Actually someone did already, though I don't believe it's been added to the scheme archive. How do I know this? I created a set of icons (JPEG | Mac format) for my Mac and the author used them without asking. Of course I can't complain as I did the same to Apple.
I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and state that this is a different situation than a theme for a competing OS. Frankly, I don't see why Apple should care if users of the current MacOS want to make their machines look like the next generation OS. Greg Landwebber also authored Aaron which gave your Mac the Platinum appearance several years before MacOS 8.0 was released. (Aaron is a play on Aaron Copland, who was the name-sake of Apple's ill-fated Copland OS.)
Do we need to go through this again? I can excuse this to an extent because it's common knowledge, but I always see a knee-jerk reaction whenever Apple does something not-so-nice: "They stole their GUI from Xerox PARC."
Woz, Did you feel wrong stealing outright from Xerox, and what did you think when Microsoft stole from Apple? Do you think Microsoft has a monopoly on the computer industry? Plan on going back to Apple? Also, can you point out more of the minor flaws in the movie? Thanks, David
WOZ:
Steve Jobs made the case to Xerox PARC execs directly that they had great technology but that Apple knew how to make it affordable enough to change the world. This was very open. In the end, Xerox got a large block of Apple stock for sharing the technology. That's not stealing outright.
Apple didn't get any stock from Microsoft. Nor was Apple dealt with openly in this area by Microsoft.
Usually when attempting to steal something, one neither enters negotions nor pays for it with stock that went through the roof shortly after the deal was completed.
A lawyer for one unhappy consumer who registered more than 100 of these new domains said the governing bodies could have a difficult time proving the recent glitch was a mistake, as it took them three months to discover the error.
I have no sympathy for this person. This is an obvious case of squatting. Excuse my ignorance, but doesn't Internic have a policy against that sort of behaviour anyway?
Anyone ever notice that the Imagination Pavillon is the closest one can get to an acid trip without actually doing it? Lots of colors... sappy colliope music... that damned dragon, etc.
Standard disclaimer: IANALG (I am not a Linux geek.) Rather, I'm a web design geek. So please, be nice.
From what I understand, what a lot of the OpenSource movement is about is doing it yourself if you don't like how it's being done now. Don't like commercial Unix, Linus? Make your own fscking Linux and let everyone contribute. Oh yeah: Give it away free to really piss people off.
In this discussion, there are a ton of excellent ideas for how search engines should operate. Yet no one, to my knowledge, has put forward the next logical step: Build our own search engine. Google is a good start but hey, I know you guys could build it better. Worried about hardware and bandwidth costs? Venture capital.
You missed the best stuff, though! You forgot to mention:
{Hn} tags to denote headers instead of using stupid workarounds like {font size=n}. The former denotes structure and importance.
Use of {strong} and {em} instead of {b} and {i}, again denoting structure.
Take a look at my site, theFYI. Still a work in progress as the backend isn't done (yet). Dig through the source and see how it's built. I would have loved to use CSS for element layout but, hey, the browser support just is not there yet. Stuck with tables for a few more years. BUT take a look at the structure around each article. The header is denoted with an {h1} tag, its appearance changed with CSS-1. The paragraphs are marked with paragraph tags and, well hell, the linked URLs are surrouned with {cite} tags. That's how you code indexable HTML.
Used a lot of the same tricks on another site, http://www.ptrm.org/ and the site does well in the search engines. Specifically, check out the page on the PTRM's paleontology field tours. It does well in the engines simple because it's got 'dinosaur' in the page title and in a header tag.
(Yes, I know that curly brackets don't go around HTML tags. I just didn't want to escape the angle brackets everytime I used an example of HTML)
Actually you can do something similar already. Just sniff for the robot's user-agent and display different content for the robot, like a very structural, correctly coded HTML index of your site.
Your forgetting the mother of all Apple eggs. Ever cracked the case on a 128k or 512k? All the egineers signatures, including Jobs', are embossed in the case's plastic.
The mouse is actually quite nice, IMHO. It's well balanced and works great--not as a full-hand mouse, but as one used mostly with your fingers. (And no, it doesn't turn around on you.) Besides, don't knock it till you've tried it...
What about all those users out there that can't change? Those who just can't see all your pretty pictures?
Did I say that I advocated making web sites inaccessible to users without graphical browsers? No. With every site I create, I ensure that it render competently in Lynx and is as close to "pure" HTML as possible. (i.e. It validates; if it doesn't, I build my own doc-type.) Why do I do this? Spiders only read text.
So please, go back to your fanatic Luddite cave. Don't be one of those people who don't think a site about kaleidoscopes should have images.
