I'm sorry, but... have you looked at HTML5 at all? I know your demagoguery sounds nice and gets mod points, but seriously... HTML5 is what you get when you take HTML4 and bring it forward a few years to the present. It standardizes some things everyone is doing, makes some easy things easier, and makes some hard things possible.
It doesn't make the format any more opaque and unhackable; in fact, it adds to the DOM and makes that more accessible to things like GreaseMonkey. Moreover, one of the chief goals is to have as much backwards compatibility as possible, so what you're doing now will still work.
And if you need Vector Graphics, use the new Canvas tag.
In another 4-8 years, Putin's power in the Russian government will have declined, and Russia will start to move towards a true, multi-party system as all those wealthy companies and individuals step in to fill the ex-Putin void.
Yes, but by then none of us will notice, as we'll be too busy playing Duke Nukem Forever.
Just try getting permission to run your own server if your ISP is AT&T or any of the Baby Bells. This story is merely a part of that recalcitrance and obstructionism.
I used to have an AT&T DSL line, and they didn't block any incoming or outgoing ports. Granted, it's not exactly permission, but it worked.
Phrases like "a complete redesign" generally just indicate that people have no idea what's wrong or how to fix it; they are not helpful.
At my current job, I inherited a 50kloc codebase for oen module in our larger codebase. It was a horrible mess; copy/pasted code, code that did nothing, duplicated data storage that would get out of sync, no central structure, etc.
What was wrong with it was that it needed a complete redesign. I took the existing code and began cutting, extracting, pulling apart, mashing together, and ended up with an 8kloc codebase that did all the same things, and did them faster.
Sometimes-- not always, and not most of the time, but sometimes-- a complete redesign is called for.
Most write in abbreviated form. That's a polite way of saying that they've adopted a habit of excessive abbreviation, truncating words where no appropriate abbreviation exists, and interspering redundant emoticons and a littering of ellipses (where a frigging period would have sufficed) between words with misplaced, absent or seemingly random capitalisation. You end trying to make sense of something that only a monkey who's a William Shatner fan banging away at a typewriter could produce. Were they in hurry, or did they never learn to type? Or is my time just worth less?
There's a big problem if, having received their "plaintive notes," the laggard P-members say "no, we just didn't respond; we want to keep our membership." As far as I can see, as long as the P-member responds to the notes, even if they ignore all other business, they get to remain P-members.
Reading my comment now, I realize I came off a bit more confrontational than I meant to; I was really just wondering if you could point me to the Time article in question, as it sounded interesting and I was curious. I've read the link you did provide, and the next chapter is sitting half-read in a browser tab, now.
But it's a question of leverage. I disagree with pretty much every vote my congressman makes, since I'm a liberal living in Orange County, CA. As such, there's no way I'm voting for him in the next election. So should I send him a letter saying "Hey, you'd better vote for this (though I know you won't) or I'm voting for the other guy (though I will be doing so anyway)"? He can happily ignore me, because he's in a safe seat and my vote won't matter to his re-election.
Reading the link you provide, I can't see how you say that Carter proposed it; he and the DoE were heavily pushing for Nuclear Power Everywhere, and actually threatened to veto a congressional bill to extend funding for the initial plan.
The only reference I find in Time's Archive is here, which is more about the precursor project Powersat, which used mirrors to heat a liquid and drive a turbine.
So yes, this idea has been around a long time (your article traces it back to Peter Glaser, which Wikipedia places in 1968), but it's always gotten the same reception it has now: "yes, that's a nice idea, but we're too busy doing other things right now."
The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.(KJV)
Note how Christ is saying that the thief comes to "steal, kill and destroy." It is not, as you would have it, directions on how to deal with said thief.
It never says that 29% goes to Apple. It could very well be that 71% goes to UMG, 10% goes to Apple, and 19% goes to the artist (note completely made up numbers).
It really, really depends on how you parse "At present, UMG... gets 0.70 euro." Does that mean they keep 70 euro, or that they split that with the artist?
If any of them lost once, it would set a precedent that would mean that all of them would lose after that. Hence, it's in each of their best interests to make sure that the others don't lose a case on grounds that they wish to exploit... er, use... later.
In Northern California, the prefix for calling time is 767, or P-O-P on a telephone keypad. For decades, locals up there have dialed POPCORN any time they have had to reset their watches or reprogram electronic gadgets after a power failure.
First thought: Neat!
Second thought: Why do those Northern Californians get a neat number, and we Southern Californians don't?
Third thought: I can make one! Let's see.... UKELELE!
Fourth thought: And that will be useful for precisely two more days. Great.
But just as importantly, it helps Google avoid any problems from non-neutral ISPs. After former SBC chief Ed Whitacre announced that Google shouldn't be able to "use my pipes free," Google saw a potential threat to its existence from the network operators that lay between it and consumers. Running a national wireless network could create enough competition that incumbent telcos simply couldn't implement their previous plans to charge companies like Google and Yahoo for better access to end users.
