Does this "computer illiterate crowd" really exist anymore? Computers (and their pointing devices) are used everyday in schools and buisnesses. They're used by everyone from secretaries, to engineers, to autobody repair men (No joke. Modern paint matching is done on computerized scales that are linked to the Internet. These scales run MS Windows, complete with IE.) Thanks to the belief that computers exude "Smartness Radiation" we have them in every class room in America. How someone in today's society could avoid learning the cursory aspects of how to use one is beyond me.
Sure your grandparents might not be able to use one all that well, but not to know the difference between "left" and "right"? I'm sorry, that's just ridiculous. You don't have to target these things at the retarded-parrot-can-do-it level. That's not to say that things should be so complicated that you have to study as an accolyte at the foot of a master to even be able to handle 1/10 the features. It's just that this segment of the population that has never even seen a computer is small, and getting smaller every day. They're so small in fact that they are are irrelevant. If they haven't bothered learning by now, they probably won't ever learn.
My parents never even touch the laptop I bought them. Why not? In their own words: "I don't see the point of wasting my time with that thing." Does this mean that we should target them as an audience? No it doesnt.
Most developers I knew thought of AI as a pretty academic discipline, and were more concerned with putting a dialog box up at the right location on the screen than trying to pass the Turing Test.
As an AI Guy let me defend AI by first stating, most people don't know what AI is. As evidenced by the above comment.
There is not one serious researcher that takes the Turing Test seriously. In a world full of 6 billion people, can you not find anyone to talk to? And if you had a Turing Machine that passed the Turing Test, would that machine want to talk to you? People make mistakes. People make typos, gramatical errors, should a machine that performs instructions without error really insert errors just for sake of mimicry? This idea of the mimiced human as a serious research died back in the 60s. It's too hard, and even if you did solve it, so what? You just made a faliable machine.
Instead modern AI is far from "an academic disipline". It used in control theory, filtering, pattern recognition, ddiagnositcs. You know that Bayseian spam filter your oohing and ahhing about? That's AI. That call you got from your credit card company saying they detected fraud on your account? That's AI. You know that doodad you just bought? It's cheap because the company that makes it's supply chain is precisely scheduled and automatically adjusts for slipage. Yup, AI. Those medical tests you took last week? Odds are your doctor used an expert system to help him diagnose you. AI does that and a whole lot more.
The goal of AI never was to make a synthetic human, it was to make humans' lives easier. It's just in age when people thought everyone was going to go to the prom on the moon while wearing white crash helmets and silver jumpsuits and driving atomic powered flying cars, they thought that was the way to go. (No one seriously says, "I don't have atomic powered flying car. The automotive industry failed.", way should AI be different?)
The problem AI has is the same problem magic has. Once you see how its done, you say "Well that wasn't hard at all. You didn't really need to 'think' (whatever that means). AI will only succeed when it does this new thing!" Lather. Rinse. Repeat. AI can never win, because people keep changing the criteria.
So the next time you think about bashing AI as a failure or an "academic", maybe you should actually find out what AI really is, because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
If I'm remembering correctly, HotBot provided a single interface to search yahoo, altavista, lycos, and excite simultaneously back in the day. "Back in the Day" being 1994-1996. I do know that submit-it.com provided a single interface to submitting URLs to multiple indexes/search_engines/portals as far back as 1995. I know this because at the time I knew Scott Banister founder of submit-it.com. (My reaction at the time was, "Big freaking deal. It's just a perl script and copy-and-pasted HTML.")
I own the first generation pronto (the midnight sea foam green one, not the new silver one with the color display). It is without a doubt my favorite piece of home electronics. It solves my problem of 5 different remotes beautifully. I put it into DVD mode and press a button marked "on" and my television turns on and selects svideo input, the dvd player turns on, the receiver turns on, and selects dvd mode. One button does it all. It truly is a sight to behold.
It came with a real screen editor. I can draw buttons, assign single functions or macros to buttons, use timers. I was afraid that the editor wouldn't be up to par, but it was exactly what I wanted.
Now there's alot of people saying "use a palmpilot" but they don't know what they're talking about. The palmpilot and the like's IR transmitter simply isn't powerful enough to work as remote control. Think about it. If it says it can send files from up to a meter away, what makes you think that it's going to be able to control your television at 4 meters?
