Advertisements that make sound without you clicking to activate it, pop-unders, and ads that move around the screen or animate enough to give regular people seizures are the kind of ads that should be blocked, not stationary ones like you see on legit sites. It takes away what's free and degrades the quality over time due to the cost of maintaining the site, staff, and others. It's no wonder that a lot of sites now have premium services because too many people block ads.
When sites violate their side of the social contract, people no longer respect their own side of the social contract. The first pop-up started the war, every "innovation" in advertising just reinforces the hatred.
There's an add-on-for-add-ons called, I think, HotPlug. It's a bit of code that developers can hide in their browser extensions that replace website ads with user-side cached ads. With the extensions' developers and HotPlug splitting revenue 50/50. The user has no control over HotPlug (other than making sure they don't downloading anything that has the fucking thing.) And obviously it steals revenue from websites (no honour amongst thieves.)
And yet no one sees the obvious. If you can serve ads from the user-side, and it's worth money, let the user have control (and revenue). Let us make money off our own viewing. Let us donate/subscribe to the websites we use. Let us block ads/product/companies we don't like. Instead of going to war against users and making ads more and more intrusive and objectionable, work with the user.
Whereas I'm sick of people bitching about every single fucking April Fool's Day story. You don't like them, we get it already. It's one day. Log off. Go outside.
websites link is real for those who think the whole thing is fake. Sorry pretty sure this isn't an april fools joke
FTFA:"Funding for the collection's digitisation has been procured via an executive order from Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi, who has expressed a strong interest in "protecting our priceless cultural heritage." [...] acount maintenance will be run by adult entertainment magnate Larry Flint."
Great, they're butthurt so they'll reign down with all their terror. And you think the father is the spoiled brat?
I didn't mean they'd do it out of spite. I mean they can't allow a precedent to be set that when they are investigating a complaint, a wealthy owner can say, "Nope", and they have to stop. If you throw lawyers at them, that kills any flexibility they might have had.
A lot of operators are cowboys, and they hate the CAA. But more light aircraft accidents in Australia have come down to company/owner error than pilot error. But if the CAA investigate complaints, they're bastards, if they don't, they're bastards.
(Someone else pointed out they were renamed CASA in the '90s, after an agency reshuffle I think. But both TFS and TFA use CAA, so I've kept using that.)
The dang government is filled with too many control freaks who want to dictate what everyone else can do.
The Civil Aviation Authority received multiple complaints from viewers. They have a statutory requirement to "adequately investigate" complaints. So they asked the Ten network for the entire unedited footage (after all, the broadcast footage was likely edited to make it look more "daring" than it really was, so it wouldn't be fair to the pilot to go off of that), the network refused, the CAA got a search warrant. The father then applied for a court order to seal the footage, and then went whining to the local press like a spoilt little brat.
Note that the CAA hadn't said the pilot did anything wrong. They are just following up on complaints. Everything else has come from the TV network and the father playing legal games. Likely this will end up costing the tax payer a fortune in legal fees. But it didn't have to. In all likelihood it could have gone: CAA asks for footage, network emails video file, CAA investigator spends half an hour going over footage, double checks regulations, licences, etc, and says, "No case to answer". Done. Whole thing could have been over with in an afternoon. But now, the Authority will almost certainly have to follow the absolute strictest letter of the law, just to send a message to other pilots/operators/owners, don't play with us.
But this is kind of my point. If material is, say, classified, then someone has already sat down, looked at it, said "OMG, this is thuper thecret!" and stamped it classified. You've already paid someone to do that. Why didn't you pay them to mark the parts that are secret, so that the rest of the document is publicly available. (Properly designed, the document could be marked up for various levels of release, over time. I'm thinking commercial-in-confidence material on government contracts.)
Even with older paper documents, a one-off Google-books style mass-transfer would be cheaper in the long run than, a) disorganised on-demand piecemeal reviews and b) the loss of efficiency in not having that material widely available within government (and business.) (Seriously, how much work is duplicated, how much lost, by simply not having documents available within agencies, between agencies, between levels of government, by business?)
Material like your private records tend to be of a class, you don't need to review each document, so access can be routine even though restricted. (And some agencies do. It is getting better. But it's so ad hoc.)
Wiki: "The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) [...] was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 4, 1966"
It's not like it's a new concept. Surely after 45 years we shouldn't be seeing FOI laws setting out costs and limits as if someone has to manually review every document requested. If I can get it, it should already be available.
Conspiracy theorists will, like metalmaster below, will say that FOIA helps governments hide material. But experienced FOIA users apparently make multiple requests for the same document, because the convoluted rules mean that the same document must be separately reviewed for each request, and different reviewers will often redact different portions, so by comparing different versions you end up with more than any single reviewer would have granted. Good for freedom, but surely a secret-keeping government would prefer a single redacted version made at the time the document was first created?
I've never really understood Freedom Of Information Act requests. If I'm allowed to request the information, then why isn't it just... available? Why the need for a request?
