For crying out loud. The whole point of my comment is that entertainment does not have to be about reality. Porn is entertainment. I enjoy fantasy and sci-fi. I enjoy thrillers and horror movies. Enjoyment in entertainment doesn't have to be about reality. If I am fat and ugly, that doesn't mean I want to look at entertainment about fat and ugly people. It also doesn't mean that just because I look at attractive people doing kinky things, I'm confused about reality. Entertainment is often about getting away from reality. Why does porn have to be indicitive of reality to be acceptable?
My comment about Frodo and Samwise wasn't meant to be a factual condemnation.
People who do this, do it because they are paid to, and in some cases, because they're desperate for some kind of approval or attention. It's not normal. Now if doing this fulfills someone's psychological or sexual needs, then it's their business. But boys shouldn't grow up thinking that women orgasm from giving blow-jobs or they're going to be pretty disappointed with their partners (and their partners might be pretty pissed, too).
People who dress up like Frodo Baggins do it because they are paid to, and because they enjoy the attention of being a celebrity. It's not normal. Now if doing this fulfills someone's psychological or sexual needs, then it's their business. But boys shouldn't grow up thinking that wizards exist or they're going to be pretty disappointed with the world.
The only porn you get is brutal, wham, bam, say thank you ma'am stuff. There's no exposure to sex between two people who love each other.
The only fantasy movies you get involve killing, fighting, and dieing. We need more fantasy movies involving Alan Alda and Beth Midler. Frodo and Samwise should be making love, not war.
since it's all client side, they have no way of flagging anybody as far as I can tell.
Not necessarily. Client-side Javascript code can write to a cookie, and the server can read that cookie on subsequent submits. The client side Javascript can even communicate the cookie to the server using the XMLHTTPRequest object, or with an iframe, eliminating the need for a subsequent user-initiated request.
Not that I expect them to go to all this trouble, and I'm definitely not saying that they are doing that now. I'm just saying it is theoretically possible.
Re:FreeBSD is nice and clean
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
Aw, cripe. Nice logic. You, sir, should be part of the whitehouse press staff, where you can gracefully dodge the real issue at hand. Your post takes us in a weird circular logic right back to using FreeBSD. The gp entire point is that you need a Linux distro to have the latest-and-greatest software in the open-source world.
Um, they copied a lot more than that. They copied resizing the map window to fill up the browser window.They copied the general color scheme. They copied the ability to switch between street maps and aerial photos. They copied DHTML layering to show point data on top of the maps. They copied the entire design for searching, navigating, and finding points-of-interest. And they copied it so closely, they made it cross-browser functional (you can damn well bet if Google Maps didn't exist as a cross-browser functional product, MSN VE would only work on IE).
And they copied the most innovative part of Google maps - tile-based pre-built raster images to assemble dynamic maps. As someone who has developed GIS applications, I can tell you, while this may sound trivial, it is not. Google thought outside the box. The GIS community for years has used vector data to produce one raster image on-the-fly at runtime (like Mapquest). Instead, Google creates small tiled images at every zoom-level they offer and stores them on the server, and thus can produce a map at any location and any zoom-level, and offer it with "dragability". This is a completely new paradigm for interactive GIS apps. The old way does offer some advantages over the new way, but for web-based interactive GIS, the new way is pretty phenominal.
While the rest of the GIS community was happily working to make incremental improvements to the old paradigm, Google innovated a new paradigm. MSN just copied it. There's nothing wrong with copying (well, until the USPTO grants software patents), but don't mistake it for anything other than what it is.
If it is acceptable for the user to have to view source, explain to me the difference between the 1pt font source (which you say is probably unnacceptable):
<span style="font-size: 1pt;">This picture was created by John Smith.</span>
And the HTML comment source (which you say is probably acceptable):
<!-- This picture was created by John Smith. -->
Because I don't see any, from an attribution point of view.
All a movie has to do to be a good movie is hold your attention and entertain for the duration it's on the screen.
For all the bitching about Star Wars around here, you might almost forget that Star Wars has held many people's interest for three decades. Perhaps we forget all the movies we've been crapped out of the Hollywood bowels over the years.
When it comes to keeping my attention, many movies these days have their hands full competing with a tub of popcorn.
This is a fun idea, sure, and might have some genuine use in a few niches, but I doubt it's going anywhere as a mainstream idea.
Nothing like thinking completely within the box. Free your mind, my friend.
