If we just had a client side include tag that allowed you to include html in the middle of a page, much in the same way that img tags allow you to do inline images, it would just be inline html. I don't know why they haven't done it already. It makes so much sense. There are all sorts of ways to refer to other files like CSS, images, scripts, etc., but there's no way to just do the C/C++ equivalent of #include.
Yes, but for data, it doesn't seem to make much sense since the same search doesn't occur for data that travels over the border. All I have to do is wipe my drive before I enter, then pull the data over the net later. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it makes any sense.
Only iTunes can place rights restricted music using the native "Fairplay" DRM on the iPod. That is how it is a monopoly. Everybody else has to use unrestricted formats.
Just like you can't make people forget all those things you said you'd wished you didn't, you can't do the same thing on the internet. You can try all you want and even make laws about it, but it won't work. Information is hard to control.
While I'm sure the folks at these colleges are learning *something*, I never found that they were really learning much that was useful to me as an employer. Their "computer science" courses are generally about the sorts of things one can learn on the web. I need people who will use the web to learn stuff on the job. I need the school to teach them the stuff they're not likely to learn by just googling it. They're also often taught by other equally uneducated people in the industry. I never hired someone from one of these schools because none of them ever could hold a candle to the folks coming out of "real" universities. Mind you, even "real" universities produce some piss poor graduates. I don't know what it is, but perhaps the research aspect that lacks from these for-profits really makes a difference in undergraduate education.
"But the summary quotation seems to imply that DNS is somehow part of the Internet."
You are of course, missing the entire point. Just because you've defined the "Internet" as the global IP network doesn't mean that that is anything but a purely *technical* definition. No one else uses that technical definition. For most of us, DNS *is* an essential part of how the Internet works. A non-standard DNS system if widely successful (unlike existing alt DNSs) would be a serious problem in terms of people using the internet on a daily basis. If it happened years ago, we might be looking at a significantly different global network today. One that might very well be fractured.
When it comes the success of the Internet as a global network, DNS is much more than simple phone book. Yes, maybe that's what it is technically, but IP addresses are not phone numbers since no normal person on the internet knows or cares what that is. People memorize (or used to) phone numbers. They don't do that with IP addresses. Admins know this and use it to their advantage. Your cavalier dismissal of virtual hosts shows that you really don't know what you're talking about.
All teachers think this about their students sometimes. Maybe this one shouldn't have posted it for the world to see, but what do you think the teachers talk about in the teacher's lounge?
I love how you go off on the GP for claiming that the beliefs of individual scientists are irrelevant to the discussion and then use exactly the same argument (albeit by implication) to try to show the opposite thing. Make up your mind.
And while we're at it, Henry Eyring was a very respected scientist who believed firmly in God.
Yeah, it doesn't work like that. It's been tried several times before and it's basically a disaster. Problem is that there is a lot of disagreement about lots of things. It makes it hard to resolve the "right" one.
It's a little late in the year to be putting a tree together. It sounds like you're underestimating the time required to do the work. Also, the software you're using has nothing to do with it. The best software for you to use right now is a plain old text editor. Genealogy software isn't going to make things any easier when you're just starting out. When you *do* start putting the data together, just make sure you can export to GEDCOM. It's far from perfect as a file format, but it's universally used and will serve your needs until you start getting over 100 names. Only then start thinking about committing to a piece of software. It's hard to switch later.
And if you didn't get information from ancestry.com, you're doing it wrong. It's a very good site. You should think twice before you disparage a website you had very little time with.
Yup. It is. Their wealth represents an unfair accumulation of wealth far beyond their value to society. It makes sense to tax them heavily to pay for their negative impact on society.
Significant digits are crap. If you want to know what the error is in a calculation, then figure it out and state it. Implying what the error is by selectively using zeros or not using zeros is a pretty piss poor way of doing that. There are a number of problems with the whole system. One is granularity. Two is the use of zero, which is possibly a significant digit itself, but there's no way to know that. Three is that even if everyone who used them, used them properly, it wouldn't matter because nobody but high school science teachers and grad students know how they work. Seriously, the public doesn't even know the slightest thing about numerical error in the first place. NOBODY CARES ABOUT SIGNIFICANT DIGITS.
