The W3C standard says that ALL attributes are required to have quotes.
Umm... which standard says this, exactly? My memory might be faulty, but I thought that the XML standard required quotes, while SGML didn't for some attribute values. The last time I checked, HTML is still an SGML application.
Except for the part where several PTP members happened to be at Starbucks the day the T-mobile installers came. As I mention in my comment above, they talked for quite a while, with the T-mobile installers being made aware of a) the PTP node, b) how long it had been installed (some 6+ months by then, longer in testing), and c) what channel it was on.
Cut ends off existing USB cable, and solder to longer cable.
...
Profit!
But seriously -- what exactly are you asking? If want to know if a longer cable will work, then just solder up a longer cable and test it. If you want to know if twisted pair will help with electrical interference, or what wires to choose to run to which pins to give the greatest benefit from the twisted pair, then ask that instead. If you're looking for inexpensive passive or active extensions, ask that. If you want to know where to find cheap cable ends from a reliable vendor, ask that. If you want to build your own USB repeater (or whatever they're called), ask that.
But I can't figure out what your current question is. If your question is "How can I extend the cable length using a longer cable," then the answer might be, umm... maybe you could use a longer cable?
Before the Clinton administration, wind power was too expensive, Alderfer said. But since then, technological improvements to the fans made it economically feasible.
Interesting. So, are we measuring time in terms of Presidential Adminstrations now? Or was Clinton somehow responsible for the improvements in technology?
I think improving wind power is even better than inventing the internet.
So, when is Slashdot going to start offering XHTML 2.0 as a page rendering option? Actually, when is Slashdot going to start offering any sort of valid HTML as a page rendering option?
If both states are claiming the right to tax the same property, it would have to be settled in the Supreme Court
Fortunately for the homeowner, finding a lawyer to fight all the way up to the Supreme Court will be very cheap. If he's lucky, he'll only have to give his house to a lawyer to pay for it all.
Any idea what version of JavaScript IE6 emulates, and Mozilla actually uses?
IE6 doesn't emulate JavaScript. It uses JScript, which is Microsoft's implimentation of the ECMA-262 Edition 3 language standard (ECMAScript). Similarly, JavaScript is Netscape's implementation of the same standard. Neither is "emulating" anything.
You can find the ECMAScript standard here: ECMA-262v3. You can discover what your favorite vendor has actually implemented by visiting either mozilla and microsoft documentation for each vendor's implementation.
I have no idea who decides what is officially JavaScript. I'm imagining an oracle sitting on a subway platform somewhere, eating a corndog and spouting off ziggyisms to anyone who will listen.
But, I'm assuming that IE will just use whatever version of JScript you happen to have installed on your machine. And, as far as I know, JScript really does follow the ECMAScript specification, which is a real spec, with standards bodies and the whole works, unlike "JavaScript", whatever that is, exactly.
Anyhow, take a look here to get a look at some of the features of the JScript interpreter hosted in some of your favorite applications.
When I visit www.unix.net, I get a picture of a pixilated finger, and the words, "Fuck You Open Group."
As "ludacris" as it might seem, I don't believe this is the type of site that WIPO is going to take seriously in a domain arbitration hearing. I don't care how rich you are, you can't lawyer away the middle finger.
And how much have they charged for their point releases (AKA Service Packs)?
Well, let's see... if memory serves me right, there was WinNT 3.0, Win NT 3.51, Win NT 4.0, Win 2000, and Now Win XP, or about one version every 20 months or so. What did they cost? Who knows -- more than $130 each, I'm sure.
Charging for point releases is an insult to your customer base.
Well, it's a good thing that everyone agrees that Apple isn't doing that.
I imagine at some point they'll go to Solaris numbering, once they've just plain given up on any sort of sensible numbers. Remember, Solaris 8 is really Solaris 2.8 which is really SunOS 5.8, which is an upgrade from Solaris 7 which is Solaris 2.7 which is SunOS 5.7.
Or, perhaps they'll soon go the same route as Intel, and soon have a moronic display name like "Pentium 4", which followed the "Pentium III", which of course followed the "Pentium II", which came after the "Pentium Pro", which followed the "Pentium", which came after the "486".
