Actually, a lot of donut shops and convenience stores give cops free stuff (e.g. coffee) to encourage them to stop by often, which they hope will deter would-be criminals who are looking to nab an easy $10 or $15 from someone’s register to buy them their next high. “The rest of the story”, if you will.
That is, not because they're performing their civic duty to unmask corrupt individuals, but rather because they hate the police/US government.
If their ends are good and their means are perfectly legal, what the fuck does their motive have to do with it?
Society needs more people with a deep-seated mistrust of authority, not less. Too many people are blind sheep who assume that anyone with power obviously earned it and is worthy of it.
Fact is, power corrupts. Without exception. Now, to those in power, give me the ability to hold you accountable, because I’d love to be proven wrong here.
But a citizen can be arbitrarily thrown in jail for recording a cop? This sounds like a story that would come out of the former East Germany. Not the United States of America.
You think that’s bad? A citizen can be arbitrarily thrown in jail for breathing, held for 3 days without bail or charges, and then released with no explanation or apology. That’s perfectly legal in the land of the brave, home of the free.
a lot of the videos that have implicated officers in the past have lacked any context
That is a complete bullshit straw-man excuse.
The obvious solution is for the cops to record everything, in-context, so that they can set matters straight.
OH WAIT, THEY ALREADY DO.
But strangely enough, their recordings never show the officers in an unfavourable light... in fact their recording equipment always seems to malfunction in situations like that. Which is precisely why citizens should be able to record them in those situations.
Your case that was settled did not, by definition, go to the Supreme Court. Ergo, it's not relevant.
And it never will, if the powers-which-be don’t want a Supreme Court case giving precedent in all future cases.
All they have to do is drop charges and/or settle (if they’re going after you) or award you a small settlement in an insignificant court (if you’re going after them). At that point the case is dead because you can’t appeal it and they won’t appeal it. So you never get to the Supreme Court.
I don’t know what the climate is like where you live, but apparently it’s never overcast, or raining, or below freezing. Or maybe you just don’t wash your clothes all winter long. EW.
Sometimes domain.tld does not work if you neglect adding it, or it takes you somewhere different. I guess that happens less frequently these days, but it's a habit to make sure. More apropos, in sane URL bars that look for an exact match of your input, www.blah pretty much forces it to display exactly what I want as the first option.
If you never visit domain.tld, you should never see it at the top of the search results. I’m a bit perplexed at how this would be a problem. You’d only have to type the full address once, a few times maybe, and after that the full and proper address should appear at the top as soon as you start typing domain.tld.
Generally you can train it by typing more of the address (but leave off that www part, that’s silly), clicking the result as soon as it’s near enough the top, and then repeating the process a few more times. How do you think I got http://www.google.com/search?q= to be my top result by typing g?
Re:Will it support languages other than JavaScript
on
Firefox 4 Beta 8 Up
·
· Score: 1
I know. And you could also compile Python to a.dll and probably hook that in. And it is a whole different ball game, I realise. I was just pointing out that you can already use different languages client-side, if you’re talking about extensions. There are just a few other hoops you have to jump through to do it.
Although it's sometimes useful, the problem is the inconsistent order urls get listed in. Depending on my recent usage, 'abc.' fluctuates between 'abc.foo' and 'abc.bar'.
The problem is that you’re typing abc, which is ambiguous. The browser is trying to eliminate ambiguity in as few keystrokes as possible, and you’re defeating it... in fact you couldn’t defeat it more effectively if you tried.
The solution is simple. If you typed “abc” and “bar”, or “foo” and “abc”, or even “foo” and “bar”, you wouldn’t have that problem.
Well, since they're asking for extradition, I don't think that's on his dime, technically...
Maybe not at this point, but I understood that it initially was.
After he turned himself in to the UK officials, then Sweden had the opportunity to press the UK for his extradition (they couldn’t very easily extradite him if they didn’t have him), and he’s pretty much at the mercy of whatever the UK officials decide at this point.
Awesome bar behavior: I type www.sl... and I get fifteen youtube URLs, and then slashdot at the very bottom.
No...
