The Bible is a little more than a revised edition of the Torah; the New Testament is a completely new set of books! And, if you have a Catholic Bible, you have even more!
On a different note, I think the Bible should NOT be considered for book of the millennium, but that the KJV should; the KJV, while a translation of the original text (in a roundabout sort of way), turned the Bible into a really long poem, which the Bible certainly was NOT intended to be. In short, the KJV is a related but separate work, which occured during this millennium.
I am looking into upgrading my outdated Riva128, and am considering both the GeForce2 and the G400 (I can't find the G450?). My question is: how do these cards compare in quality of image and quality of drivers? Matrox has always been praised for their sharpness of image, but I wonder how much a difference this really makes, unless you are talking about seriously high resolutions. How about quality of OpenGL rendering and color matching?
When I view the page in Netscape, sometimes the poll doesn't even come up. I have to hit reload several times before I see it, and even then I am told that my browser doesn't support cookies, and that is why I cannot vote. Seeing as how Netscape DOES support cookies, something seems really fishy here. Do they want us to boot to Windows just to vote for Linux? That's corporate logic for ya.
This might be a good way to filter out unwanted banner ads. Some banner ads are good, as they provide income to the maintainer of the website, so we shouldn't filter out everything, but when I'm looking for information on, say, the standard template library, I shouldn't have to look at banner ads that have body parts thrown about. Yes, I have had this happen before.
It would be nice to have the option of not filtering. I disagree with total censorship. But when it comes to be or my kids (later in life, hopefully), I don't want to have to worry about whether a search on "leather balls" will come up with something I don't want to be tempted with. Not that girls sticking beer bottles in weird places is all that tempting, but I should also have the option of being able to read through a page without being disgusted out of my mind.
And people wonder why I disable auto-load images in Netscape.
What's with all this newfangled fancy stuff?
on
Mozilla Milestone 15
·
· Score: 1
Why can't I have a web browser that looks like all my other applications? Why is it so necessary that it stand out? Sure, the ability to customize an application to suit your needs is a neat feature. But it really bothers me that ALL of my other menu bars are grey, and Mozilla's is white.
Consider this situation. Word, Wordperfect, Quattro Pro, Excel, Mirc,... all those apps that we use every day each start supporting their own interface skins. Moreover, they each come with a default skin that is different from all the others, in an attempt to stick out. That now means that if I want all my apps to look similar, I have to search through and download skins all day until I find one that is suitable and matches all the others. And I have to do that for EVERY application on my hard drive. That could take some time.
So please just give me back the NS4.7 interface. I don't care what my browser looks like, so long as it isn't ugly and it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. And I certainly don't want a browser that looks like a web page.
I can't belive you posted that silly black dot optical illusion. I am scarred for life! I can't look anywhere around my room without seeing black, no white, no they're black, white, argh!! The dots are all over! GO AWAY!!!!
For everything from do-it-yourself car MP3 players to portable NVRAM players, this is the page to check out: http://hardware.mp3.com/hardware/. It's also got stuff on other related hardware, such as sound cards, speakers, and other devices. Haven't looked into discman-type devices before, as I don't like walking around with headphones on. Something a little bit bigger seems just right for the car (something too big wastes trunk space).
Of course people would notice. But the idea is that you first reclaim your loss in market share by adding new features, then when you have enough of the market, you cut compatibility with the competing (still open-source) product, to render it essentially useless.
It's a technique that must be performed just right, otherwise it will backfire. However, this is exactly what Netscape and MS did when they had control, and it's what other companies do, too, so there's no reason it can't be applied here.
If I understand correctly, Mattel has a solution available to them. While the current version of CPHack is under the GPL, future versions do not have to be. The trick it to get people to use the new version -- which can be done by adding more features, getting the non-GPL version popular, and then making the new version incompatible with the old (note that this is a recipe for de-GPL'ing any software, not just CPHack).
Another issue here, according to the authors, is whether the GPL was applied to the utility legally. If it wasn't, then I don't think there is any question of who owns the rights.
1) Keep the faulty filtering system in place. 2) Give the librarians a "key" that would allow them to bypass the filtering, or perhaps give users a greater degree of leniancy while browsing the web.
The difference between our schemes is that the one above allows content and blocks as necessary; this method disallows content and unblocks as necessary.
On the other hand, we should just not censor at all, as some people seem to suggest. We should have Playboy and Penthouse in every library, since they have good articles. There should be an entire section of the library devoted to good sex and positions. A library that censors is no library at all.
Generally, sites that are blocked are blocked for a reason. Moreover, the information on a blocked site can almost always be obtained by other means in a library, whether that be on another web page, or even, (gasp) a book.
