Grammar Nazi are nothing... Have you worked with a Policy Nazi? Or some annoying twit who recites company policy or P.C. norms all the time?
At least Microsoft isn't doing it... We'd get Clippy the friendly policy helper who'd pop up just before we send each email with suggestions... "Can I help you rephrase that?" "Are you sure? HR will be notified..."
Me, I envision a cold war communist characterization -with a Russian accent: "Comrade, don't raise suspicions! Rethink the phrase..."
I'm a "hypermiler" and it was natural when I switched from bicycle to car. Perhaps if more people drove in their 20s instead of their teens they would be better drivers.
Driving style has a lot to do with it. I get 10mpg over other people in the same car if I try hard.... and since driving is so dull I may as well keep myself occupied with the road by driving smarter.
Highway limits should be 55mph. maybe 60mph now that cars are more aerodynamic. Above 55mph the majority of your gas is going into PUSHING AIR not propelling you to your destination. Back when 55 was chosen it was the best rate for fuel economy and safety and today it might be 60 or 65 but for safety it's still better at 55.
More people die from cars than bombs or terrorists... but we just won't give up our 5 minutes of time commuting to work... that 5 minutes of savings is just soooo valuable.... except when it is tv commercials... we've let them extend TV advertizing to nearly 8 min out of 30 min... 1/3 and we don't seem to mind losing THAT TIME... (this applies to the 90s before TV was on the internet.)
Privatizing doesn't solve most problems; if anything it creates more problems and at best it changes the nature of how to deal with problems. There are ALWAYS problems; at least with politicians you supposedly vote for based upon their management performance the public has REAL INPUT. If the public can't intelligently handle the problem then they deserve all that they get.
Changing contractors is like a boss firing employees for his own incompetence.
The public is NEVER happy - they want everything perfect and for free. Since people freak out after disasters jumping into the arms of the nearest authoritarian and the rest the time complain about the authoritarian's actions - a fair balance would be to realize that MOST the time we don't have disasters so the bias should be for less security. Then people will complain less and only be outraged during disasters (which hopefully are not timed with elections too often.)
Big Tobacco delayed progress with FUD for decades but where they finally tripped up is that they didn't fund research into other causes of lung cancer. By conflating the whole issue with tons of information about contributing factors and flat out admitting they were a contributing factor they could continue to this day!
If you ever came in contact with Asbestos, ate poorly, lived in a polluted city, failed to get X minutes of aerobic exercise and then smoked... (I'd love the aerobic part since smokers tend to hate aerobic exercise; I'm sure their stats would be low on that "contributing factor")
+1 for intelligent political speak. -10 for defending this foolishness.
There is no single cause for the bank robbery; therefore, we must be careful about accusing any single person for the loss of money because it could harm those components if we take measures against them.
If you think my logical transform is a false analogy, think about the fraudulent banks that caused the depression.
Should we worry about some peoples' jobs when we have a potentially big disaster on our hands? no. life sucks. get another business until you are proven safe. These pro-business zealots are all for competition killing each other off but when there is a seriously big risk they must defend the "industry" against the public, majority, democratic institutions. If you are unlucky because company X innovated and you go under that is just the risk of doing business and if you harm a lot of people you are also unlucky (unless you are Monsanto and evil is your purpose.)
The film makers said they wanted the unused brains to be part of the computer and that humans were being used for their excess brainpower. That was decided to be too complex for (American?) audiences so they went with the battery explanation which is so stupid some people would just think of it as a metaphor.
The brain interprets it's senses; you don't get input like a computer, you interpret the input you have. They could provide you less input for life and you'd not know the difference and would learn to interpret with what you had. During your development, I think it is possible that the input could be tuned down slowly so that you interpret the same thing using less of your senses. People who have laser damage to their eyes don't see a blank spot in their vision, the brain fills in the gap and they don't notice - only until the damage is too great do they start to notice blurry spots in their vision and it's still not black spots reflecting the reality of it (but then light does glow hitting cells in a way CCDs do not) - it takes even more severe damage before blackness sets in. Audio can be severely limited and still be fully functional - as long as the person never knew any better-- just a double pitches of clicking would still allow a language and a form of music to develop...
