Okay, why the hell does the DoD call the site "forge.mil" but actually host it at "forgemil.com"? If they can't get a real.mil site, who can? I thought it was some phishing scam. "forge.mil" doesn't even resolve, let alone redirect. And ".com"? Government reserved.gov,.mil and some other domains for its exclusive use. Why on earth are they using.com?
a large portion of fantasy/s.f. is akin to those trashy romance books that my grandmother used to read by the hundred
Though I'm, not a subscriber, I have always found that the quality of writing in F&SF was considerably above average. A lot of the old pulp SF magazines were pretty disposable, but the ones that have survived are mostly doing so because they publish good stuff, while the mediocre writers are publishing novels, especially media tie-ins (Star Trek/Wars, etc) and "epic" fantasy (i.e., regurgitated Tolkien). I'm sure you know Sturgeon's Law. The 10% that is not crap is more than enough worthwhile to keep you occupied. Look for literate reviewers (as in the SF mags) for guidance and find those you're in tune with and you will not be disappointed. If you just choose the books prominently displayed, or "NYT Bestsellers", you may well be disappointed.
Why not? It stiffles competition, Why would you pay for a 3rd party ftp client when there is one built in? It is exactly the same as with IE.
"Exactly the same"?? "ftp" is a command line. People DO pay for FTP clients when ftp has been built into Windows for at least 10 years. If MS bundled curl and lynx rather than IE, that would be similar.
Really? So people now are more stupid than they were in 1990?
No, However there are a hell of a lot more non-technial people using computers.
You were not talking about USERS, but someone building their own PC and installing Windows from scratch. That kind of person is not technical?
USERS will have the whole thing, including browser, set up before they see it.
They could never have assumed due to itunes share of the digital market, mac users would have been left out. Also due to the mp3 revolution taking place with all of the mp3 players on the market again tying to a MS specifc model would have been pretty much impossible.
Yes. But if there was a single music application on PCs, music companies could pressure MS to make non-DRM music hard, or even impossible to play on the PC. As it is, WMP makes crappy MP3s by default if you can work out how to do it at all.
For a while, MS seriously proposed making Word DOC the standard web page, instead of HTML. Fortunately Netscape had already got enough momentum to sideline that, but MS keeps trying to put proprietary formats online. If they are allowed to control the browser market, they can do that. As they have control the word processor market by defining the document format so no one can duplicate it exactly.
The whole point I am trying to make is that yes there should be choice, however there should also be a default option for those that don't care or don't know any better.
Well sure the next logical step is that MS cannot ship with ftp
No, it is not.
Incase you hadn't noticed, it's now 2009
Really? So people now are more stupid than they were in 1990?
The fact that MS includes IE is *NOT* the problem the problem is they are not RFC compliant, that is where the problem lies.
There are certainly plenty of problems with IE. That's why I don't use it. But this case is just about the legal issues.
Why are Netscape not complaining about Apple
Apple makes their own hardware, so they can bundle what they like with it. And they're a few percent of the market, so do not come under the strictures that a monopoly (in the legal sense) like MS does. You may have noticed that Apple is being forced to open up its iTunes formats, because in that market it is dominant. Probably one reason they are dropping DRM.
Living in the UK I have access to windows xp N, but when I was buying copy of windows do you think I bought that one or the normal one? (both priced the same).
The very fact that music vendors can't assume everyone has the MS player means that they must offer more open formats. So you benefit even if you do use the MS player. If there was just one player it would be very easy for the RIAA/IFPI types to get MS to lock it down. It might not even play MP3s, or report all your music to some authority. Be grateful you can laugh at this as a paranoid fear now.
Whoever it was who sold you the OS install. I don't know why you are mentioning hardware vendors. I remember about 1990 when you got a floppy with your modem , or when you signed up with an ISP, with Trumpet Winsock, Netscape, Eudora on it, and you had to work out how to install them yourself. And really, it wasn't hard, even on Windows 3.1. So I feel not the slightest sympathy for your straw man who can build a computer but is befuddled as to how to install network software.
If I want a new browser I just browse to a site in IE and download it.
Start/run
ftp open releases.mozilla.org ... etc
A little tedious now, but I'm sure they would simplify the URLs if there was a demand. And similarly, for Microsoft and anyone else: a two-line script, which your mythical home builder could use (don't tell me someone who can assemble a PC is intimidated by two lines of script).
With regards to OEMs bundling the browser are they going to be forced to bundle Netscape? After all giving away a free browser isn't very competition friendly
The idea is that they are not forced to bundle IE. Some may bundle Opera, or Firefox. Or even IE. But Microsoft will not be able to force them to take IE to get Windows. It's the tying that's the problem.