Everyone seems to know that ICANN is ineffective and corrupt, so why do people even bother with them. What would happen if a (suitably large enought) group simply refused to recognize ICANN's authority? I'm thinking something organized along the lines of realtime blacklist.
Side scrolling...well I would consider Gauntlet 3D basicly the same thing as a side scrolling...just giving another dimension.
Gauntlet 3D is sad installment of the Gauntlet and Gauntlet 2 (both used the same engine and had identical play. Gauntlet 2 had new maps, a few new baddies (I think), but mainly allowed each of the four players to play any of the four classes, rather than 1=red=warrior, 2=blue=valkyrie, 3=green=elf, 4=yellow=wizard). The only thing Gauntlet 3D shares is the audio samples ("Someone shot the food." "Save keys to open doors").
Trust me, I remember when people lined up four hours to play Gauntlet and Gauntlet 2. Each person continued where the previous one left off. Beating the game became a community effort.
"I don't plan to stand in the way of anybody building the elevator," he said. "I want to see somebody build a space elevator in the long term for the benefit of everybody. If Michael does it first, or Australia, Japan, U.S., Microsoft, whoever, that's fine."
Croquet is a next generation virtual OS written in Squeak - a modern variant of Smalltalk. Squeak runs mathematically identical on all machines, and has been ported to 32 different platforms. Do you like gay sex?
Indeed i do! What's your phone number? 212 596 7765
Thanks to Ryan, Jacob, Fisheye & Bill for their hard work!
The renegade Borg only ever attacked places that the Enterprise was near, and used some sort of triggered worm hole or quantum slipstream or something to escape
Transwarp conduits.
In some encounter, they had captured a Borg which, unbeknownst to them, was using an emotional broadcast similar to the one Lor used in order to re-evoke those emotions in Data (he had experienced them in an earlier Borg skirmish)
Didn't the Borg drone act as somesort of repeater for Lor's signal or was told to broadcast the signal himself or something? If I rememeber, that's when Data killed a drone and then spent time in the holodeck trying to recreate the sensation he felt by increasing the Borg's strength and deactivating the holodec safetys. And if I further recall correctly, Data said he felt pleasure at killing the drone.
They knew insulation fell off at launch. It has happend for years. It never caused a problem before. Why would it have this time? The track record said it was okay. The tools they used to analyize tile damage had been used for years, and never failed. In fact the program overestimated the damage to tiles.
They've lost a few tiles on every flight of the shuttle. Some from the underneath, but there was never a "zipper effect". It was well known as a potential problem, but simply never occured. Losing 1 tile never caused it. Scooping out material from several tiles never caused it. Past experience indicated that for the "zipper effect" to occur, the shuttle would have need to occur much greater damage.
Let's say for argument that the probability of a large enough piece of ice coated insulation to cause catstrophic damage to the orbiter is 1 in 10,000. That doesn't mean there will never be catstrophic damage, just that it is incredibly unlikely.
The world is full of uncertainty. I could step outside and get killed by a meteor, I probably won't, but it could happen. That doesn't mean that I shouldn't go outside.
Does anyone have any more details on what other parameters restrict EVAs?
The main restrictions is that you have to either be teathered or in an MMU.
They did have I think 1 suit so they could go out and fix the latches on the cargobay doors if they didn't work, but that wouldn't require leaving the cargobay.
Keep in mind, that you can't climb your way across the belly of the shuttle. There isn't anything to grab on to, and you may even do more damage than the damage you are trying to repair. That is why the tile kit (which was basically a caulking gun) was abandoned.
I do wonder whether the re-use of this tank will be seen as one of the more controversial parts of this whole operation in retrospect. There were public notices that these tanks had been retired from use, with the newer design being used in preference.
The Lightweight ETs had been used for years. The Super Lightweight ETs (which are the new tanks you are refering to) are relatively new (the first flew on STS-91). The lightweight tank (the older tank that was used on Columbia) had been used for years until STS-91. They were proven hardware. The Super Lightweight ETs were designed for ISS missions. Since Columbia wasn't going to the ISS, and NASA had 3 LWETs already built, it made sense to use one on this mission.
just as enineers told em not to launch the challenger at those tempratures if they didnt want it to blow up on the pad ?
