"We have made every effort to clarify the fact that Plume's book, Katie.com, and the website, Katie.com, are not in any way associated with one another."
Personally I would have thought that "every effort" would have included going to the effort of not calling the book that in the first place.
Is this one of those dumb uses of "her" in an attempt to not offend people easily offended by the use of "his"? If so, "their" is a perfectly good gender-neutral word.
Or of course, since the person's name was given as "Paul Haigh", I expect "his" would have been a better choice.
At work we manage WANs for a few nationwide (UK that is) customers. Each site has an ADSL connection, with ISDN as backup. Got to work this morning to find that all the Manchester ADSLs were down, but for some reason the ISDNs were still working... any idea why the ISDNs would still be working? I'd expected them all to be down.
>... they will need to mount a prosecution in another country - wherever that happens to be. The spammers may even win given that each country enforces copyright laws differently.
Probably not too much of a problem - Habeas are based in the USA, as are most spammers.
It was only yesterday, I think, when I was reading the/. stories about anti-spam services being taken down by ddos attacks, etc, I was thinking: what a depressing news day. The world looked pretty messed up then.
And then, *this* happens. Well, I take it all back: this is without doubt the most worrying, disturbing, depressing, troubling thing I have read in a long time. I'm not a parent, but if I was I'd being doing everything in my power to ensure my kid wasn't subjected to this propaganda in the classroom. Scary, scary times.
> It is so annoying to get an e-mail without a subject. My spam filters actually bump you a little bit closer to being considered spam if there is no subject. I consider it to be a required header.
But if you're mailing an automaton which only reads the body of your message and couldn't care a jot about the subject line - for example, a spam-collecting robot - then entering a subject line is arguably unintuitive, and certainly a waste of time.
On my Moz wish list would be a tick box for "Always use this subject line if I don't enter one (and don't ask me again)".
> Yeah, and that's especially annoying when software developers aren't aware of > SHGetFolderLocation [microsoft.com] and hard code directory names like "Program Files
Uh huh, like, err, Microsoft themselves. Install Win98; set the Windows directory as D:\WINDOWS and the Progs directory as C:\Program Files and hey presto! A few files find their way into D:\Progra~1 ! Ingenious.
The theme does a reasonable impression of native widgets, and in doing so will help new users feel comfortable with Mozilla, because it looks like what they're used to.
However, it is/just an impression/, a mock-up of the real thing, made from nothing more than XUL, CSS etc. Try/using/ Mozilla, and that illusion will quickly fade, as the widgets don't/behave/ like the real thing.
Errr, shurely the Web has contained cyclic links for some time? I really hope the novelty of pointing out cyclic links from search engines / news sites dies down pretty soon, because I for one just don't see anything entertaining in them.
> Lower Total Cost of Ownership for the desktop, including lower user training costs.
"Of course users need to be educated, otherwise they will not be able to use the applications properly."
I don't see you specifically saying that you are countering the argument - are you? If so, I don't see how what you say makes any difference. The users who can't get to grips with MS Word equally won't be able to get to grips with OpenOffice.
> Centralized and efficient security policy administration.
"Security can not be a reason to use M$ software."
They said security *policy*, not actual security!;-)
The "horizontal mirror" thing is kind of weird and quirky. Heh. In the course of testing a content-rewriting HTTP proxy once, I had it replace all occurrences of "server" by "serverino". This falls into about the same area of interest I think.
Apart from that, it's just a proxy, right? Not an open proxy, just one which proxies to Google only. China filters out the proxy; no more story any more.
I guess if it became commonplace for sites all over the place to spring up Google-proxies, then that might be relevant, since the Chinese authorities would have a hard time finding and blocking them all.
I use a home-brewed HTML- and image-rewriting proxy to zap most ads, and Mozilla takes care of the pop-ups. Sometimes the proxy gets it wrong and doesn't zap an ad, or zaps something that isn't an ad.
If I experience a problem with some site - either because my anti-ad / privacy measures have rendered the site unusable, or maybe because there's some ad I'm seeing that I *really* want to get rid of - then sometimes I'll spend a few minutes tweaking cookies / javascript / the proxy to fix the problem.
However, the bottom line is: if the site doesn't work for me, no big deal, I'll go elsewhere. So long, suckers. If you wanted my traffic, you shouldn't have used ads/cookies/javascript in that way.
... the ad is gone as
the movie rolls on in the background.
(my emphasis) Err, what's wrong with this picture?
None of this might be happening if traditional 30-second commercials got more respect. Many consumers treat them as an excuse to change channels.
I need an excuse to change channels? Get real, people.
In a way, a similar thing has been happening over here in the UK, albeit for channel promotions instead of commercial products. Several channels I can think of on satellite TV promote the next program with a little pop-up icon near the end of the program before.