Anyhow, the most suprising thing to me about the Apple pricing is not that they're charging for the software, but that Steve Jobs would allow something as odd as a version number to cloud the announcement.
The modifications to the trains are actually significant to support this, but it's about how the braking systems work and how the motor controllers work on the trains.
I got the idea that they don't have to modify the trains at all to support this. It sounded like the trains are already just dumping extra energy back into the third rail when they brake, but that the design of the current power delivery system doesn't really allow them to realize much gain from this.
It sounds like they've simply reached a point where a lot of "small" local power storage can be added to the system and integrated with the current power delivery system, and they're just expirimenting with reasonable ways to do it. It really doesn't seem to be a change in the trains as much as it is a change in the power delivery system (and maybe an improvement in the reliability of flywheels?)
I don't know... that's just the impression I got from the article.
Call me crazy, but if I were a mega-corporation, I wouldn't want someone releasing "warez" to break into my systems this way.
No, of course you wouldn't like it. And, if you were an emperor who got suckered into walking around naked, you'd be fairly pissed at the kid who pointed out that you were, in fact, naked.
But, this story has nothing to do with HP "liking" or "not liking" it when people (rightly) point out that they're walking around naked. The story is about the fact that the DMCA has emboldened HP to the point that they feel it's better to walk around naked and sue anyone who notices, rather than buying some reasonable clothes.
Etiquette in the security community demands that the discovers of holes give companies reasonable time to respond to security problems, before publicizing the security problems. But this courtesy is not, in any way, a courtesy towards the company that manufactures the flawed product. That company's opinion in the matter doesn't mean squat. It is a courtesy extended entirely to the users of the product. Users are harmed if they do not know about exploitable flaws in the products they use, but at the same time users are harmed if the exploitable flaws are widely known before patches are available. The only reasonable role for a company with flawed products in the security process is to work diligently to minimize the harm to users, by the only method available to them -- by expediting patches for their products, and thus providing an environment where the user can be informed of security flaws in their product as quickly as possible.
Unfortunately, what HP has done here is imagine itself to have some other role in the security process -- someone at HP is under the completely mistaken impression that their opinion of the security process matters in any way. It does not. The courtesies of the security process are entirely towards the users of the flawed product. People have a right to know about flawed products. HP has the opportunity to provide patches to their product, so that those users might have some alternative to simply throwing all of their HP equipment in the garbage, but that is entirely HP's opportunity, and really of no concern either to the users or to the security professionals who disclose the hole.
I am, l33t, seriously. You probably use a mac, so you havn't learned how to use a computer properly yet. You guys have all sorts of stuff like "Application Bundles" and "One Button Mice" and "Microkernels" that insulate you from the real stuff you gotta do when you use a compter.
You see, us folks who use a real operating system, like DOS or Linux, have learned all the stuff you gotta do when you use a computer -- do you have any idea how much stuff you really have to do to hook up to the internet, or to burn a VCD, or download music to one of them mp3 players? It's a lot of stuff, believe me. And all you bozos with Macs have never bothered to learn how to do that stuff, and you think that you can just get by letting Steve Jobs or someone learn how to do that stuff for you. Think of how lost you're going be someday, when you don't have a computer that does that stuff for you, and you have to do it by hand, like us smart people are able to do!
Anyhow, I've learned a lot from installing device drivers under Windows. I'm pretty sure I could even write a device driver, because I've learned so much from downloading and clicking on the icons. And, like, writing a device driver is the hardest thing there is to do on computers. A guy names Linux Torbaldes wrote a device driver once, and it became so famous that it turned into the Unix operating system! And, seriously, one of my friends told me that he invented Unix just to learn how to write a device driver (this was before you had to click on the devices to make them work, which is why sometimes Linux gets the mouse stuff a little wrong, cuz he didn't need it as much then).
So if other trains are not close by, to scoop up the power, the extra electricity dissipates like so many ripples in a pool.
I assume this means that if other trains are not close by, to scoop up the power, the extra electricy dissipates like so many ripples in a pool.
I'm also assuming this means that they generally pump energy into the system physically close to the trains, to minimize the amount of rail they have to pump the energy through.
From the article, it sounds like the current, already existing subway system already pumps energy from a train slowing down on one side of town into trains speeding up on the other side of town. But, they're losing a lot of energy that way, as the the energy travels along the rail (as opposed to being pumped into the rail close to the accelerating train).
