Can you make it so you can input any web site? That would be a useful tool for researchers or the curious. Maybe also add variables to slow down the cycling of the sites and specify intervals. And making the previews a bit bigger would be nice. Heck I don't see a reason why archive.org wouldn't want to include your application (maybe not in perl, my own bias).
If, however, these things are AI-controlled, that is just braindead. Sooner or later, they'll crash into something they shouldn't. The AI just isn't going to be good enough without decent conceptual processing algorithms.
Well, they are going to have some AI for collision avoidance and what not. But I expect that generally they will be under the direction of a controller. But if the radio link goes down, they need to not fall from the sky. The vehicle needs to be able to react safely.
How about instead of just making this the default layout, let us choose our own with CSS. Firefox allows you to select alternate style sheets, so why not just have this new layout be one of the options.
and already owns more than 4000 patents, including many patents on fundamental, but trivial technologies, like double clicks.
Patent the triple click or click(n + 1) and sue the bejesus out of Microsoft for all those times you have been waiting around for something to open and you just keep clicking.
What about Krakatoa? What about Pompeii?! What about Asian Tsunami? History has shown us the terrible dangers of geothermal energy! Geology has killed far more people than even the satanic nuclear power!
And just think how many civilizations have been totally wiped out by the evils of solar power when all those Stars go super nova!! Just think.
Like StarTrek's communicator presaged the flip phone, this , "Global Link", from the TV show "Earth Final Conflict" (terrible show yes) would really be an example of what we are after in a mobile device. The technology needed to make it happen is a high resolution OLED flexible display, so you can roll up the screen tightly. But nearly everything else is very doable with today's technology. Also, with better voice recognition with dictation it would make the interface much more appealing by limiting the need for a keyboard.
Ok. If we are going to get more specific... "Flee from justice" in the legal sense is slightly different than what you and I would mean by it.
No it doesn't. The Article clearly just applies to crimes actually commited by a person in a State followed by flight from that State.
Secondly, The actual case that was panned by the SCOTUS references a federal law that is applied according to local custom and morals. The law is the Computer Decency Act of 1996. Since it is a federal law it is even easier to get the arrest and extradition. "She intentionally put that up on her web site, and that picture is criminal in our state." Ta freakin da.
But yes, the whole point of the Supreme Court case was to challenge a Federal law which has nothing to do directly with State obsenity laws and nothing to do with extradition between States. I actually think the court was right not to get involved, since the person challenging the law wasn't actually harmed demonstrably by the law. The "chilling" effect was not considered sufficient grounds and I agree with that.
so in other words, the FOSS community is content to just act as a 'spoiler' to Windows, enabling the theft of software, rather than actually competing on an equal footing.
No, actually Dell selling Windows preinstalled is spoiling the Linux numbers because many Dell and other computers end up running Linux, in far greater numbers than Windows gets installed over Linux.
I am personally responsible for +2 Linux and -2 Windows in the OS count, and I am about to "upgrade" one more computer.
What he's saying is that the FCC is fine with a broadband provider selling you a 6Mbit line at a higher cost than a 2MBit line, as long as you get what you're paying for. The AT&T plan may have resulted in you getting less bandwidth than you paid for if you failed to pay their extortion fees.
That is very good, thanks for actually reading it. I think it is important that we are clear that providing their actual customers with different levels of service based on price should be perfectly acceptible.
But it is the Bullshit about ISPs purposefully increasing the latency of content and service providers so they can extort money out of big companies is what is unnacceptable. People are already paying for access to the whole of the Internet and bandwidth, ISPs should not be double billing content and service providers for being allowed to do business with their customers. If the ISPs want to come to some business arrangement to provide better access to some content through some distributed colocation or some other means I don't think we are going to be able to stop that. But this purposeful selective throttling down of packets by certain other companies must be considered an illegal business practice. The line might get fuzzy, so I think we may need to put a regulatory stop to QoS packet handling in general. But I could see legitamite reasons to do QoS, so I am not sure how a regulation could be effectively worded to prevent the practice that we all know is bad for the market.
Nope. The merit has to do with the flight state showing the asylum state that they had a crime commited as defined in their jurisdiction, and that there is evidence linking the person to the crime. No proving they are guilty, just enough that a grand jury would move for a trial.
Ya, well that is dumb. I think that is a real problem if a State decides not to protect its citizens from being prosecuted in another state they have never been to.
After a little reading, the types of cases we are talking about here aren't covered by the Article 4, Section 2, Clause 2. The constitution requires that the person had fled from another state where the crime was commited. But if the person was never in the State where he is being charged with a crime then this clause does not compel the State to deliver up the accused.