One might find out that the mice born into this become smarter in other ways as they have free brain power to develop to other tasks.
As I became a teen I saw what we call "press" are just press release aggregators with a strong bias to anybody who has a history of paying for advertizing. Journalism would involve LABOR and that costs.
We like to feel we are saving money because they say so but these upgrades cost us... even if eventually they every actually pass the labor savings onto the customers (unlikely) it is a blow to the local economy. Those union paid meter checkers contributed greatly to the economy (because they made a reasonable wage.)
Should we be removing all gainful employment from the economy?
Perhaps if we had a Dr. Suess book where the Lorax was defending JOBS from robots we'd have a wiser next generation?? No, there is not going to always be some higher level of job available that the robot slaves can not do.
Nearly everything a kid does is an experiment. Sometimes I wonder if anybody remembers being a kid.... or perhaps people today grew up asking permission and filing forms before they tried doing anything on their own? Perhaps they were limited ONLY to toys/kits their parents bought? Perhaps they have zero creativity and curiosity? (some stuff does show that kids today have a lot less of both... I blame TV and lack of "boredom" time. Welcome to consumer culture, where anything actually free has no value. TV is not free, think about it.)
Kids don't have sense, they are kids and today's kids have LESS sense than previous generations who were actually raised by somebody. Kids don't grasp death either. Oh, we used to have foolish kids DIE doing stupid shit and that helped the genepool. Some were LUCKY and went on to be Thomas Edison who made nitro as a kid... My father's generation had guns in their lockers and after school shooting clubs. Protectionism made their kids weak... plus getting rid of asylums and legally drugging their kids didn't help in creating an extremely small minority which terrorizes today's "adults" into the sniveling cowards they were raised to be.
truth. it hurts. suck it up you babies.
Can I try to get this game of my friends to run on my computer? circumvent DRM? no! you'll go to jail! I don't care if you learn skills that translate into a career! that $1 song is more valuable!
Spray paint somebody's property? go to jail! Make malware, crack something (digital spray paint) felony! go to jail!
Parenting has been outsourced to the legal system. Blame / sue everybody and don't take responsibility (and in rare cases, "take responsibility" like a politician does...) If they can't admit they are poor parents nothing will improve. Sure, the economy prevents a lot but without facing that reality people won't fight for more family time they'd know they actually NEEDED.
There is a new one: "My slashdot account number is higher because I'm less gullible" vs "My slashdot account number is lower because I joined up earlier than you"
Been on slashdot since '97, I didn't create an account for years.
Mod parent up! It is interesting and adds to the discussion, despite being like my position: open a ultra wide bandwidth next-gen internet wifi network with emphasis on broadcasting to replace TV, cell phone, and radio (except UHF, ham.) We are stuck with bandwidth monopolies as long as we limit ourselves to the link layer - move to a packet layer and suddenly it can be shared by more AND way more flexible.
Perfect crime= internet hack + your gun as the murder weapon left at the scene OR Perfect crime= "But it's not even my gun! I've never even held a gun before!" Now, members of the jury, how can you believe a statement like that when his fingerprints were the only ones programed into the murder weapon?
Those scientists just want more grants and jobs to make more money at the tax payers' expense!
This is just like global warming; a big hoax conspiracy that will spread to every greedy scientist around the world to pull the wool over everybody's eyes. But unfortunately, we only have a small industry which can't afford to fund think tanks to counter the lies of these wealthy science organizations. We may lose to this fraud and be forced into paying a "space tax" to fund the cleaning of this fake problem - putting us out of business and killing off the private space industry.
CS can't get our 100% man made testable and perfectly running computers to work reliably enough to risk so many lives and ecosystems upon it. Hell, in the abstract we can mathematically prove that we can't detect or prevent some problems in CS. Even if the CS and Software Engineering was perfect we have Microsoft and others producing poor quality software...
DNA hacking on a system we barely even understand in a coding language we know even less with systems larger than the human genome. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING. Why don't you start engineering humans before messing with plants which have more DNA? Oh that's right, because of the moral implications... those don't apply to other creatures because we are not part of nature, not animals, not evolved from primates... We still don't even understand human nutrition.
