People who arent successful should still be given something, no one should be starving to death, dying of sicknesses which are cureable, and living on the streets. Theres absolutely no excuse for this, none, and when you keep allowing people to live in a fucked up way, dont be surprised when these people fuck up the country with crime, terrorism, rioting, etc.
Sorry Hanzo, but you've been spending a little too much time with computers. Life is not a binary solution set. There are more than 2 choices. So no, I don't get your point. You are taking a very complex situation, and vastly oversimplifying it.
OK i should have said 2 logical choices. Sure theres more than 2 choices, but only 2 choices are logical choices, the other choices arent always as logical. Suicide is a choice, but its never a logical choice.
I'm not going to disagree with you that George Bush whines a lot. Now, unlike yourself, I don't think that George Bush is the reason for all the problems that happen in my life.
George Bush isnt the problem, but hes not part of the solution either, hes prolonging the problem because so far the problems dont effect him. Hes in his underground base, hes safe from terrorists, hes never been poor, he doesnt worry about being robbed, hes rich, hes never lived it so he couldnt understand the problems that poverty can cause. Lets see George Bush be a man like Bill Clinton is, lets see him live in Harlem for a few years, and then we will see if he still has the same opinions.
Unlike Bush who grew up rich, had a rich dad, and always had a silver spoon in his mouth, Clinton grew up poor, in poverty, like the majority of the working class. Thats why we voted for Clinton over Bush senior.
How is a Rich guy going to try to tell us to cut taxes when often we NEED those services the taxes provide? Yes I said need, because without the working class you cannot have the ruling/upper class.
The working class should be kept happy, this means the failures should have a reason to continue to play the game, if you make it winner takes all, what will happen is the economy and the world will collapse.
Making baseless assumptions. Nice. How do you suppose I have everything? How do you know I'm not just another working shmoe down on his luck right now? You're omnipotent, I guess?
If you are a working smoe just barely surviving, Do you plan to ever have kids? Do you plan to retire? What if you get sick? Dont tell me you lost all your money in your 401k because of the recession, oh no, looks like you can never retire now.
As far as the classist remark goes, I'm just going to shake my head and laugh. First off, even if I am, I'm not going to cause the destruction of the world by thinking that way, sorry. (Of course, if the world does end, it'll be everyone's fault but yours, right?)
You are a classist, you want the classes to compete by raising the stakes, thats what you do, when you say "winner takes all, be successful or go to hell"
The failures will kill you to be successful, will rob you, will do anything it takes, because at that point you are literally telling them they must be successful or ELSE.
People in Afganastan and the third world have almost no chance of success thus no reason for living, dying would do more to help their people than to stay alive, so why not suicide bomb, they are dying anyway of aids, and sicknesses, and the average lifespan is only 30 or so, so why shouldnt teenagers go blow themselves up? They have nothing to lose, absolutely nothing, and thats because you dont GIVE them anything. Everyone needs something, even if its something small.
Well, with the house I live in, the most I have to worry about is Bill Gates running me over in one of his many cars. Yeah, that's it...
Move to Harlem, Then you have to worry about being robbed and shot, every single day. Better yet, move to South Africa, have no chance at having children do to the aids problem, worry about how to find food on a daily basis, go weeks without eating, yeah you do that and you'll soon be robbing people to.
Survival is the only rule in the game. When people cant survive via your capitalism, they'll abandon your rules and play by their own rules, this means killing you and TAKING your money instead of earning the money.
You can support the losers, or its winner take all.
if its winner take all, no one can afford to be a loser, losing is worse than death.
Get my point? I whine alot? We'll George Bush whines alot, alot of people whine when 3 thousand people die in twin towers.
Stupid. I whine, afganstan whines, people in the ghettos and trailors whine, we all whine, except you, who has everything.
Look, face it, you are a classist, do you know what that is? someone who believes they are superior due to their class. Because you are successful, you feel you matter more than someone whos poor, keep thinking like that and you'll cause the destruction of the world.
Terrorism, Crime, not a problem for you yet? Well wait until you cant step outside your mansion without worrying about people trying to rob you.
Me help them? I'm one of them. I dont have shit. I'm not rich, how am I, a poor person supposed to help my poor neighbors? I can barely survive myself.
Look, people have to survive, people dont give a damn if you live or die, when you say its its them or me.
