Keep in mind a couple of things:.NET is a large platform. There are tonnes of ways to use it. You can build compiled binaries, rich ActiveX enhanced web applications for intranets, traditional websites, or AJAX enhanced web applications, to name a few.
You wouldn't necessarily know you are visiting a.NET web application.
At least with.NET, it's still dependant on IE being used as the browser. (When we're talking easy porting of a windows.NET app to a web app)
Ajax is completely different. It is a loose framework of standards available in the most widely used browsers.
That is why we're actually seeing complex web applications now, because it is viable to deploy to your customer base without pissing off a good chunk of them.
Get off the net though and there have been rich web applications built for IE on intranets for a long long time now. They just aren't viable for a publicly accessible website.
We are supposed to be above all other forms of life on this earth. We are supposed to be able to control our baser instincts and not behave as animals do. That's the point. We are at the stage in evolution where the next step is spiritual, not physical. We should not degrade ourselves by giving in and returning back to animalistic behavior.
I think my mom threw out my instruction book when I was born, could you please send me your copy so I can finally know exactly what I am _supposed_ to do with my life?
I'd suggest a conscious balance as opposed to an ignorant drive ahead. Is it really that hard to pay attention to the consequences of our actions while still moving forward?
Man, you are the king of restating the article summary aren't you?
For once could you at least attempt to impart an original thought rather than regurgitation the article? Sheesh, this one is just regurgitating the article _summary_.
I wasn't contradicting the fact that it is interesting to be able to look at birds in a manner closer to how they see themselves.
Of course that is not pointless.
The article however leads one to believe that this will allow them to properly distinguish relations between species, which may or may not be true. Regardless, it is not a known way to do this, and there is another way that we _know_ can do this.
As another poster mentioned, this could be used to back up DNA findings.
Now that I've argued again what the article had to say, have you anything of your own to add?
I'm sure there are many many ways we could look at different species. Through a sepia tone filter we could surmize that penguins are siblings of seagulls. We could speculate for ever.
While this is interesting, it really doesn't appear to me to make sense to try to determine lineage and ancestry via visual means. I'm sure there is a lot of info we can learn in other areas using this technique.
However, why use this for lineage/ancestry when we have DNA that, rather than speculate about the pretty colors we can't really see, we can actually make some scientific qualifications about.
I'm thinking the article may be extracting more from this technique than it is actually intended to cover.
I believe you are confusing NHL rules with international rules.
NHL rules are not Canadian rules. We play both NHL and international hockey up here.
We all know that NHL hockey sucks. It's designed to sell, which according to the money behind it apparently means more time hitting/fighting, less time playing hockey.
Canadian thug shit, hardly. I'll show you some Canadian thug shit;)
Best Canadian hockey is World Juniors and Olympic hockey, without a doubt.
Ahh, I see, pose the impossible question. Good argument.
Your choice was still available a week ago though, whether you can see the future or not.
Read the fine print in the contract. Don't like some clause? Don't sign. How hard is that?
OK, then, assume it all looked good to you. Or at least that you saw that Telus reserved the right to do this, and either decided that was ok, or decided you didn't think they'd actually do anything with that clause. So cancel your service now. How hard was that?
The contracts are monitored and approved by the CRTC, essentially. If an illegal contract is brough to their attention, they'll fine the offending company. It never goes to court.
So nobody can vote with their wallet because they don't understand anything.
And they can never understand anything because the corporations won't let them in on their little secrets.
Despite the huge number of issues with those 2 statements, do you not see the big problem?
Take control of your actions. Take control of your life. Take control of your money.
If you really have this level of woe-is-me attitude, it doesn't much matter what any given company does, you're going to be taken to the cleaners.
I'm _so_ sick of this attitude: Person A: This sucks. Person B: So? Change it. Person A: I can't change it, because this other thing sucks. Person B: I'm sorry, I can't help you out. I have only one set of balls and they're currently in use.
Sure, there are forms and contracts. But they are so tightly regulated that they cannot do much with them. And trying to 'slip' some clause in there that is illegal doesn't work up here. The CRTC would be all over them like flies on shit and cause one HELL of a lot more damage to the telco than one single pissed off user suing them would.
Up here, we set up organizations as watchdogs to keep certain industries on a leash rather than leaving it all to the courts. We then trust those organizations we set up to do the work we put them there to do.
Good for our people. Telcos don't like it, but funnily enough they're still rolling in the dough, and we've got tonnes of competition now. So, the people are happy, the courts are quiet, and the companies are making money. What else could you ask for?
You have the wrong view about Canada and our system of law.
Again, our telcos are very highly regulated. Sure, they can put crap in a contract, but if it is illegal, the cust will never have to take it to court.
We don't subscribe to the 'Fuck You unless you're going to sue' process. The telcos don't like it, but they are on a _very_ short leash. They are on that short leash because that is where we, the citizens of Canada, want them to be.
