The best idea is to fool the users. Keep the E icon for Internet Explorer, but have it point to the Firefox executable. That's idiot-proofing.
And if you really want to mess with your users, skin Firefox with an IE theme (once the Firefox 1.0 version theme is released).
Re:Dont hate me. I still dont get it.
on
Halo 2 Released
·
· Score: 1
All of the cute little animals making noises like squeaky toys. I felt bad shooting them actually.
They didn't happen to be furry, brown, warlike little teddy-bear things, did they? That's it, I demand that Bungie reveal which one of the names in the Halo 2 credits is Lucas's alias!
Since the quotes from this posting were a little out of place, I first read this as follows.
Here's a quote from their web site: "With patent coverage securing 80% of the world 's trading markets, DE Technologies is securing licensing arrangements with international trading participants. Kinda creepy, if you ask me."
If even DE Technologies can publicly admit their scheme is "creepy", you know something's rotten in the state of Denmark.
You see, we have no right being scared, trying to hold back other countries. You cannot be anti-monopolistic and worry about China at the same time.
Fact: China will become a (the) world super power within 40 years, and export technology, culture and politics around the world.
It's not China's culture or economy Americans fear, it's their speech-censoring, thought-controlling Communist government that bothers us. Get rid of the latter and we'll unreservedly welcome the former.
Also proves that Dual Stage to Orbit vs. NASA's Single Stage to Orbit pipe dream is more cost effective.
To orbit? I don't think it's proved that just yet. Compared to getting a man in space for a few seconds, getting a man in orbit is more of a giant leap than a small step.
"To paraphrase again...
"In the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man is king."
I believe in most cultures it would be more like
"In the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man is a freak"."
Sorry, I don't understand. If somebody is cross-eyed, what does it mean to add 1 to that? Would that be like a cyclops where the two symetrically opposed eyes are crossed, but the third eye is free and normal? If so, then I would think that in the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man would be both a king and a freak, assuming everyone else could somehow contort their head, neck, and eyes enough to see that he had a third, normal eye.
Well, they each have their strengths and weaknesses. AMD chips on the other hand are on average cooler, which big datacenters like. And with their new packaging, they're a little more durable now too.
"Kerry knows that science is not something to be feared."
I'm so tired of hearing this. It's not about "fearing science", it's about ethics. Whatever your stand on the issue is, it is undeniable that experimentation on human embryos has significant ethical considerations.
Whoever rated this a Troll doesn't deserve the use of modpoints. Modding should be a process by which we subject our political opinions to an objective analysis of the post, not the other way around. This post was a perfectly legitimate counter-argument to its parent, and should have been rated interesting or insightful, if anything.
I'm certainly not crying over this. Enough American drivers suck anyway, and don't need any added distractions. For example, a few days ago on the road where I live, a cyclist was hit and killed by a woman who "lost control" of her car. She was driving on a straight, 35mph, 6-lane road with a median on a lazy Sunday morning, and somehow lost control, swerved into the 5ft-wide bikelane and mauled the cyclist. My question: what in the hell was she doing that caused her to lose control? And there have been several other cyclist deaths similar to that in the past year. So, as a cyclist myself, I hope the lack of distracting car gadgets stays that way.
A word of advice, steer clear of flawed statements like this. Nobody has a "right" to profit.
What the original poster probably meant: Both individuals and business have a right to private property, e.g., the fruits of their labor and intelligence, and the right to exchange their private property for either cash or other goods. Ostensibly the goal of the exchange is to profit, although there is no guarantee or right to that, but regardless of the symantics, getting that property without exchanging anything for it denies the creator/owner/copyright holder of their private property rights. More to the point, it rips them off monetarily.
An object fell from the sky, finding his home among millions of others - It is a unique event that can only bring further focus from Heaven on him and his family.
I see your point. Hopefully being singled out in such a manner is truly a sign that Heaven intends for you to live in interesting times, at least for another year. But frankly I'd be more inclined to see a satellite crashing on my house out of 1.2 billion other people's houses as a sign that bad things are in store for me. As you imply, what are the chances?
Re:We need to keep re-inventing the browser
on
Netscape Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
New UIs. Tabs are great, but they're not the Holy Grail of UI design. For example, they don't scale - managing more than 20 or so open documents in one browser is not feasible because you just have lots of "..."s. At this point, I would rather have a vertical, scrollable list of open documents
Why does everyone continue to overlook Opera on this issue? It has a very clean and efficient system for managing tons of simultaneously open docs. You set Opera preferences to hide all tabs, then scroll through them with Ctrl-Tab. It's perfectly natural for folks accustomed to tabbing through apps with Alt-Tab, except it pops up a verticle, scrollable list of open docs, rather than a horizontal list of confusingly un-named app icons. So many people proclaim that Mozilla does tabbed browsing "the right way", but frankly I think Opera's is much better.
