I think a girl would be rather impressed if a guy names a comet after her.
I had the same thought, but then I reconsidered. What will the girl do when she realizes that what you named after her is a chunk of ice thats going to melt in the sun? That relationship is probably going to be as short lived as the comet
But if you're lucky enough to find one of the few comets that's going to survive then? Well you'll name a piece of rock after her. A piece that you'll see for a while, and then never again in your lifetime as it flies further and further away from you. Can't say that I like that picture either
The mobile versions of TCP/IP and HTTP used (yes, I know, mobile versions, why change a winning team?)
Because the rules are different for mobile communications. You have lower bandwith than you get with a landline internet connection. At least some operators (perhaps all of them, I don't know) charge based on data volume transferred. A cellphone has a lot less processing power and memory than a computer. You have a tiny screen unsuitable for displaying tables.
The solution to these limitations is to remove anything that isn't nesessary to display text on a tiny screen, reducing bandwith usage and making the implementations of a wap browser on a cellphone easier and more efficient
If WAP and Imode used 'regular' html with scripting and stuff, it would be (even) slow(er) and more expensive, and far less usable.
Oh, and as far as I know Imode is a service that is independent of the way the data is transferred (GSM-data / GPRS / UMTS / whatever), I think the German and Netherlands (Netherlandish?) service uses GPRS but that doesn't mean Imode has to.
A lot of network hardware such as your DSL bridge is 'hardcoded' for ipv4 packets. this hardware needs to be replaced (or have a firmware update if you're lucky) before ipv6 can fly.
On an ipv4 net ipv6 packets are not malformed. The hardware should simply have checked the version bits in the header and dropped the packets, but the people that made it probably didn't bother since there existed only ipv4 when they made it and they could save to transistors by not checking. So the fool at the ISP that told you that you could use ipv6 (you did call them didn't you) should have his fingers slapped.
What you tried to do was pass ipv6 packets onto an ipv4 based network, you would have needed an ipv6 to ipv4 bridge (before your ipv4 to xDSL bridge)
Anyway to get The Internet to support ipv6 a lot of the infrastructure has to be updated, I wouldn't expect to see that too soon. The 'killer app' we need to get ipv6 out may be streamed HIGH quality video (don't need cable when you have internet) that uses ipv6's priority value to get through.
No thanks. We'll stay with IPv4. You use the new thing. Just like it is with the imperial vs. metric unit systems.
So in a few years when we have got TV over the internet you will stick to your overpriced (you'll be the only customer remember) ipv4 connection, that makes your ipv4 packets get the lowest priority through the internet. Just because you tried the new stuff a little too early?
And without ipv6 we won't get that huge address space that will give everyone and his dog (and the dog's fleas) their own unique IP address
I was under the impression (perhaps from physics class in college) that the microwaves in a microwave oven are specifically tuned so they transfer the most energy to water molecules..
Yes they are, as far as i know, tuned to the frequency that gets absorbed best by water. And they wouldn't use that frequency to transfer energy through the atmosphere since it containes water. But we're talking about an incredible amount of energy here. And something has to be able to absorb that energy if they're going to use it. So nobody can make me believe that if that beam misses the receiver and hits something else it's not going to absorb some of the energy. And only lets say 1% would probably kill you.
the zone, that trancelike state when time stops to matter and there is only you and the code. How do we get there?
This is what works for me: in order of importance
A challenge: The task at hand has to be difficult in some way or another. If it's not then you can still do it but you don't get 'there'
Coffe. Black. Strong. Close. Hot but not hot enough to burn my tounge and throat when i gulp it in a not quite conscious motion
Nicotine. I may not go to take a smoke while i'm on a roll. But I have to be able to or I'll get distracted.
Light. Dim. At the least it shouldn't reflect off the monitor
Music. Preferably repetive with a heavy bass. The most important thing is that I've had to have heard it a thousand times before, so that I don't hear something unexpected and 'snap out'. Pity I can't do this at work because it might distract the others. Also headphones is a big no no, since they either slide off or are too tight and hurt after a while.
Air, fresh but not cold.
Something edible. So that if my stomach manages to get through to my brain i can silence it fast
Yes they are. And what will happen if you turned the power up way beyond what is possible for a cellphone, to the levels that would be necessary to transfer all that energy from the moon?
