If you ignore the fact that Microsoft is working on Silverlight, then sure, it makes some sense. In reality Microsoft is working on Silverlight and its motives are suspect.
That would be covered by "basic computer education is up to...local communities, computer retailers, ISPs, television shows and governments...to educate teens and adults."
I don't mean teaching by forcing the users to view a page when the login. Of course that doesn't work. People are not idiots and they can quickly figure out how to skip nonsense to get to the real service.
No this kind of basic computer education is up to the schools, parents, local communities, computer retailers, ISPs, television show and governments. If PayPal really wants to do something to help they should sponsor a bill that will make basic computer education part of a schools accreditation. Better yet make it part of an early education critical thinking program, where school children are taught to be skeptics. Of course you'd still have to use some of the other channels of information to educate teens and adults.
You see, phishing isn't a technological problem and therefore doesn't warrant a technological solution. This is a social problem, plain and simple.
Perhaps PayPal realized what a phisherman's dream this would be: "Can't access your PayPal with Safari? Signup for PhishPal to get instant unrestricted access. We only need your email address, ssn, bank account number, credit card numbers and drivers license."
Joking aside, just teach people to type addresses in the address bar, and to check the address bar and status bar when they are entering sensitive information. Problem solved.
There are a lot of people who believe that corporations are only motivated by money and they'll find any reason they can to support their hypothesis. Is it true? I couldn't tell you. I'm highly suspicious of businesses and their motives. But on the other hand I'm suspicious of anyone who claims "the move to widescreens is clearly a selfish one" without presenting at least one counter argument.
I know some people prefer maximized windows, but some people, like me, prefer to have two or three windows open at the same time side by side. For me a widescreen is better and if the manufacturer can save some money on the display that's not a bad thing, that sounds like a win-win.
Wow, you should reread the entire thread because you either missed every point I made or you are too caught up in arguing with me. Honestly I'm sorry I was sarcastic in my original reply. The point I was trying to make was obviously lost.
You can ignore this next part if you want.
I don't know what you think semantics is (and I'm not trying to make accusations or be rude) , but the argument we had went something like this:
You said A is good, but B, which is similar to A, is bad. I said A is good but B is similar and also good. Then you said A is not B. Then I said sure A is not B, but they are similar. Then when you say A is nothing like B, that's semantics. Sorry but it is, if you have a better word for it then please let me in on it.
Now you are playing semantic hardball...There isn't much more I can say... I'm sorry you took my post so personally...You did say they should stick to connecting calls and you have every right to say that...I was just trying to point out (perhaps inappropriately) that I think AT&T should do more that stick to connecting calls....and I also was trying to express that whatever difference there is between the various "labs" AT&T has funded, I can only support research in all of its incarnations and will not prejudicially condemn their efforts in research or business....Lastly the degradation of my privacy or anyones is a completely separate issue...and like I said, I'd address that issue when appropriate and in a manner that is appropriate...I do care about privacy...quite a lot in fact...but like I said, separate issue...but while we are on the topic and since you mentioned "fallacies", hopefully you recall that arguing a point by attacking the characteristics of the subject is itself a fallacy, "ad hominem" if I recall correctly...but I digress....again just let me reiterate my points: you are free to ridicule AT&T or anyone else including me, AT&T is free to run its business however they want, if they are breaking laws address those concerns in and of themselves, again you are free to condemn the entire company and all its practices if you'd like, I don't really care...
So semantically the new AT&T Labs is not the same as Bell Labs. Big deal! They can still do research and they are still doing research. Why are you belittling their efforts? Research is research.
because AT&T Labs developing a bloated browser when we've got several and don't need more divergence from the standards compares very poorly with the old Bell Labs
It based on Mozilla, how is that divergent from the standards? Firefox is bloated and so is Emacs, so what? Don't forget Pogo is in beta! The final shipping version might be much faster.
I'm going to leave out how your admission that you have no gripes with AT&T's treatment of privacy reflects on your judgement. But it's relevant to privacy, and to AT&T's proper mission.
Sorry, no. AT&T and it's treatment of privacy has nothing to do with whether or not they should be doing research or creating new products. Who are you to say what their "proper" mission is or should be.
If and when I do become concerned with AT&T and my privacy I'll write them a letter or contact my political representatives. I'm not going to be so arrogant as to suggest that they shouldn't be able to create products or do research because I have an opposition to their treatment of privacy. That doesn't make sense.
