Translucency means you can (for example) have an editor window open on top of a reference web site in Mozilla, and still read the reference information while working in the editor without having to repeatedly raise and lower the two windows.
More precisely, that's transparency. Translucency does not guarantee legibility. Translucency lets light through; transparency lets perception through.
I would love to see this have real translucency with the scattering and diffusion of pixels and not just redefining translucency to be a level of transparency between 100% transparent and 100% opaque. I want an impression of what's behind the window, but I don't want it to get in the way of the information I'm trying to read. (And if it updates the foreground as the background updates, that would really impress me!)
Thought you logged out of your super secret intranet page - no you didnt...
Surely your server isn't as security unconscious as to trust the client to know whether or not it is still logged in. The server should be tracking that itself.
So it should be called "stealing potential revenue"?
It's already called "copyright infringement" aka "pirating," do we really need a third name for it?
No, we need a fourth one! One with either more syllables or adds a hyphen.
(Similar to how WWI's "shell shock" became WWII's "battle fatigue", which became the Korean War's "operational exhaustion", which became the Vietnam War's "post-traumatic stress disorder".)
What I'm surprised at is the local government accepted binaries from the vendor without (a) having full access to the source code (b) a mechnism to ensure the source code they audit matches the binaries in the machine.
"You son of a bitch, you read the source, but you neglected the binaries, didn't you? You son of a bitch, you certified the binaries and you only tested the source code. You only tested the source code! Lies! Lies!"
Precise 3d positioning based on gps-like rf signals?
Absolute spacial tracking? No thanks. I'd need selective tracking ability. I really don't want to have to carry my mouse across the room just to reach that one corner of the screen.
Assuming it can find your address, it could inform the writer who could then ship a free web cam to the victim. Specially designed so that when it is plugged in, it first looks like a driverless USB thumb drive with an autorun that installs the spycam drivers, a simple video chat program, and other payloads, then reverts to a normal camera.
Bundle with it a real AOL CD and mock up the packaging to look like a special promotion from them. It isn't hard to make something believeable and glossy on the qt.
Of course, it will work perfectly well with IE because IE does not honor the Content-Type header as it must according to the HTTP RFC and instead sniffs the content out and renders according to its findings. The RFC permits that if and only if the Content-Type header is omitted; any other situation it must not do it. IE treats "text/plain" as the empty string (i.e. IE doesn't know what "if and only if" means).
Flash Bullshit: I wait for hundreds of kilobytes of useless crap to stream onto my computer. I can't control sizing. I can't print it. I can't save it.
I've scaled (if you load a.swf file in a window by itself, no HTML, I find it naturally scales to the first constraining dimension of the browser window) and saved Flash content (simple when it is the only content in the window), imported it into QuickTime Pro, and exported it as an MPEG-2 movie for use as looping backgrounds for DVD menus. If I really wanted to print it (assuming there is static content), I'd do screen captures. There are many that will automatically crop to window content, and if not yet but soon they'll allow direct printing.
The other points (not screen-readable for the blind by external packages and rarely provide an audio link for text-reading service themselves, rarely offering options to adjust volume, not searchable or spiderable) though are valid. Some can be addressed within the design, but any site that depends wholly on multimedia presentation without offering an alternative way to access the content is doing a disservice to many people.
But I really wish archive.org would archive.swf files too. There's content that has disappeared from the net that I want for my DVD-Rs.
That said, I simply suppress all flash at work. Even though my system is granted no sound card, it is too much of a distraction, and I don't care to allocate page real-estate for a click-to-view pane.
Now if only I could get the flash advertisers on fark to stop making my browser automatically ask me if I want to save their ads to my disk!
Yeah, it is, so make sure you have a large legal fund ready to pay off the RIAA when they call. They do have people whose job it is to call companies and try to get put on hold to see if the company is playing unlicensed music.
It might seem a waste of resources to you, but apparently they get enough hits that the income from settlements and new licenses is sufficient to maintain the operation.
I've had enough of these experiences, and have had enough friends with more interesting experiences, that if a self-important cop comes up on the street and asks for my name, I might decide to tell him "John Smith".
Or, "What's my name? Puddintame. Ask me again and I'll tell you the same."
