipate Flash taking a similar role.
Fixed it for you. :-)
I often hack into my neighbors microwave and ruin his TV dinners. He tells everyone about it in his tin foil hat but no one believes him. It's only a matter of time before he goes insane...
Mod parent up.
The LGPL debacle was a single instance. Many people put way too much weight on it than necessary - if you look at the entire history of the company, they have been extremely responsive and credible. My company's story shares many commonalities with the above. I have worked with extJS back when it was called yui-ext, so named because it was an set of add ons to the Yahoo User Interface libraries. Jack Slocum was a responsive, dedicated developer back then, and remains so to this day. For a long time he developed widgets in his spare time, and once demand was high enough and he wasn't getting compensated for his time enough he decided to monetize it. As with any business, there are growing pains and mistakes that get made, but to describe the licensing change as a stab in the back is hardly accurate.
As an example of a company crippling its games, I heard Windows 7 will include Micropayments for it's classic games. For instance:
Soltaire, Spider Solitaire, and FreeCell come with only half a deck. 99cents for a full one per game.
Minesweeper has only the small board. 99cents for the medium and large ones each.
Pinball, in an effort to be more true to life, will charge you 50cents per game.
Knowing Microsoft this will probably expanded to other areas of the operating system. Maybe, we can pay 2.00 to have images display on our screens, or 1.00 per hour for use of the windows calculator. Start menu clicks going for 5 cents each for a limited time!
Fnacy Nmae.
Of course, they could exist on wikipedia if you'd like!
I really want Kingdom Hearts 3 or Marvel Vs. Capcom Vs. Disney Vs. Square/Enix to have Wolverine, Cloud, Mickey, and Mega Man.
I'm confused how this got modded insightful. Microsoft still has their blacklist, the suggestion is to ADD Google's list. If anything, they suffer from the single point of failure problem now more than if they took the writer's suggestion to add on a backup source.
This post was generally full of speculation, but made me aware that there's a lot more I could be doing to add on protections to my general surfing.
In this case, cited by Alberto Gonzalez, who references Dateline as his source. This statistic is incredibly spurious, and everyone here on Slashdot should understand why.
Sex offenders are real, but the debate is particularly muddied by misinformation.
If that's true, then let's run an experiment. I'll completely copy a comment that got +5 insightful on the other thread.
It's an appalling piece of legislation for a number of reasons:
1. It makes forgetting your decryption key/passphrase/whatever illegal. Yes, seriously. The burden of proof is on the accused to show that they can no longer decrypt the data - how the hell do you prove you don't have something?
2. The people who it was originally intended to inconvenience - the real terrorists, if you like - aren't going to be even remotely concerned by it. They know full well that there is a risk they'll be caught and spend time in jail. If it's a choice between "reveal the decryption key, thus providing the police with the only evidence they're likely to find which implicates you and a number of others for so many criminal activities you'll be in prison for 20 years and when you get out you'll get a bullet in the head for the people who you dropped in it" or "keep your mouth shut, go to prison for two years", I wonder which one they'll chose?
and
Funny that the google search for "left hand doesn't kknow what the right hand is doing" returns a .co.uk site.
Take them to kdawson and force him to explain why I can't tag this !story since it is clearly NOT a STORY.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=This
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Subject:Computing Add another AskSlashdot to the pile that's 30 min of google research time.
I already have enough trouble shooting the monkey in 2d. I'll never win that free IPod now.
I respectfully disagree.
You don't think holding inept police department officials accountable is constructive? I think the tone of the article shows they realized fighting the internet is a losing battle and have given up. While those on Slashdot might know it's a losing battle, a family in a tragic situation unfamiliar with the internet might not be so wise. And who can blame them? Acting on emotions is human. But the article leaves things with this thought:
Thank you Catsouras family.
In relation to this, it is amazing to me how many sites are able to set the tone for the conversation without having a forum/comment section on their own site.
Pitchfork Media has some of the most controversial music reviews. I still don't think you can leave a comment directly on their pages. Compare that to NME, where the first review I opened had a comment section.
From the political isle: Instapundit Glenn Reynolds and Matt Drudge's Druge Report. These two pages set the tone for many (not all) conversations in the conservative blogosphere, yet no direct comment section. Same for the conservative magazine National Review. I'm wearing my political beliefs on my sleeve here. I invite someone to post a liberal site sans comments, I can't think of one on the top of my head.
The effect of removing a comment section forces the reader to search out if someone has a counterpoint to your opinion, which while it may not be terribly difficult via google, is something people simply are not accustomed to doing. This has two effects. It protects your reputation, since it is possible that someone reading your page would never know an opposing opinion. As an extension of that, since your reputation is far cleaner than a page with potential detracting comments, your message is securely delivered - whether it is that pitchfork thinks band x is good and they are also sponsoring a music festival featuring band x that you should purchase tickets for (no direct conflict of interest there!), or that you think policy y position is a good one and that you have friends that would benefit if policy y is advanced (Larry Kudlow at NRO here).
It may not necessarily be a mark of cowardice to not have direct comments on your site, but the inclusion of it is definitely a mark of bravery.
It doesn't seem like anyone force him to say March 29. There was a large failure of communication here, and those who oppressed his message of possible disaster are at fault. But he's not entirely in the clear. It's a hard situation when someone yells "Fire in 10 minutes!" and stuff starts burning a week later.
I would like to know if anyone has some translations of his actual predictions and not what Time has translated. It seems incredible to me that a scientist would put so much stake on a particular date. Of course, I can imagine it is hard to find his predictions since they forced him to wipe them out.
A parent asking for advice about filtering software by no means implies that they are not living up to their responsibilities and your entire post presuming such is in bad taste.
Didn't they show a child could hack the machines? That's probably where that came from.
mod parent up. used everywhere.
From a loudspeaker next to the camera: "IGNORE ME! IGNORE ME! IGNORE ME! "
Fixed it for you.