Firefox is perfectly ready for prime time, both for geeks who understand what a 0.x version is, and for Windows users who are accustomed to the remarkably woeful IE, and general incompleteness of most Microsoft products when they first ship. Firefox may not be perfectly polished yet, but it's certainly able to compete with Internet Explorer, and with other offerings like Opera which are intimidating to first-time users because of their complexity.
I have not encountered a single person who has been turned off Firefox because it seems incomplete. In fact, it doesn't seem incomplete. It has some way to go before it's perfect, but as browser packages go, it's streamlined, easy to use, and has everything the average user wants. If you use Firefox as your primary browser, and you in fact use 0.9x, you should know that.
To be serious for a moment, I teach Western armed martial arts, and plate is both light and manoeverable (when worn, not when carried). If it weren't, it would be useless; one needs to be able to perform the same actions with a weapon while wearing armor as one would while unarmored. If I recall correctly, as an example of how nimble one can be in full plate, Henry VIII was known to vault onto his horse in full plate.
That's something of an incorrect way of looking at it. Mysticism isn't an explanation; it merely avoids the issue rather than explaining it. Sure, superstitious cultures didn't have science to explain stuff, so they can't be blamed, but using "mysticism" as a solution via Occam's Razor is to misuse the Razor.
Ever tried playing a first person shooter with a graphics tablet? Mouses are quite acceptable input devices, and in many ways operate far more effectively than any kind of tablet-based input device. If you want to draw, get a tablet, but don't slam mouses just because they're hopeless for doing something they were never designed to do.
How about the AUTHOR decide how long they want to keep it copyrighted?
That's a good idea, and it would probably be pretty effective if the author did get to decide. However, since whenever you publish something you sign all your copyrights over to the publisher, the decision is out of your hands, and your post no longer makes sense.
While I agree that text email is a lot more useful in general than voice, one of your points is simply wrong: very few people can type faster than they can talk. Speech speed is between 60 and 160 words a minute; I can't type anywhere near the upper end of that scale, and I'm a very fast typist compared to everyone I've met (except secretaries;)). I can type at 140 wpm burst, and about 120 wpm sustained. Most people can manage up to 45 wpm if they haven't learned to touchtype, and between 60 and 90 wpm if they have. It's unusual to meet someone who has either the natural ability and/or has had the practise to achieve more than this (I've had a lot of practise). If you want to get an idea of how fast people really talk compared to typing speed, try having someone talk to you while you type out what they say. Admittedly you type faster straight out of your head, but it's still a good demonstration.
Oh, I definitely wouldn't describe Brin as an inspiration, so much as a source of what is generally an interesting alternative viewpoint. I don't think his intention was to provide a realistic analysis of LotR as much as to play a mindgame--the last page of his article indicates this. He was trying to show how to think about the stuff you read, rather than just taking it entirely at face value.
Since LOTR deals with such universal concepts, and is in essence a myth, it is applicable to lots of situations, but not a thinly veiled text about WWII. That would cheapen the book. Think of it in the same light as the Illiad, Odyssey, Anead or any great mythology.
Except that The Illiad, The Odyssey, and The Anead were all texts about the respective wars they describe, thinly veiled with heroic characters and propaganda padding to make them appealing to their audiences.
I'm not saying they aren't great, and I do agree with you, but your comparison is kinda ironic.
Sure, Brin may have certain ideologies that he likes to promote, and he may hunt out particular stories in popular culture which he can use to demonstrate his point. That doesn't mean he's wrong. As another poster pointed out, any story which involves good vs evil is, to all intents and purposes, black and white.
Brin's article wasn't just about Lord of the Rings; it was an interesting take on history and popular literature in general. He wasn't trying to put down Tolkien, and in fact he acknowledged that he considers Lord of the Rings to be one of the best works ever written.