How about an application that changes your keyboard functions as you proceed through steps? For instance, using an IDE, different key functions would show when I'm editing or debugging.
What if you had toggle keys that, when pressed, the keyboard would show you a visual indication of a completely different set of key-functions? So your keyboard is in its normal state most of the time, but gives you alternate setups as you request them.
What if in games, when you get shot, your keyboard pulses red. When you swim, your keyboard looks like water, with bubbles floating past. Keys show pictures of the weapons they would switch you to, and how much ammo they hold. Keys show the spells they would cast.
What if applications and desktops could now eliminate widgets because a key can be set to represent them as needed? No more row of buttons at the top of every web browser, word processor, and email client. Perhaps they could add a row of keys along the top of the keyboard to replace the window taskbar. These buttons would show your apps, and you could press them to minimize windows, restore them, or bring them to the front.
Or, we could just keep thinking in the box, poo-pooing ideas, and leave the innovation to others.
Where do you get off saying "OSX 10.4" isn't supported? Then you bitch about cross-platform claims of Java? You are wrong on both counts. And even worse, someone moderates you up. The FUD around Java spread by the Slashdot crowd is deafening. And I'll likely be moderated down even though I'm giving accurate information in response to your disinformation.
No, there is no OSX-labeled download. But there is a platform-independent download. There is a Zip file (don't pay attention to the fact that it says "Window ZIP file" - that just refers to the fact that Zip is often considered a Windows file format, even though it really isn't) and a tar.bz2 download (It says "Unix". OSX 10.4 is Unix, though you seem to be unaware). Download either, extract the zip, and run it.
And when it runs, email an apology to Java for your ignorance.
I used to play this game called Zork. Every time you walked into a room, you were presented the same description. It got very repetitive. Playing Zonk is apparently very similar.
Yeah, it's the rape victim's fault for dressing like that, she had it coming! An open door is *not* an invitation, no matter how much you might want what's inside.
A door is the barrier between a public space and a private space. A wireless broadcast that crosses into public spaces, or even someone else's private space, can hardly be compared to walking through an open door to trespass on private property.
And comparing this to rape! Holy cow. You are using people's emotions to spur illogical conclusions. This isn't a woman wearing provacative clothing. This is a woman getting naked, laying down, spreading her legs, telling the man "I want you to connect with me", giving the man instruction on how to connect, then later calling the police.
If you want to prey on emotion, you should call this an act of terrorism while you are at it.
I don't think this is rocket science. Blocking today is dirt simple because they host ads from an ad-specific server that is easy to block. If they started offering APIs for web servers to access and proxy the ad content, so that it was coming from the same host as the website, it would be much harder to block. If the path of the resource was random it would be next to impossible to block.
I love adblock, but I think it can and will be defeated. If DoubleClick doesn't figure out how, they may go out of business. But someone else will step in their place with a scheme for serving ads in a way that cannot be blocked.
"A British tabloid newspaper managed to buy the personal details of over 1000 bank customers from an off-shore call centre based in Delhi...The British police force has passed on details to Interpol and the Indian authorities, in an attempt to prosecute the individual."
A tabloid did something redeeming for society!
I guess they now qualify for the same legal defense as Bitorrent. And the percentages are about the same, too.
Due to the OpenOffice.org Java backlash, expect to see a spike in interest in KOffice
I suspect you overestimate the amount of people who care more about RMS's ethics than getting the job done. The fact is, businesses everywhere are building their entire infrastructure on Java. I doubt any of them is going to stop using Ooo because it has some minor dependencies on Java. The Microsoft shops certainly couldn't care less about RMS's ethics. And I doubt even the majority of the rare 100% OSS shops care.
If KOffice gains interest, I hope it is because KOffice is a good product, not because it is 100% Java free.
Slashdot Mirror
For crying out loud. The whole point of my comment is that entertainment does not have to be about reality. Porn is entertainment. I enjoy fantasy and sci-fi. I enjoy thrillers and horror movies. Enjoyment in entertainment doesn't have to be about reality. If I am fat and ugly, that doesn't mean I want to look at entertainment about fat and ugly people. It also doesn't mean that just because I look at attractive people doing kinky things, I'm confused about reality. Entertainment is often about getting away from reality. Why does porn have to be indicitive of reality to be acceptable?
My comment about Frodo and Samwise wasn't meant to be a factual condemnation.
