Yes, sorry I did mean to write moot, my mistake, however your definition of moot is completely wrong! From answers.com:
"...a moot question is one that is arguable or open to debate. But in the mid-19th century people also began to look at the hypothetical side of moot as its essential meaning, and they started to use the word to mean âoeof no significance or relevance.â Thus, a moot point, however debatable, is one that has no practical value."
Where does this knowledge come from? I have been in the UK education system recently, my father is teacher in a state school. I have taken exams set recently, and I have looked at exam papers from various times in the UK education system (part of a little research project I did with a friend) What are your credentials on the matter? Yes, the fundamental needs of our society have not changed (however there is a slight change because of the general move from skilled trades to a more academic work situation) and what has actually happened is our education system has gotten better. Past exam papers did not test a students value to society anywhere near as well as today's exam papers do. Where do you draw the conclusion that the government has purposely lowered the standards of education to artificially raise schools scores in league tables? Not only does it not make sense (I am going to assume that you mean lowering the standard of exams, as I think that is what you meant, for the sake of arguing the point) I would love to see some proof of this if you have it! Otherwise I think it is a giant leap to make.
I hate this sort of test, it is complete bullshit! If you take out a test from 50 years ago it is no mystery as to why children these days don't do so well in them. The curriculum has changed, we do not have stupid rope learning of equations and reciting the periodic table. We have moved on as a nation and have realised that education should prepare people for industry of further education, not just test their cognitive abilities. Therefore we teach different things now, and teach it in a different way, children are not prepared to take exams from the 50's! because they are irrelevant, and pointless! it is a good thing they don't do well in them. Please everybody, stop using dodgy methods to prove a mute point.
Oh come on you cant honestly believe this drivel! Public schools and paying for an education is the quintessential example of what is wrong with the world! It is incredibly unfair! Ignoring all the shit that is fed the poor kids that attend these institutions (I feel I am quite knowledgeable of the subject as I have spent a lot of time around public school pupils, and I am myself a state educated fellow) the strange elitist stuff and the notion that state educated people are "not as valid a member of society as public school educated people" (I am quoting someone I know there, who went to St Paul's). They should not have charitable status! It is plain bollocks that they are a charity. If you compare their salaries to the salaries of state school workers it is ridiculous, people do get very rich from running these institutions. I agree that there is always room for improvement in the education system but the public school system definitely isn't a model to go by!
Well if your going to be like that about it then you could argue that nothing in our world today is an energy source. The suns energy from fusion reactions could be described as an energy source, however you could argue that it was only the big bang forming a load of particles that could fuse that gave that energy. So is the big bang the only energy source? where did it get its energy? All in all,not really worth thinking about, you could do the same for many sources in this world.
that would be a very bad idea. Not only would it be one hell of a challenge, as chrome is a very different application than FF, if they did manage it they would most definitely ruin chrome's biggest advantage: speed and lightweightness.
haha! yes, I know what you mean. However, even if your connection is slow, it still takes time for the browser to render it when its down.
In response to appleprophet, one of the main advantages of chrome is its lightning fast javascript engine, which you don't get with pure safari whatever.
It's called life. That is the stuff you do in life. The whole point in a game is that you can do fun stuff that you cant do in life. The only person who would play this sort of game is one who doesn't have a life of their own.
1 and 3 both effect a wide community of developers. MS wont worry about this too much (and shouldn't) because if they make decisions like that then it would make it almost impossible for MS to progress at all. 2 is a good point, however having it woven into a new release of Windows probably wouldn't be too hard?
I get irritated by people who have the "I don't do politics" outlook. OK, you may not find it interesting, however it effects so much of yours and everybody else's lives, that it is just ridiculous to claim such a thing. OK, you didn't say that in your post, but to everyone, politics is news, and it effects everything which is featured on slashdot. Seeing as politics is so important, and this is the biggest night for 4 years, I think the slashdot admins are perfectly reasonable to have a discussion article about it on the front page, listed under news.
Re:Firefox Damage Control Is More Than Enough
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Dumping Firefox and wwitching to Chrome yesterday had that same feeling of dumping IE years ago.
Here here!!!
That's exactly what I said to my FF hooked acquaintances.
"Going incognito doesn't affect the behaviour of other people, servers or software. Be wary of:
Websites that collect or share information about you
Internet service providers or employers that track the pages that you visit
Malicious software that tracks your keystrokes in exchange for free smileys
Surveillance by secret agents
People standing behind you"
Ok, those last two points are just classic!
How would peole think that going incognito would stop people who are standing behind you from seeing what you are doing?
hahahaha, only a true stereotypical nerd could post this remark. one which has never been in contact with a female, and doesn't understand much of life.
Wow!
Just had a go on it!
That is one slow search engine.
