The idea, or theory, and it's just that and nothing more, is that as the dollar slides because it becomes more and more common, countries holding a lot of them are going to dump them. And then more countries will dump them, creating a chain reaction. So the people on the bottom holding the dollars end up being the losers. Who are these people? American's of course. We hold them every day. We work for them, our houses are paid for in them and we owe them to people.
This is tied to us too. We don't save money in this country. The average person doesn't have a savings any longer. They have a debt. And as individual's debt climbs more and more, the value of the dollar becomes less and less.
There's a lot of forces at work making the dollar worth less and less. From our lack of savings and increase in personal debt to foreign countries paying off our debt via t-notes. And then of course countries we deal with artificially keeping their currency low.
You do realize that if China did push their currency up, our goods would go up in price too. That would make the dollar more valuable of course, but not short term. So Bush isn't pushing for it because his Wal-Mart voter base doesn't want to pay more for cheap imports.
So with all these forces at work lowering the value of the dollar, the theory is big spenders like China are going to eventually say "screw the dollar, lets sell them now while they're worth something" setting off a chain reaction of dollars. The dollar becomes very much so worthless at this point.
So then interest rates go up because no one can pay their debts. High interest rates are bad of course.
This is one situation but it's increasingly more likely as we continue down this path.
did you calculate the tariffs you pay on imports? In the USA we don't pay tariffs on most foreign imports. I'm guessing Canadians do with this kind of price difference.
America's goal is to supply as many consumer goods for as cheap as possible. I'm not sure your country has that same goal. You probably wouldn't have anywhere near a surplus if you didn't have tariffs.
Canada, from what I know, is far more protectionist than the USA. Check if that saw is imported from somewhere that has a tariff. Also, assume that the good hasn't caught up to the quickly changing currency value.
I'm waiting for that day myself. They're going to unload the USA dollar big time and we're going to see serious drops in the value of that thing. We're talking mega drops.
We keep selling those treasury bonds to them and it's going to eventually come time to pay the piper. China is in effect subsidizing our war with Iraq.
Out of curiosity, does Canada have a tariff on imports from China? That's the one thing the USA could do right now to really help themselves. A tariff would level the playing field and force China to value their currency at correct levels.
Of course American consumers wouldn't go for this because then the garbage Wal-Mart sells would cost more. But it would save us from crippling ourselves even more.
I wouldn't actually want to nuke anyone. That was more or less absurdity.
However, in a war I'm not in fear of the USA's ability to win a traditional or nuclear war with anyone. In the traditional sense, Iraq was toppled in a couple days. That is, their government and ability to wage war was destroyed in days. Russia might take 3 weeks.
Russia wouldn't be able to afford the fuel necessary to send a rocket over the ocean. Russia is more or less irrelevant in today's global economy. They're broke and it isn't looking better for them. As for not noticing a war even took place, you're probably right. Plenty of Russians live in such poverty and in ruins, it looks like they were just recently bombed.
There is a proposition to put a 27.5% tariff on imports from China. This is mainly because China keeps its currency artificially low in value. It's really hurting American manufacturing, etc. Wal-Mart makes money I guess. But it creates a beyond unfair market for American companies. The tariff would in effect make China's currency value relative to what it should be. It's a good thing.
The current American administration is against it. They look at the short term benefits that insanely cheap Chinese imports create. Of course they don't care about the long term destruction this is causing our economy. We really are like a drug addict who sacrifices long term health and stability for a short term high.
But they have the upper hand because what are people going to listen to? Someone proposing that we charge more for consumer goods imported form China because it will benefit Americans in the long term? Or, someone who says we want it cheap now! Most people don't have a clue in hell about economics. They always listen to the stupid short term thing that makes them feel good now.
Allowing China to load up on dollars by keeping their own currency artificially low is just bad policy.
I seriously hope then that the plan is to let them pay our debt for years and when it comes time to pay them back we just nuke 'em.
You're not taking into account that the money people are "saving" from these tax cuts are being sent over to China to invest in treasury bonds. The wealthy who got huge sums of money back didn't go out and buy things with it. They bought bonds. The government gave them money they sold right back to the government.
