But the only taxpayers who can do anything with the research is Big Business. Even if making it marketable were cheap enough for small companies, BB would just rush over them with marketforce. Yes, BB pays taxes, but they not only keep paying less and less, they also get "something" already, like graduates from the tax funded universities and infrastructure.
No, that would be called "Government subsidizing Big Business, while giving them tax cuts to boot". It's time BB grows up, instead of depending on government wellfare.
So you are saying that "especially [...] state-funded schools" should basically give away their research to Big Business? Hey, that's giving tax money to Big Business.
Oh, somebody who manages to get 6 positive mods out of a post (instead of just 4) could get the +2 bonus in 5 instead of 7 (or is it 8?) posts - this would certainly be a disturbance in the Force.
Duh! "We only code what we want." translates to "We want to code very little, because we'd rather do things like watch Anime all day."
Re:Ability to tag friend or foe
on
Slashdot Code Update
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You mean like the JavaScript/VisualBasic AI dude? Yes, he's at -1 (or so it seems), but he still pops up as "insightfull" from time to time. Or what about those who spend half their time Karma whoring and the other half with FPs? Or those who only Karmawhore - often with the top 5 returns from Google? They may have the right of "Free Speach" (more like in "free beer"), but I have the right to ignore them, yes even to not be bothered at all.
But there is no point in arguing over the same points with the same person again and again, esp. when neither side will change their view anyway. More importantly, if those "discussions" don't take place time and time again, they take a load of the system - well, in theory at least;-)
But look at it this way, you can name somebody who you like to pick a fight with a friend, and somebody who always agrees with you a foe (or give a postive bonus to your foes), that way you will never miss a fight;-)
And that he had two brains, one in his skull and one in his chest cavity, so he wouldn't necessarily have been toast if his head had been severed with a lightsaber.
If you use Intel's C compiler (esp. when using -ipo (inter procedural optimization)), you may want to check the results. It sometimes trades speed for correct results. See this article (in German).
I thought the point of this article was to check out a web server running on a particular (old) computer. Caching the content on that server kind of defeats that point.
> From what I saw, there's no graphics (just plain text).
The research paper has the logo of the company who did it (that looks like plain text at first view), and the consultation paper has those of UK Online and the Cabinet Office.
> Operating systems not related to CP/M offer subdirectories for this.:)
Which are not one file. This means added complication for a distribution format for this. What will it be, tar.gz, WIN.ZIP or sit.hqx?
> It isn't viewing online when you have to download the entire file first before you can view it.
Thanks for completely missing my point. I was talking about HTML files that can only be viewed online, because the images are on a remote server. I'm not even going to mention the security problems linked to that.
> Yup, it would look different on each browser. What's the problem with that?
Well, if you don't realize what the problem is here (same with "optimized" pages), you are obviously not the right person to argue about this matter. Almost anything that can't be done in plain text can
also not been done in HTML. HTML is simply not a substitute for most things PDF is used for - the rest can just as well be done in plain text.
Well, let's assume they would have used HTML. Let's also assume they would not have used HTML coming out of FrontPage or even Word, nothing being "optimized" for one browser or the other. What we can tell about this document is that if it contains graphics, it's more than one file (and those files will have to be kept together) or you can only view it on-line or it's some proprietary format. We also know that it will look different on every browser there is - if it displays at all. And printing the document is yet another problem
Well, I'm awake because I have to work - pitty me!
The story had 89 replies in 2.5 hours, half of them don't sound like the writers bothered to look at the page at all (let alone the document). I expect a government server to handle that kind of load. Last but not least - this story is not really a thrilling must-read. Outside of the UK only the most rabid Open Source advocates and Microsoft astroturfers will bother to read it. But if it makes you happy to think that IIS is the reason this isn't slashdoted yet...
The site shows no sign of slashdotting, nor do I expect it to. I wonder if you can attribute that to IIS, hmm?
Ohh, could it be that it's not slashdoted because hardly anybody has read the article yet? It's New Years morning, most Europeans are still asleep and most Americans are still partying or just went to bed.
Slashdot Mirror
More proof that Slashdot lost it as a news service ;-)
And when you eject a disk - bluuurp, drop.
