Can Firefox disable animated images now? Or stop them when you hit the ESC key?
Yes, but like many things there's still no way to modify the preference from the menu. You'll have to type about:config in the URL bar, and then change the value of image.animation_mode. I've got mine set to once, which plays each animation once and then stops, but I think you can also set it to none.
I'm looking to replace my television, which is a 19" Sanyo (heh) I bought in 1992. It doesn't even have phono (RCA) inputs in the back, only a single coax for cable. It's "cable-ready", you see. Even the remote control is broken.
Here's what I want to do on the new TV:
watch DVDs (so something 16x9 is preferred)
play video games (PS2, Gamecube) maybe twice a year
What I don't need the TV for is:
watch much television (less than 2 hours a month)
watch cable/satellite
watch VHS tapes
Yes, I live alone.:)
My entertainment center has a shelf which is 36" wide, 28" tall, and 19" deep, so the thing would need to fit in there.
And I'm a public school teacher, so my budget is not huge, but if I got something I could use for a decade or so (like my current TV), I'd be willing to pay a little for it.
Any suggestions? (Note to self: ask Slashdot for display device tips. Don't bother asking for relationship advice.)
Would you rather say "du-ble-you du-ble-you du-ble-you" or type "WorldWideWeb"?
Granted, www was intended to be a typed abbreviation rather than a spoken one. He could have gone with "web", though. It's just as easy to type (easier, in fact, since the letters are on different fingers) and clocks in with a mere one syllable! It's a win-win-win! (heh)
In fact, I think "web.netscape.com" even looks nicer!
While I agree that Nvu is a pretty cool name, why do people feel the need to "shorten" something that's already just two syllables? And NewView even seems to roll off the tongue more easily than N-View.
At least it's not as bad as "WWW", which is a nine-syllable "abbreviation" for the three-syllable phrase "World-Wide Web". Radio announcers all over are still cursing Tim Berners-Lee for that one.
Re:direct links and synopses
on
Superbowling
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot doesn't embed space in href links or any markup text.
Good to know.
And thanks for the links.
You're quite welcome.
direct links and synopses
on
Superbowling
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Any of you folks running linux may not have the best RealPlayer integration in your browsers, so here are the direct links to each of the RealMedia files, with a brief synopsis of each commercial (but no "spoilers").
Slashcode will probably embed spaces in these URLs, so you may have to manually remove them.
I quit watching television about seven or eight years ago. However, I try to catch the Super Bowl every year, if only for the commercials. In fact, I've always told folks that if there was a channel that just played commercials all day, I'd probably tune in to it.
I imagine it could be like VH-1 Classic, with an hour for commercials from the 50s, another from the 60s, etc. Maybe a "groundbreaking" commercials hour. Maybe one with ads from various countries.
do-while is rarely useful... in those few cases where you do have an unconditional first pass, you are forced to structure the code differently.
I beg to differ. do-while is extremely useful, precisely because it's for situations when the code is structured differently.
I think the biggest difficulty conceptually is that most of the time you don't need do-while, you really want repeat-until, which C, C++, and Java don't provide. Which is a damn shame, since repeat-until maps more naturally to the brain. (Take this from a guy who's been teaching C++ and it's do-while to beginners for seven years now.)
Okay, you got me. I am, in fact, a Parker Brother. And, believe it or not, a Has-bro, as we sometimes call ourselves.
Or, actually, I was referring to the fact that rule sets for nearly a hundred games have already been posted, and probably more exist, but so far there aren't thousands of games already created. Of course, the potential is much greater, just as with a deck of cards.
Well, I'd better get back to astroturfing for the BGAA.... did you hear about that new LOTR trilogy Monopoly game? I hear it's the most spectacular one ever!
I know that part of the fun in your case is creating the board itself, but without a good game behind it, you're wasting your money.
