From an inferior provider? GOOD. Let their country fall behind in information services while we surge ahead. I don't want a dictatorship having access to anything before we have fully deployed it.
That's hilarious. The "dictatorship" is the one setting the rules for the people. The leaders of China have allllllll the free unfettered information they want from any search engine in the world. Those closest to the government will continue to reap the benefits, and the most advanced industries will be arms-length at most, further cementing legitimacy and progress in the minds of citizens. They aren't going to lose an inch whether Google stays or not.
Oh, you mean a PHP cartel. Sure, that usually turns out fine.
Also, if you happen to be involved in any open source projects, could you please stop diluting the workforce and just go work for somebody established? You're hurting the big guys.
Well, technically, I suppose it's more of a fiefdom.... in that I'll have to refer you to my landlord. I should mention that the tracts are not huge, and the vassals are a bit leaky, but there's always hot feoffee.
Until these legacy browsers are replaced with modern updates, Web developers may be stuck maintaining two versions of their sites: a rich version for HTML5-enabled users, and a version for legacy browsers that falls back on outdated rendering tricks.
Is this any different from the last 10 years compensating for people and entire institutions clinging to NN 4, IE 5.5, IE Mac, IE 6, IE 7, shit CSS support vs. tables, or having JS turned off?
No? Fine then. Budget time and funds as normal. Glad to know BrowserShots and QuirksMode still have a bright future ahead.
I would really like to make a shirt that says: "This T-shirt has a serious exploit that allows a remote attacker to gain complete control." It should be printed around the bottom hem for maximum effect. Could also work on tighty whiteys.
This summary offers one of the best out of context quotes I've ever seen on/. "It's just funny...", said Ha.
I would find it funny to hear whose money he thinks the city *should* be prosecuting them with.
First they came "for the environment", and I did not speak out—because I like being indoors; Then they came "for the children", and I did not speak out—because I had no children; Then they came "for my safety", and I did not speak out—because I felt quite safe at home; Then they came for my lawn—and there was nowhere left for me to speak out.
It sounds like you and OP have the right idea. But please don't forget that ~8% of men and ~0.6% of women are colour blind, and there is more than one type of colour loss. Always distinguish unique colours with a unique shape (or pattern). Just like traffic signs.
Say what you will about the Mesopotamians, but they knew how to make a damn funny lolcat. Shame that all their backup tapes were papyrus.;)
Anything of significance will either stick around, or be archived by others who find it significant.
Nah, you have too much faith in popular culture. Wikipedia will always, always have a complete list of Pokemon. And that's fantastic. But here's the tricky bit... if something that is significant *is* lost, how do you know that it was a) significant or b) existed in the first place. That's why it's so hard to think of an example. What we get is: "if only someone saved this information that would be really useful to me right now so I don't have to reinvent it..." You didn't know yesterday that you needed that information. Today you have a new job to do.
There's another important factor to consider. Sabotage. Websites die every month from server failure or hacking. All the common sense and backup policies in the world won't limit someone who's well funded mission is to disrupt your web presence. It might not even be you they target, if it's your data center (like say Amazon S3) all those people are hooped. Some of them were researching cures for diseases. You can't just go back to handwritten notes and catch up.
You're aware that in war, libraries and archives are destroyed early on? Best way to annihilate a culture is destroy the records of its existence. It happens today like it happened 2500 years ago. If they were successful we might not even know libraries existed 2500 years ago. Maybe 4000 years ago they were successful. We can't know.
Why should you care about 10 years ago or 1000? You don't need to be a history major to see the point: What we are, is because of what we were. So what should we be next?
It's unlikely most countries would adopt the same restrictions China has, but obviously when Europe starts impacting the internet, pants are rightfully bricked. (Not that the U.S. lawmakers haven't had their fair share of calls for net filtering and ISP responsibility in the name of children, privacy, and copyright.) Just to imagine what the landscape could look like a few years from now, following is *paraphrased* from Google's hearing before congress in 2006.
Some governments impose restrictions that make our mission difficult to achieve, and this is what we have encountered in Italy. In such a situation, we have to add to the balance a third fundamental commitment:
(c) Be responsive to local conditions.
So with that framework in mind, we decided to try a different path, a path rooted in the very pragmatic calculation that we could provide more access to more information to more Italian citizens more reliably by offering a new service – Google.it – that, though subject to Italy's self-censorship requirements, would have some significant advantages. Above all, it would be faster and more reliable, and would provide more and better search results for all but a handful of politically sensitive subjects. We also developed several elements that distinguish our service in Italy, including:
* Disclosure to users -- We will give notification to Italian users whenever search results have been removed.