So in this new system, they're taking the energy that the trains are already pumping into the rail when they brake, and instead of trying to push for miles and miles and miles along the rail until it (hopefully) finds a train (or all dissipates as heat), instead they're pushing the energy into big batteries near the station, to be pumped back out again when a physically close train starts to accelerate.
Wow. Maybe they could use regenerative braking, and then store the excess power generated in a battery. Maybe they could even use a mechanical battery, like a flywheel!
That would be really cool!
Is there some reason why you're able to log into slashdot to post, but unable to log into the NY Times site to read the article?
If you want money for free, you can just print some up on a color copier. It isn't immoral, because you haven't deprived anyone else of their money.
Also, I happen to know that most of the rockstar authors, like Knuth, Stevens, and Kernighan, have far more money than they would ever know what to do with. And, those bozos at Prentice Hall and O'Reilly are all a bunch of thiefs anyhow. I understand that they've recently lobbied congress for the right to burn down libraries to prevent the spread of information among poor people who can't afford to buy books of their own.
And they get their stories from people who submit them and those people seem to be mainly anti-Microsoft.
No. Slashdot gets hundreds of submissions daily. The ones you see are the ones that are worded in a way that the editor happens to find interesting or useful. The submissions the editors find most useful are the ones that are likely to generate the most comments (because slashdot isn't as much a meta-news site as it is an advertising supported billboard).
Remember, when you read an especially troller-iffic story, it was selected by an editor who, for whatever reason, wanted to post a troller-iffic story. Also, don't confuse "troll" with "crapflooder." Poopbot is a crapflooder. CmdrTaco is a troll. Trolling wasn't really a negative term until CmdrTaco gave it the negative mod points and confused it with crapflooding. This, of course, is ironic, unlike rain on a wedding day.
Slashdot Mirror
The W3C standard says that ALL attributes are required to have quotes.
Umm... which standard says this, exactly? My memory might be faulty, but I thought that the XML standard required quotes, while SGML didn't for some attribute values. The last time I checked, HTML is still an SGML application.
What am I missing?
Except for the part where several PTP members happened to be at Starbucks the day the T-mobile installers came. As I mention in my comment above, they talked for quite a while, with the T-mobile installers being made aware of a) the PTP node, b) how long it had been installed (some 6+ months by then, longer in testing), and c) what channel it was on.
But, the plankton can't all dies off. Once it's all gone, then what are we going to make this yummy new soylent green stuff out of?
Here's a plan!
- Cut ends off existing USB cable, and solder to longer cable.
- ...
- Profit!
But seriously -- what exactly are you asking? If want to know if a longer cable will work, then just solder up a longer cable and test it. If you want to know if twisted pair will help with electrical interference, or what wires to choose to run to which pins to give the greatest benefit from the twisted pair, then ask that instead. If you're looking for inexpensive passive or active extensions, ask that. If you want to know where to find cheap cable ends from a reliable vendor, ask that. If you want to build your own USB repeater (or whatever they're called), ask that. But I can't figure out what your current question is. If your question is "How can I extend the cable length using a longer cable," then the answer might be, umm... maybe you could use a longer cable?No way. I've got two words for you, buddy. Well, actually it's one word, but it's so annoying that you actually have to say it twice:
Dang. I could only bring myself to type it once, and my fingers are already blistering, like I dipped them in acid or something.I think this would be great for AD&D type games.
ME TOO!!!
I think improving wind power is even better than inventing the internet.
So, when is Slashdot going to start offering XHTML 2.0 as a page rendering option? Actually, when is Slashdot going to start offering any sort of valid HTML as a page rendering option?
My sustained data rate goes up to 11.
If both states are claiming the right to tax the same property, it would have to be settled in the Supreme Court
Fortunately for the homeowner, finding a lawyer to fight all the way up to the Supreme Court will be very cheap. If he's lucky, he'll only have to give his house to a lawyer to pay for it all.
Any idea what version of JavaScript IE6 emulates, and Mozilla actually uses?
IE6 doesn't emulate JavaScript. It uses JScript, which is Microsoft's implimentation of the ECMA-262 Edition 3 language standard (ECMAScript). Similarly, JavaScript is Netscape's implementation of the same standard. Neither is "emulating" anything.