I do a lot of genealogy research and census records are invaluable for doing family history. Your grandkids will thank you if you take off the tin foil hat and fill it out completely and accurately.
Compete all you want. But do it on a level playing field. The reason your wages are so low is because the cost of living is so low. And why is that? Because you have no protections for the poorest among you and you take advantage of them for even cheaper labor. YOU'RE EXPLOITING YOUR OWN PEOPLE. First, create a society where the most vulnerable, like children and the poor have some protections. Child labor laws, minimum wages. You're not competing. You're not doing a better job. You're killing your own people, destroying the environment, and generally being poor citizens of the world.
I always find it funny that people talk about LaTeX being the system of choice in academia. While this may be true in Computer Science, Mathematics, and Physics circles, it certainly isn't true in a whole range of other disciplines such as Biology and the Social Sciences. The claim that LaTeX is what all of academia is using just isn't true.
...by artists so full of themselves that they think can understand and harness something like stone-making bacteria. I know many of these types. They want to discuss ad nauseum every single scientific advancement and it's cultural implications, thinking that they can make some important contribution to the field. It's obvious these guys don't have a clue, as they think that an ice-nine scenario is something that, first nobody thought of, and second is even possible. These are the same people who hear about the LHC and think that there's a good chance that the universe might implode when they turn it on. As if the world works like it does in the politically motivated somewhat-sci-fi books that are all the rage in these circles.
Please, stay in the coffee shops in the village, discussing the importance of your latest pathetic attempt at relevance through putting mannequin arms in toilets bowls and calling it art.
Slashdot Mirror
So where are they?
No one cares what you think.
If we just had a client side include tag that allowed you to include html in the middle of a page, much in the same way that img tags allow you to do inline images, it would just be inline html. I don't know why they haven't done it already. It makes so much sense. There are all sorts of ways to refer to other files like CSS, images, scripts, etc., but there's no way to just do the C/C++ equivalent of #include.
Yes, but for data, it doesn't seem to make much sense since the same search doesn't occur for data that travels over the border. All I have to do is wipe my drive before I enter, then pull the data over the net later. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it makes any sense.
Steve Jobs May Be Questioned In iTunes Monopoly Suit
Only iTunes can place rights restricted music using the native "Fairplay" DRM on the iPod. That is how it is a monopoly. Everybody else has to use unrestricted formats.
Yeah, wow. That's really stifling competition.
Just like you can't make people forget all those things you said you'd wished you didn't, you can't do the same thing on the internet. You can try all you want and even make laws about it, but it won't work. Information is hard to control.
While I'm sure the folks at these colleges are learning *something*, I never found that they were really learning much that was useful to me as an employer. Their "computer science" courses are generally about the sorts of things one can learn on the web. I need people who will use the web to learn stuff on the job. I need the school to teach them the stuff they're not likely to learn by just googling it. They're also often taught by other equally uneducated people in the industry. I never hired someone from one of these schools because none of them ever could hold a candle to the folks coming out of "real" universities. Mind you, even "real" universities produce some piss poor graduates. I don't know what it is, but perhaps the research aspect that lacks from these for-profits really makes a difference in undergraduate education.
Yes, because I'm sure that it'll be priced for home market really soon.
"But the summary quotation seems to imply that DNS is somehow part of the Internet."
You are of course, missing the entire point. Just because you've defined the "Internet" as the global IP network doesn't mean that that is anything but a purely *technical* definition. No one else uses that technical definition. For most of us, DNS *is* an essential part of how the Internet works. A non-standard DNS system if widely successful (unlike existing alt DNSs) would be a serious problem in terms of people using the internet on a daily basis. If it happened years ago, we might be looking at a significantly different global network today. One that might very well be fractured.
When it comes the success of the Internet as a global network, DNS is much more than simple phone book. Yes, maybe that's what it is technically, but IP addresses are not phone numbers since no normal person on the internet knows or cares what that is. People memorize (or used to) phone numbers. They don't do that with IP addresses. Admins know this and use it to their advantage. Your cavalier dismissal of virtual hosts shows that you really don't know what you're talking about.
