What about DHTML? Or Client Side XML? Or the latest version of Javascript? Or the [etc].
Functionality as related to information retrieval, yes, you are right - PHP or Java Servlets perform the task perfectly well.
But information presentation....hell, even PHP.net uses DHTML for those pop-up windows in their rollover code. Not to mention the fact that many sites that utilize proprietary extensions are "art" or "showcase" sites, built simply for the fact of presentation, usually with little or no benefit from server side technologies such as the ones you mentioned.
True, and you raise a good point -/did/ he threaten anyone? I cannot honestly give any answers to something like this, nor could anyone else except those directly involved. What this hinges on, I would guess, is your definition of "threaten". ( Yeah, yeah, I know how it/sounds/. ) "Threaten" as I put in my case, wherein someone actually states that they will cause you harm in some manner, or "threaten" as in an implied threat?
BTW, I also write on occasion ( for my own enjoyment ), and I would never even think of implying that children should be deprived of an environment in which to develop their creative writing styles ; what I do believe, and failed to state correctly before, is that -=I believe=- this kid wrote this story not based on his teacher's assignment, but based on a need to gain attention. Is wanting to gain attention wrong? No. Is even writing about killing the teacher and classmates wrong? Depends. But to not expect a strong reaction from such an action is, as I said earlier, extremely ignorant.
Of course, this could also stem from the fact that I am quite willing to assume certain facts in this case. ( fully aware of how dangerous assuming is )
You seem to be reaching hard this time for a subject to champion as "one of the oppressed" in your long list of Hellmouth 'victims'.
And now it's kinda personal.
Last year, my brother wrote a story for his teacher in which he changed the names of the teacher and his own into pig latin ( how clever! ) and detailed a story in which he shot the teacher. Soon thereafter, he also threatened the lives of my parents, and the principal of the school. Was he the product of a school system that excluded him based on his "difference" from the others?
Bullshit.
I have a hard time feeling pity for those who seem to forget that in all situations, one's actions carry a social impact as well as a personal one. Sure, we like to pretend that our "limitless freedom of choice" allows us to carry out any action, from writing stories in which students get high then shoot some fellow classmates and a teacher to reacting violently to exclusion/abuse from other students, but the fact remains: act against the social norm, and the reaction will be a bitch. Of course, some may immediately interpret this as my saying "don't act against the establishment" - this is false. What I wish to say is "act responsibly" - or, in another way, "pick your fights carefully". Some kid writing stories in which he shoots other people is not "being different" ; it is stupidity, plain and simple.
Slapping ourselves in the head and crying "I didn't expect to get stinged" after kicking a beehive seems rather ignorant, don't you think?
It seems that once again, issue must be taken with Katz's [sic] article. Though the primary focus of it one can find no actual fault with, there seems to be an underlying current of fanaticism ( possibly idealism ) that permeates all of his articles, and this one is no different.
Beginning with his initial argument and defense of the geek 'Hollow Man', I can find nothing to actually disagree with ( read: am I looking for something to disagree with in the first place? ), and heartily agree that an evaluation system to be used in schools does indeed mirror such "dark future" societies as portrayed in 1984, or more appropriately, Brave New World.
What I do find overreactive, and almost insulting, is the quick method by which Katz jumps to conclusions, finding fault with the media/American public who he claims to be overreacting to the Columbine incident. Follow me, if you will, with this line of reasoning: Katz writes an article that attempts to cause an immediate ( read: overreactive ) opinion in the reader to assault a situation which he believes is the product of overreaction. Fighting fire with fire, perhaps? Or is he simply following the guidelines of "sensationalistic journalism" as applied to the geek culture?
Further on, I again feel as if my intelligence is being insulted by the way in which he asks if the Mosaic 2000 program will be used to scout out members of other groups that he takes offense with. Yes, I do indeed have no love of school bullies or [literal] religious fundamentalists. However, this section seems to almost depart from the message of the article and attempt to be a "rallying cry" against the various "persona non grata" of the geek community. To be more clear: His fingering of school bullies and religious fundamentalists ( I wonder, does this include Buddhists, Islamics, Native Americans, Shinto[ists(?)], Gaians, Wiccans, etc. who might not follow the precepts set by science, or is it only Christians that he finds distasteful? ) only seems to again use sensationalism as a means of raising your (ire or interest).
