Does it matter? Anyone who has changed their default to Firefox will know how to change it back - and besides, doesn't FF check at startup by default anyway?
My issue is with applications that ignore your preferences and launch IE instead; that's far more annoying, IMHO. MS are guilty of this too - if you click an ad in Live Messenger (not that I do, but I digress...) it launches IE. I've not been using it long enough to have received a link in a message; if that opens IE, I'll really be pissed.
As long as you have to use about:config rather than the preferences applet, the average user can't configure it. I'm pretty techy and I can't be bothered to spend time searching the web to work out how to use about:config properly, there's almost no chance the average user will (or will even know about it)
Unfortunately, my phone line doesn't even manage the 8Mbps my connection is nominally rated at; I'm lucky to get as high as 3. According to BT's availability checker, my postcode should get about 4Mbps. A few minutes spent typing in random postcodes in London only found a couple that got as high as even 6Mbps, let alone the full 8 that most ISPs offer.
The court has the authority to order whatever it likes. If the person/representative of the company so ordered fails to comply, then a warrant can be issued for their arrest. That applies no matter what country the subject of the order is in.
However, that said, if the subject of the order is in a different country, they can choose to ignore the order on the assumption that their home country will not prosecute or extradite them. For something this trivial, there's almost no chance that they would do so.
First Spamhaus, then online gambling sites that are perfectly legal in other countries. After that will come torrent sites, crack sites or anyone who does anything that might be illegal in the USA but legal elsewhere.
Fine, all those things will be hosted on servers outside of the US, with domains registered through registrars outside the US, and the people running them will avoid visiting the US.
All courts of all countries are perfectly free and entitled to make whatever orders they like; they just can't necessarily expect them to be enforced, except in their own jurisdiction.
ObDisclaimer: I don't even pretend to be a lawyer, that's not legal advice, rely on it and you're an idiot, etc.
No wonder most people don't care about our opinions and treat us with lack of respect.
Actually, that's because most of the most vocal members of the community come across as a bunch of immature, self-important geeks who look down on anyone not as knowledgable about the minutae of computers as they are as being hopelessly stupid and a waste of space. There's also the stereotype of the fat, unwashed, untidy geek spending all their time glued to their computers, shoving pizza and cola down their throats. Then there's also the fact that techy/sciency/clever people are generally dismissed as being "uncool".
Stupid jokes in bad taste? Go talk to some "normal" people sometime, you'd apparently be shocked at some of the stuff they can come out with.
preservation of/. These are all important outside of my mind and perfectly objective.
The importance of the preservation of/. is entirely subjective. You'll find that the vast majority of the human race couldn't care less about it. For example, I've been a registered user for years, and I certainly wouldn't put myself out to help save it were it threatened; I'd likely just shrug my shoulders and get on with my life.
A blanket ban on murder, of any kind, by anyone, including state officials, has never been enacted anywhere.
Well, it's just semantics but technically when the state/supreme ruler does it within the bounds of the legal system, it's not murder, as that's unlawful killing by definition.
I do see your point though. Many countries no longer have the death penalty (I believe the UK abolished the last capital punishment in the 1980s), but I'm not aware of any that explicitly outlaw state-sanctioned killing.
That "incremental update," as you ignorantly call it (nice nick, by the way), was a major version release with a whole new version of OS X
If it was a major version release, it would've been 11. Going from 10.x to 10.y is by definition a point release, not a major release.
Now to be fair, MS do the same thing - Win2k is NT 5.0, XP is NT 5.1. That doesn't change the fact that if Apple want me to think that 10.3 is "a major version release" they should name it as such.
That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever.
Well, perhaps I'm not a geek, but I am a professional programer with 7.5 years commercial experience and hobbiest experience going back about 22 years (to the tender age of 10), and *I* don't want to use the OS either. I want it to sit there, managing my hardware and processes, etc, and staying out of my way while I get on with what I want to do.
Don't get me wrong, I used (and played with) Linux for a few years; I've upgraded kernels, switched from libc5 to glibc2 by hand, installed gcc, etc from source, hacked around with the kernel, etc. I just can't be bothered with it any more. More power to those that can and do enjoy that sort of thing, it's just not for me any more (at the moment?).
The tabs changes are driving me nuts. I'm sure they're all perfectly reasonable from the point of view of a new user, but as someone who's been using Mozilla since M12 or so it's an utter pain.
And that's one of my few complaints about Firefox. I just want to be able to use and configure the browser, I don't want to have to search google to find out how to use the settings in about:config. Why something representing as major a change as this isn't in the preferences applet I'll never know.
His problem isn't that he can't get SP2, it's that if he installs it, he'll lose internet access altogether as his (braindead) ISP's software won't work with it.
Forced obsolesence? SP1 is more than 4 years old; very few companies (including Linux distros) support products that old. Perhaps they simply feel that they can no longer support the costs of producing updates for it, especially with Vista on the horizon (snigger).