I entirely agree with him. I'm a writer, and I began work on a fantasy series a few months back. I'm working with another guy who has a far greater grounding in fantasy than I do (I'm a sci-fi geek), and we have run into certain ideological clashes. I don't like, at all, the idea that power should remain in the hands of a few. I despise the entire ideology that fantasy--intentionally or not--promotes. To the best of my capability, I am trying to prevent my own work from incorporating it. Some authors concentrate on telling a good story. Tolkien was one of these people. I don't think you can really judge him based on what he wrote. Other authors, however, understand that everything they write promotes a message of some kind; whether people actively acknowledge that message or passively absorb it. I'd like to write something that can provide meaningful social commentary, without the cliched and shallow idea that people can be "good" and "evil" and that good must always win.
That doesn't mean I don't like Tolkien. But there's no need to be so hard on Brin, who is, after all, a writer himself.
On the other hand, if she knows your nick it's an entirely different matter.
Try doing a google for Dominic Tennant, and you come up with nothing about me. Try doing a google for Bnonn and you'll find I'm a k5 whore who doesn't like bloated HTML code and is interested in quantum physics, philosophy and gaming.
Sure, you can be lucky and have an unoriginal nick, but a lot of people don't.
Why isn't Slashdot using PNGs? Other posters have mentioned compatibility problems, which are valid, but it seems to me that the Slashdot editors simply realise that PNGs are a lot bigger than GIFs, and that a lot of the people accessing this website still use dialup.
That's right, not everyone has broadband yet. Wow. Who'd have thought?
Superman by a mile... Batman is a highly skilled human, while Superman is a endowed with superhuman strength, speed, intelligence, etc...
Superhuman strength and speed, yes. Superhuman intelligence? No.
Despite his slightly above-average IQ, Superman is hands down dumbest action hero I've come across. He has so much power that he doesn't need to use his brain. He never thinks of the simplest way of doing something, because he's so used to doing it the brawny way. I think he's a pretty good example of why you can't have brains and brawn and still use them both effectively.
In my view, as a writer myself, Superman was the worst idea for a hero that a writer ever conceived. I don't understand why anyone in their right mind would allow a concept like that to get past the dreaming phase: he's completely overpowered, with only one weakness to speak of (two if you count compassion). In nearly all scenarios there is a way for him to prevail, no matter what, so half his powers have to be conveniently forgotten each time he gets into a tricky situation. That and the fact that someone with godlike powers would have immense difficulty staying sane leads me to the conclusion that not only was he a bad idea in the first place, he was also very poorly implemented and developed.
Sorry, I know this is the kind of anal ranting that you only hear from hardcore fans or hardcore writers, but I'd have to place my bets on Batman. While he's not a wonderfully developed character, he does rely on his intelligence to a far greater degree, and from what I've seen he's definitely got a higher IQ than Superman in any case.
Actually he is correct. Polarising the hull plating should have no effect against an energy beam (as we are led to believe laser/phaser emissions are). It would also have no effect that I can think of against normal explosive charges or high-velocity projectiles. Additionally, I don't believe the armour mentioned in the article polarises anything; it electrifies an interior plate of armour.
The system is designed specifically to protect against shaped charges like those used in RPGs. When an RPG shell hits armour, the copper inside melts from the impact and is forced against the surface of the tank. Being extremely high-velocity and high-temperature, it will stick a big honking hole in it. Electrical armour creates a short-circuit between the copper, a charged plate, and a grounded external plate, forcing enormous current through the copper and vaporising it before it can do significant damage. Obviously this doesn't work against missiles or projectiles that don't employ shaped charges for their main payload.
If you're still going ahead with your nitpicker slapping, you're going to need to give him at least one article that comprehensively covers the functionality of this armour (would help if you'd read it yourself, humm?), so that if he is as smart as he thinks he is he will be able to rebut you. Willing to take that chance?
Seems like Slashdot isn't the best place for you, since you're looking for politeness, fair moderation and, apparently, people with a sense of humour. Not to say you can't find it here, but have you tried kuro5hin?
