Get I2P. It is a totally anonymous network, but unlike Freenet, it supports the client-server model; and unlike Tor, it also anonymizes the servers! Everything is referred to by its cryptographic key, yet it supports any existing TCP service. People have already set up BitTorrent trackers on it (a modified version of the standard BT client is available for download within the network).
It won't be as fast as normal BT, of course, but it's still better than risking a lawsuit, eh?
(Keep in mind that one should NOT try to use regular Internet BitTorrent over a Tor proxy; it'll anonymize you, but they don't want people to use Tor for file-sharing because it requires too much bandwidth. So play nice.)
I'm still working on reading every article in the English Wikipedia, all 450,000 of them. When I'm done, I'll make sure to write a book and alert Slashdot, assuming it's still around a few centuries from now.
Actually, a while ago, I created a revolutionary XML application for encoding images. It is very powerful and useful and extensible (thanks to XML's brilliant namespace technology, which of course nobody really uses for extending things). It goes something like this:
The average XIF (Extensible Image Format (tm) -- despite showing no signs of extensibility) is only a few hundred times larger than its PNG counterpart, and marginally easier to parse and generate!
I was kidding about having "invented" it, or it being an "alternative" to Dreamweaver templates (I've used them, and they are quite powerful and useful). That said, I do indeed manage my sites like that, simply because I do all my XHTML by hand; I am a standards freak, and if the (X)HTML editor of the W3C itself doesn't do semantics right (with commands like "bold," or "bulleted list"), I see no reason to trust graphical editors in general.
<?php include('common/header.php'); ?> ... <?php include('common/footer.php'); /* This is free software, available under the terms of the GNU GPL.:) ?>
This gets moderated as 0, Troll? What exactly is wrong this opinion? While I do think Libertarians tend to be closet-anarchist nut jobs, this isn't a troll. It's just an expression of a political opinion, which is what this thread is about, isn't it? I mean, it's not like he was saying "For meaningful change, the only choice is GNAA Lysol!" That would have been a troll, but I don't see how this is.
I don't like this trend of assigning custom URL handlers to things based on file format. That's what MIME types and file extensions (outside of HTTP) are for. We now have the feed:// handler implemented in several environments -- why? It automatically assumes HTTP, and in that case, why not just send a HEAD request to find out the format? Custom URL schemes are breaking the purpose for which they exist: indicating what protocol to use to fetch the resource, not the function of the content of that resource.
At least this provides the opportunity for more silly domain puns. Maybe, if it's as unregulated as.com,.net, and all those other general hierarchies, it'll even be abused by newspapers -- think washington.post, newyork.post, etc.
Actually, that would make for nicer URLs, but it's just not right...
In all seriousness, maybe there should be a legally-regulated.adult or.porn or.xxx TLD. If pr0n sites were required to use those, or at least any new ones, it would make blocking access by children vastly easier. The browser or blocking software can just check the URL.... On the other hand, I would like to see ICRA ratings more widely adopted and supported. There's more flexibility.
But still make a.porn TLD. That would also make things a lot easier for people searching for porn.
While I'm throwing around domain-name ideas in a post that will probably be moderated -1 Silly And Rambling anyway, how about a.secx TLD. Then all the se.cx sites can move there, and finally, the.cx TLD shall be free to be a home for domains of legitimate relevance to, or located in, Christmas Island. If there are any, which there probably aren't.
Also, we need a.slash TLD, just so someone can get orgdot.slash, and create an Elgoog-style mirror of Slashdot. (Of course, it will probably end up being taken over by trolls from the American Association of White Female Women, the mirror GNAA...)
Many people believe that a two-party system, such as the one in the US enforced by the Electoral College, is inherently unfair and undemocratic, in that people cannot cast a meaningful vote for anyone but the two "main candidates," in this case you and your opponent. Of course, a multiparty system would break down the duopoly on most American politics currently held by your party and your opponent's party. Would you put partisan politics aside in the interest of fairness? If so, what is your preferred alternative to the plurality or electoral college system?
There's also Everybody Poops But Me. It didn't sell well because it was completely incoherent and fundamentally nonsensical, though it has a bit of a cult following.
