1) The work out scenes and the time lapse security camera video was to show time passing. She was in there for a while, being fed, and eventually she figures out the numbers on the wall. We're not supposed to know how long it took. Also, someone who has the mind to come up with a code is also likely to be able to solve that code (assuming she wrote it, if not then for all we know she was in there for months pondering the numbers)
2) If you had played the game you'd know that if you shoot Orange portal it stays in place even if you shoot the Blue portal multiple times (and vice versa). That said the section with the first guard was a bit unclear what happened due to the shooting angle.
a) I have another computer with Firefox 7 on it and while you can get the file menu back the UI does not revert to the old style. I should not have to install a crapload of addons to fix UI problems that did not exist in previous versions and were entirely of Mozilla's making.
b) I'm not American but I see you are an assumptive pre-judging ass. I understand the definition of heuristic just fine. Take something as simple as the "Undo Close Tab" extension - technically speaking it will install and "work" in 7 just fine. Unfortunately you can no longer place it anywhere on the UI like you previously could, FF only allows it to be install on the tab bar where it's awkward and gets in the way. It also doesn't function as expected because Mozilla made several adjustments to how tabs work through 4-7 which broke it. The developer isn't hugely active and can't keep adjusting his script with every new change to tabs.
c) Great, yet another piece of software that has to run in the background on my system tying up resources for a problem that need not exist. I've complained to mozilla repeatedly in several different forms but they could care less about what users want they just do what they want. Don't believe me? I can show you years old bugs where the only dissenting voice is Mozilla and even then some of the Moz devs are onboard but still can't implement what users want.
While you're absolutely correct I used the wrong word, but did it really need to be pointed out? You obviously understood and given the context of where the term was used, I think others could too. But you are 100% correct, I meant to use the term extensions.
a) The UI sucks hard in 4+ b) Just because it auto-version bumps doesn't mean it won't break the addon. Prior to this the addon developers had time to deal with code changes in Firefox before a major version release. Now with new versions coming out frequently they'll be scrambling to test/update for one version and the next will already be out. That may be fine for some of the major plugins but the small developers won't bother to keep up with that pace. c) Why the f**k should a user have to go through all that trouble for an upgrade let alone every 6-8 weeks or so?
Re: ABP Chrome, I did a little digging and in fact all AdBlockers on Chrome hide elements and do not truly block them due to a limitation (or restriction?) in Chrome itself. It also does not block ads in videos with the exception of YouTube.
For me I disabled taping on the touch pad - I would trigger a tap every time I'd go to two finger scroll on the touchpad or start a mouse movement. Gesture based interfaces are great if you can get used to them/have good fine motor control, if you don't they're all but useless for more than a couple actions (I leave 2 finger scroll enabled and that's it). I also found leaving it enabled that my right thumb would trigger clicks while I was typing due to the position of the mouse relative to the F and J keys on this laptop. It's centred below the N key instead of below the B so the top right corner is directly under my thumb as it rests on the space bar.
I did try the both button workaround, more often than not I'd click one button before the other which resulted in either opening the page in that tab (instead of a new one) or clicking the bottom item in the context menu. For whatever reason Left-Click+Hold+Drag+Release works really quickly/easily/accurately for me. Even faster if I have an actual mouse plugged in.
PS: Not on Facebook (was, left after the ToS changes years back... haven't missed it a bit) and gmail chat gets blocked by ABP so it doesn't load every time I check gmail. Skype is my IM of choice for personal stuff (so looking forward to Xbox integration) and Chatzilla for professional/hobby chat.
modify headers- i don't need this, and i suppose you also don't *really* need it.
Web development reasons aside, getting around certain regional restrictions makes this one invaluable. Anything on MTV Services, BBC, etc - all easily tricked with the X-Forwarded-For header. Sadly not Hulu.
quickdrag- wtf?? ever heard of middle click??
Ever heard of not having a mouse wheel? Like on a laptop! I also find it much faster than middle click personally.
abp- chrome has it now.
Last I researched it, which was admittedly a while ago, ABP in Chrome just hides elements but still downloads them to the system. For me it's less about not seeing the ads and more the speed increase and data savings not having to download all that crap. That said, I still like getting rid of the ads so ABP Chrome does hold some value.
morning coffee- i dunno anything about this one, but if you just wanna open some websites at once, you can create a bookmark folder or something.
