Just imagine a world where a PC's computer hardware had the same range checking and memory security as what is done in Java and C# today. That would completely kick ass.
With the amount of memory that is out there today, you could have really giant LDTs...
On the surface one would think that increased relations between two dictatorships would result in less freedom for both peoples. But instead, contacts with the Chinese have benefited dissident groups in both countries immensely.
This leads to some interesting ideas. Maybe when these dictators have their lovefests, we might encourage them rather than discourage them, as, it does force those countries to open up to at least -somebody-. Thus, putting and keeping pressure on the likes of Iran and Venezuala while actively encouraging democracies underneath seems to remain a good foreign policy.
Then, in the case of Iran, if it is dissidents were talking about, and democracy that we support...
WHY THE HELL DOESN'T THE USA HAVE WIRELESS HOTSPOTS RUNNING FREE ON THE IRANIAN BORDER? IN FACT, WHY AREN'T WE COVERTLY RUNNING OUR OWN INTERNET INTO IRAN?
(well maybe we are and the whole Falun Gong thing is a cover story)
but if not.
We paid for freedom in the middle east with 5000 lives and billions of dollars. I would think that if there are groups in Iran yearning to breath free, then, here is a clear example of where the USA should support them.
We should just be sending truckloads of internet satellite modems across the border to Iran.
The left is aghast at federal firms monitoring conversations... but the same left would have absolutely no problem with forcing vehicle inspections, requiring employers and banks to hand your income to the federal government, beating the heck out of the swiss to allow access into foreign bank accounts, tracking the flow of carbon to monitor everything we burn, allowing uav overflights to monitor co2 emissions, all in the name of saving the planet and ensuring businessman pay their taxes and the planet is safe.
Conversely, the right wing could do without any of this. Keep the census as just a count, screw all the forms and taxes and filings and inspections you have to do the government. Compared to that, having your phone listened to is a lot easier. Government reporting is so intrusive and so heavy handed any more that if the government just said, let's just read your email and you don't have to fill out any more forms with us, it would be a GODSEND to 90% of the people who actually run businesses.
The biggest joke is that, we talk about all the intrusiveness of wiretaps, but look at all the forms we are REQUIRED to fill out to the IRS, the Commerce Dept, the local Depts of Transportation, and more, not to mention the Census - and the thing is, all of this data, regardless of party, is going to be a politicized fraud anyway.
Weighed against that, I think it is reasonable that for some people, who are already caught up supplying the government with a bunch of information, to wonder why not just go and wiretap everyone if it nabs a few terrorists. The government is way beyond spying, on us, in reality, it is forcing us to turn over mountains of information to it already. Spying is chump change compared to what we already do.
If you really want to get government out of monitoring you, then lets get rid of all the OTHER forms and inspections the government makes you do.
Actually, one could make the argument that we do not have enough segments. Were there more segments available within an application, you could have theoretically eliminated some sorts of attacks caused by buffer overruns.
Looking back at the time, going from segments to flat was a godsend. However, going from segments to selectors would have been probably better from a security standpoint, although computers would be slower.
I would make the argument that if you were going to pick an Intel CPU, that "shook the world", it would be the 80386 more than the 8088. Dubbed, the mainframe on the chip, it more or less lived up to its hype. Following in the wake of the 80386 came Linux and Windows NT... essentially server operating systems running on a desktop.
The 8088, conversely, was just another personal computer chip. It had some advantages but didn't really change the sorts of operating systems you could make with it. Atari, Apple and IBM DOS's were all single program, single user.
The reason was hardware. It was the 80386 that made it possible to do mainframe type things on a PC.
1) It had access to theoretically gobs of memory, introduced a flat memory model that eliminated once and for all the need to worry about 64k boundaries (this was even an issue with the 68000 - performance reasons),
2) all allowed for hardware based memory protection so that applications wouldn't trounce each other.
Yes, because when your world is falling down, it's simple to shield the kids from seeing it
It's funny but father was in sales, and just also brought up to be a man's man and be supremely confident, nothing can go wrong, a role which played pretty well, and I don't remember ever being afraid as long as my Dad was around. Vietnam, Nixon's resignation, the terrible recession of the late 1970s... my old man would figure a way out and do it with a smile.
