Maybe. I would say that taking any drugs including alcohol increases ones chances to move on to more dangerous drugs. It always boggled my mind just trying to figure out how anybody decides, "Hey I think I will try Heroin. Yea that sounds like fun." Seems to me since when your under the influence of any drug your judgment is impaired. Of course Heroin is far from pot. And I am not even saying that pot use does lead to using harder drugs anymore than alcohol use leads to smoking pot. I am just saying that the argument was trite and meaningless and devoid of value in this context. Heck even tobacco seems to lead to poor judgment. There was a guy down here that died in a hurricane because he went out in the store to smoke. Of course it could also be that smoking is result of and not the cause of bad judgment.
And at not time have I ever said in any of my posts that porn should be illegal. Sexual images of children yes. Exposing minors to porn probably. If your an adult then you can be as sleazy as you want to be for all I care. Just because something is immoral, unhealthy, or stupid doesn't mean it has to be illegal. Somethings are so immoral that we as a society have decided that they are illegal. The is way our society works. But I for one sure don't live my life by the rule that if I am not a criminal I am moral. For some reason people on Slashdot think that if you feel that something is immoral that you thing is should be illegal. Sorry to disappoint but I am not one of them. Of course I would like to see a law banning all advertising of tabaco and alcohol including signage in areas where minors are allowed but for some reason the majority of people don't agree with me so I have to live with that.
Your right that the type and amount do have an effect. I doubt that just looking at the SI Swimsuit edition causes any real harm. However in this context we are talking about porn involving children or the images of children. What gets me is how people jump to the extremes. I do not think porn is good. Do I think Playboy or even Hustler should be banned? Nope not at all. Lots of things I don't like are completely legal and should people. We can not have laws that force people to be good. Not even my ideal of being good. However sexual images of children I feel crosses the line in to highly dangerous. I don't drink and don't think it is a good choice but I don't think it should be illegal. I don't smoke and think it is a really bad life choice but I don't think it should be illegal as long as I don't have to breath it. I don't indulge in porn but I don't think all of it should be illegal. But when it comes to sexual images of children and or the exposure of minors to porn then it crosses the line from freedom of choice into immoral enough to be illegal. But that is my opinion. In a democratic society if enough people agree with me and I think they do then it is illegal. That is what it comes down too.
Hello Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle. 95% of people lung cancer smoked 100% drank milk. So milk and not smoking causes lung cancer.
Please that is the old line that a bunch of hippies came up with when trying to say pot didn't doesn't lead to other drugs.
Your math and logic are just as bad as anyone you are trying to criticize. In my original post I did make a statment leaving open that it may not have to be a cause. However don't you think that throwing away the very idea that the easy availability of constant sexual stimulation might have an effect on sexual behavior as just a bit silly?
"Correlation != Causation. " Gee I think I said that. "Now that leaves open the question is do child molesters like child porn or does porn encourage it."
There does seem to be a link between viewing child porn and abusing children. Now that leaves open the question is do child molesters like child porn or does porn encourage it. There have been many studies that show that all pron can have a very bad effect. Of course you will have any number of people on Slashdot jump up and say that they look at porn and haven't committed any sex crimes. But then I also know people that are 80 and smoked a pack of cigs a day since they where 12 and I know a few people that survived combat without a scratch. I doubt that anybody would say those where both harmless.
The Internet is like New York City. You can find anything you want there. From great art and science to the worst filth. The same basic rule should apply. Don't let your kids run around unattended.
Well this was in the post I was replying to. "You have to be a geek and download, compile, install, and hope you are geek enough to get it right before the sun goes down."
I went to see it with my girlfriend. I had a brand new C64 at home and had just finished my first programing class and was getting ready to start college. We enjoyed the movie but my girl friend got miffed when the Alley Sheenie's character didn't know what MIRVs where. She also said "Yea right they are going to nuke us in the next few hours and we are going to waste our last few hours trying to swim to the mainland!" It was a good summer.
Well I must complement your company for making the effort to break the browser lock in that so many companies have gotten themselves into. I hope they long ago banned VB for the same reason.
Your are correct on the Internet it is dumb to toss away Firefox users. I had that same argument in my company when Firefox was just at 5% of the market. On Intranets it is often acceptable to require IE. I do think it is short sighted but I can understand why it has happened. It would never be acceptable to require Firefox for a commercial product. For internal development I could see it but for something you sell never. As I said like it or not everybody has to work with the mess that is IE.
