Westernco Donuts, definitely, if there is one in your area.
I highly recommend the glazed chocolate cake donut. Much better than a raised donut, plus chocolate to boot, and the glazing is just like icing on the cake. Literally.
If you prefer something in a jelly-filled powdered donut, I'd recommend the raspberry-filled, or lemon-filled varieties, though a combination of these would be a good strategy to employ.
This, of course, depends on whether you're going to be eating these yourself, or sharing with others. If sharing, definitely go for a variety pack.
But trust me on the Westernco. Their cake donuts blow away KrispyKreme's cake donuts. Only do KrispyKreme over Westernco if you prefer raised donuts. (yech)
Okay, here's what you should do, IMO. Design for HTML 4.01 transitional. Or XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Use tables for layouts, and CSS for font specifications and a _few_ other things that are all commonly supported, _exactly the same_, on all major browsers. This is called "lowest common denominator." Don't use _anything_ that's not standard, mind you, but use that which is _correctly implemented_ from within the standards, and you'll be alright. When XHTML came out, browsers didn't stop supporting the older standards - they still work, and honestly, they work more reliably across the modern browsers than ANY of the newer standards. That's just the way it is until MS decides to actually FIX their LAME-ASS browser.
Is it your job to push people into installing a decent browser? No. Would it work, even if you tried? Hell no! Is developing _ONLY_ for the latest standards going to magically make everyone who comes to your site, or even a reasonable percentage, _want_ to upgrade? Another hell no.
You need to get real - the MS IE browser dominance is going to stick around a while (another few years, most likely), and by that time, hopefully Longhorn will be here, and will bring with it a browser that supports standards. One can only hope.
So there ya go!
Oh, another option: develop the whole site in Flash - pixel perfect on every browser that supports Flash!:)
There are varying qualities of invar shadow-masks. I use an Hitachi 21" monitor, and it's bloody marvelous. Trinitron tubes have that (to me) VERY annoying dampening wire - it's so distracting it makes me want to kill people. So, for the sake of society at large, I use shadow-mask monitors. You're welcome.
You don't even wanna know what had to go through back when we used stone tablets. AND we programmed in pure binary! And no fancy metal chisels, either. Still, nobody worried about carpal tunnel back then, either, so I guess it all balances out in the end.
> One example from my campus is the retiring of the newsgroup server and telnet.
Okay, see, gopher being retired is one thing - we have a superior (far superior) replacement. There _is_ no obviously-superior replacement for NNTP yet, and the only superior replacement for telnet is secure telnet.
The interfaces of web forum software are still leagues behind that of a decent NNTP client, and what are you going to do when you need the functionality of telnet?
The same argument can be made for passwords, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Noone's advocating that this be implemented for every site, or as a substitute for other security measures. This is a neat idea that someone's come up with as an OPTIONAL and ADDITIONAL layer of security. Stop looking for something to complain about.
> what digital watches can't do, according to sweep-hand proponents, is display > the time and context as elegantly and intuitively as an analog model.
Intuitively? INTUITIVELY?!
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Analog watches are the antithesis of 'intuitive' as far as display time goes. And the ones without numbers on them are the _WORST_. Yeesh. There's never a Carp around when someone needs slapping.:(
I say Intel should take the Dothan design, add SSE3, and make a dual-core processor outta _that_. More processing power than Northwood or Prescott, and half the power consumption.
Okay, the satisfying solution - kill all spammers. "It's the only way to be sure." Yet when I suggest this, people look at me like _I'm_ the criminal! *shrug*
Solution 2 - new technology for mail servers. A combination of a black list and a white list and challenge/response. If you make it through the challenge, depending on the destination user's preference, you automatically make it onto the white list. The user can (should) set up a list of people/mailing lists already on their whitelist. The user can generate one-time email addresses that will let, say, an ecommerce site respond to them, and that first response's from address gets added to the whitelist, but anything else using that address gets bounced as spam. Bounce messages get tossed, not responded to. Any challenge not responded to in x amount of time (configurable) get tossed (or put in a bin for the user to check on periodically).