We're in a different situation than in the 1980's. We didn't have the global threat of China undervaluing their currency to expand faster and faster while maintaining a trade deficit larger and larger. They aren't investing their money into our companies. They are investing it into t-bonds here you and I will have to pay back.
The tax cuts of a few years ago were a critical mistake. They were based on a faulty assumption that there would be a surplus. There wasn't and our deficit is accelerating in growth. The main problem?
We owe this money to another nation(s) and not to ourselves.
Our beloved, once great country (the USA) is in serious financial trouble. China has been acquiring dollars for awhile now with the trade surplus they've had with the USA for some time. Usually this isn't a problem as the trading country reinvests these dollars into the USA's markets and businesses. This is good for the USA as you can imagine. In theory it should also raise the value of the trading countries currency because their GNP should be higher. But imagine the trading country keeps its currency artificially low so it can export things cheaper and cheaper and acquire more money (dollars) faster to build more and more factories, etc. It does this by sending the dollars back to the USA in the form of treasury bonds.
Now imagine the USA expected a surplus and made a huge tax cut because of it. And then the surplus never happened so a huge debt was created. Someone has to pay this debt off. Imagine if the people paying this debt off are the ones you are running a trade deficit with. Hence, our trading partner buys treasury bonds at an alarming rate.
This works great for the USA short term because we get cheap goods from China (because their currency is still of low value because they invest their profits right away) and save a little bit on taxes. Well, a lot if you're rich.
But as you're probably starting to realize, this can't go on forever. Eventually it's going to collapse. At some point the debts will have to be paid and this will be done by raising taxes and INTEREST RATES. So now not only is the dollar worth less because everyone has a ton of them around the world, but it costs a ton to borrow them so no one wants them.
All of a sudden the value of your house is half of what it was, the value of your paycheck is half, etc. A domino effect is created because no one can afford to borrow money any longer. American business doesn't take risks, people can't take risks, and money is tight. We haven't experienced this in a long time. Money has been cheap. It's been the USA's biggest seller. The dollar was valuable and it was available. That's prosperity. Imagine the dollar being expensive and worthless. That's a depression.
So expect the Canadian dollar to become more and more valuable against the USA dollar for awhile.
DirectX has had an "easier" and "more pleasant" API for years. OpenGL is a state machine, programmed in good 'ol C. DirectX has an OO API and what some would argue a more complete library.
OpenGL 3.0 will move to a an OO API. It should make programming in OpenGL a lot more attractive. I've heard from people they feel it's easier to do a lot more things in DirectX than OpenGL. It's all opinion, of course.
I'm not a graphics programmer but I have played one on TV.
How much are you going to pay for the software and then how much are you going to pay for monthly fee? Is it worth it? For a computer?
As another read said here, the only thing really worth anything is your data. Back it up and save it. Encrypt it on your disk.
Is it really worth it to pay possibly 10% of the new value of the computer, if not more, to maybe catch someone who stole it in the unlikely event it gets stolen?
Using software like this reminds me of buying a lot of warranties. They generally aren't worth it when the risk/reward is measured. I've owned plenty of laptops and never had one taken from me. I don't know anyone that has had one taken from them. I know it *can* happen and *does* happen. But I also know that it only happens to a very small fraction of laptops.
And seriously, just because someone has your old laptop doesn't mean they are the ones that took it. It very well could have been fenced a few times and stories are likely to be made up and a conviction is probably unlikely. Do you really think police forces are going to spend all day tracking down a laptop theft?
Maybe the part that said you wished he hadn't been tazed because it's going to give him publicity. You don't wish he wasn't tazed, you wish he wouldn't get publicity. You find nothing wrong with him being tazed, so long as it doesn't result in publicity. You even went as far as to suggest he deserved it because he "causes trouble".
You are a sick, fascist pig.
And where's the irony in hoping the fascists get shot? I'm hoping they get shot for pulling crap like this. I don't wish any governing body to gather them up and kill them in a power play. I hope these guys keep messing with people until they mess with the wrong guy and get shot. Oh wait, never mind. I hope they don't because then they will just generate sympathy for fascist pigs like themselves.
