Who the f*** decided that sentences on the Internet shall no longer be formatted with two spaces after a period?!
It's never been proper typography to put two spaces after sentences in any type that doesn't use a monospaced font. Double-spaces are an unfortunate carryover from typewriter (i.e. monospaced) days, and the HTML folks were doing the right thing in abolishing them.
If you want to know what real Hungarian is, as opposed to the abomination exposed through the Windows header files, try reading about the Hungarian naming convention [idleloop.com] as conceived and used by Charles, somewhat evolved from his original PhD thesis.
I don't understand how evolution can be either proven OR disproven, as it deals with things that happened in the past and that therefore aren't now observable or falsifiable. It's half science, half history, and (imo) it deserves to be classified differently from all the other empirical theories that we can disprove at any moment if we come up with the right technology and the right experiment.
Oh, you would not write "4.999...", you only put that there to trick some poor Slashdot bystander who doesn't know any better into arguing with you. Tsk tsk.
Sorry, I didn't want to besmirch my little joke with a disclaimer, but I'm totally kidding.
Yes, I DO think it's a generally good thing for laymen to be able to use computers. I don't really think that you should have to have a license or take an IQ test to use computers. Most of the time.
(Now poetry, there's something I think you should have to have a license to do.)
Stop. Until you can insert the words "millions of" before the word "people" there, there is no chance of what follows having any bearing on MPAA's attitude towards DRM.
Also, movie download services will make normal people start to see the advantages of keeping movies on the computer, which might drive them to start wondering why they can't do the same with all the DVDs they already have as well.
Ehhh, maybe. But I wager that the primary benefit for most people of downloading movies is not that the movies are now on a computer; it's rather that the movies are now anywhere in the house without having to 1) leave the house or 2) wait for Netflix to deliver it. In fact, that scenario will cause the converse problem: people wanting to bypass the downloaded DRM to burn the movie to a disc, so they can take it over to the TV where they actually WANT to watch it.
Yes, there will always be early adopters and geeks and folks who want the bits on the disc on their hard drive, but I don't yet see the scenario where millions of people --- the required number to influence the MPAA --- want them there.
Actually, I don't see a single innovator blitzing the market. When I said "killer app," I didn't mean "application" as in computer application. I meant "application" as in "the act of putting to a special use or purpose." As in a REASON TO DO IT. There has to be a legal, Fair-Use reason for millions of folks to want to rip DVDs to their computers. That reason will be DVD-ripping's killer app, as it were.
But even in those cases, it's, like, one ten-thousandth of the population actually manipulating the video; everyone else is just watching it in Flash Player.
I just don't see where millions of people are going to want to rip video to their computers, and want it badly enough to make MPAA change its attitude toward DRM. It'll be ten years from now just like it is today: the people who want to get at the bits on a disc will be able to with some amount of trouble, the rest of the population won't be able to and won't care to. It's a totally different thing from music, where if some CD tries to keep itself from being ripped all hell is raised by lots of people until the studio gives in.
Video just != audio, and what the vast majority of people want from one will always be different from what they want from the other.
Ripping DVDs will never be a necessary feature to the everyday user, because the everyday user couldn't care less about ripping DVDs to their computer to do anything legal.
There a few reasons to put music on your computer: 1) to listen to it on the computer, 2) to save it to media (think mix CDs), or 3) to put it on a portable playing device. None of these uses is nearly so lucrative for movies as for music.
Take #1 above. Most people couldn't care less about watching movies on their computers. They may care about listening to music, because they can do that WHILE they do all the other stuff they do on their computer. But watching movies is, for most people, something they curl up on their couch and do in front of their big TV.
So what about #2? Most people don't really have much of a use for mix DVDs of movie clips. They may want to make a copy of the DVD to give to someone else, but most of the time this is illegal, therefore beyond Fair Use, therefore beyond any chance of making the MPAA budge on DRM.
Then take #3. This has potential, I guess, but they already make DVD players just about as portable as most people need a movie to be. (Insert here the whole debate about whether most people actually have a use for iPod's video features.)
there needs to be an ecosystem of products that make it so convenient to rip DVDs that it becomes a necessary feature to the everyday user.
No; what there needs to be is a mainstream killer app for DVD ripping that falls under Fair Use. We don't have that yet. I don't think we ever will, but at least until we do, no number of products is going to have any effect on enough consumers to make the MPAA change their stance on DRM.
Except that she's explicitly said that she'll never write another HP after Book 7. She always, from the earliest moments of her HP imaginings, intended there to be exactly seven HP books.
She's said that she might someday release a volume with all her notes and sketches from her HP-writing years, and I wouldn't put it past her to do another charity HP-related book (yes, she's written two short books for charity: Quidditch Through the Ages and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them), but no more novels.