Humm. I wonder. If you take all the Tivos, WAPs, Cellphones, and other embedded devices that come with Linux install on them you might actually beat Vista "Sales" You might also beat Vista sales if you only count retail boxes of Vista vs sales of Linux:)
BTW https://shipit.ubuntu.com/ They will ship you a Linux CD for free. So no download, no compile, and if you really don't want to you don't even have to install it to use it. It will work as a live-CD. Should be as easy to install as Vista if not more so.
You need to look at your sample. Are you looking at the average work pc or people's home pc? Or PC's at a University. Then how many of them Don't have IE? If they have Windows they have IE. Yes Firefox is free but rolling it out to hundreds of PCs in a company isn't. Then you have the problem of legacy systems. Do you already have a browser based system that requires IE? If so are you going to make people go back and forth? I do think IE is under 50% in Germany but in the EU I am pretty sure it is still well over 50%. World wide it is without a doubt over 50%.
Why different philosophy than the way I work. I even try and stay a way from flash because my first rule is. People shouldn't have to download or install anything to view my website. Heck I avoid Flash for that reason except for where it is the best or only solution. Unless your customer base is extremely computer literate or you have more traffic and business than you need I can not see the logic of throwing away users. I always suggest people download Firefox but I make sure IE works as well as Opera, Firefox, and Safari.
You don't get it. You are correct that IE 5,6, and 7 are different but that doesn't matter. If it works in IE 5 it will probably work in IE 6. IE 7 was a little harder to deal with which is why a lot of companies held off on IE 7. But NONE of that matters. You must support the terrible mess that is IE. There really isn't a choice for most web developers. Heck I wish that we could all just stick with W3C code but that isn't an option in this world. Firefox's market share is around 30% in Europe. But here is the key question. What market share does windows have? How many Firefox users also have IE so they can use it when they have no other choice? I love Firefox. It is a better browser than IE. It is easier to code for than IE. BUT the sad truth is that just doesn't matter.
Yes Firefox is easier to develop for than IE but. With IE market share you MUST develop for IE. For any website I feel that IE and Firefox are mandatory. Safari is getting to be mandatory but thankful it is well behaved from what I have seen.
When developing for browser apps that run on an Intranet Firefox is less important. You will not loose many sales saying it only works on IE. You will loose a lot more more if you say it doesn't work on IE.
So in that case getting your application to work on Firefox is extra work. It really doesn't matter now easy that extra work is.
Of course if you want to develop for that market you now have a key feature you can use to get sales.
Simple answer. IE has a market share of over 50%. If you develop for the web you MUST develop for IE. It doesn't matter that Firefox is easier to develop for because it is still extra work. If you are going sell anything that works on a web browser IE support is mandatory. I along with a lot of other people feel that Firefox is also mandatory for anything you put on the Internet. If you are building a site you don't want lock out big percentage of potental users. I do tend to write for Firefox and then port to IE but IE support is without a doubt mandatory.
Microsoft has it right. Developers, Developers, Developers! People don't use an OS they use applications. I love Linux but I have to keep a Windows for work and for FSX.
If the programs you use don't run on an OS that OS is useless to you.
Well I did say to name just a few. The thing is that for most part that was a long time ago. The employees of the companies are different people, the stock holders are different people, and there does have to a time when forgiveness becomes justice.
Well since I don't like Obama for his plan to shut down a big part of the manned space program and many other things I can not get too upset about what the RNC says or doesn't about him. Frankly I don't pay too much attention to politics at all. My wife has a degree in PolySci and a life long demarcate so what news I get is from her when I listen:)
That is pretty unlikely. Most systems use sound. A sunken ship is pretty dang quite. The other system that I can think of is MAD and with all the ships on the bottom of the North Atlantic I doubt that they would know the Titanic from a liberty ship from a MAD contact. I find it most interesting that they found the Titanic using the experence they gained from imaging the Threaser and Scorpion. I have to wonder why looking at our own subs was such a big secret? Now if they took a look at that Mike or Yankee that sunk then it would be a big deal. Oh and it is the Royal Navy and not the English. The folks from Scotland, Wales, and some from Northern Ireland don't really like being left out like that.
Has no web site ever been shutdown for no good reason? No and anyone that thinks so is just dumb. I support the EFF efforts but there is a difference between being informative and inflammatory. This whole thread puts out a lot more heat than light.
Slashdot Mirror
But pornography was.
Maybe.
I would say that taking any drugs including alcohol increases ones chances to move on to more dangerous drugs.
It always boggled my mind just trying to figure out how anybody decides, "Hey I think I will try Heroin. Yea that sounds like fun." Seems to me since when your under the influence of any drug your judgment is impaired.