You back people into a corner, yes they will rob you,kill you and do whatever it takes to survive, they wont play by the rules, you cannot expect them to play by the rules when they play a game which losing is not allowed!
If people werent punished so much for losing,perhaps the losers of the game wouldnt punish the winners for losing via terrorism, crime, etc.
Their need does not entitle them to my effort and the work of my hands. If they have any dignity left as human beings, they would not themselves rob me in person. They would plead their case and ask me for help.
How many years have people in afganastan been asking for help? How many years have africians been asking for help? How many years have minorities in the ghetto be DEMANDING help?
Look, they've been asking, but iff you havent been listening to them for the past hundred years or more, well, whos fault is that. Remember the civil rights movement? That happened right before gang violence in the ghettos EXPLODED onto the scene, that was their cry for help, what happened when they asked for help? They got hosed down, beat up, killed.
Asking for help only works when people are listening, when people dont give you help, you have two options, steal, or become a suicide bomber and die for the cause bringing more attention to the problem.
With terrorists and criminals from the ghetto, and trailor park biker gangs, and the mafia.
Look, its people who think like you, "be rich or die" attitude that makes people so willing to be a suicide bomber. Makes them willing to join a gang and rob people like you, makes them sell illegal drugs.
Just like you said, if its winner takes all, Why play by the rules?
Thats right, you are justifying suicide bombing, crime, etc, because hey if they have the choice of a life being homeless barly surviving, or a life in prison getting more than they get outside why not be a criminal? prison doesnt scare them if they have nothing to lose.
And why not be a suicide bomber if you have aids or your children and wife died from some disease like ebola and you have no family
When people have nothing left to lose, they stop playing.
You MUST MUST MUST, give everyone something, it doesnt have to be alot but at least give them healthcare, 3 meals a day, education, some kinda standard so people at least have hope, you remove all hope and they wont play the game anymore, society will collapse.
Not everyone can be successful. What about the failures?
Just because you are successful and all your rich friends are successful, doesnt mean everyonne is or can be. Theres going to be failures, its your responsibility as a human, to make it so even if you fail, your life still means something, failures need to have SOMETHING.
Alot of people wonder how a person can suicide bomb, its usually a rich person wondering this, how about we look at life from their point of view.
Lets look at a third world country. Say you are from a third world country, all your friends have Aids, People only live to
age 30-35, your family members have aids, one of your kids starved to death and the other is sick, and You have aids. You see rich guys coming and taking away the natural resources so you cant hunt or live off the land anymore. Why not go suicide bomb them? What do you have to lose? You have nothing to lose.
How about we look at how life is for people in the USA? Say you live in the ghetto, you grew up with a single parent, barely surviving off welfare, you didnt get a good education due to shitty public schooling, what options do you have to survive? You cant live off a Mc Donalds wage, and thats about all you can get.
Here are your options. 1.Sell Drugs/Steal 2.Sell Drugs/Steal and Work at MCDonalds 3.Be Homeless
Because these people have nothing to lose they dont fear going to jail. Someone whos homeless or close to being homeless on the
street eating 1 meal a day, would be happy to go to jail and get 3 meals a day, weights, TV, and so on.
Do you see whats happening? You have to give people something, you MUST care about society, because if you dont, society will eventually collapse and destroy you along with it.
With lower taxes, more people become poor, why? Less education or lower quality education from public schools, no healthcare,
no social security, I mean with no social security people cant even look forward to retiring.
They have NOTHING.
The problem with not sharing the wealth is, as more people have nothing, society breaks down. You can only fill the prisons so much, you cant stop terrorists for ever. The solution, is to make sure everyone has SOMETHING to lose, what stops you from going to prison? Oh thats right, you might lose your house and all your possesions, you wont be able to do all those great things which a rich person can do, like go shopping, or sit in your nice hottub. You have something to lose being in prison
because for you life outside of prison is better than life in prison. If you keep lowering taxes, it makes life for failures not worth living at all, you think we have a problem with terrorists from afganastan? IF you get rid of public schools, society security, healthcare, welfare, being poor is to alot of people worse than being dead. Their options, commit suicide, or live life as a homeless person begging for food.
For every Winner, theres a loser, in order to keep society from collapsing, the losers have to continue to play the game.
