I commonly browse with 300 to 400 tabs. Firefox crashes at 100 to 130 tabs most often. When will firefox fix the threading issues? Don't make us use Opera.
Fix an issue for users needed hundreds of tabs? Possibly never.
Chrome lacks a status bar only when the status bar would be empty. As soon as there is something to put in it, it appears.
Mouse-over a link, and it shows you the target. Click a link, and it tells you what the progress is, until it's finished. Then the status bar disappears again.
Firefox has implemented it differently, but that's basically what they've done as well.
Bring back the god damn status bar. Change for change's sake is never a good idea.
Have you looked at how they've implemented the status bar functionality yet? They didn't just get rid of the status bar without implementing the functions it provides. I think they did a good job with it.
Gopher is still around? I can't remember the last time I used it, but it's probably been around 15 years. That's some seriously obscure backwards compatibility you want.
Not really a fail. What they've done is split the functionality of the existing status bar in two. One part displays the URL you hover over; that has been moved to the URL bar instead. The other part is the add-on icons, and that's been moved to a distinct add-on toolbar, which can be shown or hidden easily as the user prefers. Each and every user will not be installing a status bar extension, because each and every user doesn't want or need a dedicated status bar. IMHO they've implemented the needed functionality in a better way.
The whole point of FF is it will look like and behave like whatever you want it to, more or less. Changing the way it works by default doesn't change that.
You do realize that he isn't a UK citizen? Sort of invalidates your theory.
He's a citizen of the commonwealth, which is still how a lot of the UK considers itself.
I realize that he is a Commonwealth citizen, but in no way do Canadians or Australians consider UK politicians as representing them, or vice-versa. That's because, in fact, they do not. Your theory does not work.
Point, but that's presumably the reason they're doing this.
It's possible, but it's also possible the Swedes just want to talk to him about the criminal charge in their country. Which is the only crime he's actually been accused of committing.
Relations being what they are between the US and the UK, if the US wanted him in Gitmo, he'd already be in Gitmo.
IIRC, the UK does not extradite people if they face capital punishment in the country requesting it. Since the US does still practice it, this should ensure that he cannot be sent there unless there is a guarantee from the US that he will not face the death penalty.
That's assuming this rule applies to Assange, of course - it might only be for British citizens, I'm not sure.
Except they aren't trying to extradite him to the US, but to Sweden. It's pretty thin.
Ahem, your implication crossed another line of stupid - do you forget most drugs are derived straight from plant tissues?
Might as well start forcing a license on EVERYTHING grown.
Want me to go further?
We may agree on whether or not it should be a controlled substance, but your prior statement fails to take into account that everything is a chemical or collection of chemicals. What you propose would require everyone to grow a license if they wanted to even LOOK at it if it had a controlled chemical in it.
That's absolute nonsense.
I may be stupid, but even a moron like me knows you can't grow an OxyContin plant in your back yard. And I'm not too stupid to realize that if you could, the cops would come knocking.
The subpoena was unsealed several weeks after it was delivered to Twitter, which gave the DOJ ample time to collect the data it wanted. Once it was a public document it was posted on the 'net. You seem to be implying it was leaked; that's not what happened.
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the application and this Order are sealed until otherwise ordered by the Court, and that Twitter shall not disclose the existence of the application or this Order of the Court, or the existence of the investigation, to the listed subscriber or to any other person, unless and until authorized to do so by the Court"
_ and within a couple of hours you can find the copy all over the Net, as usual. Another bright action from the U.S. Department of Justice? Hey guys, it is a joke, isn't it?
Sounds like you have a nice anecdote there. I'm sure your personal experience in this one instance can be applied to all unions, everywhere, for all time.
Here's another one: Three people flew from coast to coast to install a piece of equipment. The phone circuit wasn't working so we called in a ticket and the technician showed up to troubleshoot. He works on the problem for about 45 minutes and identifies that the jack was mis-wired (by another union member), then starts packing up to leave with the circuit still not working. When we asked him what he was doing, he said "I get half an hour to pick up my tools". It was 4:30PM. It took him about five minutes to pick up his tools. By 4:40 he was gone.
