You've given this a surprising amount of thought for somebody who has ignored the most basic aspect of the situation: the problem reports occur during take-offs and landings. This means that the aircraft are close to the ground, and as such are unlikely to be mistaken for stars.
Additionally, when aircraft are high enough that they CAN be mistaken for stars, they fly roughly parallel to earth's curvature, oriented in a way that prevents the passengers from falling out of their seats (actually, jumbo-jet airframes can't really safely barrel-roll anyhow). This means that lasers would bounce harmlessly off the underside, unless the astronomers happened to be at a similar altitude and looking toward the horizon. Which means again that the aircraft would not resemble stars... Well, unless, they were up really high AND really far away from the airplane. But it would have to be REALLY high, even higher than the plane, due to the curvature of the earth.
So, I call unlikely-gans for your scenario. As in "it would more likely that the remains of a 1975 Ford Pinto fell from orbit and blinded the pilot with the flash from the re-entry heat gas tank explosion"
Funny enough, I'm a fantastic speller -- having read a book a day for several years in a row as a child -- and normally eschew spell-check on all but the most important (and lengthy) documents. Firefox, however, has corrected a couple of long-term errors that I make repeatedly, such as "definately". Which still looks right to me, sigh.
Source code is nothing more than a rigorous specification. In fact, it is so rigorous that you can write a translator which automatically translates the specification into a binary you can run on your platform.
No specification will stop a vendor from writing proprietary extensions. If they publish updated source code, then whoever can catch up.
Well, you know, as long as it's not terrible code.
Once upon a time, the RFC for IP and the BSD code base (that *everyone*) used differed in some subtle way. W. Richards Stevens was the first guy to notice, years after both were written.
Interesting - it's probably a T3 or so. If you live in Canada, crappy tire sells a screwdriver kit with little bits like that, of very high quality Cr-V. Regular $24.95, you'll see it on sale for ten or twelves once or twice a year.
I bought a couple for the shop here, as we couldn't find good T9 bits for our Sun harddrive spuds any place else.
The first icon in your dock (which is probably at the bottom of your screen) is a happy face, named finder. Click on finder, then "Go" at the top of the screen. Then click on Utilities, scroll down, and click on "Terminal"
See? That wasn't so hard! Now your your mac behaves just like a real computer.
Oh --
You can use CMD+N to get a new terminal window, CMD+esc to switch between them, or CMD+<number> to switch to a specific one. CMD is apple's version of the meta key, the label on it looks a little bit like a melted swastika. The other funny key, which looks like sticks leftover after a hockey fight, is their version of the super key.
What's the big deal with e-fuses that warrants a special name? This sounds like regular old EPROM to me. You know, like we had in the 70s? Except on a processor.. Like flavones of the MC68hc11 and such. What am I missing?
The OS was windows, probably XP. Maybe 2k - I've got her on ubuntu now,
She had no problems at all, as far as SHE knew... One day I said, "hey, did you get the 3.5 update? The new JavaScript engine should make a big difference on your machine".... after her blank look, I went to see what she had, and nearly shit my pants.
URL targets are now documented in the location (it really does work well), and extensions can re-target writes to window.status to appear in the add-on bar. The add-on bar is in the exact same place as the old status bar.
I am unsure if window.status is made to appear in the location bar. javascript:experimentally, the answer appears to be "no".
> you're not supposed to skip bits of them just because you > don't think they're important.
Which just goes to show that Firefox's behaviour is *better* than certain competitive browser.
You see, the Firefox guys think the feature is not worth the trouble of implementation. So they leave it out completely.
Yet, certain other browsers think the feature is not worth the trouble of implementation, so they implement *just enough* of it to pass the ACID3 test, but not enough to actually make it usable.
Which is worse? If you're going to rail of Firefox for saying "Hey! We're not doing this!", you should be absolutely livid with vendors that do a half-assed job just to pass a freaking benchmark!
Did you enable the add-on toolbar? That might be necessary for the add-on. IIRC it's disabled by default. I had to enable it so I could drag my location bar down there.
Slashdot Mirror
I find that hard to believe.
I might believe you if you said 100%.
You've given this a surprising amount of thought for somebody who has ignored the most basic aspect of the situation: the problem reports occur during take-offs and landings. This means that the aircraft are close to the ground, and as such are unlikely to be mistaken for stars.
Additionally, when aircraft are high enough that they CAN be mistaken for stars, they fly roughly parallel to earth's curvature, oriented in a way that prevents the passengers from falling out of their seats (actually, jumbo-jet airframes can't really safely barrel-roll anyhow). This means that lasers would bounce harmlessly off the underside, unless the astronomers happened to be at a similar altitude and looking toward the horizon. Which means again that the aircraft would not resemble stars... Well, unless, they were up really high AND really far away from the airplane. But it would have to be REALLY high, even higher than the plane, due to the curvature of the earth.