Everyone must play the game, losers need a reason to keep player, if its winner takes all, the losers will stop playing, and
will do one of two things
A. Take from the winners B. Destroy everything so no one has anything
Without taxes how would you be educated enough to make "more" money?
How would we fight the war on terrorism or even crime?
Society cannot run without taxes, it CANT, THE END. IF you want a taxless society, you'll have a society just as bad as communist russia was, where the upper class always stay upper class and the lower class always stay lower class with no way to ever get out of it through education or public funded programs to help the poor become rich.
Poor people NEED healthcare because they cant afford the drugs, if you want an example look at the deaths happening in third world countries, theres no healthcare in most of these places, do you want US to be like that?
Without schools, expect everyone in the US to be uneducated, look at the trailer park and the ghettos of south central, that will be the majority off the USA without public schools.
So what do you say? Should we get rid of taxes or raise them?
Considering society has more problems, why not raise the taxes to solve these problems? Better schools, War on terrorism, cure for aids, cancer, etc,
Yes it is our responsibility, meaning the poor and the rich, to do whats best for our people.
If you dont eat carbs protien goes straight to fat instead of muscle forming, all atheletes and bodybuilders know that.
Carbs must ALWAYS be consumed with Protien and Fat.
Now its true eating all 3 together give you higher chance of having gas, but whats better, having gas, or being a blimp without gas?
Eat just carbs alone and you'll be as fat as a sumo, Eat only protein and your body will burn muscle for energy as it adapts to this, Eat a balanced diet of all 3, with each meal, and youll be fine.
Yeah it will still be slower than IE because your wholee OS will lag behind your browser thus lagging the browser itself.
Heres the post everyone should read first
on
Mozilla RC3 Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Basically, this is what posts you'll see.
"IE is faster, Mozilla cant beat IE"
Lets respond to this post right now. OF course IE is faster and always will be faster because its build into the damn OS. MSN msger is faster than ICQ and AIM, anything made by Microsoft should be the fastest considering Microsoft has advantages in terms of knowing the source code of the entire OS.
"IE has won, its too late, Mozilla team should just give up" Isnt this exactly what the IE team should have done back in 1998 when Netscape 4 was winning 70-30 in terms of percentages?
"Opera's done it all first, Mozilla is copying"
Of course Mozilla and Netscape will copy Opera the same way Opera and IE copied Netscapes Bookmark system.
"Opera is better than Mozilla and IE because its faster"
Are you using Windows? Perhaps you should try linux on your 486, its faster. What? You arent using a 486? Well stop complaining about speed, if Mozilla is slow, its because you are too slow to upgrade
"Mozilla/Netscape cant render page X"
Maybe it WOULD render page X if you stopped using IE and wrote that same msg to the site owner
"Mozilla is bloated and slow"
Try Kmeleon, Galeon, or if both those are slow try lynx.
"AOL isnt supporting Mozilla, why wont they put gecko into their AOL package?"
They have. AOL 7.0 gecko beta. Also try Netscape 7
This ends all arguements you people will have before they begin, the rest of the arguements will be about bugs in mozilla, when will 1.0 release, why mozilla isnt availble for your obscure OS, or why the mozilla team took 4 years to build the best browser.
Its impossible to have the speed of IE
on
Mozilla RC3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Redundant
When IE is part of the OS itself, and Mozilla is just an application running on the OS.
I suppose if you code Mozilla directly into the kernel or directly into explorer.exe, yeah it will be as fast as IE.
Compare the rendering speed of Mozilla and IE and IE is left in the dust though.
The technology is being stalled so it can be used in the next DVD technology.
Thank you for proving my point.
By stalled, the RIAA and MPAA forcing them to close the technology so only they can use it via contracts, and working on copy protections so it can be used for the next dvd.
actually it makes plenty of sense. If you understand geometry, some string theory, physics, its very easy to see that its possble and yes its even easy to prove its possible using math and on paper.
The question is, does it actually work or is it just a theory?
Dr. Claude Shannon's dissertation on Information Theory in 1948 and his following work on run-length encoding confidently established the understanding that compression technologies are "all" predisposed to limitation. With this foundation behind us we can conclude that the effort to accelerate the transmission of information past the permutation load capacity of the binary system, and past the naturally occurring singular-bit-variances of nature can not be accomplished through compression. Rather, this problem can only be successfully resolved through the solution of what is commonly understood within the mathematical community as the "Pigeonhole Principle."
