Try reading the Olympic Charter - there are principles (idealistic perhaps) that everyone connected in any way to the Olympics has to agree to: "respect for universal fundamental ethical principles"... "Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement."
The Olympics might not always live up to the ethical standards it sets itself, but trying to reduce it to the level of a consumerist spectacle displays a breathtaking level of malicious ignorance.
MediaWiki uses TeX to display mathematical formulas (anything in <math> tags), so it shouldn't be too much work to extend that to output full documents (in HTML and PDF) instead of little PNG images.
Actually, I'm surprised no-one has done it yet. Hmm...
[If] something is morally and ethically wrong, then it should be against the law. [If] something is legal, but would be regarded by "the society" [as] immoral and unethical, then the law is wrong and should be changed.
Utterly absurd. The business of the law is preserving the peace and promoting the common good; of providing a consistent and predictable framework for societal interaction.
If you attempt to legislate morality and altruism, not only do you create criminals and rebels, you create moral hazard - who will provide for themselves if they know they need only appeal to the law and have a stranger compelled to provide charity?
Actually, in the hypothetical case above, the tribe in question could quite possibly (though IANAL) have a viable legal case against the researcher, but through the private law, not criminal law: they would need to demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the researcher would share with them the results of the research.
Today's data is different from previous generations' in two ways:
1. It's digital 2. The machines that produce it are networked
1. means that you can copy it as many times as you like without errors creeping in. 2. means that when you buy a new computer, you just hook it up to the old and copy all your existing data across; Moore's Law means that the old data will occupy a tiny corner of the new computer's hard disk (or whatever the future storage device is).
Of course, this only works if you/do/ store everything on hard disk. But with storage prices where they are nowadays, a couple TiB is pretty affordable, and I don't see many people generating that amount of data any time soon.
The problem is, this requires a fairly major rethink from the POV of archivists, who are used to storing things on physical media and hoping they don't degrade. Time to learn - the way to assure long-term survival of data is multiply redundant on-line storage. Physical media are useful solely for sneakernet and short-term disaster recovery.
There's this thing called sarcasm, it's a relatively new advance. By stating a clearly false proposition in the proper tone of voice a touch of humour can be added while still conveying to the reader the intended meaning. Of course on the Internet the tone of voice can be lost, but what sort of moron would fail to realise this?
Look, it's pretty simple. There were originally supposed to be nine books; Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and Return of the King are books 4, 5 and 6 respectively.
Tolkein never got around to writing books 1, 2 and 3 (or 7, 8 and 9, for that matter) because he was too busy rewriting the middle 3 books to be truer to his original artistic vision. From what I've seen of the drafts, the changes principally consisted of having Saruman shoot first. Oh, and replacing swords with walkie-talkies.
In Gnome 2.16 (and thus in Edgy Eft), there's a button to the left of the path list which brings up the location entry. Far more obvious.
Not sure what your problem is with automatic completion - when it completes a path for you it selects the text it's added, so if you keep on typing your text will replace the added text. To type the next path segment you have to hit the right arrow or the End key.
Right, because the enjoyment you get out of a music player is solely dependent on its ability to reproduce every last frequency component and dynamic detail of the audio file. What about the emotional content? What about the freedom of being able to listen to anything you have in your collection, anywhere you are?
Honestly, I think you audiophile freaks would be happy listening to a 200Hz test signal, as long as it was reproduced perfectly...
Squishing sounds? Squishing sounds? Our idea of heaven was to have pseudopods that made squishing sounds! We had to make do with flagellae that didn't work half the time, and our only sense of perception was the ability to react to chemical gradients in the concentration of nutrients.
...a lot of third world farming have changed from focusing on foodcrops to crops that are higher income because the industrialised countries aren't subsidising them or aren't growing them, such as coffee, tobacco etc.
...and heroin, cocaine,...
Isn't it great how the only crops developing countries can profitably grow are those which feed our addictions?
Anyone can unroll a loop in assembler (well, anyone who can program in assembler in the first case).
Tom Duff's innovation was to discover how to do it in C, combining two warts - switch can be interleaved with other control flow constructs, and case statements fall through - to create an idiom that is at once supremely elegant and unutterably hideous.
Of course, anyone who implements a Duff's Device for loop unrolling in C nowadays is an idiot who hasn't discovered -funroll-loops. (Sure, if your compiler isn't optimizing - but the parent specifically mentioned gcc.) The money with Duff's Device nowadays is for writing poor man's coroutines (although odds are your platform has setcontext, even if it is a bitch to use).