That was different. Whatever happened to Columbia occured in flight, and the damage was therefore unpreventable. Given that, questions are: "Could they have detected this after reaching orbit?", "How did they reach the conclusion that it was safe?", and "What could have been done about it?"
On Descent 1 & 2: I decided that when Hugh returned to the Borg and the Borg went aimless, was when the Borg created the Borg Queen. My theory goes like this: As individuality propagates through the Borg collective, The Collective loses its influence on the individual drones. "Downstream" Borg realize that something is a miss, and then work on a way to assimalate and adapt. By applying their knowledge of making an "ambassador" with Locutus, they create the Borg Queen, a single individual in The Collective.
I came up with this, most to try and figure out how the Borg regained their "collectiveness" for ST:FC and to explain away the Borg Queen, because the Borg was soooo much cooler when there was no individuality, no queen, no "voice in your head telling you what to do", just cold logic and machinery. When you were assimalated, you became the Borg, and the Borg became you. None of this "I'm trapped and I can't get out!" shit.
nothing to do with Soong's homing beacon (which if you'll recall left both Data and Lor in a sleep-walking style state where they had no idea of their actions, and had to be reactivated by Soong).
How did Lor lure Data/E to the planet?
At the end of the episode, they did deactivate Lor, but I don't recall them beaming him out in to space, or otherwise stating what they did with him, including whether he actually got disassembled, or merely left on a shelf someplace safe.
Either way, Lor isn't comming back. I can't imagine anyone in starfleet [putting him completly back together and then saying "There you go Mr. Lor. Have a nice day pillaging the countryside!":)
The implication is that Data may be able to study and learn from the chip, and perhaps some day recreate his own (which we see occur in Star Trek: Generations, I believe, only Data becomes paralyzed with fear on his first away
I took it that the chip in ST:G and ST:TNG was the same chip. He kept it around because Geordi wanted him to, and then later decided to install it. As far as the chip changing appearence between the two times we see it, well that's nothing. First: Are we told that the chip is damaged? If not, it's not. If it is, well then Data (or maybe even Geordi) repairs it. Second (and most likely): The original prop was lost/"updated" for the movie.
As it was, I am sure they noticed this was irrepairable. What's worse then for NASA PR? to have 7 astronaughts up in the sky knowing they will die with the world waiting and watching helplessly. Two weeks of the mission of doomed people in space. People we feel attached to because they are doing what we see as good.
Yes. Yes. And everyone knew Apollo 13 was going to work out.
Wil originally had a speaking part in the film but it was cut out during editing after the film had been shot.
Yes. I know that. (I also love how we're all on a first name basis with someone we've never met. (Sure he's on/., but still I wouldn't say I met "Stephen VanDahm" now would I?) The "what scene?" comment was in reply to the lack of lines being distracting. It would be useful, if you actually read all the words in the comment before you post next time.
-Assuming Picard's clone-guy is at least 25 or so, that means they had to start cloning Picard back when he was just some random captain of a random ship (Stargazer?) Why'd they pick him?
He was given some given something to advance his age dramatically. It didn't work right though. That's why he was rotting away.
-Not even one throw-away line about Lore? What happened to him? You have a whole plot about another model of Data, and you don't mention Lore? What the hell? Even a line like "Lore's body was destroyed when the Enterprise D crashed." would have been appreciated.
After Hugh was returned to the Borg, the Borg lost their "collectiveness" and became sorry bunch looking for someone to lead them. Lore showed up and gave them purpose. Lore used Soong's homing beacon to draw Data to him. He controlled Data via a radio link that shared the output of the emotion chip. Picard, Giordi, Troi, et. al. sever the link and together with Data and Hugh's anitLore forces defeat Lore. Lore is then deactived by Data, disassembled (Data keeps the emotion chip.), and then beamed out into space in pieces. In short: Lore won't ever show up again.
-Having Wil [scene] in the movie, but not talked to was rather distracting, they should have left his scene in.
What scene? He was in the background of the wedding party shot. If you didn't look for him, you'd never know he was there.
The tag was supposed to be rendered with the correct representation according to the user's language preference.
So the quotation marks are "translated", but the text itself isn't? I fail to see the advantage. Afterall when I'm looking at Japanese or Chinese I know quotes are >. I know that when I'm viewing Spanish what the inverted ! and ? means. My problem isn't that I can't understand the punctuation, it's that I can't understand the language the text is written.