How about a GOOD ERGONOMIC POINTER DEVICE instead?
How about rapid-prototype customisable body, with a variety of modular pieces that can be fit wherever you want them. 3 buttons, 5, 9, mouse sensors, trackballs, touchpads, whatever combination you want. Extra fee if they assemble it for you.
Geeks only, but still, there's got to be a market for a niche player.
(I've been looking around for a decent replacement for old blinky here, and nothing is precisely right. I want to say, that style, those features, in that body.)
I'm puzzled why this doesn't have a pico-projector. With no physical feedback, seeing what you're touching would make it a much more useful device. Especially after the hardware-hacker community got stuck into it.
For example, even if it isn't accurate/fast enough to replace the mouse, it can add another layer of input that might still result in sales from the first gen device. (Especially if it didn't steal focus from the main screen.)
'Paul Conlin, the proprietor of Blaze Broadband, is not a typical telecom executive. He drives a red pickup and climbs roofs. When customers call tech support, he is the one who answers.
Or to put it another way, if NASA bought flights from SpaceX at the Russian rates, they're essentially saying they can afford to pay $400m for a 7 seat flight, or $190m for a 3 seater.
And there are fucktards in Congress specifically trying to prevent NASA buying commercial crew flights. Why? (I'm from a different country and that offends me. You guys should be setting things on fire.)
FTFA:
"Lastly, why do I support FLAC and not some other good and free format, like WavPack? The main advantage of FLAC is that it's already much more widespread than WavPack and other free lossless codecs and I believe it would be better to standardize on something, rather than have a fragmented lossless market, which could fall pray to some proprietary format that's not as accessible to everyone or is encumbered with DRM."
In a few months, once the influx of foreign rescue workers has abated, you'll see hotel/etc prices plummet. So you should be able to save money. (If that feels machiavellian, remember, you're adding money to a tourist industry that has just been shot in the face. So swing by New Zealand and northern Queensland on your way home.)
((All assuming these nukes don't kablooey.))
(((Headline on local news: "Japan launches monster rescue effort". You know it's bad when even the monsters...)))
Slashdot Mirror
Advertisements that make sound without you clicking to activate it, pop-unders, and ads that move around the screen or animate enough to give regular people seizures are the kind of ads that should be blocked, not stationary ones like you see on legit sites. It takes away what's free and degrades the quality over time due to the cost of maintaining the site, staff, and others. It's no wonder that a lot of sites now have premium services because too many people block ads.
When sites violate their side of the social contract, people no longer respect their own side of the social contract. The first pop-up started the war, every "innovation" in advertising just reinforces the hatred.
There's an add-on-for-add-ons called, I think, HotPlug. It's a bit of code that developers can hide in their browser extensions that replace website ads with user-side cached ads. With the extensions' developers and HotPlug splitting revenue 50/50. The user has no control over HotPlug (other than making sure they don't downloading anything that has the fucking thing.) And obviously it steals revenue from websites (no honour amongst thieves.)
And yet no one sees the obvious. If you can serve ads from the user-side, and it's worth money, let the user have control (and revenue). Let us make money off our own viewing. Let us donate/subscribe to the websites we use. Let us block ads/product/companies we don't like. Instead of going to war against users and making ads more and more intrusive and objectionable, work with the user.
or else I am done reading this site.
Please!
Whereas I'm sick of people bitching about every single fucking April Fool's Day story. You don't like them, we get it already. It's one day. Log off. Go outside.
websites link is real for those who think the whole thing is fake. Sorry pretty sure this isn't an april fools joke
FTFA:"Funding for the collection's digitisation has been procured via an executive order from Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi, who has expressed a strong interest in "protecting our priceless cultural heritage." [...] acount maintenance will be run by adult entertainment magnate Larry Flint."
Sure, skippy. You keep Believing.
They're catholic. It's only funny when it's someone else's religion.
Great, they're butthurt so they'll reign down with all their terror. And you think the father is the spoiled brat?
I didn't mean they'd do it out of spite. I mean they can't allow a precedent to be set that when they are investigating a complaint, a wealthy owner can say, "Nope", and they have to stop. If you throw lawyers at them, that kills any flexibility they might have had.
A lot of operators are cowboys, and they hate the CAA. But more light aircraft accidents in Australia have come down to company/owner error than pilot error. But if the CAA investigate complaints, they're bastards, if they don't, they're bastards.
(Someone else pointed out they were renamed CASA in the '90s, after an agency reshuffle I think. But both TFS and TFA use CAA, so I've kept using that.)
I bet his pals didn't believe him when he got back from his holiday.
He lives in the Northern Territory. His friends would rag on him if he hadn't done something stupid and dangerous.
The dang government is filled with too many control freaks who want to dictate what everyone else can do.
The Civil Aviation Authority received multiple complaints from viewers. They have a statutory requirement to "adequately investigate" complaints. So they asked the Ten network for the entire unedited footage (after all, the broadcast footage was likely edited to make it look more "daring" than it really was, so it wouldn't be fair to the pilot to go off of that), the network refused, the CAA got a search warrant. The father then applied for a court order to seal the footage, and then went whining to the local press like a spoilt little brat.