They didn't put him under arrest until after he was manhandled and electrocuted. He asked what he was being held for and they didn't give an answer. He was being kidnapped and rightfully wanted to escape. I'm not sure how he was resisting an arrest when he wasn't put under arrest until later.
They finally got him to the ground and had him cuffed and then they decided they needed to electrocute him. He wasn't a threat to anyone. He was under control. But they electrocuted him because they are fascist pigs.
The fact you could possible agree with him being electrocuted is sick. Those things are for people that pose a real PHYSICAL threat and cannot reasonably be detained. He couldn't have possibly posed a real threat with all the police that were there (he had no weapons and it isn't reasonable to believe he did by that point) and they basically had him in the bag.
Just because a guy is resisting arrest doesn't mean he should be electrocuted. If a cop has to take a fist to the jaw to get a guy down, then so be it. It's their job. The guy will then be charged with the serious crime of hitting an officer and the courts won't take mercy on him.
These were fascist pigs who didn't follow procedure at all. I hope they get shot.
Nah, it's a you problem. I don't have a problem with it at all. I can install it 25 times. That's not crazy. They designed a system that hopefully stops average Joe from downloading it and installing it without buying it. A serial number can't proliferate like it has many times.
I bought my game and have no problem helping them protect my investment.
You have to understand the game industry has been hurt my pirates more than just about any software industry.
I don't get how copy protection has anything to do with gameplay unless you plan on stealing it and can't play it, thus there's no gameplay.
But then someone mirrors the site minus the ads and the site operator is out. This is stealing.
It's the same with music. Simply copying a song and making it available to anyone without compensation to the owner of the music is stealing. At least according to the US Judicial system.
So people that set up mirrors to sites - the ads are stealing as well.
Personally, I think the easy solution is for content providers (Websites) to not use annoying ads. Text ads that are generated to suit the users probable desires are more effective and reasonable. Pop ups are trash IMO. Ugly banner ads are annoying as well. So there's a real reason people block them.
I believe in pragmatic business. So in this instance realize people are going to work around it and develop a system that won't inspire as many people to work around. Obviously people are interested in your content, so design a system to keep them interested and not try and block the ads. TV has started to do this with product placement more and more. Not to mention ad companies have gone out of their way to make them entertaining. Net ads are generally obnoxious and annoying. The first effect is negative. They need to change this and systems like Google AdSense has helped.
My point is you can choose not to view something. The content provider can also choose not to let you see it. You don't have a right to anything there. Just like they don't have a right to force you to watch it. They do however hold the chips because they have a right to show it to you or not under their terms.
In the instance of TV content providers over private networks such as cable, if they wanted to devise a system such that skipping commercials was basically impossible, they'd have every right to do that. If you don't like it then don't use it.
Or just not allow my server to serve your client data. When you come to my site I do in fact get to dictate the rules. You play by my rules or you don't get my data. It's very simple. You want my data, I want your business. If you can't provide me with my business then I won't provide you with my data.
If i believe certain clients are not getting me ads then I have every right on Earth to not serve them anything. In fact, I have every right to instead serve up a page with a link to a client of my choice.
I don't care how their browser works so long as they generate income for me when they visit my site. You want to dictate what data is given to you and what is not. Fair enough, you have that right. The server operator also has the right to no give it to you then.
On a personal level, I wouldn't block anyone. I also wouldn't put up annoying banner ads or pop ups of any kind. I would display text ad's tastefully that offer things to users they might actually be interested in.
Should ad blockers me made illegal? God no, that's silly. but I also can understand if a content provider blocks clients they suspect of blocking their ads. I know full well I don't have a right to anything that isn't mine and someone else's Website isn't mine.
In order for you to block their banner ads, your browser must actively not request the data for that banner in a separate transaction from the one used to get the rest of the contents of the page. I see no reason for a Website owner, as the server's owner and operator, to forbid the browser from doing so.
As a good Website on the internet, I think it a good thing that I don't waste my money serving up free pages.
It's a two way street. You don't have to ask for data and they don't have to give you data. You don't have a right to anything. Your argument is piss.
Of course (at this time anyways) it isn't modded up at all.