I thought the appearance of the Constitution Class starship was in the public domain due to a failure to provide adequate copyright notice on the first episode(s) as required then by law (either the notice was absent or deficient). It was not a trademarked image either.
A local theater has images of that ship on display that glow under blacklights, and I've seen it appear in Yellow Pages ads.
In particular, ignore Microsoft's instruction that you turn off all firewalls before running Windows Update. Leave them on!
You don't have to get naked in the communal shower before entering the pool.
Re:This is a problem! He's (or she's) right!
on
Mozilla 1.7 Released
·
· Score: 1
I run Mozilla 1.3 on Redhat 6.2 and I don't have the problem. (Can't run anything newer, either one.)
But then I also have an extensive userContent.css file overriding widths and heights on all table-related tags, suppression of images with width=1 or height=1, suppression of all spacer tags, and overriding all align attributes to left text alignment and no floating.
.entirelefttoolbar { display: none ! important } .entirerighttoolbar { display: none ! important }
Put the above in your ~/.mozilla/*/*/chrome/userContent.css file (adjusting for platform as required) and it will get rid of all the clutter on fark.com.
"I rarely have my browser window wider than 900 pixels"
Why?? Not trying to be irritating, but I really can't imagine. Surely when you have a high resolution set, you have it because you want to fit lots of stuff onto the screen at the same time?
Sure, just not all the stuff I want to fit is the current web page.
My browser window's dimensions are 645x915. Actual usable content area is less than that. I have this thing about web pages actually looking like pages, i.e. taller than they are wide, and sentences wrapping at a reasonable line length. (By that window size you can see my screen resolution is greater than 1024x768.)
I'm aware of the problems sites have fitting into my browser's dimensions, so I have several stylesheet rules overriding fixed-width tables and suppressing layout-fixing images. I even have rules tailored to address particular sites' markup to get them to behave. I even suppress datestamps in slashdot's user info page because they won't wrap. I suppress both sidebars on fark.com. I excise large chunks of useless markup from the middle of stories on MSN.
And sites like this one have forced me to force a 1 pixel white border around every DIV so that the pages don't center themselves in a window that is too small for them, leaving content off both the right and left sides of the window. It's bad enough that I should have to scroll right to read lines of text, but to say I should have to scroll left as well to see the start of the first line is too much! Especially when it is impossible to do so! (Using Mozilla 1.3 as I am not permitted to upgrade this system from Redhat 6.2.)
If sites were designed properly to work with whatever space is provided gracefully, I wouldn't have to break them myself to fit. A pity I even have to override the HTML align attribute though.
Really, the only time I'd want my browser maximized is if I were playing a Flash game where having my mouse pointer stray off of the window could bring something else forward at a critical point during the game.
I used to work at a web design company. They were so bad that they had Courier font bold and reduced to size 2 on their home page, resulting in the letter "a" looking practically like a solid yellow slug on a Mac.
I was their first hire that knew enough about Javascript to do mouseovers. That, plus providing optimizations of several of their clients' websites got me hired (reduced the transfer size of one page by more than 75% by introducing a client-side imagemap).
I left not long after the boss demanded I put together a frameset that constrained the usable content area of any browser window to at most 640x480, which he then used for the company's website. The website stayed with that design until the registrations for its domains lapsed.
You can watch the demise of digitalh2o.com on The Wayback Machine. Or at least, what pages there will load.
No, I think the positives for this could far outway the negatives. Just think about how great it would be to have a window view of the outside world, even though you're in the middle of the building...
How about some more practical uses, like allowing you to see through the back of 5-foot-high-and-wide road construction signs inconveniently placed so that they block your view of oncoming traffic when you need to make a turn.
With the capabilities of some phones, such malware could be used to send untraceable junk faxes, spam, dDoMS (multiple services), telemarketing to numbers on the donotcall list (and gathering unlisted cell phone numbers for marketing), defeating legal phone taps, even distributed wardialing to find that elusive number for Protovision.
Whatever nefarious purpose which would require laundering your identity onto another unwitting victim could be done with a worm infecting cell phones, especially if it can spread quickly without user interaction and can establish a channel to listen to for orders (a hacked website). We're not there yet, but it won't be much longer.
Create 3 seperate sequences and pause the VCR (while it's recording) in between each sequence.