Even though I knew how to fix the problem, I couldn't touch it, because only the union can touch it. We missed our window, flew home, and tried it again a week later. Thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours wasted.
Some nutter who forgot that the Internet was built with money and not ideals. Even his FidoNet analogy is bad, although he at least has the decency to point out that the people using FidoNet weren't actually paying for it (their parents were).
I really don't understand the claims that there are no improvements in Win 7 versus XP. I suspect they are only playing Minecraft.
Just a few that are top of mind for me:
A large base of 64-bit drivers; if a x86 driver exists, a 64-bit driver does too. Only needed if you want more than 4GB of RAM. What's that? No one will ever need more than 4GB of RAM?:P SSD TRIM support. A more usable taskbar. Searchable start menu. Usability improvements in native file explorer. Stability improvements. A misbehaving app doesn't kill my entire system.
Even my father, who lives on a dirt road in a town of less than 2,500, has two broadband Internet options, and neither of them are DSL because he's so far away from the CO. What kind of rural no-mans-land do you live in, and why would you assume that's typical?
The stockholders who owned stock when it crashed got screwed. Anyone who sold before that point made money that they should not have.
and no taxpayer funds were used to pay for anything.
Are you sure. At the very least they picked up the cost of the criminal proceedings. Regardless, someone had to pick up the cost of all the corporate shuffling that had to occur once Enron collapsed. And it is either the taxpayers or consumers who end up footing the bill.
Since banking is already highly regulated, are you sure you picked the right side of this argument?
The biggest bailout, and the one that has not been paid off yet went to AIG, who was not regulated since they specialized in creating derivatives and insurance options. The housing crash was bad enough, but it is the unregulated derivatives that is and continues to be a problem.
I realize I'm splitting hairs, and I do take your meaning, but someone who wasn't holding stock when Enron collapsed wasn't a stockholder. It's clear that the company was vastly overvalued by the market due to their deceitful financial reporting practices, and that's why we have SOX today.
Regarding taxpayer funding and criminal prosecution... ok, I think you're stretching a bit for that one, and I don't think you have a valid point when discussing taxpayer funding. Criminal prosecutions are funded regardless of regulation/deregulation of an industry.
Regarding AIG, you're using the term banking in an overly broad sense. As you've pointed out, AIG isn't a bank. I agree that the SEC legislation is probably due for an overhaul, but there is no analogy between Enron and AIG.
Because government regulation kept corporations in check so that they competed in ways to give better service to customers instead of competing on ways to screw over their customers.
I think you're confused, or are too young to know or remember what telecom was like before deregulation. We have more provider options and better service today than ever before.
If you only have one choice, then you will get screwed over. That is when government regulation is necessary.
If you are competing for business, you never want your customers to think they are getting screwed. You want to maximize your profitability, but you must deliver greater value to your customers than your competitors, or they will leave and you will have nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
I commonly browse with 300 to 400 tabs. Firefox crashes at 100 to 130 tabs most often. When will firefox fix the threading issues? Don't make us use Opera.
Fix an issue for users needed hundreds of tabs? Possibly never.
Chrome lacks a status bar only when the status bar would be empty. As soon as there is something to put in it, it appears.
Mouse-over a link, and it shows you the target. Click a link, and it tells you what the progress is, until it's finished. Then the status bar disappears again.
Firefox has implemented it differently, but that's basically what they've done as well.
Bring back the god damn status bar. Change for change's sake is never a good idea.
Have you looked at how they've implemented the status bar functionality yet? They didn't just get rid of the status bar without implementing the functions it provides. I think they did a good job with it.
Gopher is still around? I can't remember the last time I used it, but it's probably been around 15 years. That's some seriously obscure backwards compatibility you want.
