I don't get it. On the one hand iPhone will not include Flash. On the other, it will play Youtube videos, which are in fact Flash Video files (.flv). So iPhone does include Flash. wtf?
Are you a goddamned moron? Seriously, are you not an intelligent person?
I can understand not reading the article, because that takes time that you wouldn't have available for masturbating to hentai.
But can you at least expend the modicum of effort necessary to read the story's title before commenting?
At some point of our 230 year existence, we began to evaporate the states' rights for federal ones.
At four points, actually.
In the summer of 1787, when we ditched the Articles of Confederation and started working on the Constitution of the United States. You may not count this, but you should, because it created the framework for our Federal system.
The Civil War, when we decided that the Federal moral responsibility to abolish slavery outweighed the rights of states to institutionalize the ownership of people of a different race.
FDR's Presidency, when, first, national action was taken to redistribute our nation's wealth more evenly (TVA and Social Security are the most enduring examples of this), and, second, the nation mobilized and then fought in World War II.
LBJ's Presidency, when the Great Society expanded the social safety net to include such frivolities as "Medicare" and we enacted "The Civil Rights Act of 1964" and "The Voting Rights Act of 1965."
To crib from Sorkin, there are times when we're fifty states, and there are times when we're one country solving problems that require the pooling of resources.
Your passport says "The United States of America."
It is the voters who are electing people who represent them, and to make decisions on their behalf. Voting is not only a right, it is also a responsibility, and one that people need to take more seriously.
So, uh.
The other people on the ballot for school board—the ones who didn't get elected—wouldn't have hired that principal?
the potential new hire got pranked and responded in a calm, rational manner
Fantastic idea. Now define "calm, rational manner." You've told me what he shouldn't have done. Finish the paragraph and tell me what he should have done.
I reiterate that I don't endorse everything he did. The poster to whom I replied, however, suggested he just ignore it. That's not an option.
The fact that it's online may be new, but it's not surprising or suddenly more important. The sensible thing to do is to ignore it. It's not that difficult.
Okay. Let's say the principal is the bigger man and ignores it. Some time later, say the next winter, the principal sees another job open up--another principal job, or maybe superintendent/assistant superintendent.
The interview committee culls it down to two finalists, and he's one of 'em. The interview committee Googles both to see what turns up. When they Google him, a MySpace page purporting to be his and identifying him as a pedophile drunk shows up.
Does the interview committee choose the applicant with this profile (even though it can be explained away easily as dumb kids being dumb kids) or the applicant without a profile like this?
The nature of long-term web archiving does indeed make this much more important. Stupid posters or flyers are localized and temporary. MySpace profiles are world-wide and, for all intents and purposes, immutable.
I'm not, by any means, endorsing everything he did, but he did indeed have a legitimate beef.
No I'm not. You're confusing my comment with one that does.
Oh, but you are, and it does. The comment to which you replied makes its scope very clear:
As any Word(tm) user knows, page layout and text formatting should be done Visually.
Page layout and text formatting. Sounds more like "layout" than it does "style."
I understand tables are useful for certain things, and my point is that the OP is suggesting everyone stick with tables. I gave an example, confined to style, where CSS was the clear choice.
CSS is the clear choice for styling text because tables don't style text. Only a moron without a clear understanding of HTML and CSS would suggest that they do.
CSS is great for styling text. It's utter shit for laying it out, though, mostly because of the hoops you have to jump through to get it to work with "every browser."
But some things are possible in CSS that just cannot be done in HTML tables. For example, I can say something like "Unvisited ypertext links contained in a "navigation" div should be underlined and white text on black background. Everywhere else, unvisited hypertext links should be underlined blue text on a white background." That is, I can use selectors to target appearance (and form) based on class definitions. This is powerful stuff.
You're confusing "style" with "layout," sir. Here's an example that uses CSS for style but tables for the actual layout definition:
DUH telling me to "contact my senator or representative" should be illegal ? . encouraging more people to get involved in the political process should be illegal ? yeah that sounds real DEMOCRATIC.
Getting paid, by a stakeholder, to tell people to "contact your senator or representative" about a specific issue is lobbying.
