MS Office was using ActiveX before IE existed. Except then it was called OLE
Bzzt. Thank you for playing.
ActiveX evolved from OLE and Visual Basic.OCX controls, yes, and is implemented as a layer over COM. But no, MS Office wasn't using "ActiveX" before ActiveX, in fact, existed.
The whole problem with ActiveX is that a web browser has no business having any mechanism to automatically install and execute arbitrary COM controls in the first place.
But you knew that, right?
who could only be more wrong if they said there is no such thing as existence.
That's an interesting idea, actually. If you think about it, its very difficult to talk about "existence" as an abstract concept (especially since, well, abstractions don't necessarily "exist"). Things in the real world tend to have a very conditional form of "existence" which is much more like "accessibility from" something else. If Freddy the solid gold unicorn exists-for-real in some random isolated pocket universe which neither you nor I nor anyone else could ever access or know about... and Freddy's "existence" can never affect anything else... can it be said to really "exist" at all? And taking that idea as a meta-idea, would a concept of "existence in the abstract isolated from anything else" be actually useful even if it did "exist"? Therefore, is it not perhaps useful to say that "existence, as bare unqualified existence unrelated to anything else, does not in fact exist (as bare unqualified existence unrelated to anything else")?
Thank you for your time! This has been a promotional message for the Society For Thinking Kneejerk Aphorisms Through Before You Repeat Them (a wholly owned subsidiary of Achilles-Zeno Pragmatic Axiom Testing Grounds, Tortoise Rearing and Arrow Fabrication, Inc).
"In short, the hazard is very real - it's the mandatory evacuations that has kept the death toll so low"
well noooo kidding. Evacuating a burning building prevents fire deaths too.
Sure. The difference is, the demolition site of a burning building is safe to re-enter within a matter of days. The preventative evacuation from a nuclear reactor accident will need to remain in place for decades, if we're talking about cesium isotope fallout.
Well, since a computer virus just injects code into an already-existing hardware processor, I guess a computer bacteria would have to carry around its own little itsy-bitsy mini-PC on little ambulatory robot legs, eat power from sockets where they can find it, and reproduce by splitting down the middle into two extra widdle bran-new baby mini-PCs.
Truly an insidious force. They'd infect the entire world through their sheer power of cuteness.
And in NZ, we don't have caps so much as we have internet plungers.
Indeed. I'm on Telstra Broadband and have a 20 GB monthly cap. I've bought a bunch of games on Steam and gog.com which I've yet to download because if I pulled them all down at once, I'd burn through my monthly cap in hours. Watching HD movies on demand over the Net in NZ? Yikes! No thanks!
Re:Is it even possible to roll back a bitcoin trad
on
Bitcoin Price Crashes
·
· Score: 1
(much like your brokerage is the actual owner of your monkey while you have money deposited with the brokerage.
Everybody got somethin' to hide 'Cept for me and your money.
The problem with the final solution wasn't the gas chambers, it was the gas they were using and the reason for doing so
And here I thought the problem was that they were killing sentient beings in the first place. Of course, if one followed that logic one might wonder about the ethics of airstrikes which kill civilians as 'collateral damage'.
Apparently it's okay to start a machine which you know will kill civilians as long as you're doing it to assassinate leaders of a murderous political movement you don't like, but not okay to start another machine which you know will kill civilians in order to put political pressure on an invading military you don't like. And threatening to kill millions of civilians and building automated machines to carry out that threat on a hair-trigger is not just okay, but gosh-darned common sense. Recruiting civilians into the military, even by force, and then making them cannon fodder is a-okay. But killing civilians just because you don't like them is evil. Unless those civilians have been found guilty of a capital crime by a jury of their peers in a state that allows capital punishment, and subjected to a torturous year-long wait. Or if they've been suspected of being terrorists, or arrested in the company of suspected terrorists, and whisked away to a black site where the Constitution doesn't apply and waterboarded for a bit.
It's all in why you're killing the civilians, is the point.
I think this pretty much demonstrates how copyright has become the big bogeyman that circumvents any sanity in law any more. It's become somewhat out of control, and something people are treating as the most important thing going.
Due to outsourcing of physical manufacturing, intellectual property is about all the USA has left to export. "Designed by Apple in California; made in China." So from an economic perspective, copyright is the most important thing going for the information-sellers of the world.
It's not a very good thing at all from the point of view of civil liberties, but liberty costs money and you are not the paying customer.
Not to state the obvious but... is Ubuntu One what you mean?
Ubuntu One makes a point of not being encrypted at the client. Until they do, I don't see how it's a solution to anything except the question "how do I give the NSA the fastest possible access to all my private data".
That was the 90s. The Net in 2011 interprets censorship as a value-added customer experience enhancement service and downloads an app for it onto your non-jailbreakable iThoughtStation 451.
Whether it happens at a water cooler (is that like a Coke machine?) or in Parliament, it's a mark of a civilization to engage in discourse.
