Actually that's pure baloney. IE is the most non-conformant browser out there. It's very simple to see, too. Just code a table without a closing tag, and watch IE render the thing anyway.
Or watch Netscape choke to death. The end-user doesn't give a flying fuck. IE handles buggy html and gets the page rendered. IE supports standards and it supports lazy HTML coders. Is that so bad?
They could do it like those flip out picture wallets. Just open your laptop and half a dozen LCDs flip out.
Re:Only Trillian v0.7x affected?
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 1
back to programming for a very low resource device (can you guess where many of my ideas come from?)
i still think memory is cheap, but point taken.
Re:Only Trillian v0.7x affected?
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 1
Now, I don't really care if it shows ads or not; that had nothing to do with my decision.
But it has everything to do with AOL's decision.
This isn't about free beer or free speech. It's about free RAM and free processor cycles.
If you care that much about your processor usage (plausible) and your memory usage (bullshit. memory is cheap), you should just stick to e-mail.
Re:The part that really sucks...
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 1
I still use an older ICQ client that doesn't even serve up ads. This is partially because I have seizures just looking at icq.com and also because I have no real reason to upgrade. Hooray for ICQ!
Re:Trillian is the best thing since sliced bread
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 1
It will be AOL's loss if they get rid of a chunk of people on the network.
Hardly. Trillian users suck up bandwidth and CPU cycles on the servers without viewing the ads normally seen with the AOL AIM client. AOL's saving themselves money by blocking 3rd-party IM clients.
Maybe it is time to sue AOL for having a monopoly and waiving its monopolostic powers over IM technology.
They have a monopoly over AIM in much the same way Yahoo has a monopoly over Yahoo Messenger. There's nothing illegal going on here.
Doesn't owning that much marketshare and preventing other users from using such technology constitute a monopoly using its powers to prevent other business from competing in the market?
No. If you want to use AIM, use AIM. If you don't want to use AIM, try Yahoo. Or MSN. Or Jabber. Furthermore, AIM is FREE for the end-user. You've got no place to complain about how they run their service, or how people are allowed to access it, since it's not costing you anything to do so. What if AOL decided tomorrow that AIM just wasn't profitable and shut down all the servers. All your precious fucking 3rd-party clients would cease to work. "OH NOOO!!!! MY AIM NO WORK!" you say. You'd be mad, probably write AOL a nasty letter, maybe start a boycott of some sort. All because they took away a service you never paid for. The internet has been fostering an all-to-strong sense of "everything should be free" when that's really not the case. Providing these services costs money. If you're not covering that cost in some way, shut the fuck up and enjoy the free ride.
... best of luck sneaking around IM's / AOL's policies.
Yes, policies involving good business practices and sound reasoning. Something you are severely lacking.
they didn't include directions on how to build the massive transporter device, so an alien civilization can send one of their foremost extraterrestrial researchers to earth to meet her deceased father in a hallucinated dream-world.
... an article i read many years back on HTML and why it was so darned complex (!) the author relived the glory days of some proprietary document formatting language that had been used internally by a past employer and his conclusion was that people should start using that instead. The author might've been Cringely, for all I know.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm not really attracted to slender and fragile looking buildings, especially if it's the only safe place on the whole ball of rock. Is it the architectural fashion now to create buildings that don't look safe?
well it certainly won't be blown over by a gust of wind (no atmosphere), but i could envision a behemoth LGSUV (low-gravity sport utility vehicle) sending the thing toppling. of course, by toppling i mean descending slowly to the dusty surface.
Yup. When I signed on with concentric (now XO) last year, they sent me their terms of service and whatnot in a pdf file. i printed, signed and faxed back.
i don't think we're going to see arcades dying altogether. other posts mention that most games anymore cost too much and are bad copies of other games. that's entirely true. most games in arcades aren't worth playing, in my opinion. but there's other kinds of games now. ever been to a disneyquest and designed your own rollercoaster or? it's actually pretty cool. they also have some VR games where they stick a helmet on you or place you inside a "vehicle", but those still need some work.
i think it's games like these that will keep some arcades going. providing an experience that can't be gotten at home with a console system of pc. or maybe not. time will tell.
It looks like the project offers the 1997 TIGER line files for U.S. roadways. The 2000 data, for any interested, is available from www.census.gov as well as documentation on how to interpret it (it's a bunch of text files, one line per record with fixed-width fields. a nuisance to work with). The data is good enough for producing basic maps, but it's not detailed enough to produce the kinds of street maps you'd use in RL. Street data of that caliber is only available commercially, I think. (If somebody knows otherwise, please respond!)
even typing on a qwerty-converted-to-dvorak keyboard, the text would still be decipherable, though with some more effort. it might be enough to deter a lazy sniffer.
Slashdot Mirror
He's using broadcast in the more generic sense, not the literal techincal sense.
Actually that's pure baloney. IE is the most non-conformant browser out there. It's very simple to see, too. Just code a table without a closing tag, and watch IE render the thing anyway.
Or watch Netscape choke to death. The end-user doesn't give a flying fuck. IE handles buggy html and gets the page rendered. IE supports standards and it supports lazy HTML coders. Is that so bad?
Since no other OS is as "user friendly" as Windows
You're right. Most of them are more user-friendly.
