If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.
This reminds me of a joke...
What do you call 1,000,000 copies of Flash lying at the bottom of the ocean? A good start!
The reason we're bitching about Flash is because it is being abused by so many frigging sites that it makes me want to uninstall it. When I used MSIE, there was basically no way to prevent Flash from running without killing all other interactivity. Now I use Mozilla, and I basically just use MSIE when I come to one of those sites that uses Flash that I need to view.
People may really hate Java applets, but I've never seen a Java applet flying around my window, blocking my view of the content on screen, trying to sell me shit.
Shouldn't someone do a study of stuff like this when a Hugh Grant or Julia Roberts film hits the theaters and millions of housewives, secretaries and others flock to see it?
1. You can't compare those movies to STAR WARS. Nobody skips work to go see a Hugh Grant or Julia Roberts movie.
2. Housewives going out to see a movie helps the economy, it doesn't hurt it.
BTW, this "let's skip work to see Star Wars" is not just a geek thing. The Star Wars movies just brings out the geek in everyone, include your typical non-geeks.
i hope they dont use my method of hiding data: tar files bzip2 tar file xor it with my social security number hexdump to ascii file generate gif of the hex in the ascii file gpg encrypt gif gzip the gpg text (twice!) divide file into ints, swap endien-ness, reform uuencode the file hide contents in id3v2 tag of my "nofx" mp3s
Re:I know what I would do...
on
Paintable LCDs
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The problem I see is: what about backlighting? LCD required backlighting to work doesn't it? If the colors (colours for you brits:-) are dense enough to reflect light realistically then perhaps that isn't a problem for some applicaitons: the invisibility application, however, presents a problem.
I read an article on eInk a while back on their full-color screens that do not emit light. In other words, you need an external light source to see the screen. Sounds like a perfect match for this technology.
"Without the gee-whizery, without the remote-control and so on, that this kind of thing was possible has been obvious for decades," he said
Ummm, yes we realize that animals have been known to be trainable for thousands of years. The NEWS aspect is how they've rigged their brain up with electrodes to remotely stimulate pleasure after remotely giving them a command.
My reply from Senator Bill Nelson of Florida [tripod.com]
Or has he changed it since then? (Oh, and does he still include the Post Script about Anthrax?)
Yes the anthrax postscript is still there, but the content has changed. I'm sorry I can't scan it and upload it, as I tore it to shreds in a fit of rage!:) But he now supports the efforts of Hollins and others like him.
"I do agree that we need to take some steps to assure that material which is, for example, broadcast across digital-television equipment should be protected in such a way as to disallow unauthorized copying and disallow uploading to the Internet. I actually endorse the idea of doing that. But I think that should be done in a collaborative process that involves the manufacturers of equipment and also involves the motion-picture studios."
Let them create content and sell it to me, but don't let these greedy bastards control what I can do with it in the privacy of my own home once I've paid for it!
I just got a response back from Senator Bill Nelson, in which he endorses the bills being put forth by Senator Hollings, such as the CBDTPA! And he's a Democrat! WTF?
is for the World to begin the arduous and expensive task of removing Microsoft software from their computers.
The first step is to eliminate Outlook for e-mail.
(The rest of this fantasy snipped.)
Outlook XP has not been hit by any of these viruses because it has vastly improved security defaults, including no access to executable attachments.
The real solution is for every postmaster to implement "executable attachment filtering" at the mail server level. Have people get used to sending executables zipped up or renamed if they really need to send something like that.
Good point. When my neighbor kid throws a rock through my window, I'll be sure to blame the window company. They market there product as a way to protect me from the elements, but they make them out of glass! glass for gods sake! 1 kid with a rock can totally destroy them!
This is the worst analogy I've read in a long time.
Here's one that more closely resembles the Microsoft situation:
Imagine your window company installs windows that are open by default. That is, unless you prop them closed with a stick, they actually slide open, allowing all the elements (rain, snow, birds) right into your house.
This company then fixes the problem and offers to fix, for free, any windows that exhibit this problem. But you never registered your windows with the company, so they don't know how to contact you and tell you about the problem. And you're too stupid to realize the problem exists with your windows. ("Hey honey, why is there bird shit on the kitchen table?")
The only difference in this example and Microsoft Outlook/Express is that your window problems only harm you, and these Outlook/Express problems harm everyone!
Isn't that a bit like holding Napster responsible for all theft of music that happens on its systems, or the manufacturers of CD-RW drives for all software piracy done on their machines? That's the argument used by the supporters of DCMA and other nasty bills that outlaw fair use.
If Microsoft hadn't enabled braindead default settings in Outlook/Outlook Express, things wouldn't be as bad as they are. Most of these viruses exploit holes in versions of Outlook/OE that are very popular. Sure, there are patches, but try getting people to install them. Then they have to reinstall Windows for some reason, they put OE or Outlook back on, and leave it unpatched.
