Arg, why are people always thinking too fast? We should first colonize the deep ocean, then a meteor, then the moon, then Mars, then the sun. We can then send off intergalactic units to conquer the universe!
Will this end soon? Not likely. The reason for the rising temperatures is that many current technologies are not environmentally sound. So why are they used? They are cheaper than equivalent technologies that do the same thing. As long as the business incentives are there, people will do what it takes to earn their cash. Thus, one of the only incentives that they have to not pollute are potential government controls, which are not currently very extensive (and will get weaker in the U.S. with George Bush in power, as some of his biggest campaign donors are polluters). The only other one that I can think of is that they would feel better about themselves, but I think they would rather have their billions of dollars. Neither of these reasons are likely to stop them from polluting, and so the earth's temperature will continue to rise.
Maybe nanotechnology will help us reverse some of the damage. Any opinions on that?
Click here to see another really interesting polyhedra site, The Encylopedia of Polyhedra. It has virtual reality polyhedra models, and a lot of other interesting polyhedra information.
The reason that there is no hype this year is that the hype last year was for nothing. The turning of the so called millennium (as opposed to the real one) was anticlimatic. The y2k bug had effects to a small scale, but no major ones. The celebrations were exaggerated. Thus, tonight, when the real millennium is coming, the general attitude is "been there, done that."
While boycotting NSI might sound like a good idea, unfortunately it is not feasible. They have too much control over the registries, controlling the DNS system. Registering a domain name with a rival is not effective enough because for each you register, NSI will take a fee from it for its DNS "services." It thus only appears to be boycotting NSI but really isn't. I still recommend using GANDI, though, since they do have great service and low prices.
Who created this conflicting dot-biz business? I don't this it is an accurate reflection of the popular opinion! The infrastructure was too confusing to create new domain name extensions with. I demand a recount!
Wait a second... so I'm supposed to believe that this goes onto the web and takes information off of it from other computers? Whoa... that's a great idea! Someone should patent it if Al Gore hasn't already. Who would have known that something like this could happen to the Internet.
>>All search engines can be bought off. This is a part of the business model, unsuccessful as it tends to be.
Yeah, long term the supply of sites willing to pay will start running out and it will no longer be worth it to charge for listings. LookSmart paid Altavista a huge amount of money to use its listings and eventually those people will stop paying as well. In the end, I think (or at least hope) that most of these "directories" will stop charging.
While yahoo might be well known, a lot of high profile sites use DMoz's data, including Google, AOL, Netscape, and a bunch of others. It is slightly in the backround but a lot of people agree with me that it has higher quality (excepting possibly the Business category). I mean, when LookSmart wanted to get sites to use their data they had to actually pay them to give up DMoz's.
I wouldn't pay much at all for yahoo. Its directory project is far inferior to that of dmoz.org (Humans Do It Better!). A lot of yahoo's categories have 404's and sites that have been discontinued as well as sites without descriptions. You might find a few of those at the ODP but not many comparitively.
It is sad that sites like yahoo and looksmart have to go to charging for listings in order to get money. They should not do this but instead focus on creating quality directories that will give people reason to return. Making people pay for listings compromises their integrity by causing bad sites to be potentially listed while not listing good sites that might not want to fork over the money.
Also, people who find out about this questionable business method might question the accuracy of the search results and stop using sites like this. Yahoo should do something like google, which sells ads but not listings, as they are in a different color and distinct from normal searches (although google is a search engine, not a directory).
On another note, at least yahoo is not quite as stupid as looksmart, in that it only charges for business categories. Businesses might be able to fork over a bunch of money for listings but personal homepages that might have the most devoted people and highest quality (no commercial motivation) wouldn't pay money that often.
That's a good point, but I think that's what the domain names preceding the.TLD is for. Sites that have.com.org and.net are pretty general and I think it's good that anyone can register them. If there were only little ones like.museum not much congestion would be eliminated and there wouldn't be places to go for people that didn't fit in a little category. I think it would be good to add some that would apply to medium groups of people like.radio (or.tv if there weren't already one with the high prices). What we're talking about here is the difference between several, consistant medium ones as opposed to a few tiny ones that are so obscure that nearly no one will use them.
