It's likely not the exact origin of this argument, but this comment remains one of my all-time favorites. 20 human lives, every day. Doesn't seem so silly to me.
Policy among airlines is full compliance with terrorist demands
That's kind of a monumentally stupid thing to say. I'm afraid "airline policy" is and always has been pretty much inconsequential during an actual terrorist hijacking. What really matters is conventional wisdom among your average traveler, which used to go something like, keep quiet, wait it out and someone will eventually negotiate your release. This face tells you pretty much all you need to know about the new conventional wisdom.
If they were to take hostages among the passengers and demand this armored cockpit to be opened, there is no person with a conscience who would keep the cockpit locked down.
Another gem of conventional wisdom that's been trashed a while ago. This one took all of 23minutes to go out the window. Where've you been?
the doors would have to be opened for other reasons(runs to the john and for refreshments) which could be exploited to gain entry.
First of all those are openings that would occur at fairly irregular intervals, so a carefully choreographed operation among multiple hijackers is almost out of the question. However, use two doors, like an airlock, and it becomes totally out of the question. Sorry, yes, it really is that easy.
I called mine too - Arlen Specter of PA. Like you, the first thing I asked was "does Senator Specter have a position on this?" Like yours, the answer was no, not really. Big surprise, since this is surely the first these people have ever heard about this mysterious thing that they don't understand.
Continue to emphasize it, there has been no debate over this issue in the appropriations committee or the technology subcommittee! My guess is, this is more likely to compel them to yank the rider out of the reolution while it's in committee - if it survives to be voted on, it's over - no one will hold up an appropriations bill on account of the broadcast flag.
It's modded Funny, but what you said is actually pretty insightful. Slashdot has been cursed since before the rise of Google with an abysmal Search feature. First off, there is the fact that you get to the Search page by clicking "Old Stories" - wtf. It also appears that comment bodies are not even searchable, just the Subject. Given that the vast majority of posts are replies with no real context in the Subject, other than the parent, this renders the whole thing pretty much useless.
Sometimes I'll recall a particularly good comment from a week-old thread that I want to reread, but can only remember a few key words. Comments that are any more than a few days old are basically in a black hole as far as Slashdot Search is concerned. A while back (like 02) I started using Google almost exclusively to track down and bookmark such posts. So it's interesting that Slashdot simply pipes searches to Google when their own tool is down.
So as far as Google buying Slashdot, I say sure go ahead, at the very least it will mean they can take over search permanently so Slashdot can stop pretending theirs is the least bit useful.
Firefox has had Smart Keyword bookmarks for a while. Right click on any form entry field and click "Add a keyword for this search."
I just type "ups <tracking num>" and go; no need for Google. Also useful for dictionary/thesaurus.com, stock quotes, wikipedia, helpdesk tickets at work, Bugzilla, Google Local, Google maps, whatever. Some of these are built in already. After some initial getting-used-to, it's incredibly handy.
continuing the Bush administration policy of promoting incompetence.
Absolutely agree. I read about this in the Economist earlier this week; it should be available for another view days. I stopped being surprised at things like this a long time ago.
Note that HP stock surged 7% on the day of the announcement. Divide that into HP's market cap and it's apparent shareholders put Carly's value to the enterprise at about -$4.1 billion.
Here is an article by John Udell that I found fascinating when it was published a few months ago. It discusses the quasi-rich-client architecture that Google cobbled together to bring us GMail. The really incredible part is that interfaces built on this architecture, consumed in the browser, outperform commercial desktop apps:
"One of my favorite acid tests is address completion. When you begin typing an e-mail address, your mail program should immediately show you the matching addresses and then dynamically constrain the list as you continue to type. Outlook does poorly on this test; you have to type CTRL-K to invoke the address book in a separate window. OS X's Mail does address completion in situ, just as I expect. So does Gmail. And here's the shocker: Gmail does it faster."
I appreciate AP's efforts to assign some greater precision and clarity to this architecture. Up until now, realistically, I figured I had to be tethered to.net/XAML, Mozilla/XUL, or something like Macromedia Flex.
"He basically just said there was flaw in the way the cell phone servers were set up," says William Genovese, a 27-year-old hacker facing unrelated charges for allegedly
selling a copy of Microsoft's leaked source code for $20.00."
"the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."
you are depriving the copyright owner(s) of the money that would have been generated by the sale of that item. Is that not theft?
It's not. I cannot steal from you that which you do not already possess.
When you copy your friend's CD you are not stealing from your friend
Good example. What if I really did steal it from my friend? The material changed hands just the same, but does the rest of your statement logically follow if applied here?
you are stealing from the people who own the rights to the material contained on that CD.