Of course Heroin is far from pot. And I am not even saying that pot use does lead to using harder drugs anymore than alcohol use leads to smoking pot. I am just saying that the argument was trite and meaningless and devoid of value in this context.
Heck even tobacco seems to lead to poor judgment. There was a guy down here that died in a hurricane because he went out in the store to smoke. Of course it could also be that smoking is result of and not the cause of bad judgment.
Where is the -1 Creepy mod when you need it.
And at not time have I ever said in any of my posts that porn should be illegal.
Sexual images of children yes.
Exposing minors to porn probably.
If your an adult then you can be as sleazy as you want to be for all I care.
Just because something is immoral, unhealthy, or stupid doesn't mean it has to be illegal.
Somethings are so immoral that we as a society have decided that they are illegal. The is way our society works.
But I for one sure don't live my life by the rule that if I am not a criminal I am moral.
For some reason people on Slashdot think that if you feel that something is immoral that you thing is should be illegal.
Sorry to disappoint but I am not one of them.
Of course I would like to see a law banning all advertising of tabaco and alcohol including signage in areas where minors are allowed but for some reason the majority of people don't agree with me so I have to live with that.
Your right that the type and amount do have an effect.
I doubt that just looking at the SI Swimsuit edition causes any real harm. However in this context we are talking about porn involving children or the images of children.
What gets me is how people jump to the extremes. I do not think porn is good. Do I think Playboy or even Hustler should be banned?
Nope not at all. Lots of things I don't like are completely legal and should people. We can not have laws that force people to be good. Not even my ideal of being good.
However sexual images of children I feel crosses the line in to highly dangerous.
I don't drink and don't think it is a good choice but I don't think it should be illegal.
I don't smoke and think it is a really bad life choice but I don't think it should be illegal as long as I don't have to breath it.
I don't indulge in porn but I don't think all of it should be illegal.
But when it comes to sexual images of children and or the exposure of minors to porn then it crosses the line from freedom of choice into immoral enough to be illegal.
But that is my opinion. In a democratic society if enough people agree with me and I think they do then it is illegal.
That is what it comes down too.
Hello Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle.
95% of people lung cancer smoked 100% drank milk. So milk and not smoking causes lung cancer.
Please that is the old line that a bunch of hippies came up with when trying to say pot didn't doesn't lead to other drugs.
Your math and logic are just as bad as anyone you are trying to criticize.
In my original post I did make a statment leaving open that it may not have to be a cause. However don't you think that throwing away the very idea that the easy availability of constant sexual stimulation might have an effect on sexual behavior as just a bit silly?
"Correlation != Causation. "
Gee I think I said that.
"Now that leaves open the question is do child molesters like child porn or does porn encourage it."
I would say that the vast majority of people will disagree and the never harmed part of that statment.
There does seem to be a link between viewing child porn and abusing children. Now that leaves open the question is do child molesters like child porn or does porn encourage it.
There have been many studies that show that all pron can have a very bad effect. Of course you will have any number of people on Slashdot jump up and say that they look at porn and haven't committed any sex crimes.
But then I also know people that are 80 and smoked a pack of cigs a day since they where 12 and I know a few people that survived combat without a scratch.
I doubt that anybody would say those where both harmless.
The Internet is like New York City. You can find anything you want there. From great art and science to the worst filth.
The same basic rule should apply. Don't let your kids run around unattended.
Well this was in the post I was replying to.
"You have to be a geek and download, compile, install, and hope you are geek enough to get it right before the sun goes down."
So Shipit was a great way to dose that flame.
I went to see it with my girlfriend. I had a brand new C64 at home and had just finished my first programing class and was getting ready to start college.
We enjoyed the movie but my girl friend got miffed when the Alley Sheenie's character didn't know what MIRVs where. She also said "Yea right they are going to nuke us in the next few hours and we are going to waste our last few hours trying to swim to the mainland!"
It was a good summer.
Well I must complement your company for making the effort to break the browser lock in that so many companies have gotten themselves into.
I hope they long ago banned VB for the same reason.
Your are correct on the Internet it is dumb to toss away Firefox users. I had that same argument in my company when Firefox was just at 5% of the market.
On Intranets it is often acceptable to require IE. I do think it is short sighted but I can understand why it has happened. It would never be acceptable to require Firefox for a commercial product. For internal development I could see it but for something you sell never. As I said like it or not everybody has to work with the mess that is IE.
"No joke... ME is universally known as the worst of the Windows versions of all time (even worse than Vista)."
I don't know about that. ME was a stinker but people where not spending $200 to buy Win98SE to install over it.
In all me years I have never seen an OS get level of resistance that Vista is.
