I'm curious why you do not want video cameras in public, where anyone with eyeballs can observe and document your behavior, but yet as soon as we close the door, and expect some privacy, we lose that privacy. Why is it not OK to monitor public spaces?
I want *REAL TIME* *HUMAN* eye-coverage. That's why. Speeding cameras, red-light cameras, etc are all inappropriate extensions of police states.
If we cannot afford to staff enough people to catch the violaters then tough.
People being told that they have no expectation of privacy in public and then allowing that to be stretched to include cameras really need to think hard about their desire to have Big Brother watching over them.
Do you have a daughter or a wife? Would you like a bunch of random teenage employees at the local Gap watching her everytime she tried on a piece of clothing?
I will be married in less than a month. I would expect that their theft prevention team would be staffed by the appropriate sex as to observe that -- and most places that do have cameras note that on a large sign that you can read before you go in.
Remember, any place you shop (including ones w/cameras) is *your* choice. I choose not to give business to many different stores for many different reasons. If you have a problem w/cameras in the dressing rooms don't shop there or don't try on their clothes.
*EVERYONE* should be far more concerned w/the cameras at stop lights, intersections, lamp posts (traffic patterns my ass), etc.
"Customers who drop off their computers for servicing reasonably expect that their private data won't be handed over to the police without a warrant," said EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl.
This is completely agree with. Law enforcement should always have to get a warrant to search a computer unless we're talking about something like blatant kiddie porn as the desktop's background (and no, a picture of your child taking a bath doesn't qualify).
I have a feeling that the Gateway technician shouldn't have been poking around on the person's computer as it's doubtful that the files were of any direct relation to the problem.
It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss this and have the EFF come to the rescue. There is rarely ever a reason when LEOs should have the rights to look at anything w/o a warrant. Welcome to Scaredays 2005 people:(
"Allowing computer technicians to snoop on people's private data is like putting surveillance cameras in dressing rooms. The violation of so many people's privacy far outweighs any benefits that might be gained.
This I disagree with. While I am 100% against video cameras in the PUBLIC space I am not against video cameras in a private space (i.e. dressing rooms of a store). My feelings for personal privacy have no weight in a privately owned store that is using video cameras as a theft prevention mechanism. I do however have an equal weight with regards to my feelings about public spaces being spied upon.
So really, making a medium-rare burger is a lot more risk than you may think.
There are so many things that I risk my life doing every day but it allows me to live my life as I enjoy it. Driving, drinking, eating, breathing, etc -- all are a "big risk" these days according to everyone.
If I have to "risk my life" by eating a medium rare hamburger I'll do it so that I'm not paying $8.25 for something that tastes like shit.
Carne-Matic aside, this sounds like a mixed blessing, and brings about visions of some sterile, Spandex-jumpsuit future where food production is controlled by some central authority, and real, hoof-grown meat is a rare delicacy.
It's truly sickening to me the lengths that people go these days to ruin their eating experiences. Too many restaurants refuse to cook meat anything under "medium" - hell I'll sign a waiver to eat a burger medium rare! Too many people crinkle their nose unless you cook their meat to shoe leather and someone even asked me if I should be rushed to the hospital because my steak was "too pink".
All the fears in the world about animal borne disease (avian flu, mad cow disease, etc) have spawned even more "illness psychos" who are obsessed with the latest in 99.9% bacteria free soaps, hand lotions, and air filters. We are breeding a population of individuals that are more susceptible to illness than ever before!
Eat that fucking natural meat and cook it rare. When you are making some hamburger, wad up a ball, add some pepper and salt and eat it. I've done it since I was a kid and never had any ill effects.
I am beginning to enjoy food less and less (especially out here in the Midwest where they have no tastebuds) and bullshit like this will only make it worse. Sadly, people will love it... See, no bacteria - especially when I cook it till it's charcoal.
The band's lawyer, Dennis Pelowski, said it considered fighting the committee after receiving the initial letter this spring but backed down when he read up on the matter.
They won't allow The Olympic Hopefuls to use Olympic in their name either. It's amazing that this crap was written in to law. Now the band has to change to "The Hopefuls".
Seriously, I love how they were given powers over a word that was around LONG before "The Games" were.
"The Department of Commerce has received nearly 6,000 letters and e-mails from individuals expressing concern about the impact of pornography on families and children," Gallagher said in a letter that was made public on Monday.
