Ummm, okay, they could open up the auctions to everyone, but not that many "local folks" have like a billion dollars lying around that they could spend on the bandwidth. I don't know how well you could compete against someone who has 1000x your resources. I'm in the same boat, and so are all the other "local folks." If you get my drift.
Why would they use the Palm OS? I know they don't want to have to spend time or money developing their own OS, and they probably don't want to be proprietary, but in my experience Palm OS is totally inadequate. It gets by on Palm Pilots because there is no keyboard and there is only 1 way to access the machine, but there is a keyboard on this, and I can't see Palm OS as anything but a hindrance for this kind of thing. The OS is one (of the many) reasons I can't use a Palm Pilot.
Well, they'd better have their documents in order, or else the Boy Scouts of America will return and burn down another cafe, right? Oh wait, what does BSA stand for again?
:) I'd help you out on the project, but alas I know dick about HTML, MS- or otherwise. But I bet there are a lot of people who could help with such a thing. The problem is that you'd probably need a massive supercomputer to handle all the translation for all of AOL's users. It would probably work better if it started out with small ISPs, because AOL would have to invest a shitpot full of money at the outset, with no guarantees whatsoever. The proxy idea is better than putting it into every browser, however, because it is more noticeable to the industry and less noticeable to the user. Putting it into every browser would completely negate any advantages of the gecko renderer.
The more money you pay, the more quality you get. It's an asymptotic approach where increasing quality costs a lot more money.'
Yup, that's why Windows is so much better than Linux: because it costs so very much more. Oh, wait. That's a really big hole in your argument. Linux costs nothing and is better than Windows. The users pay for user-friendliness, not stability. If the users all paid for stability, then their computer just wouldn't crash while they found themselves completely unable to use it, they swore at it, and they went out to buy Windows.
The point is that software is completely different. You don't get what you pay for. Paying more does not necessarily get you a better product. A $45 hammer is almost always better than a $12 hammer, but software is like the $400 hammer whose real value is utterly undeterminable.
One of the possible solutions that was presented in the article was litigation, which, according to the article, is inevitable and coming soon to a software company near you. But one of the problems for the plaintiff outlined in the article is the fact that many of the problems with software that one might sue the company for are highly technical and would require the hiring of expensive computer experts to build their case. I was wondering if Slashdot, a site with numerous computer experts, could help build such a case by providing expert analysis? Obviously there are some problems with that, such as the lack of being present in court, the safety of anonymity, the unfailing bias against anything Microsoft or even anything proprietary (I don't think it goes over well in court when you roll your eyes and say "That's what I've been telling you for years. Idiots." You know what I mean?). I'm not a lawyer, so I can't think of any more problems with it, but somewhere in there is a good idea waiting to be used...
There is such a thing as "bad visibility" or even "too much visibility." You mention the Gator thing that tags along and presses the user to use it. Well, people hate that. It's all over the place, and everybody knows about it, but everyone who knows about it absolutely hates it. You don't really want people to hate Mozilla in the same manner, do you? Because I don't.
You're absolutely right, but that's exactly the reason why it is so important that people get weaned off of IE. Perhaps someone should write something that translates MS-HTML into real HTML on-the-fly so that it can be read and displayed accurately in Mozilla. I know that isn't what the Mozilla people want, because it doesn't promote standards, but I think we need to fight MS on their own terms. Once this is done, AOL might consider switching to Mozilla. Now that Mozilla has 50% of the internet users (thanks to AOL), they can start enforcing true HTML. AOL can put it in their commercials that some sites don't appear correctly in AOL because of Microsoft's monopoly (which is essentially true, but the point can be made more subtly), and that if more sites don't start cleaning up their code, they could not only lose their customers and fail to garner new ones, but their reputation could be tarnished as they are linked with MS by the consumers. It is in this way, and only in this way, that Mozilla can hope to make a dent in IE and restore freedom to the galaxy- er... internet.