You can disbelieve her now if you want, but wait and see; she'll stick to what she said.
You can't trust ANYWHERE on the internet anytime within, say, a month of the book's release to be spoiler-free. I found mine at RMS's website of all places about a week before the book came out. He was on a mostly irrational rant, as usual, about people's freedoms being violated, and in the process he just blatantly stated who killed who on what page, proving once and for all that he does not really care about people, only his own ideas.
Ahem.
So yeah. They were out there last time, and they will be again this time. The only safe place on the internet is probably the Mugglenet homepage, and that's assuming Emerson doesn't get his server hacked.
Interesting about your drivers and games and all, but nothing you said indicates that anything YOU experienced proves that the original XP key won't work anymore.
You say you know people who can't (legally) go back, but not that you know anyone who is prevented in any technical way from going back anyway.
So. Got any evidence, or just possibly flawed readings of an EULA?
Excuse me? AJAX is intimately involved with server-side technology.
Yes, yes, but what I meant, as the other guys figured out, was that "Perl and Java" and "AJAX" are not mutually exclusive, as you directly implied.
Again, you're confusing protocol with applications.
I think you're the one who's doing that, since you seem to think a representative way to use AJAX is to drop in a whole new application, instead of identifying places in your current application where the AJAX protocol (I'm not nitpicky about that word) could be helpful and coding those uses into your CURRENT application.
And we can also identify poor technology, AJAX being the latest example.
You just accused me of conflating the protocol with the applications, and yet here you are dismissing the protocol because of other people's applications!! Until you are actually familiar yourself with coding AJAX yourself, identified places in your current application where it might be of benefit, and given a few trial runs to iron out problems, I have no reason to believe that you "know what [you]'re doing" with regards to AJAX.
(On the plus side, however, I no longer think you're a troll...)
Slashdot Mirror
Quoth your sig:
It's never been proper typography to put two spaces after sentences in any type that doesn't use a monospaced font. Double-spaces are an unfortunate carryover from typewriter (i.e. monospaced) days, and the HTML folks were doing the right thing in abolishing them.
You should check out The PC is Not a Typewriter or The Mac is Not a Typewriter for more bad computer habits that make designers cringe.
Hungarian Notation has a bad (w)rap because it got perverted into something it was never meant to be.
Read Joel Spolsky's explanation of how it all went wrong, and how Hungarian Notation can actually be a good thing.
Quoth the sibling:
Or read Joel Spolsky's lucid explanation and examples of Hungarian Notation the way it was meant to be.
I don't understand how evolution can be either proven OR disproven, as it deals with things that happened in the past and that therefore aren't now observable or falsifiable. It's half science, half history, and (imo) it deserves to be classified differently from all the other empirical theories that we can disprove at any moment if we come up with the right technology and the right experiment.
Oh, you would not write "4.999...", you only put that there to trick some poor Slashdot bystander who doesn't know any better into arguing with you. Tsk tsk.
by multiple tabs?
Sorry, I didn't want to besmirch my little joke with a disclaimer, but I'm totally kidding.
Yes, I DO think it's a generally good thing for laymen to be able to use computers. I don't really think that you should have to have a license or take an IQ test to use computers. Most of the time.
(Now poetry, there's something I think you should have to have a license to do.)
Benefit?!
Cisco is a corporation. For anyone to make such a statement about a corporation is patently ridiculous.
I know some people who sure as crap won't ever forgive Myst.
Half the internet hates Myst, mostly because they're not clever enough to finish it. (It's lucky they never played Riven.)
Stop. Until you can insert the words "millions of" before the word "people" there, there is no chance of what follows having any bearing on MPAA's attitude towards DRM.
Ehhh, maybe. But I wager that the primary benefit for most people of downloading movies is not that the movies are now on a computer; it's rather that the movies are now anywhere in the house without having to 1) leave the house or 2) wait for Netflix to deliver it. In fact, that scenario will cause the converse problem: people wanting to bypass the downloaded DRM to burn the movie to a disc, so they can take it over to the TV where they actually WANT to watch it.
Yes, there will always be early adopters and geeks and folks who want the bits on the disc on their hard drive, but I don't yet see the scenario where millions of people --- the required number to influence the MPAA --- want them there.
Actually, I don't see a single innovator blitzing the market. When I said "killer app," I didn't mean "application" as in computer application. I meant "application" as in "the act of putting to a special use or purpose." As in a REASON TO DO IT. There has to be a legal, Fair-Use reason for millions of folks to want to rip DVDs to their computers. That reason will be DVD-ripping's killer app, as it were.