* Protection of user privacy -- We will not maintain on Italy soil any services, like email, that involve personal or confidential data. This means that we will not, for example, host Gmail or Blogger, our email and blogging tools, in Italy.
* Continued availability of Google.com -- We will not terminate the availability of our unfiltered Italian-language Google.com service.
This is indeed very old news. Looks like the original article is circa 2007, and we're here figuring out that hardly any developers have addressed it.
Here's how to properly resize in Photoshop:
Great tip, but sentences like that are part of the problem. If Photoshop isn't resizing "properly" it's Adobe's Damn Job to do something about it if they want to charge seven hundred dollars. Teaching users how to create an action script doesn't quite cut it. At the *very* minimum there could be a checkbox for "Very Precise Gamma Calculations (25% slower)".
"Most people don't even notice, so why bother" shouldn't be an acceptable bullet point in industries like medicine, astronomy, military, and engineering. I guarantee all of which use Photoshop, or another image viewer/processor with the same issue.
Sounds like this development would greatly improve a 2008 Casio camera a friend told me about a couple weeks ago. 6MP, with full res shots going into the buffer @ 60fps before you fully press the shutter button. Up to 1200 fps (tiny) video. Hate to sound like a shill, but "high-resolution still image alongside very high-speed video" describes this pretty well, depending on your definition of "high" at least.
The Internet is supposed to be free. It is supposed to allow equal access to data by equal parties. The existence of megacorporations in this space undermines the original spirit of the Internet, and provides just another way to turn the once-egalitarian Internet into just another tilted media outlet like Fox News.
Good discussion point or FUD?;-) Okay I'll bite. It's all very good and nostalgic to say that the original spirit of the "free internet" has been lost to commercialism. But in fact very little has been lost, the values you speak of simply get drowned out by "bigger and better". You're talking about net neutrality. I've been using the internet since the 1980s, and in fact the network is not designed to be free, it's designed to be redundant. Why can't we get back to the values of preserving communication in the event of global thermonuclear war? Twitter goes down for 10 minutes and the entire world fucking flips out. THAT'S what we're losing. The eggs are back in small baskets.
We pay for things that we decide have a certain level of value. I choose to pay for a cell phone, internet access, DVDs-by-mail, and ignore broadcast television completely. I don't pay Twitter or Google a dime to use their services because there's no paid tier that would be improve my life. If they were obliterated tomorrow I'd be grumbling for a weekend while I change my bookmarks to other services, and rebuild whatever data lost since my last offline sync. No matter how big one service gets, the "spirit" of the internet dictates that there will always be alternatives because enterprising folks are free to create those alternatives. Huge corporations, like governments, rise, crumble, and disappear. It's just that the perception of time works differently here and we can't imagine life without YouTube. But I promise you it exists.
Google doesn't just believe it offers an infrastructure for free speech, that is in fact what user-submitted content allows. Time magazine said so. And there is simply too much of it to police effectively. The fact that Google is not willing to simply roll over on any Government's whim, be it U.S., China (recently), or Australia, makes me feel better about Google as a global force. Governments are full of old puritans. Google is full of horny twenty-somethings that like streaming. I'll take my chances with how they choose to define pornography. It's their servers, and guess what, they get to make the rules and we are free to voice our dissatisfaction on their policies or leave. It's the same reason I'll never live in Australia or England.
Google is completely incapable of removing things that it didn't establish. If I give you ten apples and later decide to take back two that were rotting, you haven't lost anything, and I had no moral obligation to give you a certain number of apples. You can still pick your own apples. You can still use pine and sendmail. You can still use IPv4 addresses. You can still get access via freenets, universities, and government offices. You can still use Gopher, FTP, Archie, Jughead... but you can only see the information made accessible in that way. If you want to see Flash content, you install Flash. If you want to read Da Vinci's original notes, you have to learn Italian. Scream all you want, but access to information is a privilege, not a right. If you're illiterate, newspapers are not obligated to broadcast aloud on the radio. Someone else does that because it makes them a profit.
You are more than welcome to set up your own egalitarian area of the internet out of your own pocket, and hook your servers up to a trunk so that you don't have to pay a service provider with a puritan TOS agreement to deal with cease and desist letters. But odds are I would find your site through Google. There's nothing wrong with any of that. That's how it's supposed to work in the society we have built for ourselves.
