The problem is that for every one of us developers that hates IE, there are 10 more developers who know nothing else and think this Firefox thing is some hippie fad, and are very adamant about it.
That may have been true 10 years ago, but now, I would have a hard time finding a web developer who doesn't take Firefox seriously. Maybe in a large corporate infrastructure where the site is to be used by employees who are not allowed to have any browser other than IE...
I use a program called SpiceWorks to monitor the network, run the helpdesk etc which makes heavy use of interactive content.
I notice that the very last item is about performance.
I can load up the entire inventory of my network in around 3 seconds in Chrome and Opera. It takes 11 seconds in IE8.
Not fast at all.
Did you notice that "It's a tie" was their codephrase for "The other guy has us beat, and we can't even pretend to be better". Their ties were "Firefox and Opera do a better job at evolving standards, but we do better at css 2.1", "Other browsers are more customizable, but our default settings are awesome", and "speed? Well, in Rush hour, all cars are the same" (or in other words, "if the site you're going to is slashdotted, the speed at which it fails to load is the same speed on all browsers")
Sure, Firefox may win in sheer number of add-ons, but many of the customizations you'd want to download for Firefox are already a part of Internet Explorer 8 â" right out of the box.
In other words, Firefox is more customizable, but our default settings are awesome!
So, customizability is a tie, because although other browsers give you more options to customize the browser, Internet explorer takes some of the better ones and forces you to use them. Can't beat that logic!
I saw that mentioned on the website linked to in the summary. That is missing the forest for the trees. If the artists are getting screwed on digital downloads, then they have a right to demand compensation, but this is just one more aspect of the current RIAA business model that needs to be changed.
Sure, the shuffle in business models will give those in power a chance to screw artists a little harder, but we can't keep making buggy whips forever. We'll have to adapt eventually.
The same question would be: What if you are a painter and you paint only for a niche of the market? You make less money. But if you love the art, that's where your hart lies and that's what will make you happy.
Sure, you can go commercial and make more money, but that would probably negatively affect your happiness so you will have to choose and possible compromise.
Well said. I was going to say something along the lines of:
What if you're a food critic. You love traveling to exotic locations and sampling new food items for free, but you don't like having to write about it later. How do we, as a society, make your wishes profitable?
What is the standard concerning recently discovered evidence? If I were to learn, or realize, (possibly based on witness testimony) during the trial that a particular log file could be incriminating, what would be the appropriate way to enter that log file as a new piece of evidence?
The other thing is that they assume that "40million people with iPhones"=="40million people with PSPs". No, the 40million people with iPhones bought them to use as cell phones. They are less likely to shell out $50 for the next GTA game than the 40 million who bought video game systems to use as video game systems.
At 2Mb/s, I'd say the entire country gets punished right from the start. This sort of speed is okay, but it's hardly the future.
Point taken, but my father-in-law is stuck on dial up, because, here in the US, we're waiting for the cable company to decide that it is economically feasible to provide service in his area. He would kill for 2Mb/s.
That, and that there is something to be said for two groups coming together and achieving a compromise. Let's say group A wants lower taxes, group B wants health care. It makes sense for them to work something out that says:
Cut tax A
Cut Spending B and C
pay for healthcare
There is little reason for politicians to ever work together if the party in power can cut out items 1 and 2, or item 3.
While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from.
Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in. Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old.
I am just a tired old man.
It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.
Let's try a thought experiment...Let's say that we took every idiot, kiddie, and naive person on earth and stuck them all in one place. Now let's call this hypothetical place "yahoo.com". If you were a conman from a third world country, or just an American conman who doesn't want to leave his house, where would you want to be?
If you did see those full page flash ads, and you had no chance to block them, would you still visit the page? Or would it not be worth the annoyance and you'd just turn away in disgust? Using adblock and noscript keeps their impressions up and thus keeps the pagemasters from learning that annoying the living hell out of your visitors isn't how you attract people.
People don't care. I find internet ads to be just as annoying as television ads, but most people keep using both without blocking them. Most of the time, when I use someone else's computer, they have no ad-blocking software at all. It's not just lack of knowledge. I just asked my sister if she wanted to block online ads. She said "It's fine. I don't want to mess with it. I really don't care at all." Ads are everywhere in our culture, and most people don't give a damn.
Exactly. We learn to tune them out. Now I DO get annoyed with the talking ads, and when the last hannibal lecter movie came out, there was an obnoxious ad where he jumped out of the center of the screen. Those ads truly are obnoxious, but the average person does not really need to be protected from advertisements.
My only concern is, how does a website bring in revenue, if people expect everything to be free, and ad-free.