Turns out, that as I get older, I find out that my Dad pretty much thought the sky was falling all the time, but just kinda kept it from us because he had such a sense of duty. That he was in sales, was that, he could actually do it.
But it makes me think that, teaching young men to just portray supreme confidence, to be Jim Kirks and not Lee Adamas could probably have a huge difference on how children are raised. It's almost like you have to practice being a "man's man", just to raise your kids.
If you really, really, wanted to piss somebody off, they should remake the Edith Keeler episode as a feature film, but change it in some way as to really just make Harlan Ellison flip out. Have his "great work" get butchered by TWO generations of film-makers, now that would be priceless.
There are some things children are just NOT ready for, and watching 3000 people get killed is one of them. The best you could do is desensitize them to killing.
Right now, that book would be something helpful, but five years down the road, every cool kid will be laughing at this book and at 9/11. "Something scary happened"... will become a mockery.
I mean, if you're not going to remove a "usability hit" to your pages, why even have pages? It seems pointless.
Oh, look at you coming at me with all that logic! That's a good point. I made the "random text blocks" fixed size so that stuff doesn't move all over the place as they change. That fixes the usability of the links - don't move out from under you. Although, there's still the text changing.
Thanks for the super feedback. Yeah, Javascript being disabled is going to be a problem. I kinda lean towards Javascript because I could theoretically port it all over to another server technology at some point and its more active. I mean, just imagine SaveTheEarth with a ton of postbacks. The text on the index page is changing on its own accord... I was looking for the text based visual equivalent of a newscaster jerking his head and making random movements to try and keep your attention. A lot of people hate it though. Might do it differently, or, maybe get rid of it.
If its a troll, its a troll to the right wing. But, from the slashdot effect, it's just incredibly stupid short sightedness at my part. I didn't think through the response when I posted to slashdot. I was just focused on "firefox == good, ie == bad", because MS is just dragging its feet on the browser front.
Still, I have to say that the feedback posters have given about this or that feature sucks has been utterly tremendous. I'm deeply grateful to all the people that took the time to post links to the site as it looked on Macs or in different resolutions or different settings from what I have.
But, to get back to the troll thing, to some extent, contentwise, the Treatyist sorta lampoons the "hard hitting" political web site - with all the socialist occupation stuff, but, it actually tries to take an objective view in the guts of it. It's like, you read the National Review, and President Obama is a baby eating anti-christ. But, if you read the Nation, he's a child hugging friend of man and dolphin a like. And this is not based on what the man has done or not done, or even what he's done versus promised, but, based on the idea that he's a liberal versus a conservative.
So in the teeth of that, we can aggregate real numbers now, and compare those to plans, and see how a President is -really- doing. You can be a right winger and not think what he does will work, but, if President Obama and his Democrats actually reduce the trade deficit, shave unemployment, boost GDP, pretty much, the "company of the USA" profitable, then you have to say that it worked. Or not worked. Punditrocacy is unaccountable because it never holds consistent standards and that's what I want to change. But probably I won't get any hits at all.
It's like even with the carbon calculator, the animating thing there is the realism. My biggest worry is that it doesn't actually consider the economic effects of switching - it just the costs go up and assumes that people will come up with all of this money, but it doesn't actually look at , ok, people can't afford it, so they stop using a thing, driving up costs for everyone else as the capital costs remain fixed owing to complexity.
So I do all of that and I'm on a right wing site and someone posts back that, there's -nothing- man could ever do to screw up the planet, and I say, "well, what number does that mean"... like, does that mean you disagree with the tons of air in the atmosphere, tons of CO2, if so how many tons do you think people could put into the air... you just get no answer back. And similarly, on the other end, there's the lefties that think in all cases that efficiency will be better... but, that means numbers too, it means that they hope a complexity cost exponent of efficiency will be lower than the increasing price of fuel so that savings can be achieved.
It's just like, we live in a sea of absolutes, on both sides, and the world is just not that way. So, to answer that, is the treatyist, basically, designed to be radically moderate. I was thinking that I might even have a RHINO logo to represent RINOS... to get that point across.