Web designers are not the problem--W3BD3Z1NR3Z, our version of script kiddies, are the problem. Good Web designers don't alienate large portions of their audience--20% of all users is a HUGE share of the user base.
This is going to be labeled flamebait, but the Gimp is not superior to Photoshop--nonexistant/poor support for process color, color calibration, pantone, etc. Don't get me wrong--Gimp is a great image editor, but before I can use it for production, it needs to be more pre-press friendly.
(The reminds me, wasn't someone porting Gimp to Be? I haven't used Be in so long, I've lost touch...)
Though I haven't run any formal benchmarks, Amazon.com seems much peppier after the upgrade. Before, pages would take forever to transfer and their servers took about 15 seconds to even answer a GET/POST request, let alone do something like SSL.
Anyone got official speeds? Before and after would be cool.
We should continue this policy because the cost of entry into the nuclear club is now low enough for any 3rd world nation and many individuals to afford.
Hmmm.... brings an entirely new meaning to 'blue screen of death' if you get my drift. Though it's a bit James Bond-ian, I hold that it is still a reasonablely plausible prediction.
Of course... it would probably be a dud anyway....
I'm not quite sure if I have this right, but I believe that one of the nuclear disarmament treaties the US holds with the former USSR specifically allows an ABM facility to be placed in North Dakota and nowhere else.
I won't get into the little economic-political debates with any Alaskans on/., but North Dakota does make a lot of sense. First, we're in the middle of North America, providing equal coverage to both coasts. An Alaskan installation would cover Hawaii but wouldn't be able to cover the east coast as effectively.
Additionally anyone who has ever visited northeastern North Dakota has seen the relatively massive Airforce presence in the region. Though most lay empty, the state is dotted with nuclear missle silos, enough where (I think) North Dakota would have been the world's 3rd largest nuclear power if the state had seceded. Then there is the still functioning Cavalier Air Station which watchers the north pole for incoming nukes... And one cannot forget the abandoned but friggin cool Nekoma installation whose purpose actually was ABM. [Picture - Best I Could Find]
The parallel mission responsibility of ARADCOM to develop and deploy a ballistic missile defense system for CONUS was continued until the functions were assumed by the Ballistic Missile Defense Program Manager on September 3, 1974.
This September 3 handoff from ARADCOM to the program manager preceded, by 13 months, the date that the SAFEGUARD complex in North Dakota became operational. This complex, called the Mickelsen Complex after ARADCOM 's third commanding general, Lt. Gen. Stanley R. Mickelsen, was located 100 miles northwest of Grand Forks. Its reason for being was to defend 150 Minuteman missiles located nearby and to provide a "light" defense of the upper-Midwest of the continent against ballistic missile attack.
Donald Baucom gives a succinct description of the Mickelsen complex in his book, The Origins of SDI: In a number of ways, the Mickelsen facility was a technological marvel. The 80-foot-tall truncated pyramid that housed the antennas for the MSR dominated the flat landscape around the town of Nekoma. The structure's four-foot-thick concrete walls were sloped at a 35-degree angle to provide hardening against the effects of nuclear blast. Each sloping surface of the pyramid held a radar antenna that was 13 feet in diameter and contained five thousand phased-array elements.
The four faces of the MSR allowed it to search for targets coming from all directions, and it could acquire these targets at a range of 300 miles. The MSR worked in conjunction with a PAR near Cavalier, North Dakota, 25 miles northeast of the missile Site. This was also a phased-array radar, but it was designed to search in only one direction - toward the north. In the event of a Soviet attack, the PAR would detect incoming missiles at a range of I 800 miles, about the time the warheads were passing over the North Pole. Detection at this range would allow only six minutes to plan the battle against the approaching reentry vehicles. Computers associated with the PAR would determine the trajectory of incoming missiles and pass the information to the MSR for control of the defensive missiles that would attack the warheads.
Two types of missiles were employed in the SAFEGUARD system. The high-altitude SPARTAN missile was built by McDonnell Douglas. It was a three-stage, solid-propellant rocket armed with a nuclear warhead that killed warheads by blast and X-rays that were lethal to warheads several miles away. SPARTAN was 55 feet long. The second missile, SPRINT, was a marvel of aeronautics and space technology. Built by Martin Marietta, it was designed to operate at hypersonic speeds in the earth's atmosphere; at its top speed, the missile's skin became hotter than the interior of its rocket motor and glowed incandescently. If one somehow could have trained an acetylene torch on the nose of the missile at this speed, the hot gases of the torch would have cooled the nose. The electronic components of the SPRINT were designed to withstand accelerations of 100 times gravity. The missile was 27 feet long, consisted of two stages, and used solid fuel. Like SPARTAN, SPRINT carried a nuclear warhead.
