The tabs make sense because the URL bar should be part of the tabbed area. The URL is likely different with each tab and therefore shouldn't be outside of them (you expect anything outside the selected tab to not be affected by switching tabs).
The bookmarks & options being inside the tabs is just a judgement call to allow for my following point. By having the tabs at the very top of the frame, and likely at the very top of the desktop, the tabs actually become easier to click. This is because you no longer have to stop your vertical movement as precisely when moving to click one of them.
Money is zero-sum. Money is created through loans which much be repaid. Well, I guess it's a less than zero sum because most lenders demand payments of interest also. So for every dollar you make someone owes 1 dollar + interest to the lender that put that dollar in circulation.
I'm not sure if economics really differs from money in any real sense, since economics is just how we connect the real world with money.
supression != unwilling to use my resources to help you.
Do you seriously believe that every printing press, web server, megaphone, etc. has to convey your message when you demand it?
If it really is that simple (which could be put into a desktop shortcut) and it's causing hours upon hours of flame war, I now have a new respect for discussing the differences between emacs and vi.
What we found is they actually use their frontal cortex, the cognitive part of their brains. They are actually trying to think about this. They are trying to reason about this and it is not automatic. It is very labored for them.
So teens actually think about the decisions they make rather than:
So what happens is that in these scenarios adults have a system, an automatic system, for processing these types of dilemmas where we instantly get a visual and we instantly, if it is dangerous or gross or aversive, we get that pang.
No offense to evolution, but I would rather think about a decision I make in today's society of social engineering (advertisements, rewritten history books, etc) when the alternative is to have my imagination automatically decide for me.
So just make sure your children understand the consequences of pregnancy, conviction of a crime, breaking their leg, quiting their job, and other serious consequences in life so they have enough information to think and make the best decision possible.
I would argue that of course they're poor at judging risk. Up to adulthood they have a completely separate court system and penal system. They're expected to have parental safety nets, school safety nets, and everyone is always "Thinking of the children". Their risk is much less than an adult.
As far as impulse is concerned why should people suppress their desire to perform arbitrary actions? Unless you meant impulsive high-risk actions.
Every person above the age of child has very valid experience on "what kids are like and what their needs are". I'm not sure who you are to be spending 24 hours a day around children, but maybe you need to step back and see why your kids are fucking up so much.
Or, abstaining from voting can also be expressions of apathy or being completely discouraged due to the corruption that goes on, and on, and on, and on in political circles no matter which party is in power.
The point still remains that you could have done something as simple as write in your own name when you vote official positions. By doing nothing you are effectively telling the system, "do as you please, I no longer care."
If everyone who didn't vote (some 70+% of registered voters) actually voted for someone they believed in, even if it was just a self vote, that would be more likely to change the system than abstaining. You can't just bitch about corruption and expect everyone else to take up arms.
"We must become the change we want to see in the world".
if there was an analog to this in the PC world - some hardware DRM you could put on your machine and be done with the various software based disc checked and network activated schemes once and for all - would you install it?
Absolutely. As long as it doesn't interfere with any other executables I want to run on my general purpose personal computer. And doesn't compromise my personal security through invading my privacy.
Steam is that interface. It uses the same DirectX API type of thing as XFire that lets you IM people in game. I can bring up that same interface in WoW.
These "for the children" net censoring countries sure have a lot of child porn in their country. So much so that they're willing to spend a few hundred million dollars to just build some giant blindfolds to ignore it. Do they really not have any more pressing concerns? I'd be willing to wager they have more unemployed people than pedophiles and molested children combined.
Last I checked, there were plenty of other 'issues' that could use the attention: poverty, cancer research, alternative energies, food production, etc. I understand that raping children is a very bad behavior. But hopefully it's already illegal
However;.10x +.10x +.10x +.10x =.10(x+x+x+x)
So as you can see, 10% of many small amounts is 10% of a large amount.
But comparing it to PayPal isn't quite fair, paypal doesn't have to negotiate copyright licenses from potentially hundreds or maybe thouseands of different entities. Maybe 10% is actually appropriate in this situation.
How could we, as citizens of the global Internet connected society, go about moving back towards an egalitarian Internet?
We as citizens simply cannot. We have very little control of the infrastructure of the Internet. It just takes 1 popular politician, and we could have a great big firewall.
The only way to avoid and/or remove censorship from the Internet is to remove the idea that censorship is acceptable. But that idea is just too radical for the average schmuck who thinks he shouldn't have to even be aware that other people think differently than him/her. It has become okay to censor. From "hate speech" to "pornography" to anarchy cookbooks.