I wasn't -forced- to use an MS product, but I am more familiar with asp.net. Really, I just wanted to see how the asp.net GridView does in the "real world".. not just the corporate stuff I shovel out for a living. On the flipside, just because KDE 4.0 totally sucked doesn't mean that I should just give on KDE 4.1... indeed, as bad as Ubuntu 8 with KDE 4.0 was, Ubuntu 9 with KDE 4.1 is rather nice, so much so that I'm liking Vista more.
This is super feedback. Um, the ad thing on Google is because of a right aligned div competing with a left aligned block... really just need to have the whole flow go which way.
I'm still going to be a snob about IE, but fix up the bugs from the feedback I get.
The random text takes a usability hit... but I kinda like it. That will stay until more complain about it. Probably what I might do is keep the injected text a consistent width with sort of a fill in the blank look so that the positions of elements remain constant.
Thanks for looking at that on the Mac. The feedback is super. Yeah... I screwed up the scroll bar logic at low resolutions by trying to do something fancy.
I have a center - right web site http://www.treatyist.com./ Most of the left leaning folks on slashdot would probably puke at it but every web developer would like this: I block IE from using the site and redirect people to a page exhorting users to upgrade to a new browser. On that page I have links to download either Google Chrome or Firefox.
I did this because of all the CSS3 items available in Chrome (webkit) and FireFox (mozilla), like rounded corners, box shadows, and multicolumn text....and honestly, I don't use IE enough when developing to even know if the site is going to work.
I get like a trickle of hits, as I have no idea what I'm doing as far as advertising myself goes. But, I can tell how many people are getting bounced because of IE by looking at my stats for the block page and it seems more like only about a 1/3 of my hits are actually getting the IE bounce, rather than the 3/4s, if we were to believe the IE stats. I think this is an ok loss because it means I don't have to worry about IE stupid stuff, and, better still, I can start to roll out content using SVG.
I just wanted to share this because I would like to see Microsoft get on the stick. While we may love or hate Obama, we can at least all agree that IE sucks, and I'm hoping that I can convince other web site developers to block IE and redirect to a download page that explains why, and recommends users to move to FireFox or Chrome.
I'll see if I can't add a public stats page online so that everyone can see the stats for the site, and see how this IE blocking experiment works.
Is that, they pretty much confiscate 95% of the money, give 5% to the people, and preach how much they love the common man as they decide which of 2000 army uniforms to wear in a day. How shocking, that, whenever you have a permanent class that decides how money is allocated, that they should allocate it to themselves.
Not to worry though, when their economies die from their own kleptocracy, they blame it on the USA, and, President Obama flies down for an apology, having wrapped up his own uh, stimulus package...
Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Iraq[2], Kosovo, Afghanistan, the Confederate States. I WIN! W00t!
Um, only if you ignore history. In Korea and Iraq, the other guys fired the first shot. Iraq 2 would not have happened had we not been involved in Iraq 1.
No, seriously, Next time, elect a president that isn't so desperate to enter a war that he's craving to 'employ' the millions of Americans he put in the street with his insane economic policies, so they can be shot and blown up in foxholes. That way he can't take every step to make sure they attack you and he gets his excuse.
Well, that's stupid. The only thing insane about Bush's economic policies was that he foolishly thought that free trade would engender good will around the world. He's like the Jimmy Carter of trade, just optimistic but ultimately dumb.
The USA will not get its act together until it kicks out foreign products, and gets out of most of the alliances it is in. Let everyone get the bomb, then duck behind national missile defense and let the rest of the world blow itself up.
Slashdot Mirror
Just imagine a world where a PC's computer hardware had the same range checking and memory security as what is done in Java and C# today. That would completely kick ass.
With the amount of memory that is out there today, you could have really giant LDTs...
On the surface one would think that increased relations between two dictatorships would result in less freedom for both peoples. But instead, contacts with the Chinese have benefited dissident groups in both countries immensely.
This leads to some interesting ideas. Maybe when these dictators have their lovefests, we might encourage them rather than discourage them, as, it does force those countries to open up to at least -somebody-. Thus, putting and keeping pressure on the likes of Iran and Venezuala while actively encouraging democracies underneath seems to remain a good foreign policy.
