...properly done flash gives WAY more control to the user...and guess what, you can change anything WITHOUT reloading the page like shitty crap 1970s html you fucking throwback jerkwad.
On both counts: WHAT??
I'd really like to see some explanation here. What the hell do you mean by "change anything"? and what is that statement about reloading the page? Are you referring to what Netscape use to do way back in version 4.7 when you resized the window?
These are the same people that are coming up with the w3c standards and trying to fix the mess that Microsoft and the browser wars put us in. Making their sites accesible to non-shitheads is also one of their biggest priorities (thus the focus on graceful degradation of techniques).
At which point did this place become troll-heaven? I have seen precious few informed opinions in this thread. Less so than in any other topic.
And sIFR has been around for quite some time too. And it's not patented. And Shaun Inman came up with, a lot of people have worked on it since. And there was no press release.
Javascript cannot "render" a font that the client does not have. Javascript is executed in the client. What you suggest would only be feasible by rendering an image with the font using server-side language (which some people actually do, but I don't think it's worth the trouble).
In other issues: seriously, is there so little overlap between the web design community and Slashdot? sIFR has been around for ages, and the submitter didn't even credit Shaun Inman with coming up with the method. It's quite useful and downgrades gracefully. Not my cup of tea, but it's done wonders for designers everywhere.
Thanks for the clarification. I live in a country that rarely produces serial killers (Mexico -- There's a lot of killing, but usually related to more pedestrian motives), so I don't really follow all the happenings in US media.
The subject does interest me, but I'm not passionate about it, so I've only resesarched the most famous serial killers, who all fit that profile. And I don't really care about feeling better about the world. I think it's already screwed up enough that a normally brought up person who kills other people can fit in there. I just hadn't heard of those cases. So thanks =)
"Sometimes parents do everything right and still end up with a serial killer."
When has this happened?
In every single case I've read about serial killers, their motives could be traced back to child abuse, traumatic experiences, etc. And all of those within the family environment. So please, I'd like to see proof of this.
Well, this has gone down the hill pretty quickly, hasn't it? Risking involvement in this, I think the parent made a poor choice out of the blog's content. Here's what I think could be sensitive:
google's relocation process requires the employee to pay all the expenses up front and then get reimbursed for them later.
Ok, this is mild, but imagine what HR thinks when it sees this published on the internet? (I know: screw them, but still, it's not a good idea to piss off the people who sign your paychecks).
they don't pay out your signing bonus and relocation money until your first paycheck
What if this is not standard procedure? Someone mentioned in a related thread that maybe they gave him a signing bonus, but not to a lot of other people? How will it make them feel? This is why companies ask you not to disclose your salary (which no one actually abides by, but internet publishing is different from corridor talk)
microsoft's health care benefits shame google's relatively meager offering. for those of you who don't know, microsoft pays 100% of employees' premiums for a world-class PP
Ok, this one's a biggie. This is not so easy to get info, and it starts getting specific.
google demands employees that are 90th percentile material, so what's with the 50th percentile compensation? the packages would've been decent when the company was pre-IPO, but let's be honest here... a stock option with a strike price of $188 just doesn't have the same value as the ones of yesteryear. even microsoft adjusted their base salaries to 66th percentile years ago when it was clear that their stock options weren't as much a part of the total compensation package as it used to be. for a post-IPO company like google, it only seems fair that they adjust things accordingly.
This kind of analysis, made by an employee, publically voiced, is exactly the kind of thing the obsessive compulsive google fans are looking for. And it could, conceivably, fall in the SEC-restricted category (affecting the public's perception of the company, possibly prematurely revealing internal changes in policy, etc.).
It's not that any particular bit of info on the blog was confidential. It's that a lot of what he was taking about falls in a very gray area that might not only piss off the managers, but could get Google in trouble with the SEC. Can you blame them for being careful? (although I do think a warning would have been in order, before taking action).
You're very right. After reading through his blog, I think what got him fired was revealing too much of the inside handling of HR, compensation packages and the like.
This is info *any* company asks you not to divulge (check your contract), and it's particularly sensitive in a highly scrutinized company like Google, where evey employee is a de-facto internet rockstar.
So yes, he should have been more careful. Don't know about the complaints, but the content on the weblog is sensitive.
It worked for me (firefox in OS X). What it does is fix the lookup, not the display, so the links will still look as they did, but when you click on them it says "domain not found"
LeGuin sold her TV rights instead of putting them in her will for her grandchildren. That's a pretty shiddy thing for a 72 year old woman to do if you ask me.
I think she can very well do as she pleases, can't she? Your comment reminded me of the copyright row with Stephen Joyce, Joyce's last surviving asshole of a grandson, over public reading of "Ulysses" at the centenary of the day the book takes place in.