Gates' philanthropy is all well and fine, but stop a moment to think where that money came and is coming from. It's sucked out of the Western economy, making everyone a little bit poorer, by means of anticompetitive practices that make computing that little bit more complicated, time-consuming and frustrating. Much of it ends up distorting the economy of Redmond (and Washington), before it gets anywhere near the Gates Foundation.
In the alternate universe where Netscape triumphed, it doesn't matter that there isn't a Gates Foundation splashing money at worthy causes; the world economy is that much more efficient, more vibrant, more wealthy, that millions more kids can afford (slightly cheaper) inoculations out of their own (slightly improved) resources without relying on charity, that local governments can (with a slightly improved tax base) can procure (slightly cheaper, faster, better) network infrastructure themselves, that thousands more kids can afford to go to university without scholarships (they're slightly better off, and fees are slightly lower).
Millions of Westerners, that small amount better off, can and will contribute more to charity, mandate their governments to spend a little more on research and foreign aid, and be better equipped to resist the protectionism that keeps the developing world poor.
Siphoning money out of the economy and dumping it on a few spots (with massive leakage along the way) is no recipe to a better world. State taxes can - when administered correctly - have a net positive effect; and at least you and I have a say on how they're spent. The Microsoft Tax is indubitably a net negative, has no accountability, and the collection process is a disaster for the development of technology.
...if you don't want to accidentally see porn [the.xxx TLD] gives you a decent way to greatly reduce the amount you see...
Bzzt! You're assuming that because some porn is in.xxx, there's less porn in.com. It won't work out that way; any porn site with a.xxx domain will offer exactly the same content from a.com address, precisely to be able to service customers with the.xxx filter in place.
Your other assumption is that "there's some people that want to see porn and some that don't". That should read "there's some people that want to see porn, some people that don't want other people to see porn, and some people that don't want other people to know that they want to see porn". No-one is interested in censorship for themselves; it's always to protect the children, or to maintain public morals.
Look at the.xxx TLD pragmatically: the most that will happen is that whitehouse.com is obliged to buy whitehouse.xxx to protect their "brand" - but they're sure as hell not going to let go of whitehouse.com and lose all those customers surfing from work (pr0n is not a business-related activity), school (protect the children!), home (if you're in a loving relationship, why would you need to unblock porn?), church (heh...)
.xxx is not a filter. It won't help people searching for or filtering out porn. It's a money grab, pure and simple.
for the simple reason that the Internet doesn't have a kids' section.
What the fundies should be campaigning for is the creation of a kids.us domain, for pre-approved "child-suitable" content. Those of you who believe in parenting by machine can then restrict your children to kids.us and a few other whitelisted domains, and let the rest of us get on with raising our children by talking to them.
I followed the link to your blog post - you want the world to "ratify a treaty that would require pornography web sites to use.xxx or go to prison". It should be fairly obvious what would happen in that case: Andorra, Jersey or some other small country will pass a law defining pornography in the narrowest possible terms, then sit back and watch the pornography websites rush in with their trillions of dollars of dirty money.
There should be an international standard on what is and is not porn, you say? Sure - but whose standard do we follow? Will it be the representative from Tokyo, who's OK with anything as long as you can't see pubic hair? Or will it be the representative from Tehran - say goodbye to your holiday snaps? Because odds are it won't be the representative from Bumfuck, Ohio.
Re:gnome-terminal scroll speed & moving window
on
Gnome 2.14 Released
·
· Score: 1
In 2.14, you *can* alt-drag a window with the titlebar offscreen. Try it.
The reason it took so long to get this was to make sure that alt-drag was the *only* way to get a window off screen... which is true now, thanks to edge snapping and advanced window placement algorithms in Metacity.
For example I saw very nice properly randomized study about replacing the oil in cars. Cars with new oil ran no better than cars without oil. That is to say, new oil was a waste of money. The failure was ascribed to the fact that the oil used was virgin Italian olive oil, but who knows if that was really the cause.
You might want to look at Libconf - it's a perl interface to configuration files that behaves pretty much as you describe.
I've been playing around with config_confd, a GUI configuration editor for Gentoo that uses it - it seems to work quite well, and could be useful for those with a console phobia.
I am often asked if I still think we should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity. The answer is: Now more than ever!
Slashdot Mirror
How the fuck did this get modded insightful?
... "Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement."