Then, in the case of Iran, if it is dissidents were talking about, and democracy that we support...
WHY THE HELL DOESN'T THE USA HAVE WIRELESS HOTSPOTS RUNNING FREE ON THE IRANIAN BORDER? IN FACT, WHY AREN'T WE COVERTLY RUNNING OUR OWN INTERNET INTO IRAN?
(well maybe we are and the whole Falun Gong thing is a cover story)
but if not.
We paid for freedom in the middle east with 5000 lives and billions of dollars. I would think that if there are groups in Iran yearning to breath free, then, here is a clear example of where the USA should support them.
We should just be sending truckloads of internet satellite modems across the border to Iran.
The left is aghast at federal firms monitoring conversations... but the same left would have absolutely no problem with forcing vehicle inspections, requiring employers and banks to hand your income to the federal government, beating the heck out of the swiss to allow access into foreign bank accounts, tracking the flow of carbon to monitor everything we burn, allowing uav overflights to monitor co2 emissions, all in the name of saving the planet and ensuring businessman pay their taxes and the planet is safe.
Conversely, the right wing could do without any of this. Keep the census as just a count, screw all the forms and taxes and filings and inspections you have to do the government. Compared to that, having your phone listened to is a lot easier. Government reporting is so intrusive and so heavy handed any more that if the government just said, let's just read your email and you don't have to fill out any more forms with us, it would be a GODSEND to 90% of the people who actually run businesses.
The biggest joke is that, we talk about all the intrusiveness of wiretaps, but look at all the forms we are REQUIRED to fill out to the IRS, the Commerce Dept, the local Depts of Transportation, and more, not to mention the Census - and the thing is, all of this data, regardless of party, is going to be a politicized fraud anyway.
Weighed against that, I think it is reasonable that for some people, who are already caught up supplying the government with a bunch of information, to wonder why not just go and wiretap everyone if it nabs a few terrorists. The government is way beyond spying, on us, in reality, it is forcing us to turn over mountains of information to it already. Spying is chump change compared to what we already do.
If you really want to get government out of monitoring you, then lets get rid of all the OTHER forms and inspections the government makes you do.
Actually, one could make the argument that we do not have enough segments. Were there more segments available within an application, you could have theoretically eliminated some sorts of attacks caused by buffer overruns.
Looking back at the time, going from segments to flat was a godsend. However, going from segments to selectors would have been probably better from a security standpoint, although computers would be slower.
I would make the argument that if you were going to pick an Intel CPU, that "shook the world", it would be the 80386 more than the 8088. Dubbed, the mainframe on the chip, it more or less lived up to its hype. Following in the wake of the 80386 came Linux and Windows NT... essentially server operating systems running on a desktop.
The 8088, conversely, was just another personal computer chip. It had some advantages but didn't really change the sorts of operating systems you could make with it. Atari, Apple and IBM DOS's were all single program, single user.
The reason was hardware. It was the 80386 that made it possible to do mainframe type things on a PC.
1) It had access to theoretically gobs of memory, introduced a flat memory model that eliminated once and for all the need to worry about 64k boundaries (this was even an issue with the 68000 - performance reasons),
2) all allowed for hardware based memory protection so that applications wouldn't trounce each other.
3) provided hardware support for virtual memory.
Yes, because when your world is falling down, it's simple to shield the kids from seeing it
It's funny but father was in sales, and just also brought up to be a man's man and be supremely confident, nothing can go wrong, a role which played pretty well, and I don't remember ever being afraid as long as my Dad was around. Vietnam, Nixon's resignation, the terrible recession of the late 1970s... my old man would figure a way out and do it with a smile.
Turns out, that as I get older, I find out that my Dad pretty much thought the sky was falling all the time, but just kinda kept it from us because he had such a sense of duty. That he was in sales, was that, he could actually do it.
But it makes me think that, teaching young men to just portray supreme confidence, to be Jim Kirks and not Lee Adamas could probably have a huge difference on how children are raised. It's almost like you have to practice being a "man's man", just to raise your kids.
