Where do babies come from? How can I make this other person like me?
And why can't you explain flame without using a stupid video, in a manner that can be understood by those with crappy Internet connections and/or those with poor or non-existent eye sight? Another question, who the hell still uses frames in this day and age?
The whole concept is pretty damn cool though. Explaining science to kids. Perhaps explain evolution next. If you can make a small child understand, you've got some hope of making an adult creationist understand...
What I am interested in knowing, is did the children actually understand the explanation, or did they just pick the one that they understood the most of? Were they tested afterwards?
I'm running Firefox 12 (Ubuntu build). I don't shutdown my computer very often at all, I hibernate. I close my browser only slightly more often. My current session of Firefox has been running (including time in hibernation) for at least five days. I regularly open tens of tabs (like 50 or more) at a time. I often leave some of these open forever (until I restart the browser, after weeks).
Firefox never uses more than 500MB of RAM, and is currently using less than 250MB with 25 tabs open. Ooh, it went down, below 200MB. I can't remember a Firefox memory bug, ever.
I do have some extensions though, NoScript (though a number of websites, including Slashdot, are whitelisted), RequestPolicy, Cookie Monster, Brief (feed reader) and Status-4-Evar are the notable ones. I also don't have Flash installed (and Gnash rarely runs, 'cause of NoScript).
If they don't want to follow the simple rules, then they don't have to use the product. Sure there are other OSes, but few are as cheap, widespread, and as easy to use as the GNU/Linux and BusyBox/Linux combinations.
In fact, I would love for all the people who don't want to follow the GPL when it comes to Linux, BusyBox and the GNU tools to stop using them. Start using costly alternatives like QNX, or whatever. If the products are better, people might buy them. But the cost of the OS will make the cost of the hardware go up.
Meh. Ignorance is bliss. It depends on how you define your terms. The early anarchists (from ~1840s through to ~1940s) all described themselves as socialists. They were all on the left.
Anarchism, desiring an end to hierarchy, and freedom from oppression, etc. etc. is a type of socialism. It's not a type of state socialism, it's also not Marxian socialism. But, wanting workers to get the full value for their labour (an anarchist pillar) is a socialist pillar.
You can continue to define socialism narrowly as where the state controls everything, but by doing so you ignore thousands (more?) of people who define it much more broadly, and who happily called themselves (and call themselves) anarchists.
$100,000 to support MSIE? Bullshit. Unless they are supporting MSIE 6 or 5.5 there is no way it would cost that much to support MSIE. Even if they are supporting backwards and ancient browsers like those, it still shouldn't cost that much unless they are aiming for the website to look exactly the same on every possible browser.
Also, the whole thing is an ad. There have been a number of start-ups that have gone on about how they don't support MSIE. Some of these block anything with an MSIE user-agent (and then the site works fine in MSIE 9 with a different user-agent), and some use MSIE conditional comments (which won't work on MSIE 10). Both ways are, a bit, well crap. Unless you explicitly test in those browsers and find that things seriously break, you shouldn't not block them. Hell, who blocks Lynx (and similar)? Even though Lynx (et al.) don't support fancy CSS, images, JS or similar.
The sensible, and correct, way of doing things is to say, "we don't support MSIE (or any other browser explicitly), but because we build to the standards, any standards compliant browser should work well". And also make your site degrade gracefully (that is, continue to present content even to inferior or older browsers, or to browsers without JS, and/or without images, and/or without CSS).
So, basically, this whole thing is a stunt by the start-up in question, and they deserve no press because of it.
Let's see. I'm a student. I am studying three different subjects. At any time I will have three lots of readings, and three assignments on the go. Each assignment may use up to 20-30 (or even more) tabs. (I'll do a search, open all the articles that look interesting or relevant, and go through them one at a time. Oh, and my Internet connection is sometimes (even often) bad. Comes from living in a developing country I guess.) Each subject might have ten or twenty articles to read every week. Plus my Blackboard discussion tabs, email, and other uni administration crap (I have to check every week at least), say another five to ten. So, if I've loaded all those, 20*3 + 10*3 +5 = 95. OK, then I have my personal browsing, just now I have 9 Slashdot tabs open (it was more, but as I read them, I close them). Plus various articles I open to read later (as I read Slashdot, middle click, continue reading).
So, I will often easily have 100 tabs (or more) open. And, I don't close the browser (I hibernate), so they stay open for a good long time. (I've never had a problem with Firefox memory leaks through - running Ubuntu.) OK, so I 'cheat' a little and use at least two different profiles (different add--ons, Zotero and another for study, Brief RSS reader, web dev stuff for other profile, etc.).
There you go, at least in my case, you no longer need to wonder.
Slashdot Mirror
Where do babies come from?
How can I make this other person like me?
And why can't you explain flame without using a stupid video, in a manner that can be understood by those with crappy Internet connections and/or those with poor or non-existent eye sight? Another question, who the hell still uses frames in this day and age?
The whole concept is pretty damn cool though. Explaining science to kids. Perhaps explain evolution next. If you can make a small child understand, you've got some hope of making an adult creationist understand...