Not really a fail. What they've done is split the functionality of the existing status bar in two. One part displays the URL you hover over; that has been moved to the URL bar instead. The other part is the add-on icons, and that's been moved to a distinct add-on toolbar, which can be shown or hidden easily as the user prefers. Each and every user will not be installing a status bar extension, because each and every user doesn't want or need a dedicated status bar. IMHO they've implemented the needed functionality in a better way.
The whole point of FF is it will look like and behave like whatever you want it to, more or less. Changing the way it works by default doesn't change that.
You do realize that he isn't a UK citizen? Sort of invalidates your theory.
He's a citizen of the commonwealth, which is still how a lot of the UK considers itself.
I realize that he is a Commonwealth citizen, but in no way do Canadians or Australians consider UK politicians as representing them, or vice-versa. That's because, in fact, they do not. Your theory does not work.
Point, but that's presumably the reason they're doing this.
It's possible, but it's also possible the Swedes just want to talk to him about the criminal charge in their country. Which is the only crime he's actually been accused of committing.
Relations being what they are between the US and the UK, if the US wanted him in Gitmo, he'd already be in Gitmo.
You do realize that he isn't a UK citizen? Sort of invalidates your theory.
IIRC, the UK does not extradite people if they face capital punishment in the country requesting it. Since the US does still practice it, this should ensure that he cannot be sent there unless there is a guarantee from the US that he will not face the death penalty.
That's assuming this rule applies to Assange, of course - it might only be for British citizens, I'm not sure.
Except they aren't trying to extradite him to the US, but to Sweden. It's pretty thin.
iPhone has been "Coming to Verizon" for almost 3 years now. Always according to a "person close to the matter".
Maybe they'll bundle it with Duke Nukem.
There's a difference between bloggers and the Wall Street Journal. Blogs will post any damn thing, the WSJ generally shows more restraint.
Ahem, your implication crossed another line of stupid - do you forget most drugs are derived straight from plant tissues?
Might as well start forcing a license on EVERYTHING grown.
Want me to go further?
We may agree on whether or not it should be a controlled substance, but your prior statement fails to take into account that everything is a chemical or collection of chemicals. What you propose would require everyone to grow a license if they wanted to even LOOK at it if it had a controlled chemical in it.
That's absolute nonsense.
I may be stupid, but even a moron like me knows you can't grow an OxyContin plant in your back yard. And I'm not too stupid to realize that if you could, the cops would come knocking.
"They absolutely should if it's prescription medicine."
I wonder how many levels of stupid you just crossed in making that statement.
the difference between OTC ibuprofen and prescription ibuprofen is 600mg per pill.
IOW I can get prescription strength without a prescription.
Rather than call me stupid, why not go back and read what I wrote again?
As long as marijuana is a controlled substance, manufacture of that substance will also be controlled, even if it's just growing a plant.
Whether or not marijuana should be a controlled substance is a completely different topic. One on which I bet you and I agree, by the way.
I wasn't trying to state or imply that marijuana should be legal or illegal. You can't grow legally grow coca plants in your back yard either, right?
I support legalization and have voted that way. This is how laws get changed.
Nor should their citizens need a license to grow a plant.
They absolutely should if it's prescription medicine.
If pot were legalized then I would agree with you, but medicinal marijuana != legalized marijuana.
_ with "time of propagation" understood.
I don't know what that means.
The subpoena was unsealed several weeks after it was delivered to Twitter, which gave the DOJ ample time to collect the data it wanted. Once it was a public document it was posted on the 'net. You seem to be implying it was leaked; that's not what happened.
The Order states among other things, that _
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the application and this Order are sealed until otherwise ordered by the Court, and that Twitter shall not disclose the existence of the application or this Order of the Court, or the existence of the investigation, to the listed subscriber or to any other person, unless and until authorized to do so by the Court"
_ and within a couple of hours you can find the copy all over the Net, as usual. Another bright action from the U.S. Department of Justice? Hey guys, it is a joke, isn't it?