Microsoft will continue to get hammered over this until Outlook XP and subsequent versions reach critical mass, because those versions have some sane defaults (including not allowing any access to executable attachments finally!).
Actually, digital cable has significantly lower resolution than analog cable. Even when it's working perfectly, it doesn't look as good as analog.
That REALLY depends on which channels you're talking about, which cable company you have, etc. I've got TimeWarner digital cable in central Florida. I've got all the movie channels, the works. Even the HD channels (NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, WB, PBS, HBO, and Showtime).
The ESPN digital channel looks like shit. However the main HBO and Showtime digital channels look much better than when I compare them to the HBO and Showtime analog channels at my friend's house.
My guess is HBO and similar digital channels pay more money to Time Warner for better compression (or perhaps the way HBO transfers the feed to Time Warner comes into play). HBO is owned by AOL Time Warner, so that may even come into play.
My point is, the statement that digital channels have less resolution than analog channels is pure bullshit. SOME digital channels look worse than their analog counterpart, some look better.
Slashdot Mirror
Flash does something that most other products are NOT able to do.
Send me into a blind rage of frothy-mouthed bloodlust, ready to crack open the heads of the idiots requiring this shit to try and read a website?
Make interactive sites easy enough for even GRAPHIC developers to create.
Oh....
If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.
This reminds me of a joke...
What do you call 1,000,000 copies of Flash lying at the bottom of the ocean? A good start!
The reason we're bitching about Flash is because it is being abused by so many frigging sites that it makes me want to uninstall it. When I used MSIE, there was basically no way to prevent Flash from running without killing all other interactivity. Now I use Mozilla, and I basically just use MSIE when I come to one of those sites that uses Flash that I need to view.
People may really hate Java applets, but I've never seen a Java applet flying around my window, blocking my view of the content on screen, trying to sell me shit.
Shouldn't someone do a study of stuff like this when a Hugh Grant or Julia Roberts film hits the theaters and millions of housewives, secretaries and others flock to see it?
1. You can't compare those movies to STAR WARS. Nobody skips work to go see a Hugh Grant or Julia Roberts movie.
2. Housewives going out to see a movie helps the economy, it doesn't hurt it.
BTW, this "let's skip work to see Star Wars" is not just a geek thing. The Star Wars movies just brings out the geek in everyone, include your typical non-geeks.
i hope they dont use my method of hiding data:
tar files
bzip2 tar file
xor it with my social security number
hexdump to ascii file
generate gif of the hex in the ascii file
gpg encrypt gif
gzip the gpg text (twice!)
divide file into ints, swap endien-ness, reform
uuencode the file
hide contents in id3v2 tag of my "nofx" mp3s
Holy shit!
You do that, too?
I find this
frustrating, especially having graduated from MIT
in CS.
What a coicidence! Madnick got his PhD in CS from MIT!
Does that make you feel any better?
1. You have to find out all the functions exposed by the DLL.
2. You have to duplicate all the functions exposed by the DLL.
3. You have to do all this without the help of Microsoft.
4. You have to be willing to be sued by Microsoft if you successfully complete steps 1-3.
The Pentium FP bug was a hardware bug.
Was it really a hardware bug? (I mean, a bug related to the physical hardware?)
After all, most computer hardware is just frozen software.
One that we did...
And by "we," you mean "you."
Wrong Starting Estimate of Uranus mass
But I thought Uranus is a hole...
Any hole sufficiently big enough is bound to have some mass in there, somewhere.
The problem I see is: what about backlighting? LCD required backlighting to work doesn't it? If the colors (colours for you brits :-) are dense enough to reflect light realistically then perhaps that isn't a problem for some applicaitons: the invisibility application, however, presents a problem.
I read an article on eInk a while back on their full-color screens that do not emit light. In other words, you need an external light source to see the screen. Sounds like a perfect match for this technology.
So the JDC interviewed James Gosling. Surely he [has] contributed to the JDC and has a log in, thus making him a part of the JDC collective...
Next week on Slashdot: Taco interviews himself.
The difference is this interview is interesting, and James Gosling knows how to spell.
"Without the gee-whizery, without the remote-control and so on, that this kind of thing was possible has been obvious for decades," he said
Ummm, yes we realize that animals have been known to be trainable for thousands of years. The NEWS aspect is how they've rigged their brain up with electrodes to remotely stimulate pleasure after remotely giving them a command.
Uploading something to the Internet is not in the privacy of your own home. Last I checked, the Internet is not confined to your house.
Really?!! Thanks for the tip, man! Or maybe I was talking about the first part of the sentence:
"...digital-television equipment should be protected in such a way as to disallow unauthorized copying..."