Same with the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, if the person has not "fled from justice" then it would not apply. The exception being with someone who commits an act where it has "intentionally resulting in a crime" in the other State. So, the State would have to show that the person intentionally caused a crime to be commited in that other State. And that part is prefaced with "The Governor of this state may also surrender..." The word "may" does not compel the governor to do anything. That would imply the Governor has complete discretion regarding crimes alleged to have been commited in remote jurisdictions by people that never left their State.
2.0 is *mainly* a release for reworking the UI. Only a few hand picked SVG changes are making it into this release, and SVG declarative animation will definately not be one of them. Mozilla Firefox won't get the majority of the SVG (or other engine) improvements until it's updated to the current development version of the Mozilla Platform/Gecko. That's scheduled for Firefox 3.0 in the first half of 2003, not Firefox 2.0.
2003? scheduled? I think we are a bit behind then?
Seriously, more and more SVG animation support would be great. I am on the SVG developers mailing list and SVG development is very very active these days. Better and better support for SVG would mean that richer graphics, animations and applications based on open standards would be available natively for firefox users. I know in many people's minds AJAX techniques have meant less need for SVG as a Flash killer. But there are still areas such as graphics scalability for different displays (cell phones) and very rich set of animation features combined with the possibility of inline animations without need for a plugin that make SVG support in firefox very desirable. Also, fuller SVG support in firefox could help drive firefox marketshare and will certainly help us get to a open standard for Vector graphics and animations faster and away from any remaining reliance on Flash.
Oh, and I forgot to finish my thought, double criminality only applies to extradition to other countries, not other states in the union.
Well, then I think it falls back to "merit" of the charges. The consideration of merit should include whether what is being alleged would be a crime in the State where the arrest took place.
That means that if the asylum state has an obscenity law (and they all do), even if the standards are not the same, under treaty the asylum state has to extridite.
But what about merit? Why would the asylum state have to apply the standards of the other state to determine merit? It would be enough that the asylum state considered the charges without merit.
You don't like that professor's rules, take your money and go elsewhere - the school doesn't NEED your self centered, obnoxious ass around anyway.
I have no problem with this attitude. As long as "take your money" means a full refund of tuition already paid. Most Universities offer a short full refund period at the beginning of the semester, which is good, but that should be extended for any changes in classroom policy or practice mid semester that the student finds unreasonable.
You sure as shit can bring charges up aginst entities outside your community. Guess what? The law enforcement and courts in the other jurisdiction are legally obliged to arrest the person, decide if the case has merit in it's filing jurisdiction, and extridite you for prosecution if it does.
But also under the "doctrine of double criminality" the arresting jurisdiction must decide if what the person is accused of would also be a crime in the arresting jurisdiction.
So, if the charges that would apply in both jurisdictions don't have merit, and the ones that do have merit wouldn't apply in the arresting jurisdiction, then the person should be released. Citizens of States must be protected from the inane laws of other jurisdictions.
Ok, but how would that really help? The AdBlocking I'm familiar with - proxomitron - wouldn't be deterred by who's hosting the ad, it doesn't care, it bases it on the div ID or the size of the banner, or some identifier in the path or really anything. I'm assuming that AdMuncher, AdBlock and the upcoming Opera Content Block will be likewise.
Yes, the ads would have to be made a lot less distinguishable from the content. Sure banner ads, and such would still be blockable, as well as anything that was purposefully tagged as an "ad", but text based google style ads and non banner style images and such would probably get through until the filter started filtering out content.
Well, you could switch to an open source database, and then hire all kinds of brainpower to understand how it works, keep updated on the development, institute updates constantly, search high and low to find someone who can solve the problem that apparently only your company is having......or, you could do the exact same thing with Oracle, plus forty large per processor. This decision isn't that hard to make.
Well done, I was all ready to disagree with you... until you concluded that you have the same issues with Oracle, which has been my experience with them.
Web Sites will have to start hosting their own ads again, or else somehow detect that the browser is no longer letting ads through and cut off content. Actually, from a coding perspective the app server could proxy those ads for delivery without a problem, but there needs to be a whole new level of intimacy between the ad server and the content provider, otherwise their metrics are going to get screwed up or be untrustworthy.
When I was in school, it was mandatory to use the Full English Version (FEV) of an acronym the first time used in an essay. Is it such a unreasonble request?
Why bother? We have wikipedia to help tell us that SLI may in fact stand for "Street Light Interference, a phenomenon whereby street lights go out as you pass beneath them."
Slashdot Mirror
If you really don't trust your children, then make sure you are there watching them.
That is exactly how "elected" officials think of us.
Except this is the government, I'm afraid to see how far they'll go to do what they want... I'm not just being paranoid am I?
Eager beaver bureaucrats on a moral crusade with guns and the authority to use them... sure nothing to worry about. Just move along.
Can you make it so you can input any web site? That would be a useful tool for researchers or the curious. Maybe also add variables to slow down the cycling of the sites and specify intervals. And making the previews a bit bigger would be nice. Heck I don't see a reason why archive.org wouldn't want to include your application (maybe not in perl, my own bias).