They could do it like those flip out picture wallets. Just open your laptop and half a dozen LCDs flip out.
back to programming for a very low resource device (can you guess where many of my ideas come from?)
i still think memory is cheap, but point taken.
Now, I don't really care if it shows ads or not; that had nothing to do with my decision.
But it has everything to do with AOL's decision.
This isn't about free beer or free speech. It's about free RAM and free processor cycles.
If you care that much about your processor usage (plausible) and your memory usage (bullshit. memory is cheap), you should just stick to e-mail.
I still use an older ICQ client that doesn't even serve up ads. This is partially because I have seizures just looking at icq.com and also because I have no real reason to upgrade. Hooray for ICQ!
It will be AOL's loss if they get rid of a chunk of people on the network.
... best of luck sneaking around IM's / AOL's policies.
Hardly. Trillian users suck up bandwidth and CPU cycles on the servers without viewing the ads normally seen with the AOL AIM client. AOL's saving themselves money by blocking 3rd-party IM clients.
Maybe it is time to sue AOL for having a monopoly and waiving its monopolostic powers over IM technology.
They have a monopoly over AIM in much the same way Yahoo has a monopoly over Yahoo Messenger. There's nothing illegal going on here.
Doesn't owning that much marketshare and preventing other users from using such technology constitute a monopoly using its powers to prevent other business from competing in the market?
No. If you want to use AIM, use AIM. If you don't want to use AIM, try Yahoo. Or MSN. Or Jabber. Furthermore, AIM is FREE for the end-user. You've got no place to complain about how they run their service, or how people are allowed to access it, since it's not costing you anything to do so. What if AOL decided tomorrow that AIM just wasn't profitable and shut down all the servers. All your precious fucking 3rd-party clients would cease to work. "OH NOOO!!!! MY AIM NO WORK!" you say. You'd be mad, probably write AOL a nasty letter, maybe start a boycott of some sort. All because they took away a service you never paid for. The internet has been fostering an all-to-strong sense of "everything should be free" when that's really not the case. Providing these services costs money. If you're not covering that cost in some way, shut the fuck up and enjoy the free ride.
Yes, policies involving good business practices and sound reasoning. Something you are severely lacking.
Or the easy answer: 1 Astral Unit.
the beowolf cluster jokes got old. now the jokes about beowlf cluster jokes are getting old. please, stop the hurting.
Also, RAID isn't for people who make stupid mistakes. Sorry about your 'rm' debacle
97% of all stupid mistakes are made in the home.
anybody remember that service? the rpg (whatever it was called) was loads of fun.
i read your page. i'm going to side with the smoothwall folks. you're an idiot. go away :)
they didn't include directions on how to build the massive transporter device, so an alien civilization can send one of their foremost extraterrestrial researchers to earth to meet her deceased father in a hallucinated dream-world.
read the article. they claim the os will be open source. if that doesn't lend it to being hackable, i don't know what will.
that was so stupid that it's funny.
i submitted this story in july. i'm not too surprised that one of them is down by now.
... an article i read many years back on HTML and why it was so darned complex (!) the author relived the glory days of some proprietary document formatting language that had been used internally by a past employer and his conclusion was that people should start using that instead. The author might've been Cringely, for all I know.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm not really attracted to slender and fragile looking buildings, especially if it's the only safe place on the whole ball of rock. Is it the architectural fashion now to create buildings that don't look safe?
well it certainly won't be blown over by a gust of wind (no atmosphere), but i could envision a behemoth LGSUV (low-gravity sport utility vehicle) sending the thing toppling. of course, by toppling i mean descending slowly to the dusty surface.
if you're a trance-head, eurodance-freak, or into classical, check out http://www.digitallyimported.com
streams 24/7, lots of great music, totally ad-free so far.
has anyone ever had to sign a DSL contract?
Yup. When I signed on with concentric (now XO) last year, they sent me their terms of service and whatnot in a pdf file. i printed, signed and faxed back.
i don't think we're going to see arcades dying altogether. other posts mention that most games anymore cost too much and are bad copies of other games. that's entirely true. most games in arcades aren't worth playing, in my opinion. but there's other kinds of games now. ever been to a disneyquest and designed your own rollercoaster or? it's actually pretty cool. they also have some VR games where they stick a helmet on you or place you inside a "vehicle", but those still need some work.
i think it's games like these that will keep some arcades going. providing an experience that can't be gotten at home with a console system of pc. or maybe not. time will tell.
It looks like the project offers the 1997 TIGER line files for U.S. roadways. The 2000 data, for any interested, is available from www.census.gov as well as documentation on how to interpret it (it's a bunch of text files, one line per record with fixed-width fields. a nuisance to work with). The data is good enough for producing basic maps, but it's not detailed enough to produce the kinds of street maps you'd use in RL. Street data of that caliber is only available commercially, I think. (If somebody knows otherwise, please respond!)
even typing on a qwerty-converted-to-dvorak keyboard, the text would still be decipherable, though with some more effort. it might be enough to deter a lazy sniffer.
I doubt Linux would scale to a 256 CPU Origin 2000 machine (at least not in the near future).
I believe linux already runs on the o2k -- I seem to remember a slashdot article on it at some point in time.