Together these missiles provided a "layered" defense. SPARTAN was designed to attack the incoming "threat cloud" of warheads, boosters and decoys while it was still above the atmosphere. SPRINT would then attack surviving warheads after they had penetrated the atmosphere where the resistance and friction of the air would separate the warheads from decoys and booster debris.
Nothing in the ABM Treaty prohibits the United States from reactivating the Nekoma ABM base. Nor is the United States prevented from destroying the Nekoma facilities and building a new ABM site in a location near an ICBM deployment area. One could be chosen to provide better coverage of the contiguous 48 states than could be achieved from North Dakota. The United States also has the option to move its single site to a location within 150 kilometers (km) of Washington, DC. If well-chosen, such a deployment might protect a small fraction of the American population against a few nuclear warheads.
So there's the history, at least. BTW, some of you may be wonderinghow I could just pull this knowledge from the ether--The brother-in-law of an ex-girlfriend of mine was stationed at the Cavalier Air Station. Supposedly, he played Quake all day. Makes you feel really safe, doesn't it?:-)
First, two disclaimers: 1) IANAL 2) There is no way I'm switching to PNG until it has browser support--sorry, GIFs are part of my living. (It'd be like asking you guys to switch to a new,.01a build of a kernel just because Linus suddenly became evil.)
Anyway, here's my thoughts: If company Foo makes Widget illegally using a process patented by company Bar, the purchasers of Widget are not liable for the illegal actions of company Foo.
Now, with the players substituted: If Developer Joe's software uses LZW w/o a license from Unisys, End User Jane is not liable for the actions of Developer Joe.
Right? Or am I just stupid. (Sorry--on a MAJOR candy corn buzz right now.)
The library at the University of North Dakota names all of its machines after famous authors. Last night, I specifically sat down at Keats over Fitzgerland simply because it better fits my personality.
For what its worth, I once worked with a printer that named its Mac file servers (hey--its publishing, guys) in the following order: Lorem, Ipsum, Dolorem, etc.
The library at the University of North Dakota names all of its machines after famous authors. Last night, I specifically sat down at Keats over Fitzgerland simply because it better fits my personality.
For what its worth, I once worked with a printer that named its Mac file servers (hey--its publishing, guys) in the following order: Lorem, Ipsum, Dolorem, etc.
Hmmm... if the FCC imposes (or enables telcos to impose) a $.10/minute connect fee for all internet connections, that'd be great amunition against spam. Much like Fax Spam, the end-user would be paying out of pocket to receive unsolicited crap. Just trying to be optimistic:-)
On a more pertinent note, how would telephone companies even be able to meter this? To their telephone switches, a modem signal is just a REALLY noisy voice call. If they started monitoring calls to differentiate between a modem call and a voice call, we'd be looking at some pretty severe privacy issues as well
The only system which might work would be a special prefix of some sort, like hash-5-0 or something, to signal that you'd be making a data connection--but this, of course, could be circumvented.
As a teen, Chris Cunningham read Neuromancer - three times. Soon he could imagine every scene of a Neuromancer movie and started working on storyboards. Years later, the twentysomething prodigy (he worked with Stanley Kubrick as a youth) will bring William Gibson's classic to the screen, when Seven Arts releases the pic next year. The British director - known for his f/x work in music videos and films like Alien 3 - shies away from hyping the movie while it's in development. But Gibson isn't so demure: "The guy's a genius," says the author. "He's the man for the job - Neuromancer was his Wind in the Willows."
I presume that Gibson would have heavy influence on the project, including technical and artistic input in the truest sense. Now I know Neuromancer is visionary and it can be technologically off-the-wall at some points - but at least Gibson touches base with reality.
Oh hey, totally tangential but Gibson is also in Wired 7.10, the digital video issue. Interesting... he's got a PowerMa c in a 5x00-style case sitting on his desk! (Doh! That's write - he's one of those damned artsy-litsy people, not a Linux hacker. Seriosuly though if I'm not mistaken, in the article he mentions that he's trying to learn Linux... not sure - the full text isn't on the Wired site yet and I'm too damned lazy to reread the article.)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually someone did already, though I don't believe it's been added to the scheme archive. How do I know this? I created a set of icons (JPEG | Mac format) for my Mac and the author used them without asking. Of course I can't complain as I did the same to Apple.