Slashdot Mirror
I have not encountered a single person who has been turned off Firefox because it seems incomplete. In fact, it doesn't seem incomplete. It has some way to go before it's perfect, but as browser packages go, it's streamlined, easy to use, and has everything the average user wants. If you use Firefox as your primary browser, and you in fact use 0.9x, you should know that.
To be serious for a moment, I teach Western armed martial arts, and plate is both light and manoeverable (when worn, not when carried). If it weren't, it would be useless; one needs to be able to perform the same actions with a weapon while wearing armor as one would while unarmored. If I recall correctly, as an example of how nimble one can be in full plate, Henry VIII was known to vault onto his horse in full plate.
Actually, that's a common theological fallacy. Jesus saves, but only Buddha makes incremental backups.
That's something of an incorrect way of looking at it. Mysticism isn't an explanation; it merely avoids the issue rather than explaining it. Sure, superstitious cultures didn't have science to explain stuff, so they can't be blamed, but using "mysticism" as a solution via Occam's Razor is to misuse the Razor.
Did anyone else read the headline to mean that people were protesting Gillete pulling RFID tags?
More like stealing the chip that allows the car to turn on...
I think we're a herd of sheep, actually.
Could we revise it to include mention of terrorists, as well as nazis?
Ever tried playing a first person shooter with a graphics tablet? Mouses are quite acceptable input devices, and in many ways operate far more effectively than any kind of tablet-based input device. If you want to draw, get a tablet, but don't slam mouses just because they're hopeless for doing something they were never designed to do.
- How about the AUTHOR decide how long they want to keep it copyrighted?
That's a good idea, and it would probably be pretty effective if the author did get to decide. However, since whenever you publish something you sign all your copyrights over to the publisher, the decision is out of your hands, and your post no longer makes sense.While I agree that text email is a lot more useful in general than voice, one of your points is simply wrong: very few people can type faster than they can talk. Speech speed is between 60 and 160 words a minute; I can't type anywhere near the upper end of that scale, and I'm a very fast typist compared to everyone I've met (except secretaries ;)). I can type at 140 wpm burst, and about 120 wpm sustained. Most people can manage up to 45 wpm if they haven't learned to touchtype, and between 60 and 90 wpm if they have. It's unusual to meet someone who has either the natural ability and/or has had the practise to achieve more than this (I've had a lot of practise). If you want to get an idea of how fast people really talk compared to typing speed, try having someone talk to you while you type out what they say. Admittedly you type faster straight out of your head, but it's still a good demonstration.
- Incidentally, I discovered that the chronic unreliability problem of my '98 machine went away as soon as I swapped out the voodoo for a GForce...
Interesting. I discovered that the chronic unreliability problem of my '98 machine went away as soon as I installed 2k...Anyhoo :)
- Since LOTR deals with such universal concepts, and is in essence a myth, it is applicable to lots of situations, but not a thinly veiled text about WWII. That would cheapen the book. Think of it in the same light as the Illiad, Odyssey, Anead or any great mythology.
Except that The Illiad, The Odyssey, and The Anead were all texts about the respective wars they describe, thinly veiled with heroic characters and propaganda padding to make them appealing to their audiences.I'm not saying they aren't great, and I do agree with you, but your comparison is kinda ironic.
Sure, Brin may have certain ideologies that he likes to promote, and he may hunt out particular stories in popular culture which he can use to demonstrate his point. That doesn't mean he's wrong. As another poster pointed out, any story which involves good vs evil is, to all intents and purposes, black and white.
Brin's article wasn't just about Lord of the Rings; it was an interesting take on history and popular literature in general. He wasn't trying to put down Tolkien, and in fact he acknowledged that he considers Lord of the Rings to be one of the best works ever written.