Given a number of pigeons within a sealed room that has a single hole, and which allows only one pigeon at a time to escape the room, how many unique markers are required to individually mark all of the pigeons as each escapes, one pigeon at a time?
After some time a person will reasonably conclude that: "One unique marker is required for each pigeon that flies through the hole, if there are one hundred pigeons in the group then the answer is one hundred markers".
In our three dimensional world we can visualize an example. If we were to take a three-dimensional cube and collapse it into a two-dimensional edge, and then again reduce it into a one-dimensional point, and believe that we are going to successfully recover either the square or cube from the single edge, we would be sorely mistaken.
This three-dimensional world limitation can however be resolved in higher dimensional space. In higher, multi-dimensional projective theory, it is possible to create string nodes that describe significant components of simultaneously identically yet different mathematical entities. Within this space it is possible and is not a theoretical impossibility to create a point that is simultaneously a square and also a cube. In our example all three substantially exist as unique entities yet are linked together. This simultaneous yet differentiated occurrence is the foundation of ZeoSync's Relational Differentiation Encoding(TM) (RDE(TM)) technology. This proprietary methodology is capable of intentionally introducing a multi-dimensional patterning so that the nodes of a target binary string simultaneously and/or substantially occupy the space of a Low Kolmogorov Complexity construct. The difference between these occurrences is so small that we will have for all intents and purposes successfully encoded lossy universal compression. The limitation to this Pigeonhole Principle circumvention is that the multi-dimensional space can never be super saturated, and that all of the pigeons can not be simultaneously present at which point our multi-dimensional circumvention of the pigeonhole problem breaks down.
Basically its a multidimesional compression, compresses down to 1. Does it work? I havent tested it but it makes sense in theory if you know geometry.
Slashdot Mirror
Freedom has nothing to do with success.
People who arent successful should still be given something, no one should be starving to death, dying of sicknesses which are cureable, and living on the streets. Theres absolutely no excuse for this, none, and when you keep allowing people to live in a fucked up way, dont be surprised when these people fuck up the country with crime, terrorism, rioting, etc.
Sorry Hanzo, but you've been spending a little too much time with computers. Life is not a binary solution set. There are more than 2 choices. So no, I don't get your point. You are taking a very complex situation, and vastly oversimplifying it.
OK i should have said 2 logical choices. Sure theres more than 2 choices, but only 2 choices are logical choices, the other choices arent always as logical. Suicide is a choice, but its never a logical choice.
I'm not going to disagree with you that George Bush whines a lot. Now, unlike yourself, I don't think that George Bush is the reason for all the problems that happen in my life.
George Bush isnt the problem, but hes not part of the solution either, hes prolonging the problem because so far the problems dont effect him. Hes in his underground base, hes safe from terrorists, hes never been poor, he doesnt worry about being robbed, hes rich, hes never lived it so he couldnt understand the problems that poverty can cause. Lets see George Bush be a man like Bill Clinton is, lets see him live in Harlem for a few years, and then we will see if he still has the same opinions.
Unlike Bush who grew up rich, had a rich dad, and always had a silver spoon in his mouth, Clinton grew up poor, in poverty, like the majority of the working class. Thats why we voted for Clinton over Bush senior.
How is a Rich guy going to try to tell us to cut taxes when often we NEED those services the taxes provide? Yes I said need, because without the working class you cannot have the ruling/upper class.
The working class should be kept happy, this means the failures should have a reason to continue to play the game, if you make it winner takes all, what will happen is the economy and the world will collapse.
Making baseless assumptions. Nice. How do you suppose I have everything? How do you know I'm not just another working shmoe down on his luck right now? You're omnipotent, I guess?
If you are a working smoe just barely surviving,
Do you plan to ever have kids? Do you plan to retire? What if you get sick? Dont tell me you lost all your money in your 401k because of the recession, oh no, looks like you can never retire now.
As far as the classist remark goes, I'm just going to shake my head and laugh. First off, even if I am, I'm not going to cause the destruction of the world by thinking that way, sorry. (Of course, if the world does end, it'll be everyone's fault but yours, right?)