What some people here seem to miss is that *most* people do not care
No, that is quite obvious to everyone. But if they don't care, then what's the problem with using another browser? It's just FUD.
The other thing to consider is that by removing it, it will cause confusion to the non-tech savvy older generation who maybe can just about use IE.
Rubbish. IE is not any easier to use than any other browser. And someone that "un-savvy" will not be able to set up their computer by themself regardless. But if they have a browser and their bookmarks, it will work. I insist my daughter and wife use Firefox at home, and despite them both using IE at school and work, they can cope after a short period of bitching.
uhuh... and what happens if you build you own PC and buy a retail copy of windows and it's the only PC in the house as your other one's HDD died?
In that scenario, you would surely be offered a free CD with the browser of your choice. Or copy Firefox on a thumb drive, it's about 7 MB.
This is pretty much like not bundling a mouse with a PC by default. You probably do want one, and so at the point of purchase you choose one. The point is you have a choice. (A lot of people who have Apple's round mice in their drawers wish they'd had a choice.) Having a choice means that, yes, you have to think. Sorry.
The Bush staff had government accounts and chose to use RNC ones specifically to avoid oversight. And they did it for YEARS
did you skip this line when reading my post?
No. But you seemed to be saying that the day or two some Obama staff were using webmail, openly, because that had no official accounts yet, was comparable to the years that Bush staff covertly used non.gov accounts.
I'm pretty sure I can set up a new email account on my server...
You can, an average White House staffer can't. There probably is a room full of geeks who could do that, but the staffers didn't know how to find them. Or maybe they were occupied in setting up top level staff and rather than wait their turn the rest just made webmail. And maybe many of the support staff were being replaced too.
I'll grant that potentially the Obama team is only going to use these until they get white house addresses and then move all the emails they sent or received into their new accounts, which is the right thing to do. However, there is no guarantee that they would have if this wasn't being reported, or that they will even now.
They ANNOUNCED the fucking addresses. OF COURSE they knew it would be reported.
The Bush staff had government accounts and chose to use RNC ones specifically to avoid oversight. And they did it for YEARS.
Having read TFA, in two pages complaining about restrictions on power use, that the only data we were given on the electricity consumption that is the centre of the problem were vague comparisons:
"Some of the larger models can take as much electricity to run as a fridge freezer they say."
"a new range of plasma screens that used 40 percent less power than current models."
"lower than some LCD TV's and significantly lower than a great deal of domestic appliances."
"new models that have cut power consumption by up to 50%"
For God's sake HOW MANY FUCKING WATTS DO THEY USE? When they studiously avoid giving any numbers in a two page article, one has to assume it is not good.
analog has a far wider reach,
This is, of course, bullshit, at least in my experience.
But not in my experience.
We are in a valley with no line of sight to TV transmitters. Out analog TV signal is marginal. Digital TV works most of the time, but depending on the weather it can break up or just go dead. So then we switch back to analog, fuzzy but still watchable.
the average user would find it easier to modify Windows than some random Linux distribution,
The "average" Linux user, if he wants a leaner install, can just choose one that is already pared down. He doesn't have to start with a kitchen sink DVD and try to trim it himself, he can get Damn Small Linux, 50 MB, for example. Windows users cannot buy a legal cutdown version. (There are plenty of DIY Windows versions online, but all are illegal and/or require a great deal of knowledge to install.)
after Piquipaille ripped, bless his heart, people are now more than ever aware of click suckers like yourself.
This guy actually researched and wrote an article, unlike Piquepaille who copied and pasted from others. No shame in giving links to your own original work.
Are they really arguing that new computers should ship with no internet browser what so ever?
No. They're arguing that OEMs, retailers, etc, should be able to include OTHER browsers, as well as or instead of IE. Though if you specifically did not want a browser at all, it would be nice to have the option.
You are taking that out of context. The submitter is specifically suggesting that the rating system which should be an average of 'random' people choosing to rate the movie, is instead subject to astroturfing.
No, I understand the "context". And so should he. It's obvious that any interested party could game Netflix ratings. What I don't understand is why anyone would care what the "Netflix rating" of a film was, or base any purchase on it.
"what is Netflix's responsibility here to provide honest ratings?"
What is Slashdot's responsibility to provide honest moderation?
Both are just aggregates of random people who bothered to comment, and don't pretend to be anything more. If you want a "professional" movie rating, look at the reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, where currently the Tomatometer for Inkheart is at 63%, based on 19 reviews.
