They are created and run by people, with the express purpose of shielding these people from losing everything they own in event of their business failure.
Which makes them free to cause as much destruction as they please. After all, your tax dollars will clean up after them.
Last I checked (which was about a decade ago, I think), caching is based on popularity. Use freenet for something other than kiddie porn and something other than kiddie porn will be cached.
The web became the new visual basic, mostly due to the fact that it took some small amount of skill to drag and drop form elements onto a window in a way that doesn't fuck up if the user's resolution is not exactly like yours, while the html browser will reflow the text so it may still look like shit but at least the form will scroll if it doesn't fit, instead of putting the buttons off the bottom of an unresizable modal dialog that windows won't let you drag up off the top of the screen so you can see them.
tl;dr: UI is hard! The web makes it the browser's responsibility.
That's the same issue. You're looking at the greatest grandparent of your post, but if it's not fully opened, you can't see its children, including your own post.
Ironically when opening a direct comment link, the comment in the link is "open"... you just can't see that until you actually open all the ancestor comments first.
What is interesting to me is the contortions the kids go through while they resist. I wonder if it's possible to try that with kids strapped into an fMRI and see what exactly is going on in there that makes "wait 15 minutes" require so much physical activity.
Bah, if they made it a fixed width, they'd have no end of screaming over that choice too. Whack it with stylish or whatever CSS substitutor you feel comfortable with and move on with your life.
Myself? My first complaint is that the abbreviated view no longer shows the username.
And you'll buy the boxed set again when 4B comes out, followed by 4C?
And again when he releases the planned vol 5?
And again when he gets around to going back to redoing vol 1 2 and 3 in MMIX and releasing the 4th edition?
And again if he gets around to his planned Vol 6 and Vol 7?
Personally, I'll stick to the individual volumes (hopefully he will issue the changes to vol2 and vol3 as fascicles as he did with the Vol 1 Fascicle 1 release defining MMIX)
Re:Didn't know there was a Comic Code
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
but they may not pass laws abridging the freedom of speech or the press.
Unless it's "obscenity", which is what congress would have certainly defined comics as, and it probably would have stuck, since by that time the Supreme Court had already installed the giant loophole in the first amendment so puritanical ninnies wouldn't be hindered by it in their quest to rid America of anything that makes them feel a little funny.
Re:Didn't know there was a Comic Code
on
Comics Code Dead
·
· Score: 1
Except for the threats by congress to Do Something About It.
But isn't that exactly what custody is? Or are you suggesting that even if a guy goes on a killing spree with hundreds of witnesses and multiple video recordings, he should be completely free until the day the jury convicts him?
No, but that's why he gets a bond hearing, so that the judge, prosecutors, and defense can decide whether he should be permitted to go free until he's convicted or not.
I think they learned their lesson from the reactions to FF13. Instead of taking place in a long hallway, FF13-2 will take place entirely within one single room.
Only when you get to define "controversy". Needless to say, this does not change the fact that under the current definitions, any law that doesn't demonstrably harm anyone cannot be unconstitutional, because the government does not wish to accept that violating the Constitution is a harm of its own.
Perhaps what's needed is to amend the Constitution to create a fourth branch of government specifically to deal with questions of Constitutionality of laws and regulations, that is able to address these concerns before anyone is harmed, rather than trying to shoehorn the question into the judicial system.
the photo of the lighting transformer pretty much proves it
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. The question is whether a poorly installed dimmable ballast just showed up one day. Bonus points if it's not attached to a dimmer switch.
Sorry, but years of anti-Constitutional assholes have stripped Americans of their first amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
The courts ruled that if you can't prove that you have personally been injured by the government, you have no grievance and therefore can't sue the government to force the courts to declare a law unconstitutional. So now, the only laws that are "unconstitutional" are the ones that actually hurt people, and before you can actually do anything about it, you have to allow yourself to be hurt.
Take warrantless wiretapping: exactly one American citizen could prove that he was illegally wiretapped, because someone mailed him a transcript of their phonecalls. He went to court and the feds stole their transcript and banned them from presenting it or even talking about it as evidence. Years later (just last year, in fact he finally "won" (pending the federal government appealing for its "right" to wiretap people without a warrant).
Yeah, well, we used to take these people, drug them up and lock them in padded cells for the rest of their lives but the pansy-ass Democrats decided that was "not nice", and the cheap-ass Republicans decided it was too expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Velocity needs a unit of direction
Velocitycheaters are going straight to Hell!
Which makes them free to cause as much destruction as they please. After all, your tax dollars will clean up after them.
Last I checked (which was about a decade ago, I think), caching is based on popularity. Use freenet for something other than kiddie porn and something other than kiddie porn will be cached.