That provision would not have made it illegal. It would have required astroturfers to register as lobbyists.
I know a number of people who don't know enough to install plugins, so your 99% figure is highly suspect.:-)
1) You said "available," not "installed."
2) I can't remember the last time I've actually had to download and install Flash player. It's either been installed already or the browser took care of it for me.
The idea itself isn't bad, but the requirement to install a third-party software add-on isn't, especially one which is only available for a few platforms.
I think you misspelled "99% of the people who use the Internet."
In fact, as he addressed the social issues from the pulpit of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, GA, he might well have had to register as a lobbyist.
You want to address social issues from the pulpit? Well, that's fine under this bill, and a fair exercise of religion.
Do you, however, want to use a tax-exempt religious organization to urge people to write their Congressional representation to take a specific action on a specific measure? Unfortunately for you, that's just lobbying and a blatantly inappropriate mix of religion and politics.
If ExxonMobil pays $1000 for an ad in a newspaper, do all columnists writing for that paper have to register as lobbyists?
Buying an advertisement (where the advertisement is clearly in the words of the advertiser) isn't the same thing as paying for an OpEd.
From my reading, ExxonMobil would have to contract with the newspaper a payment of $1,000 contingent specifically on the paper publishing an editorial suggesting that its readers write covered officials urging specific action.
Slashdot Mirror
I can understand not reading the article, because that takes time that you wouldn't have available for masturbating to hentai.
But can you at least expend the modicum of effort necessary to read the story's title before commenting?
To crib from Sorkin, there are times when we're fifty states, and there are times when we're one country solving problems that require the pooling of resources.
Your passport says "The United States of America."
The other people on the ballot for school board—the ones who didn't get elected—wouldn't have hired that principal?
Is that what you're saying?
And then there's Google's cached version.
And archive.org.
And every other search engine.
I reiterate that I don't endorse everything he did. The poster to whom I replied, however, suggested he just ignore it. That's not an option.
The interview committee culls it down to two finalists, and he's one of 'em. The interview committee Googles both to see what turns up. When they Google him, a MySpace page purporting to be his and identifying him as a pedophile drunk shows up.
Does the interview committee choose the applicant with this profile (even though it can be explained away easily as dumb kids being dumb kids) or the applicant without a profile like this?
The nature of long-term web archiving does indeed make this much more important. Stupid posters or flyers are localized and temporary. MySpace profiles are world-wide and, for all intents and purposes, immutable.
I'm not, by any means, endorsing everything he did, but he did indeed have a legitimate beef.
CSS is great for styling text. It's utter shit for laying it out, though, mostly because of the hoops you have to jump through to get it to work with "every browser."
Tables and CSS can work together.
The ol' World Wide Web has moved on from static lists of your favorite websites that you put up on your 5MB of University webspace.
This'll never get that far, but, if it did, it would probably give either party the option of nullifying all of the contract.
I'm just talking out of my ass here, but so are you. You're calling heroic fourth quarter plays before kickoff.
Apple sells music with DRM because the labels won't let Apple sell music without DRM.
Until there's an industry-approved open standard for DRM, it makes no sense to shit on Apple for meeting the demands of the copyright holders.
No?
Then SHUT THE FUCK UP, YOU GODDAMNED MORON. Section 220 was pretty specific in what it covered.
That provision would not have made it illegal. It would have required astroturfers to register as lobbyists.
I said Flash is available for 99% of internet users.
2) I can't remember the last time I've actually had to download and install Flash player. It's either been installed already or the browser took care of it for me.
If the rumor I just made up that cybernetic Nazis are invading the world is correct, then we're in trouble!
Settle down there, Enjolras.
Do you, however, want to use a tax-exempt religious organization to urge people to write their Congressional representation to take a specific action on a specific measure? Unfortunately for you, that's just lobbying and a blatantly inappropriate mix of religion and politics.
From my reading, ExxonMobil would have to contract with the newspaper a payment of $1,000 contingent specifically on the paper publishing an editorial suggesting that its readers write covered officials urging specific action.