People who do this, do it because they are paid to, and in some cases, because they're desperate for some kind of approval or attention. It's not normal. Now if doing this fulfills someone's psychological or sexual needs, then it's their business. But boys shouldn't grow up thinking that women orgasm from giving blow-jobs or they're going to be pretty disappointed with their partners (and their partners might be pretty pissed, too).
People who dress up like Frodo Baggins do it because they are paid to, and because they enjoy the attention of being a celebrity. It's not normal. Now if doing this fulfills someone's psychological or sexual needs, then it's their business. But boys shouldn't grow up thinking that wizards exist or they're going to be pretty disappointed with the world.
The only porn you get is brutal, wham, bam, say thank you ma'am stuff. There's no exposure to sex between two people who love each other.
The only fantasy movies you get involve killing, fighting, and dieing. We need more fantasy movies involving Alan Alda and Beth Midler. Frodo and Samwise should be making love, not war.
since it's all client side, they have no way of flagging anybody as far as I can tell.
Not necessarily. Client-side Javascript code can write to a cookie, and the server can read that cookie on subsequent submits. The client side Javascript can even communicate the cookie to the server using the XMLHTTPRequest object, or with an iframe, eliminating the need for a subsequent user-initiated request.
Not that I expect them to go to all this trouble, and I'm definitely not saying that they are doing that now. I'm just saying it is theoretically possible.
Aw, cripe. Nice logic. You, sir, should be part of the whitehouse press staff, where you can gracefully dodge the real issue at hand. Your post takes us in a weird circular logic right back to using FreeBSD. The gp entire point is that you need a Linux distro to have the latest-and-greatest software in the open-source world.
The only thing they "copied" was the dragability.
Um, they copied a lot more than that. They copied resizing the map window to fill up the browser window.They copied the general color scheme. They copied the ability to switch between street maps and aerial photos. They copied DHTML layering to show point data on top of the maps. They copied the entire design for searching, navigating, and finding points-of-interest. And they copied it so closely, they made it cross-browser functional (you can damn well bet if Google Maps didn't exist as a cross-browser functional product, MSN VE would only work on IE).
And they copied the most innovative part of Google maps - tile-based pre-built raster images to assemble dynamic maps. As someone who has developed GIS applications, I can tell you, while this may sound trivial, it is not. Google thought outside the box. The GIS community for years has used vector data to produce one raster image on-the-fly at runtime (like Mapquest). Instead, Google creates small tiled images at every zoom-level they offer and stores them on the server, and thus can produce a map at any location and any zoom-level, and offer it with "dragability". This is a completely new paradigm for interactive GIS apps. The old way does offer some advantages over the new way, but for web-based interactive GIS, the new way is pretty phenominal.
While the rest of the GIS community was happily working to make incremental improvements to the old paradigm, Google innovated a new paradigm. MSN just copied it. There's nothing wrong with copying (well, until the USPTO grants software patents), but don't mistake it for anything other than what it is.
I don't know. These days it seems like the editors don't comment as much as they used to...
I don't know. These days it seems like the editors don't comment as much as they used to...
I don't know. These days it seems like the editors don't comment as much as they used to...
I don't know. These days it seems like the editors don't comment as much as they used to...
-The Slashdot Editors
And then they all go out for a beer.
Scrap that. They'll all go out for five beers.
It has been proven through the FPS genre that the majority of the world is very, very good at violently jerking the mouse
FPS...sure, call it whatever makes you feel better, buddy.
If it is acceptable for the user to have to view source, explain to me the difference between the 1pt font source (which you say is probably unnacceptable):
<span style="font-size: 1pt;">This picture was created by John Smith.</span>
And the HTML comment source (which you say is probably acceptable):
<!-- This picture was created by John Smith. -->
Because I don't see any, from an attribution point of view.
repost the same story (called "dupes")
No, no. That is so 90's. These days we call them "zonks".
All a movie has to do to be a good movie is hold your attention and entertain for the duration it's on the screen.
For all the bitching about Star Wars around here, you might almost forget that Star Wars has held many people's interest for three decades. Perhaps we forget all the movies we've been crapped out of the Hollywood bowels over the years.
When it comes to keeping my attention, many movies these days have their hands full competing with a tub of popcorn.
This is a fun idea, sure, and might have some genuine use in a few niches, but I doubt it's going anywhere as a mainstream idea.
Nothing like thinking completely within the box. Free your mind, my friend.
How about an application that changes your keyboard functions as you proceed through steps? For instance, using an IDE, different key functions would show when I'm editing or debugging.