Consider first creating or purchasing a standard "piecepack", which is to board games what a standard deck of cards is to more specialized card games like Uno. It's a board and standard set of pieces that you can use for dozens or even hundreds of different games.
The piecepack website has rules for a bunch of different games that can be played with it (nearly eighty at the moment). You can browse through those to see what makes a good game and what doesn't, and even make up your own game and submit it for peer evaluation.
Then, if your game seems fun and people like it, you could pony up the extra money to have custom boards made.
Have fun! Families playing card and board games are rare nowadays, so my hat's off to you!
Musicians generally don't need "the lastest thing", much to the chagrin of big companies who are trying to get us to go digital.
However, keep in mind that this is a double-edged sword, and sometimes it cuts the way of the manufacturers. One benefit about musicians accepting older tech is that the companies can have higher profit margins selling that stuff. Don't you think Shure paid off their R&D budgets on the SM-58 a few years back? And don't you think their factories are still cranking those about as efficiently as possible for $99 a pop? Talk about potential for profit.
Another example is the Alesis SR-16 drum machine, which I recently purchased myself. It was first manufactured in 1990, and has seen only tiny internal changes since then. Yet up until about three months ago, they were still selling for $200 new. They're now down to $150, but can you say "cash cow"?
I suspect they lowered the price because of price pressure from eBay, of all places, where several a week were selling for consistently $100-$125. (And that's where I got mine, for the record.)
So yeah, they don't have the forced upgrade cycle, but they also don't have to outlay several billion for a new fab every few years like AMD does. I suspect they prefer the slower pace.
Just an offtopic addition: walmart.com has huge cover art scans for every album it carries. It doesn't have quite the selection of Amazon, but on my monitor, the cover art images they have are larger than life-size, even (500x500).
Think of the many mailing lists that are run by very low budget groups to communicate with hundreds or thousands of members. These would be destroyed if each time they were to send out a message to all members they invoked a micropayment on every single e-mail.
You missed a crucial part of my original post. I suggested that the microcharge would only be incurred if the recipient didn't have the sender on their TDMA-like whitelist. It's opt-in with teeth.
And give the micropayment to the recipient, for all I care. That way if some guy can convince tens of thousands of strangers to email him, he gets rich quick. But he doesn't pay a dime to email his friends, nor they him. And mailing lists wouldn't have to pay to send to as many millions as they want, as long as they've all opted-in by adding the mailing list to their own whitelists.
The idea has its problems, but this is not one of them. Now, spammers using a trojan to spoof the sender is a legitimate concern, but it's not a new concern; they're already doing that.
I think a hybrid system would be interesting: use TDMA as the base, and allow through non-whitelisted messages for, say, half a cent per message. This would let "wanted" mail be free, and would stick spammers for $5000 per million unsolicited emails, which would greatly increase their cost of doing business.
Whereas I sent out about 2000 messages last year, so I'd only have had to pay $4 for the whole year, even if 100% of my messages were "unwanted". I'd pay $4 a year to make SPAM go away.
You would need micropayments for this to work, as well as a way of tracing back to the original sender for billing. Which is perhaps infeasible at this point.
You might also have some folks that intentionally keep people off their whitelist just to earn money from getting emails. Imagine setting your TDMA to "whitelist NULL" and then signing up for 400 mailing lists just to sit back and watch the money roll in!
Of course, maybe the money would go to a third party instead of the user, and mailing lists would probably auto-drop subscribers who didn't whitelist their mailings (after the first hit, anyway).
It'd all work out: the subscriber to the mailing list would incur a single charge for the initial 'subscribe' message since they wouldn't be on the mailing list's whitelist. Then if the user doesn't put the mailing list address on its own whitelist, the first message from the list to the user would incur a single charge for that message, and then the user would be automatically dropped from the list (for violation of terms, or what-have-you), and they'd be even. No extra costs for either the mailing list users or maintainers except a trivial one for signing up to the list.