Then get grassroots man. Go inform the marketplace then.
Look, nothing has changed. This is the way we used to get things done and invoke change. Business cannot exist without customers.
What has changed though is our level of complacency. Even you would rather run your mouth off in a way that will not help inform anyone that could use informing, than to try to help make a difference.
We're so passionate about all of these things now, and yet we do so very little about it. Unless we count bitching and moaning of course.
There's a concept in American law that when someone feels they have been wronged, they can spend as much money as they feel like or can afford at a chance to prove how much they have been wronged and to recoup an inflationary amount for the wrong, their time and expenses.
However, for most people that don't have 5 figures plus of disposable cash, we'd rather the simple option of voting with our wallets.
Actually, your last statement is not exactly correct.
The Canadian government has a mandate to make broadband available to all Canadians. The ISP's have been slowly being forced to expand into areas they wouldn't normally. (IE: Low population centres)
At least in Ontario, almost every small town has a couple of broadband choices. I'm in a town of 1400 people, and I have 4 choices. 2 cable, 2 dsl.
They basically say: Hey, you want to expand your business in this are? OK, well you're going to have to cover this area too. Don't like it? No expansion for you.
Such a contract is illegal in Canada. Our telcos are very highly regulated, and that would step well outside of the bounds. The only way a telco can get a cust to sign an extended service contract is when it is tied to the deferred payment of a physical device.
That's why they focus sales on packages. Cell service + phone purchase, Satellite service/Cable + PVR, Internet + modem...etc etc.
Your statements do nothing to change the fact that you have choices.
At the very least, you can always start your own company.
You are never forced to take a job.
Take the power into your hands, or don't. Just remember it's your choice.
And, btw, you are so far off base about my history it's not even funny. I'm quite successful at finding jobs, and at standing up for myself. Actually, I've found that standing up against bs clauses in employment contracts usually makes you even more desirable to the company in question. It says a lot about a potential hire.
Everything is negotiable. If you believe otherwise, you have lost the most important negotiation of your entire life.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever been to dell.com?
.NET is a large platform. There are tonnes of ways to use it. You can build compiled binaries, rich ActiveX enhanced web applications for intranets, traditional websites, or AJAX enhanced web applications, to name a few.
.NET web application.
There are many others.
Keep in mind a couple of things:
You wouldn't necessarily know you are visiting a
Actually, I should also add that AJAX and .NET are not mutually exclusive at all.
I'm currently building a redesign of a traditional asp site using asp.net. All of the advanced client functionality is AJAX.
At least with .NET, it's still dependant on IE being used as the browser. (When we're talking easy porting of a windows .NET app to a web app)
Ajax is completely different. It is a loose framework of standards available in the most widely used browsers.
That is why we're actually seeing complex web applications now, because it is viable to deploy to your customer base without pissing off a good chunk of them.
Get off the net though and there have been rich web applications built for IE on intranets for a long long time now. They just aren't viable for a publicly accessible website.
I think my mom threw out my instruction book when I was born, could you please send me your copy so I can finally know exactly what I am _supposed_ to do with my life?
Thanks.
I'd suggest a conscious balance as opposed to an ignorant drive ahead. Is it really that hard to pay attention to the consequences of our actions while still moving forward?
...And therein lies the kicker.
Once we know for sure...it'll be too late.
So best to ignore the _possible_ problem and remain boldly optimistic about our chances.
Man, you are the king of restating the article summary aren't you?
For once could you at least attempt to impart an original thought rather than regurgitation the article? Sheesh, this one is just regurgitating the article _summary_.
Wow, you really killed that one ;)
How is that a troll?
Really now, any moderator care to explain that?
There is actually a valid point to that statement, whether correct or not.
I wasn't contradicting the fact that it is interesting to be able to look at birds in a manner closer to how they see themselves.
Of course that is not pointless.
The article however leads one to believe that this will allow them to properly distinguish relations between species, which may or may not be true. Regardless, it is not a known way to do this, and there is another way that we _know_ can do this.
As another poster mentioned, this could be used to back up DNA findings.
Now that I've argued again what the article had to say, have you anything of your own to add?
I'm sure there are many many ways we could look at different species. Through a sepia tone filter we could surmize that penguins are siblings of seagulls. We could speculate for ever.
While this is interesting, it really doesn't appear to me to make sense to try to determine lineage and ancestry via visual means. I'm sure there is a lot of info we can learn in other areas using this technique.
However, why use this for lineage/ancestry when we have DNA that, rather than speculate about the pretty colors we can't really see, we can actually make some scientific qualifications about.
I'm thinking the article may be extracting more from this technique than it is actually intended to cover.
I believe you are confusing NHL rules with international rules.
;)
NHL rules are not Canadian rules. We play both NHL and international hockey up here.
We all know that NHL hockey sucks. It's designed to sell, which according to the money behind it apparently means more time hitting/fighting, less time playing hockey.