But the only taxpayers who can do anything with the research is Big Business. Even if making it marketable were cheap enough for small companies, BB would just rush over them with marketforce. Yes, BB pays taxes, but they not only keep paying less and less, they also get "something" already, like graduates from the tax funded universities and infrastructure.
No, that would be called "Government subsidizing Big Business, while giving them tax cuts to boot". It's time BB grows up, instead of depending on government wellfare.
So you are saying that "especially [...] state-funded schools" should basically give away their research to Big Business? Hey, that's giving tax money to Big Business.
Well, you remember not quite correctly. Piers Anthony wrote the novelization of the movie.
Oh, somebody who manages to get 6 positive mods out of a post (instead of just 4) could get the +2 bonus in 5 instead of 7 (or is it 8?) posts - this would certainly be a disturbance in the Force.
The 2nd level boost should not be X²/100, but (X/100)² (== X²/10000).
Duh! "We only code what we want." translates to "We want to code very little, because we'd rather do things like watch Anime all day."
You mean like the JavaScript/VisualBasic AI dude? Yes, he's at -1 (or so it seems), but he still pops up as "insightfull" from time to time. Or what about those who spend half their time Karma whoring and the other half with FPs? Or those who only Karmawhore - often with the top 5 returns from Google? They may have the right of "Free Speach" (more like in "free beer"), but I have the right to ignore them, yes even to not be bothered at all.
But look at it this way, you can name somebody who you like to pick a fight with a friend, and somebody who always agrees with you a foe (or give a postive bonus to your foes), that way you will never miss a fight ;-)
And that he had two brains, one in his skull and one in his chest cavity, so he wouldn't necessarily have been toast if his head had been severed with a lightsaber.
No, that's the iWalk-fake they did a couple of days before the iPod came out. Their new iWalk-fake looks somewhat like an iPod ;-)
If you use Intel's C compiler (esp. when using -ipo (inter procedural optimization)), you may want to check the results. It sometimes trades speed for correct results. See this article (in German).
He also talks about it in this recent interview (shortly).
I thought the point of this article was to check out a web server running on a particular (old) computer. Caching the content on that server kind of defeats that point.
The research paper has the logo of the company who did it (that looks like plain text at first view), and the consultation paper has those of UK Online and the Cabinet Office.
> Operating systems not related to CP/M offer subdirectories for this. :)
Which are not one file. This means added complication for a distribution format for this. What will it be, tar.gz, WIN.ZIP or sit.hqx?
> It isn't viewing online when you have to download the entire file first before you can view it.
Thanks for completely missing my point. I was talking about HTML files that can only be viewed online, because the images are on a remote server. I'm not even going to mention the security problems linked to that.
> Yup, it would look different on each browser. What's the problem with that?
Well, if you don't realize what the problem is here (same with "optimized" pages), you are obviously not the right person to argue about this matter. Almost anything that can't be done in plain text can also not been done in HTML. HTML is simply not a substitute for most things PDF is used for - the rest can just as well be done in plain text.
Well, let's assume they would have used HTML. Let's also assume they would not have used HTML coming out of FrontPage or even Word, nothing being "optimized" for one browser or the other. What we can tell about this document is that if it contains graphics, it's more than one file (and those files will have to be kept together) or you can only view it on-line or it's some proprietary format. We also know that it will look different on every browser there is - if it displays at all. And printing the document is yet another problem
The story had 89 replies in 2.5 hours, half of them don't sound like the writers bothered to look at the page at all (let alone the document). I expect a government server to handle that kind of load. Last but not least - this story is not really a thrilling must-read. Outside of the UK only the most rabid Open Source advocates and Microsoft astroturfers will bother to read it. But if it makes you happy to think that IIS is the reason this isn't slashdoted yet ...
... he asks. Time for a new Slashdot topic: Astrology and other nonsense.
Well, compare this with what you find when you search for Slashdot on Amazon (that would be nothing).
Silly, you can not find Osama by searching on Google (or anywhere else), you have to bomb Afghanistan for that.
When it's the most simple and cheap way to check for counterfeit, sure as hell they will.
That's what those slide-out cup-holders are there for.