Awesome bar behavior: I type s, and http://slashdot.org/ is at the top of the list, because that’s the only website I ever visit that I type “s” to get to. In fact if I started typing www I’d just confuse it.
But, if I type c, http://slashdot.org/~clone52431/comments is at the top of the list, which is actually part of the same site; Firefox remembers that’s what I type to go to that page...
Not so... They were asking him to come in for questioning, and he refused.
As I understand it, what happened was more like this:
they informed him of the investigation, so he couldn’t leave; they investigated the charges, found no credibility, and dropped them; at which point he asked if he could please leave the country now?; they told him yeah, go ahead... and he did;
Then the international shitstorm occurred over Assange’s involvement with the Wikileaks release of US documents and now suddenly they want him to come back, on his own dime, and answer some questions – and without yet being formally charged.
Is there an option to turn that functionality back on?
It still shows the URL in the status bar if you open up the History sidebar, so that might work for you.
Re:Will it support languages other than JavaScript
on
Firefox 4 Beta 8 Up
·
· Score: 1
IIRC it’s also possible to write the bulk of an extension in C++ and then hook it into the browser chrome with Javascript, or something along those lines.
But this discussion isn’t really about extensions, it’s about web-based applications...
It’s neither of those things. It is testimony. Whether or not it is considered to be credible depends both on its coherency, its circumstances, and the credibility of the person giving it.
Many, many convictions fall down to witness testimony rather than physical evidence, particularly where consent is an issue... Determining whether there was consent falls to witness/victim testimony, the testimony of the defendant, and the jury's opinion of their credibility.
Assange’s presence wasn’t needed for that determination until some political weight got thrown around and suddenly he’s an international fugitive. Strange...
(And Sweden apparently doesn’t use a jury system.)
Semi-offtopic, but why, why does Firefox insist on polling some unknown number of locations finding plugins and extensions when it starts up? Somebody needs to make something like autoruns for Firefox... what it loads, where it’s located, and if I’m an administrator let me remove it already. I ended up stumbling around looking for particular.dll files mentioned in about:plugins and deleting them physically, which I suspect isn’t the right way to go about doing it. At least, I hope it isn’t the right way of doing it.
So where does it look? Registry keys, folders, some combination of those?
Also, building an option to disable checking certain locations would be nice... such as for Portable Firefox, which is supposed to be self-contained but still loads up all of the plugins off the computer I plug it into, even if that computer doesn’t have Firefox installed! Plug a pristine copy of Portable Firefox into a pristine Windows install and you’ll find that you still have.NET, Silverlight, Windows Media Player, etc. plugins loading up. WTF.
So, in other words, they eliminated a perfectly good and useful function (dropping down a list of manually typed URLs) so that they could duplicate the functionality of the History panel.
How many URLs do you actually even visit by manually typing them?! It sounds to me like you are trying to duplicate the perfectly good functionality of bookmarks.
Re:Will it support languages other than JavaScript
on
Firefox 4 Beta 8 Up
·
· Score: 1
A neat demo, to be sure, but it's not compiling. It's just interpreting Python into JavaScript which is itself interpreted.
If it’s done all at once, it’s compiled. What’s more, the Javascript itself is probably being executed by something between an interpreter and a compiler. The boundaries are so indistinct anymore in this particular region that your making a point of it is not only wrong but more or less meaningless even if it was correct.
The combination of the aweseome bar with the Ctrl+L shortcut key let's me use my browser without having to rummage through countless menus and sub-menus of bookmarks and the like.
I always use (have always used) the Alt-D key combination, with the added bonus that it also works to highlight the path bar in Windows Explorer. Plus it’s a left-handed key combination, which is handy if my right hand is on the mouse.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, a lot of donut shops and convenience stores give cops free stuff (e.g. coffee) to encourage them to stop by often, which they hope will deter would-be criminals who are looking to nab an easy $10 or $15 from someone’s register to buy them their next high. “The rest of the story”, if you will.
That is, not because they're performing their civic duty to unmask corrupt individuals, but rather because they hate the police/US government.
