"I'm more curious about why "different computer draws the image slightly differently" Accessibility. This is important. The HTML5 canvas is about more than just images. It's live elements that can contain text content and other display elements. HTML should render in a sensible manner on any device as dictated by the owner of the machine. All owners are not created equal. All renderings should not be equal.
"Browsers are supposed to provide abstraction from the machine" even if that's true, there's also a matter of canvas dimensions, which can vary depending on your resolution and browser's width. Those are not attributes of the machine, but of the display environment for the page. HTML is designed to adapt to different dimensions, font settings.
I remember when Google was starting out in 98 or so. They were paying people to use their search engine too. I made a small amount of money using them instead of Yahoo, Alta Vista, or Lycos. Substandard has little to do with it. It's hard to make people switch out of what they're used to.
If the goal is to clean up the UI, why show the URL at all unless asked for (CTRL+L or clicking on the "CHIP")? Don't lie to me... I'd rather you hide the URL all together than show me an incorrect one. By showing the protocol, then host name, you're showing me a valid URL, but it's the wrong one. Either say: Domain: bankofamerica.com , or just show the "Chip" and omit the url all together.
Simplified filing is meant to be just that. Simple. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way for a tax-payer to file.
A new service from Intuit would offer, for free, to calculate, but not file your taxes. It would then compare the results to the "simplified filing" scenario. If it's in the tax-payers advantage to have Intuit file, Intuit can do so for a fee.
Intuit will lose out on lots of cases where a person's tax scenario really IS that simple... but they'll still have plenty of money to get in the middle of.
Indeed. Thank you for your contribution. I have no issue with dyndns ceasing a free service. I have a problem with netgear selling the feature as "free for life" and locking down the option to use other providers. And I did complain to them.
No. I bought the router because it had dynamic dns as a free feature. Free dynamic dns was listed as a feature. So yes. I did pay for the feature by buying the router. It would have been a simple matter for netgear to allow us to choose our own provider, but the current interface has a dropdown with ONLY dynamic dns. Do you understand the fairness now?
Looks like I'm going to My netgear router to tomato or dd-wrt The current software has a dynamic dns setting, but it's a dropdown and Dyn DNS is the ONLY option. I hope they release a new firmware relaxing this restriction, but I have not seen any updates in a few years for my model.
Effectively, they are taking away functionality that I have already paid for. Sony did this when they made us choose between PSN (and effectively any internet communication) or Custom Operating System, changing the terms of our original purchase.
Thank god for open source. But, I wasn't looking forward to this side-quest. I'm sick of things I own ceasing to work just because some external entity wishes to make it so.
But the job of the socket or outlet? I'd prefer to see some sort of USB/bluetooth-esque standard where the plugged-in device, be it a bulb in a socket, a lamp in a wall outlet, or a toaster oven could all be monitored and controlled through the same interface. A device would not even have to comply to the standard for this to be useful. We'd already be able to tell if it is on or off, and chart out power consumption. Devices in compliance could extend the functionality in the same way any number of USB devices could be controlled via the PC, so long as they have the right driver.
That sounds like a reasonable objection to showing the video. The article doesn't mention why the judge overruled that objection. I'd be interested to know. With a very large amount of money on the line, would it really be too much trouble and expense to create a less biased version of the video?
I think McAfee anti-virus has a bug. I just installed it scanned my hard drive with it. It did not detect that "McAfee" was installed. Are you sure that it's the best malware detector out there?
1) People will enjoy this content more if it's in a slideshows. 2) It's OK if ad-blocking breaks my core javascript functionality. 3) Nobody is going to view this site in a modern browser.
Suppose Bitcoin went the way of Napster. This would mean the currency might become worth less and less. People would, over time, abandon wallets and there would simply be fewer known Bitcoins to be found. Many will have simply been irrevocably deleted. At some point, wouldn't this scarcity prevent the value from dropping further?
Years from now, we'll likely be using some form of crypto/digital currency. Bitcoin will at least be an interesting historical note. Suppose my grandson steps forth with a digital wallet containing some bitcoin. Wouldn't that be worth something simply because it is rare and of historical interest?
It should be hard. The will may have said they could have the ipad. I didn't see anything about the data on it. Soon enough, it will be basic will-writing protocol to include any necessary keys to data as it is with access physical objects.
Wills aside, I'm glad to see one more hurdle in the social engineering chain.
Slashdot Mirror
Autonomous cars already hear.
It reads as if they were delivering test results via missile launch. I sit here very disappointed.
"I'm more curious about why "different computer draws the image slightly differently"
Accessibility. This is important. The HTML5 canvas is about more than just images. It's live elements that can contain text content and other display elements. HTML should render in a sensible manner on any device as dictated by the owner of the machine. All owners are not created equal. All renderings should not be equal.
"Browsers are supposed to provide abstraction from the machine" even if that's true, there's also a matter of canvas dimensions, which can vary depending on your resolution and browser's width. Those are not attributes of the machine, but of the display environment for the page. HTML is designed to adapt to different dimensions, font settings.