Canadian thug shit, hardly. I'll show you some Canadian thug shit
Best Canadian hockey is World Juniors and Olympic hockey, without a doubt.
Ahh, I see, pose the impossible question. Good argument.
Your choice was still available a week ago though, whether you can see the future or not.
Read the fine print in the contract. Don't like some clause? Don't sign. How hard is that?
OK, then, assume it all looked good to you. Or at least that you saw that Telus reserved the right to do this, and either decided that was ok, or decided you didn't think they'd actually do anything with that clause. So cancel your service now. How hard was that?
Again, we don't work that way up here.
The contracts are monitored and approved by the CRTC, essentially. If an illegal contract is brough to their attention, they'll fine the offending company. It never goes to court.
That statement is so small minded that I can not dignify it with a response.
Wow, that's really sad.
So nobody can vote with their wallet because they don't understand anything.
And they can never understand anything because the corporations won't let them in on their little secrets.
Despite the huge number of issues with those 2 statements, do you not see the big problem?
Take control of your actions.
Take control of your life.
Take control of your money.
If you really have this level of woe-is-me attitude, it doesn't much matter what any given company does, you're going to be taken to the cleaners.
I'm _so_ sick of this attitude:
Person A: This sucks.
Person B: So? Change it.
Person A: I can't change it, because this other thing sucks.
Person B: I'm sorry, I can't help you out. I have only one set of balls and they're currently in use.
Sure, there are forms and contracts. But they are so tightly regulated that they cannot do much with them. And trying to 'slip' some clause in there that is illegal doesn't work up here. The CRTC would be all over them like flies on shit and cause one HELL of a lot more damage to the telco than one single pissed off user suing them would.
Up here, we set up organizations as watchdogs to keep certain industries on a leash rather than leaving it all to the courts. We then trust those organizations we set up to do the work we put them there to do.
Good for our people. Telcos don't like it, but funnily enough they're still rolling in the dough, and we've got tonnes of competition now. So, the people are happy, the courts are quiet, and the companies are making money. What else could you ask for?
You have the wrong view about Canada and our system of law.
Again, our telcos are very highly regulated. Sure, they can put crap in a contract, but if it is illegal, the cust will never have to take it to court.
We don't subscribe to the 'Fuck You unless you're going to sue' process. The telcos don't like it, but they are on a _very_ short leash. They are on that short leash because that is where we, the citizens of Canada, want them to be.
Then get grassroots man. Go inform the marketplace then.
Look, nothing has changed. This is the way we used to get things done and invoke change. Business cannot exist without customers.
What has changed though is our level of complacency.
Even you would rather run your mouth off in a way that will not help inform anyone that could use informing, than to try to help make a difference.
We're so passionate about all of these things now, and yet we do so very little about it. Unless we count bitching and moaning of course.
There's a concept in American law that when someone feels they have been wronged, they can spend as much money as they feel like or can afford at a chance to prove how much they have been wronged and to recoup an inflationary amount for the wrong, their time and expenses.
However, for most people that don't have 5 figures plus of disposable cash, we'd rather the simple option of voting with our wallets.
Actually, your last statement is not exactly correct.
The Canadian government has a mandate to make broadband available to all Canadians. The ISP's have been slowly being forced to expand into areas they wouldn't normally. (IE: Low population centres)
At least in Ontario, almost every small town has a couple of broadband choices. I'm in a town of 1400 people, and I have 4 choices. 2 cable, 2 dsl.
They basically say: Hey, you want to expand your business in this are? OK, well you're going to have to cover this area too. Don't like it? No expansion for you.
Such a contract is illegal in Canada. Our telcos are very highly regulated, and that would step well outside of the bounds. The only way a telco can get a cust to sign an extended service contract is when it is tied to the deferred payment of a physical device.
That's why they focus sales on packages. Cell service + phone purchase, Satellite service/Cable + PVR, Internet + modem...etc etc.
There are now 3 suits involved. That is but one of them, and that particular one is between MS and Lee exclusively.
As well, MS has sued Google, and now Google has counter-sued.
This discussion is only meaningful if we understand the correct context. The contract itself is only disputable in the suit between MS and Lee.
I've discussed my views on each of these distinct suits elsewhere in this thread.
You're talking about the wrong lawsuit.
I'm talking about the MS filed suit against Google.
This is not a minor fact, rather it is of greatest importance to understand the differences between the suits that have been filed.
Your statements do nothing to change the fact that you have choices.
At the very least, you can always start your own company.
You are never forced to take a job.
Take the power into your hands, or don't. Just remember it's your choice.
And, btw, you are so far off base about my history it's not even funny. I'm quite successful at finding jobs, and at standing up for myself. Actually, I've found that standing up against bs clauses in employment contracts usually makes you even more desirable to the company in question. It says a lot about a potential hire.
Everything is negotiable. If you believe otherwise, you have lost the most important negotiation of your entire life.