Here downloading isn't illegal (although uploading is).
I'm not quite sure where you got this information from, but I don't believe it to be true. Downloading of copyright data without the copyright owner's consent almost certainly is "making an unauthorized copy" under the meaning of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. It is typically a civil offense, for which you can be sued by the copyright owner. Also, there are many additional circumstances that can turn it into a criminal offence. I recommend you read the act; it is available somewhere on the hmso.gov.uk web site -- google for it.
That's why we pay a levy on blank media.
There is no levy on blank media in the UK. The only country I'm aware of that has this system is Canada, although I'm sure there are others.
In fact, there *IS* evidence that sex offenders *CAN* change their behavior.
To clarify what the GP said, a certain type of sex offender -- i.e. child molesters -- generally suffer from a mental illness for which there is no known practical cure. That doesn't mean that all people who suffer from said mental illness immediately go out and start molesting kiddies, but they still have the impulse to do so, they just control it.
Those convicted of doing it sometimes learn afterwards how to control their impulses more effectively. This is why they are released. But relapses are common, unfortunately.
You know, KIOslaves and gnome-vfs are both really bad ideas. There are great places for virtual filesystem code (kernel, userspace filesystems like fuse or lufs, or for wildly different interfaces, just simple stand-alone libraries)
I'm getting fed up of hearing this mantra repeated again and again. Here's a hint: google "kioslaves fuse bridge".
Re:Is 100% compatibility really what we want?
on
KOffice 1.4 Released
·
· Score: 1
For example, Word has pretty poor support for fine typography. Are we really saying that an OSS word processor can't (for example) support proper ligatures and "expert" characters from OpenType fonts, typographical enhancements like hanging punctuation, or more advanced page layout like a decent line-breaking algorithm for fully justified paragraphs and stretchable whitespace?
Of course it can. But these features should be switched off when you open a Word document, and not switched on again unless the user specifically asks for them.
No, it won't. Any sane and sensible page layout program specifies the size of the print area, not the size of the margins.
The problem is that users want to specify margin size, because that's the most obvious part of it.
I think the correct way is to format for a particular size of paper, storing the details of that paper size in the document file, and then warn before printing (probably with an option to automatically correct) if your printer is configured for a different size of paper. This dialog could include options for keeping the printable area constant and keeping the margins constant, if desired.
Word of course stores the details of the document size in the printer but blindly prints onto any size paper without so much as a warning (unless the print area extends beyond the edge of the printer's printable area).
And if you add up how many sheets of paper I've wasted because the printer driver thought it had letter paper, Word wanted A4 and the printer really did have A4, it ain't insignificant!
If a Linux and a Windows version of the same word processor (or format) were showing a document for printing on 8.5x11 paper, there's no reason they shouldn't show exactly the same layout of the items on the "virtual paper" before the printing occurs. To have it otherwise is disconcerting.
Of course, MS Word fails this particular test, even from Windows -> Windows running on a different machine. Just today I had to reformat a document before doing a PDF conversion on it[1] because there was a paragraph flowing onto the next page and leaving a nearly blank page in it where there wasn't on the original writer's machine.
For some reason I've never been entirely sure of, Word seems to vary its formatting slightly according to what printer driver you have selected as the default, which has weird affects on stuff. Particularly if you come across a document written by someone who uses tabs and no hard line breaks to write indented text...
[1]: Actually, I was using OO.o to do the conversion, but opened the document in word to determine if it had got the formatting any closer to the original; it had, but it still wasn't perfect.
I admit I haven't used Opera since version 5 [*] so I'm a bit confused by some of the things you say it does better than firefox:
Enhanced text searching
Firefox has incremental search and "type to search" (although the latter is disabled by default). I'm not sure what else Opera does, but I can't really think of a way to make firefox's search any better than it is.
Tabs (options in right click like open in new page/window, open in foreground/background)
I have those options in my right click menu also. Admittedly the foreground/background option was installed by an extension, as was the preference to have new window links automatically redirected to tabs.
