Also see eventualism (eg. the wiki way) versus immediatism (wikis slowly shift to this over time, as they become more mature).
Also, I wouldn't use the word "crystallization", because Jimbo has very clearly said that no article will ever be considered to be completely solidified... Users with a certain number of edits will always be able to edit articles (except for short, temporary situations where edit wars or vandalism flares up).
Re:But Wikipedia does NOT organize the world's inf
on
Google to Buy Opera?
·
· Score: 1
Okay, is Wikipedia any less credible than anything else found on the internets? (note: most Wikipedia data is drawn from Google/the-internet, and since Wikipedia articles tend to summarize Google findings, and present them in an advertisement-free way, they are more succinct (maybe not terribly much more, but they are)).
Yes, as Google goes hardcore into properly peer-reviewed or at least properly-edited knowledge organization, that is going to be cool too, but Google so far has seemed to think that massive democratic knowledge collection is also a good thing.
Granted, the content is open-sourced, and the community is fairly independent. But there are large servers that need supporting, that's what I was refering to. Google has lots of experience running server-farms... see, it's perfect.
Red Hat makes money indirectly off of GPL code. Why should that be any different from making money off of GFDL text [1] (or usenet comments for that matter)? Not to mention that Wikipedia requires a lot of money to keep hardware upgraded and such, and a benevolent company who has the resources to back it (even if they do make a little extra off the top) is a good solution. (not to menion that since your contributions are licensed under the GFDL, there are already several websites making advertising money, simply by copying wikipedia content to random other sites).
C'mon, buy Wikipedia already. "Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," and Wikipedia fits that goal better than Google Groups does.
You're missing the forest for the flower pots. The point of the article wasn't to praise our nation's finest inventors. It was to point out that the government's criteria for recognizing our nation's great inventions is really pretty broken.
No, not HTTP-AUTH. I thought I was talking about password fields, but I can't remember specifically where I read that at (RFC2616 is hard enough to keep in your head).
most of the listed grievances are not unique to AJAX
In fact, they're so non-unique that the HTTP protocol actually specifically points out that method=POST, PUT, and DELETE should not be retried. Also, I can't find the reference, but most browsers won't cache passwords when you go back and then forwards, as a security precaution, and that's basically standard practice. The back button has LONG been broken.
That doesn't mean we should ignore the criticisms of AJAX, but I think the take-home message should more be "be aware that there are these downsides, and web authors should everything they can to minimize those downsides. In some situations, this may mean using a simpler method than AJAX. However, AJAX as a whole is something that is beneficial, rather than harmful."
*shrug* Podcasts are more about quality, not quantity, and so I really don't mind that it's delayed a little bit, because I don't mind hearing analysis of the Illinois gaming law decision, or reviews of the latest game release, or what-have-you a couple days later (or alternative analysis to what I read a couple days later, especially because my commute time is basically useless otherwise). eg. Engadget's blog has a ton of stories every week, but for their podcast, they do like 30-60 minutes of good stuff, which is usually a "best of this week". Same with Diggnation, Science Friday, etc etc.
That doesn't mean that's the way they should work, or that there aren't examples of people out there who are showing that one doesn't necessarily need to be a bully to make money or be successful (eg. Google, open source companies...).
Okay, good point, if you listen to music most of the time, it's either more expensive or less legal to go with the iPod.
However, if you primarily listen to news or talk, iPods are much better. Especially if you like gaming or tech, as there are many excellent gaming / gadgets / tech news podcasts out there, whereas similar news is virtually nonexistant on normal radio (and probably some on XM, but still less than is on podcasts).
Dude, get an iPod. They're only a little more expensive than an XM receiver, but there's never any cut-outs, the unit fits in your pocket, you get a pause and rewind button, and podcasts inherently have a broader range of content than satellite radio does (for example).
Exactly! Perhaps the author meant it doesn't have a backdoor instead, and wasn't installed by a criminal organization (both things almost always coincident with rootkits), but it's nonetheless clearly classified as a rootkit. Anything that:
patches the kernel, and
hides files and processes related to it in an attempt to evade detection and removal
It's not about anonymity, it's about reducing the number of drive-by vandals creating new pages by raising the time it takes just a small bit. That's it.
The reason IPs are included is to make it possible to IP-block people who vandalize too much from one IP. Again, it's not too hard to get around, but it's one more thing that makes it slightly harder for the non-pros.
Lots of kids and grandmas are getting their hands on multi-core consoles within the next year (XBox 360 = 3 processors, PS3 = 8 processors, Nintendo Revolution = 2 processors maybe). So game authors are going to be figuring the 3+ core game out soon, and Microsoft and Sony are betting money on that fact.
Moreover, one could really consider them two different kinds of choices: one ethical, and one intellectual. (granted, calculated risk is a part of the ethical decision)
The only thing I've tried on my PC is the Apple Quicktime HD trailer for Cars, which didn't work very well at all on my 3 year old PC, it displayed like 2fps and acted like it wanted to die.
On the XBox 360, you can get a bunch of 720p trailers for free too, those seem to work well. (some game trailers available for download here)
I guess Windows Media 9 also supports HD, and there are some trailers available there too.
OTA HD tuners are available now. CableCard is starting to become available. And there's some heavily-protected stuff on cable/satellite. But once HD-DVD or BluRay takes off, there will be a lot more content floating around. But there's probably some out on BitTorrent already.