What if you had toggle keys that, when pressed, the keyboard would show you a visual indication of a completely different set of key-functions? So your keyboard is in its normal state most of the time, but gives you alternate setups as you request them.
What if in games, when you get shot, your keyboard pulses red. When you swim, your keyboard looks like water, with bubbles floating past. Keys show pictures of the weapons they would switch you to, and how much ammo they hold. Keys show the spells they would cast.
What if applications and desktops could now eliminate widgets because a key can be set to represent them as needed? No more row of buttons at the top of every web browser, word processor, and email client. Perhaps they could add a row of keys along the top of the keyboard to replace the window taskbar. These buttons would show your apps, and you could press them to minimize windows, restore them, or bring them to the front.
Or, we could just keep thinking in the box, poo-pooing ideas, and leave the innovation to others.
There is a slight difference between this case and Google.
Yes. Google has the resources to hire large, expensive legal representation. Stephen Cooper does not.
that's why they also installed 107 cameras which will film and photograph...from every angle
Humanity is blessed to gain the technology advances pioneered by CBS's Big Brother.
If they merged we could have UbunTuseYellowCoDrivaDeraDogHat.
If nothing else the domains should be readily available.
Hah. I've been sitting on that one for a while. My pot of gold is so close I can feel it.
You left out my favorite flamefest: KDE vs. Gnome
Where do you get off saying "OSX 10.4" isn't supported? Then you bitch about cross-platform claims of Java? You are wrong on both counts. And even worse, someone moderates you up. The FUD around Java spread by the Slashdot crowd is deafening. And I'll likely be moderated down even though I'm giving accurate information in response to your disinformation.
No, there is no OSX-labeled download. But there is a platform-independent download. There is a Zip file (don't pay attention to the fact that it says "Window ZIP file" - that just refers to the fact that Zip is often considered a Windows file format, even though it really isn't) and a tar.bz2 download (It says "Unix". OSX 10.4 is Unix, though you seem to be unaware). Download either, extract the zip, and run it.
And when it runs, email an apology to Java for your ignorance.
I used to play this game called Zork. Every time you walked into a room, you were presented the same description. It got very repetitive. Playing Zonk is apparently very similar.
Zonk, read the damn site, or quit as an editor.
Yeah, it's the rape victim's fault for dressing like that, she had it coming! An open door is *not* an invitation, no matter how much you might want what's inside.
A door is the barrier between a public space and a private space. A wireless broadcast that crosses into public spaces, or even someone else's private space, can hardly be compared to walking through an open door to trespass on private property.
And comparing this to rape! Holy cow. You are using people's emotions to spur illogical conclusions. This isn't a woman wearing provacative clothing. This is a woman getting naked, laying down, spreading her legs, telling the man "I want you to connect with me", giving the man instruction on how to connect, then later calling the police.
If you want to prey on emotion, you should call this an act of terrorism while you are at it.
The Tampa Bay office of Bright House Networks can be reached at tampabay.customercare@mybrighthouse.com.
Maybe Microsoft wants to port spyware to Linux to end the "Linux doesn't have spyware" advantage. That would probably be worth $500 million.
I don't think this is rocket science. Blocking today is dirt simple because they host ads from an ad-specific server that is easy to block. If they started offering APIs for web servers to access and proxy the ad content, so that it was coming from the same host as the website, it would be much harder to block. If the path of the resource was random it would be next to impossible to block.
I love adblock, but I think it can and will be defeated. If DoubleClick doesn't figure out how, they may go out of business. But someone else will step in their place with a scheme for serving ads in a way that cannot be blocked.
"A British tabloid newspaper managed to buy the personal details of over 1000 bank customers from an off-shore call centre based in Delhi...The British police force has passed on details to Interpol and the Indian authorities, in an attempt to prosecute the individual."
A tabloid did something redeeming for society!
I guess they now qualify for the same legal defense as Bitorrent. And the percentages are about the same, too.
ten percent of UK websites alienate Firefox users.
Damnit, first a huge tax on tea, and now this.
Due to the OpenOffice.org Java backlash, expect to see a spike in interest in KOffice
I suspect you overestimate the amount of people who care more about RMS's ethics than getting the job done. The fact is, businesses everywhere are building their entire infrastructure on Java. I doubt any of them is going to stop using Ooo because it has some minor dependencies on Java. The Microsoft shops certainly couldn't care less about RMS's ethics. And I doubt even the majority of the rare 100% OSS shops care.
If KOffice gains interest, I hope it is because KOffice is a good product, not because it is 100% Java free.