Try reading the Olympic Charter - there are principles (idealistic perhaps) that everyone connected in any way to the Olympics has to agree to: "respect for universal fundamental ethical principles"
The Olympics might not always live up to the ethical standards it sets itself, but trying to reduce it to the level of a consumerist spectacle displays a breathtaking level of malicious ignorance.
Links?
MediaWiki uses TeX to display mathematical formulas (anything in <math> tags), so it shouldn't be too much work to extend that to output full documents (in HTML and PDF) instead of little PNG images.
Actually, I'm surprised no-one has done it yet. Hmm...
Oh, certainly, sir.
Look, my liege!
[trumpets]
Utterly absurd. The business of the law is preserving the peace and promoting the common good; of providing a consistent and predictable framework for societal interaction.
If you attempt to legislate morality and altruism, not only do you create criminals and rebels, you create moral hazard - who will provide for themselves if they know they need only appeal to the law and have a stranger compelled to provide charity?
Actually, in the hypothetical case above, the tribe in question could quite possibly (though IANAL) have a viable legal case against the researcher, but through the private law, not criminal law: they would need to demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the researcher would share with them the results of the research.
Today's data is different from previous generations' in two ways:
/do/ store everything on hard disk. But with storage prices where they are nowadays, a couple TiB is pretty affordable, and I don't see many people generating that amount of data any time soon.
1. It's digital
2. The machines that produce it are networked
1. means that you can copy it as many times as you like without errors creeping in.
2. means that when you buy a new computer, you just hook it up to the old and copy all your existing data across; Moore's Law means that the old data will occupy a tiny corner of the new computer's hard disk (or whatever the future storage device is).
Of course, this only works if you
The problem is, this requires a fairly major rethink from the POV of archivists, who are used to storing things on physical media and hoping they don't degrade. Time to learn - the way to assure long-term survival of data is multiply redundant on-line storage. Physical media are useful solely for sneakernet and short-term disaster recovery.
There's this thing called sarcasm, it's a relatively new advance. By stating a clearly false proposition in the proper tone of voice a touch of humour can be added while still conveying to the reader the intended meaning. Of course on the Internet the tone of voice can be lost, but what sort of moron would fail to realise this?
Look, it's pretty simple. There were originally supposed to be nine books; Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and Return of the King are books 4, 5 and 6 respectively.
Tolkein never got around to writing books 1, 2 and 3 (or 7, 8 and 9, for that matter) because he was too busy rewriting the middle 3 books to be truer to his original artistic vision. From what I've seen of the drafts, the changes principally consisted of having Saruman shoot first. Oh, and replacing swords with walkie-talkies.
In Gnome 2.16 (and thus in Edgy Eft), there's a button to the left of the path list which brings up the location entry. Far more obvious.
Not sure what your problem is with automatic completion - when it completes a path for you it selects the text it's added, so if you keep on typing your text will replace the added text. To type the next path segment you have to hit the right arrow or the End key.
Same here. My battery serial starts 6C539 which should be in the 6C519 - 6C552 range, but it says it isn't a valid serial number.
I'm going to call first thing tomorrow (UK time) to find out what the hell's going on.
Right, because the enjoyment you get out of a music player is solely dependent on its ability to reproduce every last frequency component and dynamic detail of the audio file. What about the emotional content? What about the freedom of being able to listen to anything you have in your collection, anywhere you are?
Honestly, I think you audiophile freaks would be happy listening to a 200Hz test signal, as long as it was reproduced perfectly...
Squishing sounds? Squishing sounds? Our idea of heaven was to have pseudopods that made squishing sounds! We had to make do with flagellae that didn't work half the time, and our only sense of perception was the ability to react to chemical gradients in the concentration of nutrients.
But we were happy...
Personally, I removed the semicolon; nobody uses them.
...and heroin, cocaine,...
Isn't it great how the only crops developing countries can profitably grow are those which feed our addictions?
from the Terrible Secret of Space.
Anyone can unroll a loop in assembler (well, anyone who can program in assembler in the first case).
Tom Duff's innovation was to discover how to do it in C, combining two warts - switch can be interleaved with other control flow constructs, and case statements fall through - to create an idiom that is at once supremely elegant and unutterably hideous.
Of course, anyone who implements a Duff's Device for loop unrolling in C nowadays is an idiot who hasn't discovered -funroll-loops. (Sure, if your compiler isn't optimizing - but the parent specifically mentioned gcc.) The money with Duff's Device nowadays is for writing poor man's coroutines (although odds are your platform has setcontext, even if it is a bitch to use).