Ability to right click and search for a phrase
I also have this in firefox. I'm pretty sure that isn't an extension[**].
Javascript and Java console
I have those, too, and that certainly isn't an extension. Unless you're saying they're better (the Java console is the standard one provided by the Sun JRE; but the javascript one's a bit naff, I'll grant)?
Firefox could most of these with the right extensions. But I am not happy to search high and low for an extension to do this, let alone finding a stable one.
Here's what I recommend to people: go to Tools / Extensions / Get more extensions, then look at the top ten list. Download any that sound useful to you. Everyone should have tab browser preferences, IMO, and most people want AdBlock. The rest are for people with unusual needs.
*: which I deinstalled because, while I was impressed with the small footprint, I found the UI clunky and the handling of images, which flickered badly if you scrolled pages while they were downloaded, was poor
**: (he extensions I have installed are: tab browsing preferences, "Add N Edit Cookies", web developer, fetch text URL, chatzilla and sage. None of them seem to be responsible for the search option.
Why not? It's a good idea. Especially for admin pages. Single click on a link, and it follows the link, double click on a link, and you edit the link in-line.
Yes, but don't do what I've seen some Wikis doing recently: ondblclick="location.go('[edit page]')" on a DIV around the content.
Double click on text is a fairly standard action for whole-word selection. Don't override it to do something else, please.
Re:Stopped reading it when it got so political...
on
The Onion in 2056
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, but then the Simpsons did their own version, so everything was OK again.:)
I can literally hear my computer huffing and puffing to keep up with this page, because the temperature-controlled fan turned on as they rendered.
It might be time to splurge and pick up that new 386 with 8 megs of RAM that you've had your eye on...
I know you're trying to be funny, and all, but my P2-400 slowed to an absolute crawl trying to display it in firefox; 96Mb of RAM was not enough as firefox hit over 80 (the OS typically uses about 20-30). IE6 couldn't display it at all, just sat there with the banner at the top of the screen but no content.
Of course, that is only on a British monopoly board. American boards, Australian boards, Star Wars boards, Star Trek boards, Simpsons boards and others have totally different stuff:)
There are actually multiple designs of British board, also. For instance, you can get a Coventry edition. I assume the same is true for other cities, probably throughout the world.
Besides, click-through ads do NOT work as a form of advertising. 90% of internet users do not click through intentionally. Read: dot-crash, not a revenue model.
But that's fine, because the number of viewers is high enough and the cost of the ads low enough that they're still effective.
Also, a click through isn't necessarily what the advertiser is after. They might just want you to see their brandname and short marketing message -- after all, they pay for newspaper and magazine adverts, and you don't click through on those, either, do you?
It may be the most popular ringtone in the world, but it makes me WANT TO KILL PEOPLE.
Does anyone know where I can get hold of the 3D model for that damned thing? I'm going to release a game that consists of you wandering around, picking up different weapons and destroying it, time after time, but in a different way each time. It'll be the most popular game in the world.
Exactly. Seeing large, flash animations telling me about a service I am completely uninterested in irritates me. Sometimes I click[1] on them on the basis that it will cost someone money and not give them any sales.
This idea sounds good, but unfortunately does nothing like as much good as you think it does. The problem is this: there are 3 different ways for paying for internet adverts -- per impression, per click or per successful transaction. From when I ran an advertising-paid site, I can tell you this: the really annoying ads are all paid for per impression. Why? Because they get higher click through and transaction rates, so they get a better deal buying them on per impression pricing.
Of those who would block all the ads they see and never see them again, how many would ever click on one at all? Therefore, is it really harmful to let them block those ads?
Adverts don't only exist to generate queries, though. There's also building brand awareness, which is the reason why most money is spent on advertising.