Yeah, this one just has nice day of the week features so work stuff is opened Monday-Friday and Everyday my usual sites are opened - all in one click - or - as my home page. Very much a convenience thing which I could give up if need be.
Argument is invalid, if they're not south facing + angled for latitude then they're not going to run efficiently in the panel layout. In fact that could explain his results alone, if more of the panels on the tree layout were aligned better for his latitude and/or more south facing than the panel layout it it would show in the data. The shadows from the trees would also fall more consistently on a uniform surface vs a scattered surface. Looking out at our 10 kilowatt system here there's not a tree near it to prevent just that.
Anyway, my point was not that it was bunk, but that fraudulent claims != innovation. Innovating requires something real otherwise it's just someone telling you a story.
IE is a switch I'd never make. UI issues aside it's clunky and slow, even with the upgrades. The biggest drawback for me in IE is a seemingly minor one... that you can't access the address bar when first opening the program until the onload event is fired. I get so frustrated at this when using others computers - granted the simple fix is to simply load about:blank. It makes large session saving impractical though.
I would so fork 3.6 if I had the technical know how.
Re:Really? What's the point of this version number
on
Firefox 7.0 Beta Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
What do you use instead? That's been my big problem - the plugin libraries of other browsers are no where near as extensive and a lot of the functionality I use daily just isn't there.
Plugins used daily:
- Snap Links Plus ---- a few upgrades and this should replace traditional highlighting in a browser - QuickDrag ---- removes the need to do ctrl+click to open in a new tab - Adblock Plus ---- simply hiding ads isn't enough for ABP, it must stop them from downloading to preserve the precious 20gb of data transfer/month I have - Element Hiding Helper ---- for those few pesky ads you can't block from downloading - Modify Headers ---- this one is gold - FireFTP - Canadian English Dictionary - IE Tab Plus ---- for those pesky active x controls (not used daily but useful) - Morning Coffee ---- how else would I open all my favourite sites at once? certainly not with the "dialpad" or whatever that monstrosity is called - Chatzilla - about a dozen different web development tools from Firebug to Live HTTP headers to MeasureIt... just too many to mension
There's just no option that does all that... at best I might be able to do it across 4-5 different programs if I dropped some of them. Slowly though they are no longer supporting 3.6 and I won't upgrade due to the numerous issues from their release model to their UI and so on... eventually I'll have switch to another browser because neither 3.6 nor 7+ will be worth using.
Agreed. Rendering engine changes are what to look out for and even at that I run everything through a check to make sure the feature I'm accessing actually exists before using it. Sure it costs a bit in speed but rarely does anything break. If it does break, it's usually because the error handling needs to be tweaked for when a feature doesn't exist and a hack is used as a backup.
Ditto. Not upgrading any time soon. The UI needs an overhaul in 4+ and something needs to be done about plugins breaking. Plugins are the only reason I use Firefox over other browsers. While other browsers have some, not all that I use.
"It had the same type and number of PV solar panels as the tree design, and the same peak voltage." - RTFA
Except, when you actually count, the tree in the picture has 16-18 cells and the flat panel has 10. I say 16-18 because one is a little hard to definitively say it's a cell but I'm reasonably certain, and I can't see the backside of the model so there may be one hidden there.
Oh I should note the exception to the statement "They don't want people playing the game game for months".
Unless the have a rapid/expensive DLC release schedule. Like Age of Empires Online which is "free-to-play" but $140 worth of DLC released in the first 6 months alone.
I have 313 games currently, a 43% completion ratio. I've completed 62 of them, mostly the short ones. The ones I've enjoyed the most are the long ones, even if I haven't quite finished them yet. The ones I completed quickly, I've all but forgotten what they are.
More than just lowering development costs they want people to finish a game and go out and buy a new one. They don't want people playing the same game for months. I played Dragon Age for 6 weeks of 4+ hours a day and never bothered to finish. I'd get so far into the game and go, I wonder if... and started a new character. I'm going to finish it eventually but I jump back and forth between a lot of games. In the past couple weeks I've played exactly 25 games, I completed 2 of them. A crappy, short XBLA title and one I started 12 January 2010.