Note that the CAA hadn't said the pilot did anything wrong. They are just following up on complaints. Everything else has come from the TV network and the father playing legal games. Likely this will end up costing the tax payer a fortune in legal fees. But it didn't have to. In all likelihood it could have gone: CAA asks for footage, network emails video file, CAA investigator spends half an hour going over footage, double checks regulations, licences, etc, and says, "No case to answer". Done. Whole thing could have been over with in an afternoon. But now, the Authority will almost certainly have to follow the absolute strictest letter of the law, just to send a message to other pilots/operators/owners, don't play with us.
But this is kind of my point. If material is, say, classified, then someone has already sat down, looked at it, said "OMG, this is thuper thecret!" and stamped it classified. You've already paid someone to do that. Why didn't you pay them to mark the parts that are secret, so that the rest of the document is publicly available. (Properly designed, the document could be marked up for various levels of release, over time. I'm thinking commercial-in-confidence material on government contracts.)
Even with older paper documents, a one-off Google-books style mass-transfer would be cheaper in the long run than, a) disorganised on-demand piecemeal reviews and b) the loss of efficiency in not having that material widely available within government (and business.) (Seriously, how much work is duplicated, how much lost, by simply not having documents available within agencies, between agencies, between levels of government, by business?)
Material like your private records tend to be of a class, you don't need to review each document, so access can be routine even though restricted. (And some agencies do. It is getting better. But it's so ad hoc.)
Wiki: "The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) [...] was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 4, 1966"
It's not like it's a new concept. Surely after 45 years we shouldn't be seeing FOI laws setting out costs and limits as if someone has to manually review every document requested. If I can get it, it should already be available.
Conspiracy theorists will, like metalmaster below, will say that FOIA helps governments hide material. But experienced FOIA users apparently make multiple requests for the same document, because the convoluted rules mean that the same document must be separately reviewed for each request, and different reviewers will often redact different portions, so by comparing different versions you end up with more than any single reviewer would have granted. Good for freedom, but surely a secret-keeping government would prefer a single redacted version made at the time the document was first created?
I've never really understood Freedom Of Information Act requests. If I'm allowed to request the information, then why isn't it just... available? Why the need for a request?
I'm surprised the equipment, wiring, magnets, etc, haven't been stripped by looters. The amount of copper alone in those buildings...
I know specialist systems (big blue) can beat anyone, but are standard PC-based chess programs really better than players at this level?
(If so, maybe time for everyone to switch to Go?)
How about a GOOD ERGONOMIC POINTER DEVICE instead?
How about rapid-prototype customisable body, with a variety of modular pieces that can be fit wherever you want them. 3 buttons, 5, 9, mouse sensors, trackballs, touchpads, whatever combination you want. Extra fee if they assemble it for you.
Geeks only, but still, there's got to be a market for a niche player.
(I've been looking around for a decent replacement for old blinky here, and nothing is precisely right. I want to say, that style, those features, in that body.)
still result in sales of the first gen device.
FTFM
I'm puzzled why this doesn't have a pico-projector. With no physical feedback, seeing what you're touching would make it a much more useful device. Especially after the hardware-hacker community got stuck into it.
For example, even if it isn't accurate/fast enough to replace the mouse, it can add another layer of input that might still result in sales from the first gen device. (Especially if it didn't steal focus from the main screen.)
Yes, Virginians, there is a Santa Claus.
Ashes to ashes funk to funky
We know major tom's a junky
Strung out on heaven's high
Hitting an all time low
My mama said to get things done
You better not mess with major tom
Airport security?
Drugs, mysterious deaths. I'm thinking Outland. Somebody check the airlocks!
Or to put it another way, if NASA bought flights from SpaceX at the Russian rates, they're essentially saying they can afford to pay $400m for a 7 seat flight, or $190m for a 3 seater.
And there are fucktards in Congress specifically trying to prevent NASA buying commercial crew flights. Why? (I'm from a different country and that offends me. You guys should be setting things on fire.)
The question is why didn't the US.
Wow, that makes me feel so much better about coming here to post a "One Small Step" comment.
Do you mean Ragdoll Cannon?
FTFA: "Lastly, why do I support FLAC and not some other good and free format, like WavPack? The main advantage of FLAC is that it's already much more widespread than WavPack and other free lossless codecs and I believe it would be better to standardize on something, rather than have a fragmented lossless market, which could fall pray to some proprietary format that's not as accessible to everyone or is encumbered with DRM."
In a few months, once the influx of foreign rescue workers has abated, you'll see hotel/etc prices plummet. So you should be able to save money. (If that feels machiavellian, remember, you're adding money to a tourist industry that has just been shot in the face. So swing by New Zealand and northern Queensland on your way home.)
((All assuming these nukes don't kablooey.))
(((Headline on local news: "Japan launches monster rescue effort". You know it's bad when even the monsters...)))