It is a waste of time to address this seriously, this has to be an April Fool's day joke.
I just hope I don't share any genes with those people.
If, however, these things are AI-controlled, that is just braindead. Sooner or later, they'll crash into something they shouldn't. The AI just isn't going to be good enough without decent conceptual processing algorithms.
Well, they are going to have some AI for collision avoidance and what not. But I expect that generally they will be under the direction of a controller. But if the radio link goes down, they need to not fall from the sky. The vehicle needs to be able to react safely.
How about instead of just making this the default layout, let us choose our own with CSS. Firefox allows you to select alternate style sheets, so why not just have this new layout be one of the options.
and already owns more than 4000 patents, including many patents on fundamental, but trivial technologies, like double clicks.
Patent the triple click or click(n + 1) and sue the bejesus out of Microsoft for all those times you have been waiting around for something to open and you just keep clicking.
What about Krakatoa? What about Pompeii?! What about Asian Tsunami? History has shown us the terrible dangers of geothermal energy! Geology has killed far more people than even the satanic nuclear power!
And just think how many civilizations have been totally wiped out by the evils of solar power when all those Stars go super nova!! Just think.
Like StarTrek's communicator presaged the flip phone, this , "Global Link", from the TV show "Earth Final Conflict" (terrible show yes) would really be an example of what we are after in a mobile device. The technology needed to make it happen is a high resolution OLED flexible display, so you can roll up the screen tightly. But nearly everything else is very doable with today's technology. Also, with better voice recognition with dictation it would make the interface much more appealing by limiting the need for a keyboard.
Ok. If we are going to get more specific... "Flee from justice" in the legal sense is slightly different than what you and I would mean by it.
No it doesn't. The Article clearly just applies to crimes actually commited by a person in a State followed by flight from that State.
Secondly, The actual case that was panned by the SCOTUS references a federal law that is applied according to local custom and morals. The law is the Computer Decency Act of 1996. Since it is a federal law it is even easier to get the arrest and extradition. "She intentionally put that up on her web site, and that picture is criminal in our state." Ta freakin da.
But yes, the whole point of the Supreme Court case was to challenge a Federal law which has nothing to do directly with State obsenity laws and nothing to do with extradition between States. I actually think the court was right not to get involved, since the person challenging the law wasn't actually harmed demonstrably by the law. The "chilling" effect was not considered sufficient grounds and I agree with that.
so in other words, the FOSS community is content to just act as a 'spoiler' to Windows, enabling the theft of software, rather than actually competing on an equal footing.
No, actually Dell selling Windows preinstalled is spoiling the Linux numbers because many Dell and other computers end up running Linux, in far greater numbers than Windows gets installed over Linux.
I am personally responsible for +2 Linux and -2 Windows in the OS count, and I am about to "upgrade" one more computer.
What he's saying is that the FCC is fine with a broadband provider selling you a 6Mbit line at a higher cost than a 2MBit line, as long as you get what you're paying for. The AT&T plan may have resulted in you getting less bandwidth than you paid for if you failed to pay their extortion fees.
That is very good, thanks for actually reading it. I think it is important that we are clear that providing their actual customers with different levels of service based on price should be perfectly acceptible.
But it is the Bullshit about ISPs purposefully increasing the latency of content and service providers so they can extort money out of big companies is what is unnacceptable. People are already paying for access to the whole of the Internet and bandwidth, ISPs should not be double billing content and service providers for being allowed to do business with their customers. If the ISPs want to come to some business arrangement to provide better access to some content through some distributed colocation or some other means I don't think we are going to be able to stop that. But this purposeful selective throttling down of packets by certain other companies must be considered an illegal business practice. The line might get fuzzy, so I think we may need to put a regulatory stop to QoS packet handling in general. But I could see legitamite reasons to do QoS, so I am not sure how a regulation could be effectively worded to prevent the practice that we all know is bad for the market.
Nope. The merit has to do with the flight state showing the asylum state that they had a crime commited as defined in their jurisdiction, and that there is evidence linking the person to the crime. No proving they are guilty, just enough that a grand jury would move for a trial.
Ya, well that is dumb. I think that is a real problem if a State decides not to protect its citizens from being prosecuted in another state they have never been to.
After a little reading, the types of cases we are talking about here aren't covered by the Article 4, Section 2, Clause 2. The constitution requires that the person had fled from another state where the crime was commited. But if the person was never in the State where he is being charged with a crime then this clause does not compel the State to deliver up the accused.
Same with the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, if the person has not "fled from justice" then it would not apply. The exception being with someone who commits an act where it has "intentionally resulting in a crime" in the other State. So, the State would have to show that the person intentionally caused a crime to be commited in that other State. And that part is prefaced with "The Governor of this state may also surrender..." The word "may" does not compel the governor to do anything. That would imply the Governor has complete discretion regarding crimes alleged to have been commited in remote jurisdictions by people that never left their State.
