Other board members said they believed that opposition to the domain by the adult industry, including Web masters, content providers and others, was proof that the issue was divisive and that ".xxx" was not a welcome domain.
It sounds like not everyone in the adult industry was happy about the domain.
Actually, it sounds like, this time around, there were more people against it than for it, but the people against it didn't really find a consensus on why they opposed it, only that they did. Which is interesting. At least this time around it doesn't look like a case of "the Republicans told us to reject this."
What I don't understand is why they're saying Dolphin and Konqueror are the same thing.
Konqueror started out as a file manager, true, but KDE tacked on web browsing to it and then spent most of the time developing that aspect of it -- now it's really more of a web browser that does file management too, rather than a file manager on steroids.
With Dolphin they appear to have recognized this and are creating an application to focus on what Konqueror was originally intended to do in the first place. This isn't exactly the same as creating a beginner's app and a power-user's app...
Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of KDE. KDE is the project that made me think "yes, I will eventually be able to learn to use Linux" -- that was back in its 1.0 days. Now I use Linux full time (I still consider myself a beginner though). KDE is a good desktop -- it's knaming konventions are a klittle kstrange, but it's still a good desktop that makes basic Linux use a lot easier while not actually preventing you from getting into the guts of everything. It's my desktop of choice (I use Kubuntu).
But the Holy Grail of Desktops? There is no such beast, and there are too many opinions about what such a beast would be. There are too many people who want too many different things in their desktop. For my part, I want to see some desktop incorporate all the OO elements from OS/2's Workplace Shell... I've yet to see it happen. That's my "Holy Grail," and I expect if it were ever implemented it would be anathema to someone else.
The very thought that it might be able to "meet the needs of a wide cross section of computer users" would automatically make it fail in the eyes of some. I know and have spoken with some usability nuts who claim that there is One True Path to usability, and anyone who wants to do things differently is simply doing things WRONG, and that they need to learn the One True Path and experience how much better it is. "Acommodation" would be a design flaw from that perspective.
All that aside, I'm looking forward to KDE 4. One thing I've come to expect from the KDE developers is that everytime they release a new version of KDE I wind up liking the new version significantly more than the older version, and I think that's the most realistic expectation you can hope to have about software...
I don't think Windows XP is particularly secure, but I DO think that an IT guy working for the FAA has a better chance of managing his own server environment than he does Google's.
Why are you assuming my question indicates a preference for proprietary software? It indicates a preference for local management...
Maybe I'm thinking of a different Google apps, but how is running Google software more secure? Aren't google apps accessed from google servers? Doesn't that mean this government agency would be running applications from and storing data on servers they aren't maintaining?
I'm not saying that google makes lousy software, I'm just saying that I would be nervous if I couldn't actually directly manage the servers that were responsible for creating and storing the information.
It's weird, but I don't mind Sitefinder. It's a lot less annoying than the people who set up sites that spawn eight and a half billion popup ads. I suppose Microsoft really can be the lesser of two evils...... oh, God. I didn't actually say that, did I?
I'm not very familiar with Fedora, so the "proprietary formats" complaint intrigues me, since Ubuntu doesn't strike me as particularly proprietary-format friendly... it's based on friggin' Debian, after all.
How is Ubuntu going to be any better at supporting proprietary formats? It sure doesn't support any "out-of-the-box" (er... from a fresh install) -- you have to add multiverse to your sources list in order to get access to them. (Or you can use Automatix, but that's hardly an "official" part of the distribution). I always assumed Fedora had something similiar. Am I assuming too much?
'When ODF was under consideration, Microsoft made no effort to slow down the process because we recognized customers' interest in the standardization of document formats.'
This might be true, but when Massachusetts decided to adopt this standard they raised holy hell, and used every trick in the book to make Massachusetts take it back.
The Wikipedia editors can do whatever they like with it. Seriously. My comic was up for deletion -- for some reason they decided to keep it. One way or another it really wasn't going to affect me (it's not like I get a lot of traffic from Wikipedia -- I certainly wasn't using it as a traffic magnet or anything).