Neither. How about you read the specification? It certainly doesn't seem very ambiguous.
I did. My problem with is "What constitutes 'contact information'?", and what kind of information do you put in it. "Whatever you want" really isn't a useful for use in a generic (cross document) sense.
I can see why some people are questing the value of this standards proposal.
I don't.
# acronym tag is gone
Who used this? I've never seen it used. It's demise has been overdue for a long time. I hope they killed its identical twin ABBR too. While you're at it get rid of CODE (computer code), KBD (keyboard input), VAR (program variable), DFN (defining instance), SAMP (sample program output), and ADDRESS (was this suppoed to be email or postal or both? It's ambiguity destroys any semantic value).
# q tag is gone
Good. We already have something for this. It's called the quote. It looks like this: ".
# cite tag is gone
CITE would be useful document, but without any citation fields defined its useless. Is this a standard citation like APA or MLA? Is it IEEE or ACM? Is it some sort of made up one? Or does CITE just indicate a superscript, parenthentical citation, or bracket citation? Without these fields denoted you can't do anything with it.
# img tag is gone (yes, really!)
It's handled by OBJECT, after all this is the HyperText Markup Language. Layout and textually there's no difference between an image and an applet or plugin.
Which brings us to...
# applet tag is gone (also really!)
Good. Why should Java be handled differently from Shockwave or Flash? APPLET is better replaced by OBJECT. IMG can also be handled by OBJECT as well.
# br tag is deprecated
This is a style markup, not unlike U, TT, SUP, SUB, STRONG, STRIKE, SMALL, S,I, EM, CENTER, and B.
BR will be replaced with LINE which encoses a single line of text.
# h1 thru h6 are deprecated
They were only sort of used properly. People knew they were headings, but they tended to pick them based on how they looked rather than what they meant. By depreciating these, they can be replaced by something with stricter semantics.
Slashdot Mirror
Does this "computer illiterate crowd" really exist anymore? Computers (and their pointing devices) are used everyday in schools and buisnesses. They're used by everyone from secretaries, to engineers, to autobody repair men (No joke. Modern paint matching is done on computerized scales that are linked to the Internet. These scales run MS Windows, complete with IE.) Thanks to the belief that computers exude "Smartness Radiation" we have them in every class room in America. How someone in today's society could avoid learning the cursory aspects of how to use one is beyond me.
Sure your grandparents might not be able to use one all that well, but not to know the difference between "left" and "right"? I'm sorry, that's just ridiculous. You don't have to target these things at the retarded-parrot-can-do-it level. That's not to say that things should be so complicated that you have to study as an accolyte at the foot of a master to even be able to handle 1/10 the features. It's just that this segment of the population that has never even seen a computer is small, and getting smaller every day. They're so small in fact that they are are irrelevant. If they haven't bothered learning by now, they probably won't ever learn.
My parents never even touch the laptop I bought them. Why not? In their own words: "I don't see the point of wasting my time with that thing." Does this mean that we should target them as an audience? No it doesnt.
quototh the post:
Most developers I knew thought of AI as a pretty academic discipline, and were more concerned with putting a dialog box up at the right location on the screen than trying to pass the Turing Test.
As an AI Guy let me defend AI by first stating, most people don't know what AI is. As evidenced by the above comment.
There is not one serious researcher that takes the Turing Test seriously. In a world full of 6 billion people, can you not find anyone to talk to? And if you had a Turing Machine that passed the Turing Test, would that machine want to talk to you? People make mistakes. People make typos, gramatical errors, should a machine that performs instructions without error really insert errors just for sake of mimicry? This idea of the mimiced human as a serious research died back in the 60s. It's too hard, and even if you did solve it, so what? You just made a faliable machine.
Instead modern AI is far from "an academic disipline". It used in control theory, filtering, pattern recognition, ddiagnositcs. You know that Bayseian spam filter your oohing and ahhing about? That's AI. That call you got from your credit card company saying they detected fraud on your account? That's AI. You know that doodad you just bought? It's cheap because the company that makes it's supply chain is precisely scheduled and automatically adjusts for slipage. Yup, AI. Those medical tests you took last week? Odds are your doctor used an expert system to help him diagnose you. AI does that and a whole lot more.
