Oh, and just to follow up, it's not even on. That's right, I never set it to begin with. It's not set on my home PC, and it's not only unset but grayed out on my work PC. So this ever so helpful setting that doesn't actually say it's about unsetting ads on the taskbar, that's a setting under Start, but apparently is about showing ads on the taskbar, doesn't even stop ads from being shown on the taskbar.
Jesus H FUCKING CHRIST on a UNICYCLE, you're saying it's MY FAULT because there's a setting somewhere that I've never heard of, have NO REASON WHATSOEVER to think exists, and have never seen, and apparently has a label that does not in any way imply it's actually the DO NOT SHOW ADS ON THE TASKBAR button, and I've never unset it?
Here's an idea, if that setting does exist, perhaps it shouldn't be checked by default, given nobody in their right mind wants this feature?
I really doubt that there's a huge contingent of people who are only on Twitter because Trump is. Reporters and bloggers have always used Twitter, they were there long before the rise of Trump, and Trump leaving doesn't mean they can't continue to use Twitter - it's not as if you're banned from using Twitter if you keep up with people on Facebook.
A codec is simply something that converts audio/video/whatever from one format to another. It certainly can be hardware.
I was confused too when I first used it heard to describe on-motherboard audio systems in the 1990s, but that's a legitimate use.
Ironically, most who don't think it's suitable for hardware also are the people who use it to describe formats like H.264 or AAC. You can use a (hardware or software) codec to convert something into H.264, but H.264 isn't the actual codec, it's the format.
Pretty sure David Kriss was not out in the streets protesting the NSA's bulk domestic surveillance.
I cheered on Snowden, and I cheer on the anonymous CIA agents revealing problems with the current administration. I have no objection to Trump revealing he was wiretapped, especially as that's pretty much an admission there were legitimate reasons to believe his campaign was linked to enemies of this nation.
My advice: actually listen to what individuals are arguing before assuming that because of their political stance they must oppose one thing and support another.
Better yet, would you like the CIA, NSA, $TLA to pick your leadership FOR you ?
No, but I'd like whistleblowers who are part of those agencies to continue to report on dubious activities by the state. It surprises me how many people are suddenly upset when it's Trump that's having problems when anonymous agents leak evidence of wrongdoing to the press, but were totally happy when, say, Snowden did it.
Because to be a 100% clear, that's what we're talking about. And lest you say its different because you assume that the CIA is organizationally doing this, no they're not, and the only high level manager any Three Letter Agency who's used his position to wreck a political campaign was FBI Director James Comey, and he did it to destroy Clinton.
...which is why I think Twitter needs to seriously consider removing his account. I know it'll be controversial, I know people will accuse Twitter of "censorship" (like you can shut up the President!), but their medium seems to be a serious catalyst and outlet for damaging behavior on the part of the second most powerful man on the planet, and they're pretty much the only body that can stop it.
...but they've also been spamming the damned taskbar with ads for Edge lately. If you try to fire up Firefox or Chrome, there's a good chance an ad will appear just above the taskbar Edge icon, about the same size and shape as a window preview, claiming that Edge is faster and/or more secure than {Chrome|Firefox}.
That is seriously pissing me off, as you have to close the ad to get it to go away.
Taxing someone for being a member of a group that costs society money, on the other hand, is perfectly normal. We do it with smokers. We do it with car drivers. Why shouldn't we do it with people who don't have health insurance?
It's not even as if we're forcing everyone who doesn't have it to pay a fixed fee - it's just a slight increase in income tax for those who don't have insurance, to help recover the costs they incur by being vastly more likely to declare bankruptcy, have unrecoverable medical debts, and be more likely to be sick and cause others to be sick. We're also making it easy to avoid the situation of not having insurance, by subsidizing it for those on lower incomes.
In some respects, its fairer than taxing cigarettes. The latter are an addiction, and smoking is hard to quit, whereas the availability of subsidies means getting insurance is an easy thing for most of the population to do right now.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Obamacare, but you're complaining about the wrong aspects.
The only things that could wipeout all implementations of a widely used format like ZFS would be...
Or for it not to be "widely used". Which it really isn't.
That said: whether this matters depends on whether you're going to be backing up your backups - or rather, regularly copying it to newer media.
If someone genuinely is looking towards using current media to back things up to be read 50 years from now, then I suspect they're never going to be happy. I can't find an economical SCSI adapter for my collection of SCSI (50 pin) drives any more, I doubt many here could find an RLL/MFM controller either, and that's just common storage technologies from 25-30 years ago (SCSI was still widely used 20 years ago.) I guess it's plausible USB might survive in a well supported form, but would you want to count on it?