But as I'm typing this I realize that perhaps a return to walled gardens for the majority of users could be a good thing. That way the politicians and their vocal self-absorbed constituents would never be aware of the stuff they want censored.
While it is true that physical coercion can often prevent the actions of others. IMHO it is one of the least sustainable ways of getting what you want. Eventually you'll lose your might, or the opposition will become mightier.
A solution would be to help others understand your wants, and gain support. If you cannot gain support for your wants, perhaps they should be reevaluated. People have bad ideas sometimes. Why add resentment from the oppressed on top of them?
I mean, what are you trying to say? That you can be an 'authority' on something without having studied it?
I believe it's the fact that anyone can study a topic. I can study the Bible and not be a high ranking member of a church. Just like I can study scientific journals, peer-reviewed studies, textbooks, etc. and not have a $60,000 piece of paper saying I studied it.
If someone has an argument against facts, then they should have facts to present and be weighed accordingly, regardless of bureaucratic "proof" of study.
That's valid only if you think that jobs is a zero-sum game... or that jobs is a limited resource. I don't subscribe to that view.
They are most definitely a limited resource. There are a finite amount of jobs, typically based on the amount of money an employer has. Creating a new job requires economic growth, which requires banks to loan more money and I don't believe they are at the moment.
Either the law applies to both or neither, and unless they can come up with a really good reason, we should assume they prosecutors are acting illegally (why that assumption? because all assumptions should be on the side of innocence).
Either you made a big typo or you didn't bother reading what you just wrote. Maybe the prosecutors feel that 100 not for profit DVD copies aren't worth the government's money to prosecute. Maybe they don't believe the confession since it could just be a ploy for attention. There is no reason to assume the prosecutors are acting illegally, there are plenty of legal reasons for them to not pursue this.
There is a difference to trusting your SMTP service provider to deliver a message to the intended parties, and giving information to a company with the expressed purpose of sharing it with everyone in perpetuity.
I'm sure you could get a grant from some security company to create such an app. They'd use it in their advertising, showing how "unsafe" everyone is and how we need their product to protect us.
Slashdot Mirror
The tabs make sense because the URL bar should be part of the tabbed area. The URL is likely different with each tab and therefore shouldn't be outside of them (you expect anything outside the selected tab to not be affected by switching tabs).
The bookmarks & options being inside the tabs is just a judgement call to allow for my following point. By having the tabs at the very top of the frame, and likely at the very top of the desktop, the tabs actually become easier to click. This is because you no longer have to stop your vertical movement as precisely when moving to click one of them.
Money is zero-sum. Money is created through loans which much be repaid. Well, I guess it's a less than zero sum because most lenders demand payments of interest also. So for every dollar you make someone owes 1 dollar + interest to the lender that put that dollar in circulation.
I'm not sure if economics really differs from money in any real sense, since economics is just how we connect the real world with money.
All products suffer from these kinds of problems
I don't remember the last time I was required to take my paint internally though
supression != unwilling to use my resources to help you.
Do you seriously believe that every printing press, web server, megaphone, etc. has to convey your message when you demand it?
If it really is that simple (which could be put into a desktop shortcut) and it's causing hours upon hours of flame war, I now have a new respect for discussing the differences between emacs and vi.
From the article linked:
What we found is they actually use their frontal cortex, the cognitive part of their brains. They are actually trying to think about this. They are trying to reason about this and it is not automatic. It is very labored for them.
So teens actually think about the decisions they make rather than:
So what happens is that in these scenarios adults have a system, an automatic system, for processing these types of dilemmas where we instantly get a visual and we instantly, if it is dangerous or gross or aversive, we get that pang.
No offense to evolution, but I would rather think about a decision I make in today's society of social engineering (advertisements, rewritten history books, etc) when the alternative is to have my imagination automatically decide for me.
So just make sure your children understand the consequences of pregnancy, conviction of a crime, breaking their leg, quiting their job, and other serious consequences in life so they have enough information to think and make the best decision possible.
I would argue that of course they're poor at judging risk. Up to adulthood they have a completely separate court system and penal system. They're expected to have parental safety nets, school safety nets, and everyone is always "Thinking of the children". Their risk is much less than an adult.
As far as impulse is concerned why should people suppress their desire to perform arbitrary actions? Unless you meant impulsive high-risk actions.
Every person above the age of child has very valid experience on "what kids are like and what their needs are". I'm not sure who you are to be spending 24 hours a day around children, but maybe you need to step back and see why your kids are fucking up so much.
I agree with with the gov't bashing; however
Or, abstaining from voting can also be expressions of apathy or being completely discouraged due to the corruption that goes on, and on, and on, and on in political circles no matter which party is in power.