Great defense against incoming jetliners as the kites get sucked into engines, either from terrorists or major campaign donors out for a spin in Air Force One.
It'll be like the ending of Mary Poppins, only it never ends! Let's go fly a kite, up to the highest height...
Did Mary Poppins get sucked into a jet engine? I'd like to know, but not enough to watch the movie again.
The problem isn't lack of choice. If you don't like the way iTunes runs things, then by all means by a product from one of Apple's many competitors. The problem is a monopoly combined with lack of choice. That is why bundling is illegal fro the big guy but not the little guy.
You may be the same troll I fed yesterday, when I asked why God would care if we have fingerprints, but your answer makes no sense. The implication that a god just did something, implies that he she or it has no regard for natural processes. I.E., the question has no answer other than "divine power" (or whatever you choose to cause it). So, why would a divine being care if the poles were magnetic? For that matter, why would any of the crap that happened before man matter?
My assertion that God just created it that way, so that we could live upon the earth and worship him is just as valid.
No. Your assertion is like me stating that because Steven Hawking doesn't know everything there is to know about Science, that his opinion is just as valid as that of my 2 year old son. Scientists do not know everything, but they have evidence for the things they claim to know, and that makes their opinion more valid than a creationist viewpoint.
Scientists think they know how our world works, but the more answers they get, the more questions they get as well and so they are not much further ahead than our ancestors.
Do you mean that ones that lost a third of their numbers to the plague, the ones whose average lifespan was 30 years, or the ones who, were they able to see a modern airport, would declare it as either witchcraft, or the work of the Devil?
Yes, the number of questions is staying relatively high, but the relevance and quality of them are improving. Where our ancestors might have said "there is a God. How do we make him fix whatever's wrong with Jeb", a scientist might ask "which of these genes codes for this particular illness", "how does it work", and "how do we fix it". Notice that more unanswered questions does not mean less knowledge.
Despite all of our technology, we still have not learned to live in peace with one another
As for that, well, that is an entirely other argument, but it is also something we cannot undo, and something for which reliance on religion, or anti-intellectuallism will not help, and for which further science cannot hurt.
a rather large interval of time that is meaningful in the life of a person, in history, etc., because of its particular characteristics: a period of illness; a period of great profitability for a company; a period of social unrest in Germany.
the point or character (.) used to mark the end of a declarative sentence, indicate an abbreviation, etc.; full stop.
A method by which douchebags display their douchebagishness, often via online chats, or short one-line assertions involving overly complex issues which they lack the cognitive capacity, emotional maturity, or attention span to comprehend.
Synonyms:
"Nuff Said"
"or the Terrorists Win"
"and Oprah is rarely ever wrong"
My view is that the reason science and religion come up with different answers is because they ask different questions.
Erm...Religion tries to answer all the questions science does. That's why Galileo and Darwin have been declared heretics; religion tried to answer a question, and scientists provided a better answer, with evidence. The difference is that behavior and philosophy are subjective and cannot be proven or disproven by the scientific method.
So, as Science continues to advance, those who would have previously proclaimed "Religion answers all questions" are now being forced to change their proclamation to "Religion answers all questions that science cannot". But I still have my doubts about the later claim.
Just one more thing science can't answer. Of course the answer is obvious but no scientist would ever consider [i]that[/i].
Forgive me for feeding a troll, but I am assuming that the obvious answer is whatever religion your pappy taught you...So why would a god or devil or FSM care about fingerprints?
It's not just the exercise.
The great thing about today's video games are the reward schedules that make games so damn addictive. These rewards cause dopamine release, which helps offset Parkinson's.
What I wonder is if there's a "Flowers for Algernon" type effect -- like with Levadopa, is tolerance built up quickly? Do patients doing Wii-hab for Parkinson's need to take a "Wii holiday" the same way Parkinson's patients on Levadopa need to take a drug holiday to reset their tolerance?
Or would it be reasonable for doctors to measure dopamine produced and tell their patients when it's time to buy a new game? "This test suggests you might be getting bored with wii sports. Maybe you should try switching to Punch Out!"
The official USB 3 logo has the phrase "superspeed" on it, and the icon has a matching "SS"
Who keeps on doing this!! Being a relative term, you'll be up to ludicrous speed by USB 5.
Ditto for fast ethernet.
Oh, I thought you were referring to the use of an acronym shared by Nazis. Don't they have someone there who can check out their acronyms to verify that they are not associated with any notorious hate groups?
But you do have a point about relative speed designations. I remember the days of double density floppies, follwed by "high density".
