Yes, what an earth shattering advantages, when it's "just" 53 keys to relearn. Why didn't they keep the QWERTY order at least? Would it have made things too easy?
As for calling her a disgrace to humanity, she's probably done more for children in 3rd world countries than you have.
I wasn't calling anyone in particular that, I was calling the damn celebrity news list that's supposed to be about searches in general that. One would expect e.g. George W Bush to be somewhere in there, but no...
Google News - Top Searches in 2005... WORLDWIDE ALL CATEGORIES
1. Janet Jackson 2. Hurricane Katrina 3. tsunami 4. xbox 360 5. Brad Pitt 6. Michael Jackson 7. American Idol 8. Britney Spears 9. Angelina Jolie 10. Harry Potter
2, 3 is understandable but the rest... What a fucking disgrace to humanity:-(
It still isn't a problem -I say, let all viewpoints be recorded, atleast all well written and well sourced viewpoints. I think it is fairer to the reader if a point of view is out in the open rather than hidden behind claimed netrality.
But this is usually what happens on Wikipedia if you haven't noticed. Criticism is woven into the articles while debates about how it should be written and common grounds are met and established by both parts in the talk pages. If no common ground is found, a highly visible disclaimer is added on the article page and usually both sides are instead present on the page.
Take nuclear power for example. Are the "greens" silenced? Of course not! That's basically their section on the matter. Petroleum? Same thing. Slashdot? Well, lookie here. To go to more extremes.. How about advocacy of pedophilia? Self-criticism of Wikipedia itself even has its own article. I've actually found Wikipedia to be pretty good at presenting more than one side, probably exactly because it's editable by everyone.
Did you believe Wikipedia was a "reliable source of information" in the first place?
Seriously, it's so fluctuating, that no one should treat it as that, but rather containing information one can use as a starting point for research, by verifying it with other sources. But name a source you wouldn't want to do that with. A single scientist's paper? Encyclopedia Britannica?
It's not really still gone. Sure, it's not on the same domain, but the Suprnova code is up under another host now. Same as for ISO News that was also "shut down" and possibly other sites too.
The RSS specifications are specific subsets of XML, and RSS readers have to know how to interpret that XML. When Microsoft starts to change the RSS spec, and if others decide to use Microsoft's features, then there's a good chance that users of non-Microsoft RSS client software will be effectively locked out of these feeds.
Hmm, so it was revealed Microsoft's extensions won't form a subset of RSS and still be understood by regular RSS readers?
See the above posts as for fractions. To me, it seems like a whole lot even if only considering those with enough money to spare. Often, they don't donate much at all.
I know I'd have at least $100-$200 to donate every month and still live a healthy life, but I'm too cheap to donate much at all besides in major disasters, and I'm sure there are plenty living the same way. The nice thing is that Bill Gates don't.
The funny thing is the seals like to find a nice new boat, the kind with an easy to reach swim platform and then have a sunbathing party on said boat. They proceed to trash the boat by shitting all over it, tear up the gear with mating/territory fights, and then finally they pack onto it like a bunch of high schoolers in a compact car on a Friday night, sink it with their shear weight.
I agree with this, Windows is trademarked in several countries to the point that Lindows haven't been allowed, and the reason behind this "Linspire" thing.
In the USA, Lindows could keep using its name after a drawn out case that finally ruled in their favor, and that Windows could just be used in the context of Microsoft Windows and not in general, so there was no "collision" with Lindows, but this didn't happen in Europe AFAIK.
But what is this in your article about then? (bolding mine)
Because WPF is largely written in managed code on the common language runtime, it never ran in kernel mode.
Looking at that part, are you sure they say nothing changed from XP -> Vista, and not nothing changed recently in Vista? Two different things there, the latter should still mean rather big news.
True, but Google isn't the lyric site here. However, MPA seemed to believe jailtime was worthy, so I suppose wishing to ban links on a search engine isn't too far fetched either.
Bah, typical Slashdot rhetoric... 1. The Economist happened to support an on-topic argument well on that patents have long been problematic. 2. The poster wish to look cool and intellectual, joining a new global Economist lovefest.