You are also more than welcome to start your own society. I'll bring the kool aid.:-)
I understand some issues are not clearly defined in law but this is turning into a circus.
IANAL but I'm thinking about law school and life as a corporate counsel. I have to wonder how many of these RIAA shysters, one day, relaxed with a cup of tea during their undergrad and thought it would make for a satisfying career to serve an organization that enjoys pounding its fists against the judicial system until she goes blind *again*.
Don't get me wrong, I can do my job without feeling personally responsible for the outcomes. But I just might have to remove all the mirrors from my penthouse apartment.
Now they have to go to the media lab to watch them.
If the demand on the media lab increases to the point where students need to use it on weekends, the university should extend the hours of the lab if it has any sense. They're deliberately trying to save court fees... will they also say they can't pay a few students minimum wage to sit at a reference desk on Sunday?
Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose...
This is the new economy. Retail prices don't go down anymore, they just take longer to increase when the manufacturer cuts costs. When was the last time you bought a candy bar? Notice they're getting lighter? Lowering a MSRP sends a bad message, that's what Wal-mart (and in our gaming context, Steam) is for.
I just don't see why Ballmer signing a Mac has any significance at all.
Because people, including myself, like to forget that Microsoft helped Apple out in 1997 to the tune of $150 Million. So that we don't have to entertain the thought of thanking MS that Apple survived long enough for the product to exist.
This story is far less significant than Bill Gates face on the big screen at an Apple keynote. Boos, then cheers. Classic. Say hi to the new Apple.
Slashdot Mirror
From an inferior provider? GOOD. Let their country fall behind in information services while we surge ahead. I don't want a dictatorship having access to anything before we have fully deployed it.
That's hilarious. The "dictatorship" is the one setting the rules for the people. The leaders of China have allllllll the free unfettered information they want from any search engine in the world. Those closest to the government will continue to reap the benefits, and the most advanced industries will be arms-length at most, further cementing legitimacy and progress in the minds of citizens. They aren't going to lose an inch whether Google stays or not.
Oh, you mean a PHP cartel.
Sure, that usually turns out fine.
Also, if you happen to be involved in any open source projects, could you please stop diluting the workforce and just go work for somebody established? You're hurting the big guys.
Well, technically, I suppose it's more of a fiefdom.... in that I'll have to refer you to my landlord.
I should mention that the tracts are not huge, and the vassals are a bit leaky, but there's always hot feoffee.
My kingdom for a mod point.
This would work best on assless chaps.
That's not a bug, it's a feature.
Until these legacy browsers are replaced with modern updates, Web developers may be stuck maintaining two versions of their sites: a rich version for HTML5-enabled users, and a version for legacy browsers that falls back on outdated rendering tricks.
Is this any different from the last 10 years compensating for people and entire institutions clinging to NN 4, IE 5.5, IE Mac, IE 6, IE 7, shit CSS support vs. tables, or having JS turned off?
No? Fine then. Budget time and funds as normal. Glad to know BrowserShots and QuirksMode still have a bright future ahead.
I would really like to make a shirt that says: "This T-shirt has a serious exploit that allows a remote attacker to gain complete control."
It should be printed around the bottom hem for maximum effect.
Could also work on tighty whiteys.
I said I'd like to make it, not wear it. :-)
a thousand indignant ./ stories and editorials.
Those insensitive Dotslash clods!
This summary offers one of the best out of context quotes I've ever seen on /.
"It's just funny...", said Ha.
I would find it funny to hear whose money he thinks the city *should* be prosecuting them with.
First they came "for the environment", and I did not speak out—because I like being indoors;
Then they came "for the children", and I did not speak out—because I had no children;
Then they came "for my safety", and I did not speak out—because I felt quite safe at home;
Then they came for my lawn—and there was nowhere left for me to speak out.
I was expecting to see warlock as well. But Gattaca has Gore Vidal, so I guess that wins.
It sounds like you and OP have the right idea. But please don't forget that ~8% of men and ~0.6% of women are colour blind, and there is more than one type of colour loss. Always distinguish unique colours with a unique shape (or pattern). Just like traffic signs.
http://www.iamcal.com/toys/colors/whatis.php
http://www.stcsig.org/usability/topics/colorblind.html
I'm Canadian so I'd be willing to feel embarrassed on your behalf, if you ask nicely.
Say what you will about the Mesopotamians, but they knew how to make a damn funny lolcat. Shame that all their backup tapes were papyrus. ;)
Anything of significance will either stick around, or be archived by others who find it significant.