Slashdot Mirror
Or better yet, send them a telegraph. Why bother communicating with friends in a way they feel comfortable with?
The problem is that for every one of us developers that hates IE, there are 10 more developers who know nothing else and think this Firefox thing is some hippie fad, and are very adamant about it.
That may have been true 10 years ago, but now, I would have a hard time finding a web developer who doesn't take Firefox seriously. Maybe in a large corporate infrastructure where the site is to be used by employees who are not allowed to have any browser other than IE...
I use a program called SpiceWorks to monitor the network, run the helpdesk etc which makes heavy use of interactive content.
I notice that the very last item is about performance.
I can load up the entire inventory of my network in around 3 seconds in Chrome and Opera. It takes 11 seconds in IE8.
Not fast at all.
Did you notice that "It's a tie" was their codephrase for "The other guy has us beat, and we can't even pretend to be better". Their ties were "Firefox and Opera do a better job at evolving standards, but we do better at css 2.1", "Other browsers are more customizable, but our default settings are awesome", and "speed? Well, in Rush hour, all cars are the same" (or in other words, "if the site you're going to is slashdotted, the speed at which it fails to load is the same speed on all browsers")
Sure, Firefox may win in sheer number of add-ons, but many of the customizations you'd want to download for Firefox are already a part of Internet Explorer 8 â" right out of the box.
I'm sure there will be a loophole somewhere.
There always will be. The difference is that, with regulation, there is a loophole somewhere. With deregulation, there are loopholes everywhere.
I saw that mentioned on the website linked to in the summary. That is missing the forest for the trees. If the artists are getting screwed on digital downloads, then they have a right to demand compensation, but this is just one more aspect of the current RIAA business model that needs to be changed.
Sure, the shuffle in business models will give those in power a chance to screw artists a little harder, but we can't keep making buggy whips forever. We'll have to adapt eventually.
The same question would be: What if you are a painter and you paint only for a niche of the market? You make less money. But if you love the art, that's where your hart lies and that's what will make you happy.
Sure, you can go commercial and make more money, but that would probably negatively affect your happiness so you will have to choose and possible compromise.
Well said. I was going to say something along the lines of:
What if you're a food critic. You love traveling to exotic locations and sampling new food items for free, but you don't like having to write about it later. How do we, as a society, make your wishes profitable?
without the defense being notified of it.
What is the standard concerning recently discovered evidence? If I were to learn, or realize, (possibly based on witness testimony) during the trial that a particular log file could be incriminating, what would be the appropriate way to enter that log file as a new piece of evidence?
The other thing is that they assume that "40million people with iPhones"=="40million people with PSPs". No, the 40million people with iPhones bought them to use as cell phones. They are less likely to shell out $50 for the next GTA game than the 40 million who bought video game systems to use as video game systems.
The best thing you could do to help the people who rigged the election is to just say "no big deal" and move on.
At 2Mb/s, I'd say the entire country gets punished right from the start. This sort of speed is okay, but it's hardly the future.
Point taken, but my father-in-law is stuck on dial up, because, here in the US, we're waiting for the cable company to decide that it is economically feasible to provide service in his area. He would kill for 2Mb/s.
There is little reason for politicians to ever work together if the party in power can cut out items 1 and 2, or item 3.
While the internet is a wonderful thing; I can't help but wonder where did all of the douchebags come from. Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in. Its all fun and games when windows users get hosed, but after awhile even that gets old. I am just a tired old man. It makes me sad that my poor view of humanity gets reinforced every time I turn around.
Let's try a thought experiment...Let's say that we took every idiot, kiddie, and naive person on earth and stuck them all in one place. Now let's call this hypothetical place "yahoo.com". If you were a conman from a third world country, or just an American conman who doesn't want to leave his house, where would you want to be?
If you did see those full page flash ads, and you had no chance to block them, would you still visit the page? Or would it not be worth the annoyance and you'd just turn away in disgust? Using adblock and noscript keeps their impressions up and thus keeps the pagemasters from learning that annoying the living hell out of your visitors isn't how you attract people.
People don't care. I find internet ads to be just as annoying as television ads, but most people keep using both without blocking them. Most of the time, when I use someone else's computer, they have no ad-blocking software at all. It's not just lack of knowledge. I just asked my sister if she wanted to block online ads. She said "It's fine. I don't want to mess with it. I really don't care at all." Ads are everywhere in our culture, and most people don't give a damn.
Exactly. We learn to tune them out. Now I DO get annoyed with the talking ads, and when the last hannibal lecter movie came out, there was an obnoxious ad where he jumped out of the center of the screen. Those ads truly are obnoxious, but the average person does not really need to be protected from advertisements.
