I'm referring to privacy rights guaranteed in constitutional amendments (4th, particularly). Most of these refer to search and seizure within the home. If devices (say, a gun for example) have RFID tags that can be read from outside your home, should law enforcment be allowed to do this? etc.
RFID is great and all, but until there is legislation preventing law enforcment from using/viewing the data collected by these companies, I wouldn't go for it.
Buying products with these tags seems like asking to be tracked. I know there are benefits to using them, but I'd rather not volunteer a public record of everything I do while carrying these products. It contradicts the spirit of the privacy rights granted in the constitution.
Part of the problem, though, is that the "web standards" movement isn't just about improving things; it's also about abandoning things.
I don't think this is entirely true. You can still validate HTML 2.0 using the W3C validator. Any page that validates to that standard is web compliant--the push is for web developers to identify what standard they've used (even if it is old) and to use it properly. IE doesn't give a flying rip of you implement Standards properly.
Microsoft's whole goal in the IE/Netscape war was to make its webpages incompatible with Netscape. We still see crap like that today.
I think the only hope for actually implementing web standards lies in demonstrating the superiority of products like Mozilla Firefox. Don't expect any development from Microsoft on this front; the more exclusive they can make their browser, the better (in their eyes).
I don't expect to Longhorn/the new IE giving anything helpful to web standards.
Some idiot will figure out how to trick the program and we'll have gobs of script kiddies getting A's in English, when in reality they write so poorly that they should be beaten.
The United States harbors concerns that the army-run Chinese program could some day pose a threat to U.S. dominance in military satellite communications.
Translation:
US Media conglomerates are worried that other countries might start broadcasting television without them. Let's go to war.
I still have bad associations with the name Novell and token-ring ethernet adapters.
*shudder*
Re:Here we go again...
on
NextFest
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Flash sucks because it isn't standards compliant.
Websites that use flash navigation and provide no text alternative are totally unusable by my blind friend. Text -> Speech converters can't touch them.
Then again, you're probably right that most/.ers dislike it for other reasons. I mean, Slashdot does have a good 170 HTML errors. Even Microsoft beats that (although only by 4).
I think the severity of this must have to do with some manufacturing technique. Some of the first CDs I ever bought are still in perfect shape, while others from more recent purchases are experiencing this. Anyone else confirm this?
Security holes in any system will come out more quickly when more people use it. The fact that Apple can (usually) find and fix security holes before they are made publicly known might just stem from the fact that their user base is smaller than Microsoft's and therefore their security holes are more obscure (in terms of publicity, not coding content). The most used product will always have the most exposed flaws. Microsoft simply can't keep up with the number that are exposed; who's to say they same wouldn't be true if Apple was the industry standard? Immunity from errors of this kind can be found in open source type systems, but that's a whole other can of worms.
Fine SCO every time someone writes another article about them. They're being so damn frivolous that it pains me to hear anything else about them short of their ultimate demise.
So, if this telephone system was designed to withstand a nuclear blast the size of that at Hiroshima, how is it that they think a fire damaged it? That would be one huge fire, and I think we'd have heard a lot more about it.
unless they create the need, no one will buy it. most people are pretty happy the way things are, so if the TV companies can sell them poor technology at a high price they'll keep doing that. it's just economics; until people quit being satisfied with buying the cheaper product, the demand for a better technology will be nonexistant. it's starting to exist now, slowly.
if it increased boot time significantly, it could be of great benefit--think of a webhosting company that guarantees less than a certain number of minutes of downtime each year. shaving off seconds on each reboot could save them $$$.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, this is great stuff! We should all go back to typewriters; that was the zenith in the flight of technology.
fix a troubled mac?
install linux.
OK,OK.
Clarification:
I'm referring to privacy rights guaranteed in constitutional amendments (4th, particularly). Most of these refer to search and seizure within the home. If devices (say, a gun for example) have RFID tags that can be read from outside your home, should law enforcment be allowed to do this? etc.
RFID is great and all, but until there is legislation preventing law enforcment from using/viewing the data collected by these companies, I wouldn't go for it.
Buying products with these tags seems like asking to be tracked. I know there are benefits to using them, but I'd rather not volunteer a public record of everything I do while carrying these products. It contradicts the spirit of the privacy rights granted in the constitution.
Yes! You're no longer limited to slowing your computer by simulating an architecture you don't have--you can run their viruses, too!
Like a baseball and a bat?
I don't think this is entirely true. You can still validate HTML 2.0 using the W3C validator. Any page that validates to that standard is web compliant--the push is for web developers to identify what standard they've used (even if it is old) and to use it properly. IE doesn't give a flying rip of you implement Standards properly.
Microsoft's whole goal in the IE/Netscape war was to make its webpages incompatible with Netscape. We still see crap like that today.
I think the only hope for actually implementing web standards lies in demonstrating the superiority of products like Mozilla Firefox. Don't expect any development from Microsoft on this front; the more exclusive they can make their browser, the better (in their eyes).
I don't expect to Longhorn/the new IE giving anything helpful to web standards.
Some idiot will figure out how to trick the program and we'll have gobs of script kiddies getting A's in English, when in reality they write so poorly that they should be beaten.
Haxored!Translation:
US Media conglomerates are worried that other countries might start broadcasting television without them. Let's go to war.
This just in:
SCO Claims they created Linux and sues itself. Happy day.
I still have bad associations with the name Novell and token-ring ethernet adapters.
*shudder*
Flash sucks because it isn't standards compliant.
/.ers dislike it for other reasons. I mean, Slashdot does have a good 170 HTML errors. Even Microsoft beats that (although only by 4).
Websites that use flash navigation and provide no text alternative are totally unusable by my blind friend. Text -> Speech converters can't touch them.
Then again, you're probably right that most
Transparent cloaks? I knew Harry Potter was real.
I think the severity of this must have to do with some manufacturing technique. Some of the first CDs I ever bought are still in perfect shape, while others from more recent purchases are experiencing this. Anyone else confirm this?
but... does it run linux?
Security holes in any system will come out more quickly when more people use it. The fact that Apple can (usually) find and fix security holes before they are made publicly known might just stem from the fact that their user base is smaller than Microsoft's and therefore their security holes are more obscure (in terms of publicity, not coding content). The most used product will always have the most exposed flaws. Microsoft simply can't keep up with the number that are exposed; who's to say they same wouldn't be true if Apple was the industry standard? Immunity from errors of this kind can be found in open source type systems, but that's a whole other can of worms.
Does the book come with a complementary Bill Gates Voodoo Doll? If so, sign me up.
buy a mini cd-rw and burn whatever you wanted to move. it's that easy.
if people would brush their blueteeth more, they'd get less cavities.
obviously bluetooth devices aren't packaged with enough care instructions.
Fine SCO every time someone writes another article about them. They're being so damn frivolous that it pains me to hear anything else about them short of their ultimate demise.
So, if this telephone system was designed to withstand a nuclear blast the size of that at Hiroshima, how is it that they think a fire damaged it? That would be one huge fire, and I think we'd have heard a lot more about it.
by providing a service to compare all of the comparison services.
unless they create the need, no one will buy it. most people are pretty happy the way things are, so if the TV companies can sell them poor technology at a high price they'll keep doing that. it's just economics; until people quit being satisfied with buying the cheaper product, the demand for a better technology will be nonexistant. it's starting to exist now, slowly.
if it increased boot time significantly, it could be of great benefit--think of a webhosting company that guarantees less than a certain number of minutes of downtime each year. shaving off seconds on each reboot could save them $$$.