If the European bills for the same service are so bad then the Europeans should do something about it. Criticizing a new web browsers they are developing isn't going to change regionally base billing.
But that doesn't mean I have to trade all that in exchange for a fat browser that runs only on an upgraded Windows machine.
No one said you have to. You don't have to use the browser, plain and simple.
Basically all I'm saying is AT&T, just like everyone else, is free do do research and create new products. I can not believe you would suggest otherwise.
I'm glad you brought up Bell Labs as an example for why AT&T shouldn't do research. *rolls eyes* I don't think they ever got out of the research business. Their corporate website talks about the new AT&T Laboratories. Basically it's a joint venture with the former SBC Laboratories, BellSouth Laboratories and AT&T Laboratories.
Yeah AT&T should stay out of research...those bastards need to make sure I have phone service at the bottom of the abandon mine on the outskirts of town. *rolls eyes*
In all seriousness, I'm a current customer of AT&T and I have no gripes with their cell phone service, privacy or billing. I admit that I don't get perfect service when I go snowboarding, but I'm sure that will change soon. I'm happy my money is funding research if they want to play around and possible improve the web browser good!
I'm not going to pretend I know that much about this, but that is my fear too...if ISO continues to defend this decision they are risking a loss of good faith, or perhaps a loss of confidence. The publicly known irregularities should be enough for ISO to admit they made a mistake and restart the standardization process. I think anything "fast-tracked" should be considered suspicious.
Re:It doesn't Matter Anymore. XAML replaces it all
on
ISO Takes Control Of OOXML
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
It matters because Microsoft is not going to control the web...all those technologies you mention are pointless in light of:
HTML5/XHTML2
CSS 3
SVG
H.264
JavaScript
PDF
Microsoft's track record for cross platform web support just plain sucks. Internet Explorer for the Mac is abandonware! Microsoft quit supporting WM Player for Mac, they now distribute a third-party application. Do you think well ever see IE for Linux or WM Player for Linux? No we won't. Microsoft may be working with Mono on Moonlight, but what will happen when they abandon the project like they did with IE on Mac?
ODF/OOXML is about creating a desktop office suite interchange format to make sharing documents easier...that's all, that's what it's made for...that's not what XPS is made for. XPS is a pointless replacement for something that's not broken...PDF works just fine.
Well you're right, but why would you need HDMI at the chipset level when you can just convert DVI to HDMI? What's wrong with running separate cables for audio?
A Mac costs about the same as a similarly configured Dell. Take the MacBook Pro as an example, the Dell doesn't have: MagSafe, digital optical audio (in/out), MultiTouch track pad, DVI out or FW800. The Dell doesn't run Mac OS X. Don't forget OS X is UNIX and runs in Posix compliant program (that's thousands of additional third-party programs). Plus a Mac can run Windows and/or Linux. Sticking with the MacBook Pro example, I've personally upgraded my RAM and hard drive...what kind of upgrades are you doing? Besides maybe upgrading a video card there isn't much more you can do short of buying a new motherboard on a PC. Basically what I'm saying is the cost is the same, the specs the same, upgradeability is the same, it's actually more compatible with third-party applications because, duh, it can do Mac, UNIX, Windows and Linux...
So aside from your smart-ass rhetorical question you haven't presented any proof. You're just being a Fanboy!
What are you talking about? I can't think of a single product Apple makes that is less useful than a similar product made by another manufacturer. Show a single products that cost more and is less useful. Show some proof!
AFAIK, the HF Java book is used for the Data Structures course a UC Berkeley. If it's good enough for Cal students, it should be good enough for anyone.
I see why you posted AC...You are guilty of the same self-righteousness that you claim is a attribute of engineers. I never claimed to be smart, I was just pointing out my observation.
When I hear a (presumably) college educated teacher say, "Him and me are going to the store," I want to beat him or her with a stick.
Perhaps the problem is with you, not these people making the mistakes. Let me explain, many people agree that what matters in communication is the ability to understand the other person, I'd say 90% of the time when a common language mistake is made the listener or reader can understand what the speaker or writer meant.
Grammar and spelling change, if enough Yale grads begin using "him and me" that will likely become acceptable. Besides people are very smart and we're very good at finding patterns, most of the so-called common mistakes come from a divergence in the normal patterns of grammar and spelling. If a child says "the cat runed away" it's not because the child is dumb, it's because they discovered a pattern and attempted to normalize it.
Slashdot Mirror
Haiku, actually.