It even prompted Neil Gaiman to make this announcement in his blog, which contains the following jewel:
"So, for whatever it's worth, and for the record, and as long as it's not-for-profit, people can always do readings of my stuff, if they want to, in public, in private, in school, in front of small invited audiences of marsupials, or even in Dublin. No permission or payment will ever be required. And my unborn grandchildren will just have to learn to live with it."
So, in short... They are her rights, dude. Authors don't have a moral obligation to do anything, and if I were her I'd be damn pissed about the comments the director made.
I can't find any sympathy for someone who sells the rights to their work, then complains about what happens to it.
You should read the entire article then. She's a pro. She didn't complain or attack the miniseries until the director decided to put words in her mouth and say what "she had intended by..."
I do web designs for outside clients, and also get some money off ads in my blog (not much right now, but steadily improving).
Re:No, that's not accurate
on
A New Elena Story
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The area is heavily guarded, apparently. Someone stirred up a ruckus when they saw her story on the net and took it up against the guards. Eventually it turned out that she had taken a helmet with her on one of the usual (legal) tours and took pictures with that. She also changed her story after the allegations of fraud surfaced (at first, she claimed that her dad was a worker in the zone, and that she routinely biked there)
So, the only option available is to cut jobs, destroy the industry and head into economic downfall, is it?
I take it that placing stronger regulations in place to stop soccer moms from buying gas-guzzling 2-ton SUV's to drop the kids at school and cutting on all the excess americans are so prone to indulge in is out of the question?
Iraq is better off now than under the thumb of Saddam and will be ven better off as time goes by and the "minority" of people that make up the terrorist groups over there killing their own people for getting jobs and taking care of their own families are finally taken care of.
You really think that? REALLY? Going from a crazy dictator that killed a few people everyday to an invasion that routinely bombs civilian emplacements and has killed 100,000 innocent people in a few months?
Are you watching the same war the rest of the world is?
You should play it and you'll see. They have this amazing graphics engine but every room is dark as a camel's ass and you can't use the flashlight at the same time you shoot.
Essentially, it's a cheap gimmick to get you to be afraid. The engine itself rocks, but the level design sucks incredibly.
Source is the name of the new game engine (graphics+physics). Counter Strike Source is the old Counter Strike implemented on the new engine with better models, physics and textures. It's quite a big deal for CS fans.
AFAIK, Valve is making the usual stuff available for modders, but that does not include source code to the whole engine.
Slashdot Mirror
...properly done flash gives WAY more control to the user...and guess what, you can change anything WITHOUT reloading the page like shitty crap 1970s html you fucking throwback jerkwad.
On both counts: WHAT??
I'd really like to see some explanation here. What the hell do you mean by "change anything"? and what is that statement about reloading the page? Are you referring to what Netscape use to do way back in version 4.7 when you resized the window?
Troll.
These are the same people that are coming up with the w3c standards and trying to fix the mess that Microsoft and the browser wars put us in. Making their sites accesible to non-shitheads is also one of their biggest priorities (thus the focus on graceful degradation of techniques).
At which point did this place become troll-heaven? I have seen precious few informed opinions in this thread. Less so than in any other topic.
Care to provide an example?
And sIFR has been around for quite some time too. And it's not patented. And Shaun Inman came up with, a lot of people have worked on it since. And there was no press release.
Other than that, your post is pretty accurate.
The reason no one has done that is... you can't.
Javascript cannot "render" a font that the client does not have. Javascript is executed in the client. What you suggest would only be feasible by rendering an image with the font using server-side language (which some people actually do, but I don't think it's worth the trouble).
In other issues: seriously, is there so little overlap between the web design community and Slashdot? sIFR has been around for ages, and the submitter didn't even credit Shaun Inman with coming up with the method. It's quite useful and downgrades gracefully. Not my cup of tea, but it's done wonders for designers everywhere.
Thanks for the clarification. I live in a country that rarely produces serial killers (Mexico -- There's a lot of killing, but usually related to more pedestrian motives), so I don't really follow all the happenings in US media.
The subject does interest me, but I'm not passionate about it, so I've only resesarched the most famous serial killers, who all fit that profile. And I don't really care about feeling better about the world. I think it's already screwed up enough that a normally brought up person who kills other people can fit in there. I just hadn't heard of those cases. So thanks =)
When has this happened?
In every single case I've read about serial killers, their motives could be traced back to child abuse, traumatic experiences, etc. And all of those within the family environment. So please, I'd like to see proof of this.
Ok, this is mild, but imagine what HR thinks when it sees this published on the internet? (I know: screw them, but still, it's not a good idea to piss off the people who sign your paychecks).