The hard parts: requires new software, requires users (who are almost ALL stupid) to respond to a challenge if they've never emailed that person before.
Good: stops spam at the server level, not at the mail client level. Doesn't require government intervention. Puts user in control of email they get. An IQ test of sorts for people to get onto mailing lists (yay!).
Now WHY is this SO hard? An upgraded version of TMDA could do it if you slap a web interface on it.
I think I'd be kind of conflicted about saving that last target from being hit, though.
I mean, it's historic, and all, but saving the life of a politician is kind of a neutral act in life, seems to me. I guess I could just pretend it was President Bartlett in there or something, and feel good about it.:)
I saw this about a month ago being played in a computer store, and was blown away. The graphics on this game are noticeably beyond anything else I've seen currently available. There's definitely still much room for improvement, if that's the only game out there with that kind of detail.
Also third-person games blow away FPSs, IMO. Except for BZFlag - that game rawks!:) (ps to BZFlaggers - GMs & Lasers are for pussies! PUUUUSSSSEEEEEES. (Yes, I mean *YOU*!))
Slashdot Mirror
Westernco Donuts, definitely, if there is one in your area.
I highly recommend the glazed chocolate cake donut. Much better than a raised donut, plus chocolate to boot, and the glazing is just like icing on the cake. Literally.
If you prefer something in a jelly-filled powdered donut, I'd recommend the raspberry-filled, or lemon-filled varieties, though a combination of these would be a good strategy to employ.
This, of course, depends on whether you're going to be eating these yourself, or sharing with others. If sharing, definitely go for a variety pack.
But trust me on the Westernco. Their cake donuts blow away KrispyKreme's cake donuts. Only do KrispyKreme over Westernco if you prefer raised donuts. (yech)
Okay, here's what you should do, IMO. Design for HTML 4.01 transitional. Or XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Use tables for layouts, and CSS for font specifications and a _few_ other things that are all commonly supported, _exactly the same_, on all major browsers. This is called "lowest common denominator." Don't use _anything_ that's not standard, mind you, but use that which is _correctly implemented_ from within the standards, and you'll be alright. When XHTML came out, browsers didn't stop supporting the older standards - they still work, and honestly, they work more reliably across the modern browsers than ANY of the newer standards. That's just the way it is until MS decides to actually FIX their LAME-ASS browser.
:)
Is it your job to push people into installing a decent browser? No.
Would it work, even if you tried? Hell no!
Is developing _ONLY_ for the latest standards going to magically make everyone who comes to your site, or even a reasonable percentage, _want_ to upgrade? Another hell no.
You need to get real - the MS IE browser dominance is going to stick around a while (another few years, most likely), and by that time, hopefully Longhorn will be here, and will bring with it a browser that supports standards. One can only hope.
So there ya go!
Oh, another option: develop the whole site in Flash - pixel perfect on every browser that supports Flash!
There are varying qualities of invar shadow-masks. I use an Hitachi 21" monitor, and it's bloody marvelous. Trinitron tubes have that (to me) VERY annoying dampening wire - it's so distracting it makes me want to kill people. So, for the sake of society at large, I use shadow-mask monitors. You're welcome.
You don't even wanna know what had to go through back when we used stone tablets. AND we programmed in pure binary! And no fancy metal chisels, either. Still, nobody worried about carpal tunnel back then, either, so I guess it all balances out in the end.
HyperGlobalMegaNetBrowser
Be careful or Bill Gates might "buy them out"! (He didn't get rich by writing a lotta checks!)
Relive the Battle of Hoth
> Hubble is the first to go - followed a close second by the IIS.
:)
I agree with the second half of that - IIS should definitely go. Good thing Apache has 'alternate' funding!
Oh geez. Sorry, been a long week. :)
> One example from my campus is the retiring of the newsgroup server and telnet.