I was actually looking forward to the new domains. I thought they would create some good ones that might be worth using. I find these new ones to be most illogical, however. Except for.biz and.pro, they are all over three letters! Judging from how unsuccessful.us has been due to its long extensions (see nic.us to see how long they are; domainname.city.state.us), you would think that they'd learn. What about.web? And how about.porn or.xxx, which would finally make it easy to create filters that didn't have large rates of misblocking pages while not blocking all pages that they are supposed to (see peacefire.org)? I could have done a better job than them and I'm just a teenager.
The whole point of this was to get rid of the congestion that has overtaken.com,.net, and.org. There is no way that creating extensions that only apply to a small percentage of people will work. We need to get rid of this appointed web authority.
There is no lego!
You take the blue lego and the story ends. You wake in your lego castle and you believe whatever you want to believe.
You take the red pill and you stay in Legoland and I show you how deep the legos connect.
Hopefully the system won't be running Windows. Imagine the surprise of the world if the new planes suddently take a break from fighting against other countries in war and suddenly engage in a tactical attack on Netscape Navigator's home base. =-)
That's kind of weird. I think.org.net and.com are the best to get anyway, though, because they are easiest to remember and most general and the only reason I've heard of others buying others were that they were cheaper. I think that this was because they had only heard of expensive places like NSI for buying them, though, because at gandi.net you can get them for only $10 or $11.
They are exceedingly long. Have you ever been to nic.us? If you want a.us domain you have to choose domainname.city.state.us. For example, if I wanted to choose a domain with them I would be choosing mathjmendl.rochester.ny.us instead of mathjmendl.org. Who would want to make their surfers type in so many letters when there is a simpler way? They would also be harder to remember. Luckily, there are currently people reviewing this policy so that it might soon changing. Plus other countries don't have to register their name with the.country TLD as well. They just choose to more often, as they often have better policies than.us does.
Do you have any idea how many domains there are total? There would be so many of them and they would be constantly changing that it would be nearly impossible for ICANN to police them, and if it were possible it would be very expensive for such an agency to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Arg, why are people always thinking too fast? We should first colonize the deep ocean, then a meteor, then the moon, then Mars, then the sun. We can then send off intergalactic units to conquer the universe!
Will this end soon? Not likely. The reason for the rising temperatures is that many current technologies are not environmentally sound. So why are they used? They are cheaper than equivalent technologies that do the same thing. As long as the business incentives are there, people will do what it takes to earn their cash. Thus, one of the only incentives that they have to not pollute are potential government controls, which are not currently very extensive (and will get weaker in the U.S. with George Bush in power, as some of his biggest campaign donors are polluters). The only other one that I can think of is that they would feel better about themselves, but I think they would rather have their billions of dollars. Neither of these reasons are likely to stop them from polluting, and so the earth's temperature will continue to rise.
Maybe nanotechnology will help us reverse some of the damage. Any opinions on that?
Click here to see another really interesting polyhedra site, The Encylopedia of Polyhedra. It has virtual reality polyhedra models, and a lot of other interesting polyhedra information.
The reason that there is no hype this year is that the hype last year was for nothing. The turning of the so called millennium (as opposed to the real one) was anticlimatic. The y2k bug had effects to a small scale, but no major ones. The celebrations were exaggerated. Thus, tonight, when the real millennium is coming, the general attitude is "been there, done that."
Why don't they patent a method for using "dispersion" to hold together "hydrogen" and "oxygen" atoms in nearby molecules?
"E-Bay Patents Thumbnail Galleries" implies that they have won the patent. They have simply filed for a patent, however.
Without binaries, if you're installing linux for the first time, how are you supposed to run it? =-) One little thing to think about...
While boycotting NSI might sound like a good idea, unfortunately it is not feasible. They have too much control over the registries, controlling the DNS system. Registering a domain name with a rival is not effective enough because for each you register, NSI will take a fee from it for its DNS "services." It thus only appears to be boycotting NSI but really isn't. I still recommend using GANDI, though, since they do have great service and low prices.
Now that they have gnome computers maybe they'll put elves and dwarves on some too.
Who created this conflicting dot-biz business? I don't this it is an accurate reflection of the popular opinion! The infrastructure was too confusing to create new domain name extensions with. I demand a recount!
Wait a second... so I'm supposed to believe that this goes onto the web and takes information off of it from other computers? Whoa... that's a great idea! Someone should patent it if Al Gore hasn't already. Who would have known that something like this could happen to the Internet.