Of course, someone has to post reason #2 because that seem so much more likely to a paranoid and depressed geek. Yeah, yeah, in general people are stupid and we can assume they wish to boast and not post opinions on the actual subject at hand.:-p
That's said, it's great that Microsoft is starting to get serious about security.
Well, 2000 has been EAL4 certified as well for quite some time now, so when we're speaking of those certifications, I think it's only that they take some time to get, not that Microsoft has just recently started considering them.
I don't think Google will buy Opera just yet at least, especially considering Opera's denial in connection to this, but Opera has a much greater foothold than any Mozilla product in the mobile market, and it has earlier been rumored that Google is considering moving into the mobile business more. (actually, they already have with their free WiFi service, their online mobile-targeting services, etc)
Isn't it missing the point a bit saying that there should be many open source formats for the same thing, when the point of open formats is to make it easy for everyone to implement them?
How about Microsoft instead making it easier for everyone and joining forces with IBM, Adobe, Corel, and Sun among others behind OpenDocument, and trying suggest improvements to it to do whatever they so badly need to make their own format for?
The Wikipedia article is written flabbily, by a collection of authors, some experts, some not, some good writers, some terrible ones.
Yes, and terrible contributions gets edited over time as the article stabilizes.
The error per word rate in Britannica may be higher, but the error per fact rate is probably much more favourable to Britannica.
So you have no idea or basis for this claim?
Easy example - compare the writing in a mainstream newspaper to a well-written one with tight editorial policies, like the Financial Times or the Economist. Your average Sidney Morning Herald, Guardian or San Francisco Chroncile article is probably longer, but it says less.
I don't know about you, but from the articles I've seen on Wikipedia, they've been quite rich in information.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, can you be more specific what exactly you're talking about?
I'll just disregard that as a troll until then.
And flexibility incompatible...
;-)
I wonder if they even got the definition of piracy right...
There are only half as many keys to learn
Yes, what an earth shattering advantages, when it's "just" 53 keys to relearn.
Why didn't they keep the QWERTY order at least? Would it have made things too easy?
As for calling her a disgrace to humanity, she's probably done more for children in 3rd world countries than you have.
I wasn't calling anyone in particular that, I was calling the damn celebrity news list that's supposed to be about searches in general that. One would expect e.g. George W Bush to be somewhere in there, but no...
Google News - Top Searches in 2005 ... WORLDWIDE ALL CATEGORIES
:-(
1. Janet Jackson
2. Hurricane Katrina
3. tsunami
4. xbox 360
5. Brad Pitt
6. Michael Jackson
7. American Idol
8. Britney Spears
9. Angelina Jolie
10. Harry Potter
2, 3 is understandable but the rest...
What a fucking disgrace to humanity
I, for one, welcome our new overzealous Irefly overlord!
Isn't it a fact that electricity powers light bulbs?
;-)
Hey you there!
"... and God said, let there be light"!
It still isn't a problem -I say, let all viewpoints be recorded, atleast all well written and well sourced viewpoints. I think it is fairer to the reader if a point of view is out in the open rather than hidden behind claimed netrality.
But this is usually what happens on Wikipedia if you haven't noticed. Criticism is woven into the articles while debates about how it should be written and common grounds are met and established by both parts in the talk pages. If no common ground is found, a highly visible disclaimer is added on the article page and usually both sides are instead present on the page.
Take nuclear power for example. Are the "greens" silenced? Of course not! That's basically their section on the matter. Petroleum? Same thing. Slashdot? Well, lookie here. To go to more extremes.. How about advocacy of pedophilia? Self-criticism of Wikipedia itself even has its own article. I've actually found Wikipedia to be pretty good at presenting more than one side, probably exactly because it's editable by everyone.
Did you believe Wikipedia was a "reliable source of information" in the first place?
Seriously, it's so fluctuating, that no one should treat it as that, but rather containing information one can use as a starting point for research, by verifying it with other sources. But name a source you wouldn't want to do that with. A single scientist's paper? Encyclopedia Britannica?
Beagle Smash of Death? :-/
It's not really still gone. Sure, it's not on the same domain, but the Suprnova code is up under another host now. Same as for ISO News that was also "shut down" and possibly other sites too.