People who are petitioning the government: Learn to use your computer and block out connections to.xxx (as well as the numerous other porn sites and link listing services such as sublimedirectory, elephantlist, and thehun). If you don't want to do that yourself, pay a third party to do it, but *do not* and I mean *do not* ask the government to do it for you because you are too lazy to keep an eye on your children's Internet viewing. The rest of us do not give a shit about your desire to not pay attention to those in your family but we do care when you step into *our* personal space.
I realize that the current administration (and quite a few other politicians outside of the White House walls) want to have everyone come crying to them to "think of the children" but we need to remember *real* freedom first - not the created/imagined freedom the Bush Administration and fellow politicians have decided exists in 2005. This type of behavior in response to a few letters? No thanks.
We are talking about 6000 letters. There are what, ~270 million people in the USA? Sorry but ~6000 letters doesn't give equal footing for their voice, regardless of whether or not it "looks good" politically or it fits the Administration's religious agenda. I realize that "morality" is a huge buzzword in America these days but I should be able to do, see, and view whatever the fuck I want regardless of whether or not children could view the material. The Government should be representing more than just a tiny portion of the population. Just because the pro-porno people aren't stepping up to the bat (for obvious reasons) doesn't mean that their silent voice should be ignored. I'll be more likely to understand when you get something like 80 million letters.
If anything, I would think that the current administration would be thrilled with the prospect of having all the porno in one location. It's easier to track the "undesirables" and ban freedom and artistic expression. At least, much easier than the current setup allows.
ICANN, you fuck up enough, ignore these pointless requests from the Nation of the "Free" and go about your business properly.
The displaying of ads while surfing are the least of your tinfoil problems if you are using someone else's free wifi.
They are already building business listing databases and reviews via Dodgeball, they are building HUGE databases based on your e-mail with GMail, and I can only imagine what databases they could build w/free wifi.
However, if you wish to buy their CDs, you would have to pay the RIAA. Which is my point. You can't go out and say "Boycott RIAA CDs" and then make exceptions...
Why would I ever buy their CDs when their music is freely available?
OK, I have an idea. Let's stop with the stealing of music, and let them do whatever they want to stop us from copying it. There's a simple answer - don't buy it. Instead, create and listen to free content.
Thanks, at least someone has been paying attention to what I've been saying all these years! Do not buy music that is backed by the RIAA. Only support the bands that allow the free distribution of their music.
There are already plenty of torrent trackers and listing services out there that do exactly what you propose (and I have listed them before). The "madness" you claim might exist, won't. Artists are still taught to believe what the RIAA is feeding them and it will likely never been overflowing like you hope.
e-tree and dimeadozen along w/various others already take care of the tracking and listing. We just need more bands to allow the trading of their content.
If the RIAA gets their way and either taxes recordable media out of the realm of usefulness or somehow gets it so protected it violates fair-use, then we need to bring back the P2P networks and get people to realize that there are viable performers out there that are releasing their stuff to the public for free!
It seems to me like the RIAA is stabbing blindly in the dark. They constantly shift their attention from one medium (for pirating) to another.
They aren't stabbing in the dark at all. These have been slow and calculated moves! They have been planning on attacking the P2P networks, getting people to switch to legally downloaded media formats (which basically eliminate distribution costs as the RIAA doesn't even pay for it), and now they want to end recordable media!
According to Bainwol, in turn citing figures from market watcher NPD, 29 per cent of the recorded music obtained by listeners last year came from content copied onto recordable media. Only 16 per cent came from illegal downloads.
So, now that they believe that they have lessened the impact of downloaded music by finally "opening" up to the desire of the market and selling their wares, they have decided to turn their FUD campaign towards recordable media.
Yes, we should all bend over backwards to the wishes, whines, and desires of a small group of "individuals" that are just trying to protect their financial interests, right? Why should we have any fair-use rights? That doesn't help the RIAA's bottom line does it... We need to be re-educated into believing that fair-use doesn't exist. If you want to play your purchased music on your portable player *and* use a CD you have to buy it twice! Once for the MP3 player and once for the CD player.
DO NOT PURCHASE SONGS BACKED BY THE RIAA. It is only increasing their finances which are used to back legislation and smear campaigns to further erode fair-use rights.
Personally I think the "worst kind" of vigilante approach would be getting the spammers home addresses and savagely beating them... or killing them. I dont think DDOSing some spammer pricks domain is that bad if you compare what could happen to these people.