I love how 90% of the arguments here are lying around the "it's my computer, my bandwidth too...I can block whatever I want". But no one gets it that a server should be able to block what they want too. All of a sudden it's a terrible thing!
The feeling of entitlement here is amazing. People who actually make things, spend time on things, are creative, etc are always being chastised here for wanting to get paid for their efforts.
If a Website operator thinks a user is blocking their ads, then they have every right to block them. If a Website user can't browse a site in their favorite browser, they have every right to go somewhere else.
We had a Silver Light guy come to my company and give us a speech on it. Whatever.
Why do you have a problem with Javascript not being strongly typed? I tend to enjoy that feature. Test your code, make it strong. Dynamic typing is your friend, even if it slows you down.
Thin clients do in fact mainly suck today. It has a lot to do with them being a relatively new in this context, being forced to use HTTP which wasn't designed for it and an array of other issues.
10 years probably isn't enough. Things always take a lot longer than they should. However, HTTP was along well before my mom and dad knew what the Internet was. Colleges and such (mainly science departments) were using HTTP in the 1980's. This of course influenced a couple guys to make Mosaic. The rest is history.
As for the clients, plug-ins, etc. I would imagine the only things sent to a user are UI elements, preferences for the UI and a protocol language that their client compiles into a real transmission protocol. I mean, all protocols are built on top of IP anyways. Why can't the top layer be dynamic? Minimal functionality would be left to the users. I'd imagine if you think of the wire as another part of the bus, the UI and protocol are on your end, the functionality and data is on the servers end. Rich UI's complete with preferences and look and feel shouldn't be an obstacle. A protocol complier might require some research. A program that ties it all together would be the real trick.
We can take as input a grammar and output a parser. Is it reasonable to think the same for a protocol? How about other elements of a networked program?
Slashdot Mirror
The idea, or theory, and it's just that and nothing more, is that as the dollar slides because it becomes more and more common, countries holding a lot of them are going to dump them. And then more countries will dump them, creating a chain reaction. So the people on the bottom holding the dollars end up being the losers. Who are these people? American's of course. We hold them every day. We work for them, our houses are paid for in them and we owe them to people.
This is tied to us too. We don't save money in this country. The average person doesn't have a savings any longer. They have a debt. And as individual's debt climbs more and more, the value of the dollar becomes less and less.
There's a lot of forces at work making the dollar worth less and less. From our lack of savings and increase in personal debt to foreign countries paying off our debt via t-notes. And then of course countries we deal with artificially keeping their currency low.
You do realize that if China did push their currency up, our goods would go up in price too. That would make the dollar more valuable of course, but not short term. So Bush isn't pushing for it because his Wal-Mart voter base doesn't want to pay more for cheap imports.
So with all these forces at work lowering the value of the dollar, the theory is big spenders like China are going to eventually say "screw the dollar, lets sell them now while they're worth something" setting off a chain reaction of dollars. The dollar becomes very much so worthless at this point.
So then interest rates go up because no one can pay their debts. High interest rates are bad of course.
This is one situation but it's increasingly more likely as we continue down this path.
did you calculate the tariffs you pay on imports? In the USA we don't pay tariffs on most foreign imports. I'm guessing Canadians do with this kind of price difference.
America's goal is to supply as many consumer goods for as cheap as possible. I'm not sure your country has that same goal. You probably wouldn't have anywhere near a surplus if you didn't have tariffs.
Canada, from what I know, is far more protectionist than the USA. Check if that saw is imported from somewhere that has a tariff. Also, assume that the good hasn't caught up to the quickly changing currency value.
I'm waiting for that day myself. They're going to unload the USA dollar big time and we're going to see serious drops in the value of that thing. We're talking mega drops.
We keep selling those treasury bonds to them and it's going to eventually come time to pay the piper. China is in effect subsidizing our war with Iraq.
Out of curiosity, does Canada have a tariff on imports from China? That's the one thing the USA could do right now to really help themselves. A tariff would level the playing field and force China to value their currency at correct levels.
Of course American consumers wouldn't go for this because then the garbage Wal-Mart sells would cost more. But it would save us from crippling ourselves even more.
I wouldn't actually want to nuke anyone. That was more or less absurdity.