In related news, Vice President Dick Cheney has announced that the country should be on full alert of a possible nuclear attack on American soil in the near future, adding that there is no reason to believe it could happen, just that we need to be more careful. Attorney General John Ashcroft followed with a press conference condemning all manufacturers of smoke detectors, calling them "domestic terrorists" and adding them to the until now rather exclusive membership of the "Axis of Evil." Effective noon tomorrow, all smoke detector factories will be shut down, and anyone attempting to purchase a smoke detector from any such radioactive material dispensing locations as "Walmart" or "Kmart" or "Target," etc, will be arrested on the spot and handed over to the military until such time as they can be tried, or the War on Terrorism is over. "Whichever comes first," said Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who recently submitted an application to President George W. Bush to change the name of his department from the old, boring name of "Department of Defense" to something more exciting and relevant, such as the "Department of Capture, Murder, and Torture of Foreigners." Also included as options in his application were "Department of Sexy Guns" and "Department of Kiss My Ass, You Foreign Scumbags
!" Rumsfeld requested that the exclamation point be emphasized rather heavily, as it added a certain levity to the situation, which he prefers, as it puts him in the proper mood to bomb those filthy targets.
That should be an article in the Onion, shouldn't it? Hehe...:)
Your post makes me wonder: would you still be so worried if you didn't know about the vulnerability? I mean, if ISS had waited, the vulnerability would still be there, and all your servers would still be hackable, but you would be sleeping like a baby. And perhaps there is an ever bigger, more dangerous vulnerability in Apache or in some other program that you use, but you don't even know about it yet. If you suddenly become so paranoid when you hear about a vulnerability, how can you not be just as paranoid when you don't know specifically about a bug, but can be reasonably sure that it's there? I'm just wondering.
But what if someday this feature was included in mass-market PCs? Do you really think that the people who would go down the street to buy a computer from Walmart are really going to know anything about a jumper? They aren't going to want to have to break open their case.
So you start playing DDR (Dance Dance Revolution), and at first you kind of suck. But as time goes on, you get better, so the machine starts going faster. Eventually the game is giving you the steps DDR (Double Data Rate)-style, and you can't keep up unless you increase your step (bus) speed. Interesting. You play DDR at DDR.
Does it cover how many bullets it really takes to kill someone? I've never actually seen someone get shot in real life, but in the movies it seems really ridiculous. It seems like the amount of times someone needs to shoot you before you die is directly related to how stupid you are, or, more accurately, inversely related to how intelligent you look. Not only that, but there seems to be a good guy bonus and a bad guy penalty. That doesn't count for the boss bad guy, though, he always takes a couple of clips. Have you ever noticed that the regular bad guys always go down in one bullet, but the good guy can get shot as many times as he needs to? A really stupid looking good guy, like Arnold (don't get me wrong, I like the big oaf), is practically invulnerable!
Does anyone else think this is foolish? At any point that there is access to/from the outside, there is a possible vulnerability. How much of a breakthrough would this be if someone hacked into your BIOS and created a boot-password that you didn't know? Wouldn't that really suck?
Hmmm... Is this going to make it any easier to hit the stupid ball in a straight line? Or to control the spin? Or to not jump the table? Some people, namely myself, are more than capable of visualizing the angles and recognizing what needs to happen, but then are unable to follow through because they can't hit the stupid ball right. I mean c'mon, the damn thing is just sitting there, not moving! Why can't I hit it? Is someone going to make a computer that can help people with that?
Why are so many people trying to spell "dimensional?" What's the big draw all of a sudden? Or are you just attracted to anyone talking about a dimension? But to answer your question, yes, I think Slashdot has been taken over by fifth graders. Well, maybe everyone just thought it would be a better idea to drop out of school after the fifth grade and get certifications to appear more desirable in the job market...;)
Why is that? I would think that discovering a form of sentient life that is completely different from ourselves would be much more adventurous than finding like Humanity v2.0. You know what I mean? Exploring space is already the biggest adventure mankind has ever embarked upon, and why would we want to wreck the excitement by meeting extraterrestrial life we already know everything about? Wouldn't we want to be able to learn something completely new?
I wonder: is it even possible for us to imagine a world void of human arrogance and curiosity? Those are two characteristics by which humanity is defined, and if the humans in this world lacked them, would they still be humans? Would there be war? Would there be science? Would there be art? Would there be language? Would we even be able to survive? Thinking about it boggles the mind. I think now I have to go think about it for the next few days, as I've just now come across this. Amazing.
