And they're off! Mario shoots ahead and is off to a great start as the winner (for now)! But, uh-oh, Bowser just got a red shell! Whammo! Mario is spinning out of control and Bowser zooms by as the winner for now. Mario recovers with a mushroom and blasts ahead and is once again today's winner for now. And here he comes, approaching the finish line, and... hold on a second! Yoshi comes screaming past into first place at the last second! The race is over! Yoshi has won this race! (But only for now. The race is entirely over, but the outcome can still change!)
I pretty fluent in JPEG myself, though I read the files in a hex editor. You get used to it. I...I don't even see the code. All I see is blonde, brunette, red-head.
Would it label something straightforward as innuendo? For example, would the phrase "Let's have sex" be identified as having a double meaning, or would this system be able to tell that it means exactly what it says?
No, it's not like a public mail drop. It'd be more like allowing someone to send and receive physical mail from your personal home address while you pick up the cost of postage. On top of that, the person can disappear at any time, so if they're sending harmful or abusive packages, you'll have to be the one to answer for it.
What? If you don't have your pawns mine metal, how are you going to enhance the shielding for your rooks, let alone construct steel crucifixes which are required to create churches to manufacture bishops? You must have an interesting chess strategy.
Why not issue laptops that the children are allowed to explore and hack?
Probably because these are middle school students and the devices are intended only for taking notes and completing assignments in very particular ways while lightening backpack load. Allowing the devices to be hacked would likely result in them being broken by inexperienced students which would require the cost of repairing and would detract from completing classwork.
If I had been given an iPad, things may have turned out differently; my curiosity would have remained strong, but now I would be forced to beg for $99 to get a developer account or to settle for an emulator on a Mac.
Or you would have found a machine that was more hacker-friendly that you had access to, like at your friend's house. You didn't own a computer but were still interested in them. I don't see why a kid having a tightly-sealed machine would deflate any curiosity about computers; if anything, for the relatively few number of students who do find themselves genuinely interested in them, they'd like to figure out how computers operate independently.
With the low price of computers, I don't see what would stop a parent from giving their kid a second-hand machine of their own, especially since they'd see their children's interest and understand that the iPad belongs to the school.
And what Apple is pushing with the iProducts is that "you don't own your computer, we do." It'll interest them enough to mess with what they have at home, but then they'll find that they have to pay Apple again to access the mobile device, and only on extremely limited terms
Or they'll find a way to get a machine of their own if they don't have access to a non-iPad computer already. A piece of equipment can inspire curiosity in devices beyond just that particular piece of equipment.
Even having a consumption-only device can get kids interested in computers. Not all of them will develop a curiosity for how computers work (or not even most, I'm sure), but having a device of their own to use will get some of them to experiment with what's available and ultimately start wondering about what's going on underneath the interface.
I remember being interested in computers early on, yet having no knowledge of how anything worked. That inspired me to go to the library and check out as many books as I could on computers, operating systems, programming languages, etc, which helped me to tinker around with my machine at home.
I don't know how soon that day will be coming. There are plenty of budget developers who make games and sell them for cheap at retail stores (things I've never heard of being sold at Target, Best Buy, Office Max, Half-Price Books brand new, etc).
This kind of availability is advantageous to these publishers mainly for visibility. Products that exist in a brick-and-mortar building will be seen by anyone who shops in that section of the store. Someone with a couple of bucks might pick up a budget title for the hell of it. Or they might be buying it for someone as a gift. Or they're not avid gamers who don't own consoles and don't keep up with the latest games. Whatever the reason, the option is there, and some people will choose to go with it.
If every existing publisher, major or minor, simultaneously decided to release games online only one day, someone else would come along to take advantage of that empty shelf space in the video game sections of every store that had them.
I can see the reason for the success of that movie:
"I paid to see a porno in a theater, but they screwed up the showing and I got a movie about Vin Diesel skiing and blowing up boats instead! So I paid again to see a later showing, thinking they fixed this problem, but they didn't. I thought that that theater was bad, but they did the same thing at every other theater I went to! Those morons!"
Shouldn't effect users.... but I was thinking some of the 'evil bots' might be using an API/framework for making bots, where they supplied the fake UA field to, and that framework might be so gracious as to _force_ the bot application developer to comply (?)
Yeah, there are some frameworks and free-to-use bots all around, but because of the diversity of bots and their uses as well as the functions of various servers, it'd be hard to control their behavior so simply. That's part of the reason why robots.txt is voluntary; it's more so that the good bots will find relevant data and not login screens, user forms, etc.
Also.... any link pre-fetching technology is crawling, since the human didn't select the web page to be shown yet, by definition; any pre-fetching of a link disallowed in robots.txt would be breaking the robot exclusion conventions.
I don't agree with this. Prefetching isn't so far off from regular browsing; downloading all of the images, scripts, objects, etc, that are linked to any common page online would qualify everyone for running a crawler if that were the case. Crawlers move much differently through a site than a regular user, often at a faster pace, and read in a way much unlike our own.
Sometimes, bots can be detected by their patterns or behavior. If a bot doesn't want to comply with robots.txt and ends up sucking a site's bandwidth, the site may ban it automatically if it's configured to do so. Not sure if Wiki does this, though
Listing Firefox/MSIE in robots.txt also wouldn't do anything because those are browsers, not web crawlers, so they don't have to even acknowledge the robots.txt standard. Though, that's not to say that it wouldn't be fun, let alone downright tempting, to disallow users of IE6 from accessing various sites in hopes that they'd switch to something more relevant:P
Slashdot Mirror
And they're off! Mario shoots ahead and is off to a great start as the winner (for now)! But, uh-oh, Bowser just got a red shell! Whammo! Mario is spinning out of control and Bowser zooms by as the winner for now. Mario recovers with a mushroom and blasts ahead and is once again today's winner for now. And here he comes, approaching the finish line, and... hold on a second! Yoshi comes screaming past into first place at the last second! The race is over! Yoshi has won this race! (But only for now. The race is entirely over, but the outcome can still change!)