If their ends are good and their means are perfectly legal, what the fuck does their motive have to do with it?
Society needs more people with a deep-seated mistrust of authority, not less. Too many people are blind sheep who assume that anyone with power obviously earned it and is worthy of it.
Fact is, power corrupts. Without exception. Now, to those in power, give me the ability to hold you accountable, because I’d love to be proven wrong here.
As if that would stop law enforcement for more than a few days if they wanted to find out who you were.
When guns are the most powerful weapon that the public has, they have the 2nd Amendment to fall back upon...
When information is the most powerful weapon that the public has, they have...?
my advice would be wearing a T-shirt that states by being in your presence you are agreeing to be audio recorded
I wonder how creatively that could be worded and still be legally binding?
Anyway I’m glad I live in a state that has one-party consent to recording.
But a citizen can be arbitrarily thrown in jail for recording a cop? This sounds like a story that would come out of the former East Germany. Not the United States of America.
You think that’s bad? A citizen can be arbitrarily thrown in jail for breathing, held for 3 days without bail or charges, and then released with no explanation or apology. That’s perfectly legal in the land of the brave, home of the free.
a lot of the videos that have implicated officers in the past have lacked any context
That is a complete bullshit straw-man excuse.
The obvious solution is for the cops to record everything, in-context, so that they can set matters straight.
OH WAIT, THEY ALREADY DO.
But strangely enough, their recordings never show the officers in an unfavourable light... in fact their recording equipment always seems to malfunction in situations like that. Which is precisely why citizens should be able to record them in those situations.
Your case that was settled did not, by definition, go to the Supreme Court. Ergo, it's not relevant.
And it never will, if the powers-which-be don’t want a Supreme Court case giving precedent in all future cases.
All they have to do is drop charges and/or settle (if they’re going after you) or award you a small settlement in an insignificant court (if you’re going after them). At that point the case is dead because you can’t appeal it and they won’t appeal it. So you never get to the Supreme Court.
For some time people have been complaining about the inability to put the close button on the left side of the tab.
Tab Mix Plus has that option.
Then all the damp ends up in your house.
Dryers are convenient. Not an absolute necessity, but natural gas is relatively cheap in the US and we can afford the luxury.
I don’t know what the climate is like where you live, but apparently it’s never overcast, or raining, or below freezing. Or maybe you just don’t wash your clothes all winter long. EW.
Sometimes domain.tld does not work if you neglect adding it, or it takes you somewhere different. I guess that happens less frequently these days, but it's a habit to make sure. More apropos, in sane URL bars that look for an exact match of your input, www.blah pretty much forces it to display exactly what I want as the first option.
If you never visit domain.tld, you should never see it at the top of the search results. I’m a bit perplexed at how this would be a problem. You’d only have to type the full address once, a few times maybe, and after that the full and proper address should appear at the top as soon as you start typing domain.tld.
Generally you can train it by typing more of the address (but leave off that www part, that’s silly), clicking the result as soon as it’s near enough the top, and then repeating the process a few more times. How do you think I got http://www.google.com/search?q= to be my top result by typing g?
I know. And you could also compile Python to a .dll and probably hook that in. And it is a whole different ball game, I realise. I was just pointing out that you can already use different languages client-side, if you’re talking about extensions. There are just a few other hoops you have to jump through to do it.
Although it's sometimes useful, the problem is the inconsistent order urls get listed in. Depending on my recent usage, 'abc.' fluctuates between 'abc.foo' and 'abc.bar'.
The problem is that you’re typing abc, which is ambiguous. The browser is trying to eliminate ambiguity in as few keystrokes as possible, and you’re defeating it... in fact you couldn’t defeat it more effectively if you tried.
The solution is simple. If you typed “abc” and “bar”, or “foo” and “abc”, or even “foo” and “bar”, you wouldn’t have that problem.
Well, since they're asking for extradition, I don't think that's on his dime, technically...
Maybe not at this point, but I understood that it initially was.
After he turned himself in to the UK officials, then Sweden had the opportunity to press the UK for his extradition (they couldn’t very easily extradite him if they didn’t have him), and he’s pretty much at the mercy of whatever the UK officials decide at this point.