"Once More Unto the Breach" is actually one of my favorite DS9 episodes. Colicos was magnificent in that role.
If you really, really, wanted to piss somebody off, they should remake the Edith Keeler episode as a feature film, but change it in some way as to really just make Harlan Ellison flip out. Have his "great work" get butchered by TWO generations of film-makers, now that would be priceless.
See I really liked the Klingons in TOS and thought they sucked ever since.
I remember watching the Star Trek TMP in the movies, and I was like "w.t.f did they do with the Klingons"..
In fact, I do believe that one of the Klingons in the TOS was actually John Colicos. He spoke Melodrama, not Klingon.
Hope this helps for your feedback.
Immensely, thank you.
There are some things children are just NOT ready for, and watching 3000 people get killed is one of them. The best you could do is desensitize them to killing.
Right now, that book would be something helpful, but five years down the road, every cool kid will be laughing at this book and at 9/11. "Something scary happened"... will become a mockery.
Friends Of Dvorak.
I think the Internet has been doomed since even ARPANET.
I mean, if you're not going to remove a "usability hit" to your pages, why even have pages? It seems pointless.
Oh, look at you coming at me with all that logic! That's a good point. I made the "random text blocks" fixed size so that stuff doesn't move all over the place as they change. That fixes the usability of the links - don't move out from under you. Although, there's still the text changing.
Thanks for the super feedback. Yeah, Javascript being disabled is going to be a problem. I kinda lean towards Javascript because I could theoretically port it all over to another server technology at some point and its more active. I mean, just imagine SaveTheEarth with a ton of postbacks. The text on the index page is changing on its own accord... I was looking for the text based visual equivalent of a newscaster jerking his head and making random movements to try and keep your attention. A lot of people hate it though. Might do it differently, or, maybe get rid of it.
If its a troll, its a troll to the right wing. But, from the slashdot effect, it's just incredibly stupid short sightedness at my part. I didn't think through the response when I posted to slashdot. I was just focused on "firefox == good, ie == bad", because MS is just dragging its feet on the browser front.
Still, I have to say that the feedback posters have given about this or that feature sucks has been utterly tremendous. I'm deeply grateful to all the people that took the time to post links to the site as it looked on Macs or in different resolutions or different settings from what I have.
But, to get back to the troll thing, to some extent, contentwise, the Treatyist sorta lampoons the "hard hitting" political web site - with all the socialist occupation stuff, but, it actually tries to take an objective view in the guts of it. It's like, you read the National Review, and President Obama is a baby eating anti-christ. But, if you read the Nation, he's a child hugging friend of man and dolphin a like. And this is not based on what the man has done or not done, or even what he's done versus promised, but, based on the idea that he's a liberal versus a conservative.
So in the teeth of that, we can aggregate real numbers now, and compare those to plans, and see how a President is -really- doing. You can be a right winger and not think what he does will work, but, if President Obama and his Democrats actually reduce the trade deficit, shave unemployment, boost GDP, pretty much, the "company of the USA" profitable, then you have to say that it worked. Or not worked. Punditrocacy is unaccountable because it never holds consistent standards and that's what I want to change. But probably I won't get any hits at all.
It's like even with the carbon calculator, the animating thing there is the realism. My biggest worry is that it doesn't actually consider the economic effects of switching - it just the costs go up and assumes that people will come up with all of this money, but it doesn't actually look at , ok, people can't afford it, so they stop using a thing, driving up costs for everyone else as the capital costs remain fixed owing to complexity.
So I do all of that and I'm on a right wing site and someone posts back that, there's -nothing- man could ever do to screw up the planet, and I say, "well, what number does that mean"... like, does that mean you disagree with the tons of air in the atmosphere, tons of CO2, if so how many tons do you think people could put into the air... you just get no answer back. And similarly, on the other end, there's the lefties that think in all cases that efficiency will be better... but, that means numbers too, it means that they hope a complexity cost exponent of efficiency will be lower than the increasing price of fuel so that savings can be achieved.
It's just like, we live in a sea of absolutes, on both sides, and the world is just not that way. So, to answer that, is the treatyist, basically, designed to be radically moderate. I was thinking that I might even have a RHINO logo to represent RINOS... to get that point across.
