How do you do ANYTHING for deaf-blind people? This seems to be a much larger, general problem. Signs? Prices? Car horns? Consumer product instructions? The list goes on. It seems simple math or word problems would suffice, but the problem is the IO. How do you get the challenge to and the answer back out of the handicapped person?
Pick up a book on CSS and make sure to frequent sites and IRC channels on the topic (google will probably reveal these to you, freenode is a good irc network), including portability best-practices. You should be set as far as aesthetic "design" goes. XHTML is a more strict form of HTML that conforms to XML syntax. You don't have to worry about why this is right now, it's not relevant, just make sure that you are conforming to XHTML as much as possible (and document stuff religiously when you can't conform to the standard or best practice). It will make life down the road much easier.
As far as implementing back-ends for dynamic web-sites, that is venturing into programming proper. There are any number of starting points for programming in general. Python and Java are two good places to start. Once you have general programming concepts under your belt you can pretty much pick up anything.
keyes? Let me guess, this is a KDE version of that immenseley useful *X* eyes app, which also does nothing but follow your mouse around the screen. Perhaps the better question is what purpose did this ever have in X to begin with. It's surely only being reproduced for nostalgia factor.
warning, this post is not specifically relevant to gaming
While I can certainly accept that women feel or actually are "oppressed" by either media's or the culture's or even directly men's demand on some physical form, what I just cannot understand, or stand, is the brazen and ubiquitous *willingness* to be oppressed. Perhaps it is making an unfair overgeneralization, but I think women's own fixation on this shit is also partly (largely?) to blame. The second you can realize your oppression it is your responsibility to do something about it, not just passively accept it, or what is even worse, and seems more widespread, *actively* engage in it against others. Stop asking if you look fat in those jeans, and stop having stupid "who can waste more of their meal by eating the least" contests (give me a girl that can down a pint of beer and a burger and feel ZERO REMORSE about it). Maybe it's some sort of social inheritence inherited from mothers of past generations, or perhaps I just don't understand because while I am increasingly bombarded by some male-form-oriented pressure (yeah, buy that metrosexual beauty cream men or nobody will love you omigod the horror) I grant it is nowhere close to female-form-oriented pressure. I think (hope) this is slowly changing over time regardless as women are gradually and naturally realizing power in various other spheres of life and society. But the passive "media-made-me-hate-myself" victim mentality really annoys me.
football/soccer/hockey hooligans that berate the other team for no apparent reason ("my arbitrary geogsocial location is better than your arbitrary geosocial location! Shelbyville sucks, Springfield rules!"), and run around town smashing stuff when their team does OR doesn't win. I'll take some ribbing from MrFr4gs4Lot any day over ridiculous macho redneck physical sports fans.
The "File" menu has traditionally been the place for "standard" system stuff that has nothing to do with "files". E.g. "Exit". What does "exiting" have to do with files? And what "menu" would you put the "exit" menu item (if you even had one), the "Exit Menu" menu? (yes you could dispense with the notion entirely, but closing a single window is often NOT equivalent to "exiting")
The USPTO should just say: "If you can't explain your novel invention to a subject matter expert in less than 12000 words, please come back at a later time when you can. The USPTO is not a book club, and has pressing work to do. kthx."
Why is the burden on the the rest of the society to understand how your idea is novel. You should have to PROVE it to us. Even disregarding the possibility that it actually may be novel, if we can't understand that how can we possibly legitimately give you a monopoly on it? That would be a disservice.
What do you mean "at one point"? The article he is spoofing is his OWN article about frames, and the advice STILL holds. How many sites do you see using frames out there? From my experience, almost none (I only say almost because I know there are but I haven't come accross anything other than the occasional garish personal geocities homepage which actually uses frames).
The spoof is not the content, the spoof is that he re-used a previous (valid) article about frames to layout the AJAX article.
Either he is genuine in his current analysis, or he needs to make it way more obvious that his own arguments are disingenuous (but I don't believe they are).
Um, isn't this exactly how drivers run in Linux (and most other unixes for that matter)? I mean to avoid that they'd need something like, oh I don't know, a "messaging scheme".
Microsoft spends tons of money employing smart people to do cool things - I don't think the technology is the problem, it's that the technical side always gets railroaded by the marketing and business side that demands the expediency of Clippy-s and monstrous ActiveX controls and shiny widgets (and user demands on visible things) at the expense of hard, sound, engineering. From what I recall from _Showstopper_, the NT design was actually based on VMS (Cutler was from Digital) and had sound seperation of concerns and privileges, and only partway through this insurgent development was Cutler forced by the business weenies to bolt the "Windows" interface and API onto it, with all the ensuing problems. NT stands in contrast to the other slop MS produces, and is probably a strong reason MS can even produce a credible (apply appropriate salt) OS today. Could you imagine mainstream computing on a Windows 9x core? BLEEDING EYE HORROR.