That might be why you are arrogant, but bear in mind that not everyone was "created in the image of your creator." And if not everyone was created in your creator's image, and they all look the same, did that creator really do it? Please keep religion out of learned discussions. I know I'll get modded down to the bottoms of hell for this, but there is a reason Creationism isn't taught in Science classes.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm, okay, they could open up the auctions to everyone, but not that many "local folks" have like a billion dollars lying around that they could spend on the bandwidth. I don't know how well you could compete against someone who has 1000x your resources. I'm in the same boat, and so are all the other "local folks." If you get my drift.
Why would they use the Palm OS? I know they don't want to have to spend time or money developing their own OS, and they probably don't want to be proprietary, but in my experience Palm OS is totally inadequate. It gets by on Palm Pilots because there is no keyboard and there is only 1 way to access the machine, but there is a keyboard on this, and I can't see Palm OS as anything but a hindrance for this kind of thing. The OS is one (of the many) reasons I can't use a Palm Pilot.
Well, they'd better have their documents in order, or else the Boy Scouts of America will return and burn down another cafe, right? Oh wait, what does BSA stand for again?
:) I'd help you out on the project, but alas I know dick about HTML, MS- or otherwise. But I bet there are a lot of people who could help with such a thing. The problem is that you'd probably need a massive supercomputer to handle all the translation for all of AOL's users. It would probably work better if it started out with small ISPs, because AOL would have to invest a shitpot full of money at the outset, with no guarantees whatsoever. The proxy idea is better than putting it into every browser, however, because it is more noticeable to the industry and less noticeable to the user. Putting it into every browser would completely negate any advantages of the gecko renderer.
The more money you pay, the more quality you get. It's an asymptotic approach where increasing quality costs a lot more money.'
Yup, that's why Windows is so much better than Linux: because it costs so very much more. Oh, wait. That's a really big hole in your argument. Linux costs nothing and is better than Windows. The users pay for user-friendliness, not stability. If the users all paid for stability, then their computer just wouldn't crash while they found themselves completely unable to use it, they swore at it, and they went out to buy Windows.
The point is that software is completely different. You don't get what you pay for. Paying more does not necessarily get you a better product. A $45 hammer is almost always better than a $12 hammer, but software is like the $400 hammer whose real value is utterly undeterminable.
One of the possible solutions that was presented in the article was litigation, which, according to the article, is inevitable and coming soon to a software company near you. But one of the problems for the plaintiff outlined in the article is the fact that many of the problems with software that one might sue the company for are highly technical and would require the hiring of expensive computer experts to build their case. I was wondering if Slashdot, a site with numerous computer experts, could help build such a case by providing expert analysis? Obviously there are some problems with that, such as the lack of being present in court, the safety of anonymity, the unfailing bias against anything Microsoft or even anything proprietary (I don't think it goes over well in court when you roll your eyes and say "That's what I've been telling you for years. Idiots." You know what I mean?). I'm not a lawyer, so I can't think of any more problems with it, but somewhere in there is a good idea waiting to be used...
./'ed? What is he, a configure script?
There is such a thing as "bad visibility" or even "too much visibility." You mention the Gator thing that tags along and presses the user to use it. Well, people hate that. It's all over the place, and everybody knows about it, but everyone who knows about it absolutely hates it. You don't really want people to hate Mozilla in the same manner, do you? Because I don't.
You're absolutely right, but that's exactly the reason why it is so important that people get weaned off of IE. Perhaps someone should write something that translates MS-HTML into real HTML on-the-fly so that it can be read and displayed accurately in Mozilla. I know that isn't what the Mozilla people want, because it doesn't promote standards, but I think we need to fight MS on their own terms. Once this is done, AOL might consider switching to Mozilla. Now that Mozilla has 50% of the internet users (thanks to AOL), they can start enforcing true HTML. AOL can put it in their commercials that some sites don't appear correctly in AOL because of Microsoft's monopoly (which is essentially true, but the point can be made more subtly), and that if more sites don't start cleaning up their code, they could not only lose their customers and fail to garner new ones, but their reputation could be tarnished as they are linked with MS by the consumers. It is in this way, and only in this way, that Mozilla can hope to make a dent in IE and restore freedom to the galaxy- er... internet.