Ratpr is great but it never tells the whole story.
People care about them but the big ideas now require 2 things:
1) Advancements in little things. Quite literally. New materials research is what advances most big ideas now. Take stainless steel as an example - high cost, required nickle, etc. The Chinese didn't like relying on North America for their nickle so they came up with using iron ore containing nickle to create a cheaper, easier to produce form of stainless steel which is used all over now. Not as ground breaking as carbon nano-tubes but it came to market much faster.
2) A lot of resources. People, money, expertise, etc. It's pretty easy to tinker around and come up with some of the old "big ideas"... now it's very hard. Not impossible though, UofT prof creating an infrared solar cell that theoretically can be painted on, Ren Ng creating a post capture image re-focusing technique (may not seem big but the potential is rather scary if used in video with image recognition software)
This is definitely true. They've pigeonholed themselves into the wiki parser (and all it's limitations/quirks) when technology has long since passed that format by.
I think another overlooked problem is the lack of a solid interface for data. There's list upon list of various data sets that are completely isolated. These could be incredible tools that interface with the main article to provide meaningful content that does not require multiple updates. As it is now you need an insanely complex template system of isolated objects. One of the best examples I can think of is actually on http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon_Age_Wiki take this page as an example: http://dragonage.wikia.com/index.php?title=Heavy_chestpieces_(Dragon_Age_II)&action=edit It requires 15 different templates, 18 transclutions of objects that are written in "wiki code" instead of something the average person could edit.
I actually created a template on that site quite a while ago.... how many people could make sense of this: http://dragonage.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template:Approval&action=edit (I tried pasting it in here, Slashdot complained about too many 'junk' characters) All it does is put a picture and a green or red number in some text. I look at it now and I don't think I could modify it without first deconstructing it piece by piece.
I agree with your point to an extent but I believe there's something more going on here. My personal belief is that it's a conflict between what contributors want Wikipedia to be vs what Wikipedia wants to be vs what Wikipedia was vs what the reality has become.
What Wikipedia was: It was a place where anyone could contribute their bit of knowledge about a particular subject and walk away feeling they had done a good thing. The belief was that that text would be refined, updated, and addressed if incorrect.
What Wikipedia has become: A place where every contribution is scrutinized, usually by one or two "active" members, who often revert or demand citations. The breadth of subjects is restricted and anything non-standard is immediately removed. The corporate and social structure created is adversarial and overly complex. The citations are becoming more and more obtuse/inaccessible (literally behind paywalls) and add little to the quality of the site.
What Wikipedia wants to be: A happy go lucky repository of rudimentary beliefs and "subjective balance" supported by those who do the work and those that need tax write offs.
What contributors want it to be: Everyone has their own interpretation of this. My personal belief is that the majority of contributors are looking for a place that is a repository for knowledge, all that is known, beliefs and arguments, data, and clear distinctions between them.
Until these are reconciled into something more cohesive Wiki will continue to bleed contributors.
I purchase a connection advertised at say 2mbps. That means I should theoretically be able to transfer up to 641.6 GB in a month. They place a 20 GB/month limit on my data transfer and throttle me down to 0.3mbps after. Are they really selling me a 2mbps connection?
Really, if I used the connection to it's full potential I would be throttled before a 24 hour period is up.
Now you say I should pay more to be able to fully utilize the potential of the connection? Netflix CEO has stated that it costs less than $0.005/GB to transfer data (note that deployment costs are not included in this as those costs are recouped by the "access" charge on your bill). We're strictly talking the cost of operating/maintaining the network. The company in question wants to charge $1.95/GB or ~$1,212/month for me to utilize the 2mbps I pay for every month.
This is the connection I'm on now, it's actually advertised as up to 7mbps but due to my distance to the tower it's only 2mbps. In addition to the throttling described they also throttle P2P. I'm on it because there are no other high speed options in my area save satellite internet which is even more expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
1) The work out scenes and the time lapse security camera video was to show time passing. She was in there for a while, being fed, and eventually she figures out the numbers on the wall. We're not supposed to know how long it took. Also, someone who has the mind to come up with a code is also likely to be able to solve that code (assuming she wrote it, if not then for all we know she was in there for months pondering the numbers)
2) If you had played the game you'd know that if you shoot Orange portal it stays in place even if you shoot the Blue portal multiple times (and vice versa). That said the section with the first guard was a bit unclear what happened due to the shooting angle.
x2. I want to watch this movie!