The web became the new visual basic, mostly due to the fact that it took some small amount of skill to drag and drop form elements onto a window in a way that doesn't fuck up if the user's resolution is not exactly like yours, while the html browser will reflow the text so it may still look like shit but at least the form will scroll if it doesn't fit, instead of putting the buttons off the bottom of an unresizable modal dialog that windows won't let you drag up off the top of the screen so you can see them.
tl;dr: UI is hard! The web makes it the browser's responsibility.
If I was in Egypt, I'd be pretty pissed at them canceling my circuses and would probably go out and break stuff.
There's plenty of posts, you just can't see them since after the redesign, "abbreviated" comments completely hide all of the comments below them.
That's the same issue. You're looking at the greatest grandparent of your post, but if it's not fully opened, you can't see its children, including your own post.
Ironically when opening a direct comment link, the comment in the link is "open"... you just can't see that until you actually open all the ancestor comments first.
What is interesting to me is the contortions the kids go through while they resist. I wonder if it's possible to try that with kids strapped into an fMRI and see what exactly is going on in there that makes "wait 15 minutes" require so much physical activity.
And how will I show off my manly 'stache without :-{)?
"Abbreviated" posts hide their children entirely (previously these were below and indented).
This makes the link directly to a comment all sorts of wrong since you can't even see it until you open up every low-scoring ancestor.
Bah, if they made it a fixed width, they'd have no end of screaming over that choice too. Whack it with stylish or whatever CSS substitutor you feel comfortable with and move on with your life.
Myself? My first complaint is that the abbreviated view no longer shows the username.
Holy cow, I clicked "reply to this" and I got a textarea I can type in!
Did they actually test this redesign this time?!
I see previewing still takes several seconds the first time.
And you'll buy the boxed set again when 4B comes out, followed by 4C?
And again when he releases the planned vol 5?
And again when he gets around to going back to redoing vol 1 2 and 3 in MMIX and releasing the 4th edition?
And again if he gets around to his planned Vol 6 and Vol 7?
Personally, I'll stick to the individual volumes (hopefully he will issue the changes to vol2 and vol3 as fascicles as he did with the Vol 1 Fascicle 1 release defining MMIX)
but they may not pass laws abridging the freedom of speech or the press.
Unless it's "obscenity", which is what congress would have certainly defined comics as, and it probably would have stuck, since by that time the Supreme Court had already installed the giant loophole in the first amendment so puritanical ninnies wouldn't be hindered by it in their quest to rid America of anything that makes them feel a little funny.
Except for the threats by congress to Do Something About It.
Somebody's gotta pay for that data, and if the government wont...
But isn't that exactly what custody is? Or are you suggesting that even if a guy goes on a killing spree with hundreds of witnesses and multiple video recordings, he should be completely free until the day the jury convicts him?
No, but that's why he gets a bond hearing, so that the judge, prosecutors, and defense can decide whether he should be permitted to go free until he's convicted or not.
I think they learned their lesson from the reactions to FF13. Instead of taking place in a long hallway, FF13-2 will take place entirely within one single room.
If that's the case, what were you arrested for in the first place, for which you were "resisting"?
Cops are busy people, you expect them to waste their time on fake paperwork so you can have a fake charge to go with your resisting arrest?
Why would they spend hundreds of man and money hours spying on you?
Yeah, why WOULD they, when it's becoming cheaper and easier?
When it costs them nothing to spy on you, why not?
The US dreams that after decades of sanctions and embargoes, Cubans might yet throw off their Communist yoke and depose Castro.
Even if they have to dig him back up in order to throw him out.
it's actually part of the Constitution itself
Only when you get to define "controversy". Needless to say, this does not change the fact that under the current definitions, any law that doesn't demonstrably harm anyone cannot be unconstitutional, because the government does not wish to accept that violating the Constitution is a harm of its own.
Perhaps what's needed is to amend the Constitution to create a fourth branch of government specifically to deal with questions of Constitutionality of laws and regulations, that is able to address these concerns before anyone is harmed, rather than trying to shoehorn the question into the judicial system.
the photo of the lighting transformer pretty much proves it
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. The question is whether a poorly installed dimmable ballast just showed up one day. Bonus points if it's not attached to a dimmer switch.
Sorry, but years of anti-Constitutional assholes have stripped Americans of their first amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
The courts ruled that if you can't prove that you have personally been injured by the government, you have no grievance and therefore can't sue the government to force the courts to declare a law unconstitutional. So now, the only laws that are "unconstitutional" are the ones that actually hurt people, and before you can actually do anything about it, you have to allow yourself to be hurt.
Take warrantless wiretapping: exactly one American citizen could prove that he was illegally wiretapped, because someone mailed him a transcript of their phonecalls. He went to court and the feds stole their transcript and banned them from presenting it or even talking about it as evidence. Years later (just last year, in fact he finally "won" (pending the federal government appealing for its "right" to wiretap people without a warrant).
Yeah, well, we used to take these people, drug them up and lock them in padded cells for the rest of their lives but the pansy-ass Democrats decided that was "not nice", and the cheap-ass Republicans decided it was too expensive.