You can find the ECMAScript standard here: ECMA-262v3. You can discover what your favorite vendor has actually implemented by visiting either mozilla and microsoft documentation for each vendor's implementation.
I have no idea who decides what is officially JavaScript. I'm imagining an oracle sitting on a subway platform somewhere, eating a corndog and spouting off ziggyisms to anyone who will listen.
But, I'm assuming that IE will just use whatever version of JScript you happen to have installed on your machine. And, as far as I know, JScript really does follow the ECMAScript specification, which is a real spec, with standards bodies and the whole works, unlike "JavaScript", whatever that is, exactly.
Anyhow, take a look here to get a look at some of the features of the JScript interpreter hosted in some of your favorite applications.
When I visit www.unix.net, I get a picture of a pixilated finger, and the words, "Fuck You Open Group."
As "ludacris" as it might seem, I don't believe this is the type of site that WIPO is going to take seriously in a domain arbitration hearing. I don't care how rich you are, you can't lawyer away the middle finger.
Wndows NT came out how many years ago?
Cripes -- how long has NT been out now? 11 years?
And how much have they charged for their point releases (AKA Service Packs)?
Well, let's see... if memory serves me right, there was WinNT 3.0, Win NT 3.51, Win NT 4.0, Win 2000, and Now Win XP, or about one version every 20 months or so. What did they cost? Who knows -- more than $130 each, I'm sure.
Charging for point releases is an insult to your customer base.
Well, it's a good thing that everyone agrees that Apple isn't doing that.
I imagine at some point they'll go to Solaris numbering, once they've just plain given up on any sort of sensible numbers. Remember, Solaris 8 is really Solaris 2.8 which is really SunOS 5.8, which is an upgrade from Solaris 7 which is Solaris 2.7 which is SunOS 5.7.
Or, perhaps they'll soon go the same route as Intel, and soon have a moronic display name like "Pentium 4", which followed the "Pentium III", which of course followed the "Pentium II", which came after the "Pentium Pro", which followed the "Pentium", which came after the "486".
Anyhow, the most suprising thing to me about the Apple pricing is not that they're charging for the software, but that Steve Jobs would allow something as odd as a version number to cloud the announcement.
The modifications to the trains are actually significant to support this, but it's about how the braking systems work and how the motor controllers work on the trains.
I got the idea that they don't have to modify the trains at all to support this. It sounded like the trains are already just dumping extra energy back into the third rail when they brake, but that the design of the current power delivery system doesn't really allow them to realize much gain from this.
It sounds like they've simply reached a point where a lot of "small" local power storage can be added to the system and integrated with the current power delivery system, and they're just expirimenting with reasonable ways to do it. It really doesn't seem to be a change in the trains as much as it is a change in the power delivery system (and maybe an improvement in the reliability of flywheels?)
I don't know... that's just the impression I got from the article.
Call me crazy, but if I were a mega-corporation, I wouldn't want someone releasing "warez" to break into my systems this way.
No, of course you wouldn't like it. And, if you were an emperor who got suckered into walking around naked, you'd be fairly pissed at the kid who pointed out that you were, in fact, naked.
But, this story has nothing to do with HP "liking" or "not liking" it when people (rightly) point out that they're walking around naked. The story is about the fact that the DMCA has emboldened HP to the point that they feel it's better to walk around naked and sue anyone who notices, rather than buying some reasonable clothes.
Etiquette in the security community demands that the discovers of holes give companies reasonable time to respond to security problems, before publicizing the security problems. But this courtesy is not, in any way, a courtesy towards the company that manufactures the flawed product. That company's opinion in the matter doesn't mean squat. It is a courtesy extended entirely to the users of the product. Users are harmed if they do not know about exploitable flaws in the products they use, but at the same time users are harmed if the exploitable flaws are widely known before patches are available. The only reasonable role for a company with flawed products in the security process is to work diligently to minimize the harm to users, by the only method available to them -- by expediting patches for their products, and thus providing an environment where the user can be informed of security flaws in their product as quickly as possible.