You are a classist, you want the classes to compete by raising the stakes, thats what you do, when you say "winner takes all, be successful or go to hell"
The failures will kill you to be successful, will rob you, will do anything it takes, because at that point you are literally telling them they must be successful or ELSE.
People in Afganastan and the third world have almost no chance of success thus no reason for living, dying would do more to help their people than to stay alive, so why not suicide bomb, they are dying anyway of aids, and sicknesses, and the average lifespan is only 30 or so, so why shouldnt teenagers go blow themselves up? They have nothing to lose, absolutely nothing, and thats because you dont GIVE them anything. Everyone needs something, even if its something small.
Well, with the house I live in, the most I have to worry about is Bill Gates running me over in one of his many cars. Yeah, that's it...
Move to Harlem, Then you have to worry about being robbed and shot, every single day. Better yet, move to South Africa, have no chance at having children do to the aids problem, worry about how to find food on a daily basis, go weeks without eating, yeah you do that and you'll soon be robbing people to.
Survival is the only rule in the game.
When people cant survive via your capitalism, they'll abandon your rules and play by their own rules, this means killing you and TAKING your money instead of earning the money.
Get my point?
You have 2 choices.
You can support the losers, or its winner take all.
if its winner take all, no one can afford to be a loser, losing is worse than death.
Get my point? I whine alot? We'll George Bush whines alot, alot of people whine when 3 thousand people die in twin towers.
Stupid. I whine, afganstan whines, people in the ghettos and trailors whine, we all whine, except you, who has everything.
Look, face it, you are a classist, do you know what that is? someone who believes they are superior due to their class. Because you are successful, you feel you matter more than someone whos poor, keep thinking like that and you'll cause the destruction of the world.
Terrorism, Crime, not a problem for you yet? Well wait until you cant step outside your mansion without worrying about people trying to rob you.
Me help them? I'm one of them. I dont have shit. I'm not rich, how am I, a poor person supposed to help my poor neighbors? I can barely survive myself.
Look, people have to survive, people dont give a damn if you live or die, when you say its its them or me.
You back people into a corner, yes they will rob you,kill you and do whatever it takes to survive, they wont play by the rules, you cannot expect them to play by the rules when they play a game which losing is not allowed!
If people werent punished so much for losing,perhaps the losers of the game wouldnt punish the winners for losing via terrorism, crime, etc.
Their need does not entitle them
to my effort and the work of my hands. If they
have any dignity left as human beings, they would
not themselves rob me in person. They would plead
their case and ask me for help.
How many years have people in afganastan been asking for help? How many years have africians been asking for help? How many years have minorities in the ghetto be DEMANDING help?
Look, they've been asking, but iff you havent been listening to them for the past hundred years or more, well, whos fault is that. Remember the civil rights movement? That happened right before gang violence in the ghettos EXPLODED onto the scene, that was their cry for help, what happened when they asked for help? They got hosed down, beat up, killed.
Asking for help only works when people are listening, when people dont give you help, you have two options, steal, or become a suicide bomber and die for the cause bringing more attention to the problem.
With terrorists and criminals from the ghetto, and trailor park biker gangs, and the mafia.
Look, its people who think like you, "be rich or die" attitude that makes people so willing to be a suicide bomber. Makes them willing to join a gang and rob people like you, makes them sell illegal drugs.
Just like you said, if its winner takes all, Why play by the rules?
Why should the losers play the game?
Thats right, you are justifying suicide bombing, crime, etc, because hey if they have the choice of a life being homeless barly surviving, or a life in prison getting more than they get outside why not be a criminal? prison doesnt scare them if they have nothing to lose.
And why not be a suicide bomber if you have aids or your children and wife died from some disease like ebola and you have no family
When people have nothing left to lose, they stop playing.
You MUST MUST MUST, give everyone something, it doesnt have to be alot but at least give them healthcare, 3 meals a day, education, some kinda standard so people at least have hope, you remove all hope and they wont play the game anymore, society will collapse.
Not everyone can be successful. What about the failures?
Just because you are successful and all your rich friends are successful, doesnt mean everyonne is or can be. Theres going to be failures, its your responsibility as a human, to make it so even if you fail, your life still means something, failures need to have SOMETHING.
Alot of people wonder how a person can suicide bomb, its usually a rich person wondering this, how about we look at life from their point of view.