But there are many things that there isn't a reasonable choice for -- look at the sites listed:
Odeon.co.uk - this company operates the only cinema I can get to within half an hour on public transport. I don't have much choice but using them (however they do have a text only site that works well, I've found, so I wouldn't actally complain about them myself).
Jobcentreplus.gov.uk - a government agency, not much choice there.
Companieshouse.gov.uk - another government agency
So, out of 8 that are listed, 3 are people I have no choice but to deal with.
I encounter incompatible sites now and then. But so far, I haven't found an incompatible site that didn't have a compatible competitor. So what if "Weather.com" goes into an infinite redirect loop? There's Yahoo Weather.
At least one of the sites on their list is a government site. Can you recommend a competing government to me? I don't know of any locally...;)
The article doesn't say 10% of sites; it's 10% of the top 100 sites. That's a big difference -- the sites that put the most effort into being popular are the ones most likely to push the edge of browser compatibility, because they're trying to cram more and more features into the pages all the time.
One of my clients recently insisted on switching to a page layout that renders shaded areas using MS's non-standard 'behaviour' CSS tags, because they felt it would help the pages load faster. Faster page loads is more important to them than compatibility, because their market surveys tell them that people prefer to visit sites that load faster.
But if you accept that you don't have pixel-for-pixel control and let the browser lay out the page the way it wants, you don't need to write different code for different browsers in general.
True. But the clients never accept this, and if you insist too hard that it's true, they leave and take their business to somebody who will tell them they can. And then when you tell them it doesn't work in firefox, they say they don't care.
It used to happen all the time to me, when I was in the web design business.
Slashdot Mirror
Shame the mods haven't noticed it yet.
Here downloading isn't illegal (although uploading is).
I'm not quite sure where you got this information from, but I don't believe it to be true. Downloading of copyright data without the copyright owner's consent almost certainly is "making an unauthorized copy" under the meaning of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. It is typically a civil offense, for which you can be sued by the copyright owner. Also, there are many additional circumstances that can turn it into a criminal offence. I recommend you read the act; it is available somewhere on the hmso.gov.uk web site -- google for it.
That's why we pay a levy on blank media.
There is no levy on blank media in the UK. The only country I'm aware of that has this system is Canada, although I'm sure there are others.
That's a terrible definition of theft.
The standard one is:
The removal of somebody else's property without consent, with intent to permanently deprive the owner of its use.
You say:
Did NoWares Corp. consent to you taking their software? Nope. It's theft.
I didn't take it. They still have it.
No, but that isn't the business method's fault -- it's the idiots designing the adverts who are to blame for that.
In fact, there *IS* evidence that sex offenders *CAN* change their behavior.
To clarify what the GP said, a certain type of sex offender -- i.e. child molesters -- generally suffer from a mental illness for which there is no known practical cure. That doesn't mean that all people who suffer from said mental illness immediately go out and start molesting kiddies, but they still have the impulse to do so, they just control it.
Those convicted of doing it sometimes learn afterwards how to control their impulses more effectively. This is why they are released. But relapses are common, unfortunately.
You know, KIOslaves and gnome-vfs are both really bad ideas. There are great places for virtual filesystem code (kernel, userspace filesystems like fuse or lufs, or for wildly different interfaces, just simple stand-alone libraries)
I'm getting fed up of hearing this mantra repeated again and again. Here's a hint: google "kioslaves fuse bridge".
For example, Word has pretty poor support for fine typography. Are we really saying that an OSS word processor can't (for example) support proper ligatures and "expert" characters from OpenType fonts, typographical enhancements like hanging punctuation, or more advanced page layout like a decent line-breaking algorithm for fully justified paragraphs and stretchable whitespace?
Of course it can. But these features should be switched off when you open a Word document, and not switched on again unless the user specifically asks for them.
No, it won't. Any sane and sensible page layout program specifies the size of the print area, not the size of the margins.
The problem is that users want to specify margin size, because that's the most obvious part of it.