I entirely agree with him. I'm a writer, and I began work on a fantasy series a few months back. I'm working with another guy who has a far greater grounding in fantasy than I do (I'm a sci-fi geek), and we have run into certain ideological clashes. I don't like, at all, the idea that power should remain in the hands of a few. I despise the entire ideology that fantasy--intentionally or not--promotes. To the best of my capability, I am trying to prevent my own work from incorporating it. Some authors concentrate on telling a good story. Tolkien was one of these people. I don't think you can really judge him based on what he wrote. Other authors, however, understand that everything they write promotes a message of some kind; whether people actively acknowledge that message or passively absorb it. I'd like to write something that can provide meaningful social commentary, without the cliched and shallow idea that people can be "good" and "evil" and that good must always win.
That doesn't mean I don't like Tolkien. But there's no need to be so hard on Brin, who is, after all, a writer himself.
These licenses are as much designed for software as the GPL was designed for literature. Now do you understand?
You'll also find, if you click those links, that for all my spouting I am an idiot who doesn't check my own URIs before posting a comment.
Try doing a google for Dominic Tennant, and you come up with nothing about me. Try doing a google for Bnonn and you'll find I'm a k5 whore who doesn't like bloated HTML code and is interested in quantum physics, philosophy and gaming.
Sure, you can be lucky and have an unoriginal nick, but a lot of people don't.
So when are they going to rework their site so I can access it in Opera for Linux and download these drivers?
That's right, not everyone has broadband yet. Wow. Who'd have thought?
- [...] but their overediting and bad dub jobs are notorious among hardcore fans.
The use of "hardcore" in that sentence is redundant. It's like saying "smart geek" or "annoying teenybopper", yah know?- Superman by a mile... Batman is a highly skilled human, while Superman is a endowed with superhuman strength, speed, intelligence, etc...
Superhuman strength and speed, yes. Superhuman intelligence? No.Despite his slightly above-average IQ, Superman is hands down dumbest action hero I've come across. He has so much power that he doesn't need to use his brain. He never thinks of the simplest way of doing something, because he's so used to doing it the brawny way. I think he's a pretty good example of why you can't have brains and brawn and still use them both effectively.
In my view, as a writer myself, Superman was the worst idea for a hero that a writer ever conceived. I don't understand why anyone in their right mind would allow a concept like that to get past the dreaming phase: he's completely overpowered, with only one weakness to speak of (two if you count compassion). In nearly all scenarios there is a way for him to prevail, no matter what, so half his powers have to be conveniently forgotten each time he gets into a tricky situation. That and the fact that someone with godlike powers would have immense difficulty staying sane leads me to the conclusion that not only was he a bad idea in the first place, he was also very poorly implemented and developed.
Sorry, I know this is the kind of anal ranting that you only hear from hardcore fans or hardcore writers, but I'd have to place my bets on Batman. While he's not a wonderfully developed character, he does rely on his intelligence to a far greater degree, and from what I've seen he's definitely got a higher IQ than Superman in any case.
The system is designed specifically to protect against shaped charges like those used in RPGs. When an RPG shell hits armour, the copper inside melts from the impact and is forced against the surface of the tank. Being extremely high-velocity and high-temperature, it will stick a big honking hole in it. Electrical armour creates a short-circuit between the copper, a charged plate, and a grounded external plate, forcing enormous current through the copper and vaporising it before it can do significant damage. Obviously this doesn't work against missiles or projectiles that don't employ shaped charges for their main payload.
If you're still going ahead with your nitpicker slapping, you're going to need to give him at least one article that comprehensively covers the functionality of this armour (would help if you'd read it yourself, humm?), so that if he is as smart as he thinks he is he will be able to rebut you. Willing to take that chance?
Seems like Slashdot isn't the best place for you, since you're looking for politeness, fair moderation and, apparently, people with a sense of humour. Not to say you can't find it here, but have you tried kuro5hin?
Sheesh, you've gotta be kidding me.