I sincerely hope that, as any geek should, persons who read this article step back and think for themselves before formulating an opinion. One must remember that in an opinion article, the opinion stems from the fact that it is the author's opinion only, and one which does not necessarily inherit wisdom or truth based on the sheer merit of publication.
Recently this thought had been discussed in a review of Epic's Unreal Tournament, but was either not submitted or not responded to by the parties involved ( Epic and id Software ).
Is there a conscious effort to present an attitude of "refinement" in the Quake/Doom series, instead of innovation? Or, to elaborate: The Quake/Doom series has changed very little in actual terms of gameplay mechanics - instead, the code has been refined and tuned to create what one imagines must be the ideal 3d FPS environment. Is this on purpose? And, to continue that line of thought, will the next id project be radically different from what has been created so far, or will it stick to the same formula as the previous games?
For any out there that have been complaining, please allow me to shed a silent tear. The endless masses of consumeroids have their morning tranquility of force fed corporately altered news interrupted by video card enthusiasts ( or paid off placard wavers ). Rats.
Hey, I know AMD doesn't have a lilly white past, but this is ridiculous. If any company wants decent SMP performance at a 'relatively' cheap price ( again, compared to the -=real=- heavy chips ) then Athlon is the only choice. Any corporation that would choose Intel over the Athlon High End series either has a special deal with Intel, or an uninformed IT department.
Using illegal MP3's is the choice of the individual. Sure, we all do anyways, but the fact is that they -are- illegal. I don't care - I've made choices to the opposite, and I'll deal with it. My personal reason for deciding to? Because the record companys are all -more- amoral ( or antimoral ) than the people who screw them over. Or, to put it another way, they're more capitalistic. But I believe this isn't an exact reply to Mr. Katz's article, but just an assertion, so I'll withold from spamming the rest of you anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
What about DHTML? Or Client Side XML? Or the latest version of Javascript? Or the [etc].
Functionality as related to information retrieval, yes, you are right - PHP or Java Servlets perform the task perfectly well.
But information presentation....hell, even PHP.net uses DHTML for those pop-up windows in their rollover code. Not to mention the fact that many sites that utilize proprietary extensions are "art" or "showcase" sites, built simply for the fact of presentation, usually with little or no benefit from server side technologies such as the ones you mentioned.
netshade
True, and you raise a good point - /did/ he threaten anyone? I cannot honestly give any answers to something like this, nor could anyone else except those directly involved. What this hinges on, I would guess, is your definition of "threaten". ( Yeah, yeah, I know how it /sounds/. ) "Threaten" as I put in my case, wherein someone actually states that they will cause you harm in some manner, or "threaten" as in an implied threat?
BTW, I also write on occasion ( for my own enjoyment ), and I would never even think of implying that children should be deprived of an environment in which to develop their creative writing styles ; what I do believe, and failed to state correctly before, is that -=I believe=- this kid wrote this story not based on his teacher's assignment, but based on a need to gain attention. Is wanting to gain attention wrong? No. Is even writing about killing the teacher and classmates wrong? Depends. But to not expect a strong reaction from such an action is, as I said earlier, extremely ignorant.
Of course, this could also stem from the fact that I am quite willing to assume certain facts in this case. ( fully aware of how dangerous assuming is )
netshade
Why, Katz?
You seem to be reaching hard this time for a subject to champion as "one of the oppressed" in your long list of Hellmouth 'victims'.
And now it's kinda personal.
Last year, my brother wrote a story for his teacher in which he changed the names of the teacher and his own into pig latin ( how clever! ) and detailed a story in which he shot the teacher. Soon thereafter, he also threatened the lives of my parents, and the principal of the school. Was he the product of a school system that excluded him based on his "difference" from the others?
Bullshit.