Maybe now they'll also allow it to stop crashing after the subscription period ends.
Microsoft will enter into a pact with Netscape giving them access to their Operating System!
>>All search engines can be bought off. This is a part of the business model, unsuccessful as it tends to be. Yeah, long term the supply of sites willing to pay will start running out and it will no longer be worth it to charge for listings. LookSmart paid Altavista a huge amount of money to use its listings and eventually those people will stop paying as well. In the end, I think (or at least hope) that most of these "directories" will stop charging.
While yahoo might be well known, a lot of high profile sites use DMoz's data, including Google, AOL, Netscape, and a bunch of others. It is slightly in the backround but a lot of people agree with me that it has higher quality (excepting possibly the Business category). I mean, when LookSmart wanted to get sites to use their data they had to actually pay them to give up DMoz's.
I wouldn't pay much at all for yahoo. Its directory project is far inferior to that of dmoz.org (Humans Do It Better!). A lot of yahoo's categories have 404's and sites that have been discontinued as well as sites without descriptions. You might find a few of those at the ODP but not many comparitively.
It is sad that sites like yahoo and looksmart have to go to charging for listings in order to get money. They should not do this but instead focus on creating quality directories that will give people reason to return. Making people pay for listings compromises their integrity by causing bad sites to be potentially listed while not listing good sites that might not want to fork over the money.
Also, people who find out about this questionable business method might question the accuracy of the search results and stop using sites like this. Yahoo should do something like google, which sells ads but not listings, as they are in a different color and distinct from normal searches (although google is a search engine, not a directory).
On another note, at least yahoo is not quite as stupid as looksmart, in that it only charges for business categories. Businesses might be able to fork over a bunch of money for listings but personal homepages that might have the most devoted people and highest quality (no commercial motivation) wouldn't pay money that often.
That's a good point, but I think that's what the domain names preceding the .TLD is for. Sites that have .com .org and .net are pretty general and I think it's good that anyone can register them. If there were only little ones like .museum not much congestion would be eliminated and there wouldn't be places to go for people that didn't fit in a little category. I think it would be good to add some that would apply to medium groups of people like .radio (or .tv if there weren't already one with the high prices). What we're talking about here is the difference between several, consistant medium ones as opposed to a few tiny ones that are so obscure that nearly no one will use them.
I was actually looking forward to the new domains. I thought they would create some good ones that might be worth using. I find these new ones to be most illogical, however. Except for .biz and .pro, they are all over three letters! Judging from how unsuccessful .us has been due to its long extensions (see nic.us to see how long they are; domainname.city.state.us), you would think that they'd learn. What about .web? And how about .porn or .xxx, which would finally make it easy to create filters that didn't have large rates of misblocking pages while not blocking all pages that they are supposed to (see peacefire.org)? I could have done a better job than them and I'm just a teenager.
.com, .net, and .org. There is no way that creating extensions that only apply to a small percentage of people will work. We need to get rid of this appointed web authority.
The whole point of this was to get rid of the congestion that has overtaken
There is no lego! You take the blue lego and the story ends. You wake in your lego castle and you believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill and you stay in Legoland and I show you how deep the legos connect.
Hopefully the system won't be running Windows. Imagine the surprise of the world if the new planes suddently take a break from fighting against other countries in war and suddenly engage in a tactical attack on Netscape Navigator's home base. =-)
Video game arcades with flight simulations?
That's kind of weird. I think .org .net and .com are the best to get anyway, though, because they are easiest to remember and most general and the only reason I've heard of others buying others were that they were cheaper. I think that this was because they had only heard of expensive places like NSI for buying them, though, because at gandi.net you can get them for only $10 or $11.
They are exceedingly long. Have you ever been to nic.us? If you want a .us domain you have to choose domainname.city.state.us. For example, if I wanted to choose a domain with them I would be choosing mathjmendl.rochester.ny.us instead of mathjmendl.org. Who would want to make their surfers type in so many letters when there is a simpler way? They would also be harder to remember. Luckily, there are currently people reviewing this policy so that it might soon changing. Plus other countries don't have to register their name with the .country TLD as well. They just choose to more often, as they often have better policies than .us does.
Do you have any idea how many domains there are total? There would be so many of them and they would be constantly changing that it would be nearly impossible for ICANN to police them, and if it were possible it would be very expensive for such an agency to do.
seineeW erA srekcaH IBF