On another note, the statistic 1 failure every 99 seconds is quite misleading. This does not mean 1 failure out of every 99, since there are probably more than one hit per second. As more people get on this rate will climb -- of course it will! That doesn't mean that the system it getting less stable; it only means that more people are using it, and therefore there are more hits per second.
A much better statistic would be the percentage of failures, which is probably far less than 1%.
- Netscape crashes. I restart Netscape. All's well except I have to find my place and/or retype any lost email. 1/10 this results in a BSOD, and hence a reboot. - IE4 crashes. More often than Netscape. About twice a day, in fact, it gives me a message that seems to be related to the pwl files, but isn't. It takes down Explorer with it, no wait, it is explorer. 1/10 this results in a reboot. - IE5 crashes. About once a week. 10 times out of 10 this results in a reboot. So about the same amount of lost data as the previous two.
TANSTAFWB (there ain't no such thing as a free web broser), I suppose.
That's interesting that they should say that; I run a Sun system, and I've only had to bring it down a few times, to do a level 0 backup. I did run into some weird problem with the SCSI bus, but it went away. I've even got Samba serving out files as if it were a true NT machine.
If Windows NT is so reliable, then why do I feel so hesitant to switch? Of course, we could also just change the definition of reliability; then Windows 95 (pre-SP1) would be the king of the hill.
It is possible to go the other way, running the VNC server on the Unix machine and getting multiple users to connect, but X seems to be much better for that anyway.
You can also run multiple VNC servers on the Unix machine, but they don't work the way you would expect.
I do like the VMWare idea you suggest. Perhaps a small change to the server would allow that? The only problem I see is that the Win32 API isn't reproduced across VM's; it would be nice if VMWare supported a copy-on-write policy for its VM's, then you don't have the memory consumption problem you'd have otherwise.
It's not about the client side they worry but about the serverside. Right now using windows media to stream audio and video means excluding non windows and non apple platforms. With a growing marketshare for these windows media incompatible platform that means that content providers are excluding a growing group of people.
Yes, that's exactly right. Microsoft is interested in pushing their server, which will probably not be multiplatform. That's exactly what they did with Netscape. The browser war was never over browsers; anyone who thinks that is a fool. The browser war was about "who controls the client controls the server" -- if you can add extensions to the browser that only your server supports, and your server supports the competition's extensions, too, then you maintain market share. The browser's are free, but the servers are what cost money.
I see this happening with RealAudio and Shoutcast. Already, people are claiming that Media Player gets better quality than RA or MP3. If this is true, then why would anyone use the competition's formats? If MP4 is all that's promised (or is that just rumor?), then perhaps Shoutcast could be the Apache of the media player war.
Subject: DCIT Bulletin Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:37:22 -0500 From: DCIT Publications To: CLEMSON_STUDENTS-L@CLEMSON.EDU
DCIT Bulletin Vol. 1 No. 7
Access to voice over internet services is back!
The group of students, faculty, and staff that is looking into how the university should incorporate internet phone service into its infrastructure will be meeting next Thursday. The study group will recommend policies and procedures related to internet phone service and suggest ways in which the university can optimize its use.
Well, keep this in mind when they ban the sites again -- you will only be able to receive voice; you will not be able to speak, if you follow these instructions. This is because the server does not know your address. Perhaps future versions of dialpad's software will support proxies.
They put in a PIXen firewall between the dorm network and the rest of the world and basically, we have to authenticate with our e-mail password every 2 hours. they said it was "to protect the university leagally" but now we all see what they really intended it for. preserveing a monopoly over the students.
I don't think the PIXen are what's blocking the traffic -- note that the machines outside the firewall are also blocked from dialpad.com. This means you can't set up a proxy on hubcap (our Unix server here, for those who don't know) and get to dialpad.com that way. Nor can you get to dialpad.com from any of the computer labs, or from a professor's office. The entire campus is blocked.
My freshman year, we had to pay $40 per semester to have access to Resnet (residential networking at Clemson). Last year, the entire campus got access to Resnet (including on-campus apartments), the housing fee was increased, and the $40 connection fee was removed. So essentially we don't have a choice for ISP as long as we live on campus. We can choose to use another ISP, but we can't opt to not pay for Clemson's service.
Slashdot Mirror
The Bible is a little more than a revised edition of the Torah; the New Testament is a completely new set of books! And, if you have a Catholic Bible, you have even more!
On a different note, I think the Bible should NOT be considered for book of the millennium, but that the KJV should; the KJV, while a translation of the original text (in a roundabout sort of way), turned the Bible into a really long poem, which the Bible certainly was NOT intended to be. In short, the KJV is a related but separate work, which occured during this millennium.