"We have faith that the laws of physics have been in effect since the t=0 that some would call the big bang, and will be in effect until such a time the universe might disintegrate. We also have faith that the laws of physics work uniformly throughout the universe. The articles of faiths are called assumptions, and are as often ubiquitous as 1+1=2."
What are you talking about? The laws of physics are to be trusted only as far as they can be measured and have predictive capability. I absolutely DO NOT have "faith" in the laws of physics. A lot of physics is really wacky shit, that is on a yearly basis being revised. Of course a lot of these things have to do with fairly obscure niches like quantum physics. We absolutely cannot assume that the "laws of physics have been in effect since the t=0" (research that is beyond my understanding actually indicates the opposite - that the fundamental constants, particles, and laws of physics may well have changed, perhaps drastically, over time), or that "the laws of physics work uniformly throughout the universe" (case in point: general relatively and quantum mechanics has not yet been unified, so the "common sense" laws in the macroscopic world have no applicability in quantum mechanics which is chock full of ludicrous phenomena to the point that it remains unbelievable except for its outstanding accuracy in prediction - didn't Feynman say: "you never understand quantum physics, you just get used to it" ?).
A uniform, predictable, understandable, world is simply a comfortable abstraction that us humans would LIKE to impose on the universe. In fact, it may very well be true that the universe is a lot more complicated, arbitrary, and nonsensical than we would like. The universe may very well be "meaningless", "design"-less, and completely indifferent to us. This seems to be a very scary possibility to people who like to wrap themselves in the notion that as long as they follow some arbitrary rigid guidelines that a nice man in the sky will give them peace and love forever.
"To me, the funniest thing about this whole debate is how nobody seems to see that science and religion don't need to be stepping on each other's toes."
It looks like this suit is all about these people NOT WANTING people to see science and religion as NOT conflicting. They actually WANT to engender a false debate and a false CONFLICT so that they can attempt to WIN that conflict (winning presumably meaning that children are not taught anything that doesn't conform to their brand of strict theology).
Tell me about it. All we have to do is send Jeff Goldblum of phony sophicated beguilement voice-overs to upload a virus on diskette. Ph34R u5!
(can't you just see, after "ooh"ing and "ahh"ing over the latest consumer bauble, director calls cut and after being handed a bagel Goldblum shouts I SAID ONION NOT GARLIC YOU BITCH! throwing it to the ground)
The issue, more than a stable ABI/API, is stable semantics, no? If the ABI/API is changed, but *semantics are preserved* then venders can simply add an adapter/translation abstraction layer. In fact, they could all get together and agree on one, completely separately from the Linux core developers (and in fact they probably SHOULD do this anyway). It would be nice to have more drivers, but it's also nice for the kernel to advance. So it's just a matter of who has to do more work: the kernel develepors to adapt the kernel to a fixed ABI/API, or the driver developers to adapt their drivest to a non-fixed ABI/API.
What about those who listen but don't care? Or feel resentful for being created as a toy for a supreme being (his "benevolence" aside) to fulfill his personal wishes, for FAILING to do so due to some other personal squabble between God and some other guy with horns, and that it is now OUR responsibility to somehow decipher and discover the means by which we are to be "reconciled".
Fuck That.
If God wants "reconciliation" he should come down and give us a clue about why he started this big fucking soap opera.
The philosophy and metaphor I get (because they have been developed by humans based on human experience). But the literalism that my entire life is owned by some ethereal entity I must worship is bullshit.
So roughly: Even though each measuring stick would would shrink/grow to respect GR, they should shrink/grow differently in relation to each other - the measuring stick being light, this should be manifested in an interference pattern?
It took me forever to find (first documentation which made no mention of the flag, then 'strings' on the client 'jvm.dll' and then google searching which turned up nothing except a single usenet post on the issue which lead me back to, guess what, the docs where it was hidden somewhere other than the tool docs), but anyway, this is partly implemented in Java. 1.5:
Basically the VM slurps up the runtime library, preparses it, and dumps it back in a fashion which it can memory-map much faster on subsequent launches.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you do ANYTHING for deaf-blind people? This seems to be a much larger, general problem. Signs? Prices? Car horns? Consumer product instructions? The list goes on. It seems simple math or word problems would suffice, but the problem is the IO. How do you get the challenge to and the answer back out of the handicapped person?
Laugh now. I'm sure Huehueteotl will take your blasphemous comment into consideration in the afterlife you heathen.
As for the rest: divide into groups and choose who you will be sacrificing for today's lesson on chunky heart and brains minestrone.