Unfortunately the resulting epic has no convenient places whence to pause where timing won't be critical. At least, not until the final unified credits sequence.
Or, export all of your sequences as stand alone DV files and put them into a playlist in Quicktime Player. Redirect the DV output through the bridge.
Now that's a thought. QuickTime Pro does have basic editing ability. Simple concatenation of the clips should be possible, provided QuickTime itself can handle such a long sequence.
Another considered destination was the hard drive as a large DVD-compliant image. Or possibly MPEG4 if it could compress enough without too much quality loss as I have an MPEG4-compliant DVD player now (though it doesn't say it supports MPEG4 on DVD-R). But keeping it in DV would leave open the ability to send the stream to the TV over the DV bridge.
I should have thought of that myself. Thank you, log0n, for your help! I now have multiple avenues of thought to follow for this project.
burning the purchased tracks to a DVD-R for safe keeping, deleting all protected files from iTunes, then dropping in all the unprotected files.
So now, i have no simple way of going thru my whole library picking out the previously protected now unprotected file.
Well, you have a list of all your unprotected files on your DVD-R. Just deprotect them again, apply the fix to the newly deprotected files, then use them to replace the same tracks in your iTunes library.
Sure it does; it just doesn't let you encode your content at the necessary bit rate to do it. If your >120min video is already MPEG-2 encoded at a bit rate that would fit, iDVD would indeed let you put it on a disc.
They won't sell Compressor with the necessary variable bit rate encoding with iDVD at that price. So you need to buy the more advanced software to enable that ability, or third party software that will do it for you.
You should try my problem: I want to put together a seamless 6 hour epic version of three movies for putting on a single VHS tape in SLP, but Final Cut Pro won't let me create a Sequence longer than 4 hours nor seamlessly play back a series of Sequences over my video bridge.
Slashdot Mirror
Translucency means you can (for example) have an editor window open on top of a reference web site in Mozilla, and still read the reference information while working in the editor without having to repeatedly raise and lower the two windows.
More precisely, that's transparency. Translucency does not guarantee legibility. Translucency lets light through; transparency lets perception through.
I would love to see this have real translucency with the scattering and diffusion of pixels and not just redefining translucency to be a level of transparency between 100% transparent and 100% opaque. I want an impression of what's behind the window, but I don't want it to get in the way of the information I'm trying to read. (And if it updates the foreground as the background updates, that would really impress me!)
Thought you logged out of your super secret intranet page - no you didnt...
Surely your server isn't as security unconscious as to trust the client to know whether or not it is still logged in. The server should be tracking that itself.
No, we need a fourth one! One with either more syllables or adds a hyphen.
(Similar to how WWI's "shell shock" became WWII's "battle fatigue", which became the Korean War's "operational exhaustion", which became the Vietnam War's "post-traumatic stress disorder".)
What I'm surprised at is the local government accepted binaries from the vendor without (a) having full access to the source code (b) a mechnism to ensure the source code they audit matches the binaries in the machine.
"You son of a bitch, you read the source, but you neglected the binaries, didn't you? You son of a bitch, you certified the binaries and you only tested the source code. You only tested the source code! Lies! Lies! "
""128KB = 1Mb"
Wrong, 1024KB = 1Mb"
Apart from the metric vs. binary units (I'll assume everyone meant the binary in archaic units):
1 MiB == 1024 KiB
1 Mib == 128 KiB
where B is for Bytes and b is for bits.
But if you meant the modern metric abbeviations, it would be:
1 MB == 1000 KB
1 Mb == 125 KB
Precise 3d positioning based on gps-like rf signals?
Absolute spacial tracking? No thanks. I'd need selective tracking ability. I really don't want to have to carry my mouse across the room just to reach that one corner of the screen.
Assuming it can find your address, it could inform the writer who could then ship a free web cam to the victim. Specially designed so that when it is plugged in, it first looks like a driverless USB thumb drive with an autorun that installs the spycam drivers, a simple video chat program, and other payloads, then reverts to a normal camera.
Bundle with it a real AOL CD and mock up the packaging to look like a special promotion from them. It isn't hard to make something believeable and glossy on the qt.
People will do stupid things for/with free stuff.