(That's the same reason why Slashdot isn't subscription-only.)
In other news, September 3 marks be the 35th anniversary of Goatse (and, additionally marking the birthday of leetspeak, we must remember that back then it was known only by its IP address -- 60.47.53.101).
I don't really think that this mouse is that special, but look how well the make-everything-look-pretty-no-matter-how-minor model worked for Apple. It's understandable that MS would try to pursue it (though of course it would actually look out of place if the computer itself couldn't match its prettyness).
I'm starting to think that Longhorn might suffer the same fate as Apple's mid-90s Copland project. They create enormous hype for it, give developers plenty of betas and do lots of previews, but it never ends up materializing. And then, the best features from it get rolled into their existing operating system (Copland -> Mac OS 8, Longhorn -> Windows XP) and it gets canned. Then, years later, they realize that they really should have completed the objectives of the project because their existing system is getting old and stale.
Of course there probably won't be so many parallels, but I do suspect that Longhorn will end up vaporizing and the most-demanded features and the interface will be integrated into the existing platform.
I don't know about Yellow Dog, but the Red Hat installation program flashes trivia by occasionally to keep you busy, and it provides a few insights. First of all, Wikipedia says this: "Red Hat's name came from the manual of the beta version, which contained a request for the return of Marc Ewing's characteristic red and white-striped hat, should anyone find it." The installer trivia says, if I remember correctly, that when Ewing was in college people would often ask for "the guy in the red hat" for computer help. So he came to be associated with the hat.
Slashdot Mirror
Get I2P. It is a totally anonymous network, but unlike Freenet, it supports the client-server model; and unlike Tor, it also anonymizes the servers! Everything is referred to by its cryptographic key, yet it supports any existing TCP service. People have already set up BitTorrent trackers on it (a modified version of the standard BT client is available for download within the network).
It won't be as fast as normal BT, of course, but it's still better than risking a lawsuit, eh?
(Keep in mind that one should NOT try to use regular Internet BitTorrent over a Tor proxy; it'll anonymize you, but they don't want people to use Tor for file-sharing because it requires too much bandwidth. So play nice.)
There's a free PDF (from here) of the whole manuscript.
You're thinking of Sonny Bono. He's dead. This is U2's Bono.
Can I get IPTV over my cable internet connection?
I'm still working on reading every article in the English Wikipedia, all 450,000 of them. When I'm done, I'll make sure to write a book and alert Slashdot, assuming it's still around a few centuries from now.
That invalidates yours.
Actually, a while ago, I created a revolutionary XML application for encoding images. It is very powerful and useful and extensible (thanks to XML's brilliant namespace technology, which of course nobody really uses for extending things). It goes something like this:
... --> ... -->
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<image xmlns="http://atommic.com/image#" size width="100px" height="32px">
<data>
<row>
<pix>
<red>0</red>
<green>0</green>
<blue>255</blue>
<opacity>255</opacity>
</pix>
<!--
</row>
<!--
</data>
</image>
The average XIF (Extensible Image Format (tm) -- despite showing no signs of extensibility) is only a few hundred times larger than its PNG counterpart, and marginally easier to parse and generate!
Advantages: ???
Disadvantages: As a structuring language, XML sucks ass.
I was kidding about having "invented" it, or it being an "alternative" to Dreamweaver templates (I've used them, and they are quite powerful and useful). That said, I do indeed manage my sites like that, simply because I do all my XHTML by hand; I am a standards freak, and if the (X)HTML editor of the W3C itself doesn't do semantics right (with commands like "bold," or "bulleted list"), I see no reason to trust graphical editors in general.
Well, such is part of the power of open-source/free development -- when everyone can see the source, bugs can be found and fixed quicker!
Hey, maybe I'll register a Sourceforge project for the code.
<?php include('common/header.php'); ?> :) ?>
...
<?php include('common/footer.php');
/* This is free software, available under
the terms of the GNU GPL.
This gets moderated as 0, Troll? What exactly is wrong this opinion? While I do think Libertarians tend to be closet-anarchist nut jobs, this isn't a troll. It's just an expression of a political opinion, which is what this thread is about, isn't it? I mean, it's not like he was saying "For meaningful change, the only choice is GNAA Lysol!" That would have been a troll, but I don't see how this is.