I think the correct way is to format for a particular size of paper, storing the details of that paper size in the document file, and then warn before printing (probably with an option to automatically correct) if your printer is configured for a different size of paper. This dialog could include options for keeping the printable area constant and keeping the margins constant, if desired.
Word of course stores the details of the document size in the printer but blindly prints onto any size paper without so much as a warning (unless the print area extends beyond the edge of the printer's printable area).
And if you add up how many sheets of paper I've wasted because the printer driver thought it had letter paper, Word wanted A4 and the printer really did have A4, it ain't insignificant!
If a Linux and a Windows version of the same word processor (or format) were showing a document for printing on 8.5x11 paper, there's no reason they shouldn't show exactly the same layout of the items on the "virtual paper" before the printing occurs. To have it otherwise is disconcerting.
Of course, MS Word fails this particular test, even from Windows -> Windows running on a different machine. Just today I had to reformat a document before doing a PDF conversion on it[1] because there was a paragraph flowing onto the next page and leaving a nearly blank page in it where there wasn't on the original writer's machine.
For some reason I've never been entirely sure of, Word seems to vary its formatting slightly according to what printer driver you have selected as the default, which has weird affects on stuff. Particularly if you come across a document written by someone who uses tabs and no hard line breaks to write indented text...
[1]: Actually, I was using OO.o to do the conversion, but opened the document in word to determine if it had got the formatting any closer to the original; it had, but it still wasn't perfect.
I admit I haven't used Opera since version 5 [*] so I'm a bit confused by some of the things you say it does better than firefox:
Enhanced text searching
Firefox has incremental search and "type to search" (although the latter is disabled by default). I'm not sure what else Opera does, but I can't really think of a way to make firefox's search any better than it is.
Tabs (options in right click like open in new page/window, open in foreground/background)
I have those options in my right click menu also. Admittedly the foreground/background option was installed by an extension, as was the preference to have new window links automatically redirected to tabs.
Ability to right click and search for a phrase
I also have this in firefox. I'm pretty sure that isn't an extension[**].
Javascript and Java console
I have those, too, and that certainly isn't an extension. Unless you're saying they're better (the Java console is the standard one provided by the Sun JRE; but the javascript one's a bit naff, I'll grant)?
Firefox could most of these with the right extensions. But I am not happy to search high and low for an extension to do this, let alone finding a stable one.
Here's what I recommend to people: go to Tools / Extensions / Get more extensions, then look at the top ten list. Download any that sound useful to you. Everyone should have tab browser preferences, IMO, and most people want AdBlock. The rest are for people with unusual needs.
*: which I deinstalled because, while I was impressed with the small footprint, I found the UI clunky and the handling of images, which flickered badly if you scrolled pages while they were downloaded, was poor
**: (he extensions I have installed are: tab browsing preferences, "Add N Edit Cookies", web developer, fetch text URL, chatzilla and sage. None of them seem to be responsible for the search option.
Why not? It's a good idea. Especially for admin pages. Single click on a link, and it follows the link, double click on a link, and you edit the link in-line.
Yes, but don't do what I've seen some Wikis doing recently: ondblclick="location.go('[edit page]')" on a DIV around the content.
Double click on text is a fairly standard action for whole-word selection. Don't override it to do something else, please.
Yeah, but then the Simpsons did their own version, so everything was OK again. :)
I can literally hear my computer huffing and puffing to keep up with this page, because the temperature-controlled fan turned on as they rendered.
It might be time to splurge and pick up that new 386 with 8 megs of RAM that you've had your eye on...
I know you're trying to be funny, and all, but my P2-400 slowed to an absolute crawl trying to display it in firefox; 96Mb of RAM was not enough as firefox hit over 80 (the OS typically uses about 20-30). IE6 couldn't display it at all, just sat there with the banner at the top of the screen but no content.
It was overkill.