I have a hard time feeling pity for those who seem to forget that in all situations, one's actions carry a social impact as well as a personal one. Sure, we like to pretend that our "limitless freedom of choice" allows us to carry out any action, from writing stories in which students get high then shoot some fellow classmates and a teacher to reacting violently to exclusion/abuse from other students, but the fact remains: act against the social norm, and the reaction will be a bitch. Of course, some may immediately interpret this as my saying "don't act against the establishment" - this is false. What I wish to say is "act responsibly" - or, in another way, "pick your fights carefully". Some kid writing stories in which he shoots other people is not "being different" ; it is stupidity, plain and simple.
Slapping ourselves in the head and crying "I didn't expect to get stinged" after kicking a beehive seems rather ignorant, don't you think?
netshade
It seems that once again, issue must be taken with Katz's [sic] article. Though the primary focus of it one can find no actual fault with, there seems to be an underlying current of fanaticism ( possibly idealism ) that permeates all of his articles, and this one is no different.
Beginning with his initial argument and defense of the geek 'Hollow Man', I can find nothing to actually disagree with ( read: am I looking for something to disagree with in the first place? ), and heartily agree that an evaluation system to be used in schools does indeed mirror such "dark future" societies as portrayed in 1984, or more appropriately, Brave New World.
What I do find overreactive, and almost insulting, is the quick method by which Katz jumps to conclusions, finding fault with the media/American public who he claims to be overreacting to the Columbine incident. Follow me, if you will, with this line of reasoning: Katz writes an article that attempts to cause an immediate ( read: overreactive ) opinion in the reader to assault a situation which he believes is the product of overreaction. Fighting fire with fire, perhaps? Or is he simply following the guidelines of "sensationalistic journalism" as applied to the geek culture?
Further on, I again feel as if my intelligence is being insulted by the way in which he asks if the Mosaic 2000 program will be used to scout out members of other groups that he takes offense with. Yes, I do indeed have no love of school bullies or [literal] religious fundamentalists. However, this section seems to almost depart from the message of the article and attempt to be a "rallying cry" against the various "persona non grata" of the geek community. To be more clear: His fingering of school bullies and religious fundamentalists ( I wonder, does this include Buddhists, Islamics, Native Americans, Shinto[ists(?)], Gaians, Wiccans, etc. who might not follow the precepts set by science, or is it only Christians that he finds distasteful? ) only seems to again use sensationalism as a means of raising your (ire or interest).
I sincerely hope that, as any geek should, persons who read this article step back and think for themselves before formulating an opinion. One must remember that in an opinion article, the opinion stems from the fact that it is the author's opinion only, and one which does not necessarily inherit wisdom or truth based on the sheer merit of publication.
net_shade
Recently this thought had been discussed in a review of Epic's Unreal Tournament, but was either not submitted or not responded to by the parties involved ( Epic and id Software ).
Is there a conscious effort to present an attitude of "refinement" in the Quake/Doom series, instead of innovation? Or, to elaborate: The Quake/Doom series has changed very little in actual terms of gameplay mechanics - instead, the code has been refined and tuned to create what one imagines must be the ideal 3d FPS environment. Is this on purpose? And, to continue that line of thought, will the next id project be radically different from what has been created so far, or will it stick to the same formula as the previous games?
For any out there that have been complaining, please allow me to shed a silent tear. The endless masses of consumeroids have their morning tranquility of force fed corporately altered news interrupted by video card enthusiasts ( or paid off placard wavers ). Rats.
What the hell?
Hey, I know AMD doesn't have a lilly white past, but this is ridiculous. If any company wants decent SMP performance at a 'relatively' cheap price ( again, compared to the -=real=- heavy chips ) then Athlon is the only choice. Any corporation that would choose Intel over the Athlon High End series either has a special deal with Intel, or an uninformed IT department.
Basically....
Using illegal MP3's is the choice of the individual. Sure, we all do anyways, but the fact is that they -are- illegal. I don't care - I've made choices to the opposite, and I'll deal with it. My personal reason for deciding to? Because the record companys are all -more- amoral ( or antimoral ) than the people who screw them over. Or, to put it another way, they're more capitalistic. But I believe this isn't an exact reply to Mr. Katz's article, but just an assertion, so I'll withold from spamming the rest of you anymore.
ns