Better editing controls. Yes, I know what you're thinking: Keep Firefox lean. But having a good integrated text editor for things like wikis or even this form into which I'm typing into right now makes life a lot easier for the average user.
To keep Firefox lean, combine this with your second point and make the editing controls a XUL app, and bookmark it. Or encourage sites like wikis to provide their own XUL apps clearly accessible on their front pages. I'm not certain the "average user" is someone who uses text editors to update wikis, anyway.
My wording on that wasn't clear, but what I should have said was that evolution has always been in balance. It's a self-sustaining, self-correcting process that doesn't spiral out of control and self-destruct. By "in balance" I didn't mean a final state after which everything is static and unchanging. Any system that can sustain a trend toward greater complexity while managing to keep all the symbiotic parts and subsystems working together is "in balance".
One problem with genetically modifying everything is that the modifications are done to solve a specific problem, or a relatively narrow set of problems. But do the modifiers thoroughly consider the far ranging consequences of their modifications? Eg, if a genetically modified butterfly flaps its wings in New York, does a typhoon still occur in Hong Kong, or is it a flood in Bangladesh? Is it even possible to discern what the unintended consequences may be five, ten, fifty years in the future? Nature spent thousands, millions of years evolving itself to a state of balance, and then we come along and start altering that balance willy-nilly to solve a few immediately pressing problems. I worry that we're taking an approach to GM similar to a very bad software development project - no overall plan, build features and modifications in response to isolated needs, and spend the rest of the project lifetime putting out fire after fire after fire. It's just that fires in software development are not quite as consequential as fires that affect the natural state of the world ecology.
Slashdot Mirror
The best idea is to fool the users. Keep the E icon for Internet Explorer, but have it point to the Firefox executable. That's idiot-proofing.
And if you really want to mess with your users, skin Firefox with an IE theme (once the Firefox 1.0 version theme is released).
All of the cute little animals making noises like squeaky toys. I felt bad shooting them actually.
They didn't happen to be furry, brown, warlike little teddy-bear things, did they? That's it, I demand that Bungie reveal which one of the names in the Halo 2 credits is Lucas's alias!
but Google has the right to censor their own content.
Not when their stated motto is "Do no evil".
Your real name isn't by any chance George W, is it?
/.? ;)
Must I answer that? Do you really think that George W. - the president who's not into "book learning" - reads, posts to, or even knows about
Since the quotes from this posting were a little out of place, I first read this as follows.
Here's a quote from their web site: "With patent coverage securing 80% of the world 's trading markets, DE Technologies is securing licensing arrangements with international trading participants. Kinda creepy, if you ask me."
If even DE Technologies can publicly admit their scheme is "creepy", you know something's rotten in the state of Denmark.
You see, we have no right being scared, trying to hold back other countries. You cannot be anti-monopolistic and worry about China at the same time.
Fact: China will become a (the) world super power within 40 years, and export technology, culture and politics around the world.
It's not China's culture or economy Americans fear, it's their speech-censoring, thought-controlling Communist government that bothers us. Get rid of the latter and we'll unreservedly welcome the former.
Also proves that Dual Stage to Orbit vs. NASA's Single Stage to Orbit pipe dream is more cost effective.
To orbit? I don't think it's proved that just yet. Compared to getting a man in space for a few seconds, getting a man in orbit is more of a giant leap than a small step.
"To paraphrase again...
"In the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man is king."
I believe in most cultures it would be more like
"In the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man is a freak"."
Sorry, I don't understand. If somebody is cross-eyed, what does it mean to add 1 to that? Would that be like a cyclops where the two symetrically opposed eyes are crossed, but the third eye is free and normal? If so, then I would think that in the land of the X eyed, the X+1 eyed man would be both a king and a freak, assuming everyone else could somehow contort their head, neck, and eyes enough to see that he had a third, normal eye.
Well, they each have their strengths and weaknesses. AMD chips on the other hand are on average cooler, which big datacenters like. And with their new packaging, they're a little more durable now too.
"Honestly, who is buying these things?"
These guys are, for starters.
"Kerry knows that science is not something to be feared."
I'm so tired of hearing this. It's not about "fearing science", it's about ethics. Whatever your stand on the issue is, it is undeniable that experimentation on human embryos has significant ethical considerations.