However, in a war I'm not in fear of the USA's ability to win a traditional or nuclear war with anyone. In the traditional sense, Iraq was toppled in a couple days. That is, their government and ability to wage war was destroyed in days. Russia might take 3 weeks.
Russia wouldn't be able to afford the fuel necessary to send a rocket over the ocean. Russia is more or less irrelevant in today's global economy. They're broke and it isn't looking better for them. As for not noticing a war even took place, you're probably right. Plenty of Russians live in such poverty and in ruins, it looks like they were just recently bombed.
There is a proposition to put a 27.5% tariff on imports from China. This is mainly because China keeps its currency artificially low in value. It's really hurting American manufacturing, etc. Wal-Mart makes money I guess. But it creates a beyond unfair market for American companies. The tariff would in effect make China's currency value relative to what it should be. It's a good thing.
The current American administration is against it. They look at the short term benefits that insanely cheap Chinese imports create. Of course they don't care about the long term destruction this is causing our economy. We really are like a drug addict who sacrifices long term health and stability for a short term high.
But they have the upper hand because what are people going to listen to? Someone proposing that we charge more for consumer goods imported form China because it will benefit Americans in the long term? Or, someone who says we want it cheap now! Most people don't have a clue in hell about economics. They always listen to the stupid short term thing that makes them feel good now.
Allowing China to load up on dollars by keeping their own currency artificially low is just bad policy.
I seriously hope then that the plan is to let them pay our debt for years and when it comes time to pay them back we just nuke 'em.
You're not taking into account that the money people are "saving" from these tax cuts are being sent over to China to invest in treasury bonds. The wealthy who got huge sums of money back didn't go out and buy things with it. They bought bonds. The government gave them money they sold right back to the government.
We're in a different situation than in the 1980's. We didn't have the global threat of China undervaluing their currency to expand faster and faster while maintaining a trade deficit larger and larger. They aren't investing their money into our companies. They are investing it into t-bonds here you and I will have to pay back.
The tax cuts of a few years ago were a critical mistake. They were based on a faulty assumption that there would be a surplus. There wasn't and our deficit is accelerating in growth. The main problem?
We owe this money to another nation(s) and not to ourselves.
Our beloved, once great country (the USA) is in serious financial trouble. China has been acquiring dollars for awhile now with the trade surplus they've had with the USA for some time. Usually this isn't a problem as the trading country reinvests these dollars into the USA's markets and businesses. This is good for the USA as you can imagine. In theory it should also raise the value of the trading countries currency because their GNP should be higher. But imagine the trading country keeps its currency artificially low so it can export things cheaper and cheaper and acquire more money (dollars) faster to build more and more factories, etc. It does this by sending the dollars back to the USA in the form of treasury bonds.
Now imagine the USA expected a surplus and made a huge tax cut because of it. And then the surplus never happened so a huge debt was created. Someone has to pay this debt off. Imagine if the people paying this debt off are the ones you are running a trade deficit with. Hence, our trading partner buys treasury bonds at an alarming rate.
This works great for the USA short term because we get cheap goods from China (because their currency is still of low value because they invest their profits right away) and save a little bit on taxes. Well, a lot if you're rich.
But as you're probably starting to realize, this can't go on forever. Eventually it's going to collapse. At some point the debts will have to be paid and this will be done by raising taxes and INTEREST RATES. So now not only is the dollar worth less because everyone has a ton of them around the world, but it costs a ton to borrow them so no one wants them.
All of a sudden the value of your house is half of what it was, the value of your paycheck is half, etc. A domino effect is created because no one can afford to borrow money any longer. American business doesn't take risks, people can't take risks, and money is tight. We haven't experienced this in a long time. Money has been cheap. It's been the USA's biggest seller. The dollar was valuable and it was available. That's prosperity. Imagine the dollar being expensive and worthless. That's a depression.
So expect the Canadian dollar to become more and more valuable against the USA dollar for awhile.
DirectX has had an "easier" and "more pleasant" API for years. OpenGL is a state machine, programmed in good 'ol C. DirectX has an OO API and what some would argue a more complete library.
OpenGL 3.0 will move to a an OO API. It should make programming in OpenGL a lot more attractive. I've heard from people they feel it's easier to do a lot more things in DirectX than OpenGL. It's all opinion, of course.