The goal of AI never was to make a synthetic human, it was to make humans' lives easier. It's just in age when people thought everyone was going to go to the prom on the moon while wearing white crash helmets and silver jumpsuits and driving atomic powered flying cars, they thought that was the way to go. (No one seriously says, "I don't have atomic powered flying car. The automotive industry failed.", way should AI be different?)
The problem AI has is the same problem magic has. Once you see how its done, you say "Well that wasn't hard at all. You didn't really need to 'think' (whatever that means). AI will only succeed when it does this new thing!" Lather. Rinse. Repeat. AI can never win, because people keep changing the criteria.
So the next time you think about bashing AI as a failure or an "academic", maybe you should actually find out what AI really is, because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
If I'm remembering correctly, HotBot provided a single interface to search yahoo, altavista, lycos, and excite simultaneously back in the day. "Back in the Day" being 1994-1996. I do know that submit-it.com provided a single interface to submitting URLs to multiple indexes/search_engines/portals as far back as 1995. I know this because at the time I knew
Scott Banister founder of submit-it.com. (My reaction at the time was, "Big freaking deal. It's just a perl script and copy-and-pasted HTML.")
I own the first generation pronto (the midnight sea foam green one, not the new silver one with the color display). It is without a doubt my favorite piece of home electronics. It solves my problem of 5 different remotes beautifully. I put it into DVD mode and press a button marked "on" and my television turns on and selects svideo input, the dvd player turns on, the receiver turns on, and selects dvd mode. One button does it all. It truly is a sight to behold.
It came with a real screen editor. I can draw buttons, assign single functions or macros to buttons, use timers. I was afraid that the editor wouldn't be up to par, but it was exactly what I wanted.
Now there's alot of people saying "use a palmpilot" but they don't know what they're talking about. The palmpilot and the like's IR transmitter simply isn't powerful enough to work as remote control. Think about it. If it says it can send files from up to a meter away, what makes you think that it's going to be able to control your television at 4 meters?
Everyone seems to know that ICANN is ineffective and corrupt, so why do people even bother with them. What would happen if a (suitably large enought) group simply refused to recognize ICANN's authority? I'm thinking something organized along the lines of realtime blacklist.
Side scrolling...well I would consider Gauntlet 3D basicly the same thing as a side scrolling...just giving another dimension.
Gauntlet 3D is sad installment of the Gauntlet and Gauntlet 2 (both used the same engine and had identical play. Gauntlet 2 had new maps, a few new baddies (I think), but mainly allowed each of the four players to play any of the four classes, rather than 1=red=warrior, 2=blue=valkyrie, 3=green=elf, 4=yellow=wizard). The only thing Gauntlet 3D shares is the audio samples ("Someone shot the food." "Save keys to open doors").
Trust me, I remember when people lined up four hours to play Gauntlet and Gauntlet 2. Each person continued where the previous one left off. Beating the game became a community effort.
Those were the days.
What happened? Someone crack it or something?
After a looking at the the results of these experiments, one question came to mind.
:)
What's up with all the fat chicks?
The renegade Borg only ever attacked places that the Enterprise was near, and used some sort of triggered worm hole or quantum slipstream or something to escape
Transwarp conduits.
In some encounter, they had captured a Borg which, unbeknownst to them, was using an emotional broadcast similar to the one Lor used in order to re-evoke those emotions in Data (he had experienced them in an earlier Borg skirmish)
Didn't the Borg drone act as somesort of repeater for Lor's signal or was told to broadcast the signal himself or something? If I rememeber, that's when Data killed a drone and then spent time in the holodeck trying to recreate the sensation he felt by increasing the Borg's strength and deactivating the holodec safetys. And if I further recall correctly, Data said he felt pleasure at killing the drone.
They knew insulation fell off at launch. It has happend for years. It never caused a problem before. Why would it have this time? The track record said it was okay. The tools they used to analyize tile damage had been used for years, and never failed. In fact the program overestimated the damage to tiles.
They've lost a few tiles on every flight of the shuttle. Some from the underneath, but there was never a "zipper effect". It was well known as a potential problem, but simply never occured. Losing 1 tile never caused it. Scooping out material from several tiles never caused it. Past experience indicated that for the "zipper effect" to occur, the shuttle would have need to occur much greater damage.