The point still remains that you could have done something as simple as write in your own name when you vote official positions. By doing nothing you are effectively telling the system, "do as you please, I no longer care."
If everyone who didn't vote (some 70+% of registered voters) actually voted for someone they believed in, even if it was just a self vote, that would be more likely to change the system than abstaining. You can't just bitch about corruption and expect everyone else to take up arms.
"We must become the change we want to see in the world".
---Mohandas Gandhi.
if there was an analog to this in the PC world - some hardware DRM you could put on your machine and be done with the various software based disc checked and network activated schemes once and for all - would you install it?
Absolutely. As long as it doesn't interfere with any other executables I want to run on my general purpose personal computer. And doesn't compromise my personal security through invading my privacy.
Steam is that interface. It uses the same DirectX API type of thing as XFire that lets you IM people in game. I can bring up that same interface in WoW.
These "for the children" net censoring countries sure have a lot of child porn in their country. So much so that they're willing to spend a few hundred million dollars to just build some giant blindfolds to ignore it. Do they really not have any more pressing concerns? I'd be willing to wager they have more unemployed people than pedophiles and molested children combined.
Last I checked, there were plenty of other 'issues' that could use the attention: poverty, cancer research, alternative energies, food production, etc. I understand that raping children is a very bad behavior. But hopefully it's already illegal
However; .10x + .10x + .10x + .10x = .10(x+x+x+x)
So as you can see, 10% of many small amounts is 10% of a large amount.
But comparing it to PayPal isn't quite fair, paypal doesn't have to negotiate copyright licenses from potentially hundreds or maybe thouseands of different entities. Maybe 10% is actually appropriate in this situation.
How could we, as citizens of the global Internet connected society, go about moving back towards an egalitarian Internet?
We as citizens simply cannot. We have very little control of the infrastructure of the Internet. It just takes 1 popular politician, and we could have a great big firewall.
The only way to avoid and/or remove censorship from the Internet is to remove the idea that censorship is acceptable. But that idea is just too radical for the average schmuck who thinks he shouldn't have to even be aware that other people think differently than him/her. It has become okay to censor. From "hate speech" to "pornography" to anarchy cookbooks.
But as I'm typing this I realize that perhaps a return to walled gardens for the majority of users could be a good thing. That way the politicians and their vocal self-absorbed constituents would never be aware of the stuff they want censored.
While it is true that physical coercion can often prevent the actions of others. IMHO it is one of the least sustainable ways of getting what you want. Eventually you'll lose your might, or the opposition will become mightier.
A solution would be to help others understand your wants, and gain support. If you cannot gain support for your wants, perhaps they should be reevaluated. People have bad ideas sometimes. Why add resentment from the oppressed on top of them?
Yeah, because those that are now modifying our food have our best interest at heart.
Before we did it to increase sustainability. Now we do it to increase scarcity (and hence profit).
Because they're poor and no other job will take them?
I mean, what are you trying to say? That you can be an 'authority' on something without having studied it?
I believe it's the fact that anyone can study a topic. I can study the Bible and not be a high ranking member of a church. Just like I can study scientific journals, peer-reviewed studies, textbooks, etc. and not have a $60,000 piece of paper saying I studied it.
If someone has an argument against facts, then they should have facts to present and be weighed accordingly, regardless of bureaucratic "proof" of study.
Yep. Everyone who breaks from the status quo should be punished by everyone with an axe to grind in perpetuity forever and ever.
We have enough "innocent" people that we don't need those "guilty" people to help us.</sarcasm>
Knowledge is power
Q.E.D.
And you want every tabbed window contained, not only the same size but only viewable one at a time?
That's valid only if you think that jobs is a zero-sum game... or that jobs is a limited resource. I don't subscribe to that view.
They are most definitely a limited resource. There are a finite amount of jobs, typically based on the amount of money an employer has. Creating a new job requires economic growth, which requires banks to loan more money and I don't believe they are at the moment.
Either the law applies to both or neither, and unless they can come up with a really good reason, we should assume they prosecutors are acting illegally (why that assumption? because all assumptions should be on the side of innocence).
Either you made a big typo or you didn't bother reading what you just wrote. Maybe the prosecutors feel that 100 not for profit DVD copies aren't worth the government's money to prosecute. Maybe they don't believe the confession since it could just be a ploy for attention. There is no reason to assume the prosecutors are acting illegally, there are plenty of legal reasons for them to not pursue this.
There is a difference to trusting your SMTP service provider to deliver a message to the intended parties, and giving information to a company with the expressed purpose of sharing it with everyone in perpetuity.
I'm sure you could get a grant from some security company to create such an app. They'd use it in their advertising, showing how "unsafe" everyone is and how we need their product to protect us.