So, from that point of view, a better approach might be to forget trying to pick a file system and media technology, and instead focus ensuring you can regularly copy from an old system to a new system. That almost certainly means thinking in terms of an archive format, like tar or zip, and, preferably, an error correction system like PAR.
File system? Red herring. It's not going to help. And the more obscure and advanced the file system you pick, the infinitely less probability you'll be able to get tools to read it in future. Don't even bother, just copy your archive to a current technology on a regular basis.
Frankly, ZFS-style checksumming is the future of files systems. It has to be for any data you care about.
Really, that file system level checksumming should be redundant, and if it's redundant then the question is why you're bothering.
What you want is more that error detection, you want error correction. That means using regular archives with PAR files providing a matrix based correction system. Store that on a RAID and there's no reason for obscure file systems that have a high probability of being unsupported 50 years from now.
Not that I'm happy ZFS counts as an obscure file system, but it is. Sun fucked up the licensing, and so it never got the adoption or mindshare it deserved. You absolutely should never, ever, use it for anything you plan to read a long time from now. You'd be better of 'tar'ing files directly to/dev/sda.
Fortunately, the both the BBC and the Facebook employee concerned, CEOP was then legally obliged to report itself to itself, resulting in an infinite loop...
In fairness, at one point Apple did (context note: this was from 2002. So 15 years ago. Presumably Apple still had the policy for several years afterwards, but I don't believe it to be true now. Customers seemed fairly divided about it.)
T-Mobile bought MetroPCS, which similarly was a cdmaOne/cdma2000 network, and has converted it to GSM, so there's a precedent.
Indeed, Sprint PCS itself bought out a GSM network in the DC area fairly early on in its history, and forced customers to switch to its very-inferior cdmaOne based system (which at the time didn't support two way text messaging or data in any form, let alone SIM cards/personal mobility)
Later on, Sprint PCS bought NEXTEL which used some kind of custom mobile phone standard built by Motorola, they also eventually forced NEXTEL customers to switch. Many had chosen NEXTEL to begin with because the technology it used provided an extremely intuitive push-to-talk system, something Sprint and Qualcomm were never able to fully replicate.
So the irony would be thick if Sprint PCS was bought by someone else and all of its customers were forced to migrate. At least they'd be getting something more powerful this time, I guess.
Like MetroPCS though, remember that Sprint is migrating to LTE, which at least means more modern handsets will work on some of both Sprint and T-Mobile's networks.
You're saying the developers intended it to look great on a technology not available to them, rather than optimized for the technology they had?
As a developer, I can tell you that's not how we work. We always primarily try to make sure it works well on the target platform. If that means making decisions that work against some futuristic optimal model of how things should be, then so be it.
Well, kinda. Yes, the original authors probably wanted higher quality graphics, but they designed for hardware that couldn't show those graphics, and they made use of the features of the technology available to them, some of which aren't replicated in the 'better' replacements.
To put it another way, had better technology been available, they wouldn't have made the same design decisions, because design decisions intended to make something like awesome on a CRT can make things look worse on a better screen. Color bleed and interlacing would be two examples of things you make use of, that would make a game seem better on a CRT than not using them, but would make a game look awful if the technology is used on an LCD.
1. As your follow-up sentence implies, many people have no idea what Java is or how it's supposed to be used - witness the confusion that comes up in every Slashdot article mentioning Java where people are convinced it's an alternative to Flash.
2. The language itself is extremely bureaucratic, which puts off many developers. Ease of use is critical in getting a language mass adoption.
3. It bundled a single language, and VM, together, coupling it with a small set of libraries designed for different environments. The reliance on a single language means developers support or do not support it based upon their view of the language, not the underlying platform..NET has done a much better job here, and I think it's only people's mistrust of Microsoft that's holding the latter back..NET is certainly most people's first choice for developing on Windows.
(3.1. To be clear,.NET has done a better job on creating an environment not dependent upon the whims of developers..NET's failure to standardize a cross platform UI framework prevents that from being a complete rival to Java when it comes to being a cross platform application distribution system. That said, cross platform UIs... we're still waiting on someone to create a real, context-sensitive, cross platform UI framework in any platform, and no, QT isn't it.)
Absolutely no reason why Mass Effect type games shouldn't run at full speed if written in a JVM or CLR compatible language, as long as the platform supports mid-level (think OpenGL or DirectX) graphics APIs and the execution environment precompiles the code. Java is thought of as slow, but that's largely because of implementation issues, especially the user interface frameworks.