YOU can't prove GMO is safe; the burden is on YOU making the claims it is perfectly safe not on us skeptics. Yes, WE are the skeptics not you. It is not science to be DNA script kiddies and merely say "it's alive!", possibly test it with mice, bribe some officials, and then unleash it on the public saying "prove nobody is being harmed." Trying to claim the scientific high ground after you unscientifically claimed the position is hypocritical.
We are not lab rats developing liver cancer from eating GMO corn... oh, wait... perhaps we are! FYI, the lab rats did already, but as expected, "we" are skeptical about the lab tests on the rats but we weren't so skeptical before approving the GMO corn!
Aside: EU agriculture is subsidized. Most of it can't compete with the 3rd world. They prop it up for security and economic reasons and they already depend on outside sources - too many people, too little farm land. duh. Population growth is the real problem not production rate. If terrorists weren't ignorant Luddites, GMO would be their greatest weapon.
This donations need to go to key politicians, that is just a drop in the bucket. The cost for highways is way out of his league. Upkeep is high as well. Auditing would only go so far, the big issue is that roads are expensive.... you could lower the cost considerably if you prohibited heavy trucks and limited the speed! (F=ma dominates the cost.) I've seen the cost for roads and the load + speed makes it rise so fast, people have no clue how much all these roads legitimately cost. You could double the size of city blocks and remove a lot of waste... however, those roads are cheap and it doesn't end up making a big difference in the long run (it does however SAVE a lot of money...)
All that being said, once you look into the real world numbers you realize that adding 1 lane for billions of dollars only improves traffic by about 10% if I remember correctly. If you take too long to build it, then you gain nothing! Unless you cut down on the INCREASE in cars you can't build it fast enough; as is already the case in just about every major city in the USA. Mass transit is required and far cheaper - like everything there is some function for both and likely an intersection point where cars will always lose.
You could cut down on the number of people... contribute to education - its the most effective politically correct way to control population growth.
The solutions are not something people are going to like. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Musk could work on building a huge rail line... and a car rental service for either end of it.... I'd like to see a train station that moves with the train so you don't have to wait while people get on and off. Even that is cheap compared to highway construction and buying land.
A completely closed end to end system with zero freedom outside the walled garden.... oh but it's not a walled garden because the iPhone is more walled in.
The web was popular because it was accessible and it worked reasonably well despite most people messing their HTML up; this is a concern and some think that XHTML 1 being extremely slow (arguably a failure) and that XHTML 2 died in part because of they lacked that understanding.
Most the web is STILL in HTML 4.
As one of the volunteers, I can tell you that pretty much every angle on such topics has been covered by somebody. The best decision is not always made but there is not much trouble in the opinion dept. HTML5 complicates things slightly by using MIME types to indicate an XML or HTML parser - defaulting to the HTML parser. There is an XML form of HTML5 look at the top of the spec, then configure your webserver to send the proper http header; meta tags with http data is a lame work around and I frankly do not know how successful that will be in practice.
Open source implementations of DRM? you think the content mafia is going to allow you to use an open implementation of some DRM "standard"? 1st thing hundreds of C coders will do is dump the frame buffer into libmp4 just to snub the bastards!
Inflation is no longer reported but it must be above 5% or they'd start reporting it again. Politicians in the USA rarely ever set budgets to adapt to inflation rates; they like to waste more money fighting over it every single year.
The US doesn't hardly have mental health care; at least you have problems in it- that is better than nothing. Our congress does not even get it and they NEED it!
Abrams didn't like Star Trek, he never got it and even said so - he liked Star Wars. He managed to even blow up a whole planet with a super large ship and I was waiting for some kind of "Kirk, I'm your father" moment... He'd have used light sabers in his sword fighting scene except that wouldn't have gotten permission from Lucas.
The movie was not Star Trek and despite being a Trek fan, I was not suckered into the typical remake formula that even the most poorly made movies use today. Cameos and geeky back references don't fool me. I guess I'm not much of a Trekkie because I'm not so emotionally desperate that I shutdown my brain at a Spock cameo. Hell, Disney could put Spock into the next Star Wars movie and bill it as both a Trek film and Star Wars film and I bet people would buy it! Sheep.