Perhaps. But what do we call it when something formerly morally unthinkable, beyond the bounds of discussion, becomes thinkable, and then doable? In the history of 20th century war, for example, there have been several watershed moments when conduct formerly unacceptable - like, say, deliberate targeting of civilians in strategic aerial bombing - was first unthinkable, then discussed, then implemented, then became the new bedrock of military strategy during the Cold War. Was it actually "civilised" for that unthinkable thing to be discussed? Or would it have been more civilised for, say, the generals in charge of the Manhattan Project to stop at one point and say "right, that's it, this thing is NOT to be discussed, we're not doing it, end of story"?
Euthanasia is not war, but there is a similar quality to the discussion because it centres around the status of human life. It's fashionable to call the deliberate violation of ethical taboos "moral progress". It's moral change, certainly. But why are we so sure that all change is progress? What if some taboos exist for a good reason?
not transferable to another or capable of being repudiated
In other words the right to life rest solely in the hands of the individual, which would extend to the right to end that life
I'm pretty sure that's a contradiction. You can't both have an inalienable right, and have the right to alienate it. A bit like the GPL. You have the freedom to do anything you want with the code except give up your freedoms.
This is important because if you allow people to give up their freedoms, even if they claim they want to, then you can get a "race to the bottom" where competitive pressure to sell your rights leaves nobody with any rights at all.
We already did this once, it was called "feudalism".
These bombs are specially designed to minimize damage to neighboring third world shacks
No, I think you'll find these bombs are specially designed to explode and kill people and break stuff as job #1, with 'try not to kill and break stuff that wasn't on the mission plan, but if a few more brown orphans grow up to become terrorists, that's just acceptable losses' as a distinct #2.
They don't actually contain marshmallows and puppies, you know.
Well, given that we (in the US) currently have a government that thinks "Atlas Shrugged" is a great story about how to run a railroad, I suppose it will be a while before stuff like this gets sorted out. And it probably won't be pleasant.
Slashdot Mirror
MS Office was using ActiveX before IE existed. Except then it was called OLE
Bzzt. Thank you for playing.
ActiveX evolved from OLE and Visual Basic .OCX controls, yes, and is implemented as a layer over COM. But no, MS Office wasn't using "ActiveX" before ActiveX, in fact, existed.
The whole problem with ActiveX is that a web browser has no business having any mechanism to automatically install and execute arbitrary COM controls in the first place.
But you knew that, right?
who could only be more wrong if they said there is no such thing as existence.
That's an interesting idea, actually. If you think about it, its very difficult to talk about "existence" as an abstract concept (especially since, well, abstractions don't necessarily "exist"). Things in the real world tend to have a very conditional form of "existence" which is much more like "accessibility from" something else. If Freddy the solid gold unicorn exists-for-real in some random isolated pocket universe which neither you nor I nor anyone else could ever access or know about... and Freddy's "existence" can never affect anything else... can it be said to really "exist" at all? And taking that idea as a meta-idea, would a concept of "existence in the abstract isolated from anything else" be actually useful even if it did "exist"? Therefore, is it not perhaps useful to say that "existence, as bare unqualified existence unrelated to anything else, does not in fact exist (as bare unqualified existence unrelated to anything else")?
Thank you for your time! This has been a promotional message for the Society For Thinking Kneejerk Aphorisms Through Before You Repeat Them (a wholly owned subsidiary of Achilles-Zeno Pragmatic Axiom Testing Grounds, Tortoise Rearing and Arrow Fabrication, Inc).
"In short, the hazard is very real - it's the mandatory evacuations that has kept the death toll so low"
well noooo kidding. Evacuating a burning building prevents fire deaths too.
Sure. The difference is, the demolition site of a burning building is safe to re-enter within a matter of days. The preventative evacuation from a nuclear reactor accident will need to remain in place for decades, if we're talking about cesium isotope fallout.
In the case of little Jeffery, Mycoplasma, you ARE the father!
Join me, and together we can rule the upper right nasal cavity!
Noooo! I'll never exchange plasmids with you! E Coli, why didn't you tell me?
static data don't evolve
Nothing in the real world is truly static over time. You think your /etc config files are static data? Ever done a series of in-place system upgrades?
When will Avast release an Antibacterial beta?
Well, since a computer virus just injects code into an already-existing hardware processor, I guess a computer bacteria would have to carry around its own little itsy-bitsy mini-PC on little ambulatory robot legs, eat power from sockets where they can find it, and reproduce by splitting down the middle into two extra widdle bran-new baby mini-PCs.
Truly an insidious force. They'd infect the entire world through their sheer power of cuteness.
Swamp Thing
You make my heart sing
You make everything
Squelchy
Haven't heard that one before...
Not an Australian then, eh mate?
And in NZ, we don't have caps so much as we have internet plungers.
Indeed. I'm on Telstra Broadband and have a 20 GB monthly cap. I've bought a bunch of games on Steam and gog.com which I've yet to download because if I pulled them all down at once, I'd burn through my monthly cap in hours. Watching HD movies on demand over the Net in NZ? Yikes! No thanks!
(much like your brokerage is the actual owner of your monkey while you have money deposited with the brokerage.