2.0 is *mainly* a release for reworking the UI. Only a few hand picked SVG changes are making it into this release, and SVG declarative animation will definately not be one of them. Mozilla Firefox won't get the majority of the SVG (or other engine) improvements until it's updated to the current development version of the Mozilla Platform/Gecko. That's scheduled for Firefox 3.0 in the first half of 2003, not Firefox 2.0.
2003? scheduled? I think we are a bit behind then?
Seriously, more and more SVG animation support would be great. I am on the SVG developers mailing list and SVG development is very very active these days. Better and better support for SVG would mean that richer graphics, animations and applications based on open standards would be available natively for firefox users. I know in many people's minds AJAX techniques have meant less need for SVG as a Flash killer. But there are still areas such as graphics scalability for different displays (cell phones) and very rich set of animation features combined with the possibility of inline animations without need for a plugin that make SVG support in firefox very desirable. Also, fuller SVG support in firefox could help drive firefox marketshare and will certainly help us get to a open standard for Vector graphics and animations faster and away from any remaining reliance on Flash.
Oh, and I forgot to finish my thought, double criminality only applies to extradition to other countries, not other states in the union.
Well, then I think it falls back to "merit" of the charges. The consideration of merit should include whether what is being alleged would be a crime in the State where the arrest took place.
That means that if the asylum state has an obscenity law (and they all do), even if the standards are not the same, under treaty the asylum state has to extridite.
But what about merit? Why would the asylum state have to apply the standards of the other state to determine merit? It would be enough that the asylum state considered the charges without merit.
At it's root, the SCOTUS decision of Dred Scott was a property issue. He was property being taken away from his owner without due proces of law.
This has nothing to do fugitives fleeing over state lines.
In the asylum state, a former slave was no longer property.
You don't like that professor's rules, take your money and go elsewhere - the school doesn't NEED your self centered, obnoxious ass around anyway.
I have no problem with this attitude. As long as "take your money" means a full refund of tuition already paid. Most Universities offer a short full refund period at the beginning of the semester, which is good, but that should be extended for any changes in classroom policy or practice mid semester that the student finds unreasonable.
You sure as shit can bring charges up aginst entities outside your community. Guess what? The law enforcement and courts in the other jurisdiction are legally obliged to arrest the person, decide if the case has merit in it's filing jurisdiction, and extridite you for prosecution if it does.
But also under the "doctrine of double criminality" the arresting jurisdiction must decide if what the person is accused of would also be a crime in the arresting jurisdiction.
So, if the charges that would apply in both jurisdictions don't have merit, and the ones that do have merit wouldn't apply in the arresting jurisdiction, then the person should be released. Citizens of States must be protected from the inane laws of other jurisdictions.
These laws are based in the Constitution, and are designed to keep people from simply fleeing across state lines to avoid prosecution.
Ya, remember Dredd Scott? That worked out well.
Ok, but how would that really help? The AdBlocking I'm familiar with - proxomitron - wouldn't be deterred by who's hosting the ad, it doesn't care, it bases it on the div ID or the size of the banner, or some identifier in the path or really anything. I'm assuming that AdMuncher, AdBlock and the upcoming Opera Content Block will be likewise.
Yes, the ads would have to be made a lot less distinguishable from the content. Sure banner ads, and such would still be blockable, as well as anything that was purposefully tagged as an "ad", but text based google style ads and non banner style images and such would probably get through until the filter started filtering out content.
Well, you could switch to an open source database, and then hire all kinds of brainpower to understand how it works, keep updated on the development, institute updates constantly, search high and low to find someone who can solve the problem that apparently only your company is having... ...or, you could do the exact same thing with Oracle, plus forty large per processor. This decision isn't that hard to make.
Well done, I was all ready to disagree with you... until you concluded that you have the same issues with Oracle, which has been my experience with them.
Web Sites will have to start hosting their own ads again, or else somehow detect that the browser is no longer letting ads through and cut off content. Actually, from a coding perspective the app server could proxy those ads for delivery without a problem, but there needs to be a whole new level of intimacy between the ad server and the content provider, otherwise their metrics are going to get screwed up or be untrustworthy.
I don't block until the ads get annoying, personally. But once they're blocked, they're blocked.
Sorry Slashdot, your ads just got blocked. They were screwing up the layout of the page and making it unreadable.
When I was in school, it was mandatory to use the Full English Version (FEV) of an acronym the first time used in an essay. Is it such a unreasonble request?
Why bother? We have wikipedia to help tell us that SLI may in fact stand for "Street Light Interference, a phenomenon whereby street lights go out as you pass beneath them."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLI
Or perhaps it is "Scalable Link Interface", but that isn't half as fun.