To put in context, back when Jake 2 (the Java version of Quake 2) came out, I found - on relatively low end hardware - it had pretty much identical framerates to its C++ predecessor.
By including DRM in the standard, you allow everyone to implement the exact same thing...
That's possible anyway.
and make it universally available on all devices
...that doesn't follow from the first part of your sentence. It would follow if what you'd written was by standardizing DRM you allow everyone to implement the exact same thing, but as your wording correctly implies, all that was standardized was the method by which DRM is referred to in HTML5, not the DRM itself.
Had the W3C not punted on the DRM scheme itself, Berners-Lee's comments would have been legitimate if not what we necessarily wanted. But in failing to standardize DRM, they basically created another <OBJECT> tag - something that's inherently platform and vendor specific, and will never be anything but.
Oh bollocks. In the vast majority of cases, the laws that Uber violates existed long before the Internet was ever a twinkle in Al Gore's eye. They exist for the most part to ensure accountability (licensing), fair and predictable service (published fares), and, in some cases such as NYC's medallion system, to prevent already clogged streets from being clogged with more taxis.
Even those cities that passed rules Uber has problems with after Uber's creation did so because Uber was already causing problems with the above pre-existing frameworks.
WIth the exception of cities with quotas (like the medallion system in NYC) the laws in question didn't preclude competition. It was easy to start up a new taxi company - you just had to follow the rules, which weren't hard.
One can argue that the taxi system should have been modernized, but the argument that taxi regulations were created to protect taxis from Uber is utterly ridiculous.
Uber was violating perfectly reasonable laws that existed for perfectly reasonable reasons.
It'll probably last a little longer than the drum, which will start smearing after two or three years. And the $50 (ok, $150) replacement printer will cost less than the drum for that $1,000 laser printer we're comparing it to.
So... I don't know, but I suspect overall modern printers are vastly more cost effective than the supposedly high quality laser printers of 30 years ago. Leaving aside their higher resolution (300dpi just doesn't cut it any more...)
Sanders would have lost even more decisively. The opinion polls showing him in the lead did so without any substantive campaigning against him. If you think the average Trump voter was ever going to vote for a self-avowed socialist, who supported BLM (and was closely associated with the civil rights movement), after a relentless RNC+Trump+Kochs/otherbillionaires campaign portraying him as a ushering in a Venezuelan government, you have another thing coming...
No, he didn't, you're repeating an outright, and blatantly obvious, lie. Obama never banned travel from those countries, he never cancelled visas or green cards issued to people from those countries, and people were able to get visas from the countries in question.
Ride hailing is actually a perfectly reasonable description. It's "ride sharing" that's the dubious - no, not dubious, more or less completely false - description of the main product.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and just to follow up, it's not even on. That's right, I never set it to begin with. It's not set on my home PC, and it's not only unset but grayed out on my work PC. So this ever so helpful setting that doesn't actually say it's about unsetting ads on the taskbar, that's a setting under Start, but apparently is about showing ads on the taskbar, doesn't even stop ads from being shown on the taskbar.
Jesus H FUCKING CHRIST on a UNICYCLE, you're saying it's MY FAULT because there's a setting somewhere that I've never heard of, have NO REASON WHATSOEVER to think exists, and have never seen, and apparently has a label that does not in any way imply it's actually the DO NOT SHOW ADS ON THE TASKBAR button, and I've never unset it?
Here's an idea, if that setting does exist, perhaps it shouldn't be checked by default, given nobody in their right mind wants this feature?
I really doubt that there's a huge contingent of people who are only on Twitter because Trump is. Reporters and bloggers have always used Twitter, they were there long before the rise of Trump, and Trump leaving doesn't mean they can't continue to use Twitter - it's not as if you're banned from using Twitter if you keep up with people on Facebook.
A codec is simply something that converts audio/video/whatever from one format to another. It certainly can be hardware.
I was confused too when I first used it heard to describe on-motherboard audio systems in the 1990s, but that's a legitimate use.
Ironically, most who don't think it's suitable for hardware also are the people who use it to describe formats like H.264 or AAC. You can use a (hardware or software) codec to convert something into H.264, but H.264 isn't the actual codec, it's the format.
Pretty sure David Kriss was not out in the streets protesting the NSA's bulk domestic surveillance.