I know it will speed up with less people trying it out, but it cant be getting any where near the traffic of Google, and it is incredibly slow.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, sorry I did mean to write moot, my mistake, however your definition of moot is completely wrong! From answers.com: "...a moot question is one that is arguable or open to debate. But in the mid-19th century people also began to look at the hypothetical side of moot as its essential meaning, and they started to use the word to mean âoeof no significance or relevance.â Thus, a moot point, however debatable, is one that has no practical value." Where does this knowledge come from? I have been in the UK education system recently, my father is teacher in a state school. I have taken exams set recently, and I have looked at exam papers from various times in the UK education system (part of a little research project I did with a friend) What are your credentials on the matter? Yes, the fundamental needs of our society have not changed (however there is a slight change because of the general move from skilled trades to a more academic work situation) and what has actually happened is our education system has gotten better. Past exam papers did not test a students value to society anywhere near as well as today's exam papers do. Where do you draw the conclusion that the government has purposely lowered the standards of education to artificially raise schools scores in league tables? Not only does it not make sense (I am going to assume that you mean lowering the standard of exams, as I think that is what you meant, for the sake of arguing the point) I would love to see some proof of this if you have it! Otherwise I think it is a giant leap to make.
I hate this sort of test, it is complete bullshit! If you take out a test from 50 years ago it is no mystery as to why children these days don't do so well in them. The curriculum has changed, we do not have stupid rope learning of equations and reciting the periodic table. We have moved on as a nation and have realised that education should prepare people for industry of further education, not just test their cognitive abilities. Therefore we teach different things now, and teach it in a different way, children are not prepared to take exams from the 50's! because they are irrelevant, and pointless! it is a good thing they don't do well in them. Please everybody, stop using dodgy methods to prove a mute point.
Oh come on you cant honestly believe this drivel! Public schools and paying for an education is the quintessential example of what is wrong with the world! It is incredibly unfair! Ignoring all the shit that is fed the poor kids that attend these institutions (I feel I am quite knowledgeable of the subject as I have spent a lot of time around public school pupils, and I am myself a state educated fellow) the strange elitist stuff and the notion that state educated people are "not as valid a member of society as public school educated people" (I am quoting someone I know there, who went to St Paul's). They should not have charitable status! It is plain bollocks that they are a charity. If you compare their salaries to the salaries of state school workers it is ridiculous, people do get very rich from running these institutions. I agree that there is always room for improvement in the education system but the public school system definitely isn't a model to go by!
Well if your going to be like that about it then you could argue that nothing in our world today is an energy source. The suns energy from fusion reactions could be described as an energy source, however you could argue that it was only the big bang forming a load of particles that could fuse that gave that energy. So is the big bang the only energy source? where did it get its energy? All in all,not really worth thinking about, you could do the same for many sources in this world.
hmm, unsurprisingly this release didn't work, ill go into the archive when I get time.
hmm, interesting. Anyway to test this in windows along side chrome?
that would be a very bad idea. Not only would it be one hell of a challenge, as chrome is a very different application than FF, if they did manage it they would most definitely ruin chrome's biggest advantage: speed and lightweightness.
"pure safari" ? wtf, why did I write that. I just mean safari.
haha! yes, I know what you mean. However, even if your connection is slow, it still takes time for the browser to render it when its down. In response to appleprophet, one of the main advantages of chrome is its lightning fast javascript engine, which you don't get with pure safari whatever.
Google Docs must have beaten them to this some way back, or does this offer important stuff that Docs doesn't?
It's called life. That is the stuff you do in life. The whole point in a game is that you can do fun stuff that you cant do in life. The only person who would play this sort of game is one who doesn't have a life of their own.
If this does happen, does it mean that we could see IE tab in Linux?
1 and 3 both effect a wide community of developers. MS wont worry about this too much (and shouldn't) because if they make decisions like that then it would make it almost impossible for MS to progress at all. 2 is a good point, however having it woven into a new release of Windows probably wouldn't be too hard?
At least not for a long time. He may say that he is interested, but its not something he or anybody else high up at MS is likely to push.
fair enough.
Did I call him an idiot?
I get irritated by people who have the "I don't do politics" outlook. OK, you may not find it interesting, however it effects so much of yours and everybody else's lives, that it is just ridiculous to claim such a thing. OK, you didn't say that in your post, but to everyone, politics is news, and it effects everything which is featured on slashdot. Seeing as politics is so important, and this is the biggest night for 4 years, I think the slashdot admins are perfectly reasonable to have a discussion article about it on the front page, listed under news.
Dumping Firefox and wwitching to Chrome yesterday had that same feeling of dumping IE years ago.
Here here!!! That's exactly what I said to my FF hooked acquaintances.
wtf?
i like that 3/4 of those points included /.
Its good!
"Going incognito doesn't affect the behaviour of other people, servers or software. Be wary of: Websites that collect or share information about you Internet service providers or employers that track the pages that you visit Malicious software that tracks your keystrokes in exchange for free smileys Surveillance by secret agents People standing behind you" Ok, those last two points are just classic! How would peole think that going incognito would stop people who are standing behind you from seeing what you are doing?
hahahaha, only a true stereotypical nerd could post this remark. one which has never been in contact with a female, and doesn't understand much of life.
Wow! Just had a go on it! That is one slow search engine. I know it will speed up with less people trying it out, but it cant be getting any where near the traffic of Google, and it is incredibly slow.
I don't think my water cooling system will be up for the task of cooling that chip. Yet more expenses!