There are actual recorded interviews with Gene Roddenberry about how Trek was never "dark" and "edgy" and that completely missed the point of it; he had to fight to keep it away from people trying to drag it into that direction. It had the 60's moon landing optimism about the future and how we could aspire to evolve beyond such things; he primarily used aliens to illustrate those things. Today's modern anti-heroes have no place in the world he created. Like religion, the qualities that bring people in are often forgotten and the dogma takes over; having the superficial Trek branding doesn't define what is Star Trek. I wonder why anybody bothers to study or think at deeper levels on literature, because apparently not even the authors do; anymore. I dare not imagine how Candide, ou l'Optimisme would turn out as a movie.
Yes, the last Trek movies sucked because they don't care once they make money and know they can sucker people back for a few sequels - then they bring in somebody to try something drastic so they can continue to beat a dead horse... as if the "franchise" was worn out when in fact it is 100% the studio's fault every time. They make their money because people will settle for back references with a bland thoughtless dream-like state of mind (which is why huge plot holes are commonplace; once you suspend all reasoning... see the "How it should have ended" series) All this stuff is making people more stupid while wasting their time. Entertainment doesn't have to lower your IQ.
When all you have is a hammer... Politicians for the most part can only create law; even to kill a law they must create a law to repeal the old one. So even the small gov people are creating law to shrink it.
Big government is a loaded buzz phrase. People might support that it is too big, but they WANT nearly everything it does and often WANT more - politicians are stuck in the middle kissing ass; both cheeks... some down the middle others flip flop... sorry this is getting to dirty.
If government only stuck to the basics, it would still be the 2nd largest employer in the nation. constitution says post office - that is the 2nd biggest today alone.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and if they did read it-- they couldn't use it in court against you. But that is assuming you even have legal rights...
Grammar Nazi are nothing... Have you worked with a Policy Nazi? Or some annoying twit who recites company policy or P.C. norms all the time?
At least Microsoft isn't doing it... We'd get Clippy the friendly policy helper who'd pop up just before we send each email with suggestions... "Can I help you rephrase that?" "Are you sure? HR will be notified..."
Me, I envision a cold war communist characterization -with a Russian accent: "Comrade, don't raise suspicions! Rethink the phrase..."
I'm a "hypermiler" and it was natural when I switched from bicycle to car. Perhaps if more people drove in their 20s instead of their teens they would be better drivers.
Driving style has a lot to do with it. I get 10mpg over other people in the same car if I try hard.... and since driving is so dull I may as well keep myself occupied with the road by driving smarter.
Highway limits should be 55mph. maybe 60mph now that cars are more aerodynamic. Above 55mph the majority of your gas is going into PUSHING AIR not propelling you to your destination. Back when 55 was chosen it was the best rate for fuel economy and safety and today it might be 60 or 65 but for safety it's still better at 55.
More people die from cars than bombs or terrorists... but we just won't give up our 5 minutes of time commuting to work... that 5 minutes of savings is just soooo valuable .... except when it is tv commercials... we've let them extend TV advertizing to nearly 8 min out of 30 min... 1/3 and we don't seem to mind losing THAT TIME... (this applies to the 90s before TV was on the internet.)
Finally somebody speaking sense!
Privatizing doesn't solve most problems; if anything it creates more problems and at best it changes the nature of how to deal with problems. There are ALWAYS problems; at least with politicians you supposedly vote for based upon their management performance the public has REAL INPUT. If the public can't intelligently handle the problem then they deserve all that they get.
Changing contractors is like a boss firing employees for his own incompetence.
The public is NEVER happy - they want everything perfect and for free. Since people freak out after disasters jumping into the arms of the nearest authoritarian and the rest the time complain about the authoritarian's actions - a fair balance would be to realize that MOST the time we don't have disasters so the bias should be for less security. Then people will complain less and only be outraged during disasters (which hopefully are not timed with elections too often.)
Big Tobacco delayed progress with FUD for decades but where they finally tripped up is that they didn't fund research into other causes of lung cancer. By conflating the whole issue with tons of information about contributing factors and flat out admitting they were a contributing factor they could continue to this day!
If you ever came in contact with Asbestos, ate poorly, lived in a polluted city, failed to get X minutes of aerobic exercise and then smoked... (I'd love the aerobic part since smokers tend to hate aerobic exercise; I'm sure their stats would be low on that "contributing factor")
+1 for intelligent political speak.
-10 for defending this foolishness.
There is no single cause for the bank robbery; therefore, we must be careful about accusing any single person for the loss of money because it could harm those components if we take measures against them.
If you think my logical transform is a false analogy, think about the fraudulent banks that caused the depression.
Should we worry about some peoples' jobs when we have a potentially big disaster on our hands? no. life sucks. get another business until you are proven safe. These pro-business zealots are all for competition killing each other off but when there is a seriously big risk they must defend the "industry" against the public, majority, democratic institutions. If you are unlucky because company X innovated and you go under that is just the risk of doing business and if you harm a lot of people you are also unlucky (unless you are Monsanto and evil is your purpose.)
The film makers said they wanted the unused brains to be part of the computer and that humans were being used for their excess brainpower. That was decided to be too complex for (American?) audiences so they went with the battery explanation which is so stupid some people would just think of it as a metaphor.
The brain interprets it's senses; you don't get input like a computer, you interpret the input you have. They could provide you less input for life and you'd not know the difference and would learn to interpret with what you had. During your development, I think it is possible that the input could be tuned down slowly so that you interpret the same thing using less of your senses. People who have laser damage to their eyes don't see a blank spot in their vision, the brain fills in the gap and they don't notice - only until the damage is too great do they start to notice blurry spots in their vision and it's still not black spots reflecting the reality of it (but then light does glow hitting cells in a way CCDs do not) - it takes even more severe damage before blackness sets in. Audio can be severely limited and still be fully functional - as long as the person never knew any better-- just a double pitches of clicking would still allow a language and a form of music to develop...
One might find out that the mice born into this become smarter in other ways as they have free brain power to develop to other tasks.
As I became a teen I saw what we call "press" are just press release aggregators with a strong bias to anybody who has a history of paying for advertizing. Journalism would involve LABOR and that costs.
We like to feel we are saving money because they say so but these upgrades cost us... even if eventually they every actually pass the labor savings onto the customers (unlikely) it is a blow to the local economy. Those union paid meter checkers contributed greatly to the economy (because they made a reasonable wage.)
Should we be removing all gainful employment from the economy?
Perhaps if we had a Dr. Suess book where the Lorax was defending JOBS from robots we'd have a wiser next generation?? No, there is not going to always be some higher level of job available that the robot slaves can not do.
Nearly everything a kid does is an experiment. Sometimes I wonder if anybody remembers being a kid.... or perhaps people today grew up asking permission and filing forms before they tried doing anything on their own? Perhaps they were limited ONLY to toys/kits their parents bought? Perhaps they have zero creativity and curiosity? (some stuff does show that kids today have a lot less of both... I blame TV and lack of "boredom" time. Welcome to consumer culture, where anything actually free has no value. TV is not free, think about it.)
Kids don't have sense, they are kids and today's kids have LESS sense than previous generations who were actually raised by somebody. Kids don't grasp death either. Oh, we used to have foolish kids DIE doing stupid shit and that helped the genepool. Some were LUCKY and went on to be Thomas Edison who made nitro as a kid... My father's generation had guns in their lockers and after school shooting clubs. Protectionism made their kids weak... plus getting rid of asylums and legally drugging their kids didn't help in creating an extremely small minority which terrorizes today's "adults" into the sniveling cowards they were raised to be.
truth. it hurts. suck it up you babies.
Can I try to get this game of my friends to run on my computer? circumvent DRM?
no! you'll go to jail! I don't care if you learn skills that translate into a career! that $1 song is more valuable!
Spray paint somebody's property? go to jail!
Make malware, crack something (digital spray paint) felony! go to jail!
Parenting has been outsourced to the legal system. Blame / sue everybody and don't take responsibility (and in rare cases, "take responsibility" like a politician does...) If they can't admit they are poor parents nothing will improve. Sure, the economy prevents a lot but without facing that reality people won't fight for more family time they'd know they actually NEEDED.
There is a new one:
"My slashdot account number is higher because I'm less gullible" vs "My slashdot account number is lower because I joined up earlier than you"
Been on slashdot since '97, I didn't create an account for years.
Mod parent up! It is interesting and adds to the discussion, despite being like my position: open a ultra wide bandwidth next-gen internet wifi network with emphasis on broadcasting to replace TV, cell phone, and radio (except UHF, ham.) We are stuck with bandwidth monopolies as long as we limit ourselves to the link layer - move to a packet layer and suddenly it can be shared by more AND way more flexible.
The main purpose of that program (or selling point) was to get old dirty cars off the road; destruction of those cars was the point.
I guess this sounded too realistic and not sarcastic enough for moderators.
Perfect crime= internet hack + your gun as the murder weapon left at the scene
OR
Perfect crime= "But it's not even my gun! I've never even held a gun before!" Now, members of the jury, how can you believe a statement like that when his fingerprints were the only ones programed into the murder weapon?
Those scientists just want more grants and jobs to make more money at the tax payers' expense!
This is just like global warming; a big hoax conspiracy that will spread to every greedy scientist around the world to pull the wool over everybody's eyes. But unfortunately, we only have a small industry which can't afford to fund think tanks to counter the lies of these wealthy science organizations. We may lose to this fraud and be forced into paying a "space tax" to fund the cleaning of this fake problem - putting us out of business and killing off the private space industry.
It has happened before... ;-)
CS can't get our 100% man made testable and perfectly running computers to work reliably enough to risk so many lives and ecosystems upon it. Hell, in the abstract we can mathematically prove that we can't detect or prevent some problems in CS. Even if the CS and Software Engineering was perfect we have Microsoft and others producing poor quality software...
DNA hacking on a system we barely even understand in a coding language we know even less with systems larger than the human genome. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING. Why don't you start engineering humans before messing with plants which have more DNA? Oh that's right, because of the moral implications... those don't apply to other creatures because we are not part of nature, not animals, not evolved from primates... We still don't even understand human nutrition.
YOU can't prove GMO is safe; the burden is on YOU making the claims it is perfectly safe not on us skeptics. Yes, WE are the skeptics not you. It is not science to be DNA script kiddies and merely say "it's alive!", possibly test it with mice, bribe some officials, and then unleash it on the public saying "prove nobody is being harmed." Trying to claim the scientific high ground after you unscientifically claimed the position is hypocritical.
We are not lab rats developing liver cancer from eating GMO corn... oh, wait... perhaps we are!
FYI, the lab rats did already, but as expected, "we" are skeptical about the lab tests on the rats but we weren't so skeptical before approving the GMO corn!
Aside:
EU agriculture is subsidized. Most of it can't compete with the 3rd world. They prop it up for security and economic reasons and they already depend on outside sources - too many people, too little farm land. duh. Population growth is the real problem not production rate.
If terrorists weren't ignorant Luddites, GMO would be their greatest weapon.
This donations need to go to key politicians, that is just a drop in the bucket. The cost for highways is way out of his league. Upkeep is high as well. Auditing would only go so far, the big issue is that roads are expensive.... you could lower the cost considerably if you prohibited heavy trucks and limited the speed! (F=ma dominates the cost.) I've seen the cost for roads and the load + speed makes it rise so fast, people have no clue how much all these roads legitimately cost. You could double the size of city blocks and remove a lot of waste... however, those roads are cheap and it doesn't end up making a big difference in the long run (it does however SAVE a lot of money...)
All that being said, once you look into the real world numbers you realize that adding 1 lane for billions of dollars only improves traffic by about 10% if I remember correctly. If you take too long to build it, then you gain nothing! Unless you cut down on the INCREASE in cars you can't build it fast enough; as is already the case in just about every major city in the USA. Mass transit is required and far cheaper - like everything there is some function for both and likely an intersection point where cars will always lose.
You could cut down on the number of people... contribute to education - its the most effective politically correct way to control population growth.