What I am interested in knowing, is did the children actually understand the explanation, or did they just pick the one that they understood the most of? Were they tested afterwards?
I'm running Firefox 12 (Ubuntu build). I don't shutdown my computer very often at all, I hibernate. I close my browser only slightly more often. My current session of Firefox has been running (including time in hibernation) for at least five days. I regularly open tens of tabs (like 50 or more) at a time. I often leave some of these open forever (until I restart the browser, after weeks).
Firefox never uses more than 500MB of RAM, and is currently using less than 250MB with 25 tabs open. Ooh, it went down, below 200MB. I can't remember a Firefox memory bug, ever.
I do have some extensions though, NoScript (though a number of websites, including Slashdot, are whitelisted), RequestPolicy, Cookie Monster, Brief (feed reader) and Status-4-Evar are the notable ones. I also don't have Flash installed (and Gnash rarely runs, 'cause of NoScript).
Maybe you should switch off MS Windows?
Anecdote power!
That'd be RequestPolicy actually. NoScript doesn't stop images from external domains being loaded (the 'traditional' way of tracking across the web).
If they don't want to follow the simple rules, then they don't have to use the product. Sure there are other OSes, but few are as cheap, widespread, and as easy to use as the GNU/Linux and BusyBox/Linux combinations.
In fact, I would love for all the people who don't want to follow the GPL when it comes to Linux, BusyBox and the GNU tools to stop using them. Start using costly alternatives like QNX, or whatever. If the products are better, people might buy them. But the cost of the OS will make the cost of the hardware go up.
Meh. Ignorance is bliss. It depends on how you define your terms.
The early anarchists (from ~1840s through to ~1940s) all described themselves as socialists. They were all on the left.
Anarchism, desiring an end to hierarchy, and freedom from oppression, etc. etc. is a type of socialism. It's not a type of state socialism, it's also not Marxian socialism. But, wanting workers to get the full value for their labour (an anarchist pillar) is a socialist pillar.
You can continue to define socialism narrowly as where the state controls everything, but by doing so you ignore thousands (more?) of people who define it much more broadly, and who happily called themselves (and call themselves) anarchists.
For reference I'll point you to An Anarchist FAQ, a collaborative effort of anarchists today. Specifically, A.1.3 Why is anarchism also called libertarian socialism? and the next section A.1.4 Are anarchists socialists?". The authors of the FAQ use historical writings from a variety of anarchists to support their claim (and my claim) that anarchism is a type of socialism. (You may also be interested in Section H - Why do anarchists oppose state socialism?.)
$100,000 to support MSIE? Bullshit. Unless they are supporting MSIE 6 or 5.5 there is no way it would cost that much to support MSIE. Even if they are supporting backwards and ancient browsers like those, it still shouldn't cost that much unless they are aiming for the website to look exactly the same on every possible browser.
Also, the whole thing is an ad. There have been a number of start-ups that have gone on about how they don't support MSIE. Some of these block anything with an MSIE user-agent (and then the site works fine in MSIE 9 with a different user-agent), and some use MSIE conditional comments (which won't work on MSIE 10). Both ways are, a bit, well crap. Unless you explicitly test in those browsers and find that things seriously break, you shouldn't not block them. Hell, who blocks Lynx (and similar)? Even though Lynx (et al.) don't support fancy CSS, images, JS or similar.
The sensible, and correct, way of doing things is to say, "we don't support MSIE (or any other browser explicitly), but because we build to the standards, any standards compliant browser should work well". And also make your site degrade gracefully (that is, continue to present content even to inferior or older browsers, or to browsers without JS, and/or without images, and/or without CSS).
So, basically, this whole thing is a stunt by the start-up in question, and they deserve no press because of it.
Lisp. If you are runnng stuff on your machine for your purposes, run Lisp.
If you want a job, maybe look at Java or C or something. But if you want fun, try Lisp. (Or Python.)
(Disclaimer: I don't actually know Lisp, but I want to learn.)
Let's see. I'm a student. I am studying three different subjects. At any time I will have three lots of readings, and three assignments on the go. Each assignment may use up to 20-30 (or even more) tabs. (I'll do a search, open all the articles that look interesting or relevant, and go through them one at a time. Oh, and my Internet connection is sometimes (even often) bad. Comes from living in a developing country I guess.) Each subject might have ten or twenty articles to read every week. Plus my Blackboard discussion tabs, email, and other uni administration crap (I have to check every week at least), say another five to ten.
So, if I've loaded all those, 20*3 + 10*3 +5 = 95. OK, then I have my personal browsing, just now I have 9 Slashdot tabs open (it was more, but as I read them, I close them). Plus various articles I open to read later (as I read Slashdot, middle click, continue reading).
So, I will often easily have 100 tabs (or more) open. And, I don't close the browser (I hibernate), so they stay open for a good long time. (I've never had a problem with Firefox memory leaks through - running Ubuntu.) OK, so I 'cheat' a little and use at least two different profiles (different add--ons, Zotero and another for study, Brief RSS reader, web dev stuff for other profile, etc.).
There you go, at least in my case, you no longer need to wonder.