If you ignore the fact that Microsoft is working on Silverlight, then sure, it makes some sense. In reality Microsoft is working on Silverlight and its motives are suspect.
That would be covered by "basic computer education is up to...local communities, computer retailers, ISPs, television shows and governments...to educate teens and adults."
I don't mean teaching by forcing the users to view a page when the login. Of course that doesn't work. People are not idiots and they can quickly figure out how to skip nonsense to get to the real service.
No this kind of basic computer education is up to the schools, parents, local communities, computer retailers, ISPs, television show and governments. If PayPal really wants to do something to help they should sponsor a bill that will make basic computer education part of a schools accreditation. Better yet make it part of an early education critical thinking program, where school children are taught to be skeptics. Of course you'd still have to use some of the other channels of information to educate teens and adults.
You see, phishing isn't a technological problem and therefore doesn't warrant a technological solution. This is a social problem, plain and simple.
Perhaps PayPal realized what a phisherman's dream this would be: "Can't access your PayPal with Safari? Signup for PhishPal to get instant unrestricted access. We only need your email address, ssn, bank account number, credit card numbers and drivers license."
Joking aside, just teach people to type addresses in the address bar, and to check the address bar and status bar when they are entering sensitive information. Problem solved.
I think that was the original intent of the patent law, however, a corporation is legally and individual from what I understand.
There are a lot of people who believe that corporations are only motivated by money and they'll find any reason they can to support their hypothesis. Is it true? I couldn't tell you. I'm highly suspicious of businesses and their motives. But on the other hand I'm suspicious of anyone who claims "the move to widescreens is clearly a selfish one" without presenting at least one counter argument.
I know some people prefer maximized windows, but some people, like me, prefer to have two or three windows open at the same time side by side. For me a widescreen is better and if the manufacturer can save some money on the display that's not a bad thing, that sounds like a win-win.
Wow, you should reread the entire thread because you either missed every point I made or you are too caught up in arguing with me. Honestly I'm sorry I was sarcastic in my original reply. The point I was trying to make was obviously lost.
You can ignore this next part if you want.
I don't know what you think semantics is (and I'm not trying to make accusations or be rude) , but the argument we had went something like this:
You said A is good, but B, which is similar to A, is bad. I said A is good but B is similar and also good. Then you said A is not B. Then I said sure A is not B, but they are similar. Then when you say A is nothing like B, that's semantics. Sorry but it is, if you have a better word for it then please let me in on it.
...and the type and calibration of the monitor is a factor too. No matter what a company is not going to have complete control of the appearance...
Now you are playing semantic hardball...There isn't much more I can say... I'm sorry you took my post so personally...You did say they should stick to connecting calls and you have every right to say that...I was just trying to point out (perhaps inappropriately) that I think AT&T should do more that stick to connecting calls....and I also was trying to express that whatever difference there is between the various "labs" AT&T has funded, I can only support research in all of its incarnations and will not prejudicially condemn their efforts in research or business....Lastly the degradation of my privacy or anyones is a completely separate issue...and like I said, I'd address that issue when appropriate and in a manner that is appropriate...I do care about privacy...quite a lot in fact...but like I said, separate issue...but while we are on the topic and since you mentioned "fallacies", hopefully you recall that arguing a point by attacking the characteristics of the subject is itself a fallacy, "ad hominem" if I recall correctly...but I digress....again just let me reiterate my points: you are free to ridicule AT&T or anyone else including me, AT&T is free to run its business however they want, if they are breaking laws address those concerns in and of themselves, again you are free to condemn the entire company and all its practices if you'd like, I don't really care...
So semantically the new AT&T Labs is not the same as Bell Labs. Big deal! They can still do research and they are still doing research. Why are you belittling their efforts? Research is research.
It based on Mozilla, how is that divergent from the standards? Firefox is bloated and so is Emacs, so what? Don't forget Pogo is in beta! The final shipping version might be much faster.
Sorry, no. AT&T and it's treatment of privacy has nothing to do with whether or not they should be doing research or creating new products. Who are you to say what their "proper" mission is or should be.
If and when I do become concerned with AT&T and my privacy I'll write them a letter or contact my political representatives. I'm not going to be so arrogant as to suggest that they shouldn't be able to create products or do research because I have an opposition to their treatment of privacy. That doesn't make sense.
If the European bills for the same service are so bad then the Europeans should do something about it. Criticizing a new web browsers they are developing isn't going to change regionally base billing.
No one said you have to. You don't have to use the browser, plain and simple.