I'm going to go out on a limb, here, and state that this is a different situation than a theme for a competing OS. Frankly, I don't see why Apple should care if users of the current MacOS want to make their machines look like the next generation OS. Greg Landwebber also authored Aaron which gave your Mac the Platinum appearance several years before MacOS 8.0 was released. (Aaron is a play on Aaron Copland, who was the name-sake of Apple's ill-fated Copland OS.)
----
Do we need to go through this again? I can excuse this to an extent because it's common knowledge, but I always see a knee-jerk reaction whenever Apple does something not-so-nice: "They stole their GUI from Xerox PARC."
No, they didn't.
From http://www.woz.org/woz/presponses/ commets24.html And The Woz Spaketh:
Usually when attempting to steal something, one neither enters negotions nor pays for it with stock that went through the roof shortly after the deal was completed.
----
A lawyer for one unhappy consumer who registered more than 100 of these new domains said the governing bodies could have a difficult time proving the recent glitch was a mistake, as it took them three months to discover the error.
I have no sympathy for this person. This is an obvious case of squatting. Excuse my ignorance, but doesn't Internic have a policy against that sort of behaviour anyway?
----
Anyone ever notice that the Imagination Pavillon is the closest one can get to an acid trip without actually doing it? Lots of colors... sappy colliope music... that damned dragon, etc.
I heard about this years ago. They used to call them IP patents.
Standard disclaimer: IANALG (I am not a Linux geek.) Rather, I'm a web design geek. So please, be nice.
From what I understand, what a lot of the OpenSource movement is about is doing it yourself if you don't like how it's being done now. Don't like commercial Unix, Linus? Make your own fscking Linux and let everyone contribute. Oh yeah: Give it away free to really piss people off.
In this discussion, there are a ton of excellent ideas for how search engines should operate. Yet no one, to my knowledge, has put forward the next logical step: Build our own search engine. Google is a good start but hey, I know you guys could build it better. Worried about hardware and bandwidth costs? Venture capital.
As I said, do it yourself. :-)
You missed the best stuff, though! You forgot to mention:
Take a look at my site, theFYI. Still a work in progress as the backend isn't done (yet). Dig through the source and see how it's built. I would have loved to use CSS for element layout but, hey, the browser support just is not there yet. Stuck with tables for a few more years. BUT take a look at the structure around each article. The header is denoted with an {h1} tag, its appearance changed with CSS-1. The paragraphs are marked with paragraph tags and, well hell, the linked URLs are surrouned with {cite} tags. That's how you code indexable HTML.
Used a lot of the same tricks on another site, http://www.ptrm.org/ and the site does well in the search engines. Specifically, check out the page on the PTRM's paleontology field tours. It does well in the engines simple because it's got 'dinosaur' in the page title and in a header tag.
(Yes, I know that curly brackets don't go around HTML tags. I just didn't want to escape the angle brackets everytime I used an example of HTML)
Actually you can do something similar already. Just sniff for the robot's user-agent and display different content for the robot, like a very structural, correctly coded HTML index of your site.
Your forgetting the mother of all Apple eggs. Ever cracked the case on a 128k or 512k? All the egineers signatures, including Jobs', are embossed in the case's plastic.
The mouse is actually quite nice, IMHO. It's well balanced and works great--not as a full-hand mouse, but as one used mostly with your fingers. (And no, it doesn't turn around on you.) Besides, don't knock it till you've tried it...
The keyboards though? Ugh... nasty.
What about all those users out there that can't change? Those who just can't see all your pretty pictures?
Did I say that I advocated making web sites inaccessible to users without graphical browsers? No. With every site I create, I ensure that it render competently in Lynx and is as close to "pure" HTML as possible. (i.e. It validates; if it doesn't, I build my own doc-type.) Why do I do this? Spiders only read text.
So please, go back to your fanatic Luddite cave. Don't be one of those people who don't think a site about kaleidoscopes should have images.
Web designers are not the problem--W3BD3Z1NR3Z, our version of script kiddies, are the problem. Good Web designers don't alienate large portions of their audience--20% of all users is a HUGE share of the user base.
This is going to be labeled flamebait, but the Gimp is not superior to Photoshop--nonexistant/poor support for process color, color calibration, pantone, etc. Don't get me wrong--Gimp is a great image editor, but before I can use it for production, it needs to be more pre-press friendly.
(The reminds me, wasn't someone porting Gimp to Be? I haven't used Be in so long, I've lost touch...)
Just my 2px...
Though I haven't run any formal benchmarks, Amazon.com seems much peppier after the upgrade. Before, pages would take forever to transfer and their servers took about 15 seconds to even answer a GET/POST request, let alone do something like SSL.
Anyone got official speeds? Before and after would be cool.