Of course, that is only on a British monopoly board. :)
American boards, Australian boards, Star Wars boards, Star Trek boards, Simpsons boards and others have totally different stuff
There are actually multiple designs of British board, also. For instance, you can get a Coventry edition. I assume the same is true for other cities, probably throughout the world.
Besides, click-through ads do NOT work as a form of advertising. 90% of internet users do not click through intentionally. Read: dot-crash, not a revenue model.
But that's fine, because the number of viewers is high enough and the cost of the ads low enough that they're still effective.
Also, a click through isn't necessarily what the advertiser is after. They might just want you to see their brandname and short marketing message -- after all, they pay for newspaper and magazine adverts, and you don't click through on those, either, do you?
Bah --- most commercials are better written, better acted, and more entertaining than any six reality shows (RemodelAmerica notwithstanding).
In order to know that, you must have watched at least six different reality shows. Why did you do it?
It may be the most popular ringtone in the world, but it makes me WANT TO KILL PEOPLE.
Does anyone know where I can get hold of the 3D model for that damned thing? I'm going to release a game that consists of you wandering around, picking up different weapons and destroying it, time after time, but in a different way each time. It'll be the most popular game in the world.
Exactly. Seeing large, flash animations telling me about a service I am completely uninterested in irritates me. Sometimes I click[1] on them on the basis that it will cost someone money and not give them any sales.
This idea sounds good, but unfortunately does nothing like as much good as you think it does. The problem is this: there are 3 different ways for paying for internet adverts -- per impression, per click or per successful transaction. From when I ran an advertising-paid site, I can tell you this: the really annoying ads are all paid for per impression. Why? Because they get higher click through and transaction rates, so they get a better deal buying them on per impression pricing.
Sad, but true.
The next thing we'll see is sites that don't work if you block the popups. Here's how it would work:
Original site:
Page A links to page B, page B has javascript to display popup when it loads.
New site:
Page A has a link which loads a popup; when the popup is fully loaded the popup uses opener.location to load page B into the parent window.
We don't stand a chance.
Of those who would block all the ads they see and never see them again, how many would ever click on one at all? Therefore, is it really harmful to let them block those ads?
Adverts don't only exist to generate queries, though. There's also building brand awareness, which is the reason why most money is spent on advertising.
But there are many things that there isn't a reasonable choice for -- look at the sites listed:
Odeon.co.uk - this company operates the only cinema I can get to within half an hour on public transport. I don't have much choice but using them (however they do have a text only site that works well, I've found, so I wouldn't actally complain about them myself).
Jobcentreplus.gov.uk - a government agency, not much choice there.
Companieshouse.gov.uk - another government agency
So, out of 8 that are listed, 3 are people I have no choice but to deal with.
They'd only reject based on "standards-supported: activex/2.0" or something.
I encounter incompatible sites now and then. But so far, I haven't found an incompatible site that didn't have a compatible competitor. So what if "Weather.com" goes into an infinite redirect loop? There's Yahoo Weather.
;)
At least one of the sites on their list is a government site. Can you recommend a competing government to me? I don't know of any locally...
The article doesn't say 10% of sites; it's 10% of the top 100 sites. That's a big difference -- the sites that put the most effort into being popular are the ones most likely to push the edge of browser compatibility, because they're trying to cram more and more features into the pages all the time.
One of my clients recently insisted on switching to a page layout that renders shaded areas using MS's non-standard 'behaviour' CSS tags, because they felt it would help the pages load faster. Faster page loads is more important to them than compatibility, because their market surveys tell them that people prefer to visit sites that load faster.
But if you accept that you don't have pixel-for-pixel control and let the browser lay out the page the way it wants, you don't need to write different code for different browsers in general.
True. But the clients never accept this, and if you insist too hard that it's true, they leave and take their business to somebody who will tell them they can. And then when you tell them it doesn't work in firefox, they say they don't care.
It used to happen all the time to me, when I was in the web design business.