Lets look at a third world country. Say you are from a third world country, all your friends have Aids, People only live to
age 30-35, your family members have aids, one of your kids starved to death and the other is sick, and You have aids. You see rich guys coming and taking away the natural resources so you cant hunt or live off the land anymore. Why not go suicide bomb them? What do you have to lose? You have nothing to lose.
How about we look at how life is for people in the USA? Say you live in the ghetto, you grew up with a single parent, barely surviving off welfare, you didnt get a good education due to shitty public schooling, what options do you have to survive? You cant live off a Mc Donalds wage, and thats about all you can get.
Here are your options.
1.Sell Drugs/Steal
2.Sell Drugs/Steal and Work at MCDonalds
3.Be Homeless
Because these people have nothing to lose they dont fear going to jail. Someone whos homeless or close to being homeless on the
street eating 1 meal a day, would be happy to go to jail and get 3 meals a day, weights, TV, and so on.
Do you see whats happening? You have to give people something, you MUST care about society, because if you dont, society will eventually collapse and destroy you along with it.
With lower taxes, more people become poor, why? Less education or lower quality education from public schools, no healthcare,
no social security, I mean with no social security people cant even look forward to retiring.
They have NOTHING.
The problem with not sharing the wealth is, as more people have nothing, society breaks down. You can only fill the prisons so much, you cant stop terrorists for ever. The solution, is to make sure everyone has SOMETHING to lose, what stops you from going to prison? Oh thats right, you might lose your house and all your possesions, you wont be able to do all those great things which a rich person can do, like go shopping, or sit in your nice hottub. You have something to lose being in prison
because for you life outside of prison is better than life in prison. If you keep lowering taxes, it makes life for failures not worth living at all, you think we have a problem with terrorists from afganastan? IF you get rid of public schools, society security, healthcare, welfare, being poor is to alot of people worse than being dead. Their options, commit suicide, or live life as a homeless person begging for food.
For every Winner, theres a loser, in order to keep society from collapsing, the losers have to continue to play the game.
Everyone must play the game, losers need a reason to keep player, if its winner takes all, the losers will stop playing, and
will do one of two things
A. Take from the winners
B. Destroy everything so no one has anything
Without taxes how would you be educated enough to make "more" money?
How would we fight the war on terrorism or even crime?
Society cannot run without taxes, it CANT, THE END. IF you want a taxless society, you'll have a society just as bad as communist russia was, where the upper class always stay upper class and the lower class always stay lower class with no way to ever get out of it through education or public funded programs to help the poor become rich.
Poor people NEED healthcare because they cant afford the drugs, if you want an example look at the deaths happening in third world countries, theres no healthcare in most of these places, do you want US to be like that?
Without schools, expect everyone in the US to be uneducated, look at the trailer park and the ghettos of south central, that will be the majority off the USA without public schools.
So what do you say? Should we get rid of taxes or raise them?
Considering society has more problems, why not raise the taxes to solve these problems? Better schools, War on terrorism, cure for aids, cancer, etc,
Yes it is our responsibility, meaning the poor and the rich, to do whats best for our people.
If you dont eat carbs protien goes straight to fat instead of muscle forming, all atheletes and bodybuilders know that.
Carbs must ALWAYS be consumed with Protien and Fat.
Now its true eating all 3 together give you higher chance of having gas, but whats better, having gas, or being a blimp without gas?
Eat just carbs alone and you'll be as fat as a sumo, Eat only protein and your body will burn muscle for energy as it adapts to this, Eat a balanced diet of all 3, with each meal, and youll be fine.
Processed foods, powdered sugars, flour, etc
http://www.propellerheads.se/
see
http://www.propellerheads.se/
When we have programs like reason, things will be good on the music side.
Time for suppliment companies to make a quick buck on a new protien
Neither will contacting your senator.
What will help is supporting geekPAC.
faster at what? and on what machine?
Yeah it will still be slower than IE because your wholee OS will lag behind your browser thus lagging the browser itself.
Basically, this is what posts you'll see.
"IE is faster, Mozilla cant beat IE"
Lets respond to this post right now. OF course IE is faster and always will be faster because its build into the damn OS. MSN msger is faster than ICQ and AIM, anything made by Microsoft should be the fastest considering Microsoft has advantages in terms of knowing the source code of the entire OS.