I'm not a graphics programmer but I have played one on TV.
How much are you going to pay for the software and then how much are you going to pay for monthly fee? Is it worth it? For a computer?
As another read said here, the only thing really worth anything is your data. Back it up and save it. Encrypt it on your disk.
Is it really worth it to pay possibly 10% of the new value of the computer, if not more, to maybe catch someone who stole it in the unlikely event it gets stolen?
Using software like this reminds me of buying a lot of warranties. They generally aren't worth it when the risk/reward is measured. I've owned plenty of laptops and never had one taken from me. I don't know anyone that has had one taken from them. I know it *can* happen and *does* happen. But I also know that it only happens to a very small fraction of laptops.
And seriously, just because someone has your old laptop doesn't mean they are the ones that took it. It very well could have been fenced a few times and stories are likely to be made up and a conviction is probably unlikely. Do you really think police forces are going to spend all day tracking down a laptop theft?
Maybe the part that said you wished he hadn't been tazed because it's going to give him publicity. You don't wish he wasn't tazed, you wish he wouldn't get publicity. You find nothing wrong with him being tazed, so long as it doesn't result in publicity. You even went as far as to suggest he deserved it because he "causes trouble".
You are a sick, fascist pig.
And where's the irony in hoping the fascists get shot? I'm hoping they get shot for pulling crap like this. I don't wish any governing body to gather them up and kill them in a power play. I hope these guys keep messing with people until they mess with the wrong guy and get shot. Oh wait, never mind. I hope they don't because then they will just generate sympathy for fascist pigs like themselves.
Now that's irony!
They didn't put him under arrest until after he was manhandled and electrocuted. He asked what he was being held for and they didn't give an answer. He was being kidnapped and rightfully wanted to escape. I'm not sure how he was resisting an arrest when he wasn't put under arrest until later.
They finally got him to the ground and had him cuffed and then they decided they needed to electrocute him. He wasn't a threat to anyone. He was under control. But they electrocuted him because they are fascist pigs.
The fact you could possible agree with him being electrocuted is sick. Those things are for people that pose a real PHYSICAL threat and cannot reasonably be detained. He couldn't have possibly posed a real threat with all the police that were there (he had no weapons and it isn't reasonable to believe he did by that point) and they basically had him in the bag.
Just because a guy is resisting arrest doesn't mean he should be electrocuted. If a cop has to take a fist to the jaw to get a guy down, then so be it. It's their job. The guy will then be charged with the serious crime of hitting an officer and the courts won't take mercy on him.
These were fascist pigs who didn't follow procedure at all. I hope they get shot.
Fair use generates some money to a lot of people.
Copyright generates a lot of money to some people.
So the real question is what does our society value? Many people getting a slice of the the pie, or a few people getting all the pie?
Nah, it's a you problem. I don't have a problem with it at all. I can install it 25 times. That's not crazy. They designed a system that hopefully stops average Joe from downloading it and installing it without buying it. A serial number can't proliferate like it has many times.
I bought my game and have no problem helping them protect my investment.
You have to understand the game industry has been hurt my pirates more than just about any software industry.
I don't get how copy protection has anything to do with gameplay unless you plan on stealing it and can't play it, thus there's no gameplay.
But then someone mirrors the site minus the ads and the site operator is out. This is stealing.
It's the same with music. Simply copying a song and making it available to anyone without compensation to the owner of the music is stealing. At least according to the US Judicial system.
So people that set up mirrors to sites - the ads are stealing as well.
Personally, I think the easy solution is for content providers (Websites) to not use annoying ads. Text ads that are generated to suit the users probable desires are more effective and reasonable. Pop ups are trash IMO. Ugly banner ads are annoying as well. So there's a real reason people block them.
I believe in pragmatic business. So in this instance realize people are going to work around it and develop a system that won't inspire as many people to work around. Obviously people are interested in your content, so design a system to keep them interested and not try and block the ads. TV has started to do this with product placement more and more. Not to mention ad companies have gone out of their way to make them entertaining. Net ads are generally obnoxious and annoying. The first effect is negative. They need to change this and systems like Google AdSense has helped.