Though, if your TV is simply unable to accept that resolution, then you might have to go with a more typical 720p resolution (which might not be so bad, if the bezel on your TV chops the couple of extra pixels off anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
Also see simulated annealing.
Also see eventualism (eg. the wiki way) versus immediatism (wikis slowly shift to this over time, as they become more mature).
Also, I wouldn't use the word "crystallization", because Jimbo has very clearly said that no article will ever be considered to be completely solidified... Users with a certain number of edits will always be able to edit articles (except for short, temporary situations where edit wars or vandalism flares up).
Soylent Green => Computer Space => arcade game => Pac-Man => eating cheetos / circle (of life, sorta kinda)
Yes, as Google goes hardcore into properly peer-reviewed or at least properly-edited knowledge organization, that is going to be cool too, but Google so far has seemed to think that massive democratic knowledge collection is also a good thing.
Granted, the content is open-sourced, and the community is fairly independent. But there are large servers that need supporting, that's what I was refering to. Google has lots of experience running server-farms... see, it's perfect.
Red Hat makes money indirectly off of GPL code. Why should that be any different from making money off of GFDL text [1] (or usenet comments for that matter)? Not to mention that Wikipedia requires a lot of money to keep hardware upgraded and such, and a benevolent company who has the resources to back it (even if they do make a little extra off the top) is a good solution. (not to menion that since your contributions are licensed under the GFDL, there are already several websites making advertising money, simply by copying wikipedia content to random other sites).
C'mon, buy Wikipedia already. "Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," and Wikipedia fits that goal better than Google Groups does.
But Information wants to be Free! Surely the Slashdot mob will now string you up and lambast you for daring to try to hide information.
"Wow. So, all we have to do... is write down... everything we can possibly think of?"
"That's right!"
You're missing the forest for the flower pots. The point of the article wasn't to praise our nation's finest inventors. It was to point out that the government's criteria for recognizing our nation's great inventions is really pretty broken.
No, not HTTP-AUTH. I thought I was talking about password fields, but I can't remember specifically where I read that at (RFC2616 is hard enough to keep in your head).
In fact, they're so non-unique that the HTTP protocol actually specifically points out that method=POST, PUT, and DELETE should not be retried. Also, I can't find the reference, but most browsers won't cache passwords when you go back and then forwards, as a security precaution, and that's basically standard practice. The back button has LONG been broken.
That doesn't mean we should ignore the criticisms of AJAX, but I think the take-home message should more be "be aware that there are these downsides, and web authors should everything they can to minimize those downsides. In some situations, this may mean using a simpler method than AJAX. However, AJAX as a whole is something that is beneficial, rather than harmful."
*shrug* Podcasts are more about quality, not quantity, and so I really don't mind that it's delayed a little bit, because I don't mind hearing analysis of the Illinois gaming law decision, or reviews of the latest game release, or what-have-you a couple days later (or alternative analysis to what I read a couple days later, especially because my commute time is basically useless otherwise). eg. Engadget's blog has a ton of stories every week, but for their podcast, they do like 30-60 minutes of good stuff, which is usually a "best of this week". Same with Diggnation, Science Friday, etc etc.
Neither. He actually meant!
morans
That doesn't mean that's the way they should work, or that there aren't examples of people out there who are showing that one doesn't necessarily need to be a bully to make money or be successful (eg. Google, open source companies...).
However, if you primarily listen to news or talk, iPods are much better. Especially if you like gaming or tech, as there are many excellent gaming / gadgets / tech news podcasts out there, whereas similar news is virtually nonexistant on normal radio (and probably some on XM, but still less than is on podcasts).
Dude, get an iPod. They're only a little more expensive than an XM receiver, but there's never any cut-outs, the unit fits in your pocket, you get a pause and rewind button, and podcasts inherently have a broader range of content than satellite radio does (for example).
is clearly a rootkit.
It may not address the problem squarely head-on, but Jimbo has said that it's the first step of several to come.
The reason IPs are included is to make it possible to IP-block people who vandalize too much from one IP. Again, it's not too hard to get around, but it's one more thing that makes it slightly harder for the non-pros.
Lots of kids and grandmas are getting their hands on multi-core consoles within the next year (XBox 360 = 3 processors, PS3 = 8 processors, Nintendo Revolution = 2 processors maybe). So game authors are going to be figuring the 3+ core game out soon, and Microsoft and Sony are betting money on that fact.
Moreover, one could really consider them two different kinds of choices: one ethical, and one intellectual. (granted, calculated risk is a part of the ethical decision)
Had I been in this kid's shoes, and I had already decided to commit this crime, here's how I would go about doing it
I'm not sure why that's not exceedingly obvious.
Or, for those who want a hilarious animated version of it, see this This Week In God episode. (skip to 1:20 if you need to).
On the XBox 360, you can get a bunch of 720p trailers for free too, those seem to work well. (some game trailers available for download here)
I guess Windows Media 9 also supports HD, and there are some trailers available there too.
OTA HD tuners are available now. CableCard is starting to become available. And there's some heavily-protected stuff on cable/satellite. But once HD-DVD or BluRay takes off, there will be a lot more content floating around. But there's probably some out on BitTorrent already.
Though, if your TV is simply unable to accept that resolution, then you might have to go with a more typical 720p resolution (which might not be so bad, if the bezel on your TV chops the couple of extra pixels off anyway).