The RSS specifications are specific subsets of XML, and RSS readers have to know how to interpret that XML. When Microsoft starts to change the RSS spec, and if others decide to use Microsoft's features, then there's a good chance that users of non-Microsoft RSS client software will be effectively locked out of these feeds.
Hmm, so it was revealed Microsoft's extensions won't form a subset of RSS and still be understood by regular RSS readers?
See the above posts as for fractions. To me, it seems like a whole lot even if only considering those with enough money to spare. Often, they don't donate much at all.
I know I'd have at least $100-$200 to donate every month and still live a healthy life, but I'm too cheap to donate much at all besides in major disasters, and I'm sure there are plenty living the same way. The nice thing is that Bill Gates don't.
The funny thing is the seals like to find a nice new boat, the kind with an easy to reach swim platform and then have a sunbathing party on said boat. They proceed to trash the boat by shitting all over it, tear up the gear with mating/territory fights, and then finally they pack onto it like a bunch of high schoolers in a compact car on a Friday night, sink it with their shear weight.
Hey, all that sounds like a party with my pals!
I agree with this, Windows is trademarked in several countries to the point that Lindows haven't been allowed, and the reason behind this "Linspire" thing.
In the USA, Lindows could keep using its name after a drawn out case that finally ruled in their favor, and that Windows could just be used in the context of Microsoft Windows and not in general, so there was no "collision" with Lindows, but this didn't happen in Europe AFAIK.
It's not Blue-ray, since it was considered too generic to be trademarked.
Hmm... "Blue-rays" less generic than... Windows?
An album with the average quality of a large number of albums.
But what is this in your article about then? (bolding mine)
Because WPF is largely written in managed code on the common language runtime, it never ran in kernel mode.
Looking at that part, are you sure they say nothing changed from XP -> Vista, and not nothing changed recently in Vista?
Two different things there, the latter should still mean rather big news.
True, but Google isn't the lyric site here. However, MPA seemed to believe jailtime was worthy, so I suppose wishing to ban links on a search engine isn't too far fetched either.
Bah, typical Slashdot rhetoric...
:-p
1. The Economist happened to support an on-topic argument well on that patents have long been problematic.
2. The poster wish to look cool and intellectual, joining a new global Economist lovefest.
Of course, someone has to post reason #2 because that seem so much more likely to a paranoid and depressed geek. Yeah, yeah, in general people are stupid and we can assume they wish to boast and not post opinions on the actual subject at hand.
That's said, it's great that Microsoft is starting to get serious about security.
Well, 2000 has been EAL4 certified as well for quite some time now, so when we're speaking of those certifications, I think it's only that they take some time to get, not that Microsoft has just recently started considering them.
I can't begin to imagine why.
I don't think Google will buy Opera just yet at least, especially considering Opera's denial in connection to this, but Opera has a much greater foothold than any Mozilla product in the mobile market, and it has earlier been rumored that Google is considering moving into the mobile business more. (actually, they already have with their free WiFi service, their online mobile-targeting services, etc)
Isn't it missing the point a bit saying that there should be many open source formats for the same thing, when the point of open formats is to make it easy for everyone to implement them?
How about Microsoft instead making it easier for everyone and joining forces with IBM, Adobe, Corel, and Sun among others behind OpenDocument, and trying suggest improvements to it to do whatever they so badly need to make their own format for?
The Wikipedia article is written flabbily, by a collection of authors, some experts, some not, some good writers, some terrible ones.
Yes, and terrible contributions gets edited over time as the article stabilizes.
The error per word rate in Britannica may be higher, but the error per fact rate is probably much more favourable to Britannica.
So you have no idea or basis for this claim?
Easy example - compare the writing in a mainstream newspaper to a well-written one with tight editorial policies, like the Financial Times or the Economist. Your average Sidney Morning Herald, Guardian or San Francisco Chroncile article is probably longer, but it says less.
I don't know about you, but from the articles I've seen on Wikipedia, they've been quite rich in information.
I didn't believe it would fare that well
:P
should be that bad of course... Posting too late