Try out apt, emerge, up2date (actually, don't -- up2date truly sucks. Everyone using RH who cares about automatic updating has long since started using apt or (IMHO, better) yum).
What don't you like about up2date? I think it's great, but then, I've never used apt or emerge, so I don't appreciate what you're comparing it to.
I keep the Red Hat Network Alert Notification Tool running in the tray, and then if it indicates that something's out-of-date, I just do
su -c "up2date --nox --update"
...and BAM, everything's downloaded and installed.
Maybe you mean up2date sucks for installing new packages, rather than upgrading old ones? I get the feeling it's not really designed to do the same things as apt.
I'm just using the definitions out of Stuart and Fee. They admit, and I know, that the terms are often used in a broader sense, but to clarify discussion they restrict their meanings to the narrower senses I quoted above.
Your point is valid, though. Mind you, I'm a computer science teacher, so I'm fairly self-taught in Biblical interpretation and I could be way off base....
...the more popular current versions that have passed through multiple interpretations through multiple cultural lenses.
The New International Version dates from 1978, and many consider it to be very good. The updated New American Standard was originally done in 1971, but was updated as recently as 1995. Both are "from scratch" translations from the most reliable texts currently available, so neither has passed through "multiple cultural lenses". And I'd say the NIV is the most popular current translation (for Protestants, anyway), so your assertion is incorrect.
You can find information on other modern translations at Zondervan's site.
Interpretation of any centuries-old work is difficult, and involves two phases. First is exegesis, the careful, systematic study of the Scripture to discover the original, intended meaning. That is, what was the original writer attempting to say to the original audience? This is where better understanding of the source language and the culture at the time of writing is most helpful.
The second phase is hermeneutics, the contemptorary relevance of ancient texts. That is, given the original, intended meaning of this passage, what does it mean to me, today?
An excellent book discussing proper exegesis and hermeneutics, looking book-by-book at each literary type in the Bible is How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by Stuart and Fee. I highly recommend it for those interested in the subject.
Does use of the phrase 'clinically proven' require anything like FDA approval?
I'm not a dentist, but my Dad is. The upshot is this: look on the packaging. On the front you're looking for a little logo that says:
A D A ACCEPTED American Dental Association(R)
On the back, it should have a little blurb that says something like:
"[This product] has been shown to be an effective [product for a specific purpose] that can be of significant value when used as directed in conjunction with [other steps] in a conscientiously applied program of oral hygiene and regular professional care. It has been shown to [do certain things], but has not been shown to [do other things]. Its affect on [final thing] has not been determined." - Council on Scientific Affairs - American Dental Association
If the product doesn't have anything on it from the ADA, it probably doesn't work. A good example of this is "Plax", a pre-brushing mouth rinse which claims to loosen plaque so your brushing is more effective. Only problem is, when the ADA tested it, they found that a saline solution was more effective. Hence "Plax" can't bear any ADA logo, and you're probably wasting your money by buying it. Whereas right next to it on the shelf is usually "ACT", a fluoride rinse for after you brush your teeth. It works quite well, and has the ADA's "seal of approval" to prove it.
(Incidentally, Plax is also "clinically-proven": they contrasted brushing with a dry toothbrush (no water or toothpaste) for fifteen seconds vs. rinsing with Plax and then brushing with a dry toothbrush for fifteen seconds. Turns out using Plax first "loosened" the plaque, so brushing was more effective for people using a dry toothbrush for fifteen seconds. If, on the other hand, you're using a wet toothbrush with toothpaste (like most of us), then rinsing with Plax first is a waste of time and money.)
So regarding tooth whitening, I have three recommendations, in order:
Don't be shallow. Who cares what color your teeth are if they're healthy?
Failing that, go see your dentist. It may cost a little more, but quality typically does.
If you're shallow and broke, buy an over-the-counter product with the ADA seal on it.
Slashdot Mirror
Can Firefox disable animated images now? Or stop them when you hit the ESC key?