What if this is not standard procedure? Someone mentioned in a related thread that maybe they gave him a signing bonus, but not to a lot of other people? How will it make them feel? This is why companies ask you not to disclose your salary (which no one actually abides by, but internet publishing is different from corridor talk)
Ok, this one's a biggie. This is not so easy to get info, and it starts getting specific.
This kind of analysis, made by an employee, publically voiced, is exactly the kind of thing the obsessive compulsive google fans are looking for. And it could, conceivably, fall in the SEC-restricted category (affecting the public's perception of the company, possibly prematurely revealing internal changes in policy, etc.).
It's not that any particular bit of info on the blog was confidential. It's that a lot of what he was taking about falls in a very gray area that might not only piss off the managers, but could get Google in trouble with the SEC. Can you blame them for being careful? (although I do think a warning would have been in order, before taking action).
You're very right. After reading through his blog, I think what got him fired was revealing too much of the inside handling of HR, compensation packages and the like.
This is info *any* company asks you not to divulge (check your contract), and it's particularly sensitive in a highly scrutinized company like Google, where evey employee is a de-facto internet rockstar.
So yes, he should have been more careful. Don't know about the complaints, but the content on the weblog is sensitive.
Oh, crap, you're right! I restarted the browser and the exploit works again, enableIDN still set to false.
Damn. This sucks.
It worked for me (firefox in OS X). What it does is fix the lookup, not the display, so the links will still look as they did, but when you click on them it says "domain not found"
Don't give a shit either.
Ok, this is just begging to be posted:
Hey Hey 16k
Awesome-est animation about nostalgia games ever.
I think she can very well do as she pleases, can't she? Your comment reminded me of the copyright row with Stephen Joyce, Joyce's last surviving asshole of a grandson, over public reading of "Ulysses" at the centenary of the day the book takes place in.
It even prompted Neil Gaiman to make this announcement in his blog, which contains the following jewel:
So, in short... They are her rights, dude. Authors don't have a moral obligation to do anything, and if I were her I'd be damn pissed about the comments the director made.
I can't find any sympathy for someone who sells the rights to their work, then complains about what happens to it.
You should read the entire article then. She's a pro. She didn't complain or attack the miniseries until the director decided to put words in her mouth and say what "she had intended by..."
A very understandable reaction, I believe.
I do web designs for outside clients, and also get some money off ads in my blog (not much right now, but steadily improving).
The area is heavily guarded, apparently. Someone stirred up a ruckus when they saw her story on the net and took it up against the guards. Eventually it turned out that she had taken a helmet with her on one of the usual (legal) tours and took pictures with that. She also changed her story after the allegations of fraud surfaced (at first, she claimed that her dad was a worker in the zone, and that she routinely biked there)
So, the only option available is to cut jobs, destroy the industry and head into economic downfall, is it?
I take it that placing stronger regulations in place to stop soccer moms from buying gas-guzzling 2-ton SUV's to drop the kids at school and cutting on all the excess americans are so prone to indulge in is out of the question?
Even more interestingly, the USA has 5% of the world's population, but emits 25% of the world's pollution.
You're right. It's all in how you look at things...
Iraq is better off now than under the thumb of Saddam and will be ven better off as time goes by and the "minority" of people that make up the terrorist groups over there killing their own people for getting jobs and taking care of their own families are finally taken care of.
You really think that? REALLY? Going from a crazy dictator that killed a few people everyday to an invasion that routinely bombs civilian emplacements and has killed 100,000 innocent people in a few months?
Are you watching the same war the rest of the world is?
You should play it and you'll see. They have this amazing graphics engine but every room is dark as a camel's ass and you can't use the flashlight at the same time you shoot.
Essentially, it's a cheap gimmick to get you to be afraid. The engine itself rocks, but the level design sucks incredibly.
Will they put an actual game in there this time?
Sorry, cheap shot, couldn't resist.
It just occured to me that in this question:
"Did Saddam ever have relations with any Al Qaeda operatives or offer them assistance?"
if you change "Saddam" for "the US govt", you'd also get a "yes".
Wasn't Osama Bin Laden trained by the CIA?
More importantly, how can you have a 4 digit uid and still find this notable in any way? =)
Source is the name of the new game engine (graphics+physics). Counter Strike Source is the old Counter Strike implemented on the new engine with better models, physics and textures. It's quite a big deal for CS fans.
AFAIK, Valve is making the usual stuff available for modders, but that does not include source code to the whole engine.
Seems to me it could be the overclock that is causing his 20% speed increase, not some special optimizations.
Firefox standard build and alternate build are both run on the same hardware, so... No.