It still used z-ordering, that is, when you closed a "tab", focus returned to the last "tab" you had viewed, unlike a real tabbed browsing implementation, where focus goes to the tab next to the one you are closing; and when you cycled through your open "tabs" with the keyboard, they would come up in last-viewed order rather than linear. That is a *major* difference.
This is still true for Opera, I think those are even the default settings. You can change it to a (cumbersome) Firefox-like configuration if you so desire, of course
Following your logic Opera still doesn't have tabs.
This is why we see can see the same exact products being sold in the US, Mexico, and China go for far far less in the last 2 countries. US and EU college students see this with book pricing.
I think you mean "US and UK college students". I'm in the EU and we don't really have a university textbook industry here. Most of the time professors will provide their own comprehensive and inexpensive scripts which are updated every year or they'll just post their material online. Some people recommend books but not textbooks specifically (so there's no price-gouging).
Not really. I used OS/2 [Warp] around that time. It was a solid OS, compared to that day's Windows. But it had no appeal to the regular user; fonts were fat and ugly, GUI operations were somewhat unusual, and IIRC only 16-bit Windows apps were supported (Win95 was released a couple of years before that.)
OS/2 Warp 3 was released one year before Windows 95. OS/2 Warp 4 (the last major version) was released one year after Windows 95.
The problems in Africa aren't our fault. We send plenty of aid, but it ends up lining the pockets of Robert Mugabe and his ilk more than the people who need it. It's not a racial issue; it's a cultural issue.
Depends on who you claim to be speaking for. The Europeans ("we") screwed up pretty much all of Africa, what with inventing ethnicities (Rwanda) and slavery among many other things. So from my point of view, most of their current problems are a direct consequence of European colonial rule and therefore it's "our" fault.
And if your "we" is the US, there are good examples as well; see Liberia.
Try it in a medium or small town in Italy, or anywhere in Greece that isn't "designated" clothing-optional.
Good, those are rather conservative (religious) areas by most standards. You said that the best case in "relaxed" regions is that you might only get arrested, now you're choosing rather "un-relaxed" examples yourself.
People have been arrested in the UK very recently for "indecent exposure", when they were doing nothing more than hiking naked.
I would be very careful when it comes to comparing anything in the UK with the rest of Europe.
And as for the social tolerance for nudity, I'd have to agree that certain parts of Europe are more
relaxed, meaning that in general public nudity might only get you arrested, but not end up forcing you
to register as a "sex offender" for it and be ordered to go door to door explaining to your neighbors that
are a "sex offender."
Excuse me? I'm in Central Europe and public nudity doesn't usually get you anything except strange looks. In fact there have been numerous promotions in recent years where appearing naked gets you free clothes at a clothes store or free entry to a museum for a day. And the best part is, our TV stations can show it without people freaking out. Now, that doesn't happen every day, but it's not particularly shocking for anyone.
And the fact that those other countries are considerably smaller and more densely populated, reducing build-out costs by vast amounts.
If that were the real reason big, densely populated US cities would have much better connectivity than "those other countries", some of which BTW have a total population that's smaller than the biggest cities in the US.
Car drivers are much more likely to suffer serious and fatal head injuries. I sure hope you wear a helmet while driving and that you blame drivers for head injuries if they didn't wear a helmet?
Also, please look at the funding behind the studies you linked to. Anything with the names "Rivara" and "Thompson" in them is sponsored by Bell. Guess what they produce?
Bicycle helmets are designed to absorb energy by compressing a thin layer of styrofoam-like material. Most people who say "the helmet saved my life" report shattered helmets. In that case the helmet didn't work. It takes very little energy do crack styrofoam. All they're good for is preventing superficial bruises at best.
You write: "Even if they can protect in only a small fraction of cases, isn't it worth it to wear one?" That kind of generic statement (think of the children!) can be applied to anything and everything. Showering is dangerous, very dangerous. Much more dangerous for your head than cycling and driving.