I think Vista is a waste but the shear hate that normal people are showing for it is shocking too me.
Humm. I wonder. If you take all the Tivos, WAPs, Cellphones, and other embedded devices that come with Linux install on them you might actually beat Vista "Sales" :)
You might also beat Vista sales if you only count retail boxes of Vista vs sales of Linux
BTW
https://shipit.ubuntu.com/
They will ship you a Linux CD for free.
So no download, no compile, and if you really don't want to you don't even have to install it to use it. It will work as a live-CD.
Should be as easy to install as Vista if not more so.
You need to look at your sample.
Are you looking at the average work pc or people's home pc?
Or PC's at a University.
Then how many of them Don't have IE? If they have Windows they have IE.
Yes Firefox is free but rolling it out to hundreds of PCs in a company isn't. Then you have the problem of legacy systems. Do you already have a browser based system that requires IE? If so are you going to make people go back and forth?
I do think IE is under 50% in Germany but in the EU I am pretty sure it is still well over 50%. World wide it is without a doubt over 50%.
Why different philosophy than the way I work.
I even try and stay a way from flash because my first rule is.
People shouldn't have to download or install anything to view my website.
Heck I avoid Flash for that reason except for where it is the best or only solution.
Unless your customer base is extremely computer literate or you have more traffic and business than you need I can not see the logic of throwing away users. I always suggest people download Firefox but I make sure IE works as well as Opera, Firefox, and Safari.
You don't get it.
You are correct that IE 5,6, and 7 are different but that doesn't matter.
If it works in IE 5 it will probably work in IE 6. IE 7 was a little harder to deal with which is why a lot of companies held off on IE 7. But NONE of that matters. You must support the terrible mess that is IE. There really isn't a choice for most web developers. Heck I wish that we could all just stick with W3C code but that isn't an option in this world.
Firefox's market share is around 30% in Europe. But here is the key question. What market share does windows have? How many Firefox users also have IE so they can use it when they have no other choice?
I love Firefox. It is a better browser than IE. It is easier to code for than IE.
BUT the sad truth is that just doesn't matter.
Yes Firefox is easier to develop for than IE but.
With IE market share you MUST develop for IE.
For any website I feel that IE and Firefox are mandatory. Safari is getting to be mandatory but thankful it is well behaved from what I have seen.
When developing for browser apps that run on an Intranet Firefox is less important. You will not loose many sales saying it only works on IE. You will loose a lot more more if you say it doesn't work on IE.
So in that case getting your application to work on Firefox is extra work. It really doesn't matter now easy that extra work is.
Of course if you want to develop for that market you now have a key feature you can use to get sales.
Simple answer.
IE has a market share of over 50%.
If you develop for the web you MUST develop for IE. It doesn't matter that Firefox is easier to develop for because it is still extra work.
If you are going sell anything that works on a web browser IE support is mandatory.
I along with a lot of other people feel that Firefox is also mandatory for anything you put on the Internet. If you are building a site you don't want lock out big percentage of potental users. I do tend to write for Firefox and then port to IE but IE support is without a doubt mandatory.
Microsoft has it right. Developers, Developers, Developers! People don't use an OS they use applications. I love Linux but I have to keep a Windows for work and for FSX.
If the programs you use don't run on an OS that OS is useless to you.
Well I did say to name just a few.
The thing is that for most part that was a long time ago. The employees of the companies are different people, the stock holders are different people, and there does have to a time when forgiveness becomes justice.
That is right but it sure wasn't when the Titanic sunk.
The only thing that heard that where what whales that where left.
Well since I don't like Obama for his plan to shut down a big part of the manned space program and many other things I can not get too upset about what the RNC says or doesn't about him. Frankly I don't pay too much attention to politics at all. My wife has a degree in PolySci and a life long demarcate so what news I get is from her when I listen :)
That is pretty unlikely.
Most systems use sound. A sunken ship is pretty dang quite.
The other system that I can think of is MAD and with all the ships on the bottom of the North Atlantic I doubt that they would know the Titanic from a liberty ship from a MAD contact.
I find it most interesting that they found the Titanic using the experence they gained from imaging the Threaser and Scorpion. I have to wonder why looking at our own subs was such a big secret?
Now if they took a look at that Mike or Yankee that sunk then it would be a big deal.
Oh and it is the Royal Navy and not the English. The folks from Scotland, Wales, and some from Northern Ireland don't really like being left out like that.
Has no web site ever been shutdown for no good reason?
No and anyone that thinks so is just dumb.
I support the EFF efforts but there is a difference between being informative and inflammatory.
This whole thread puts out a lot more heat than light.