Most business doesn't take this approach.
My point is you can choose not to view something. The content provider can also choose not to let you see it. You don't have a right to anything there. Just like they don't have a right to force you to watch it. They do however hold the chips because they have a right to show it to you or not under their terms.
In the instance of TV content providers over private networks such as cable, if they wanted to devise a system such that skipping commercials was basically impossible, they'd have every right to do that. If you don't like it then don't use it.
Or just not allow my server to serve your client data. When you come to my site I do in fact get to dictate the rules. You play by my rules or you don't get my data. It's very simple. You want my data, I want your business. If you can't provide me with my business then I won't provide you with my data.
If i believe certain clients are not getting me ads then I have every right on Earth to not serve them anything. In fact, I have every right to instead serve up a page with a link to a client of my choice.
I don't care how their browser works so long as they generate income for me when they visit my site. You want to dictate what data is given to you and what is not. Fair enough, you have that right. The server operator also has the right to no give it to you then.
On a personal level, I wouldn't block anyone. I also wouldn't put up annoying banner ads or pop ups of any kind. I would display text ad's tastefully that offer things to users they might actually be interested in.
Should ad blockers me made illegal? God no, that's silly. but I also can understand if a content provider blocks clients they suspect of blocking their ads. I know full well I don't have a right to anything that isn't mine and someone else's Website isn't mine.
In order for you to block their banner ads, your browser must actively not request the data for that banner in a separate transaction from the one used to get the rest of the contents of the page. I see no reason for a Website owner, as the server's owner and operator, to forbid the browser from doing so.
As a good Website on the internet, I think it a good thing that I don't waste my money serving up free pages.
It's a two way street. You don't have to ask for data and they don't have to give you data. You don't have a right to anything. Your argument is piss.
Of course (at this time anyways) it isn't modded up at all.
I love how 90% of the arguments here are lying around the "it's my computer, my bandwidth too...I can block whatever I want". But no one gets it that a server should be able to block what they want too. All of a sudden it's a terrible thing!
The feeling of entitlement here is amazing. People who actually make things, spend time on things, are creative, etc are always being chastised here for wanting to get paid for their efforts.
If a Website operator thinks a user is blocking their ads, then they have every right to block them. If a Website user can't browse a site in their favorite browser, they have every right to go somewhere else.
You pay for the paper.
I'm thinking if you paid to go to a Website, they wouldn't call it stealing then.
"With a pipe, there ARE two ends to it you know."
Actually, the Internet is a series of tubes, not pipes.
We clarified that already. I was roughly pulling an era form my head. FOr some reason I thought HTTP was invented in 1988. Turns out it was 1990.
That's amazing then. I really thought it came out in 1988 or so. I guess it's my fault for generalizing.
That's why we hire fact checker types like you. We need someone to do the leg work.
We had a Silver Light guy come to my company and give us a speech on it. Whatever.
Why do you have a problem with Javascript not being strongly typed? I tend to enjoy that feature. Test your code, make it strong. Dynamic typing is your friend, even if it slows you down.
Thin clients do in fact mainly suck today. It has a lot to do with them being a relatively new in this context, being forced to use HTTP which wasn't designed for it and an array of other issues.
10 years probably isn't enough. Things always take a lot longer than they should. However, HTTP was along well before my mom and dad knew what the Internet was. Colleges and such (mainly science departments) were using HTTP in the 1980's. This of course influenced a couple guys to make Mosaic. The rest is history.
As for the clients, plug-ins, etc. I would imagine the only things sent to a user are UI elements, preferences for the UI and a protocol language that their client compiles into a real transmission protocol. I mean, all protocols are built on top of IP anyways. Why can't the top layer be dynamic? Minimal functionality would be left to the users. I'd imagine if you think of the wire as another part of the bus, the UI and protocol are on your end, the functionality and data is on the servers end. Rich UI's complete with preferences and look and feel shouldn't be an obstacle. A protocol complier might require some research. A program that ties it all together would be the real trick.
It wouldn't be appropriate for everything.
We can take as input a grammar and output a parser. Is it reasonable to think the same for a protocol? How about other elements of a networked program?