I played Doom online with my vice principal when I was younger.
a) I have another computer with Firefox 7 on it and while you can get the file menu back the UI does not revert to the old style. I should not have to install a crapload of addons to fix UI problems that did not exist in previous versions and were entirely of Mozilla's making.
b) I'm not American but I see you are an assumptive pre-judging ass. I understand the definition of heuristic just fine. Take something as simple as the "Undo Close Tab" extension - technically speaking it will install and "work" in 7 just fine. Unfortunately you can no longer place it anywhere on the UI like you previously could, FF only allows it to be install on the tab bar where it's awkward and gets in the way. It also doesn't function as expected because Mozilla made several adjustments to how tabs work through 4-7 which broke it. The developer isn't hugely active and can't keep adjusting his script with every new change to tabs.
c) Great, yet another piece of software that has to run in the background on my system tying up resources for a problem that need not exist. I've complained to mozilla repeatedly in several different forms but they could care less about what users want they just do what they want. Don't believe me? I can show you years old bugs where the only dissenting voice is Mozilla and even then some of the Moz devs are onboard but still can't implement what users want.
While you're absolutely correct I used the wrong word, but did it really need to be pointed out? You obviously understood and given the context of where the term was used, I think others could too. But you are 100% correct, I meant to use the term extensions.
a) The UI sucks hard in 4+
b) Just because it auto-version bumps doesn't mean it won't break the addon. Prior to this the addon developers had time to deal with code changes in Firefox before a major version release. Now with new versions coming out frequently they'll be scrambling to test/update for one version and the next will already be out. That may be fine for some of the major plugins but the small developers won't bother to keep up with that pace.
c) Why the f**k should a user have to go through all that trouble for an upgrade let alone every 6-8 weeks or so?
Re: ABP Chrome, I did a little digging and in fact all AdBlockers on Chrome hide elements and do not truly block them due to a limitation (or restriction?) in Chrome itself. It also does not block ads in videos with the exception of YouTube.
For me I disabled taping on the touch pad - I would trigger a tap every time I'd go to two finger scroll on the touchpad or start a mouse movement. Gesture based interfaces are great if you can get used to them/have good fine motor control, if you don't they're all but useless for more than a couple actions (I leave 2 finger scroll enabled and that's it). I also found leaving it enabled that my right thumb would trigger clicks while I was typing due to the position of the mouse relative to the F and J keys on this laptop. It's centred below the N key instead of below the B so the top right corner is directly under my thumb as it rests on the space bar.
I did try the both button workaround, more often than not I'd click one button before the other which resulted in either opening the page in that tab (instead of a new one) or clicking the bottom item in the context menu. For whatever reason Left-Click+Hold+Drag+Release works really quickly/easily/accurately for me. Even faster if I have an actual mouse plugged in.
PS: Not on Facebook (was, left after the ToS changes years back... haven't missed it a bit) and gmail chat gets blocked by ABP so it doesn't load every time I check gmail. Skype is my IM of choice for personal stuff (so looking forward to Xbox integration) and Chatzilla for professional/hobby chat.
modify headers- i don't need this, and i suppose you also don't *really* need it.
Web development reasons aside, getting around certain regional restrictions makes this one invaluable. Anything on MTV Services, BBC, etc - all easily tricked with the X-Forwarded-For header. Sadly not Hulu.
quickdrag- wtf?? ever heard of middle click??
Ever heard of not having a mouse wheel? Like on a laptop! I also find it much faster than middle click personally.
abp- chrome has it now.
Last I researched it, which was admittedly a while ago, ABP in Chrome just hides elements but still downloads them to the system. For me it's less about not seeing the ads and more the speed increase and data savings not having to download all that crap. That said, I still like getting rid of the ads so ABP Chrome does hold some value.
morning coffee- i dunno anything about this one, but if you just wanna open some websites at once, you can create a bookmark folder or something.