All teachers think this about their students sometimes. Maybe this one shouldn't have posted it for the world to see, but what do you think the teachers talk about in the teacher's lounge?
If this is the future of web apps, then I have no worries about the future native apps.
I love how you go off on the GP for claiming that the beliefs of individual scientists are irrelevant to the discussion and then use exactly the same argument (albeit by implication) to try to show the opposite thing. Make up your mind.
And while we're at it, Henry Eyring was a very respected scientist who believed firmly in God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring
Yeah, it doesn't work like that. It's been tried several times before and it's basically a disaster. Problem is that there is a lot of disagreement about lots of things. It makes it hard to resolve the "right" one.
It's a little late in the year to be putting a tree together. It sounds like you're underestimating the time required to do the work. Also, the software you're using has nothing to do with it. The best software for you to use right now is a plain old text editor. Genealogy software isn't going to make things any easier when you're just starting out. When you *do* start putting the data together, just make sure you can export to GEDCOM. It's far from perfect as a file format, but it's universally used and will serve your needs until you start getting over 100 names. Only then start thinking about committing to a piece of software. It's hard to switch later.
Like others have said, go find a FamilySearch center https://library.familysearch.org/ and get some help. They're very nice.
And if you didn't get information from ancestry.com, you're doing it wrong. It's a very good site. You should think twice before you disparage a website you had very little time with.
I think you just made the GP's point.
Yup. It is. Their wealth represents an unfair accumulation of wealth far beyond their value to society. It makes sense to tax them heavily to pay for their negative impact on society.
Significant digits are crap. If you want to know what the error is in a calculation, then figure it out and state it. Implying what the error is by selectively using zeros or not using zeros is a pretty piss poor way of doing that. There are a number of problems with the whole system. One is granularity. Two is the use of zero, which is possibly a significant digit itself, but there's no way to know that. Three is that even if everyone who used them, used them properly, it wouldn't matter because nobody but high school science teachers and grad students know how they work. Seriously, the public doesn't even know the slightest thing about numerical error in the first place. NOBODY CARES ABOUT SIGNIFICANT DIGITS.
I do a lot of genealogy research and census records are invaluable for doing family history. Your grandkids will thank you if you take off the tin foil hat and fill it out completely and accurately.
To spend lots of time talking about how cool their idea is, without actually doing it.
Compete all you want. But do it on a level playing field. The reason your wages are so low is because the cost of living is so low. And why is that? Because you have no protections for the poorest among you and you take advantage of them for even cheaper labor. YOU'RE EXPLOITING YOUR OWN PEOPLE. First, create a society where the most vulnerable, like children and the poor have some protections. Child labor laws, minimum wages. You're not competing. You're not doing a better job. You're killing your own people, destroying the environment, and generally being poor citizens of the world.
Free speech is a basic human right, whether Germany thinks so or not.
BASIC HUMAN RIGHT
I always find it funny that people talk about LaTeX being the system of choice in academia. While this may be true in Computer Science, Mathematics, and Physics circles, it certainly isn't true in a whole range of other disciplines such as Biology and the Social Sciences. The claim that LaTeX is what all of academia is using just isn't true.
Oh, and LaTeX is not an editor.
...by artists so full of themselves that they think can understand and harness something like stone-making bacteria. I know many of these types. They want to discuss ad nauseum every single scientific advancement and it's cultural implications, thinking that they can make some important contribution to the field. It's obvious these guys don't have a clue, as they think that an ice-nine scenario is something that, first nobody thought of, and second is even possible. These are the same people who hear about the LHC and think that there's a good chance that the universe might implode when they turn it on. As if the world works like it does in the politically motivated somewhat-sci-fi books that are all the rage in these circles.
Please, stay in the coffee shops in the village, discussing the importance of your latest pathetic attempt at relevance through putting mannequin arms in toilets bowls and calling it art.
The only thing the public schools provide that the private school didn't is transportation (school buses).
Public schools provide a whole lot more than just that, that a private school doesn't.