That should be an article in the Onion, shouldn't it? Hehe...
Your post makes me wonder: would you still be so worried if you didn't know about the vulnerability? I mean, if ISS had waited, the vulnerability would still be there, and all your servers would still be hackable, but you would be sleeping like a baby. And perhaps there is an ever bigger, more dangerous vulnerability in Apache or in some other program that you use, but you don't even know about it yet. If you suddenly become so paranoid when you hear about a vulnerability, how can you not be just as paranoid when you don't know specifically about a bug, but can be reasonably sure that it's there? I'm just wondering.
Right. That's what I was getting at. But thanks.
"I don't believe it took more than 5 years off my life. The amount of years it took off the lives of my offspring, however, is yet to be seen..."
But what if someday this feature was included in mass-market PCs? Do you really think that the people who would go down the street to buy a computer from Walmart are really going to know anything about a jumper? They aren't going to want to have to break open their case.
So you start playing DDR (Dance Dance Revolution), and at first you kind of suck. But as time goes on, you get better, so the machine starts going faster. Eventually the game is giving you the steps DDR (Double Data Rate)-style, and you can't keep up unless you increase your step (bus) speed. Interesting. You play DDR at DDR.
Does it cover how many bullets it really takes to kill someone? I've never actually seen someone get shot in real life, but in the movies it seems really ridiculous. It seems like the amount of times someone needs to shoot you before you die is directly related to how stupid you are, or, more accurately, inversely related to how intelligent you look. Not only that, but there seems to be a good guy bonus and a bad guy penalty. That doesn't count for the boss bad guy, though, he always takes a couple of clips. Have you ever noticed that the regular bad guys always go down in one bullet, but the good guy can get shot as many times as he needs to? A really stupid looking good guy, like Arnold (don't get me wrong, I like the big oaf), is practically invulnerable!
Does anyone else think this is foolish? At any point that there is access to/from the outside, there is a possible vulnerability. How much of a breakthrough would this be if someone hacked into your BIOS and created a boot-password that you didn't know? Wouldn't that really suck?
Hmmm... Is this going to make it any easier to hit the stupid ball in a straight line? Or to control the spin? Or to not jump the table? Some people, namely myself, are more than capable of visualizing the angles and recognizing what needs to happen, but then are unable to follow through because they can't hit the stupid ball right. I mean c'mon, the damn thing is just sitting there, not moving! Why can't I hit it? Is someone going to make a computer that can help people with that?
Hmmm... it said "No Disc." That's not what the kitchen sink is supposed to sound like, is it?
Damn it, I wish my DVD player could play the kitchen sink. I hear those sinks are damn good musicians...
Why are so many people trying to spell "dimensional?" What's the big draw all of a sudden? Or are you just attracted to anyone talking about a dimension? But to answer your question, yes, I think Slashdot has been taken over by fifth graders. Well, maybe everyone just thought it would be a better idea to drop out of school after the fifth grade and get certifications to appear more desirable in the job market... ;)
Why is that? I would think that discovering a form of sentient life that is completely different from ourselves would be much more adventurous than finding like Humanity v2.0. You know what I mean? Exploring space is already the biggest adventure mankind has ever embarked upon, and why would we want to wreck the excitement by meeting extraterrestrial life we already know everything about? Wouldn't we want to be able to learn something completely new?
I wonder: is it even possible for us to imagine a world void of human arrogance and curiosity? Those are two characteristics by which humanity is defined, and if the humans in this world lacked them, would they still be humans? Would there be war? Would there be science? Would there be art? Would there be language? Would we even be able to survive? Thinking about it boggles the mind. I think now I have to go think about it for the next few days, as I've just now come across this. Amazing.
I believe it is supposed to refer to some creation myth, presumably Chritianity's. Ridiculous, I know, and it really has no place here.
That might be why you are arrogant, but bear in mind that not everyone was "created in the image of your creator." And if not everyone was created in your creator's image, and they all look the same, did that creator really do it? Please keep religion out of learned discussions. I know I'll get modded down to the bottoms of hell for this, but there is a reason Creationism isn't taught in Science classes.