This post sounds a lot like the reaction I get when I offer people Coke Cake. Yes, it's got Coke in it.
I am looking into upgrading my outdated Riva128, and am considering both the GeForce2 and the G400 (I can't find the G450?). My question is: how do these cards compare in quality of image and quality of drivers? Matrox has always been praised for their sharpness of image, but I wonder how much a difference this really makes, unless you are talking about seriously high resolutions. How about quality of OpenGL rendering and color matching?
When I view the page in Netscape, sometimes the poll doesn't even come up. I have to hit reload several times before I see it, and even then I am told that my browser doesn't support cookies, and that is why I cannot vote. Seeing as how Netscape DOES support cookies, something seems really fishy here. Do they want us to boot to Windows just to vote for Linux? That's corporate logic for ya.
This might be a good way to filter out unwanted banner ads. Some banner ads are good, as they provide income to the maintainer of the website, so we shouldn't filter out everything, but when I'm looking for information on, say, the standard template library, I shouldn't have to look at banner ads that have body parts thrown about. Yes, I have had this happen before.
It would be nice to have the option of not filtering. I disagree with total censorship. But when it comes to be or my kids (later in life, hopefully), I don't want to have to worry about whether a search on "leather balls" will come up with something I don't want to be tempted with. Not that girls sticking beer bottles in weird places is all that tempting, but I should also have the option of being able to read through a page without being disgusted out of my mind.
And people wonder why I disable auto-load images in Netscape.
Why can't I have a web browser that looks like all my other applications? Why is it so necessary that it stand out? Sure, the ability to customize an application to suit your needs is a neat feature. But it really bothers me that ALL of my other menu bars are grey, and Mozilla's is white.
... all those apps that we use every day each start supporting their own interface skins. Moreover, they each come with a default skin that is different from all the others, in an attempt to stick out. That now means that if I want all my apps to look similar, I have to search through and download skins all day until I find one that is suitable and matches all the others. And I have to do that for EVERY application on my hard drive. That could take some time.
Consider this situation. Word, Wordperfect, Quattro Pro, Excel, Mirc,
So please just give me back the NS4.7 interface. I don't care what my browser looks like, so long as it isn't ugly and it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. And I certainly don't want a browser that looks like a web page.
I can't belive you posted that silly black dot optical illusion. I am scarred for life! I can't look anywhere around my room without seeing black, no white, no they're black, white, argh!! The dots are all over! GO AWAY!!!!
For everything from do-it-yourself car MP3 players to portable NVRAM players, this is the page to check out: http://hardware.mp3.com/hardware/. It's also got stuff on other related hardware, such as sound cards, speakers, and other devices. Haven't looked into discman-type devices before, as I don't like walking around with headphones on. Something a little bit bigger seems just right for the car (something too big wastes trunk space).
Of course people would notice. But the idea is that you first reclaim your loss in market share by adding new features, then when you have enough of the market, you cut compatibility with the competing (still open-source) product, to render it essentially useless.
It's a technique that must be performed just right, otherwise it will backfire. However, this is exactly what Netscape and MS did when they had control, and it's what other companies do, too, so there's no reason it can't be applied here.
If I understand correctly, Mattel has a solution available to them. While the current version of CPHack is under the GPL, future versions do not have to be. The trick it to get people to use the new version -- which can be done by adding more features, getting the non-GPL version popular, and then making the new version incompatible with the old (note that this is a recipe for de-GPL'ing any software, not just CPHack).
Another issue here, according to the authors, is whether the GPL was applied to the utility legally. If it wasn't, then I don't think there is any question of who owns the rights.
What's a record?
1) Keep the faulty filtering system in place.
2) Give the librarians a "key" that would allow them to bypass the filtering, or perhaps give users a greater degree of leniancy while browsing the web.
The difference between our schemes is that the one above allows content and blocks as necessary; this method disallows content and unblocks as necessary.
On the other hand, we should just not censor at all, as some people seem to suggest. We should have Playboy and Penthouse in every library, since they have good articles. There should be an entire section of the library devoted to good sex and positions. A library that censors is no library at all.
Respectfully, I disagree.
Generally, sites that are blocked are blocked for a reason. Moreover, the information on a blocked site can almost always be obtained by other means in a library, whether that be on another web page, or even, (gasp) a book.
On another note, the statistic 1 failure every 99 seconds is quite misleading. This does not mean 1 failure out of every 99, since there are probably more than one hit per second. As more people get on this rate will climb -- of course it will! That doesn't mean that the system it getting less stable; it only means that more people are using it, and therefore there are more hits per second.