Aren't you overreacting just a little? Have you seriously considered finding a bulk mailer and "savagely beating them or killing them"? If so, I really suggest you seek professional help. Prozac might reverse that so that you could quite possibly end up killing yourself.
Comments like yours means that you are as much a drain on society as the spammers.
Spend all that mouthy energy you have to create worthwhile legislation, write code, or find alternate methods to dealing with the problem.
DDOSing, physical harm, and strange thoughts are pointless. Really, they are.
I still have my USR Courier 56k (bought it on SysOp deal for $289 as a 28.8) which has survived 1000s of hours and numerous loan-outs to those that lost a broadband connection or needed a sturdy analog connection.
It will be the *one* piece of hardware that will follow me no matter where I move to. You never know when you might need an analog connection and you can always guarantee that the Courier will connect at the fastest and most reliable speeds available.
Then stop telling everybody else how to raise theirs.
Hmm, I never told anyone how they should raise their children. All I said is that I don't expect people to sit on their asses and only complain when SOMEONE ELSE doesn't raise their children correctly.
Did it? Because I make a valid comment and a bunch of anti-garcia trolls and/or anti-freethinking individuals ignore what I write and instead mod me down without comprehension my post backfired?
People need to realize that there are several on-going plagues in our society right now and it has nothing to do w/what the media is saying.
1. Parents are ignoring the *needs* of their children and are giving into their *wants* instead. It's a sad state of affairs when people justify their malaise with "but I'm just too busy/stressed at work."
2. People want other to do their work for them and only use the failure of *others* doing the parenting as an important enough reason to get off their couch and do something.
3. People like you, the ones that refuse to read and comprehend what others are saying that might even teach you something or change your way of thought. You ignore intelligent discussion and instead want to chastise and destroy it.
Stop being a troll and instead become a productive member of Slashdot. It will help everyone.
Mr Freund suggested that the problem was that parents felt disconnected from the world of video games and so showed little interest in this aspect of their children's lives.
"Parents are too divorced from what teenagers play," he said.
Most parents are too divorced from nearly all aspects of their children's lives because they are too wrapped up in their own and the lives of those they live vicariously through via the television.
As long as the television isn't telling them that the video games are bad and the politicians aren't doing "their job" and telling parents that the video games are bad then they must be just fine.
Remember, everyone wants the politicians living inside the little electrical box to tell them what to do. Anything else is too much added stress - unless they can place the blame on someone else.
Re:To buy or not to buy, the reviewer doesn't know
on
Spring Into PHP 5
·
· Score: 1
Read the first line of my post:
This book is clearly not intended to be one of those PHP + MySQL combo books that have proven so popular during the past few years.
So, if it's not meant to be a PHP + MySQL book and it's not showing the other options what exactly is the book doing? The reviewer doesn't know.
Thanks for proving my point.
Re:To buy or not to buy, the reviewer doesn't know
on
Spring Into PHP 5
·
· Score: 1
If the reviewer is really that confused, it might not be a good idea to take any of the points he makes too seroiusly.
Are you inferring that the reviewer thought the book was a joke and that I should assume that from what he wrote?
I took a look at the header above his confused review and saw that he rated it an 8 (I assume out of 10). If you are really inferring that I shouldn't take his review "seriously" and that I should instead assume he was joking around about the book perhaps he should have rated it differently?
author: Steven Holzner pages: 340 publisher: Addison-Wesley rating: 8 reviewer: Michael J. Ross ISBN: 0131498622 summary: A comprehensive and no-nonsense primer on the basics of PHP
If I misinterpreted your statement perhaps I shouldn't pay any attention at all to reviews?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious why you do not want video cameras in public, where anyone with eyeballs can observe and document your behavior, but yet as soon as we close the door, and expect some privacy, we lose that privacy. Why is it not OK to monitor public spaces?
I want *REAL TIME* *HUMAN* eye-coverage. That's why. Speeding cameras, red-light cameras, etc are all inappropriate extensions of police states.
If we cannot afford to staff enough people to catch the violaters then tough.
People being told that they have no expectation of privacy in public and then allowing that to be stretched to include cameras really need to think hard about their desire to have Big Brother watching over them.
In the future please read and comprehend what I say:
My feelings for personal privacy have no weight in a privately owned store that is using video cameras as a theft prevention mechanism.