If someone is punished for not following a law with no punishment, there is ground for a lawsuit.
I was assuming that "punishment" was as defined for the particular offence. Obviously courts (in countries constrained by the rule of law) do not have the power to arbitrarily impose punishments.
, but either possibility (purposely deleted or accident) seems equally likely to me.
700 days' worth of email are missing. I think you'd have to work pretty hard to "accidentally lose" that. You might neglect a backup or two. To do it for two years... well, Bush can just isue himself and his staff pardons to cover it.
Why do you think it's irrational for someone to want to protect themselves, their family, and their property; and have a means to put food on the table?
None of that has anything to do with owning a gun, unless you live in the 19th Century Wild West.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, why the hell does the DoD call the site "forge.mil" but actually host it at "forgemil.com"? If they can't get a real .mil site, who can? I thought it was some phishing scam. "forge.mil" doesn't even resolve, let alone redirect. And ".com"? Government reserved .gov, .mil and some other domains for its exclusive use. Why on earth are they using .com?
Though I'm, not a subscriber, I have always found that the quality of writing in F&SF was considerably above average. A lot of the old pulp SF magazines were pretty disposable, but the ones that have survived are mostly doing so because they publish good stuff, while the mediocre writers are publishing novels, especially media tie-ins (Star Trek/Wars, etc) and "epic" fantasy (i.e., regurgitated Tolkien). I'm sure you know Sturgeon's Law. The 10% that is not crap is more than enough worthwhile to keep you occupied. Look for literate reviewers (as in the SF mags) for guidance and find those you're in tune with and you will not be disappointed. If you just choose the books prominently displayed, or "NYT Bestsellers", you may well be disappointed.
"Exactly the same"?? "ftp" is a command line. People DO pay for FTP clients when ftp has been built into Windows for at least 10 years. If MS bundled curl and lynx rather than IE, that would be similar.
Really? So people now are more stupid than they were in 1990?
No, However there are a hell of a lot more non-technial people using computers.
You were not talking about USERS, but someone building their own PC and installing Windows from scratch. That kind of person is not technical?
USERS will have the whole thing, including browser, set up before they see it.
They could never have assumed due to itunes share of the digital market, mac users would have been left out. Also due to the mp3 revolution taking place with all of the mp3 players on the market again tying to a MS specifc model would have been pretty much impossible.
Yes. But if there was a single music application on PCs, music companies could pressure MS to make non-DRM music hard, or even impossible to play on the PC. As it is, WMP makes crappy MP3s by default if you can work out how to do it at all.
For a while, MS seriously proposed making Word DOC the standard web page, instead of HTML. Fortunately Netscape had already got enough momentum to sideline that, but MS keeps trying to put proprietary formats online. If they are allowed to control the browser market, they can do that. As they have control the word processor market by defining the document format so no one can duplicate it exactly.
The whole point I am trying to make is that yes there should be choice, however there should also be a default option for those that don't care or don't know any better.
And there will be. But it might not be IE.
No, it is not.
Incase you hadn't noticed, it's now 2009
Really? So people now are more stupid than they were in 1990?
The fact that MS includes IE is *NOT* the problem the problem is they are not RFC compliant, that is where the problem lies.
There are certainly plenty of problems with IE. That's why I don't use it. But this case is just about the legal issues.
Why are Netscape not complaining about Apple
Apple makes their own hardware, so they can bundle what they like with it. And they're a few percent of the market, so do not come under the strictures that a monopoly (in the legal sense) like MS does. You may have noticed that Apple is being forced to open up its iTunes formats, because in that market it is dominant. Probably one reason they are dropping DRM.
Living in the UK I have access to windows xp N, but when I was buying copy of windows do you think I bought that one or the normal one? (both priced the same).
The very fact that music vendors can't assume everyone has the MS player means that they must offer more open formats. So you benefit even if you do use the MS player. If there was just one player it would be very easy for the RIAA/IFPI types to get MS to lock it down. It might not even play MP3s, or report all your music to some authority. Be grateful you can laugh at this as a paranoid fear now.
Whoever it was who sold you the OS install. I don't know why you are mentioning hardware vendors. I remember about 1990 when you got a floppy with your modem , or when you signed up with an ISP, with Trumpet Winsock, Netscape, Eudora on it, and you had to work out how to install them yourself. And really, it wasn't hard, even on Windows 3.1. So I feel not the slightest sympathy for your straw man who can build a computer but is befuddled as to how to install network software.
If I want a new browser I just browse to a site in IE and download it.