Don't think so. If I jack a car, do I owe it's value to the car's manufacturer?
You won't find me arguing that copyright infringement is "right" by any stretch, but please, stop calling it what it isn't.
Excellent point, since Sega has already done exactly what you are describing. ESPN NFL 2K5 accepts roster updates, new stadiums, playbooks, and other stuff through XBOX Live.
What if, instead of releasing an NFL 2K6 doomed to fictional teams and rosters, they released a bundle of gameplay and roster updates to the 2K5 product - and continued to do so for five years?
This plan is certain to lose them money, but it may allow them to cling to some mindshare that will still be there when the EA agreement ends. Without NFLPA licensing, what choice do they really have?
"we've asked several of our editors and contributors to make "the conservative case" for their favored candidate. Their pieces, plus Taki's column closing out this issue, constitute TAC's endorsement."
They go on to endorse the Constitution Party candidate, Michael Peroutka - not John Kerry.
"Without big ideas, elections become about personalities--popularity contests, nothing more. Both major candidates are filching each others' rhetoric and pandering. All that matters is the sell, not the content. Kerry is an opportunist sans pareil, Bush a man under the wrong influence. Vote for the real deal, Michael Anthony Peroutka."
Interestingly, President Bush's position on reinstituting the draft is similar to his positions on things like deficit spending and the Iraq insurgency: "Don't Worry About It."
Q Mr. President, if the war on terrorism continues, do you feel that there will be a need for the draft? And do you want to start the draft again?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, first of all, the war on terror will continue. It's going to take awhile. And, no, we don't need a draft. What we need to do is -- don't worry about it. What we need to do is to make sure our troops are well-paid, and well-housed, and well-equipped. (Applause.)
Bluetooth used to be a dealbreaker for me too, but then I got my sidekick almost totally by accident when I ditched AT&T Wireless. A friend of mine worked for T-Mobile at the time and simply gave me one that he had laying around.
I had a T68i, and so I gave up all the Bluetooth functionality you pointed out for better IM (keyboard makes a world of difference) and the web browser. Not once have I wished for my T68i back.
It doesn't mean one of us "gets it" and the other does not, it just means that the value attached to each of these features is not arbitrarily fixed, but is a reflection of personal preference. And for me, IM and the browser have been bumped up the list, even ahead of BT, which I never thought would happen, go figure.
This is not to say I don't still want BT. If what you say about cost to implement is true, well then that's annoying, but very few people I know have found the phone they can describe as "perfect" for them.
By the way I am lounging on my couch posting this from my sidekick;)
it would really make sense to tightly integrate Mozilla Calendar into Thunderbird.
As somone else already pointed out, Calendar is available as an extension, and I'm inclined to think that's where it ought to stay. Were Calendar not a far, far less mature app than Thunderbird, you might persuade me that they should be bundled, but the timing is not right.
You can't print tasks, can't export to HTML, can't do a proper advanced search, can't integrate with more popular clients, and can't sync with mobile devices.
Lack of decentralized, open calendar functionality is a sore spot for me. I use Thunderbird at home, Lotus Notes at work, an iPAQ on the go, and I interact with lots of folks using Outlook, so I certainly sympathize with the point you are making. But I'm afraid it's quite wishful thinking at this point.
I don't care if it's a beta. Firebird/FireFox/Whatever is simply a better product than IE in every conceivable way - with the pertinent exception of branding, but including stability and security. So what exactly makes its use at a corporate level a "bad idea?"
The problem is, I am trying to get my family to use it as well, but trying to keep them straight on what it is called is getting a little ridiculous.
You think you've got problems; I'm trying to get my corporation to use it. This will accomplish nothing but confuse end users and cripple adoption by making the product even more obscure. It shows a lack of direction and it makes all of us look silly. This is terrible news.
The quirks/strict standards modes are triggered by these doctypes respectively:
Quiks mode:
HTML 3.2
HTML 4.01 Transitional
HTML 4.01 Frameset
XHTML 1.0 Transitional
XHTML 1.0 Frameset
Wrong. XHTML 1.0 and HTML 4.01 Transitional/Frameset have never explicitly triggered quirks mode. They once triggered Standards mode, but somewhere along the way they were added to a new, intermediate stage, "almost standards mode." I recommend you read Mozilla's doctype switching documentation.
I'd advise everyone to write (X)HTML to the strict versions and make the www a better place to be for all of us.