Experiment: boil an egg in the microwave and see what happens
What do you think would happen if that beam got sligtly out of 'whack' and hit a makor city, say New York?
And with commercial spaceflight not that far away every 'James Bond style bad guy' / lunatic / bin laden / president / etc.... will want control of that beam to 'cook' everybody they don't like.
And don't get me started on the virtues of human error
Point is it's too dangerous, its's the Death Star disguised as a power plant.
Ignoring the ads by not looking at them is not letting them win.
I agree that most banner ads are rubbish, but at least you can easily see them for what they are.
I fear that the future might bring sites where ads are placed in the content so that you won't know which is which all the time. Or a news site that randomly sends you to a sponsors home page every third time instead of the article you wanted.
My point is that the harder we fight back the harder they will fight back at us, and with more and more annoying methods of advertising.
I'm not sure of what you mean by specifically targetted. If you mean targetted at the topic of the site you are watching I agree. Ads should at least be relevant to the page you're on, a site about programming shouldn't have ads for vaccum cleaners. But if by specifically taretted you mean targetted at YOU then it's completely unacceptable. Having companies throwing ads at me is one thing, having them storing information about me and my web surfing habits is another.
Physical newspapers that people pay for have always had ads in them, why should news on the internet be any different?
If newspapers (paper or internet) have no ads they get no income from them, and will have to charge more for the news. If you have a problem with this start nagging them to make and ad-free version for users that are willing to pay a little extra.
Blocking the ads takes income away from the people making a site. If you want to support a site then you should let the ads get through (if only they would make them use less bandwith).
I agree that ads can get too intrusive pop-ups are bad and pop-unders are worse. But this is another problem: advertisers failing to realize that annoyed people wont buy anything.
As long as ad-blocking software keeps killing the fairly innocent banners we'll be bothered by more and more annoying attemts for advertisers to get their message through (such as using referrer logging to force users past an ad page to get at the content)
The best thing for the internet would be for people to learn to just ignore ads they don't care for instead of forcing them to get more annoyng to get past blocker programs.
Slashdot Mirror
I think a girl would be rather impressed if a guy names a comet after her.
I had the same thought, but then I reconsidered. What will the girl do when she realizes that what you named after her is a chunk of ice thats going to melt in the sun? That relationship is probably going to be as short lived as the comet
But if you're lucky enough to find one of the few comets that's going to survive then? Well you'll name a piece of rock after her. A piece that you'll see for a while, and then never again in your lifetime as it flies further and further away from you. Can't say that I like that picture either
The mobile versions of TCP/IP and HTTP used (yes, I know, mobile versions, why change a winning team?)
Because the rules are different for mobile communications. You have lower bandwith than you get with a landline internet connection. At least some operators (perhaps all of them, I don't know) charge based on data volume transferred. A cellphone has a lot less processing power and memory than a computer. You have a tiny screen unsuitable for displaying tables.
The solution to these limitations is to remove anything that isn't nesessary to display text on a tiny screen, reducing bandwith usage and making the implementations of a wap browser on a cellphone easier and more efficient
If WAP and Imode used 'regular' html with scripting and stuff, it would be (even) slow(er) and more expensive, and far less usable.
Oh, and as far as I know Imode is a service that is independent of the way the data is transferred (GSM-data / GPRS / UMTS / whatever), I think the German and Netherlands (Netherlandish?) service uses GPRS but that doesn't mean Imode has to.
A lot of network hardware such as your DSL bridge is 'hardcoded' for ipv4 packets. this hardware needs to be replaced (or have a firmware update if you're lucky) before ipv6 can fly.
On an ipv4 net ipv6 packets are not malformed. The hardware should simply have checked the version bits in the header and dropped the packets, but the people that made it probably didn't bother since there existed only ipv4 when they made it and they could save to transistors by not checking. So the fool at the ISP that told you that you could use ipv6 (you did call them didn't you) should have his fingers slapped.
What you tried to do was pass ipv6 packets onto an ipv4 based network, you would have needed an ipv6 to ipv4 bridge (before your ipv4 to xDSL bridge)
Anyway to get The Internet to support ipv6 a lot of the infrastructure has to be updated, I wouldn't expect to see that too soon. The 'killer app' we need to get ipv6 out may be streamed HIGH quality video (don't need cable when you have internet) that uses ipv6's priority value to get through.