Yeah, this one just has nice day of the week features so work stuff is opened Monday-Friday and Everyday my usual sites are opened - all in one click - or - as my home page. Very much a convenience thing which I could give up if need be.
Argument is invalid, if they're not south facing + angled for latitude then they're not going to run efficiently in the panel layout. In fact that could explain his results alone, if more of the panels on the tree layout were aligned better for his latitude and/or more south facing than the panel layout it it would show in the data. The shadows from the trees would also fall more consistently on a uniform surface vs a scattered surface. Looking out at our 10 kilowatt system here there's not a tree near it to prevent just that.
Anyway, my point was not that it was bunk, but that fraudulent claims != innovation. Innovating requires something real otherwise it's just someone telling you a story.
IE is a switch I'd never make. UI issues aside it's clunky and slow, even with the upgrades. The biggest drawback for me in IE is a seemingly minor one... that you can't access the address bar when first opening the program until the onload event is fired. I get so frustrated at this when using others computers - granted the simple fix is to simply load about:blank. It makes large session saving impractical though.
I would so fork 3.6 if I had the technical know how.
What do you use instead? That's been my big problem - the plugin libraries of other browsers are no where near as extensive and a lot of the functionality I use daily just isn't there.
Plugins used daily:
- Snap Links Plus ---- a few upgrades and this should replace traditional highlighting in a browser
- QuickDrag ---- removes the need to do ctrl+click to open in a new tab
- Adblock Plus ---- simply hiding ads isn't enough for ABP, it must stop them from downloading to preserve the precious 20gb of data transfer/month I have
- Element Hiding Helper ---- for those few pesky ads you can't block from downloading
- Modify Headers ---- this one is gold
- FireFTP
- Canadian English Dictionary
- IE Tab Plus ---- for those pesky active x controls (not used daily but useful)
- Morning Coffee ---- how else would I open all my favourite sites at once? certainly not with the "dialpad" or whatever that monstrosity is called
- Chatzilla
- about a dozen different web development tools from Firebug to Live HTTP headers to MeasureIt... just too many to mension
There's just no option that does all that... at best I might be able to do it across 4-5 different programs if I dropped some of them. Slowly though they are no longer supporting 3.6 and I won't upgrade due to the numerous issues from their release model to their UI and so on... eventually I'll have switch to another browser because neither 3.6 nor 7+ will be worth using.
It was good while it lasted.
Agreed. Rendering engine changes are what to look out for and even at that I run everything through a check to make sure the feature I'm accessing actually exists before using it. Sure it costs a bit in speed but rarely does anything break. If it does break, it's usually because the error handling needs to be tweaked for when a feature doesn't exist and a hack is used as a backup.
Ditto. Not upgrading any time soon. The UI needs an overhaul in 4+ and something needs to be done about plugins breaking. Plugins are the only reason I use Firefox over other browsers. While other browsers have some, not all that I use.
I'm not shocked that an American didn't notice this was fraud. Count the number of panels on each and then do a facepalm.
"It had the same type and number of PV solar panels as the tree design, and the same peak voltage." - RTFA
Except, when you actually count, the tree in the picture has 16-18 cells and the flat panel has 10. I say 16-18 because one is a little hard to definitively say it's a cell but I'm reasonably certain, and I can't see the backside of the model so there may be one hidden there.
All this discussion is for not.
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Controversial_content
Somehow, I don't think the OP was being entirely serious.
Oh I should note the exception to the statement "They don't want people playing the game game for months".
Unless the have a rapid/expensive DLC release schedule. Like Age of Empires Online which is "free-to-play" but $140 worth of DLC released in the first 6 months alone.
100% agree - total bullsh*t
I have 313 games currently, a 43% completion ratio. I've completed 62 of them, mostly the short ones. The ones I've enjoyed the most are the long ones, even if I haven't quite finished them yet. The ones I completed quickly, I've all but forgotten what they are.
More than just lowering development costs they want people to finish a game and go out and buy a new one. They don't want people playing the same game for months. I played Dragon Age for 6 weeks of 4+ hours a day and never bothered to finish. I'd get so far into the game and go, I wonder if... and started a new character. I'm going to finish it eventually but I jump back and forth between a lot of games. In the past couple weeks I've played exactly 25 games, I completed 2 of them. A crappy, short XBLA title and one I started 12 January 2010.