Do you trust the MPAA/RIAA to decide what "unauthorized copying" really is?
Is it the same reply as I got? (See Below)
:) But he now supports the efforts of Hollins and others like him.
My reply from Senator Bill Nelson of Florida [tripod.com]
Or has he changed it since then? (Oh, and does he still include the Post Script about Anthrax?)
Yes the anthrax postscript is still there, but the content has changed. I'm sorry I can't scan it and upload it, as I tore it to shreds in a fit of rage!
I will vote against him next time around.
"I do agree that we need to take some steps to assure that material which is, for example, broadcast across digital-television equipment should be protected in such a way as to disallow unauthorized copying and disallow uploading to the Internet. I actually endorse the idea of doing that. But I think that should be done in a collaborative process that involves the manufacturers of equipment and also involves the motion-picture studios."
Let them create content and sell it to me, but don't let these greedy bastards control what I can do with it in the privacy of my own home once I've paid for it!
I just got a response back from Senator Bill Nelson, in which he endorses the bills being put forth by Senator Hollings, such as the CBDTPA! And he's a Democrat! WTF?
So keep that in mind when voting next time...
is for the World to begin the arduous and expensive task of removing Microsoft software from their computers.
The first step is to eliminate Outlook for e-mail.
(The rest of this fantasy snipped.)
Outlook XP has not been hit by any of these viruses because it has vastly improved security defaults, including no access to executable attachments.
The real solution is for every postmaster to implement "executable attachment filtering" at the mail server level. Have people get used to sending executables zipped up or renamed if they really need to send something like that.
Because the truth is, the masses are asses.
I have nothing to do with the program or its development, I'm just a happy user.
I hope it doesn't have any unchecked/overflow buffer problems.
Good point. When my neighbor kid throws a rock through my window, I'll be sure to blame the window company. They market there product as a way to protect me from the elements, but they make them out of glass! glass for gods sake! 1 kid with a rock can totally destroy them!
This is the worst analogy I've read in a long time.
Here's one that more closely resembles the Microsoft situation:
Imagine your window company installs windows that are open by default. That is, unless you prop them closed with a stick, they actually slide open, allowing all the elements (rain, snow, birds) right into your house.
This company then fixes the problem and offers to fix, for free, any windows that exhibit this problem. But you never registered your windows with the company, so they don't know how to contact you and tell you about the problem. And you're too stupid to realize the problem exists with your windows. ("Hey honey, why is there bird shit on the kitchen table?")
The only difference in this example and Microsoft Outlook/Express is that your window problems only harm you, and these Outlook/Express problems harm everyone!
It's a frigging troll. The information given is not about Klez!
Isn't that a bit like holding Napster responsible for all theft of music that happens on its systems, or the manufacturers of CD-RW drives for all software piracy done on their machines? That's the argument used by the supporters of DCMA and other nasty bills that outlaw fair use.
If Microsoft hadn't enabled braindead default settings in Outlook/Outlook Express, things wouldn't be as bad as they are. Most of these viruses exploit holes in versions of Outlook/OE that are very popular. Sure, there are patches, but try getting people to install them. Then they have to reinstall Windows for some reason, they put OE or Outlook back on, and leave it unpatched.
Microsoft will continue to get hammered over this until Outlook XP and subsequent versions reach critical mass, because those versions have some sane defaults (including not allowing any access to executable attachments finally!).
Also banned are corkscrews and toy transformer robots.
Actually, just the ones that transform into guns, bombs, or box-cutters.
Surcharge for buying my ticket four weeks early: 75 cents
/. geek in Florida for a place in line at the only digital theatre around: PRICELESS!
A ticket to see Star Wars II at the Pleasure Island AMC: $8
Having to fight every
Actually, digital cable has significantly lower resolution than analog cable. Even when it's working perfectly, it doesn't look as good as analog.
That REALLY depends on which channels you're talking about, which cable company you have, etc. I've got TimeWarner digital cable in central Florida. I've got all the movie channels, the works. Even the HD channels (NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, WB, PBS, HBO, and Showtime).
The ESPN digital channel looks like shit. However the main HBO and Showtime digital channels look much better than when I compare them to the HBO and Showtime analog channels at my friend's house.
My guess is HBO and similar digital channels pay more money to Time Warner for better compression (or perhaps the way HBO transfers the feed to Time Warner comes into play). HBO is owned by AOL Time Warner, so that may even come into play.
My point is, the statement that digital channels have less resolution than analog channels is pure bullshit. SOME digital channels look worse than their analog counterpart, some look better.
And of course, the HD channels are superb.
Besides that, I (and others, no doubt..) would actually go see one if I knew Jar Jar was going to get snuffed out beforehand.
Whew! Because I hear George is having a hard time getting people to show up for the SW movies!
He'll be glad to read this!