I cannot possibly control what a private company does with their property (i.e. add cameras for theft prevention). I can choose not to be a patron.
I *can*, however, use my weight as a citizen to push for no cameras in the public space as I have just as much right as anyone else.
Do you have a daughter or a wife? Would you like a bunch of random teenage employees at the local Gap watching her everytime she tried on a piece of clothing?
I will be married in less than a month. I would expect that their theft prevention team would be staffed by the appropriate sex as to observe that -- and most places that do have cameras note that on a large sign that you can read before you go in.
Remember, any place you shop (including ones w/cameras) is *your* choice. I choose not to give business to many different stores for many different reasons. If you have a problem w/cameras in the dressing rooms don't shop there or don't try on their clothes.
*EVERYONE* should be far more concerned w/the cameras at stop lights, intersections, lamp posts (traffic patterns my ass), etc.
"Customers who drop off their computers for servicing reasonably expect that their private data won't be handed over to the police without a warrant," said EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl.
:(
This is completely agree with. Law enforcement should always have to get a warrant to search a computer unless we're talking about something like blatant kiddie porn as the desktop's background (and no, a picture of your child taking a bath doesn't qualify).
I have a feeling that the Gateway technician shouldn't have been poking around on the person's computer as it's doubtful that the files were of any direct relation to the problem.
It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss this and have the EFF come to the rescue. There is rarely ever a reason when LEOs should have the rights to look at anything w/o a warrant. Welcome to Scaredays 2005 people
"Allowing computer technicians to snoop on people's private data is like putting surveillance cameras in dressing rooms. The violation of so many people's privacy far outweighs any benefits that might be gained.
This I disagree with. While I am 100% against video cameras in the PUBLIC space I am not against video cameras in a private space (i.e. dressing rooms of a store). My feelings for personal privacy have no weight in a privately owned store that is using video cameras as a theft prevention mechanism. I do however have an equal weight with regards to my feelings about public spaces being spied upon.
So really, making a medium-rare burger is a lot more risk than you may think.
There are so many things that I risk my life doing every day but it allows me to live my life as I enjoy it. Driving, drinking, eating, breathing, etc -- all are a "big risk" these days according to everyone.
If I have to "risk my life" by eating a medium rare hamburger I'll do it so that I'm not paying $8.25 for something that tastes like shit.
Thanks for your input though.
Carne-Matic aside, this sounds like a mixed blessing, and brings about visions of some sterile, Spandex-jumpsuit future where food production is controlled by some central authority, and real, hoof-grown meat is a rare delicacy.
It's truly sickening to me the lengths that people go these days to ruin their eating experiences. Too many restaurants refuse to cook meat anything under "medium" - hell I'll sign a waiver to eat a burger medium rare! Too many people crinkle their nose unless you cook their meat to shoe leather and someone even asked me if I should be rushed to the hospital because my steak was "too pink".
All the fears in the world about animal borne disease (avian flu, mad cow disease, etc) have spawned even more "illness psychos" who are obsessed with the latest in 99.9% bacteria free soaps, hand lotions, and air filters. We are breeding a population of individuals that are more susceptible to illness than ever before!
Eat that fucking natural meat and cook it rare. When you are making some hamburger, wad up a ball, add some pepper and salt and eat it. I've done it since I was a kid and never had any ill effects.
I am beginning to enjoy food less and less (especially out here in the Midwest where they have no tastebuds) and bullshit like this will only make it worse. Sadly, people will love it... See, no bacteria - especially when I cook it till it's charcoal.
Blah.
Wrong, in the US it's established law:
From this Star Tribune article:
The band's lawyer, Dennis Pelowski, said it considered fighting the committee after receiving the initial letter this spring but backed down when he read up on the matter.
"The law is pretty clearly written," he said.
They won't allow The Olympic Hopefuls to use Olympic in their name either. It's amazing that this crap was written in to law. Now the band has to change to "The Hopefuls".
Seriously, I love how they were given powers over a word that was around LONG before "The Games" were.
What a bunch of shit.
Out of curiosity, does your view on the government staying out of running the Internet also extend to staying out of passing laws against spam?
Yes. Contrary to popular the typical Slashbotter stance, it is inappropriate to legislate against spam. It is your own responsibility to block it.
"The Department of Commerce has received nearly 6,000 letters and e-mails from individuals expressing concern about the impact of pornography on families and children," Gallagher said in a letter that was made public on Monday.