So I answer: "Even if a shower helmet can protect in only a small fraction of cases, isn't it worth it to wear one?" See, that kind of argument gets you nowhere. We don't think showering is that dangerous. For a good reason, it isn't, yet it's much more dangerous than cycling.
What it comes down to is this: Cycling is safer than driving and safer than walking. Cycling is better for your health than not cycling. Anything that discourages cycling will be detrimental for the health of the overall population. Making cycling appear more dangerous than it actually is will discourage people from cycling.
Finally, when Australia made bicycle helmets mandatory two things happened: the number of cyclists dropped significantly (which costs society money because people don't exercise as much) and the rate of cyclist fatalities increased. Make of that what you will.
Thanks for the insight. Looks like that kind of alarm is more of an exception rather than the rule and things aren't _quite_ as bad as I thought they were (yet).
A couple of weeks ago I set off one of those alarms. I took a wrong turn at a particularly confusing roundabout in an English city (forgot which one) and ended up in what turned out to be a cul-de-sac (there was no sign indicating that). At the end of said cul-de-sac there was some kind of repair shop. I had to turn around to go back again, which involved driving part of the car over their driveway/parking lot, setting off an alarm like you describe (I didn't understand the entire message, so I'm not sure if it mentioned the police specifically).
It was Saturday afternoon (which means that the place was empty) and having done nothing wrong, I just drove away.
Since I'm not a UK resident, perhaps you could explain a couple of things: - Does this happen a lot? - Are the police really notified right away? - How should one react in such a situation?
All in all, it was a very strange Big-Brother-like experience.
AltaVista (or better their owner Overture, who sell advertising and are in turn owned by Yahoo!) always tracks where you're going if you click links on the results page. Google only does this every once in a while.
Heh, well as a whitewater kayaker as well, I would foster that ability on the whitewater guys. After all, you use your roll a GREAT deal while on whitewater.
Where they beat the whitewater guys is speed (they roll over as quickly as possible in a set amount of time) and variety. Most whitewater kayakers only really use two or three different rolls and a hand roll or two regularly. Those Greenlanders have an amazing array of techniques that they use.
The Inuit kayaks were nothing like canoes, they were very wide with flat bottoms and very stable, and the Inuit *DID NOT* "eskimo" roll them.
I think that's a bit too broad. Not all Inuit kayaks are (or were) wide and I don't think one could say that all Greenland Inuit had the same customs.
If you do a bit of research you'll find that the first Europeans who knew of the eskimo roll were those who had travelled to Greenland. The story you usually read (don't know if it's true) goes like this: Greenland Inuit couldn't swim (water too cold) so they needed a method to recover from capsizing if they didn't want to drown.
In any case, those who compete in Greenland's water sports competitions nowadays are arguably some of the best "eskimo rollers".
I wrote "IP address AND user agent string". A couple of related searches from the same IP could be a company doing NAT. If there are a couple of searches in a certain (short) period of time, all coming from the same IP using the exact same version of a certain browser on a, face it, relatively little-used operating system it's much more likely that they're from the same person.
As I expected, the list blocks Google ads. If everyone downloaded this list and used AdBlock, Google would die.
I have JavaScript disabled most of the time, for very good reasons. JavaScript is enabled for a couple of (very few) sites, such as my bank's online banking application -- Opera lets me do this. Google AdSense does not work without JavaScript. Please tell me, am I a bad person?
I guess the point of my post was to say that toolbars and the like may provide some nice functionality, but the sheer number of them makes for a significant reduction in actually usable screen real estate. My only critisism of Opera in this is that by default, it is worse in this then about any other browser. You can indeed disable most of it, but making it less cluthered by default and possibly moving part of all the functionality into its own module/extension would imho be a serious improvement.
You seem to be implying (please correct me if I'm wrong) that Opera is more "cluttered" by default and takes up more screen real estate than "any other browser". This is of course not true. I present you a screenshot with a default installation (freshly installed, nothing changed) of both Firefox and Opera, both recent versions. Note that Firefox takes up more screen space than Opera.