Okay, see, gopher being retired is one thing - we have a superior (far superior) replacement. There _is_ no obviously-superior replacement for NNTP yet, and the only superior replacement for telnet is secure telnet.
The interfaces of web forum software are still leagues behind that of a decent NNTP client, and what are you going to do when you need the functionality of telnet?
Bizarre decision.
Let's try this again. Here's the part you missed:
> This is a neat idea that someone's come up with as an OPTIONAL and ADDITIONAL layer of security.
Please to note the word 'additional.'
Thank you for your time.
The same argument can be made for passwords, but I don't see anyone complaining about that. Noone's advocating that this be implemented for every site, or as a substitute for other security measures. This is a neat idea that someone's come up with as an OPTIONAL and ADDITIONAL layer of security. Stop looking for something to complain about.
> what digital watches can't do, according to sweep-hand proponents, is display
:(
> the time and context as elegantly and intuitively as an analog model.
Intuitively? INTUITIVELY?!
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Analog watches are the antithesis of 'intuitive' as far as display time goes. And the ones without numbers on them are the _WORST_. Yeesh. There's never a Carp around when someone needs slapping.
Photoshop is probably the hardest game _EVAR_! The one game that's fastest on a Mac (usually). :)
My favourite part of the game is seeing how many layers I can add before the dreaded "Execution Error".
BTW - Does anyone have any cheat codes for this thing?
> It makes stars on the edge of the field look like seagulls.
Thanks for that explanation. I can stop taking those meds, now. *whew*
Either that or his neighbours are really, _really_ small.
I say Intel should take the Dothan design, add SSE3, and make a dual-core processor outta _that_. More processing power than Northwood or Prescott, and half the power consumption.
Okay, the satisfying solution - kill all spammers. "It's the only way to be sure." Yet when I suggest this, people look at me like _I'm_ the criminal! *shrug*
Solution 2 - new technology for mail servers. A combination of a black list and a white list and challenge/response. If you make it through the challenge, depending on the destination user's preference, you automatically make it onto the white list. The user can (should) set up a list of people/mailing lists already on their whitelist. The user can generate one-time email addresses that will let, say, an ecommerce site respond to them, and that first response's from address gets added to the whitelist, but anything else using that address gets bounced as spam. Bounce messages get tossed, not responded to. Any challenge not responded to in x amount of time (configurable) get tossed (or put in a bin for the user to check on periodically).
The hard parts: requires new software, requires users (who are almost ALL stupid) to respond to a challenge if they've never emailed that person before.
Good: stops spam at the server level, not at the mail client level. Doesn't require government intervention. Puts user in control of email they get. An IQ test of sorts for people to get onto mailing lists (yay!).
Now WHY is this SO hard? An upgraded version of TMDA could do it if you slap a web interface on it.
Dig Dug!
Way to kill a joke, dipstick.
I think I'd be kind of conflicted about saving that last target from being hit, though.
:)
I mean, it's historic, and all, but saving the life of a politician is kind of a neutral act in life, seems to me. I guess I could just pretend it was President Bartlett in there or something, and feel good about it.
Well, she'd probably keep it on all the time, but you damned kids are so noisy! Sheesh.
I saw this about a month ago being played in a computer store, and was blown away. The graphics on this game are noticeably beyond anything else I've seen currently available. There's definitely still much room for improvement, if that's the only game out there with that kind of detail.
:) (ps to BZFlaggers - GMs & Lasers are for pussies! PUUUUSSSSEEEEEES. (Yes, I mean *YOU*!))
Also third-person games blow away FPSs, IMO. Except for BZFlag - that game rawks!
Hmmm, sounds like Toy Story 3 in the making!
Oh, you didn't mean those kind of toys? Too bad...
Will you please shut up? I'm trying to use the phone!
Bit Bucket (*woosh!*) He shoots, he scores!
Yes, ye olde bit bucket - silent but deadly. Virus-infected emails check in, but they don't check out (or get delivered). Saves disk space, too.