While quite sturdy devices, iPads are not designed for rolling. Couldn't they have just carried them out? Typical government idiocy.
Big ups to my garden, big ups to my hoe.
What the dill w/ my weeds and my dill-yo?
Gotta keep the green flowing round my grill-yo.
My lyrics is tight.
My rhymes on target.
I drop fatter beets
Than a farmer's market.
Need we comment further?
That word ("can" not)... I don't think it means what you think it means.
The word you are probably looking for is "may" not.
I remember when Google was starting out in 98 or so. They were paying people to use their search engine too. I made a small amount of money using them instead of Yahoo, Alta Vista, or Lycos. Substandard has little to do with it. It's hard to make people switch out of what they're used to.
... seeing that it's twelve getting paid what 8 deserve.
1. Walk up to spot. Stand next to car I do not own. ....
2. Check in with app
3. Accept Bids
4.
5. Profit (and run like Hell)
How long must we sing this song?
Oh my. This was supposed to be posted to the previous story. MOD ME INTO OBLIVION!
If the goal is to clean up the UI, why show the URL at all unless asked for (CTRL+L or clicking on the "CHIP")? Don't lie to me... I'd rather you hide the URL all together than show me an incorrect one. By showing the protocol, then host name, you're showing me a valid URL, but it's the wrong one. Either say: Domain: bankofamerica.com , or just show the "Chip" and omit the url all together.
I liked the game too as a kid. It had its shortcomings which by the way are all addressed here. ET is no longer an awful game:
http://www.neocomputer.org/pro...
Simplified filing is meant to be just that. Simple. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way for a tax-payer to file.
A new service from Intuit would offer, for free, to calculate, but not file your taxes. It would then compare the results to the "simplified filing" scenario. If it's in the tax-payers advantage to have Intuit file, Intuit can do so for a fee.
Intuit will lose out on lots of cases where a person's tax scenario really IS that simple... but they'll still have plenty of money to get in the middle of.
Indeed. Thank you for your contribution. I have no issue with dyndns ceasing a free service. I have a problem with netgear selling the feature as "free for life" and locking down the option to use other providers. And I did complain to them.
No. I bought the router because it had dynamic dns as a free feature. Free dynamic dns was listed as a feature. So yes. I did pay for the feature by buying the router. It would have been a simple matter for netgear to allow us to choose our own provider, but the current interface has a dropdown with ONLY dynamic dns. Do you understand the fairness now?
Looks like I'm going to My netgear router to tomato or dd-wrt
The current software has a dynamic dns setting, but it's a dropdown and Dyn DNS is the ONLY option. I hope they release a new firmware relaxing this restriction, but I have not seen any updates in a few years for my model.
Effectively, they are taking away functionality that I have already paid for. Sony did this when they made us choose between PSN (and effectively any internet communication) or Custom Operating System, changing the terms of our original purchase.
Thank god for open source. But, I wasn't looking forward to this side-quest. I'm sick of things I own ceasing to work just because some external entity wishes to make it so.
But the job of the socket or outlet? I'd prefer to see some sort of USB/bluetooth-esque standard where the plugged-in device, be it a bulb in a socket, a lamp in a wall outlet, or a toaster oven could all be monitored and controlled through the same interface. A device would not even have to comply to the standard for this to be useful. We'd already be able to tell if it is on or off, and chart out power consumption. Devices in compliance could extend the functionality in the same way any number of USB devices could be controlled via the PC, so long as they have the right driver.
That sounds like a reasonable objection to showing the video. The article doesn't mention why the judge overruled that objection. I'd be interested to know. With a very large amount of money on the line, would it really be too much trouble and expense to create a less biased version of the video?
I think McAfee anti-virus has a bug. I just installed it scanned my hard drive with it.
It did not detect that "McAfee" was installed. Are you sure that it's the best malware detector out there?
1) People will enjoy this content more if it's in a slideshows.
2) It's OK if ad-blocking breaks my core javascript functionality.
3) Nobody is going to view this site in a modern browser.
Suppose Bitcoin went the way of Napster. This would mean the currency might become worth less and less. People would, over time, abandon wallets and there would simply be fewer known Bitcoins to be found. Many will have simply been irrevocably deleted. At some point, wouldn't this scarcity prevent the value from dropping further?
Years from now, we'll likely be using some form of crypto/digital currency. Bitcoin will at least be an interesting historical note. Suppose my grandson steps forth with a digital wallet containing some bitcoin. Wouldn't that be worth something simply because it is rare and of historical interest?
It should be hard. The will may have said they could have the ipad. I didn't see anything about the data on it. Soon enough, it will be basic will-writing protocol to include any necessary keys to data as it is with access physical objects.
Wills aside, I'm glad to see one more hurdle in the social engineering chain.
Is "relying" an overstatement? Yes.