.xxx (as well as the numerous other porn sites and link listing services such as sublimedirectory, elephantlist, and thehun). If you don't want to do that yourself, pay a third party to do it, but *do not* and I mean *do not* ask the government to do it for you because you are too lazy to keep an eye on your children's Internet viewing. The rest of us do not give a shit about your desire to not pay attention to those in your family but we do care when you step into *our* personal space.
People who are petitioning the government: Learn to use your computer and block out connections to
I realize that the current administration (and quite a few other politicians outside of the White House walls) want to have everyone come crying to them to "think of the children" but we need to remember *real* freedom first - not the created/imagined freedom the Bush Administration and fellow politicians have decided exists in 2005. This type of behavior in response to a few letters? No thanks.
We are talking about 6000 letters. There are what, ~270 million people in the USA? Sorry but ~6000 letters doesn't give equal footing for their voice, regardless of whether or not it "looks good" politically or it fits the Administration's religious agenda. I realize that "morality" is a huge buzzword in America these days but I should be able to do, see, and view whatever the fuck I want regardless of whether or not children could view the material. The Government should be representing more than just a tiny portion of the population. Just because the pro-porno people aren't stepping up to the bat (for obvious reasons) doesn't mean that their silent voice should be ignored. I'll be more likely to understand when you get something like 80 million letters.
If anything, I would think that the current administration would be thrilled with the prospect of having all the porno in one location. It's easier to track the "undesirables" and ban freedom and artistic expression. At least, much easier than the current setup allows.
ICANN, you fuck up enough, ignore these pointless requests from the Nation of the "Free" and go about your business properly.
The displaying of ads while surfing are the least of your tinfoil problems if you are using someone else's free wifi.
They are already building business listing databases and reviews via Dodgeball, they are building HUGE databases based on your e-mail with GMail, and I can only imagine what databases they could build w/free wifi.
However, if you wish to buy their CDs, you would have to pay the RIAA. Which is my point. You can't go out and say "Boycott RIAA CDs" and then make exceptions...
Why would I ever buy their CDs when their music is freely available?
actual bands like Radiohead, the Kaiser Chiefs, Franz Ferdinand, Pink Floyd, Four Tet
Radiohead allows the taping of their shows and thus I have no problems with them.
OK, I have an idea. Let's stop with the stealing of music, and let them do whatever they want to stop us from copying it. There's a simple answer - don't buy it. Instead, create and listen to free content.
Thanks, at least someone has been paying attention to what I've been saying all these years! Do not buy music that is backed by the RIAA. Only support the bands that allow the free distribution of their music.
There are already plenty of torrent trackers and listing services out there that do exactly what you propose (and I have listed them before). The "madness" you claim might exist, won't. Artists are still taught to believe what the RIAA is feeding them and it will likely never been overflowing like you hope.
e-tree and dimeadozen along w/various others already take care of the tracking and listing. We just need more bands to allow the trading of their content.
If the RIAA gets their way and either taxes recordable media out of the realm of usefulness or somehow gets it so protected it violates fair-use, then we need to bring back the P2P networks and get people to realize that there are viable performers out there that are releasing their stuff to the public for free!
It seems to me like the RIAA is stabbing blindly in the dark. They constantly shift their attention from one medium (for pirating) to another.
They aren't stabbing in the dark at all. These have been slow and calculated moves! They have been planning on attacking the P2P networks, getting people to switch to legally downloaded media formats (which basically eliminate distribution costs as the RIAA doesn't even pay for it), and now they want to end recordable media!
According to Bainwol, in turn citing figures from market watcher NPD, 29 per cent of the recorded music obtained by listeners last year came from content copied onto recordable media. Only 16 per cent came from illegal downloads.
So, now that they believe that they have lessened the impact of downloaded music by finally "opening" up to the desire of the market and selling their wares, they have decided to turn their FUD campaign towards recordable media.
Yes, we should all bend over backwards to the wishes, whines, and desires of a small group of "individuals" that are just trying to protect their financial interests, right? Why should we have any fair-use rights? That doesn't help the RIAA's bottom line does it... We need to be re-educated into believing that fair-use doesn't exist. If you want to play your purchased music on your portable player *and* use a CD you have to buy it twice! Once for the MP3 player and once for the CD player.
DO NOT PURCHASE SONGS BACKED BY THE RIAA. It is only increasing their finances which are used to back legislation and smear campaigns to further erode fair-use rights.