Nah, you have too much faith in popular culture. Wikipedia will always, always have a complete list of Pokemon. And that's fantastic. But here's the tricky bit... if something that is significant *is* lost, how do you know that it was a) significant or b) existed in the first place. That's why it's so hard to think of an example. What we get is: "if only someone saved this information that would be really useful to me right now so I don't have to reinvent it..." You didn't know yesterday that you needed that information. Today you have a new job to do.
There's another important factor to consider. Sabotage. Websites die every month from server failure or hacking. All the common sense and backup policies in the world won't limit someone who's well funded mission is to disrupt your web presence. It might not even be you they target, if it's your data center (like say Amazon S3) all those people are hooped. Some of them were researching cures for diseases. You can't just go back to handwritten notes and catch up.
You're aware that in war, libraries and archives are destroyed early on? Best way to annihilate a culture is destroy the records of its existence. It happens today like it happened 2500 years ago. If they were successful we might not even know libraries existed 2500 years ago. Maybe 4000 years ago they were successful. We can't know.
Why should you care about 10 years ago or 1000? You don't need to be a history major to see the point:
What we are, is because of what we were. So what should we be next?
What about ununbium?
Too much of a double double negative. And speaking of which, I heard Starbucks is still lobbying for Lattenium.
It's unlikely most countries would adopt the same restrictions China has, but obviously when Europe starts impacting the internet, pants are rightfully bricked. (Not that the U.S. lawmakers haven't had their fair share of calls for net filtering and ISP responsibility in the name of children, privacy, and copyright.)
Just to imagine what the landscape could look like a few years from now, following is *paraphrased* from Google's hearing before congress in 2006.
Some governments impose restrictions that make our mission difficult to achieve, and this is what we have encountered in Italy. In such a situation, we have to add to the balance a third fundamental commitment:
(c) Be responsive to local conditions.
So with that framework in mind, we decided to try a different path, a path rooted in the very pragmatic calculation that we could provide more access to more information to more Italian citizens more reliably by offering a new service – Google.it – that, though subject to Italy's self-censorship requirements, would have some significant advantages. Above all, it would be faster and more reliable, and would provide more and better search results for all but a handful of politically sensitive subjects. We also developed several elements that distinguish our service in Italy, including:
* Disclosure to users -- We will give notification to Italian users whenever search results have been removed.
* Protection of user privacy -- We will not maintain on Italy soil any services, like email, that involve personal or confidential data. This means that we will not, for example, host Gmail or Blogger, our email and blogging tools, in Italy.
* Continued availability of Google.com -- We will not terminate the availability of our unfiltered Italian-language Google.com service.
This is indeed very old news. Looks like the original article is circa 2007, and we're here figuring out that hardly any developers have addressed it.
Here's how to properly resize in Photoshop:
Great tip, but sentences like that are part of the problem.
If Photoshop isn't resizing "properly" it's Adobe's Damn Job to do something about it if they want to charge seven hundred dollars.
Teaching users how to create an action script doesn't quite cut it. At the *very* minimum there could be a checkbox for "Very Precise Gamma Calculations (25% slower)".
"Most people don't even notice, so why bother" shouldn't be an acceptable bullet point in industries like medicine, astronomy, military, and engineering. I guarantee all of which use Photoshop, or another image viewer/processor with the same issue.
I'll be damned if you're going to lay all the blame on me.
I think you've hit upon it. This exact phrase appears on the contracts, next to your blood stained signature.
Sounds like this development would greatly improve a 2008 Casio camera a friend told me about a couple weeks ago. 6MP, with full res shots going into the buffer @ 60fps before you fully press the shutter button. Up to 1200 fps (tiny) video.
Hate to sound like a shill, but "high-resolution still image alongside very high-speed video" describes this pretty well, depending on your definition of "high" at least.
http://www.exilim.com/intl/ex_f1/features1.html
http://www.casio.com/products/Cameras/EXILIM_High-Speed/EX-F1/
http://gizmodo.com/383843/casio-exilim-ex+f1-slow+mo-super-cam-full-review-verdict-totally-unique-shockingly-powerful
The Internet is supposed to be free. It is supposed to allow equal access to data by equal parties. The existence of megacorporations in this space undermines the original spirit of the Internet, and provides just another way to turn the once-egalitarian Internet into just another tilted media outlet like Fox News.
Good discussion point or FUD? ;-) Okay I'll bite.