It's just that the notability thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the topic "webcomics" is in itself notable, then the notability for an individual webcomic should be based on that topic -- the parent topic -- rather than an external factor. A painter who was very influential in surrealist art but not as well known in the larger sphere of painting would be notable as far as surrealist art went, and it would be stupid to exclude that painter from wikipedia just because there weren't a lot of articles written about the painter from outside the genre. But that is exactly the standard that the deltion-happy editors are using for webcomics -- it doesn't matter how influential a webcomic is within the genre, what matters is whether they get a lot of independent press.
But that's ok -- they can do as they please. It won't keep me from considering the whole thing a collossal waste of time.
the Constitution only applies to the relationship between a citizen and the government. The Government can't take action to supress my free speech (well, obviously it can -- but it shouldn't be able to) -- but these rights can be almost nonexistant when it comes to business relationships. For example, I can't say anything I like in a privately owned building on the grounds that I have free speech -- when I'm on private property, my right to free speech is drastically weakened.
A webhost is also not bound by the constitution -- it can refuse to host anyone it likes, and if it finds your content objectionable for any reason it can shut you down. This is because the server space is privately owned, and you have to play by their rules.
A registrar is not precisely the same thing as a webhost, and perhaps it is under more strict federal regulation and oversight. But I don't think you can take constitutional protections for granted in a business arrangement with a private company.
... when I think about it more, what MySpace did was reprehensible but it's really the standard level of reprehensible I've come to expect from companies that grow more sociopathic the more successful they become. But GoDaddy pulled the plug and gave their paying customer no way of trying to resolve the problem -- he had to force the issue on his own. That leaves a really sour taste in my mouth. It almost makes me wish I had domains registered there just so I could transfer them.
do not apply to your business relationship with a registrar.
That said, Godaddy acted irresponsibly and their reaction to the whole thing guarantee I'll never consider them if I want to register a domain.... not that I need any more. Six is probably too much as it is...
Slashdot Mirror
must... counter... irony... with...
... oh, hell, there IS no counter to irony.
with...
How exactly is power consumption a "trade secret?" That makes no sense...
... before Microsoft started getting all their ideas from me, instead of the other way 'round:
http://www.ubersoft.net/d/20030224.html
but more specifically
http://www.ubersoft.net/d/20030228.html
... they're where the Martians store all their canal-boats till next thaw.
KDE allows you to switch virtual desktops by scrolling the mouse wheel on an empty space of desktop.
Oops. Please ignore my post, then. :)
It sounds like not everyone in the adult industry was happy about the domain.
Actually, it sounds like, this time around, there were more people against it than for it, but the people against it didn't really find a consensus on why they opposed it, only that they did. Which is interesting. At least this time around it doesn't look like a case of "the Republicans told us to reject this."
Wish I'd thought of it. :)
I agree that Konqueror is an extremely capable file manager, but Konqueror the application is thought of primarily as a browser these days...
What I don't understand is why they're saying Dolphin and Konqueror are the same thing.
Konqueror started out as a file manager, true, but KDE tacked on web browsing to it and then spent most of the time developing that aspect of it -- now it's really more of a web browser that does file management too, rather than a file manager on steroids.
With Dolphin they appear to have recognized this and are creating an application to focus on what Konqueror was originally intended to do in the first place. This isn't exactly the same as creating a beginner's app and a power-user's app...
Hardly.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm a huge fan of KDE. KDE is the project that made me think "yes, I will eventually be able to learn to use Linux" -- that was back in its 1.0 days. Now I use Linux full time (I still consider myself a beginner though). KDE is a good desktop -- it's knaming konventions are a klittle kstrange, but it's still a good desktop that makes basic Linux use a lot easier while not actually preventing you from getting into the guts of everything. It's my desktop of choice (I use Kubuntu).
But the Holy Grail of Desktops? There is no such beast, and there are too many opinions about what such a beast would be. There are too many people who want too many different things in their desktop. For my part, I want to see some desktop incorporate all the OO elements from OS/2's Workplace Shell... I've yet to see it happen. That's my "Holy Grail," and I expect if it were ever implemented it would be anathema to someone else.
The very thought that it might be able to "meet the needs of a wide cross section of computer users" would automatically make it fail in the eyes of some. I know and have spoken with some usability nuts who claim that there is One True Path to usability, and anyone who wants to do things differently is simply doing things WRONG, and that they need to learn the One True Path and experience how much better it is. "Acommodation" would be a design flaw from that perspective.