Pick up a book on CSS and make sure to frequent sites and IRC channels on the topic (google will probably reveal these to you, freenode is a good irc network), including portability best-practices. You should be set as far as aesthetic "design" goes. XHTML is a more strict form of HTML that conforms to XML syntax. You don't have to worry about why this is right now, it's not relevant, just make sure that you are conforming to XHTML as much as possible (and document stuff religiously when you can't conform to the standard or best practice). It will make life down the road much easier.
As far as implementing back-ends for dynamic web-sites, that is venturing into programming proper. There are any number of starting points for programming in general. Python and Java are two good places to start. Once you have general programming concepts under your belt you can pretty much pick up anything.
And no, formal classes aren't worth a damn.
keyes? Let me guess, this is a KDE version of that immenseley useful *X* eyes app, which also does nothing but follow your mouse around the screen. Perhaps the better question is what purpose did this ever have in X to begin with. It's surely only being reproduced for nostalgia factor.
warning, this post is not specifically relevant to gaming
While I can certainly accept that women feel or actually are "oppressed" by either media's or the culture's or even directly men's demand on some physical form, what I just cannot understand, or stand, is the brazen and ubiquitous *willingness* to be oppressed. Perhaps it is making an unfair overgeneralization, but I think women's own fixation on this shit is also partly (largely?) to blame. The second you can realize your oppression it is your responsibility to do something about it, not just passively accept it, or what is even worse, and seems more widespread, *actively* engage in it against others. Stop asking if you look fat in those jeans, and stop having stupid "who can waste more of their meal by eating the least" contests (give me a girl that can down a pint of beer and a burger and feel ZERO REMORSE about it). Maybe it's some sort of social inheritence inherited from mothers of past generations, or perhaps I just don't understand because while I am increasingly bombarded by some male-form-oriented pressure (yeah, buy that metrosexual beauty cream men or nobody will love you omigod the horror) I grant it is nowhere close to female-form-oriented pressure. I think (hope) this is slowly changing over time regardless as women are gradually and naturally realizing power in various other spheres of life and society. But the passive "media-made-me-hate-myself" victim mentality really annoys me.
what about:
football/soccer/hockey hooligans that berate the other team for no apparent reason ("my arbitrary geogsocial location is better than your arbitrary geosocial location! Shelbyville sucks, Springfield rules!"), and run around town smashing stuff when their team does OR doesn't win. I'll take some ribbing from MrFr4gs4Lot any day over ridiculous macho redneck physical sports fans.
Yeah, being paid NOT to work for 2 weeks? Doesn't sound that bad to me.
The "File" menu has traditionally been the place for "standard" system stuff that has nothing to do with "files". E.g. "Exit". What does "exiting" have to do with files? And what "menu" would you put the "exit" menu item (if you even had one), the "Exit Menu" menu? (yes you could dispense with the notion entirely, but closing a single window is often NOT equivalent to "exiting")
The USPTO should just say: "If you can't explain your novel invention to a subject matter expert in less than 12000 words, please come back at a later time when you can. The USPTO is not a book club, and has pressing work to do. kthx."
Why is the burden on the the rest of the society to understand how your idea is novel. You should have to PROVE it to us. Even disregarding the possibility that it actually may be novel, if we can't understand that how can we possibly legitimately give you a monopoly on it? That would be a disservice.
For anyone wondering it is apparently an ability you can specify that allows uses to navigate to links in your page with a keyboard shortcut.
WTF are "Access Keys"? I thought Doom-style keycards for a second.
kthx
Gah, I missed that somebody else wrote the article linking to Neilson's. But the arguments seem genuine regardless.
"valid at one point for using frames as well"
What do you mean "at one point"? The article he is spoofing is his OWN article about frames, and the advice STILL holds. How many sites do you see using frames out there? From my experience, almost none (I only say almost because I know there are but I haven't come accross anything other than the occasional garish personal geocities homepage which actually uses frames).
The spoof is not the content, the spoof is that he re-used a previous (valid) article about frames to layout the AJAX article.
Either he is genuine in his current analysis, or he needs to make it way more obvious that his own arguments are disingenuous (but I don't believe they are).
"drivers running at ring-0"
Um, isn't this exactly how drivers run in Linux (and most other unixes for that matter)? I mean to avoid that they'd need something like, oh I don't know, a "messaging scheme".