Ratpr is great but it never tells the whole story.
People care about them but the big ideas now require 2 things:
1) Advancements in little things. Quite literally. New materials research is what advances most big ideas now. Take stainless steel as an example - high cost, required nickle, etc. The Chinese didn't like relying on North America for their nickle so they came up with using iron ore containing nickle to create a cheaper, easier to produce form of stainless steel which is used all over now. Not as ground breaking as carbon nano-tubes but it came to market much faster.
2) A lot of resources. People, money, expertise, etc. It's pretty easy to tinker around and come up with some of the old "big ideas"... now it's very hard. Not impossible though, UofT prof creating an infrared solar cell that theoretically can be painted on, Ren Ng creating a post capture image re-focusing technique (may not seem big but the potential is rather scary if used in video with image recognition software)
Rapid release is fine, who really cares what the number is, but do it in a way that doesn't break addons.
This is definitely true. They've pigeonholed themselves into the wiki parser (and all it's limitations/quirks) when technology has long since passed that format by.
I think another overlooked problem is the lack of a solid interface for data. There's list upon list of various data sets that are completely isolated. These could be incredible tools that interface with the main article to provide meaningful content that does not require multiple updates. As it is now you need an insanely complex template system of isolated objects. One of the best examples I can think of is actually on http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon_Age_Wiki take this page as an example: http://dragonage.wikia.com/index.php?title=Heavy_chestpieces_(Dragon_Age_II)&action=edit It requires 15 different templates, 18 transclutions of objects that are written in "wiki code" instead of something the average person could edit.
I actually created a template on that site quite a while ago.... how many people could make sense of this: http://dragonage.wikia.com/index.php?title=Template:Approval&action=edit (I tried pasting it in here, Slashdot complained about too many 'junk' characters) All it does is put a picture and a green or red number in some text. I look at it now and I don't think I could modify it without first deconstructing it piece by piece.
I agree with your point to an extent but I believe there's something more going on here. My personal belief is that it's a conflict between what contributors want Wikipedia to be vs what Wikipedia wants to be vs what Wikipedia was vs what the reality has become.
What Wikipedia was:
It was a place where anyone could contribute their bit of knowledge about a particular subject and walk away feeling they had done a good thing. The belief was that that text would be refined, updated, and addressed if incorrect.
What Wikipedia has become:
A place where every contribution is scrutinized, usually by one or two "active" members, who often revert or demand citations. The breadth of subjects is restricted and anything non-standard is immediately removed. The corporate and social structure created is adversarial and overly complex. The citations are becoming more and more obtuse/inaccessible (literally behind paywalls) and add little to the quality of the site.
What Wikipedia wants to be:
A happy go lucky repository of rudimentary beliefs and "subjective balance" supported by those who do the work and those that need tax write offs.
What contributors want it to be:
Everyone has their own interpretation of this. My personal belief is that the majority of contributors are looking for a place that is a repository for knowledge, all that is known, beliefs and arguments, data, and clear distinctions between them.
Until these are reconciled into something more cohesive Wiki will continue to bleed contributors.
Here's a real life example:
I purchase a connection advertised at say 2mbps. That means I should theoretically be able to transfer up to 641.6 GB in a month. They place a 20 GB/month limit on my data transfer and throttle me down to 0.3mbps after. Are they really selling me a 2mbps connection?
Really, if I used the connection to it's full potential I would be throttled before a 24 hour period is up.
Now you say I should pay more to be able to fully utilize the potential of the connection? Netflix CEO has stated that it costs less than $0.005/GB to transfer data (note that deployment costs are not included in this as those costs are recouped by the "access" charge on your bill). We're strictly talking the cost of operating/maintaining the network. The company in question wants to charge $1.95/GB or ~$1,212/month for me to utilize the 2mbps I pay for every month.
This is the connection I'm on now, it's actually advertised as up to 7mbps but due to my distance to the tower it's only 2mbps. In addition to the throttling described they also throttle P2P. I'm on it because there are no other high speed options in my area save satellite internet which is even more expensive.