It's all very good and nostalgic to say that the original spirit of the "free internet" has been lost to commercialism. But in fact very little has been lost, the values you speak of simply get drowned out by "bigger and better". You're talking about net neutrality. I've been using the internet since the 1980s, and in fact the network is not designed to be free, it's designed to be redundant. Why can't we get back to the values of preserving communication in the event of global thermonuclear war? Twitter goes down for 10 minutes and the entire world fucking flips out. THAT'S what we're losing. The eggs are back in small baskets.
We pay for things that we decide have a certain level of value. I choose to pay for a cell phone, internet access, DVDs-by-mail, and ignore broadcast television completely. I don't pay Twitter or Google a dime to use their services because there's no paid tier that would be improve my life. If they were obliterated tomorrow I'd be grumbling for a weekend while I change my bookmarks to other services, and rebuild whatever data lost since my last offline sync. No matter how big one service gets, the "spirit" of the internet dictates that there will always be alternatives because enterprising folks are free to create those alternatives. Huge corporations, like governments, rise, crumble, and disappear. It's just that the perception of time works differently here and we can't imagine life without YouTube. But I promise you it exists.
Google doesn't just believe it offers an infrastructure for free speech, that is in fact what user-submitted content allows. Time magazine said so. And there is simply too much of it to police effectively. The fact that Google is not willing to simply roll over on any Government's whim, be it U.S., China (recently), or Australia, makes me feel better about Google as a global force. Governments are full of old puritans. Google is full of horny twenty-somethings that like streaming. I'll take my chances with how they choose to define pornography. It's their servers, and guess what, they get to make the rules and we are free to voice our dissatisfaction on their policies or leave. It's the same reason I'll never live in Australia or England.
Google is completely incapable of removing things that it didn't establish. If I give you ten apples and later decide to take back two that were rotting, you haven't lost anything, and I had no moral obligation to give you a certain number of apples. You can still pick your own apples. You can still use pine and sendmail. You can still use IPv4 addresses. You can still get access via freenets, universities, and government offices. You can still use Gopher, FTP, Archie, Jughead... but you can only see the information made accessible in that way. If you want to see Flash content, you install Flash. If you want to read Da Vinci's original notes, you have to learn Italian. Scream all you want, but access to information is a privilege, not a right. If you're illiterate, newspapers are not obligated to broadcast aloud on the radio. Someone else does that because it makes them a profit.
You are more than welcome to set up your own egalitarian area of the internet out of your own pocket, and hook your servers up to a trunk so that you don't have to pay a service provider with a puritan TOS agreement to deal with cease and desist letters. But odds are I would find your site through Google. There's nothing wrong with any of that. That's how it's supposed to work in the society we have built for ourselves.
You are also more than welcome to start your own society. I'll bring the kool aid. :-)
I understand some issues are not clearly defined in law but this is turning into a circus.
IANAL but I'm thinking about law school and life as a corporate counsel.
I have to wonder how many of these RIAA shysters, one day, relaxed with a cup of tea during their undergrad and thought it would make for a satisfying career to serve an organization that enjoys pounding its fists against the judicial system until she goes blind *again*.
Don't get me wrong, I can do my job without feeling personally responsible for the outcomes. But I just might have to remove all the mirrors from my penthouse apartment.
If you recall? It came out last week. My copy arrived today.
Too bad the post office couldn't entangle it into my mailbox sooner.
Now they have to go to the media lab to watch them.
If the demand on the media lab increases to the point where students need to use it on weekends, the university should extend the hours of the lab if it has any sense.
They're deliberately trying to save court fees... will they also say they can't pay a few students minimum wage to sit at a reference desk on Sunday?
Can you imagine handing out shiny new business cards?
-----
[DHS logo]
Bill "FraggleR0x0rs" Ferguson
Cyber Warrior
U.S. Government
Cell: ### Skype: ### AIM: ###
-----
Dude, awesome.
Maybe game prices can go down now that games don't have to pay for the network costs, and people can choose...
This is the new economy. Retail prices don't go down anymore, they just take longer to increase when the manufacturer cuts costs.
When was the last time you bought a candy bar? Notice they're getting lighter?
Lowering a MSRP sends a bad message, that's what Wal-mart (and in our gaming context, Steam) is for.
I just don't see why Ballmer signing a Mac has any significance at all.
Because people, including myself, like to forget that Microsoft helped Apple out in 1997 to the tune of $150 Million.
So that we don't have to entertain the thought of thanking MS that Apple survived long enough for the product to exist.
This story is far less significant than Bill Gates face on the big screen at an Apple keynote.
Boos, then cheers. Classic. Say hi to the new Apple.