That's a little unrealistic I'm afraid. I have a difficult enough time getting people to write web content that is compliant to any Web Standard. But XHTML Strict? That's quite a delta between it and most of today's developers' quirky markup. If Web Standards compliance is new to someone, then by definition, their initial target should be to write content that is valid to a Transitional DTD.
"It's not that hard" has been a key strategic advantage in compelling people to embrace Web Standards. Please try to keep it that way.
Yes, but now the most enterprising criminals among us have the ability to glance at a crowded city block and immediately pick out the person carrying the most cash.
Slashdot Mirror
It's likely not the exact origin of this argument, but this comment remains one of my all-time favorites. 20 human lives, every day. Doesn't seem so silly to me.
It wasn't me, but I think you are referring to this comment from a few weeks ago. It stuck in my mind as well. Simple, effective, brilliant.
Santorum's original statement outlining his proposal
Statement from Santorum's office addressing criticism of the proposed legislation
Slashdot discussion of the proposal
How about some software to measure the informativeness of Slashdot headlines?
That's kind of a monumentally stupid thing to say. I'm afraid "airline policy" is and always has been pretty much inconsequential during an actual terrorist hijacking. What really matters is conventional wisdom among your average traveler, which used to go something like, keep quiet, wait it out and someone will eventually negotiate your release. This face tells you pretty much all you need to know about the new conventional wisdom.
Another gem of conventional wisdom that's been trashed a while ago. This one took all of 23 minutes to go out the window. Where've you been?
First of all those are openings that would occur at fairly irregular intervals, so a carefully choreographed operation among multiple hijackers is almost out of the question. However, use two doors, like an airlock, and it becomes totally out of the question. Sorry, yes, it really is that easy.
I called mine too - Arlen Specter of PA. Like you, the first thing I asked was "does Senator Specter have a position on this?" Like yours, the answer was no, not really. Big surprise, since this is surely the first these people have ever heard about this mysterious thing that they don't understand.
Continue to emphasize it, there has been no debate over this issue in the appropriations committee or the technology subcommittee! My guess is, this is more likely to compel them to yank the rider out of the reolution while it's in committee - if it survives to be voted on, it's over - no one will hold up an appropriations bill on account of the broadcast flag.
It's modded Funny, but what you said is actually pretty insightful. Slashdot has been cursed since before the rise of Google with an abysmal Search feature. First off, there is the fact that you get to the Search page by clicking "Old Stories" - wtf. It also appears that comment bodies are not even searchable, just the Subject. Given that the vast majority of posts are replies with no real context in the Subject, other than the parent, this renders the whole thing pretty much useless.
Sometimes I'll recall a particularly good comment from a week-old thread that I want to reread, but can only remember a few key words. Comments that are any more than a few days old are basically in a black hole as far as Slashdot Search is concerned. A while back (like 02) I started using Google almost exclusively to track down and bookmark such posts. So it's interesting that Slashdot simply pipes searches to Google when their own tool is down.
So as far as Google buying Slashdot, I say sure go ahead, at the very least it will mean they can take over search permanently so Slashdot can stop pretending theirs is the least bit useful.
Firefox has had Smart Keyword bookmarks for a while. Right click on any form entry field and click "Add a keyword for this search."
I just type "ups <tracking num>" and go; no need for Google. Also useful for dictionary/thesaurus.com, stock quotes, wikipedia, helpdesk tickets at work, Bugzilla, Google Local, Google maps, whatever. Some of these are built in already. After some initial getting-used-to, it's incredibly handy.
I have been using this all week and I've already made three appointments to see apartments that I found on there. It is insanely useful.
The Google Maps sightseeing blog doesn't quite have its utility, but is hours of entertainment nonetheless.
Absolutely agree. I read about this in the Economist earlier this week; it should be available for another view days. I stopped being surprised at things like this a long time ago.
Note that HP stock surged 7% on the day of the announcement. Divide that into HP's market cap and it's apparent shareholders put Carly's value to the enterprise at about -$4.1 billion.
Here is an article by John Udell that I found fascinating when it was published a few months ago. It discusses the quasi-rich-client architecture that Google cobbled together to bring us GMail. The really incredible part is that interfaces built on this architecture, consumed in the browser, outperform commercial desktop apps:
I appreciate AP's efforts to assign some greater precision and clarity to this architecture. Up until now, realistically, I figured I had to be tethered to .net/XAML, Mozilla/XUL, or something like Macromedia Flex.
I hope it came with an 18-dollar bill.
Jack, Is that you?
Sorry, you're wrong.
Sounds pretty clear to me. Here are some more thoughts from the EFF.