There was an article just like this in late September, saying that September 2 marked the Internet's 35th. What the hell?
Which is it, Slashdot?? Make up your mind!
I don't like this trend of assigning custom URL handlers to things based on file format. That's what MIME types and file extensions (outside of HTTP) are for. We now have the feed:// handler implemented in several environments -- why? It automatically assumes HTTP, and in that case, why not just send a HEAD request to find out the format? Custom URL schemes are breaking the purpose for which they exist: indicating what protocol to use to fetch the resource, not the function of the content of that resource.
Yeah, this article is full of inaccuracies. Just look at this:
from the comic-shop-guy's-revenge dept.
It's Comic Book Guy, not Comic Shop Guy! Those ignorant fools.
At least this provides the opportunity for more silly domain puns. Maybe, if it's as unregulated as .com, .net, and all those other general hierarchies, it'll even be abused by newspapers -- think washington.post, newyork.post, etc.
.adult or .porn or .xxx TLD. If pr0n sites were required to use those, or at least any new ones, it would make blocking access by children vastly easier. The browser or blocking software can just check the URL. ... On the other hand, I would like to see ICRA ratings more widely adopted and supported. There's more flexibility.
.porn TLD. That would also make things a lot easier for people searching for porn.
.secx TLD. Then all the se.cx sites can move there, and finally, the .cx TLD shall be free to be a home for domains of legitimate relevance to, or located in, Christmas Island. If there are any, which there probably aren't.
.slash TLD, just so someone can get orgdot.slash, and create an Elgoog-style mirror of Slashdot. (Of course, it will probably end up being taken over by trolls from the American Association of White Female Women, the mirror GNAA...)
Actually, that would make for nicer URLs, but it's just not right...
In all seriousness, maybe there should be a legally-regulated
But still make a
While I'm throwing around domain-name ideas in a post that will probably be moderated -1 Silly And Rambling anyway, how about a
Also, we need a
Directed at either or both candidates:
Many people believe that a two-party system, such as the one in the US enforced by the Electoral College, is inherently unfair and undemocratic, in that people cannot cast a meaningful vote for anyone but the two "main candidates," in this case you and your opponent. Of course, a multiparty system would break down the duopoly on most American politics currently held by your party and your opponent's party. Would you put partisan politics aside in the interest of fairness? If so, what is your preferred alternative to the plurality or electoral college system?
There's also Everybody Poops But Me. It didn't sell well because it was completely incoherent and fundamentally nonsensical, though it has a bit of a cult following. (That's the same reason why Slashdot isn't subscription-only.)
Why is this modded +4 funny? Al Gore does deserve to be remembered for his involvement in the creation of what we now know as the Internet.
I don't really think that this mouse is that special, but look how well the make-everything-look-pretty-no-matter-how-minor model worked for Apple. It's understandable that MS would try to pursue it (though of course it would actually look out of place if the computer itself couldn't match its prettyness).
I'm starting to think that Longhorn might suffer the same fate as Apple's mid-90s Copland project. They create enormous hype for it, give developers plenty of betas and do lots of previews, but it never ends up materializing. And then, the best features from it get rolled into their existing operating system (Copland -> Mac OS 8, Longhorn -> Windows XP) and it gets canned. Then, years later, they realize that they really should have completed the objectives of the project because their existing system is getting old and stale.
Of course there probably won't be so many parallels, but I do suspect that Longhorn will end up vaporizing and the most-demanded features and the interface will be integrated into the existing platform.
I don't know about Yellow Dog, but the Red Hat installation program flashes trivia by occasionally to keep you busy, and it provides a few insights. First of all, Wikipedia says this: "Red Hat's name came from the manual of the beta version, which contained a request for the return of Marc Ewing's characteristic red and white-striped hat, should anyone find it." The installer trivia says, if I remember correctly, that when Ewing was in college people would often ask for "the guy in the red hat" for computer help. So he came to be associated with the hat.
They probably added it so they can remove it in a future version and claim it's a "400% Speed Increase!"