A much better statistic would be the percentage of failures, which is probably far less than 1%.
My experience:
- Netscape crashes. I restart Netscape. All's well except I have to find my place and/or retype any lost email. 1/10 this results in a BSOD, and hence a reboot.
- IE4 crashes. More often than Netscape. About twice a day, in fact, it gives me a message that seems to be related to the pwl files, but isn't. It takes down Explorer with it, no wait, it is explorer. 1/10 this results in a reboot.
- IE5 crashes. About once a week. 10 times out of 10 this results in a reboot. So about the same amount of lost data as the previous two.
TANSTAFWB (there ain't no such thing as a free web broser), I suppose.
That's interesting that they should say that; I run a Sun system, and I've only had to bring it down a few times, to do a level 0 backup. I did run into some weird problem with the SCSI bus, but it went away. I've even got Samba serving out files as if it were a true NT machine.
If Windows NT is so reliable, then why do I feel so hesitant to switch? Of course, we could also just change the definition of reliability; then Windows 95 (pre-SP1) would be the king of the hill.
I believe one of the documents in the LDP mentions this, and says that Linux does this same thing. Does Windows have this feature?
All I hear is music, and what's with this message?
Cannot find 'file:///Lacie 4400/Desktop Folder/Desktop Folder/WBAI/index.html
Sounds like an automated slashdot effect :)
It is possible to go the other way, running the VNC server on the Unix machine and getting multiple users to connect, but X seems to be much better for that anyway.
You can also run multiple VNC servers on the Unix machine, but they don't work the way you would expect.
I do like the VMWare idea you suggest. Perhaps a small change to the server would allow that? The only problem I see is that the Win32 API isn't reproduced across VM's; it would be nice if VMWare supported a copy-on-write policy for its VM's, then you don't have the memory consumption problem you'd have otherwise.
It's not about the client side they worry but about the serverside. Right now using windows media to stream audio and video means excluding non windows and non apple platforms. With a growing marketshare for these windows media incompatible platform that means that content providers are excluding a growing group of people.
Yes, that's exactly right. Microsoft is interested in pushing their server, which will probably not be multiplatform. That's exactly what they did with Netscape. The browser war was never over browsers; anyone who thinks that is a fool. The browser war was about "who controls the client controls the server" -- if you can add extensions to the browser that only your server supports, and your server supports the competition's extensions, too, then you maintain market share. The browser's are free, but the servers are what cost money.
I see this happening with RealAudio and Shoutcast. Already, people are claiming that Media Player gets better quality than RA or MP3. If this is true, then why would anyone use the competition's formats? If MP4 is all that's promised (or is that just rumor?), then perhaps Shoutcast could be the Apache of the media player war.
Clemson student:
"Guess what guys, there is a rival to dialpad. its called http://www.funphone.com/."
DCIT response:
"Now you've done it. I can't ignore such a blatant challenge to our ability to block access to a website whether we agree with it or not."
This was in everyone's mailbox yesterday morning:
Subject: DCIT Bulletin
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:37:22 -0500
From: DCIT Publications
To: CLEMSON_STUDENTS-L@CLEMSON.EDU
DCIT Bulletin
Vol. 1 No. 7
Access to voice over internet services is back!
The group of students, faculty, and staff that is looking into how the university should incorporate internet phone service into its infrastructure will be meeting next Thursday. The study group will recommend policies and procedures related to internet phone service and suggest ways in which the university can optimize its use.
Well, keep this in mind when they ban the sites again -- you will only be able to receive voice; you will not be able to speak, if you follow these instructions. This is because the server does not know your address. Perhaps future versions of dialpad's software will support proxies.
They put in a PIXen firewall between the dorm network and the rest of the world and basically, we have to authenticate with our e-mail password every 2 hours. they said it was "to protect the university leagally" but now we all see what they really intended it for. preserveing a monopoly over the students.
I don't think the PIXen are what's blocking the traffic -- note that the machines outside the firewall are also blocked from dialpad.com. This means you can't set up a proxy on hubcap (our Unix server here, for those who don't know) and get to dialpad.com that way. Nor can you get to dialpad.com from any of the computer labs, or from a professor's office. The entire campus is blocked.
My freshman year, we had to pay $40 per semester to have access to Resnet (residential networking at Clemson). Last year, the entire campus got access to Resnet (including on-campus apartments), the housing fee was increased, and the $40 connection fee was removed. So essentially we don't have a choice for ISP as long as we live on campus. We can choose to use another ISP, but we can't opt to not pay for Clemson's service.
How does this not sound like a monopoly?