On British Eurosport, they'll squish the picture up into the top ~75% of the screen, and show some scrolling tickertape promotion (competitions; visit our web site; forthcoming programming) in the bottom banner, then "un-squish" the picture back to 100% again.
It's a little irritating, since the program is rather harder to take seriously at the wrong aspect ratio, and of course suddenly there's this animated thing distracting your attention on screen. Usually lasts no more than 15-30 seconds.
However, I'd feel a whole lot different about it if the technique was being used for commercial advertising.
If you have multiple tabs open, and close one, the next one made active is the one last opened. That means that the order can been terribly random. With Mozilla, you close one tab and it takes you to the next one to the left. Quite simple.
Opera has a "preference" setting for that under the "Accessibility" section. I haven't tested it, but that's what it claims to control...
I'm a bit of a fan of the Acorn/ARM lineage - it's what I cut my teeth on. After unsuccessful forays at Z80 and 6502 coding, ARM was a dream to code for. When the machines first came out in 1988 (ish), they were talked about as being fast - which of course, they were (compared to the old BBC model B).
Alas, the first version of the OS, "Arthur", was a dreadful letdown, IMHO - considering that, just a year or two later, on the same hardware, RISC OS 2 was released, with proper GUI and multitasking etc. So anyway, then I used RISC OS 2, and then RISC OS 3 when *it* was released. Life was great.
My old A440 machine still sits here beside me, and when I fire it up every so often, there's one thing above all others which strikes me about it - it's so dependent upon the mouse. Typically most of the functions of any RISC OS application were accessed via a menu (keyboard shortcuts were only sparingly provided), and there was no way to invoke/operate the menu without the mouse. Nor switch applications. Nor all sorts of other stuff.
Does anybody know if, now we're at RISC OS 4 (and more), that particular shortcoming has been addressed?
P.S. looking at the screenshot, can I submit a bug report for the typo in "SysLog workspce" ?
Slashdot Mirror
"We have made every effort to clarify the fact that Plume's book, Katie.com, and the website, Katie.com, are not in any way associated with one another."
:-)
Personally I would have thought that "every effort" would have included going to the effort of not calling the book that in the first place.
Still, a small victory. Behold, Geek Power!
> because her machine got infected
Is this one of those dumb uses of "her" in an attempt to not offend people easily offended by the use of "his"? If so, "their" is a perfectly good gender-neutral word.
Or of course, since the person's name was given as "Paul Haigh", I expect "his" would have been a better choice.
That cracks me up that that was modded "Informative" :-)
At work we manage WANs for a few nationwide (UK that is) customers. Each site has an ADSL connection, with ISDN as backup. Got to work this morning to find that all the Manchester ADSLs were down, but for some reason the ISDNs were still working... any idea why the ISDNs would still be working? I'd expected them all to be down.
You mean, far from unusual?
> ... they will need to mount a prosecution in another country - wherever that happens to be. The spammers may even win given that each country enforces copyright laws differently.
Probably not too much of a problem - Habeas are based in the USA, as are most spammers.
It was only yesterday, I think, when I was reading the /. stories about anti-spam services being taken down by ddos attacks, etc, I was thinking: what a depressing news day. The world looked pretty messed up then.
And then, *this* happens. Well, I take it all back: this is without doubt the most worrying, disturbing, depressing, troubling thing I have read in a long time. I'm not a parent, but if I was I'd being doing everything in my power to ensure my kid wasn't subjected to this propaganda in the classroom. Scary, scary times.
> Let's say I take a quick snap of myself and my new girlfriend, and send it off to my pal across town so he can see how much fun we're having.
:-)
"Hi! Me and my girlfriends had this great new idea - a webcam in our dorm! Check it out!"
Yup, restricting forwarding of that would be good, IMO.
Restriciting sending it in the first place would be even better
> Just my $0.02's worth.
I think I just found what they'll be taxing next! (Warning: completely made up figures).
/. stories per day: 30
comments per story: 500
worth per comment: $0.02
Worth per day: 30 * 500 * $0.02 = $300
per year: $90,000
Tax at 15%: $13,500 per year
Small beer I know, but it's a start.
> It is so annoying to get an e-mail without a subject. My spam filters actually bump you a little bit closer to being considered spam if there is no subject. I consider it to be a required header.
But if you're mailing an automaton which only reads the body of your message and couldn't care a jot about the subject line - for example, a spam-collecting robot - then entering a subject line is arguably unintuitive, and certainly a waste of time.
On my Moz wish list would be a tick box for "Always use this subject line if I don't enter one (and don't ask me again)".