Yes, but like many things there's still no way to modify the preference from the menu. You'll have to type about:config in the URL bar, and then change the value of image.animation_mode. I've got mine set to once, which plays each animation once and then stops, but I think you can also set it to none.
I'm looking to replace my television, which is a 19" Sanyo (heh) I bought in 1992. It doesn't even have phono (RCA) inputs in the back, only a single coax for cable. It's "cable-ready", you see. Even the remote control is broken.
Here's what I want to do on the new TV:
What I don't need the TV for is:
Yes, I live alone. :)
My entertainment center has a shelf which is 36" wide, 28" tall, and 19" deep, so the thing would need to fit in there.
And I'm a public school teacher, so my budget is not huge, but if I got something I could use for a decade or so (like my current TV), I'd be willing to pay a little for it.
Any suggestions? (Note to self: ask Slashdot for display device tips. Don't bother asking for relationship advice.)
Would you rather say "du-ble-you du-ble-you du-ble-you" or type "WorldWideWeb"?
Granted, www was intended to be a typed abbreviation rather than a spoken one. He could have gone with "web", though. It's just as easy to type (easier, in fact, since the letters are on different fingers) and clocks in with a mere one syllable! It's a win-win-win! (heh)
In fact, I think "web.netscape.com" even looks nicer!
Nvu (pronounced 'N-View', short for 'New View')
While I agree that Nvu is a pretty cool name, why do people feel the need to "shorten" something that's already just two syllables? And NewView even seems to roll off the tongue more easily than N-View.
At least it's not as bad as "WWW", which is a nine-syllable "abbreviation" for the three-syllable phrase "World-Wide Web". Radio announcers all over are still cursing Tim Berners-Lee for that one.
Quick-wafting zephyrs vex bold Jim.
Slashdot doesn't embed space in href links or any markup text.
Good to know.
And thanks for the links.
You're quite welcome.
Any of you folks running linux may not have the best RealPlayer integration in your browsers, so here are the direct links to each of the RealMedia files, with a brief synopsis of each commercial (but no "spoilers").
Slashcode will probably embed spaces in these URLs, so you may have to manually remove them.
I quit watching television about seven or eight years ago. However, I try to catch the Super Bowl every year, if only for the commercials. In fact, I've always told folks that if there was a channel that just played commercials all day, I'd probably tune in to it.
I imagine it could be like VH-1 Classic, with an hour for commercials from the 50s, another from the 60s, etc. Maybe a "groundbreaking" commercials hour. Maybe one with ads from various countries.
I'd tune in, anyway.
I do have mod points, but it's already at +5. I'd give a 6 or 7 if I could. Holy dang, that's funny!
Less than 4 digits doesn't even really get you a good conventional wired mike.... A hundred bucks can go a long way towards....
Um, looks like you count 4 digits differently than I do. $999 is still less than four digits.
do-while is rarely useful... in those few cases where you do have an unconditional first pass, you are forced to structure the code differently.
I beg to differ. do-while is extremely useful, precisely because it's for situations when the code is structured differently.
I think the biggest difficulty conceptually is that most of the time you don't need do-while, you really want repeat-until, which C, C++, and Java don't provide. Which is a damn shame, since repeat-until maps more naturally to the brain. (Take this from a guy who's been teaching C++ and it's do-while to beginners for seven years now.)
Okay, you got me. I am, in fact, a Parker Brother. And, believe it or not, a Has-bro, as we sometimes call ourselves.
Or, actually, I was referring to the fact that rule sets for nearly a hundred games have already been posted, and probably more exist, but so far there aren't thousands of games already created. Of course, the potential is much greater, just as with a deck of cards.
Well, I'd better get back to astroturfing for the BGAA.... did you hear about that new LOTR trilogy Monopoly game? I hear it's the most spectacular one ever!
