I disagree. He'll never see the inside of a prison. He is rich, after all, and in our system of justice, that provides a significant amount of immunity.
I don't wish rape or other abuse on anyone, even a scumbag like this.
But considering the (metaphorical, but not less harmful) raping that he engaged in, the phrase "live by the sword, die by the sword" did pop into my mind.
The medium that best suits a person's ability to learn varies a lot from person to person. For me, easily the worst way to absorb and understand information is verbally (reading is the best by orders of magnitude). I've always found lectures to be a complete waste of time because of that.
But I'm not in favor of getting rid of lectures because there are a lot of people for whom it's the best way for them to absorb information.
Ideally, lectures would be available for those who can benefit from them, but optional so that people like me, for whom they are a total waste of time, can learn the same things in way the better suits them.
In concept, net neutrality was designed to ensure carriers wouldn't charge different amounts for different types of services.
No, that's not the idea at all. The idea is to ensure that ISPs wouldn't interfere or impede packets based on who was sending or receiving them.
was designed to wrap the entire ISP industry in so much legislation that upstarts couldn't get started and small-mid sized ISPs couldn't compete with the larger ISPs.
If that was the goal, it failed. Nearly all small and mid-sized ISPs want net neutrality. It helps them, too, and outside if a handful of small ISPs who are taking a political, rather than business, stance, they all see that.
I suspect that manufacturers consider this a part of branding. They want something that sets their phones apart from other Android phones, and the most visible differentiator is a different UI.
slack_justyb has the comprehensive answer, but here's the tl;dr: they forgot what a browser is supposed to be.
I also blame rapid release (what software has that approach not made worse?), the desire to copy Chrome, and the incredibly stupid desire to turn the browser into an operating system.
I, too, would like to be able to, for example, run a small server on occasion for limited periods of time like a few hours to a week or two without having to purchase a commercial-class connection
I've been running a server constantly for about 20 years now that provides a wide range of services for myself and a handful of close friends. I've been forced to use Comcast for about 10 years of that. I've never had a commercial-class connection, and it has never been an issue.
Yes, this is pretty much what I've done for lots of years now: I run my own CA, because I know I can trust the certs signed by it -- and I don't know that I can trust the certs signed by anyone else.
None of that changes the fact that it's a royal pain if you're doing it just to appease FF, though.
Why not? I don't rely on my browser to keep my systems secure. The main advantage of NoScript, though, isn't really security (even though that's a great advantage). It's that NoScript makes the web usable again by letting me selectively avoid running client-side scripts. I'd use it even if the browser's security were perfect.
The first rule of UI design is to let the user know that things are happening
Is that rule still in force? It seems that UX designers have largely decided to ignore it and follow the philosophy of giving as little information as possible.
No worries, I didn't think you were picking a fight, and didn't take offense. I was just trying to express my genuine dismay at missing a reference that I totally shouldn't have missed.
The point would be to reduce the attack surface. Also, it's not a given that everyone running XP are doing anything terribly risky (although most probably are). There are ways of securing XP even without security updates for it.
This is potentially great news! I look forward to seeing how well this ports over. Certain things he said in the page you linked to have me worried, though (for example, that he's relying on HTML5 features to replace some functionality -- which implies that they would only work on sites that are HTML5 compliant).
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. He'll never see the inside of a prison. He is rich, after all, and in our system of justice, that provides a significant amount of immunity.
Because the goal of the justice system is supposed to be justice, not vengeance.
I don't wish rape or other abuse on anyone, even a scumbag like this.
But considering the (metaphorical, but not less harmful) raping that he engaged in, the phrase "live by the sword, die by the sword" did pop into my mind.
The medium that best suits a person's ability to learn varies a lot from person to person. For me, easily the worst way to absorb and understand information is verbally (reading is the best by orders of magnitude). I've always found lectures to be a complete waste of time because of that.
But I'm not in favor of getting rid of lectures because there are a lot of people for whom it's the best way for them to absorb information.
Ideally, lectures would be available for those who can benefit from them, but optional so that people like me, for whom they are a total waste of time, can learn the same things in way the better suits them.
Monsanto is hardly the only, first, or last corporation who is willing to risk innocent lives in pursuit of profit. This is a time-worn tradition.
So we know our response: nothing at all.
Monsanto is, after all, one of the nastiest, sociopathic and evil corporations on the planet.
No, that's not the idea at all. The idea is to ensure that ISPs wouldn't interfere or impede packets based on who was sending or receiving them.
If that was the goal, it failed. Nearly all small and mid-sized ISPs want net neutrality. It helps them, too, and outside if a handful of small ISPs who are taking a political, rather than business, stance, they all see that.
And under the leadership of Ajit Pai, that something is shit.
I suspect that manufacturers consider this a part of branding. They want something that sets their phones apart from other Android phones, and the most visible differentiator is a different UI.
slack_justyb has the comprehensive answer, but here's the tl;dr: they forgot what a browser is supposed to be.
I also blame rapid release (what software has that approach not made worse?), the desire to copy Chrome, and the incredibly stupid desire to turn the browser into an operating system.
They're using Google f'ing analytics???
Good lord.
Yeah, we'll see. What I've heard from Mozilla about FF57 doesn't make it sound like they've fixed much of what they've broken.
I, too, would like to be able to, for example, run a small server on occasion for limited periods of time like a few hours to a week or two without having to purchase a commercial-class connection
I've been running a server constantly for about 20 years now that provides a wide range of services for myself and a handful of close friends. I've been forced to use Comcast for about 10 years of that. I've never had a commercial-class connection, and it has never been an issue.
Because you haven't disabled KWallet, which is a KDE thing, not a Chrome thing.
Yes, this is pretty much what I've done for lots of years now: I run my own CA, because I know I can trust the certs signed by it -- and I don't know that I can trust the certs signed by anyone else.
None of that changes the fact that it's a royal pain if you're doing it just to appease FF, though.
Why not? I don't rely on my browser to keep my systems secure. The main advantage of NoScript, though, isn't really security (even though that's a great advantage). It's that NoScript makes the web usable again by letting me selectively avoid running client-side scripts. I'd use it even if the browser's security were perfect.
Thunderbird isn't dead. I use it every day. Mozilla cut it loose, true, but that will probably save it, since they weren't maintaining it.
Interesting turn of phrase there.
Enabling EME isn't really embracing customer choice, though. It's enabling corporate misbehavior.
The first rule of UI design is to let the user know that things are happening
Is that rule still in force? It seems that UX designers have largely decided to ignore it and follow the philosophy of giving as little information as possible.
No worries, I didn't think you were picking a fight, and didn't take offense. I was just trying to express my genuine dismay at missing a reference that I totally shouldn't have missed.
The point would be to reduce the attack surface. Also, it's not a given that everyone running XP are doing anything terribly risky (although most probably are). There are ways of securing XP even without security updates for it.
Even better!
Right now, I'm using Online Bookmarks http://www.frech.ch/online-boo...
It's sparse, but it works, and I haven't found anything else that will do the job. I'll probably end up having to write one someday.
Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry for the nomenclature confusion.
This is potentially great news! I look forward to seeing how well this ports over. Certain things he said in the page you linked to have me worried, though (for example, that he's relying on HTML5 features to replace some functionality -- which implies that they would only work on sites that are HTML5 compliant).