What Google should do is call up Yahoo (and any other web behemoths they can get), and start the 'Network Neutrality Organization', a non-profit in charge of the new huge swath of bandwidth that the group of them pool their cash to buy. It's in all their interest to have a neutral network, and it's equally in their interest to have a third party running it. Best of all, it's in the customer's interest, as well.
Slashdot Mirror
So it's just a judgement error, then?
It's true; in the short term, the long term doesn't pay off, but in the long term it does.
Yes it would, as it would require that Microsoft recognizes that the effort is going on; at present, they're willfully ignoring it.
I'm sorry, but... have you looked at HTML5 at all? I know your demagoguery sounds nice and gets mod points, but seriously... HTML5 is what you get when you take HTML4 and bring it forward a few years to the present. It standardizes some things everyone is doing, makes some easy things easier, and makes some hard things possible.
It doesn't make the format any more opaque and unhackable; in fact, it adds to the DOM and makes that more accessible to things like GreaseMonkey. Moreover, one of the chief goals is to have as much backwards compatibility as possible, so what you're doing now will still work.
And if you need Vector Graphics, use the new Canvas tag.
Yes, but by then none of us will notice, as we'll be too busy playing Duke Nukem Forever.
They've already accomplished the later; now they're attempting the former.
I used to have an AT&T DSL line, and they didn't block any incoming or outgoing ports. Granted, it's not exactly permission, but it worked.
At my current job, I inherited a 50kloc codebase for oen module in our larger codebase. It was a horrible mess; copy/pasted code, code that did nothing, duplicated data storage that would get out of sync, no central structure, etc.
What was wrong with it was that it needed a complete redesign. I took the existing code and began cutting, extracting, pulling apart, mashing together, and ended up with an 8kloc codebase that did all the same things, and did them faster.
Sometimes-- not always, and not most of the time, but sometimes-- a complete redesign is called for.
Well put. Your English is really good.
Wait, what was my boss emailing to you?
There's a big problem if, having received their "plaintive notes," the laggard P-members say "no, we just didn't respond; we want to keep our membership." As far as I can see, as long as the P-member responds to the notes, even if they ignore all other business, they get to remain P-members.
Reading my comment now, I realize I came off a bit more confrontational than I meant to; I was really just wondering if you could point me to the Time article in question, as it sounded interesting and I was curious. I've read the link you did provide, and the next chapter is sitting half-read in a browser tab, now.
But it's a question of leverage. I disagree with pretty much every vote my congressman makes, since I'm a liberal living in Orange County, CA. As such, there's no way I'm voting for him in the next election. So should I send him a letter saying "Hey, you'd better vote for this (though I know you won't) or I'm voting for the other guy (though I will be doing so anyway)"? He can happily ignore me, because he's in a safe seat and my vote won't matter to his re-election.
Reading the link you provide, I can't see how you say that Carter proposed it; he and the DoE were heavily pushing for Nuclear Power Everywhere, and actually threatened to veto a congressional bill to extend funding for the initial plan.
The only reference I find in Time's Archive is here, which is more about the precursor project Powersat, which used mirrors to heat a liquid and drive a turbine.
The Wikipedia article doesn't mention Carter at all.
So yes, this idea has been around a long time (your article traces it back to Peter Glaser, which Wikipedia places in 1968), but it's always gotten the same reception it has now: "yes, that's a nice idea, but we're too busy doing other things right now."
Was it scotch or duct?
Because we just wrangled a build this morning, and I could use some scotch.
Man, you sure made wthanna eat crow!
Thanks, I'm here all week. Try the veal.
Not being a physicist or anything, "Strong as Steel" was more helpful to me than anything you or the grandparent said.
Man, I thought people were just downloading stuff, but people are shooting at the RIAA, now?
Note how Christ is saying that the thief comes to "steal, kill and destroy." It is not, as you would have it, directions on how to deal with said thief.
It never says that 29% goes to Apple. It could very well be that 71% goes to UMG, 10% goes to Apple, and 19% goes to the artist (note completely made up numbers).
It really, really depends on how you parse "At present, UMG... gets 0.70 euro." Does that mean they keep 70 euro, or that they split that with the artist?
Thats it! We need to start a consultancy that differentiates asses and elbows! We'll make millions selling our services to other consultants!
If any of them lost once, it would set a precedent that would mean that all of them would lose after that. Hence, it's in each of their best interests to make sure that the others don't lose a case on grounds that they wish to exploit... er, use... later.
Happy Birthday (by way of Wikipedia).
First thought: Neat!
Second thought: Why do those Northern Californians get a neat number, and we Southern Californians don't?
Third thought: I can make one! Let's see.... UKELELE!
Fourth thought: And that will be useful for precisely two more days. Great.
What Google should do is call up Yahoo (and any other web behemoths they can get), and start the 'Network Neutrality Organization', a non-profit in charge of the new huge swath of bandwidth that the group of them pool their cash to buy. It's in all their interest to have a neutral network, and it's equally in their interest to have a third party running it. Best of all, it's in the customer's interest, as well.