My only concern is, how does a website bring in revenue, if people expect everything to be free, and ad-free.
I mean really, its all just semantics (and semiotics) and we're all infected...cookie anyone?
But the difference is that cookies are only an "infection" in the same way that you grocery store card is an "infection".
Great defense against incoming jetliners as the kites get sucked into engines, either from terrorists or major campaign donors out for a spin in Air Force One.
It'll be like the ending of Mary Poppins, only it never ends! Let's go fly a kite, up to the highest height...
Did Mary Poppins get sucked into a jet engine? I'd like to know, but not enough to watch the movie again.
The problem isn't lack of choice. If you don't like the way iTunes runs things, then by all means by a product from one of Apple's many competitors. The problem is a monopoly combined with lack of choice. That is why bundling is illegal fro the big guy but not the little guy.
My assertion that God just created it that way
You may be the same troll I fed yesterday, when I asked why God would care if we have fingerprints, but your answer makes no sense. The implication that a god just did something, implies that he she or it has no regard for natural processes. I.E., the question has no answer other than "divine power" (or whatever you choose to cause it). So, why would a divine being care if the poles were magnetic? For that matter, why would any of the crap that happened before man matter?
My assertion that God just created it that way, so that we could live upon the earth and worship him is just as valid.
No. Your assertion is like me stating that because Steven Hawking doesn't know everything there is to know about Science, that his opinion is just as valid as that of my 2 year old son. Scientists do not know everything, but they have evidence for the things they claim to know, and that makes their opinion more valid than a creationist viewpoint.
Scientists think they know how our world works, but the more answers they get, the more questions they get as well and so they are not much further ahead than our ancestors.
Do you mean that ones that lost a third of their numbers to the plague, the ones whose average lifespan was 30 years, or the ones who, were they able to see a modern airport, would declare it as either witchcraft, or the work of the Devil?
Yes, the number of questions is staying relatively high, but the relevance and quality of them are improving. Where our ancestors might have said "there is a God. How do we make him fix whatever's wrong with Jeb", a scientist might ask "which of these genes codes for this particular illness", "how does it work", and "how do we fix it". Notice that more unanswered questions does not mean less knowledge.
Despite all of our technology, we still have not learned to live in peace with one another
As for that, well, that is an entirely other argument, but it is also something we cannot undo, and something for which reliance on religion, or anti-intellectuallism will not help, and for which further science cannot hurt.
noun
Synonyms:
"Nuff Said"
"or the Terrorists Win"
"and Oprah is rarely ever wrong"
My view is that the reason science and religion come up with different answers is because they ask different questions.
Erm...Religion tries to answer all the questions science does. That's why Galileo and Darwin have been declared heretics; religion tried to answer a question, and scientists provided a better answer, with evidence. The difference is that behavior and philosophy are subjective and cannot be proven or disproven by the scientific method.
So, as Science continues to advance, those who would have previously proclaimed "Religion answers all questions" are now being forced to change their proclamation to "Religion answers all questions that science cannot". But I still have my doubts about the later claim.
Just one more thing science can't answer. Of course the answer is obvious but no scientist would ever consider [i]that[/i].
Forgive me for feeding a troll, but I am assuming that the obvious answer is whatever religion your pappy taught you...So why would a god or devil or FSM care about fingerprints?
It's not just the exercise. The great thing about today's video games are the reward schedules that make games so damn addictive. These rewards cause dopamine release, which helps offset Parkinson's. What I wonder is if there's a "Flowers for Algernon" type effect -- like with Levadopa, is tolerance built up quickly? Do patients doing Wii-hab for Parkinson's need to take a "Wii holiday" the same way Parkinson's patients on Levadopa need to take a drug holiday to reset their tolerance?
Or would it be reasonable for doctors to measure dopamine produced and tell their patients when it's time to buy a new game? "This test suggests you might be getting bored with wii sports. Maybe you should try switching to Punch Out!"
Oh....The Jessica Simpson effect?
The official USB 3 logo has the phrase "superspeed" on it, and the icon has a matching "SS"
Who keeps on doing this!! Being a relative term, you'll be up to ludicrous speed by USB 5. Ditto for fast ethernet.
Oh, I thought you were referring to the use of an acronym shared by Nazis. Don't they have someone there who can check out their acronyms to verify that they are not associated with any notorious hate groups?
But you do have a point about relative speed designations. I remember the days of double density floppies, follwed by "high density".
Nice to hear that, but are there any USB 3.0 devices to plug ?
Mod me troll if you want, but the majority of the devices won't come until Windows has USB 3.0 support.