_nice!
Have a look at the date of the subpoena.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Reminds me of that old joke:
What's the difference between a successful union and a successful parasite?
The parasite doesn't kill its host.
Sounds like you have a nice anecdote there. I'm sure your personal experience in this one instance can be applied to all unions, everywhere, for all time.
Here's another one: Three people flew from coast to coast to install a piece of equipment. The phone circuit wasn't working so we called in a ticket and the technician showed up to troubleshoot. He works on the problem for about 45 minutes and identifies that the jack was mis-wired (by another union member), then starts packing up to leave with the circuit still not working. When we asked him what he was doing, he said "I get half an hour to pick up my tools". It was 4:30PM. It took him about five minutes to pick up his tools. By 4:40 he was gone.
Even though I knew how to fix the problem, I couldn't touch it, because only the union can touch it. We missed our window, flew home, and tried it again a week later. Thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours wasted.
Some nutter who forgot that the Internet was built with money and not ideals. Even his FidoNet analogy is bad, although he at least has the decency to point out that the people using FidoNet weren't actually paying for it (their parents were).
You still have to download a virus scanner, there is none built-in nor is the OS self-contained enough to be used without one.
The DOJ made sure it wouldn't come with one bundled. Installing MSE is free, easy, and it works well.
I really don't understand the claims that there are no improvements in Win 7 versus XP. I suspect they are only playing Minecraft.
Just a few that are top of mind for me:
A large base of 64-bit drivers; if a x86 driver exists, a 64-bit driver does too. Only needed if you want more than 4GB of RAM. What's that? No one will ever need more than 4GB of RAM? :P
SSD TRIM support.
A more usable taskbar.
Searchable start menu.
Usability improvements in native file explorer.
Stability improvements. A misbehaving app doesn't kill my entire system.
Even my father, who lives on a dirt road in a town of less than 2,500, has two broadband Internet options, and neither of them are DSL because he's so far away from the CO. What kind of rural no-mans-land do you live in, and why would you assume that's typical?
Their stockholders got shafted
The stockholders who owned stock when it crashed got screwed. Anyone who sold before that point made money that they should not have.
and no taxpayer funds were used to pay for anything.
Are you sure. At the very least they picked up the cost of the criminal proceedings. Regardless, someone had to pick up the cost of all the corporate shuffling that had to occur once Enron collapsed. And it is either the taxpayers or consumers who end up footing the bill.
Since banking is already highly regulated, are you sure you picked the right side of this argument?
The biggest bailout, and the one that has not been paid off yet went to AIG, who was not regulated since they specialized in creating derivatives and insurance options. The housing crash was bad enough, but it is the unregulated derivatives that is and continues to be a problem.
I realize I'm splitting hairs, and I do take your meaning, but someone who wasn't holding stock when Enron collapsed wasn't a stockholder. It's clear that the company was vastly overvalued by the market due to their deceitful financial reporting practices, and that's why we have SOX today.
Regarding taxpayer funding and criminal prosecution... ok, I think you're stretching a bit for that one, and I don't think you have a valid point when discussing taxpayer funding. Criminal prosecutions are funded regardless of regulation/deregulation of an industry.
Regarding AIG, you're using the term banking in an overly broad sense. As you've pointed out, AIG isn't a bank. I agree that the SEC legislation is probably due for an overhaul, but there is no analogy between Enron and AIG.
Because government regulation kept corporations in check so that they competed in ways to give better service to customers instead of competing on ways to screw over their customers.
I think you're confused, or are too young to know or remember what telecom was like before deregulation. We have more provider options and better service today than ever before.
If you only have one choice, then you will get screwed over. That is when government regulation is necessary.
If you are competing for business, you never want your customers to think they are getting screwed. You want to maximize your profitability, but you must deliver greater value to your customers than your competitors, or they will leave and you will have nothing.