Actually assuming the internet holds to its original purpose, perhaps you might be able to frag the few remaing souls in a Quake death match.
On the missile silo, I especially love the fact that thet specifically mention that it can survive direct nuclear hit!
We should continue this policy because the cost of entry into the nuclear club is now low enough for any 3rd world nation and many individuals to afford.
Hmmm.... brings an entirely new meaning to 'blue screen of death' if you get my drift. Though it's a bit James Bond-ian, I hold that it is still a reasonablely plausible prediction.
Of course... it would probably be a dud anyway....
If the US does honor the treaty, I'm making a quick dash 80 miles to the north:Canada.
I'm not quite sure if I have this right, but I believe that one of the nuclear disarmament treaties the US holds with the former USSR specifically allows an ABM facility to be placed in North Dakota and nowhere else.
I won't get into the little economic-political debates with any Alaskans on /., but North Dakota does make a lot of sense. First, we're in the middle of North America, providing equal coverage to both coasts. An Alaskan installation would cover Hawaii but wouldn't be able to cover the east coast as effectively.
Additionally anyone who has ever visited northeastern North Dakota has seen the relatively massive Airforce presence in the region. Though most lay empty, the state is dotted with nuclear missle silos, enough where (I think) North Dakota would have been the world's 3rd largest nuclear power if the state had seceded. Then there is the still functioning Cavalier Air Station which watchers the north pole for incoming nukes... And one cannot forget the abandoned but friggin cool Nekoma installation whose purpose actually was ABM. [Picture - Best I Could Find]
From http://www.redstone.army.m il/history/vigilant/chap4.html
Also, from http://www.dlcppi.org/TEXTS/FOREIGN/MISSILE.HTM
So there's the history, at least. BTW, some of you may be wonderinghow I could just pull this knowledge from the ether--The brother-in-law of an ex-girlfriend of mine was stationed at the Cavalier Air Station. Supposedly, he played Quake all day. Makes you feel really safe, doesn't it? :-)
First, two disclaimers: 1) IANAL 2) There is no way I'm switching to PNG until it has browser support--sorry, GIFs are part of my living. (It'd be like asking you guys to switch to a new, .01a build of a kernel just because Linus suddenly became evil.)
Anyway, here's my thoughts: If company Foo makes Widget illegally using a process patented by company Bar, the purchasers of Widget are not liable for the illegal actions of company Foo.
Now, with the players substituted: If Developer Joe's software uses LZW w/o a license from Unisys, End User Jane is not liable for the actions of Developer Joe.
Right? Or am I just stupid. (Sorry--on a MAJOR candy corn buzz right now.)
The library at the University of North Dakota names all of its machines after famous authors. Last night, I specifically sat down at Keats over Fitzgerland simply because it better fits my personality.
For what its worth, I once worked with a printer that named its Mac file servers (hey--its publishing, guys) in the following order: Lorem, Ipsum, Dolorem, etc.
The library at the University of North Dakota names all of its machines after famous authors. Last night, I specifically sat down at Keats over Fitzgerland simply because it better fits my personality.
For what its worth, I once worked with a printer that named its Mac file servers (hey--its publishing, guys) in the following order: Lorem, Ipsum, Dolorem, etc.
Hmmm... if the FCC imposes (or enables telcos to impose) a $.10/minute connect fee for all internet connections, that'd be great amunition against spam. Much like Fax Spam, the end-user would be paying out of pocket to receive unsolicited crap. Just trying to be optimistic :-)
On a more pertinent note, how would telephone companies even be able to meter this? To their telephone switches, a modem signal is just a REALLY noisy voice call. If they started monitoring calls to differentiate between a modem call and a voice call, we'd be looking at some pretty severe privacy issues as well
The only system which might work would be a special prefix of some sort, like hash-5-0 or something, to signal that you'd be making a data connection--but this, of course, could be circumvented.
Excuse me for my 19-year-old ignornace but: RBOC?
A few months ago in Wired reported that "Neuromancer" was being made into a feature length film:
I presume that Gibson would have heavy influence on the project, including technical and artistic input in the truest sense. Now I know Neuromancer is visionary and it can be technologically off-the-wall at some points - but at least Gibson touches base with reality.
Oh hey, totally tangential but Gibson is also in Wired 7.10, the digital video issue. Interesting... he's got a PowerMa c in a 5x00-style case sitting on his desk! (Doh! That's write - he's one of those damned artsy-litsy people, not a Linux hacker. Seriosuly though if I'm not mistaken, in the article he mentions that he's trying to learn Linux... not sure - the full text isn't on the Wired site yet and I'm too damned lazy to reread the article.)