I cheered on Snowden, and I cheer on the anonymous CIA agents revealing problems with the current administration. I have no objection to Trump revealing he was wiretapped, especially as that's pretty much an admission there were legitimate reasons to believe his campaign was linked to enemies of this nation.
My advice: actually listen to what individuals are arguing before assuming that because of their political stance they must oppose one thing and support another.
No, but I'd like whistleblowers who are part of those agencies to continue to report on dubious activities by the state. It surprises me how many people are suddenly upset when it's Trump that's having problems when anonymous agents leak evidence of wrongdoing to the press, but were totally happy when, say, Snowden did it.
Because to be a 100% clear, that's what we're talking about. And lest you say its different because you assume that the CIA is organizationally doing this, no they're not, and the only high level manager any Three Letter Agency who's used his position to wreck a political campaign was FBI Director James Comey, and he did it to destroy Clinton.
That is seriously pissing me off, as you have to close the ad to get it to go away.
Taxing someone for being a member of a group that costs society money, on the other hand, is perfectly normal. We do it with smokers. We do it with car drivers. Why shouldn't we do it with people who don't have health insurance?
It's not even as if we're forcing everyone who doesn't have it to pay a fixed fee - it's just a slight increase in income tax for those who don't have insurance, to help recover the costs they incur by being vastly more likely to declare bankruptcy, have unrecoverable medical debts, and be more likely to be sick and cause others to be sick. We're also making it easy to avoid the situation of not having insurance, by subsidizing it for those on lower incomes.
In some respects, its fairer than taxing cigarettes. The latter are an addiction, and smoking is hard to quit, whereas the availability of subsidies means getting insurance is an easy thing for most of the population to do right now.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Obamacare, but you're complaining about the wrong aspects.
Well, at least you appear to be 'appy about the news.
Or for it not to be "widely used". Which it really isn't.
That said: whether this matters depends on whether you're going to be backing up your backups - or rather, regularly copying it to newer media.
If someone genuinely is looking towards using current media to back things up to be read 50 years from now, then I suspect they're never going to be happy. I can't find an economical SCSI adapter for my collection of SCSI (50 pin) drives any more, I doubt many here could find an RLL/MFM controller either, and that's just common storage technologies from 25-30 years ago (SCSI was still widely used 20 years ago.) I guess it's plausible USB might survive in a well supported form, but would you want to count on it?
So, from that point of view, a better approach might be to forget trying to pick a file system and media technology, and instead focus ensuring you can regularly copy from an old system to a new system. That almost certainly means thinking in terms of an archive format, like tar or zip, and, preferably, an error correction system like PAR.
File system? Red herring. It's not going to help. And the more obscure and advanced the file system you pick, the infinitely less probability you'll be able to get tools to read it in future. Don't even bother, just copy your archive to a current technology on a regular basis.
Really, that file system level checksumming should be redundant, and if it's redundant then the question is why you're bothering.
What you want is more that error detection, you want error correction. That means using regular archives with PAR files providing a matrix based correction system. Store that on a RAID and there's no reason for obscure file systems that have a high probability of being unsupported 50 years from now.
Not that I'm happy ZFS counts as an obscure file system, but it is. Sun fucked up the licensing, and so it never got the adoption or mindshare it deserved. You absolutely should never, ever, use it for anything you plan to read a long time from now. You'd be better of 'tar'ing files directly to /dev/sda.
Fortunately, the both the BBC and the Facebook employee concerned, CEOP was then legally obliged to report itself to itself, resulting in an infinite loop...
In fairness, at one point Apple did (context note: this was from 2002. So 15 years ago. Presumably Apple still had the policy for several years afterwards, but I don't believe it to be true now. Customers seemed fairly divided about it.)
T-Mobile bought MetroPCS, which similarly was a cdmaOne/cdma2000 network, and has converted it to GSM, so there's a precedent.
Indeed, Sprint PCS itself bought out a GSM network in the DC area fairly early on in its history, and forced customers to switch to its very-inferior cdmaOne based system (which at the time didn't support two way text messaging or data in any form, let alone SIM cards/personal mobility)
Later on, Sprint PCS bought NEXTEL which used some kind of custom mobile phone standard built by Motorola, they also eventually forced NEXTEL customers to switch. Many had chosen NEXTEL to begin with because the technology it used provided an extremely intuitive push-to-talk system, something Sprint and Qualcomm were never able to fully replicate.
So the irony would be thick if Sprint PCS was bought by someone else and all of its customers were forced to migrate. At least they'd be getting something more powerful this time, I guess.
Like MetroPCS though, remember that Sprint is migrating to LTE, which at least means more modern handsets will work on some of both Sprint and T-Mobile's networks.