> Yeah, and that's especially annoying when software developers aren't aware of
> SHGetFolderLocation [microsoft.com] and hard code directory names like "Program Files
Uh huh, like, err, Microsoft themselves. Install Win98; set the Windows directory as D:\WINDOWS and the Progs directory as C:\Program Files and hey presto! A few files find their way into D:\Progra~1 ! Ingenious.
Same on Windows, for what it's worth.
/just an impression/, a mock-up of the real thing, made from nothing more than XUL, CSS etc. Try /using/ Mozilla, and that illusion will quickly fade, as the widgets don't /behave/ like the real thing.
The theme does a reasonable impression of native widgets, and in doing so will help new users feel comfortable with Mozilla, because it looks like what they're used to.
However, it is
Errr, shurely the Web has contained cyclic links for some time? I really hope the novelty of pointing out cyclic links from search engines / news sites dies down pretty soon, because I for one just don't see anything entertaining in them.
Mod: -1, Killjoy.
> Lower Total Cost of Ownership for the desktop, including lower user training costs.
;-)
"Of course users need to be educated, otherwise they will not be able to use the applications properly."
I don't see you specifically saying that you are countering the argument - are you? If so, I don't see how what you say makes any difference. The users who can't get to grips with MS Word equally won't be able to get to grips with OpenOffice.
> Centralized and efficient security policy administration.
"Security can not be a reason to use M$ software."
They said security *policy*, not actual security!
Am I missing something here?
The "horizontal mirror" thing is kind of weird and quirky. Heh. In the course of testing a content-rewriting HTTP proxy once, I had it replace all occurrences of "server" by "serverino". This falls into about the same area of interest I think.
Apart from that, it's just a proxy, right? Not an open proxy, just one which proxies to Google only. China filters out the proxy; no more story any more.
I guess if it became commonplace for sites all over the place to spring up Google-proxies, then that might be relevant, since the Chinese authorities would have a hard time finding and blocking them all.
But it's just one site, so what's the big deal?
I use a home-brewed HTML- and image-rewriting proxy to zap most ads, and Mozilla takes care of the pop-ups. Sometimes the proxy gets it wrong and doesn't zap an ad, or zaps something that isn't an ad.
If I experience a problem with some site - either because my anti-ad / privacy measures have rendered the site unusable, or maybe because there's some ad I'm seeing that I *really* want to get rid of - then sometimes I'll spend a few minutes tweaking cookies / javascript / the proxy to fix the problem.
However, the bottom line is: if the site doesn't work for me, no big deal, I'll go elsewhere. So long, suckers. If you wanted my traffic, you shouldn't have used ads/cookies/javascript in that way.
In a way, a similar thing has been happening over here in the UK, albeit for channel promotions instead of commercial products. Several channels I can think of on satellite TV promote the next program with a little pop-up icon near the end of the program before.
On British Eurosport, they'll squish the picture up into the top ~75% of the screen, and show some scrolling tickertape promotion (competitions; visit our web site; forthcoming programming) in the bottom banner, then "un-squish" the picture back to 100% again.
It's a little irritating, since the program is rather harder to take seriously at the wrong aspect ratio, and of course suddenly there's this animated thing distracting your attention on screen. Usually lasts no more than 15-30 seconds.
However, I'd feel a whole lot different about it if the technique was being used for commercial advertising.
P.S. Hmmm, just found this page selling advertising, but I think it's for the web site only.
Opera has a "preference" setting for that under the "Accessibility" section. I haven't tested it, but that's what it claims to control...
Mmmmm, this isn't authoritative, but up until I stopped working with Acorn hardware (mid 1995, A5000 or so) the situation was this:
If I remember I'll try to post a pic or two on http://rudolf.org.uk/acorn.html (but I'll have to create the page first) - give me an hour or so... :-)
I'm a bit of a fan of the Acorn/ARM lineage - it's what I cut my teeth on. After unsuccessful forays at Z80 and 6502 coding, ARM was a dream to code for. When the machines first came out in 1988 (ish), they were talked about as being fast - which of course, they were (compared to the old BBC model B).
Alas, the first version of the OS, "Arthur", was a dreadful letdown, IMHO - considering that, just a year or two later, on the same hardware, RISC OS 2 was released, with proper GUI and multitasking etc. So anyway, then I used RISC OS 2, and then RISC OS 3 when *it* was released. Life was great.
My old A440 machine still sits here beside me, and when I fire it up every so often, there's one thing above all others which strikes me about it - it's so dependent upon the mouse. Typically most of the functions of any RISC OS application were accessed via a menu (keyboard shortcuts were only sparingly provided), and there was no way to invoke/operate the menu without the mouse. Nor switch applications. Nor all sorts of other stuff.
Does anybody know if, now we're at RISC OS 4 (and more), that particular shortcoming has been addressed?
P.S. looking at the screenshot, can I submit a bug report for the typo in "SysLog workspce" ?