2. Are you trolling? Now I don't know what you mean by "opening a link into a new tab", but for me that's middle-clicking. If that's what you mean, you can change the behaviour under Preferences -> Advanced -> Shortcuts -> Middle click options.
Slashdot Mirror
Following your logic Opera still doesn't have tabs.
And if your "we" is the US, there are good examples as well; see Liberia.
What exactly should naked people be arrested for?
In short, bullshit.
Google Images stores thumbnails.
Car drivers are much more likely to suffer serious and fatal head injuries. I sure hope you wear a helmet while driving and that you blame drivers for head injuries if they didn't wear a helmet?
Also, please look at the funding behind the studies you linked to. Anything with the names "Rivara" and "Thompson" in them is sponsored by Bell. Guess what they produce?
Bicycle helmets are designed to absorb energy by compressing a thin layer of styrofoam-like material. Most people who say "the helmet saved my life" report shattered helmets. In that case the helmet didn't work. It takes very little energy do crack styrofoam. All they're good for is preventing superficial bruises at best.
You write: "Even if they can protect in only a small fraction of cases, isn't it worth it to wear one?"
That kind of generic statement (think of the children!) can be applied to anything and everything. Showering is dangerous, very dangerous. Much more dangerous for your head than cycling and driving.
So I answer: "Even if a shower helmet can protect in only a small fraction of cases, isn't it worth it to wear one?"
See, that kind of argument gets you nowhere. We don't think showering is that dangerous. For a good reason, it isn't, yet it's much more dangerous than cycling.
What it comes down to is this: Cycling is safer than driving and safer than walking. Cycling is better for your health than not cycling. Anything that discourages cycling will be detrimental for the health of the overall population. Making cycling appear more dangerous than it actually is will discourage people from cycling.
Finally, when Australia made bicycle helmets mandatory two things happened: the number of cyclists dropped significantly (which costs society money because people don't exercise as much) and the rate of cyclist fatalities increased. Make of that what you will.
Thanks for the insight. Looks like that kind of alarm is more of an exception rather than the rule and things aren't _quite_ as bad as I thought they were (yet).
A couple of weeks ago I set off one of those alarms. I took a wrong turn at a particularly confusing roundabout in an English city (forgot which one) and ended up in what turned out to be a cul-de-sac (there was no sign indicating that). At the end of said cul-de-sac there was some kind of repair shop. I had to turn around to go back again, which involved driving part of the car over their driveway/parking lot, setting off an alarm like you describe (I didn't understand the entire message, so I'm not sure if it mentioned the police specifically).
It was Saturday afternoon (which means that the place was empty) and having done nothing wrong, I just drove away.
Since I'm not a UK resident, perhaps you could explain a couple of things:
- Does this happen a lot?
- Are the police really notified right away?
- How should one react in such a situation?
All in all, it was a very strange Big-Brother-like experience.
It's still like that in the Old Quarter of Hanoi. Every day you wake up to loudspeaker messages which I've been told are "news".
AltaVista (or better their owner Overture, who sell advertising and are in turn owned by Yahoo!) always tracks where you're going if you click links on the results page. Google only does this every once in a while.
If you do a bit of research you'll find that the first Europeans who knew of the eskimo roll were those who had travelled to Greenland. The story you usually read (don't know if it's true) goes like this: Greenland Inuit couldn't swim (water too cold) so they needed a method to recover from capsizing if they didn't want to drown.
In any case, those who compete in Greenland's water sports competitions nowadays are arguably some of the best "eskimo rollers".
I wrote "IP address AND user agent string". A couple of related searches from the same IP could be a company doing NAT. If there are a couple of searches in a certain (short) period of time, all coming from the same IP using the exact same version of a certain browser on a, face it, relatively little-used operating system it's much more likely that they're from the same person.
Yay for selective reading.
2. Are you trolling? Now I don't know what you mean by "opening a link into a new tab", but for me that's middle-clicking. If that's what you mean, you can change the behaviour under Preferences -> Advanced -> Shortcuts -> Middle click options.