So, I call unlikely-gans for your scenario. As in "it would more likely that the remains of a 1975 Ford Pinto fell from orbit and blinded the pilot with the flash from the re-entry heat gas tank explosion"
> The world is far worse off without Mr. Stevens.
Truer words have never been spoken.
Funny enough, I'm a fantastic speller -- having read a book a day for several years in a row as a child -- and normally eschew spell-check on all but the most important (and lengthy) documents. Firefox, however, has corrected a couple of long-term errors that I make repeatedly, such as "definately". Which still looks right to me, sigh.
Source code is nothing more than a rigorous specification. In fact, it is so rigorous that you can write a translator which automatically translates the specification into a binary you can run on your platform.
No specification will stop a vendor from writing proprietary extensions. If they publish updated source code, then whoever can catch up.
Also, isn't the VP8 source code freely usable?
You need to read more.
Reading is key to spelling. Read, read, read, read. Read 6 or 7 books a week. Reading Slashdot doesn't count.
That is the very best way to become a good speller.
Put a squid proxy on a host with both 6 and 4 connectivity.
Well, you know, as long as it's not terrible code.
Once upon a time, the RFC for IP and the BSD code base (that *everyone*) used differed in some subtle way. W. Richards Stevens was the first guy to notice, years after both were written.
Guess what happened? They changed the standard.
Facetime only works when you're connected to Wi-Fi (how stupid is that?) and I don't ... think? .. it's VoIP.
> I was going to respond by saying that there have been various emacs variants, but...
Why didn't you? It would have been a very Lucid response.
I'm not a complete noob, and I use Skype. It works fine, as far as I can tell.
Can you suggest a VoIP client for my phone that supports video chat?
Interesting - it's probably a T3 or so. If you live in Canada, crappy tire sells a screwdriver kit with little bits like that, of very high quality Cr-V. Regular $24.95, you'll see it on sale for ten or twelves once or twice a year.
I bought a couple for the shop here, as we couldn't find good T9 bits for our Sun harddrive spuds any place else.
> Anyone know of a chemical you can pour into the hole to make it a "no-head" screw
Yes, it's called epoxy.
Torx, or pentalobular?
The first icon in your dock (which is probably at the bottom of your screen) is a happy face, named finder.
Click on finder, then "Go" at the top of the screen. Then click on Utilities, scroll down, and click on "Terminal"
See? That wasn't so hard! Now your your mac behaves just like a real computer.
Oh --
You can use CMD+N to get a new terminal window, CMD+esc to switch between them, or CMD+<number> to switch to a specific one.
CMD is apple's version of the meta key, the label on it looks a little bit like a melted swastika. The other funny key, which looks like sticks leftover after a hockey fight, is their version of the super key.
> The Eternal September, BTW, finally ended.
Seriously? Um, HOW?
And I won't accept "AOL went bankrupt" as an answer.
If usenet is, somehow, incomprehensibly "back", I'll have to go dig out a copy of nn6.4, get myself a feed, and fire up my old uncancel bots!
Dammit, I was hoping that was a different D'Addario. Loved their phosphor bronze strings..
They sell 2m DVI cables for $89 CAD plus tax.
I think that's all you need to know.v
What's the big deal with e-fuses that warrants a special name? This sounds like regular old EPROM to me. You know, like we had in the 70s? Except on a processor.. Like flavones of the MC68hc11 and such. What am I missing?
The OS was windows, probably XP. Maybe 2k - I've got her on ubuntu now,
She had no problems at all, as far as SHE knew... One day I said, "hey, did you get the 3.5 update? The new JavaScript engine should make a big difference on your machine".... after her blank look, I went to see what she had, and nearly shit my pants.
Don't laugh, I upgraded my mother all the way from Firefox 1.0 beta to Firefox 3.5 not so long ago...
I was shocked that GMail still worked!
URL targets are now documented in the location (it really does work well), and extensions can re-target writes to window.status to appear in the add-on bar. The add-on bar is in the exact same place as the old status bar.
I am unsure if window.status is made to appear in the location bar. javascript:experimentally, the answer appears to be "no".
> you're not supposed to skip bits of them just because you
> don't think they're important.
Which just goes to show that Firefox's behaviour is *better* than certain competitive browser.
You see, the Firefox guys think the feature is not worth the trouble of implementation. So they leave it out completely.
Yet, certain other browsers think the feature is not worth the trouble of implementation, so they implement *just enough* of it to pass the ACID3 test, but not enough to actually make it usable.
Which is worse? If you're going to rail of Firefox for saying "Hey! We're not doing this!", you should be absolutely livid with vendors that do a half-assed job just to pass a freaking benchmark!
As for why Moz thinks SVG fonts aren't worth the effort? This guy has it covered: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=9868007#p9868007
Did you enable the add-on toolbar? That might be necessary for the add-on. IIRC it's disabled by default. I had to enable it so I could drag my location bar down there.
View->Toolbars->Add-on Bar
Is this the same HDR that the iPhone 4's still camera has?