You're saying the developers intended it to look great on a technology not available to them, rather than optimized for the technology they had?
As a developer, I can tell you that's not how we work. We always primarily try to make sure it works well on the target platform. If that means making decisions that work against some futuristic optimal model of how things should be, then so be it.
Well, kinda. Yes, the original authors probably wanted higher quality graphics, but they designed for hardware that couldn't show those graphics, and they made use of the features of the technology available to them, some of which aren't replicated in the 'better' replacements.
To put it another way, had better technology been available, they wouldn't have made the same design decisions, because design decisions intended to make something like awesome on a CRT can make things look worse on a better screen. Color bleed and interlacing would be two examples of things you make use of, that would make a game seem better on a CRT than not using them, but would make a game look awful if the technology is used on an LCD.
Multiple reasons:
1. As your follow-up sentence implies, many people have no idea what Java is or how it's supposed to be used - witness the confusion that comes up in every Slashdot article mentioning Java where people are convinced it's an alternative to Flash.
2. The language itself is extremely bureaucratic, which puts off many developers. Ease of use is critical in getting a language mass adoption.
3. It bundled a single language, and VM, together, coupling it with a small set of libraries designed for different environments. The reliance on a single language means developers support or do not support it based upon their view of the language, not the underlying platform. .NET has done a much better job here, and I think it's only people's mistrust of Microsoft that's holding the latter back. .NET is certainly most people's first choice for developing on Windows.
(3.1. To be clear, .NET has done a better job on creating an environment not dependent upon the whims of developers. .NET's failure to standardize a cross platform UI framework prevents that from being a complete rival to Java when it comes to being a cross platform application distribution system. That said, cross platform UIs... we're still waiting on someone to create a real, context-sensitive, cross platform UI framework in any platform, and no, QT isn't it.)
Absolutely no reason why Mass Effect type games shouldn't run at full speed if written in a JVM or CLR compatible language, as long as the platform supports mid-level (think OpenGL or DirectX) graphics APIs and the execution environment precompiles the code. Java is thought of as slow, but that's largely because of implementation issues, especially the user interface frameworks.
To put in context, back when Jake 2 (the Java version of Quake 2) came out, I found - on relatively low end hardware - it had pretty much identical framerates to its C++ predecessor.
That's possible anyway.
Had the W3C not punted on the DRM scheme itself, Berners-Lee's comments would have been legitimate if not what we necessarily wanted. But in failing to standardize DRM, they basically created another <OBJECT> tag - something that's inherently platform and vendor specific, and will never be anything but.
Oh bollocks. In the vast majority of cases, the laws that Uber violates existed long before the Internet was ever a twinkle in Al Gore's eye. They exist for the most part to ensure accountability (licensing), fair and predictable service (published fares), and, in some cases such as NYC's medallion system, to prevent already clogged streets from being clogged with more taxis.
Even those cities that passed rules Uber has problems with after Uber's creation did so because Uber was already causing problems with the above pre-existing frameworks.
WIth the exception of cities with quotas (like the medallion system in NYC) the laws in question didn't preclude competition. It was easy to start up a new taxi company - you just had to follow the rules, which weren't hard.
One can argue that the taxi system should have been modernized, but the argument that taxi regulations were created to protect taxis from Uber is utterly ridiculous.
Uber was violating perfectly reasonable laws that existed for perfectly reasonable reasons.
It'll probably last a little longer than the drum, which will start smearing after two or three years. And the $50 (ok, $150) replacement printer will cost less than the drum for that $1,000 laser printer we're comparing it to.
So... I don't know, but I suspect overall modern printers are vastly more cost effective than the supposedly high quality laser printers of 30 years ago. Leaving aside their higher resolution (300dpi just doesn't cut it any more...)
Sanders would have lost even more decisively. The opinion polls showing him in the lead did so without any substantive campaigning against him. If you think the average Trump voter was ever going to vote for a self-avowed socialist, who supported BLM (and was closely associated with the civil rights movement), after a relentless RNC+Trump+Kochs/otherbillionaires campaign portraying him as a ushering in a Venezuelan government, you have another thing coming...
No, he didn't, you're repeating an outright, and blatantly obvious, lie. Obama never banned travel from those countries, he never cancelled visas or green cards issued to people from those countries, and people were able to get visas from the countries in question.
Ride hailing is actually a perfectly reasonable description. It's "ride sharing" that's the dubious - no, not dubious, more or less completely false - description of the main product.