Unfortunately, what HP has done here is imagine itself to have some other role in the security process -- someone at HP is under the completely mistaken impression that their opinion of the security process matters in any way. It does not. The courtesies of the security process are entirely towards the users of the flawed product. People have a right to know about flawed products. HP has the opportunity to provide patches to their product, so that those users might have some alternative to simply throwing all of their HP equipment in the garbage, but that is entirely HP's opportunity, and really of no concern either to the users or to the security professionals who disclose the hole.
This guy is a l33t hax0r for sure.
I am, l33t, seriously. You probably use a mac, so you havn't learned how to use a computer properly yet. You guys have all sorts of stuff like "Application Bundles" and "One Button Mice" and "Microkernels" that insulate you from the real stuff you gotta do when you use a compter.
You see, us folks who use a real operating system, like DOS or Linux, have learned all the stuff you gotta do when you use a computer -- do you have any idea how much stuff you really have to do to hook up to the internet, or to burn a VCD, or download music to one of them mp3 players? It's a lot of stuff, believe me. And all you bozos with Macs have never bothered to learn how to do that stuff, and you think that you can just get by letting Steve Jobs or someone learn how to do that stuff for you. Think of how lost you're going be someday, when you don't have a computer that does that stuff for you, and you have to do it by hand, like us smart people are able to do!
Anyhow, I've learned a lot from installing device drivers under Windows. I'm pretty sure I could even write a device driver, because I've learned so much from downloading and clicking on the icons. And, like, writing a device driver is the hardest thing there is to do on computers. A guy names Linux Torbaldes wrote a device driver once, and it became so famous that it turned into the Unix operating system! And, seriously, one of my friends told me that he invented Unix just to learn how to write a device driver (this was before you had to click on the devices to make them work, which is why sometimes Linux gets the mouse stuff a little wrong, cuz he didn't need it as much then).
So if other trains are not close by, to scoop up the power, the extra electricity dissipates like so many ripples in a pool.
I assume this means that if other trains are not close by, to scoop up the power, the extra electricy dissipates like so many ripples in a pool.
I'm also assuming this means that they generally pump energy into the system physically close to the trains, to minimize the amount of rail they have to pump the energy through.
From the article, it sounds like the current, already existing subway system already pumps energy from a train slowing down on one side of town into trains speeding up on the other side of town. But, they're losing a lot of energy that way, as the the energy travels along the rail (as opposed to being pumped into the rail close to the accelerating train).
So in this new system, they're taking the energy that the trains are already pumping into the rail when they brake, and instead of trying to push for miles and miles and miles along the rail until it (hopefully) finds a train (or all dissipates as heat), instead they're pushing the energy into big batteries near the station, to be pumped back out again when a physically close train starts to accelerate.
At least, that's how I read the article.
Wow. Maybe they could use regenerative braking, and then store the excess power generated in a battery. Maybe they could even use a mechanical battery, like a flywheel!
That would be really cool!
Is there some reason why you're able to log into slashdot to post, but unable to log into the NY Times site to read the article?
Clue me in... is there a reason why you're able to log in to slashdot to post, but not able to log into the NY Times site to read the article?
Don't be a slimebag. Go the the library.
Also, I happen to know that most of the rockstar authors, like Knuth, Stevens, and Kernighan, have far more money than they would ever know what to do with. And, those bozos at Prentice Hall and O'Reilly are all a bunch of thiefs anyhow. I understand that they've recently lobbied congress for the right to burn down libraries to prevent the spread of information among poor people who can't afford to buy books of their own.
No. Slashdot gets hundreds of submissions daily. The ones you see are the ones that are worded in a way that the editor happens to find interesting or useful. The submissions the editors find most useful are the ones that are likely to generate the most comments (because slashdot isn't as much a meta-news site as it is an advertising supported billboard).
Remember, when you read an especially troller-iffic story, it was selected by an editor who, for whatever reason, wanted to post a troller-iffic story. Also, don't confuse "troll" with "crapflooder." Poopbot is a crapflooder. CmdrTaco is a troll. Trolling wasn't really a negative term until CmdrTaco gave it the negative mod points and confused it with crapflooding. This, of course, is ironic, unlike rain on a wedding day.
Uhh, the word is "too" scared. And in your original post, you meant "seem", not "seam".
I personally enjoy the rules of Western Society. I especially like the rule that says that people who can't spell are generally morons.