Let's say for argument that the probability of a large enough piece of ice coated insulation to cause catstrophic damage to the orbiter is 1 in 10,000. That doesn't mean there will never be catstrophic damage, just that it is incredibly unlikely.
The world is full of uncertainty. I could step outside and get killed by a meteor, I probably won't, but it could happen. That doesn't mean that I shouldn't go outside.
Does anyone have any more details on what other parameters restrict EVAs?
The main restrictions is that you have to either be teathered or in an MMU.
They did have I think 1 suit so they could go out and fix the latches on the cargobay doors if they didn't work, but that wouldn't require leaving the cargobay.
Keep in mind, that you can't climb your way across the belly of the shuttle. There isn't anything to grab on to, and you may even do more damage than the damage you are trying to repair. That is why the tile kit (which was basically a caulking gun) was abandoned.
I do wonder whether the re-use of this tank will be seen as one of the more controversial parts of this whole operation in retrospect. There were public notices that these tanks had been retired from use, with the newer design being used in preference.
The Lightweight ETs had been used for years. The Super Lightweight ETs (which are the new tanks you are refering to) are relatively new (the first flew on STS-91). The lightweight tank (the older tank that was used on Columbia) had been used for years until STS-91. They were proven hardware. The Super Lightweight ETs were designed for ISS missions. Since Columbia wasn't going to the ISS, and NASA had 3 LWETs already built, it made sense to use one on this mission.
just as enineers told em not to launch the challenger at those tempratures if they didnt want it to blow up on the pad ?
That was different. Whatever happened to Columbia occured in flight, and the damage was therefore unpreventable. Given that, questions are: "Could they have detected this after reaching orbit?", "How did they reach the conclusion that it was safe?", and "What could have been done about it?"
On Descent 1 & 2: I decided that when Hugh returned to the Borg and the Borg went aimless, was when the Borg created the Borg Queen. My theory goes like this: As individuality propagates through the Borg collective, The Collective loses its influence on the individual drones. "Downstream" Borg realize that something is a miss, and then work on a way to assimalate and adapt. By applying their knowledge of making an "ambassador" with Locutus, they create the Borg Queen, a single individual in The Collective.
I came up with this, most to try and figure out how the Borg regained their "collectiveness" for ST:FC and to explain away the Borg Queen, because the Borg was soooo much cooler when there was no individuality, no queen, no "voice in your head telling you what to do", just cold logic and machinery. When you were assimalated, you became the Borg, and the Borg became you. None of this "I'm trapped and I can't get out!" shit.
nothing to do with Soong's homing beacon (which if you'll recall left both Data and Lor in a sleep-walking style state where they had no idea of their actions, and had to be reactivated by Soong).
:)
How did Lor lure Data/E to the planet?
At the end of the episode, they did deactivate Lor, but I don't recall them beaming him out in to space, or otherwise stating what they did with him, including whether he actually got disassembled, or merely left on a shelf someplace safe.
Either way, Lor isn't comming back. I can't imagine anyone in starfleet [putting him completly back together and then saying "There you go Mr. Lor. Have a nice day pillaging the countryside!"
The implication is that Data may be able to study and learn from the chip, and perhaps some day recreate his own (which we see occur in Star Trek: Generations, I believe, only Data becomes paralyzed with fear on his first away
I took it that the chip in ST:G and ST:TNG was the same chip. He kept it around because Geordi wanted him to, and then later decided to install it. As far as the chip changing appearence between the two times we see it, well that's nothing. First: Are we told that the chip is damaged? If not, it's not. If it is, well then Data (or maybe even Geordi) repairs it. Second (and most likely): The original prop was lost/"updated" for the movie.
This is so troll bait but I'll bite.
As it was, I am sure they noticed this was irrepairable. What's worse then for NASA PR? to have 7 astronaughts up in the sky knowing they will die with the world waiting and watching helplessly. Two weeks of the mission of doomed people in space. People we feel attached to because they are doing what we see as good.
Yes. Yes. And everyone knew Apollo 13 was going to work out.
descent part 2
Wil originally had a speaking part in the film but it was cut out during editing after the film had been shot.
/., but still I wouldn't say I met "Stephen VanDahm" now would I?) The "what scene?" comment was in reply to the lack of lines being distracting. It would be useful, if you actually read all the words in the comment before you post next time.
