Well, a complete uninstall, followed by manual delete of the/mozilla.org tree (I keep my profile elsewhere) seems to have cured the whole shot. Of course I had to reinstall mozgest, which would have been the latest build, so perhaps an outdated mozgest was the issue. At any rate, it was relatively easy to get 1.4 running and I'm completely satisfied so far.
Actually, the only extension I had was mozgest from the optimoz project, without which I can't browse anymore. For a previous reply, the only sign of the crash was a message from talkback saying a log was being created. regrettably, no log file was in fact created.
Just installed the windows version: release notes don't require an uninstall of previous versions (in my case 1.3.1) but V1.4 barfed every time it started until I had rebooted and uninstalled 1.3.1. Seems fine since though
Remember a particular piece of software will simply do what it is meant to do. Thinking about it that a system has to adapt to a user is an antiproductive strategy, when the user should be adapting to what the tool can do
Fair enough as far as it goes. IMHO, tool-using is a collaboration, particularly when it is a software tool. The user adapts the tool to their preferences, and learns new operations from the way the tool behaves, which then modifies the way the user interacts with the tool. The exit point of the process comes when the user's needs no longer fit the tool and when the tool can not be further adapted to the user. Users choose tools (platforms, OSes, apps) for what they can do, and for what they can be anticipated to do. Another way of stating your point might be that users are bound by the limitations of the chosen tool; I would add that they are bound only when they find the limits, at which point, the user is free to locate another tool. Until then, tool and user are adapting to each other.
Very sound (!) plan. I've always thought that hand-made music is best. When the technology for recording, manufacture and distribution was in the hands of an oligopoly, they got fat and contemptuous of the public. Now that is it relatively easy to produce and distribute material, I say boycott the fat cats, support live music! Hug a folkie tonight!
ISTM that the reaction in the atmosphere would likely be something like O3 + H2 = O2 + H2O, where ozone and molecular hydrogen combine to produce oxygen and water, along with a net depletion of the free ozone. Of course, IANA atmospheric chemist.
Furthermore, I went so far as to buy a "how to solve the rubik's cube" book. Followed every goddamn step in that thing, and was pissed when it wasn't working. Eventually I tried it on my sibling's and it worked, and I came to the conclusion that mine was defective. Not sure how long it took me to figure out how mine became defective, but the blame was fully mine.:)
Y'know, I'm kinda glad to see that apostrophe there. I'm sure Mum and Dad would have been severely pissed if you'd managed to solve their kids.
OT but wotthehell . . .
The Queen and Prince Philip were hosting a dinner for the palace staff, Queen at one end of the table, Philip at the other. During the meal, the Queen noticed a wee chambermiad sitting next to Philip and giggling uncontrollably. "Are you feeling hysterical?" Her Majesty asked. "No, Ma'am, he's feeling mine!" came the reply.
This year, he plans on building a 20-foot action monkey -- cymbals and all - - and mount it on an art car to bring to Burning Man. With any luck, it will make a splash.
Hard to imagine where the monkey might not be noticed, but I suppose Burning Man would be there, possibly racing power tools.
The issue then becomes who gets to decide who the "respectable, civilised scientists" are. Your underlying assumption, that if exploration is possible, then restraint is impossible, is probably true, though regrettably so. ISTM that the author is really calling for a degree of vision and selflessness that has been possible only to individuals and never to the race as a whole. Legislative restraints on exploration are like gun laws: unlikely to work worth a damn, restraining only those people who were going to be well-behaved anyway, ultimately not preventing much of anything, but well-intentioned legislators think There Oughtta Be A Law!
Well, USTM that if input to his mail(server/box) is X spam, and he puts out 5X spam, then not only is he increasing the noise level, but he's executing a loud SSF instruction at the same time: the only one he punishes to any noticable extent is himself.
ISTM that this only compounds the problem, not cures it. The goal is to maximise the signal to noise ratio on the Net, so multiplying the noise by 5 seems an ineffective way of getting there. Surely you would do better by creating a form letter demanding to be removed from the spam list, reporting the abusers to postmasters, and so forth.
Well, lessee now:
Saddam is a totalitarian dictator, completely oblivious of world opinion, rolling in more wealth than is reasonable, doing his damnedest to impose his will on anyone nearby, funding subversive agents . ..well, he fits right into the corporate culture, *and* he's recently been invited to relocate. Don't move your markers, we have a bingo!
Agree completely about the necessity of interpreting data. The challenge is to remember that our worldview is not necessarily congruent with that of the original makers of history. There is, of course, no such thing as an unbiased text, but it would be nice, in a more perfect world, to have that bias declared on the frontispiece. I'm thinking the same should be applied to the broadcast media. Then all we have to do (all?! hah!) is teach our kids critical thinking: how to identify bias and form conclusions accordingly.
Somewhat OT: Randy Cassingham is launching a crusade against Paternalistic Condescention, on the This Is True website.
I just ran across this when I googled. Might be of interest, Joe:
http://www.attentiondeficitdisorder.ws/links/techn ology.html
BTW: I found out after 48 years that I have ADD, and I'm working as an coountant. Go figure! or design a database, or plan a wooden ship or wite a song . . .