All that aside, I'm looking forward to KDE 4. One thing I've come to expect from the KDE developers is that everytime they release a new version of KDE I wind up liking the new version significantly more than the older version, and I think that's the most realistic expectation you can hope to have about software...
I would hate to lose that key.
I don't even have a dual core chip. I guess that makes my computer non-existent... ...
Egads. I've been looking forward to getting a single-core 3800 -- that would be an upgrade for me.
I don't think Windows XP is particularly secure, but I DO think that an IT guy working for the FAA has a better chance of managing his own server environment than he does Google's.
Why are you assuming my question indicates a preference for proprietary software? It indicates a preference for local management...
...
Maybe I'm thinking of a different Google apps, but how is running Google software more secure? Aren't google apps accessed from google servers? Doesn't that mean this government agency would be running applications from and storing data on servers they aren't maintaining?
I'm not saying that google makes lousy software, I'm just saying that I would be nervous if I couldn't actually directly manage the servers that were responsible for creating and storing the information.
It's weird, but I don't mind Sitefinder. It's a lot less annoying than the people who set up sites that spawn eight and a half billion popup ads. I suppose Microsoft really can be the lesser of two evils... ... oh, God. I didn't actually say that, did I?
... it's an interesting one to be sure.
I'm not very familiar with Fedora, so the "proprietary formats" complaint intrigues me, since Ubuntu doesn't strike me as particularly proprietary-format friendly... it's based on friggin' Debian, after all.
How is Ubuntu going to be any better at supporting proprietary formats? It sure doesn't support any "out-of-the-box" (er... from a fresh install) -- you have to add multiverse to your sources list in order to get access to them. (Or you can use Automatix, but that's hardly an "official" part of the distribution). I always assumed Fedora had something similiar. Am I assuming too much?
Well they were running Unholy Hell 1.0 and found a bug...
This might be true, but when Massachusetts decided to adopt this standard they raised holy hell, and used every trick in the book to make Massachusetts take it back.
The Wikipedia editors can do whatever they like with it. Seriously. My comic was up for deletion -- for some reason they decided to keep it. One way or another it really wasn't going to affect me (it's not like I get a lot of traffic from Wikipedia -- I certainly wasn't using it as a traffic magnet or anything).
It's just that the notability thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the topic "webcomics" is in itself notable, then the notability for an individual webcomic should be based on that topic -- the parent topic -- rather than an external factor. A painter who was very influential in surrealist art but not as well known in the larger sphere of painting would be notable as far as surrealist art went, and it would be stupid to exclude that painter from wikipedia just because there weren't a lot of articles written about the painter from outside the genre. But that is exactly the standard that the deltion-happy editors are using for webcomics -- it doesn't matter how influential a webcomic is within the genre, what matters is whether they get a lot of independent press.
But that's ok -- they can do as they please. It won't keep me from considering the whole thing a collossal waste of time.
... is that they're too busy nominating webcomic articles for deletion to bother updating anything else.
the Constitution only applies to the relationship between a citizen and the government. The Government can't take action to supress my free speech (well, obviously it can -- but it shouldn't be able to) -- but these rights can be almost nonexistant when it comes to business relationships. For example, I can't say anything I like in a privately owned building on the grounds that I have free speech -- when I'm on private property, my right to free speech is drastically weakened.
A webhost is also not bound by the constitution -- it can refuse to host anyone it likes, and if it finds your content objectionable for any reason it can shut you down. This is because the server space is privately owned, and you have to play by their rules.
A registrar is not precisely the same thing as a webhost, and perhaps it is under more strict federal regulation and oversight. But I don't think you can take constitutional protections for granted in a business arrangement with a private company.
... when I think about it more, what MySpace did was reprehensible but it's really the standard level of reprehensible I've come to expect from companies that grow more sociopathic the more successful they become. But GoDaddy pulled the plug and gave their paying customer no way of trying to resolve the problem -- he had to force the issue on his own. That leaves a really sour taste in my mouth. It almost makes me wish I had domains registered there just so I could transfer them.
do not apply to your business relationship with a registrar.
... not that I need any more. Six is probably too much as it is...
That said, Godaddy acted irresponsibly and their reaction to the whole thing guarantee I'll never consider them if I want to register a domain.