Personally I think the "worst kind" of vigilante approach would be getting the spammers home addresses and savagely beating them... or killing them. I dont think DDOSing some spammer pricks domain is that bad if you compare what could happen to these people.
Aren't you overreacting just a little? Have you seriously considered finding a bulk mailer and "savagely beating them or killing them"? If so, I really suggest you seek professional help. Prozac might reverse that so that you could quite possibly end up killing yourself.
Comments like yours means that you are as much a drain on society as the spammers.
Spend all that mouthy energy you have to create worthwhile legislation, write code, or find alternate methods to dealing with the problem.
DDOSing, physical harm, and strange thoughts are pointless. Really, they are.
Anyone remember the US Robotics Sysop Program?
I still have my USR Courier 56k (bought it on SysOp deal for $289 as a 28.8) which has survived 1000s of hours and numerous loan-outs to those that lost a broadband connection or needed a sturdy analog connection.
It will be the *one* piece of hardware that will follow me no matter where I move to. You never know when you might need an analog connection and you can always guarantee that the Courier will connect at the fastest and most reliable speeds available.
We even had a yearly cookout at a local park where dozens would show up from around the area. ... to the good'ol days... ...
That local scene has spread to other Internet based communities such as the one I participate the most in, geocaching.
We have a state-wide forum and routinely meet up for "Events" which are generally cook-outs drawing people in from all over the area.
While I miss the BBS days I really don't think that much has changed as far as communities meeting up outside of the computer realm.
40,000 sites - 0.64% drop/gain. The results are neglible and worthless.
When it goes down/up 8+% over 100k sites then there's cause for news.
Then stop telling everybody else how to raise theirs.
Hmm, I never told anyone how they should raise their children. All I said is that I don't expect people to sit on their asses and only complain when SOMEONE ELSE doesn't raise their children correctly.
Did it? Because I make a valid comment and a bunch of anti-garcia trolls and/or anti-freethinking individuals ignore what I write and instead mod me down without comprehension my post backfired?
People need to realize that there are several on-going plagues in our society right now and it has nothing to do w/what the media is saying.
1. Parents are ignoring the *needs* of their children and are giving into their *wants* instead. It's a sad state of affairs when people justify their malaise with "but I'm just too busy/stressed at work."
2. People want other to do their work for them and only use the failure of *others* doing the parenting as an important enough reason to get off their couch and do something.
3. People like you, the ones that refuse to read and comprehend what others are saying that might even teach you something or change your way of thought. You ignore intelligent discussion and instead want to chastise and destroy it.
Stop being a troll and instead become a productive member of Slashdot. It will help everyone.
Like they keep 18+ magazines behind the counter. If a parent wants to buy it, they can ask for it.
A) porno is not the same as a video game.
B) that's up to the store to decide
Mr Freund suggested that the problem was that parents felt disconnected from the world of video games and so showed little interest in this aspect of their children's lives.
"Parents are too divorced from what teenagers play," he said.
Most parents are too divorced from nearly all aspects of their children's lives because they are too wrapped up in their own and the lives of those they live vicariously through via the television.
As long as the television isn't telling them that the video games are bad and the politicians aren't doing "their job" and telling parents that the video games are bad then they must be just fine.
Remember, everyone wants the politicians living inside the little electrical box to tell them what to do. Anything else is too much added stress - unless they can place the blame on someone else.
Read the first line of my post:
This book is clearly not intended to be one of those PHP + MySQL combo books that have proven so popular during the past few years.
So, if it's not meant to be a PHP + MySQL book and it's not showing the other options what exactly is the book doing? The reviewer doesn't know.
Thanks for proving my point.
If the reviewer is really that confused, it might not be a good idea to take any of the points he makes too seroiusly.
Are you inferring that the reviewer thought the book was a joke and that I should assume that from what he wrote?
I took a look at the header above his confused review and saw that he rated it an 8 (I assume out of 10). If you are really inferring that I shouldn't take his review "seriously" and that I should instead assume he was joking around about the book perhaps he should have rated it differently?
author: Steven Holzner
pages: 340
publisher: Addison-Wesley
rating: 8
reviewer: Michael J. Ross
ISBN: 0131498622
summary: A comprehensive and no-nonsense primer on the basics of PHP
If I misinterpreted your statement perhaps I shouldn't pay any attention at all to reviews?