It's not. I cannot steal from you that which you do not already possess.
Good example. What if I really did steal it from my friend? The material changed hands just the same, but does the rest of your statement logically follow if applied here?
Don't think so. If I jack a car, do I owe it's value to the car's manufacturer?
You won't find me arguing that copyright infringement is "right" by any stretch, but please, stop calling it what it isn't.
Excellent point, since Sega has already done exactly what you are describing. ESPN NFL 2K5 accepts roster updates, new stadiums, playbooks, and other stuff through XBOX Live.
What if, instead of releasing an NFL 2K6 doomed to fictional teams and rosters, they released a bundle of gameplay and roster updates to the 2K5 product - and continued to do so for five years?
This plan is certain to lose them money, but it may allow them to cling to some mindshare that will still be there when the EA agreement ends. Without NFLPA licensing, what choice do they really have?
His legacy lives even now; check the front page of CNN.com.
You'll see a huge photo of Ashcroft's face under the main headline, next to another headline, "Airport X-Ray Sees Through Clothes."
Paging Dr. Freud.
From the cover of the series:
They go on to endorse the Constitution Party candidate, Michael Peroutka - not John Kerry.
Interestingly, President Bush's position on reinstituting the draft is similar to his positions on things like deficit spending and the Iraq insurgency: "Don't Worry About It."
Bluetooth used to be a dealbreaker for me too, but then I got my sidekick almost totally by accident when I ditched AT&T Wireless. A friend of mine worked for T-Mobile at the time and simply gave me one that he had laying around. I had a T68i, and so I gave up all the Bluetooth functionality you pointed out for better IM (keyboard makes a world of difference) and the web browser. Not once have I wished for my T68i back. It doesn't mean one of us "gets it" and the other does not, it just means that the value attached to each of these features is not arbitrarily fixed, but is a reflection of personal preference. And for me, IM and the browser have been bumped up the list, even ahead of BT, which I never thought would happen, go figure. This is not to say I don't still want BT. If what you say about cost to implement is true, well then that's annoying, but very few people I know have found the phone they can describe as "perfect" for them. By the way I am lounging on my couch posting this from my sidekick ;)
As somone else already pointed out, Calendar is available as an extension, and I'm inclined to think that's where it ought to stay. Were Calendar not a far, far less mature app than Thunderbird, you might persuade me that they should be bundled, but the timing is not right.
The Moz folks readily admit "we currently lack active developers" on Calendar.
You can't print tasks, can't export to HTML, can't do a proper advanced search, can't integrate with more popular clients, and can't sync with mobile devices.
Lack of decentralized, open calendar functionality is a sore spot for me. I use Thunderbird at home, Lotus Notes at work, an iPAQ on the go, and I interact with lots of folks using Outlook, so I certainly sympathize with the point you are making. But I'm afraid it's quite wishful thinking at this point.
Oh really.
Why You Should Switch to FireFox
"Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS"
Secunia Internet Explorer System Compromise Vulnerabilities. Solution: "Use another product"
The Twenty Most Critical Internet Security Vulnerabilities IE: Number four.
"we are not aware of any vendor-supplied patches for this issue"
Patch for 'critical' IE vulnerability doesn't work
IE full of holes, unsafe: Security experts
AMS Vice President and CTO: Mozilla Firebird is a Tier 1, Best of Breed Open Source Application
I don't care if it's a beta. Firebird/FireFox/Whatever is simply a better product than IE in every conceivable way - with the pertinent exception of branding, but including stability and security. So what exactly makes its use at a corporate level a "bad idea?"
You think you've got problems; I'm trying to get my corporation to use it. This will accomplish nothing but confuse end users and cripple adoption by making the product even more obscure. It shows a lack of direction and it makes all of us look silly. This is terrible news.
Wrong. XHTML 1.0 and HTML 4.01 Transitional/Frameset have never explicitly triggered quirks mode. They once triggered Standards mode, but somewhere along the way they were added to a new, intermediate stage, "almost standards mode." I recommend you read Mozilla's doctype switching documentation.
That's a little unrealistic I'm afraid. I have a difficult enough time getting people to write web content that is compliant to any Web Standard. But XHTML Strict? That's quite a delta between it and most of today's developers' quirky markup. If Web Standards compliance is new to someone, then by definition, their initial target should be to write content that is valid to a Transitional DTD."It's not that hard" has been a key strategic advantage in compelling people to embrace Web Standards. Please try to keep it that way.
Yes, but now the most enterprising criminals among us have the ability to glance at a crowded city block and immediately pick out the person carrying the most cash.