No thanks. We'll stay with IPv4. You use the new thing. Just like it is with the imperial vs. metric unit systems.
So in a few years when we have got TV over the internet you will stick to your overpriced (you'll be the only customer remember) ipv4 connection, that makes your ipv4 packets get the lowest priority through the internet. Just because you tried the new stuff a little too early?
And without ipv6 we won't get that huge address space that will give everyone and his dog (and the dog's fleas) their own unique IP address
Can I have a Windows with the bsod at random times functionality removed, please?
I was under the impression (perhaps from physics class in college) that the microwaves in a microwave oven are specifically tuned so they transfer the most energy to water molecules..
Yes they are, as far as i know, tuned to the frequency that gets absorbed best by water. And they wouldn't use that frequency to transfer energy through the atmosphere since it containes water. But we're talking about an incredible amount of energy here. And something has to be able to absorb that energy if they're going to use it. So nobody can make me believe that if that beam misses the receiver and hits something else it's not going to absorb some of the energy. And only lets say 1% would probably kill you.
the zone, that trancelike state when time stops to matter and there is only you and the code. How do we get there?
This is what works for me: in order of importance
A challenge: The task at hand has to be difficult in some way or another. If it's not then you can still do it but you don't get 'there'
Coffe. Black. Strong. Close. Hot but not hot enough to burn my tounge and throat when i gulp it in a not quite conscious motion
Nicotine. I may not go to take a smoke while i'm on a roll. But I have to be able to or I'll get distracted.
Light. Dim. At the least it shouldn't reflect off the monitor
Music. Preferably repetive with a heavy bass. The most important thing is that I've had to have heard it a thousand times before, so that I don't hear something unexpected and 'snap out'. Pity I can't do this at work because it might distract the others. Also headphones is a big no no, since they either slide off or are too tight and hurt after a while.
Air, fresh but not cold.
Something edible. So that if my stomach manages to get through to my brain i can silence it fast
Yes they are. And what will happen if you turned the power up way beyond what is possible for a cellphone, to the levels that would be necessary to transfer all that energy from the moon?
Experiment: boil an egg in the microwave and see what happens
What do you think would happen if that beam got sligtly out of 'whack' and hit a makor city, say New York?And with commercial spaceflight not that far away every 'James Bond style bad guy' / lunatic / bin laden / president / etc.... will want control of that beam to 'cook' everybody they don't like.
And don't get me started on the virtues of human error
Point is it's too dangerous, its's the Death Star disguised as a power plant.
Ignoring the ads by not looking at them is not letting them win.
I agree that most banner ads are rubbish, but at least you can easily see them for what they are.
I fear that the future might bring sites where ads are placed in the content so that you won't know which is which all the time. Or a news site that randomly sends you to a sponsors home page every third time instead of the article you wanted.
My point is that the harder we fight back the harder they will fight back at us, and with more and more annoying methods of advertising.
I'm not sure of what you mean by specifically targetted. If you mean targetted at the topic of the site you are watching I agree. Ads should at least be relevant to the page you're on, a site about programming shouldn't have ads for vaccum cleaners. But if by specifically taretted you mean targetted at YOU then it's completely unacceptable. Having companies throwing ads at me is one thing, having them storing information about me and my web surfing habits is another.
Physical newspapers that people pay for have always had ads in them, why should news on the internet be any different?
If newspapers (paper or internet) have no ads they get no income from them, and will have to charge more for the news. If you have a problem with this start nagging them to make and ad-free version for users that are willing to pay a little extra.
Blocking the ads takes income away from the people making a site. If you want to support a site then you should let the ads get through (if only they would make them use less bandwith).
I agree that ads can get too intrusive pop-ups are bad and pop-unders are worse. But this is another problem: advertisers failing to realize that annoyed people wont buy anything.
As long as ad-blocking software keeps killing the fairly innocent banners we'll be bothered by more and more annoying attemts for advertisers to get their message through (such as using referrer logging to force users past an ad page to get at the content)
The best thing for the internet would be for people to learn to just ignore ads they don't care for instead of forcing them to get more annoyng to get past blocker programs.
HK