Microsoft spends tons of money employing smart people to do cool things - I don't think the technology is the problem, it's that the technical side always gets railroaded by the marketing and business side that demands the expediency of Clippy-s and monstrous ActiveX controls and shiny widgets (and user demands on visible things) at the expense of hard, sound, engineering. From what I recall from _Showstopper_, the NT design was actually based on VMS (Cutler was from Digital) and had sound seperation of concerns and privileges, and only partway through this insurgent development was Cutler forced by the business weenies to bolt the "Windows" interface and API onto it, with all the ensuing problems. NT stands in contrast to the other slop MS produces, and is probably a strong reason MS can even produce a credible (apply appropriate salt) OS today. Could you imagine mainstream computing on a Windows 9x core? BLEEDING EYE HORROR.
Yeah, for some reason a hyperactive drunk doesn't sound like a good idea.
Only because you are health conscious and choose "diet" coke.
"We have faith that the laws of physics have been in effect since the t=0 that some would call the big bang, and will be in effect until such a time the universe might disintegrate. We also have faith that the laws of physics work uniformly throughout the universe. The articles of faiths are called assumptions, and are as often ubiquitous as 1+1=2."
What are you talking about? The laws of physics are to be trusted only as far as they can be measured and have predictive capability. I absolutely DO NOT have "faith" in the laws of physics. A lot of physics is really wacky shit, that is on a yearly basis being revised. Of course a lot of these things have to do with fairly obscure niches like quantum physics. We absolutely cannot assume that the "laws of physics have been in effect since the t=0" (research that is beyond my understanding actually indicates the opposite - that the fundamental constants, particles, and laws of physics may well have changed, perhaps drastically, over time), or that "the laws of physics work uniformly throughout the universe" (case in point: general relatively and quantum mechanics has not yet been unified, so the "common sense" laws in the macroscopic world have no applicability in quantum mechanics which is chock full of ludicrous phenomena to the point that it remains unbelievable except for its outstanding accuracy in prediction - didn't Feynman say: "you never understand quantum physics, you just get used to it" ?).
A uniform, predictable, understandable, world is simply a comfortable abstraction that us humans would LIKE to impose on the universe. In fact, it may very well be true that the universe is a lot more complicated, arbitrary, and nonsensical than we would like. The universe may very well be "meaningless", "design"-less, and completely indifferent to us. This seems to be a very scary possibility to people who like to wrap themselves in the notion that as long as they follow some arbitrary rigid guidelines that a nice man in the sky will give them peace and love forever.
"To me, the funniest thing about this whole debate is how nobody seems to see that science and religion don't need to be stepping on each other's toes."
It looks like this suit is all about these people NOT WANTING people to see science and religion as NOT conflicting. They actually WANT to engender a false debate and a false CONFLICT so that they can attempt to WIN that conflict (winning presumably meaning that children are not taught anything that doesn't conform to their brand of strict theology).
Tell me about it. All we have to do is send Jeff Goldblum of phony sophicated beguilement voice-overs to upload a virus on diskette. Ph34R u5!
(can't you just see, after "ooh"ing and "ahh"ing over the latest consumer bauble, director calls cut and after being handed a bagel Goldblum shouts I SAID ONION NOT GARLIC YOU BITCH! throwing it to the ground)
The article indicates that there is a lot of novel science behind the colored and disappearing-color bubbles.
Woe un2mnkind
The issue, more than a stable ABI/API, is stable semantics, no? If the ABI/API is changed, but *semantics are preserved* then venders can simply add an adapter/translation abstraction layer. In fact, they could all get together and agree on one, completely separately from the Linux core developers (and in fact they probably SHOULD do this anyway). It would be nice to have more drivers, but it's also nice for the kernel to advance. So it's just a matter of who has to do more work: the kernel develepors to adapt the kernel to a fixed ABI/API, or the driver developers to adapt their drivest to a non-fixed ABI/API.
What about those who listen but don't care? Or feel resentful for being created as a toy for a supreme being (his "benevolence" aside) to fulfill his personal wishes, for FAILING to do so due to some other personal squabble between God and some other guy with horns, and that it is now OUR responsibility to somehow decipher and discover the means by which we are to be "reconciled".
Fuck That.
If God wants "reconciliation" he should come down and give us a clue about why he started this big fucking soap opera.
The philosophy and metaphor I get (because they have been developed by humans based on human experience). But the literalism that my entire life is owned by some ethereal entity I must worship is bullshit.
So roughly: Even though each measuring stick would would shrink/grow to respect GR, they should shrink/grow differently in relation to each other - the measuring stick being light, this should be manifested in an interference pattern?
It took me forever to find (first documentation which made no mention of the flag, then 'strings' on the client 'jvm.dll' and then google searching which turned up nothing except a single usenet post on the issue which lead me back to, guess what, the docs where it was hidden somewhere other than the tool docs), but anyway, this is partly implemented in Java. 1.5:
s -data-sharing.html
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/vm/clas
Basically the VM slurps up the runtime library, preparses it, and dumps it back in a fashion which it can memory-map much faster on subsequent launches.