Awesome bar behavior: I type www.sl... and I get fifteen youtube URLs, and then slashdot at the very bottom.
No...
Awesome bar behavior: I type s, and http://slashdot.org/ is at the top of the list, because that’s the only website I ever visit that I type “s” to get to. In fact if I started typing www I’d just confuse it.
But, if I type c, http://slashdot.org/~clone52431/comments is at the top of the list, which is actually part of the same site; Firefox remembers that’s what I type to go to that page...
g is http://www.google.com/search?q=
m is http://maps.google.com/
m- is http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/
e is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
If I was on my home computer, ma or mai would probably put Gmail at the top of the list. Etc.
Not so... They were asking him to come in for questioning, and he refused.
As I understand it, what happened was more like this:
they informed him of the investigation, so he couldn’t leave;
they investigated the charges, found no credibility, and dropped them;
at which point he asked if he could please leave the country now?;
they told him yeah, go ahead... and he did;
Then the international shitstorm occurred over Assange’s involvement with the Wikileaks release of US documents and now suddenly they want him to come back, on his own dime, and answer some questions – and without yet being formally charged.
They only show the first little bit in the awesomebar
I’m not seeing the problem, I see the whole URL, granted if the URL is really long I guess you wouldn’t see the whole thing, but that same limitation would apply to the status bar, too.
Is there an option to turn that functionality back on?
It still shows the URL in the status bar if you open up the History sidebar, so that might work for you.
IIRC it’s also possible to write the bulk of an extension in C++ and then hook it into the browser chrome with Javascript, or something along those lines.
But this discussion isn’t really about extensions, it’s about web-based applications...
witness testimony is proof, or evidence rather
It’s neither of those things. It is testimony. Whether or not it is considered to be credible depends both on its coherency, its circumstances, and the credibility of the person giving it.
Many, many convictions fall down to witness testimony rather than physical evidence, particularly where consent is an issue ... Determining whether there was consent falls to witness/victim testimony, the testimony of the defendant, and the jury's opinion of their credibility.
Assange’s presence wasn’t needed for that determination until some political weight got thrown around and suddenly he’s an international fugitive. Strange...
(And Sweden apparently doesn’t use a jury system.)
Semi-offtopic, but why, why does Firefox insist on polling some unknown number of locations finding plugins and extensions when it starts up? Somebody needs to make something like autoruns for Firefox... what it loads, where it’s located, and if I’m an administrator let me remove it already. I ended up stumbling around looking for particular .dll files mentioned in about:plugins and deleting them physically, which I suspect isn’t the right way to go about doing it. At least, I hope it isn’t the right way of doing it.
So where does it look? Registry keys, folders, some combination of those?
Also, building an option to disable checking certain locations would be nice... such as for Portable Firefox, which is supposed to be self-contained but still loads up all of the plugins off the computer I plug it into, even if that computer doesn’t have Firefox installed! Plug a pristine copy of Portable Firefox into a pristine Windows install and you’ll find that you still have .NET, Silverlight, Windows Media Player, etc. plugins loading up. WTF.
So, in other words, they eliminated a perfectly good and useful function (dropping down a list of manually typed URLs) so that they could duplicate the functionality of the History panel.
How many URLs do you actually even visit by manually typing them?! It sounds to me like you are trying to duplicate the perfectly good functionality of bookmarks.
A neat demo, to be sure, but it's not compiling. It's just interpreting Python into JavaScript which is itself interpreted.
If it’s done all at once, it’s compiled. What’s more, the Javascript itself is probably being executed by something between an interpreter and a compiler. The boundaries are so indistinct anymore in this particular region that your making a point of it is not only wrong but more or less meaningless even if it was correct.
The combination of the aweseome bar with the Ctrl+L shortcut key let's me use my browser without having to rummage through countless menus and sub-menus of bookmarks and the like.
I always use (have always used) the Alt-D key combination, with the added bonus that it also works to highlight the path bar in Windows Explorer. Plus it’s a left-handed key combination, which is handy if my right hand is on the mouse.