I know that part of the fun in your case is creating the board itself, but without a good game behind it, you're wasting your money.
Consider first creating or purchasing a standard "piecepack", which is to board games what a standard deck of cards is to more specialized card games like Uno. It's a board and standard set of pieces that you can use for dozens or even hundreds of different games.
The piecepack website has rules for a bunch of different games that can be played with it (nearly eighty at the moment). You can browse through those to see what makes a good game and what doesn't, and even make up your own game and submit it for peer evaluation.
Then, if your game seems fun and people like it, you could pony up the extra money to have custom boards made.
Have fun! Families playing card and board games are rare nowadays, so my hat's off to you!
Musicians generally don't need "the lastest thing", much to the chagrin of big companies who are trying to get us to go digital.
However, keep in mind that this is a double-edged sword, and sometimes it cuts the way of the manufacturers. One benefit about musicians accepting older tech is that the companies can have higher profit margins selling that stuff. Don't you think Shure paid off their R&D budgets on the SM-58 a few years back? And don't you think their factories are still cranking those about as efficiently as possible for $99 a pop? Talk about potential for profit.
Another example is the Alesis SR-16 drum machine, which I recently purchased myself. It was first manufactured in 1990, and has seen only tiny internal changes since then. Yet up until about three months ago, they were still selling for $200 new. They're now down to $150, but can you say "cash cow"?
I suspect they lowered the price because of price pressure from eBay, of all places, where several a week were selling for consistently $100-$125. (And that's where I got mine, for the record.)
So yeah, they don't have the forced upgrade cycle, but they also don't have to outlay several billion for a new fab every few years like AMD does. I suspect they prefer the slower pace.
Just an offtopic addition: walmart.com has huge cover art scans for every album it carries. It doesn't have quite the selection of Amazon, but on my monitor, the cover art images they have are larger than life-size, even (500x500).
The file's has a .mov extension, but neither file nor xine seems able to recognize it. Does anyone know what format it is, and how to play it?
MPlayer with the Quicktime support compiled in plays it fine. It's using the SVQ3 decoder module, if that helps.
I can't really blame them though... People don't buy macs as "gaming machines"
DrunkGamers.com would agree:
Think of the many mailing lists that are run by very low budget groups to communicate with hundreds or thousands of members. These would be destroyed if each time they were to send out a message to all members they invoked a micropayment on every single e-mail.
You missed a crucial part of my original post. I suggested that the microcharge would only be incurred if the recipient didn't have the sender on their TDMA-like whitelist. It's opt-in with teeth.
And give the micropayment to the recipient, for all I care. That way if some guy can convince tens of thousands of strangers to email him, he gets rich quick. But he doesn't pay a dime to email his friends, nor they him. And mailing lists wouldn't have to pay to send to as many millions as they want, as long as they've all opted-in by adding the mailing list to their own whitelists.
The idea has its problems, but this is not one of them. Now, spammers using a trojan to spoof the sender is a legitimate concern, but it's not a new concern; they're already doing that.
If elected, will you take what you (and your campaign site) are learning today and apply it in the event that California itself gets slashdotted?
I think a hybrid system would be interesting: use TDMA as the base, and allow through non-whitelisted messages for, say, half a cent per message. This would let "wanted" mail be free, and would stick spammers for $5000 per million unsolicited emails, which would greatly increase their cost of doing business.
Whereas I sent out about 2000 messages last year, so I'd only have had to pay $4 for the whole year, even if 100% of my messages were "unwanted". I'd pay $4 a year to make SPAM go away.
You would need micropayments for this to work, as well as a way of tracing back to the original sender for billing. Which is perhaps infeasible at this point.
You might also have some folks that intentionally keep people off their whitelist just to earn money from getting emails. Imagine setting your TDMA to "whitelist NULL" and then signing up for 400 mailing lists just to sit back and watch the money roll in!