Yes. I know that. (I also love how we're all on a first name basis with someone we've never met. (Sure he's on
Timing, Timing, Timing.
That's it exactly.
-Assuming Picard's clone-guy is at least 25 or so, that means they had to start cloning Picard back when he was just some random captain of a random ship (Stargazer?) Why'd they pick him?
He was given some given something to advance his age dramatically. It didn't work right though. That's why he was rotting away.
-Not even one throw-away line about Lore? What happened to him? You have a whole plot about another model of Data, and you don't mention Lore? What the hell? Even a line like "Lore's body was destroyed when the Enterprise D crashed." would have been appreciated.
After Hugh was returned to the Borg, the Borg lost their "collectiveness" and became sorry bunch looking for someone to lead them. Lore showed up and gave them purpose. Lore used Soong's homing beacon to draw Data to him. He controlled Data via a radio link that shared the output of the emotion chip. Picard, Giordi, Troi, et. al. sever the link and together with Data and Hugh's anitLore forces defeat Lore. Lore is then deactived by Data, disassembled (Data keeps the emotion chip.), and then beamed out into space in pieces. In short: Lore won't ever show up again.
-Having Wil [scene] in the movie, but not talked to was rather distracting, they should have left his scene in.
What scene? He was in the background of the wedding party shot. If you didn't look for him, you'd never know he was there.
Fortran was killed a long time ago (except for legacy apps and such)
Fortran was last updated in 1992. It maybe out of favor, but it certainly isn't dead.
aybe someday I will load a newer distribution (I'm RH7.3) on new hardware and everything will just work.
No it won't. New hardware is never supported. Hell, hardwarae is never fully supported.
Trust me. I know. I've been running linux since 94 and I have never had a system where all my hardware was fully supported.
The tag was supposed to be rendered with the correct representation according to the user's language preference.
So the quotation marks are "translated", but the text itself isn't? I fail to see the advantage. Afterall when I'm looking at Japanese or Chinese I know quotes are >. I know that when I'm viewing Spanish what the inverted ! and ? means. My problem isn't that I can't understand the punctuation, it's that I can't understand the language the text is written.
is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
USA Today disagrees
Homer: Here's good news! According to this eye-catching article, SAT scores are declining at a slower rate!
Lisa: Dad, I think this paper is a flimsy hodgepodge of pie graphs, factoids and Larry King.
Homer: Hey, this is the only paper in America that's not afraid to tell the truth, that everything is just fine.
--
"Homer Defined," (8F04, 3/4/92)
Neither. How about you read the specification? It certainly doesn't seem very ambiguous.
I did. My problem with is "What constitutes 'contact information'?", and what kind of information do you put in it. "Whatever you want" really isn't a useful for use in a generic (cross document) sense.
I can see why some people are questing the value of this standards proposal.
.
I don't.
# acronym tag is gone
Who used this? I've never seen it used. It's demise has been overdue for a long time. I hope they killed its identical twin ABBR too. While you're at it get rid of CODE (computer code), KBD (keyboard input), VAR (program variable), DFN (defining instance), SAMP (sample program output), and ADDRESS (was this suppoed to be email or postal or both? It's ambiguity destroys any semantic value).
# q tag is gone
Good. We already have something for this. It's called the quote. It looks like this: "
# cite tag is gone
CITE would be useful document, but without any citation fields defined its useless. Is this a standard citation like APA or MLA? Is it IEEE or ACM? Is it some sort of made up one? Or does CITE just indicate a superscript, parenthentical citation, or bracket citation? Without these fields denoted you can't do anything with it.
# img tag is gone (yes, really!)
It's handled by OBJECT, after all this is the HyperText Markup Language. Layout and textually there's no difference between an image and an applet or plugin.
Which brings us to...
# applet tag is gone (also really!)
Good. Why should Java be handled differently from Shockwave or Flash? APPLET is better replaced by OBJECT. IMG can also be handled by OBJECT as well.
# br tag is deprecated
This is a style markup, not unlike U, TT, SUP, SUB, STRONG, STRIKE, SMALL, S,I, EM, CENTER, and B.
BR will be replaced with LINE which encoses a single line of text.
# h1 thru h6 are deprecated
They were only sort of used properly. People knew they were headings, but they tended to pick them based on how they looked rather than what they meant. By depreciating these, they can be replaced by something with stricter semantics.