Gates' philanthropy is all well and fine, but stop a moment to think where that money came and is coming from. It's sucked out of the Western economy, making everyone a little bit poorer, by means of anticompetitive practices that make computing that little bit more complicated, time-consuming and frustrating. Much of it ends up distorting the economy of Redmond (and Washington), before it gets anywhere near the Gates Foundation.
In the alternate universe where Netscape triumphed, it doesn't matter that there isn't a Gates Foundation splashing money at worthy causes; the world economy is that much more efficient, more vibrant, more wealthy, that millions more kids can afford (slightly cheaper) inoculations out of their own (slightly improved) resources without relying on charity, that local governments can (with a slightly improved tax base) can procure (slightly cheaper, faster, better) network infrastructure themselves, that thousands more kids can afford to go to university without scholarships (they're slightly better off, and fees are slightly lower).
Millions of Westerners, that small amount better off, can and will contribute more to charity, mandate their governments to spend a little more on research and foreign aid, and be better equipped to resist the protectionism that keeps the developing world poor.
Siphoning money out of the economy and dumping it on a few spots (with massive leakage along the way) is no recipe to a better world. State taxes can - when administered correctly - have a net positive effect; and at least you and I have a say on how they're spent. The Microsoft Tax is indubitably a net negative, has no accountability, and the collection process is a disaster for the development of technology.
Bzzt! You're assuming that because some porn is in .xxx, there's less porn in .com. It won't work out that way; any porn site with a .xxx domain will offer exactly the same content from a .com address, precisely to be able to service customers with the .xxx filter in place.
Your other assumption is that "there's some people that want to see porn and some that don't". That should read "there's some people that want to see porn, some people that don't want other people to see porn, and some people that don't want other people to know that they want to see porn". No-one is interested in censorship for themselves; it's always to protect the children, or to maintain public morals.
Look at the .xxx TLD pragmatically: the most that will happen is that whitehouse.com is obliged to buy whitehouse.xxx to protect their "brand" - but they're sure as hell not going to let go of whitehouse.com and lose all those customers surfing from work (pr0n is not a business-related activity), school (protect the children!), home (if you're in a loving relationship, why would you need to unblock porn?), church (heh...)
.xxx is not a filter. It won't help people searching for or filtering out porn. It's a money grab, pure and simple.
It's more interesting if you compare a bunch of search terms.
For example, see how Ubuntu took just a year to become top distro. (And also note how popular Suse is with the Germans compared to everyone else.)
For another upstart, how about Slashdot v. Digg?
I can see this becoming the new Googlefight...
for the simple reason that the Internet doesn't have a kids' section.
.xxx or go to prison". It should be fairly obvious what would happen in that case: Andorra, Jersey or some other small country will pass a law defining pornography in the narrowest possible terms, then sit back and watch the pornography websites rush in with their trillions of dollars of dirty money.
What the fundies should be campaigning for is the creation of a kids.us domain, for pre-approved "child-suitable" content. Those of you who believe in parenting by machine can then restrict your children to kids.us and a few other whitelisted domains, and let the rest of us get on with raising our children by talking to them.
I followed the link to your blog post - you want the world to "ratify a treaty that would require pornography web sites to use
There should be an international standard on what is and is not porn, you say? Sure - but whose standard do we follow? Will it be the representative from Tokyo, who's OK with anything as long as you can't see pubic hair? Or will it be the representative from Tehran - say goodbye to your holiday snaps? Because odds are it won't be the representative from Bumfuck, Ohio.
In 2.14, you *can* alt-drag a window with the titlebar offscreen. Try it.
The reason it took so long to get this was to make sure that alt-drag was the *only* way to get a window off screen... which is true now, thanks to edge snapping and advanced window placement algorithms in Metacity.
OK, you got me...
Which one is it?
For example I saw very nice properly randomized study about replacing the oil in cars. Cars with new oil ran no better than cars without oil. That is to say, new oil was a waste of money. The failure was ascribed to the fact that the oil used was virgin Italian olive oil, but who knows if that was really the cause.
...ya think?
You might want to look at Libconf - it's a perl interface to configuration files that behaves pretty much as you describe.
I've been playing around with config_confd, a GUI configuration editor for Gentoo that uses it - it seems to work quite well, and could be useful for those with a console phobia.
Mainstream? You put that woman on the cover of Time!