I don't see that happening any time soon. To whatever extent video manipulation is mainstream, it's not video that comes from DVDs. It's music videos that come straight from artists' Myspace pages, or guys taping themselves dancing on treadmills, or people's frankly disturbing homespun animations or something.
But even in those cases, it's, like, one ten-thousandth of the population actually manipulating the video; everyone else is just watching it in Flash Player.
I just don't see where millions of people are going to want to rip video to their computers, and want it badly enough to make MPAA change its attitude toward DRM. It'll be ten years from now just like it is today: the people who want to get at the bits on a disc will be able to with some amount of trouble, the rest of the population won't be able to and won't care to. It's a totally different thing from music, where if some CD tries to keep itself from being ripped all hell is raised by lots of people until the studio gives in.
Video just != audio, and what the vast majority of people want from one will always be different from what they want from the other.
Ripping DVDs will never be a necessary feature to the everyday user, because the everyday user couldn't care less about ripping DVDs to their computer to do anything legal.
There a few reasons to put music on your computer: 1) to listen to it on the computer, 2) to save it to media (think mix CDs), or 3) to put it on a portable playing device. None of these uses is nearly so lucrative for movies as for music.
Take #1 above. Most people couldn't care less about watching movies on their computers. They may care about listening to music, because they can do that WHILE they do all the other stuff they do on their computer. But watching movies is, for most people, something they curl up on their couch and do in front of their big TV.
So what about #2? Most people don't really have much of a use for mix DVDs of movie clips. They may want to make a copy of the DVD to give to someone else, but most of the time this is illegal, therefore beyond Fair Use, therefore beyond any chance of making the MPAA budge on DRM.
Then take #3. This has potential, I guess, but they already make DVD players just about as portable as most people need a movie to be. (Insert here the whole debate about whether most people actually have a use for iPod's video features.)
No; what there needs to be is a mainstream killer app for DVD ripping that falls under Fair Use. We don't have that yet. I don't think we ever will, but at least until we do, no number of products is going to have any effect on enough consumers to make the MPAA change their stance on DRM.
Nah, I'm the one who owes the apologies. I took "Pictures of Larry" to mean "Pctures that prove something" rather than "Haha look at this crap".
Because illustrations on a Geocities website are incontrovertible when compared with courts' finding that she doctored evidence to support her claim.
Except that she's explicitly said that she'll never write another HP after Book 7. She always, from the earliest moments of her HP imaginings, intended there to be exactly seven HP books.
She's said that she might someday release a volume with all her notes and sketches from her HP-writing years, and I wouldn't put it past her to do another charity HP-related book (yes, she's written two short books for charity: Quidditch Through the Ages and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them), but no more novels.
You can disbelieve her now if you want, but wait and see; she'll stick to what she said.
You can't trust ANYWHERE on the internet anytime within, say, a month of the book's release to be spoiler-free. I found mine at RMS's website of all places about a week before the book came out. He was on a mostly irrational rant, as usual, about people's freedoms being violated, and in the process he just blatantly stated who killed who on what page, proving once and for all that he does not really care about people, only his own ideas.
Ahem.
So yeah. They were out there last time, and they will be again this time. The only safe place on the internet is probably the Mugglenet homepage, and that's assuming Emerson doesn't get his server hacked.
Interesting about your drivers and games and all, but nothing you said indicates that anything YOU experienced proves that the original XP key won't work anymore.
You say you know people who can't (legally) go back, but not that you know anyone who is prevented in any technical way from going back anyway.
So. Got any evidence, or just possibly flawed readings of an EULA?
Yes, yes, we've heard it a million times...
Gibbehdeh-WHA? You finished that sentence with.... but not Com...
I think I just had some kind of religious experience.
You said:
He said:
See the problem?
What two companies?
Exactly, except for the part where GGP explicitly said "arrow keys." Fifth bullet point.
Close, but no cigar:
Yes, yes, but what I meant, as the other guys figured out, was that "Perl and Java" and "AJAX" are not mutually exclusive, as you directly implied.
I think you're the one who's doing that, since you seem to think a representative way to use AJAX is to drop in a whole new application, instead of identifying places in your current application where the AJAX protocol (I'm not nitpicky about that word) could be helpful and coding those uses into your CURRENT application.
You just accused me of conflating the protocol with the applications, and yet here you are dismissing the protocol because of other people's applications!! Until you are actually familiar yourself with coding AJAX yourself, identified places in your current application where it might be of benefit, and given a few trial runs to iron out problems, I have no reason to believe that you "know what [you]'re doing" with regards to AJAX.
(On the plus side, however, I no longer think you're a troll...)
What's keeping you from parsing it on the server-side before it sends anything back to the browser?