Of course, maybe the money would go to a third party instead of the user, and mailing lists would probably auto-drop subscribers who didn't whitelist their mailings (after the first hit, anyway).
It'd all work out: the subscriber to the mailing list would incur a single charge for the initial 'subscribe' message since they wouldn't be on the mailing list's whitelist. Then if the user doesn't put the mailing list address on its own whitelist, the first message from the list to the user would incur a single charge for that message, and then the user would be automatically dropped from the list (for violation of terms, or what-have-you), and they'd be even. No extra costs for either the mailing list users or maintainers except a trivial one for signing up to the list.
...interesting to daydream about, at least.
Personally, the Zalman flower fans look very attractive to me... not in a visual sense, but an auditory one.
They look very attractive in an auditory sense? I think I see what you're saying....
Try out apt, emerge, up2date (actually, don't -- up2date truly sucks. Everyone using RH who cares about automatic updating has long since started using apt or (IMHO, better) yum).
What don't you like about up2date? I think it's great, but then, I've never used apt or emerge, so I don't appreciate what you're comparing it to.
I keep the Red Hat Network Alert Notification Tool running in the tray, and then if it indicates that something's out-of-date, I just do
...and BAM, everything's downloaded and installed.
Maybe you mean up2date sucks for installing new packages, rather than upgrading old ones? I get the feeling it's not really designed to do the same things as apt.
Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, start.
Gosh, the memories....
I'm just using the definitions out of Stuart and Fee. They admit, and I know, that the terms are often used in a broader sense, but to clarify discussion they restrict their meanings to the narrower senses I quoted above.
Your point is valid, though. Mind you, I'm a computer science teacher, so I'm fairly self-taught in Biblical interpretation and I could be way off base....
The New International Version dates from 1978, and many consider it to be very good. The updated New American Standard was originally done in 1971, but was updated as recently as 1995. Both are "from scratch" translations from the most reliable texts currently available, so neither has passed through "multiple cultural lenses". And I'd say the NIV is the most popular current translation (for Protestants, anyway), so your assertion is incorrect.
You can find information on other modern translations at Zondervan's site.
Interpretation of any centuries-old work is difficult, and involves two phases. First is exegesis, the careful, systematic study of the Scripture to discover the original, intended meaning. That is, what was the original writer attempting to say to the original audience? This is where better understanding of the source language and the culture at the time of writing is most helpful.
The second phase is hermeneutics, the contemptorary relevance of ancient texts. That is, given the original, intended meaning of this passage, what does it mean to me, today?
An excellent book discussing proper exegesis and hermeneutics, looking book-by-book at each literary type in the Bible is How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by Stuart and Fee. I highly recommend it for those interested in the subject.
Does use of the phrase 'clinically proven' require anything like FDA approval?
I'm not a dentist, but my Dad is. The upshot is this: look on the packaging. On the front you're looking for a little logo that says:
On the back, it should have a little blurb that says something like:
If the product doesn't have anything on it from the ADA, it probably doesn't work. A good example of this is "Plax", a pre-brushing mouth rinse which claims to loosen plaque so your brushing is more effective. Only problem is, when the ADA tested it, they found that a saline solution was more effective. Hence "Plax" can't bear any ADA logo, and you're probably wasting your money by buying it. Whereas right next to it on the shelf is usually "ACT", a fluoride rinse for after you brush your teeth. It works quite well, and has the ADA's "seal of approval" to prove it.
(Incidentally, Plax is also "clinically-proven": they contrasted brushing with a dry toothbrush (no water or toothpaste) for fifteen seconds vs. rinsing with Plax and then brushing with a dry toothbrush for fifteen seconds. Turns out using Plax first "loosened" the plaque, so brushing was more effective for people using a dry toothbrush for fifteen seconds. If, on the other hand, you're using a wet toothbrush with toothpaste (like most of us), then rinsing with Plax first is a waste of time and money.)
So regarding tooth whitening, I have three recommendations, in order: