Seriously, trying to build rich client side functionality that has more than default form controls is death with html/js.
The HTML 5 spec is already out of date, by the time it gets wide browser support it will still require epic amounts of code to do anything advanced in terms of ui, and even then the results will probably be as buggy and divergent as they are now. W3C specs are nice, but the whole process is so bogged down that it's almost irrelevant.
In addition, assuming this is a "will word replace SciWord/other LaTeX editor" rather than the awkward apples and oranges comparison of editor to format in the summary, the userbase on SciWord is a very inert group. They don't move much once they've started using something.
My old man, an economics prof, has been using SciWord for as long as I can remember. I also remember the grief in getting him to switch form Netscape 4 to Firefox. Academics are more focused on their areas of research, and many don't have the time/inclination to play with and learn new software.
MS Word would have to offer some HUGE incentives, and be prepared for a very long haul in order to replace SciWord with most of the academics I know, especially given that I won't be agitating for this change, like I did with the netscape->firefox upgrade.
Do you know what "bug" and "feature" mean? A bug is an unintended and undesireable behaviour. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a bug. Get over yourself (this applies to the summary too).
Designers typically do visual design. There's more to this than "make things pretty", but it's not an engineering-ish role.
With the rise of standards-based markup, semantic html, etc... this has become more of an engineering/taxonomical function, and strikes me as similar to xml and db design in terms of thought abstractions needed. Designers are certainly able to put together pages in stuff like dreamweaver, but this is typically not production-worthy code, especially if accessibility or standards compliance are a priority (and they should be).
The downside to trying to get engineers to do this, is that your typical system engineer views html as beneath him/her and as a means to an end, the approach being "as long as it looks right". I've found it a very difficult role to hire for, and find myself having to bring most candidates up to speed on some aspect or other of html.
Ask a candidate if they can describe what th css box model is, or if they can explain how floats work. Ask them the difference between position: relative and position: absolute, and where in a table's markup does the tfoot go? Ask them what's wrong with a div inside a p tag, and the difference between a span and a div. A person in this role needs to understand more than "making it look right", they need to know how to write clear, maintainable html.
Yes, because it takes that long to do all the testing they need to do before electronics can be certified for space (at least according to NASA specs). I heard, through the grapevine, though I have no link to back it up, that Pentium 2's just got certified.
Fixed that for ya. Solipsism, especially of the type you indulge in above, is not useful to remind people to question anything, unless they've consumed significant amounts of LSD. "Dude, are we the dreamers, or the dreamed?" only makes stoners think(and I use the term loosely).
If you want to challenge people's assumptions, challenge meaningful assumptions. For example, I heard that astronomers just observed a supernova that occurred when earlier than predicted, so we're not sure why it happened. Pretty cool...
We're pretty sure event horizons exist, whether, beyond the event horizon, matter collapses to the theorised singularity, or something else, e.g. Einstein-Bose condensate is indeed speculative.
In terms of how they decay, it's primarily through gravitational energy. I'm not sure of all the mechanisms involved off the top of my head, but consider that a black hole's accretion disk is usually bright in the higher energy EM spectrum, this energy is essentially sourced from the mass of a black hole.
If the LHC manages to create mini blck holes, let's be clear here, tese will be very very mini. A black hole weighing what? Same as a couple atoms of carbon?
Consider that even if matter collapses to a singularity, its gravitational effect is still just proportional to its mass. Given that the LHC is a vacuum where the collisions are occuring, the blackhole could only ever mass the sum total of the mass of the particles used in the collision. From a casual outside observer you wouldn't even notice, and the black hole would decay before it could acquire more mass.
Yup, and I've made this is a point I've made in the past. I personally believe that while MS is generally evil, and Ballmer rates slightly below Dick Cheney on the evil intentions scale (decidedly lower on the actual evil scale due to Ballmer's patented apeish idiocy), Chris Wilson, program manager for IE, is trying to do The Right Thing.
Personally I think he gets away with it only because Ballmer hasn't noticed.
Name calling aside, my categorisation of FOXNEWS was not as "some hatemongering right-wing nutjob site that spreads hate", rather as a participant of the fearmongering that seems to grip most american media. I picked out FOXNEWS specifically because I like to pick on FOXNEWS, but MSNBC and CNN spread just as much "YOU ARE THIS CLOSE TO BEING BLOWED UP" bullshit as FOXNEWS.
What's the point? If there had recently been a number of planes blown out of the sky by groups of Hasidic Jews, then the family of Hasidic Jews would CERTAINLY have aroused more suspicion. And it would be a rational bias. Just like it's a rational bias to have higher suspicion of groups of Muslims, although the vast majority will clearly have peaceable intentions. This is all part of the pattern-recognition faculty with which the human mind is gifted.
I'm guessing you don't know what rational means. Rational implies a logical reasoned cause. The probability of any randomly selected Muslim being desperate to blow up a plane full of people is trivially similar to the probability of any randomly selected Hasidic Jew/Quaker/Pastafarian/Botanist/whatever being desperate to blow up a plane full of people.
The association of Muslims and acts of terrorism is a decidedly fear driven, emotional, and IRRATIONAL reaction based on perceived portrayals in media (e.g. news, fictional shows, blah blah blah). That Jack Bauer fought some Muslims who wanted Death to America last season (a couple seasons ago?) is not the basis for anything rational. Rational bias is backed up by objective evidence and reasoning, not cause FOXNEWS tells you to be scared.
The "pattern recognition" you refer to (I'm figuring you probably mean some sort of associative function of the human brain), is a this-implies-that behaviour of the mind. These associations aren't necessarily rational, only if they are formed based on rational reasoning. Simply believing that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists does not imply rationality.
Restricting breastfeeding in public / common private(e.g. restaurants) is different than censoring the pics of same.
I don't think facebook is in the right here, but it's a different can of worms.
In cases like what you describe, this actually affects the woman's ability to nurse, restricting the posting of pictures after the vent doesn't affect the mother's ability to nurse.
Again, I thnk facebook is stupid, but the problems associated with trying to stop public nursing are different than posting pics.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to assert that I've personally written prior art.
Ok, bye bye then.
Seriously, trying to build rich client side functionality that has more than default form controls is death with html/js.
The HTML 5 spec is already out of date, by the time it gets wide browser support it will still require epic amounts of code to do anything advanced in terms of ui, and even then the results will probably be as buggy and divergent as they are now. W3C specs are nice, but the whole process is so bogged down that it's almost irrelevant.
In addition, assuming this is a "will word replace SciWord/other LaTeX editor" rather than the awkward apples and oranges comparison of editor to format in the summary, the userbase on SciWord is a very inert group. They don't move much once they've started using something.
My old man, an economics prof, has been using SciWord for as long as I can remember. I also remember the grief in getting him to switch form Netscape 4 to Firefox. Academics are more focused on their areas of research, and many don't have the time/inclination to play with and learn new software.
MS Word would have to offer some HUGE incentives, and be prepared for a very long haul in order to replace SciWord with most of the academics I know, especially given that I won't be agitating for this change, like I did with the netscape->firefox upgrade.
Do you know what "bug" and "feature" mean? A bug is an unintended and undesireable behaviour. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a bug. Get over yourself (this applies to the summary too).
We can't take your advice, you're just a grunt... no offense...
Designers typically do visual design. There's more to this than "make things pretty", but it's not an engineering-ish role.
With the rise of standards-based markup, semantic html, etc... this has become more of an engineering/taxonomical function, and strikes me as similar to xml and db design in terms of thought abstractions needed. Designers are certainly able to put together pages in stuff like dreamweaver, but this is typically not production-worthy code, especially if accessibility or standards compliance are a priority (and they should be).
The downside to trying to get engineers to do this, is that your typical system engineer views html as beneath him/her and as a means to an end, the approach being "as long as it looks right". I've found it a very difficult role to hire for, and find myself having to bring most candidates up to speed on some aspect or other of html.
Ask a candidate if they can describe what th css box model is, or if they can explain how floats work. Ask them the difference between position: relative and position: absolute, and where in a table's markup does the tfoot go? Ask them what's wrong with a div inside a p tag, and the difference between a span and a div. A person in this role needs to understand more than "making it look right", they need to know how to write clear, maintainable html.
Yes, because it takes that long to do all the testing they need to do before electronics can be certified for space (at least according to NASA specs). I heard, through the grapevine, though I have no link to back it up, that Pentium 2's just got certified.
What's that you say? Chain George W. to the sun?
That's so crazy, it just might work...
Fixed that for ya. Solipsism, especially of the type you indulge in above, is not useful to remind people to question anything, unless they've consumed significant amounts of LSD. "Dude, are we the dreamers, or the dreamed?" only makes stoners think(and I use the term loosely).
If you want to challenge people's assumptions, challenge meaningful assumptions. For example, I heard that astronomers just observed a supernova that occurred when earlier than predicted, so we're not sure why it happened. Pretty cool...
#shutTheFuckUp{ /*put your style rules here*/
}
Shut the fuck up
There ya go.
A good analogy. Linux is IT, Sage is data collection and sharing.
What I'm trying to find, and more relevant, is if Sage's open source license will be "viral", à la GPL.
I thought FOSS stood for Free Operating System Stickers.
What's that? It's Free Open Source Software? Wow, that explains a lot. Excuse me, I need to go make some apologies on some Linux forums.
Out of band network-controlled Lego Mindstorm cable puller FTW?
I just solved this, pay me!!
Violence inducing regicide simulator, training kids to kill monarchs and towers and to move in L-shapes for centuries!!!
I don't think the word "proves" means what you think it means...
We're pretty sure event horizons exist, whether, beyond the event horizon, matter collapses to the theorised singularity, or something else, e.g. Einstein-Bose condensate is indeed speculative.
In terms of how they decay, it's primarily through gravitational energy. I'm not sure of all the mechanisms involved off the top of my head, but consider that a black hole's accretion disk is usually bright in the higher energy EM spectrum, this energy is essentially sourced from the mass of a black hole.
If the LHC manages to create mini blck holes, let's be clear here, tese will be very very mini. A black hole weighing what? Same as a couple atoms of carbon?
Consider that even if matter collapses to a singularity, its gravitational effect is still just proportional to its mass. Given that the LHC is a vacuum where the collisions are occuring, the blackhole could only ever mass the sum total of the mass of the particles used in the collision. From a casual outside observer you wouldn't even notice, and the black hole would decay before it could acquire more mass.
Yup, and I've made this is a point I've made in the past. I personally believe that while MS is generally evil, and Ballmer rates slightly below Dick Cheney on the evil intentions scale (decidedly lower on the actual evil scale due to Ballmer's patented apeish idiocy), Chris Wilson, program manager for IE, is trying to do The Right Thing.
Personally I think he gets away with it only because Ballmer hasn't noticed.
Exactly my point.
Name calling aside, my categorisation of FOXNEWS was not as "some hatemongering right-wing nutjob site that spreads hate", rather as a participant of the fearmongering that seems to grip most american media. I picked out FOXNEWS specifically because I like to pick on FOXNEWS, but MSNBC and CNN spread just as much "YOU ARE THIS CLOSE TO BEING BLOWED UP" bullshit as FOXNEWS.
The probability you discuss is not the one I discussed. I specifically described # of Muslim terrorists / # of Muslims. Nice straw man though.
I'm guessing you don't know what rational means. Rational implies a logical reasoned cause. The probability of any randomly selected Muslim being desperate to blow up a plane full of people is trivially similar to the probability of any randomly selected Hasidic Jew/Quaker/Pastafarian/Botanist/whatever being desperate to blow up a plane full of people.
The association of Muslims and acts of terrorism is a decidedly fear driven, emotional, and IRRATIONAL reaction based on perceived portrayals in media (e.g. news, fictional shows, blah blah blah). That Jack Bauer fought some Muslims who wanted Death to America last season (a couple seasons ago?) is not the basis for anything rational. Rational bias is backed up by objective evidence and reasoning, not cause FOXNEWS tells you to be scared.
The "pattern recognition" you refer to (I'm figuring you probably mean some sort of associative function of the human brain), is a this-implies-that behaviour of the mind. These associations aren't necessarily rational, only if they are formed based on rational reasoning. Simply believing that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists does not imply rationality.
Restricting breastfeeding in public / common private(e.g. restaurants) is different than censoring the pics of same.
I don't think facebook is in the right here, but it's a different can of worms.
In cases like what you describe, this actually affects the woman's ability to nurse, restricting the posting of pictures after the vent doesn't affect the mother's ability to nurse.
Again, I thnk facebook is stupid, but the problems associated with trying to stop public nursing are different than posting pics.
My mama always said never trust Whitty... or was that Whitey?
So, in punishment for preventing people from getting RIMjobs, you hope Motorola gets spanked? Aren't you just all in the butt.