Basically all I'm saying is AT&T, just like everyone else, is free do do research and create new products. I can not believe you would suggest otherwise.
Maybe but his subject line said: "Stick to Connecting Our Calls"
I'm glad you brought up Bell Labs as an example for why AT&T shouldn't do research. *rolls eyes* I don't think they ever got out of the research business. Their corporate website talks about the new AT&T Laboratories. Basically it's a joint venture with the former SBC Laboratories, BellSouth Laboratories and AT&T Laboratories.
Let see Bell Labs has produced a total of 6 Nobel Prizes. They did their part in developing radio astronomy, the transistor, the laser and information theory. And let's not forget: the UNIX operating system, and the C programming language.
Yeah AT&T should stay out of research...those bastards need to make sure I have phone service at the bottom of the abandon mine on the outskirts of town. *rolls eyes*
In all seriousness, I'm a current customer of AT&T and I have no gripes with their cell phone service, privacy or billing. I admit that I don't get perfect service when I go snowboarding, but I'm sure that will change soon. I'm happy my money is funding research if they want to play around and possible improve the web browser good!
Which begs the question, why didn't they use WebKit? Mozilla has a better browser (Firefox), but WebKit is a better engine.
I'm not going to pretend I know that much about this, but that is my fear too...if ISO continues to defend this decision they are risking a loss of good faith, or perhaps a loss of confidence. The publicly known irregularities should be enough for ISO to admit they made a mistake and restart the standardization process. I think anything "fast-tracked" should be considered suspicious.
It matters because Microsoft is not going to control the web...all those technologies you mention are pointless in light of:
Microsoft's track record for cross platform web support just plain sucks. Internet Explorer for the Mac is abandonware! Microsoft quit supporting WM Player for Mac, they now distribute a third-party application. Do you think well ever see IE for Linux or WM Player for Linux? No we won't. Microsoft may be working with Mono on Moonlight, but what will happen when they abandon the project like they did with IE on Mac?
ODF/OOXML is about creating a desktop office suite interchange format to make sharing documents easier...that's all, that's what it's made for...that's not what XPS is made for. XPS is a pointless replacement for something that's not broken...PDF works just fine.
I realize you were probably being sarcastic... :-)
Well you're right, but why would you need HDMI at the chipset level when you can just convert DVI to HDMI? What's wrong with running separate cables for audio?
You are aware that you can convert from DVI to HDMI with a single cable...right?
A Mac costs about the same as a similarly configured Dell. Take the MacBook Pro as an example, the Dell doesn't have: MagSafe, digital optical audio (in/out), MultiTouch track pad, DVI out or FW800. The Dell doesn't run Mac OS X. Don't forget OS X is UNIX and runs in Posix compliant program (that's thousands of additional third-party programs). Plus a Mac can run Windows and/or Linux. Sticking with the MacBook Pro example, I've personally upgraded my RAM and hard drive...what kind of upgrades are you doing? Besides maybe upgrading a video card there isn't much more you can do short of buying a new motherboard on a PC. Basically what I'm saying is the cost is the same, the specs the same, upgradeability is the same, it's actually more compatible with third-party applications because, duh, it can do Mac, UNIX, Windows and Linux...
So aside from your smart-ass rhetorical question you haven't presented any proof. You're just being a Fanboy!
</rant>What are you talking about? I can't think of a single product Apple makes that is less useful than a similar product made by another manufacturer. Show a single products that cost more and is less useful. Show some proof!
I really love ADC (Apple Display Connector) it's power, dvi and usb in one cable.
And it runs Linux! Not to sound like a snob, but I own two because not enough of my friends own their own.
AFAIK, the HF Java book is used for the Data Structures course a UC Berkeley. If it's good enough for Cal students, it should be good enough for anyone.
I see why you posted AC...You are guilty of the same self-righteousness that you claim is a attribute of engineers. I never claimed to be smart, I was just pointing out my observation.
Perhaps the problem is with you, not these people making the mistakes. Let me explain, many people agree that what matters in communication is the ability to understand the other person, I'd say 90% of the time when a common language mistake is made the listener or reader can understand what the speaker or writer meant.
Grammar and spelling change, if enough Yale grads begin using "him and me" that will likely become acceptable. Besides people are very smart and we're very good at finding patterns, most of the so-called common mistakes come from a divergence in the normal patterns of grammar and spelling. If a child says "the cat runed away" it's not because the child is dumb, it's because they discovered a pattern and attempted to normalize it.