The solutions are not something people are going to like. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Musk could work on building a huge rail line... and a car rental service for either end of it.... I'd like to see a train station that moves with the train so you don't have to wait while people get on and off. Even that is cheap compared to highway construction and buying land.
A completely closed end to end system with zero freedom outside the walled garden.... oh but it's not a walled garden because the iPhone is more walled in.
The web was popular because it was accessible and it worked reasonably well despite most people messing their HTML up; this is a concern and some think that XHTML 1 being extremely slow (arguably a failure) and that XHTML 2 died in part because of they lacked that understanding.
Most the web is STILL in HTML 4.
As one of the volunteers, I can tell you that pretty much every angle on such topics has been covered by somebody. The best decision is not always made but there is not much trouble in the opinion dept. HTML5 complicates things slightly by using MIME types to indicate an XML or HTML parser - defaulting to the HTML parser. There is an XML form of HTML5 look at the top of the spec, then configure your webserver to send the proper http header; meta tags with http data is a lame work around and I frankly do not know how successful that will be in practice.
I suggest the parent see section 1.6 of the HTML5 spec: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/introduction.html#html-vs-xhtml
Open source implementations of DRM? you think the content mafia is going to allow you to use an open implementation of some DRM "standard"? 1st thing hundreds of C coders will do is dump the frame buffer into libmp4 just to snub the bastards!
Inflation is no longer reported but it must be above 5% or they'd start reporting it again. Politicians in the USA rarely ever set budgets to adapt to inflation rates; they like to waste more money fighting over it every single year.
The US doesn't hardly have mental health care; at least you have problems in it- that is better than nothing. Our congress does not even get it and they NEED it!
Abrams didn't like Star Trek, he never got it and even said so - he liked Star Wars. He managed to even blow up a whole planet with a super large ship and I was waiting for some kind of "Kirk, I'm your father" moment... He'd have used light sabers in his sword fighting scene except that wouldn't have gotten permission from Lucas.
The movie was not Star Trek and despite being a Trek fan, I was not suckered into the typical remake formula that even the most poorly made movies use today. Cameos and geeky back references don't fool me. I guess I'm not much of a Trekkie because I'm not so emotionally desperate that I shutdown my brain at a Spock cameo. Hell, Disney could put Spock into the next Star Wars movie and bill it as both a Trek film and Star Wars film and I bet people would buy it! Sheep.
There are actual recorded interviews with Gene Roddenberry about how Trek was never "dark" and "edgy" and that completely missed the point of it; he had to fight to keep it away from people trying to drag it into that direction. It had the 60's moon landing optimism about the future and how we could aspire to evolve beyond such things; he primarily used aliens to illustrate those things. Today's modern anti-heroes have no place in the world he created. Like religion, the qualities that bring people in are often forgotten and the dogma takes over; having the superficial Trek branding doesn't define what is Star Trek. I wonder why anybody bothers to study or think at deeper levels on literature, because apparently not even the authors do; anymore. I dare not imagine how Candide, ou l'Optimisme would turn out as a movie.
Yes, the last Trek movies sucked because they don't care once they make money and know they can sucker people back for a few sequels - then they bring in somebody to try something drastic so they can continue to beat a dead horse... as if the "franchise" was worn out when in fact it is 100% the studio's fault every time. They make their money because people will settle for back references with a bland thoughtless dream-like state of mind (which is why huge plot holes are commonplace; once you suspend all reasoning... see the "How it should have ended" series) All this stuff is making people more stupid while wasting their time. Entertainment doesn't have to lower your IQ.
When all you have is a hammer... Politicians for the most part can only create law; even to kill a law they must create a law to repeal the old one. So even the small gov people are creating law to shrink it.
Big government is a loaded buzz phrase. People might support that it is too big, but they WANT nearly everything it does and often WANT more - politicians are stuck in the middle kissing ass; both cheeks... some down the middle others flip flop... sorry this is getting to dirty.
If government only stuck to the basics, it would still be the 2nd largest employer in the nation. constitution says post office - that is the 2nd biggest today alone.
There is a sucker born every second, the others choose linux.