Start/run
A little tedious now, but I'm sure they would simplify the URLs if there was a demand. And similarly, for Microsoft and anyone else: a two-line script, which your mythical home builder could use (don't tell me someone who can assemble a PC is intimidated by two lines of script).
With regards to OEMs bundling the browser are they going to be forced to bundle Netscape? After all giving away a free browser isn't very competition friendly
The idea is that they are not forced to bundle IE. Some may bundle Opera, or Firefox. Or even IE. But Microsoft will not be able to force them to take IE to get Windows. It's the tying that's the problem.
What some people here seem to miss is that *most* people do not care
No, that is quite obvious to everyone. But if they don't care, then what's the problem with using another browser? It's just FUD.
The other thing to consider is that by removing it, it will cause confusion to the non-tech savvy older generation who maybe can just about use IE.
Rubbish. IE is not any easier to use than any other browser. And someone that "un-savvy" will not be able to set up their computer by themself regardless. But if they have a browser and their bookmarks, it will work. I insist my daughter and wife use Firefox at home, and despite them both using IE at school and work, they can cope after a short period of bitching.
In that scenario, you would surely be offered a free CD with the browser of your choice. Or copy Firefox on a thumb drive, it's about 7 MB.
This is pretty much like not bundling a mouse with a PC by default. You probably do want one, and so at the point of purchase you choose one. The point is you have a choice. (A lot of people who have Apple's round mice in their drawers wish they'd had a choice.) Having a choice means that, yes, you have to think. Sorry.
did you skip this line when reading my post?
No. But you seemed to be saying that the day or two some Obama staff were using webmail, openly, because that had no official accounts yet, was comparable to the years that Bush staff covertly used non .gov accounts.
You can, an average White House staffer can't. There probably is a room full of geeks who could do that, but the staffers didn't know how to find them. Or maybe they were occupied in setting up top level staff and rather than wait their turn the rest just made webmail. And maybe many of the support staff were being replaced too.
My point was that NO numbers were in the news articles. So you can't even begin to rationally debate the question.
They ANNOUNCED the fucking addresses. OF COURSE they knew it would be reported.
The Bush staff had government accounts and chose to use RNC ones specifically to avoid oversight. And they did it for YEARS.
Are you being ironic? Because that doesn't look like a figure to me.
I know that I could find out easily enough, probably in the link you gave. But why the aversion to stating a number up front?
For God's sake HOW MANY FUCKING WATTS DO THEY USE? When they studiously avoid giving any numbers in a two page article, one has to assume it is not good.
This is, of course, bullshit, at least in my experience.
But not in my experience.
We are in a valley with no line of sight to TV transmitters. Out analog TV signal is marginal. Digital TV works most of the time, but depending on the weather it can break up or just go dead. So then we switch back to analog, fuzzy but still watchable.
The "average" Linux user, if he wants a leaner install, can just choose one that is already pared down. He doesn't have to start with a kitchen sink DVD and try to trim it himself, he can get Damn Small Linux, 50 MB, for example. Windows users cannot buy a legal cutdown version. (There are plenty of DIY Windows versions online, but all are illegal and/or require a great deal of knowledge to install.)
This guy actually researched and wrote an article, unlike Piquepaille who copied and pasted from others. No shame in giving links to your own original work.
No. They're arguing that OEMs, retailers, etc, should be able to include OTHER browsers, as well as or instead of IE. Though if you specifically did not want a browser at all, it would be nice to have the option.
No, I understand the "context". And so should he. It's obvious that any interested party could game Netflix ratings. What I don't understand is why anyone would care what the "Netflix rating" of a film was, or base any purchase on it.
What is Slashdot's responsibility to provide honest moderation?
Both are just aggregates of random people who bothered to comment, and don't pretend to be anything more. If you want a "professional" movie rating, look at the reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, where currently the Tomatometer for Inkheart is at 63%, based on 19 reviews.
Yes, since breaking just about any other law does. An empty gesture by politicians who want to pretend they're doing the right thing.
Yeah, how else would you hear new viola music?
Weren;t you trying not to loan your AP?
I was assuming that "punishment" was as defined for the particular offence. Obviously courts (in countries constrained by the rule of law) do not have the power to arbitrarily impose punishments.
No, any punishment would be for willfuly neglecting to keep records as they are required by law to do.
Though sadly I think it unlikely that any charges will be laid, just as a political consideration.
700 days' worth of email are missing. I think you'd have to work pretty hard to "accidentally lose" that. You might neglect a backup or two. To do it for two years ... well, Bush can just isue himself and his staff pardons to cover it.
None of that has anything to do with owning a gun, unless you live in the 19th Century Wild West.