ISTM that Big Brother is only acceptable when the laws are intended to maximise personal accountabiliy. The gun appears to manage this quite nicely. Given the combination of biometrics and imaging, it's nearly beyond argument who shot Cock Robin. It's just like cell phones or browsing: if you don't want anyone looking over your shoulder, don't do it. The thing about the usual gun laws is that they punish the law-abiding citizen for owning guns, rather than penalising the wrongful use of guns.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, a complete uninstall, followed by manual delete of the /mozilla.org tree (I keep my profile elsewhere) seems to have cured the whole shot. Of course I had to reinstall mozgest, which would have been the latest build, so perhaps an outdated mozgest was the issue. At any rate, it was relatively easy to get 1.4 running and I'm completely satisfied so far.
Actually, the only extension I had was mozgest from the optimoz project, without which I can't browse anymore. For a previous reply, the only sign of the crash was a message from talkback saying a log was being created. regrettably, no log file was in fact created.
Just installed the windows version: release notes don't require an uninstall of previous versions (in my case 1.3.1) but V1.4 barfed every time it started until I had rebooted and uninstalled 1.3.1. Seems fine since though
Very sound (!) plan. I've always thought that hand-made music is best. When the technology for recording, manufacture and distribution was in the hands of an oligopoly, they got fat and contemptuous of the public. Now that is it relatively easy to produce and distribute material, I say boycott the fat cats, support live music! Hug a folkie tonight!
ISTM that the reaction in the atmosphere would likely be something like O3 + H2 = O2 + H2O, where ozone and molecular hydrogen combine to produce oxygen and water, along with a net depletion of the free ozone. Of course, IANA atmospheric chemist.
Here's another option for you.
OT but wotthehell . . . The Queen and Prince Philip were hosting a dinner for the palace staff, Queen at one end of the table, Philip at the other. During the meal, the Queen noticed a wee chambermiad sitting next to Philip and giggling uncontrollably. "Are you feeling hysterical?" Her Majesty asked. "No, Ma'am, he's feeling mine!" came the reply.
Speaking of antiwater, we need to be careful with that stuff!
Naah, a pokemon is a rastafarian proctologist. And rectitude is that air of moral uprightness he asumes as he goes to work.
Thank you, Amber, what a delightful site. I'm looking forward to the movie, no doubt starring Leslie Neilsen.
The issue then becomes who gets to decide who the "respectable, civilised scientists" are. Your underlying assumption, that if exploration is possible, then restraint is impossible, is probably true, though regrettably so. ISTM that the author is really calling for a degree of vision and selflessness that has been possible only to individuals and never to the race as a whole. Legislative restraints on exploration are like gun laws: unlikely to work worth a damn, restraining only those people who were going to be well-behaved anyway, ultimately not preventing much of anything, but well-intentioned legislators think There Oughtta Be A Law!
Well, USTM that if input to his mail(server/box) is X spam, and he puts out 5X spam, then not only is he increasing the noise level, but he's executing a loud SSF instruction at the same time: the only one he punishes to any noticable extent is himself.
How much / could a /.ter / if a /.ter could /. /.?
ISTM that this only compounds the problem, not cures it. The goal is to maximise the signal to noise ratio on the Net, so multiplying the noise by 5 seems an ineffective way of getting there. Surely you would do better by creating a form letter demanding to be removed from the spam list, reporting the abusers to postmasters, and so forth.
Presumably it would take a BC of plumbers?
Well, lessee now: Saddam is a totalitarian dictator, completely oblivious of world opinion, rolling in more wealth than is reasonable, doing his damnedest to impose his will on anyone nearby, funding subversive agents . . .well, he fits right into the corporate culture, *and* he's recently been invited to relocate. Don't move your markers, we have a bingo!
Agree completely about the necessity of interpreting data. The challenge is to remember that our worldview is not necessarily congruent with that of the original makers of history. There is, of course, no such thing as an unbiased text, but it would be nice, in a more perfect world, to have that bias declared on the frontispiece. I'm thinking the same should be applied to the broadcast media. Then all we have to do (all?! hah!) is teach our kids critical thinking: how to identify bias and form conclusions accordingly. Somewhat OT: Randy Cassingham is launching a crusade against Paternalistic Condescention, on the This Is True website.
I just ran across this when I googled. Might be of interest, Joe: http://www.attentiondeficitdisorder.ws/links/techn ology.html
BTW: I found out after 48 years that I have ADD, and I'm working as an coountant. Go figure! or design a database, or plan a wooden ship or wite a song . . .
ISTM that Big Brother is only acceptable when the laws are intended to maximise personal accountabiliy. The gun appears to manage this quite nicely. Given the combination of biometrics and imaging, it's nearly beyond argument who shot Cock Robin. It's just like cell phones or browsing: if you don't want anyone looking over your shoulder, don't do it. The thing about the usual gun laws is that they punish the law-abiding citizen for owning guns, rather than penalising the wrongful use of guns.