"IE has won, its too late, Mozilla team should just give up"
Isnt this exactly what the IE team should have done back in 1998 when Netscape 4 was winning 70-30 in terms of percentages?
"Opera's done it all first, Mozilla is copying"
Of course Mozilla and Netscape will copy Opera the same way Opera and IE copied Netscapes Bookmark system.
"Opera is better than Mozilla and IE because its faster"
Are you using Windows? Perhaps you should try linux on your 486, its faster. What? You arent using a 486? Well stop complaining about speed, if Mozilla is slow, its because you are too slow to upgrade
"Mozilla/Netscape cant render page X"
Maybe it WOULD render page X if you stopped using IE and wrote that same msg to the site owner
"Mozilla is bloated and slow"
Try Kmeleon, Galeon, or if both those are slow try lynx.
"AOL isnt supporting Mozilla, why wont they put gecko into their AOL package?"
They have. AOL 7.0 gecko beta. Also try Netscape 7
This ends all arguements you people will have before they begin, the rest of the arguements will be about bugs in mozilla, when will 1.0 release, why mozilla isnt availble for your obscure OS, or why the mozilla team took 4 years to build the best browser.
When IE is part of the OS itself, and Mozilla is just an application running on the OS.
I suppose if you code Mozilla directly into the kernel or directly into explorer.exe, yeah it will be as fast as IE.
Compare the rendering speed of Mozilla and IE and IE is left in the dust though.
AOL is using gecko. AOL 7 was switched to gecko, thats also why netscape 6.5 was renamed 7.0
The technology is being stalled so it can be used in the next DVD technology.
Thank you for proving my point.
By stalled, the RIAA and MPAA forcing them to close the technology so only they can use it via contracts, and working on copy protections so it can be used for the next dvd.
actually it makes plenty of sense. If you understand geometry, some string theory, physics, its very easy to see that its possble and yes its even easy to prove its possible using math and on paper.
The question is, does it actually work or is it just a theory?
This is why i dont use windows
Invest in C3d, This company, and Zeosync.
FMD can store about a terrabyte.
The Pigeonhole Principle and Data Encoding -
Dr. Claude Shannon's dissertation on Information Theory in 1948 and his following work on run-length encoding confidently established the understanding that compression technologies are "all" predisposed to limitation. With this foundation behind us we can conclude that the effort to accelerate the transmission of information past the permutation load capacity of the binary system, and past the naturally occurring singular-bit-variances of nature can not be accomplished through compression. Rather, this problem can only be successfully resolved through the solution of what is commonly understood within the mathematical community as the "Pigeonhole Principle."
Given a number of pigeons within a sealed room that has a single hole, and which allows only one pigeon at a time to escape the room, how many unique markers are required to individually mark all of the pigeons as each escapes, one pigeon at a time?
After some time a person will reasonably conclude that: "One unique marker is required for each pigeon that flies through the hole, if there are one hundred pigeons in the group then the answer is one hundred markers".
In our three dimensional world we can visualize an example. If we were to take a three-dimensional cube and collapse it into a two-dimensional edge, and then again reduce it into a one-dimensional point, and believe that we are going to successfully recover either the square or cube from the single edge, we would be sorely mistaken.
This three-dimensional world limitation can however be resolved in higher dimensional space. In higher, multi-dimensional projective theory, it is possible to create string nodes that describe significant components of simultaneously identically yet different mathematical entities. Within this space it is possible and is not a theoretical impossibility to create a point that is simultaneously a square and also a cube. In our example all three substantially exist as unique entities yet are linked together. This simultaneous yet differentiated occurrence is the foundation of ZeoSync's Relational Differentiation Encoding(TM) (RDE(TM)) technology. This proprietary methodology is capable of intentionally introducing a multi-dimensional patterning so that the nodes of a target binary string simultaneously and/or substantially occupy the space of a Low Kolmogorov Complexity construct. The difference between these occurrences is so small that we will have for all intents and purposes successfully encoded lossy universal compression. The limitation to this Pigeonhole Principle circumvention is that the multi-dimensional space can never be super saturated, and that all of the pigeons can not be simultaneously present at which point our multi-dimensional circumvention of the pigeonhole problem breaks down.
Basically its a multidimesional compression, compresses down to 1. Does it work? I havent tested it but it makes sense in theory if you know geometry.