I pretty fluent in JPEG myself, though I read the files in a hex editor. You get used to it. I...I don't even see the code. All I see is blonde, brunette, red-head.
Would it label something straightforward as innuendo? For example, would the phrase "Let's have sex" be identified as having a double meaning, or would this system be able to tell that it means exactly what it says?
No, it's not like a public mail drop. It'd be more like allowing someone to send and receive physical mail from your personal home address while you pick up the cost of postage. On top of that, the person can disappear at any time, so if they're sending harmful or abusive packages, you'll have to be the one to answer for it.
Yeah, but only [App]le device [App]lications
I can see them claiming that "App" is short for "Apple" as well, unfortunately.
I have to say, that Monopoly + Risk game sounds pretty awesome. You should implement it as an online game.
What? If you don't have your pawns mine metal, how are you going to enhance the shielding for your rooks, let alone construct steel crucifixes which are required to create churches to manufacture bishops? You must have an interesting chess strategy.
Probably because these are middle school students and the devices are intended only for taking notes and completing assignments in very particular ways while lightening backpack load. Allowing the devices to be hacked would likely result in them being broken by inexperienced students which would require the cost of repairing and would detract from completing classwork.
Or you would have found a machine that was more hacker-friendly that you had access to, like at your friend's house. You didn't own a computer but were still interested in them. I don't see why a kid having a tightly-sealed machine would deflate any curiosity about computers; if anything, for the relatively few number of students who do find themselves genuinely interested in them, they'd like to figure out how computers operate independently.
With the low price of computers, I don't see what would stop a parent from giving their kid a second-hand machine of their own, especially since they'd see their children's interest and understand that the iPad belongs to the school.
Or they'll find a way to get a machine of their own if they don't have access to a non-iPad computer already. A piece of equipment can inspire curiosity in devices beyond just that particular piece of equipment.
Even having a consumption-only device can get kids interested in computers. Not all of them will develop a curiosity for how computers work (or not even most, I'm sure), but having a device of their own to use will get some of them to experiment with what's available and ultimately start wondering about what's going on underneath the interface.
I remember being interested in computers early on, yet having no knowledge of how anything worked. That inspired me to go to the library and check out as many books as I could on computers, operating systems, programming languages, etc, which helped me to tinker around with my machine at home.
They're helping to develop Google's self-driving cars by acting as crash-test dummies.
Just curious as to what this software was? Was it actually a useful piece of code?
If I had this engine, I could use all of my empty energy drink cans to power everything in my room!
Why would this ever be a rule?
I don't know how soon that day will be coming. There are plenty of budget developers who make games and sell them for cheap at retail stores (things I've never heard of being sold at Target, Best Buy, Office Max, Half-Price Books brand new, etc).
This kind of availability is advantageous to these publishers mainly for visibility. Products that exist in a brick-and-mortar building will be seen by anyone who shops in that section of the store. Someone with a couple of bucks might pick up a budget title for the hell of it. Or they might be buying it for someone as a gift. Or they're not avid gamers who don't own consoles and don't keep up with the latest games. Whatever the reason, the option is there, and some people will choose to go with it.
If every existing publisher, major or minor, simultaneously decided to release games online only one day, someone else would come along to take advantage of that empty shelf space in the video game sections of every store that had them.
William Shatner, is that you?
I thought they stored CSV database entries
I can see the reason for the success of that movie:
"I paid to see a porno in a theater, but they screwed up the showing and I got a movie about Vin Diesel skiing and blowing up boats instead! So I paid again to see a later showing, thinking they fixed this problem, but they didn't. I thought that that theater was bad, but they did the same thing at every other theater I went to! Those morons!"
I was expecting there to be wheels. Either way, still cool, and better than a tree fort.
The structure of the web is way off. We're using browsers to access pages instead of sucker electrodes to enter the Other Plane
That is an awesome idea
L4D3? I don't know about you, but I'm anticipating Left Four Dead.
Yeah, there are some frameworks and free-to-use bots all around, but because of the diversity of bots and their uses as well as the functions of various servers, it'd be hard to control their behavior so simply. That's part of the reason why robots.txt is voluntary; it's more so that the good bots will find relevant data and not login screens, user forms, etc.
I don't agree with this. Prefetching isn't so far off from regular browsing; downloading all of the images, scripts, objects, etc, that are linked to any common page online would qualify everyone for running a crawler if that were the case. Crawlers move much differently through a site than a regular user, often at a faster pace, and read in a way much unlike our own.
Sometimes, bots can be detected by their patterns or behavior. If a bot doesn't want to comply with robots.txt and ends up sucking a site's bandwidth, the site may ban it automatically if it's configured to do so. Not sure if Wiki does this, though
Listing Firefox/MSIE in robots.txt also wouldn't do anything because those are browsers, not web crawlers, so they don't have to even acknowledge the robots.txt standard. Though, that's not to say that it wouldn't be fun, let alone downright tempting, to disallow users of IE6 from accessing various sites in hopes that they'd switch to something more relevant :P