Everybody got somethin' to hide
'Cept for me and your money.
Does a cow have a Buddha nature?
Mu.
The problem with the final solution wasn't the gas chambers, it was the gas they were using and the reason for doing so
And here I thought the problem was that they were killing sentient beings in the first place. Of course, if one followed that logic one might wonder about the ethics of airstrikes which kill civilians as 'collateral damage'.
Apparently it's okay to start a machine which you know will kill civilians as long as you're doing it to assassinate leaders of a murderous political movement you don't like, but not okay to start another machine which you know will kill civilians in order to put political pressure on an invading military you don't like. And threatening to kill millions of civilians and building automated machines to carry out that threat on a hair-trigger is not just okay, but gosh-darned common sense. Recruiting civilians into the military, even by force, and then making them cannon fodder is a-okay. But killing civilians just because you don't like them is evil. Unless those civilians have been found guilty of a capital crime by a jury of their peers in a state that allows capital punishment, and subjected to a torturous year-long wait. Or if they've been suspected of being terrorists, or arrested in the company of suspected terrorists, and whisked away to a black site where the Constitution doesn't apply and waterboarded for a bit.
It's all in why you're killing the civilians, is the point.
I think this pretty much demonstrates how copyright has become the big bogeyman that circumvents any sanity in law any more. It's become somewhat out of control, and something people are treating as the most important thing going.
Due to outsourcing of physical manufacturing, intellectual property is about all the USA has left to export. "Designed by Apple in California; made in China." So from an economic perspective, copyright is the most important thing going for the information-sellers of the world.
It's not a very good thing at all from the point of view of civil liberties, but liberty costs money and you are not the paying customer.
The US controls domains with other country TLDs?
They use Aircraft Carrier Deployment Protocol for that.
Not to state the obvious but... is Ubuntu One what you mean?
Ubuntu One makes a point of not being encrypted at the client. Until they do, I don't see how it's a solution to anything except the question "how do I give the NSA the fastest possible access to all my private data".
did a search for the terms "motorcycle" and "squid"
I don't want to Google that because there's no way my mental image of a badass biker cephalopod could ever compare with harsh reality.
And it was like, bleep bleep bleep, I am the pusher robot, and I was like, nu ma nu ma iei.
The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.
John Gilmore, quoted in Time Magazine
That was the 90s. The Net in 2011 interprets censorship as a value-added customer experience enhancement service and downloads an app for it onto your non-jailbreakable iThoughtStation 451.
Whether it happens at a water cooler (is that like a Coke machine?) or in Parliament, it's a mark of a civilization to engage in discourse.
Perhaps. But what do we call it when something formerly morally unthinkable, beyond the bounds of discussion, becomes thinkable, and then doable? In the history of 20th century war, for example, there have been several watershed moments when conduct formerly unacceptable - like, say, deliberate targeting of civilians in strategic aerial bombing - was first unthinkable, then discussed, then implemented, then became the new bedrock of military strategy during the Cold War. Was it actually "civilised" for that unthinkable thing to be discussed? Or would it have been more civilised for, say, the generals in charge of the Manhattan Project to stop at one point and say "right, that's it, this thing is NOT to be discussed, we're not doing it, end of story"?
Euthanasia is not war, but there is a similar quality to the discussion because it centres around the status of human life. It's fashionable to call the deliberate violation of ethical taboos "moral progress". It's moral change, certainly. But why are we so sure that all change is progress? What if some taboos exist for a good reason?
not transferable to another or capable of being repudiated
In other words the right to life rest solely in the hands of the individual, which would extend to the right to end that life
I'm pretty sure that's a contradiction. You can't both have an inalienable right, and have the right to alienate it. A bit like the GPL. You have the freedom to do anything you want with the code except give up your freedoms.
This is important because if you allow people to give up their freedoms, even if they claim they want to, then you can get a "race to the bottom" where competitive pressure to sell your rights leaves nobody with any rights at all.
We already did this once, it was called "feudalism".
These bombs are specially designed to minimize damage to neighboring third world shacks
No, I think you'll find these bombs are specially designed to explode and kill people and break stuff as job #1, with 'try not to kill and break stuff that wasn't on the mission plan, but if a few more brown orphans grow up to become terrorists, that's just acceptable losses' as a distinct #2.
They don't actually contain marshmallows and puppies, you know.
Yeah Debian is ok if you don't mind an OS thats made by people who don't understand sarcasm or irony
So if I don't want a sarcastic, ironic OS I'll be just fine then?
Thanks!
wtf is a meta key?
I don't know, but I never one I didn't like.
painted in an exciting mix of puss
Tortiseshell or tabby?
Well, given that we (in the US) currently have a government that thinks "Atlas Shrugged" is a great story about how to run a railroad, I suppose it will be a while before stuff like this gets sorted out. And it probably won't be pleasant.
Ah yes, that train story about how running a red signal light is perfectly safe.
I think people with guns can stand up to huge industrial combines who manufacture and sell the guns and ammo in the first place quite nicely.
Fixed that for you, and by "fixed" I mean "broke".