Whoever rated this a Troll doesn't deserve the use of modpoints. Modding should be a process by which we subject our political opinions to an objective analysis of the post, not the other way around. This post was a perfectly legitimate counter-argument to its parent, and should have been rated interesting or insightful, if anything.
I'm certainly not crying over this. Enough American drivers suck anyway, and don't need any added distractions. For example, a few days ago on the road where I live, a cyclist was hit and killed by a woman who "lost control" of her car. She was driving on a straight, 35mph, 6-lane road with a median on a lazy Sunday morning, and somehow lost control, swerved into the 5ft-wide bikelane and mauled the cyclist. My question: what in the hell was she doing that caused her to lose control? And there have been several other cyclist deaths similar to that in the past year. So, as a cyclist myself, I hope the lack of distracting car gadgets stays that way.
x + y + ??? = Profit!!!
It's Xbox Next, in disguise.
A word of advice, steer clear of flawed statements like this. Nobody has a "right" to profit.
What the original poster probably meant: Both individuals and business have a right to private property, e.g., the fruits of their labor and intelligence, and the right to exchange their private property for either cash or other goods. Ostensibly the goal of the exchange is to profit, although there is no guarantee or right to that, but regardless of the symantics, getting that property without exchanging anything for it denies the creator/owner/copyright holder of their private property rights. More to the point, it rips them off monetarily.
An object fell from the sky, finding his home among millions of others - It is a unique event that can only bring further focus from Heaven on him and his family.
I see your point. Hopefully being singled out in such a manner is truly a sign that Heaven intends for you to live in interesting times, at least for another year. But frankly I'd be more inclined to see a satellite crashing on my house out of 1.2 billion other people's houses as a sign that bad things are in store for me. As you imply, what are the chances?
The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Period. End of discussion.
The basis of all freedom is the freedom to break the law.
Logical inconsistencies? Yes, we've heard of them...
Perhaps I misunderstand, but what does any of that have to do with having good luck for a year?
I guess we'll be deploying SpecOps forces into French internet cafes now. So, does Carnivore work on Minitel?
I'll bet dollars to donuts that the ad guy who came up with the new naming system owns a BMW.
Either that, or he owns an Opteron server and AMD already took all the even numbers...
New UIs. Tabs are great, but they're not the Holy Grail of UI design. For example, they don't scale - managing more than 20 or so open documents in one browser is not feasible because you just have lots of "..."s. At this point, I would rather have a vertical, scrollable list of open documents
Why does everyone continue to overlook Opera on this issue? It has a very clean and efficient system for managing tons of simultaneously open docs. You set Opera preferences to hide all tabs, then scroll through them with Ctrl-Tab. It's perfectly natural for folks accustomed to tabbing through apps with Alt-Tab, except it pops up a verticle, scrollable list of open docs, rather than a horizontal list of confusingly un-named app icons. So many people proclaim that Mozilla does tabbed browsing "the right way", but frankly I think Opera's is much better.
Better editing controls. Yes, I know what you're thinking: Keep Firefox lean. But having a good integrated text editor for things like wikis or even this form into which I'm typing into right now makes life a lot easier for the average user.
To keep Firefox lean, combine this with your second point and make the editing controls a XUL app, and bookmark it. Or encourage sites like wikis to provide their own XUL apps clearly accessible on their front pages. I'm not certain the "average user" is someone who uses text editors to update wikis, anyway.
at least it's got an FM tuner built in. Hopefully this will be the start of at trend that forces Apple's future iPods along with it.
Evolution is never "in balance," chicken little.
My wording on that wasn't clear, but what I should have said was that evolution has always been in balance. It's a self-sustaining, self-correcting process that doesn't spiral out of control and self-destruct. By "in balance" I didn't mean a final state after which everything is static and unchanging. Any system that can sustain a trend toward greater complexity while managing to keep all the symbiotic parts and subsystems working together is "in balance".
One problem with genetically modifying everything is that the modifications are done to solve a specific problem, or a relatively narrow set of problems. But do the modifiers thoroughly consider the far ranging consequences of their modifications? Eg, if a genetically modified butterfly flaps its wings in New York, does a typhoon still occur in Hong Kong, or is it a flood in Bangladesh? Is it even possible to discern what the unintended consequences may be five, ten, fifty years in the future? Nature spent thousands, millions of years evolving itself to a state of balance, and then we come along and start altering that balance willy-nilly to solve a few immediately pressing problems. I worry that we're taking an approach to GM similar to a very bad software development project - no overall plan, build features and modifications in response to isolated needs, and spend the rest of the project lifetime putting out fire after fire after fire. It's just that fires in software development are not quite as consequential as fires that affect the natural state of the world ecology.