Anyway I hate MS versioning schemes, why service pack why not call it a point release?
Because the average user won't know what you mean by "point release", but (presumably) has an idea of what "service pack" means - they're used to having their car serviced, for a start, making sure that it keeps running properly and doesn't break down.
Or those projects aren't as "major" as Windows is?
Mechanics and engineering are extremely well understood disciplines that have been practiced for thousands of years.
Software "engineering" isn't, and hasn't.
In those respects at least, no, putting up a building or making a car is *not* as major as Windows, or a Linux distro, or indeed any complex application.
To be fair, it's "Internet (Internet Explorer)", just like my default email client is "E-Mail (Mozilla Thunderbird)" (parenthised bits are on a separate line).
They've not renamed IE to "The Internet", they're making it obvious for the less technically savvy that that's the program you use to access the Internet. You're free to change it to whatever you want, in which case it'll say (eg) "Internet (Mozilla Firefox)".
Just as releasing IE6 was bad if you wanted to test in IE5?
It'll be a pain for small-time web shops for a little while, but if IE7 really is going to be pushed out as a high priority, most people will end up getting it relatively quickly.
More serious shops should already have a range of different OS and browser combinations setup for testing; this will only add a couple more. Certainly it's no worse than testing under (eg) a couple of combinations of OS X and Safari, or various distros and various versions of Mozilla, FF, Konqi, Galleon, etc.
The next time round it's a different keypad layout.
But that doesn't matter, because the first time round I mapped 8473 to 1234 in my head as I watched you do it.
This is security through obscurity; it relies on one or both of:
1) me not realising that the keypad represents the "normal" numeric keypad, mixed up 2) me not being able to perform the reverse of the mapping you're doing to enter your PIN.
1) is solvable by my simply perusing the site, even if I don't guess. 2) isn't a reasonable assumption to make about most people.
Slashdot Mirror
Does it matter? Anyone who has changed their default to Firefox will know how to change it back - and besides, doesn't FF check at startup by default anyway?
My issue is with applications that ignore your preferences and launch IE instead; that's far more annoying, IMHO. MS are guilty of this too - if you click an ad in Live Messenger (not that I do, but I digress...) it launches IE. I've not been using it long enough to have received a link in a message; if that opens IE, I'll really be pissed.
As long as you have to use about:config rather than the preferences applet, the average user can't configure it. I'm pretty techy and I can't be bothered to spend time searching the web to work out how to use about:config properly, there's almost no chance the average user will (or will even know about it)
Unfortunately, my phone line doesn't even manage the 8Mbps my connection is nominally rated at; I'm lucky to get as high as 3. According to BT's availability checker, my postcode should get about 4Mbps. A few minutes spent typing in random postcodes in London only found a couple that got as high as even 6Mbps, let alone the full 8 that most ISPs offer.
100Mbps? Not in the UK, not over our phone lines.
The court has the authority to order whatever it likes. If the person/representative of the company so ordered fails to comply, then a warrant can be issued for their arrest. That applies no matter what country the subject of the order is in.
However, that said, if the subject of the order is in a different country, they can choose to ignore the order on the assumption that their home country will not prosecute or extradite them. For something this trivial, there's almost no chance that they would do so.
First Spamhaus, then online gambling sites that are perfectly legal in other countries. After that will come torrent sites, crack sites or anyone who does anything that might be illegal in the USA but legal elsewhere.
Fine, all those things will be hosted on servers outside of the US, with domains registered through registrars outside the US, and the people running them will avoid visiting the US.
All courts of all countries are perfectly free and entitled to make whatever orders they like; they just can't necessarily expect them to be enforced, except in their own jurisdiction.
ObDisclaimer: I don't even pretend to be a lawyer, that's not legal advice, rely on it and you're an idiot, etc.
Why not? (Genuine question)
Every person is unique and irreplacable; not so filesystems.
I doubt you have the wit to keep a civil tongue in your head.
Hey, this is easy *and* fun!
No wonder most people don't care about our opinions and treat us with lack of respect.
Actually, that's because most of the most vocal members of the community come across as a bunch of immature, self-important geeks who look down on anyone not as knowledgable about the minutae of computers as they are as being hopelessly stupid and a waste of space. There's also the stereotype of the fat, unwashed, untidy geek spending all their time glued to their computers, shoving pizza and cola down their throats. Then there's also the fact that techy/sciency/clever people are generally dismissed as being "uncool".
Stupid jokes in bad taste? Go talk to some "normal" people sometime, you'd apparently be shocked at some of the stuff they can come out with.
preservation of /. These are all important outside of my mind and perfectly objective.
/. is entirely subjective. You'll find that the vast majority of the human race couldn't care less about it. For example, I've been a registered user for years, and I certainly wouldn't put myself out to help save it were it threatened; I'd likely just shrug my shoulders and get on with my life.
The importance of the preservation of
A blanket ban on murder, of any kind, by anyone, including state officials, has never been enacted anywhere.