I wasn't -forced- to use an MS product, but I am more familiar with asp.net. Really, I just wanted to see how the asp.net GridView does in the "real world".. not just the corporate stuff I shovel out for a living. On the flipside, just because KDE 4.0 totally sucked doesn't mean that I should just give on KDE 4.1... indeed, as bad as Ubuntu 8 with KDE 4.0 was, Ubuntu 9 with KDE 4.1 is rather nice, so much so that I'm liking Vista more.
This is super feedback. Um, the ad thing on Google is because of a right aligned div competing with a left aligned block... really just need to have the whole flow go which way.
I'm still going to be a snob about IE, but fix up the bugs from the feedback I get.
The random text takes a usability hit... but I kinda like it. That will stay until more complain about it. Probably what I might do is keep the injected text a consistent width with sort of a fill in the blank look so that the positions of elements remain constant.
Thanks for looking at that on the Mac. The feedback is super. Yeah... I screwed up the scroll bar logic at low resolutions by trying to do something fancy.
Also a guy who bitches about MS and it's technology yet uses ASP.NET.
Well, no. I bitched about an MS Browser. ASP.NET is a different product. I like Visual Studio for development.
I think that on balance users will see the perceived cost* of switching browser as much greater than the perceived cost of not viewing your site.
I think that's true, but, if you have ten sites, then the leverage shifts.
I have a center - right web site http://www.treatyist.com./ Most of the left leaning folks on slashdot would probably puke at it but every web developer would like this: I block IE from using the site and redirect people to a page exhorting users to upgrade to a new browser. On that page I have links to download either Google Chrome or Firefox.
I did this because of all the CSS3 items available in Chrome (webkit) and FireFox (mozilla), like rounded corners, box shadows, and multicolumn text....and honestly, I don't use IE enough when developing to even know if the site is going to work.
I get like a trickle of hits, as I have no idea what I'm doing as far as advertising myself goes. But, I can tell how many people are getting bounced because of IE by looking at my stats for the block page and it seems more like only about a 1/3 of my hits are actually getting the IE bounce, rather than the 3/4s, if we were to believe the IE stats. I think this is an ok loss because it means I don't have to worry about IE stupid stuff, and, better still, I can start to roll out content using SVG.
I just wanted to share this because I would like to see Microsoft get on the stick. While we may love or hate Obama, we can at least all agree that IE sucks, and I'm hoping that I can convince other web site developers to block IE and redirect to a download page that explains why, and recommends users to move to FireFox or Chrome.
I'll see if I can't add a public stats page online so that everyone can see the stats for the site, and see how this IE blocking experiment works.
Is that, they pretty much confiscate 95% of the money, give 5% to the people, and preach how much they love the common man as they decide which of 2000 army uniforms to wear in a day. How shocking, that, whenever you have a permanent class that decides how money is allocated, that they should allocate it to themselves.
Not to worry though, when their economies die from their own kleptocracy, they blame it on the USA, and, President Obama flies down for an apology, having wrapped up his own uh, stimulus package...
Couple this with stem cell harvested human hair, we really could be yelling: "Soylent Green is PEOPLE, MY GOD, ITS PEOPLE"...
Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Iraq[2], Kosovo, Afghanistan, the Confederate States. I WIN! W00t!
Um, only if you ignore history. In Korea and Iraq, the other guys fired the first shot. Iraq 2 would not have happened had we not been involved in Iraq 1.
No, seriously, Next time, elect a president that isn't so desperate to enter a war that he's craving to 'employ' the millions of Americans he put in the street with his insane economic policies, so they can be shot and blown up in foxholes. That way he can't take every step to make sure they attack you and he gets his excuse.
Well, that's stupid. The only thing insane about Bush's economic policies was that he foolishly thought that free trade would engender good will around the world. He's like the Jimmy Carter of trade, just optimistic but ultimately dumb.
The USA will not get its act together until it kicks out foreign products, and gets out of most of the alliances it is in. Let everyone get the bomb, then duck behind national missile defense and let the rest of the world blow itself up.