Well, it's just semantics but technically when the state/supreme ruler does it within the bounds of the legal system, it's not murder, as that's unlawful killing by definition.
I do see your point though. Many countries no longer have the death penalty (I believe the UK abolished the last capital punishment in the 1980s), but I'm not aware of any that explicitly outlaw state-sanctioned killing.
That "incremental update," as you ignorantly call it (nice nick, by the way), was a major version release with a whole new version of OS X
If it was a major version release, it would've been 11. Going from 10.x to 10.y is by definition a point release, not a major release.
Now to be fair, MS do the same thing - Win2k is NT 5.0, XP is NT 5.1. That doesn't change the fact that if Apple want me to think that 10.3 is "a major version release" they should name it as such.
He should at least refer to it as a platform
.NET Framework", so perhaps he really ought to be calling it a framework, not a platform.
Well, its full name is "the
That's because they don't want to use an operating system. They want to send email, work with their digital pictures, write a novel, or whatever.
Well, perhaps I'm not a geek, but I am a professional programer with 7.5 years commercial experience and hobbiest experience going back about 22 years (to the tender age of 10), and *I* don't want to use the OS either. I want it to sit there, managing my hardware and processes, etc, and staying out of my way while I get on with what I want to do.
Don't get me wrong, I used (and played with) Linux for a few years; I've upgraded kernels, switched from libc5 to glibc2 by hand, installed gcc, etc from source, hacked around with the kernel, etc. I just can't be bothered with it any more. More power to those that can and do enjoy that sort of thing, it's just not for me any more (at the moment?).
1.5 still does this, though now usually only when Flash is on the page. Why Firefox allows flash to intercept command keystrokes is beyond me.
I can only assume that the developers didn't want to prevent Flash from intercepting the key strokes in case they're required by the Flash app.
In any case, clicking somewhere in the window to remove focus from the Flash object generally allows you to use the key commands again.
Without them, you can right-click on the tab and choose "close tab", or simply middle-click on the tab.
THANK YOU!
The tabs changes are driving me nuts. I'm sure they're all perfectly reasonable from the point of view of a new user, but as someone who's been using Mozilla since M12 or so it's an utter pain.
And that's one of my few complaints about Firefox. I just want to be able to use and configure the browser, I don't want to have to search google to find out how to use the settings in about:config. Why something representing as major a change as this isn't in the preferences applet I'll never know.
His problem isn't that he can't get SP2, it's that if he installs it, he'll lose internet access altogether as his (braindead) ISP's software won't work with it.
Forced obsolesence? SP1 is more than 4 years old; very few companies (including Linux distros) support products that old. Perhaps they simply feel that they can no longer support the costs of producing updates for it, especially with Vista on the horizon (snigger).
Anyway I hate MS versioning schemes, why service pack why not call it a point release?
Because the average user won't know what you mean by "point release", but (presumably) has an idea of what "service pack" means - they're used to having their car serviced, for a start, making sure that it keeps running properly and doesn't break down.
I mean, how many GiBs does a default install consume?
I might be wrong, but I seem to remember that it was somewhat less than 4.
Compare that with the 6.5GB+ of UT 2004.
Or those projects aren't as "major" as Windows is?
Mechanics and engineering are extremely well understood disciplines that have been practiced for thousands of years.
Software "engineering" isn't, and hasn't.
In those respects at least, no, putting up a building or making a car is *not* as major as Windows, or a Linux distro, or indeed any complex application.
To be fair, it's "Internet (Internet Explorer)", just like my default email client is "E-Mail (Mozilla Thunderbird)" (parenthised bits are on a separate line).
They've not renamed IE to "The Internet", they're making it obvious for the less technically savvy that that's the program you use to access the Internet. You're free to change it to whatever you want, in which case it'll say (eg) "Internet (Mozilla Firefox)".
Just as releasing IE6 was bad if you wanted to test in IE5?
It'll be a pain for small-time web shops for a little while, but if IE7 really is going to be pushed out as a high priority, most people will end up getting it relatively quickly.
More serious shops should already have a range of different OS and browser combinations setup for testing; this will only add a couple more. Certainly it's no worse than testing under (eg) a couple of combinations of OS X and Safari, or various distros and various versions of Mozilla, FF, Konqi, Galleon, etc.
I'm shoulder-surfing you.
..
..
Actual pin is 1234
I don't know that.
Standard keypad layout
I know that.
The screen shows
251
369
847
I can see that.
You click on 8473.
I see that.
The next time round it's a different keypad layout.
But that doesn't matter, because the first time round I mapped 8473 to 1234 in my head as I watched you do it.
This is security through obscurity; it relies on one or both of:
1) me not realising that the keypad represents the "normal" numeric keypad, mixed up
2) me not being able to perform the reverse of the mapping you're doing to enter your PIN.
1) is solvable by my simply perusing the site, even if I don't guess. 2) isn't a reasonable assumption to make about most people.