Of course, it will work perfectly well with IE because IE does not honor the Content-Type header as it must according to the HTTP RFC and instead sniffs the content out and renders according to its findings. The RFC permits that if and only if the Content-Type header is omitted; any other situation it must not do it. IE treats "text/plain" as the empty string (i.e. IE doesn't know what "if and only if" means).
Flash Bullshit: I wait for hundreds of kilobytes of useless crap to stream onto my computer. I can't control sizing. I can't print it. I can't save it.
.swf file in a window by itself, no HTML, I find it naturally scales to the first constraining dimension of the browser window) and saved Flash content (simple when it is the only content in the window), imported it into QuickTime Pro, and exported it as an MPEG-2 movie for use as looping backgrounds for DVD menus. If I really wanted to print it (assuming there is static content), I'd do screen captures. There are many that will automatically crop to window content, and if not yet but soon they'll allow direct printing.
.swf files too. There's content that has disappeared from the net that I want for my DVD-Rs.
I've scaled (if you load a
The other points (not screen-readable for the blind by external packages and rarely provide an audio link for text-reading service themselves, rarely offering options to adjust volume, not searchable or spiderable) though are valid. Some can be addressed within the design, but any site that depends wholly on multimedia presentation without offering an alternative way to access the content is doing a disservice to many people.
But I really wish archive.org would archive
That said, I simply suppress all flash at work. Even though my system is granted no sound card, it is too much of a distraction, and I don't care to allocate page real-estate for a click-to-view pane.
Now if only I could get the flash advertisers on fark to stop making my browser automatically ask me if I want to save their ads to my disk!
Licensing might be an issue; I don't know.
Yeah, it is, so make sure you have a large legal fund ready to pay off the RIAA when they call. They do have people whose job it is to call companies and try to get put on hold to see if the company is playing unlicensed music.
It might seem a waste of resources to you, but apparently they get enough hits that the income from settlements and new licenses is sufficient to maintain the operation.
Think of it as being obese, but with muscle instead of fat. Why would that be an advantage?
You'd be able to crush webheads without having any manipulator arms fused to your spine.
Now if we could only get Steve Rogers to take the experimental myostatin antibody serum....
I've had enough of these experiences, and have had enough friends with more interesting experiences, that if a self-important cop comes up on the street and asks for my name, I might decide to tell him "John Smith".
Or, "What's my name? Puddintame. Ask me again and I'll tell you the same."
Did they say you couldn't be pseudonymous?
I thought the appearance of the Constitution Class starship was in the public domain due to a failure to provide adequate copyright notice on the first episode(s) as required then by law (either the notice was absent or deficient). It was not a trademarked image either.
A local theater has images of that ship on display that glow under blacklights, and I've seen it appear in Yellow Pages ads.
Probably the one without the warp particles and the intelligent deuterium ore.
In particular, ignore Microsoft's instruction that you turn off all firewalls before running Windows Update. Leave them on!
You don't have to get naked in the communal shower before entering the pool.
I run Mozilla 1.3 on Redhat 6.2 and I don't have the problem. (Can't run anything newer, either one.)
But then I also have an extensive userContent.css file overriding widths and heights on all table-related tags, suppression of images with width=1 or height=1, suppression of all spacer tags, and overriding all align attributes to left text alignment and no floating.
"I rarely have my browser window wider than 900 pixels"
Why?? Not trying to be irritating, but I really can't imagine. Surely when you have a high resolution set, you have it because you want to fit lots of stuff onto the screen at the same time?
Sure, just not all the stuff I want to fit is the current web page.
My browser window's dimensions are 645x915. Actual usable content area is less than that. I have this thing about web pages actually looking like pages, i.e. taller than they are wide, and sentences wrapping at a reasonable line length. (By that window size you can see my screen resolution is greater than 1024x768.)
I'm aware of the problems sites have fitting into my browser's dimensions, so I have several stylesheet rules overriding fixed-width tables and suppressing layout-fixing images. I even have rules tailored to address particular sites' markup to get them to behave. I even suppress datestamps in slashdot's user info page because they won't wrap. I suppress both sidebars on fark.com. I excise large chunks of useless markup from the middle of stories on MSN.
And sites like this one have forced me to force a 1 pixel white border around every DIV so that the pages don't center themselves in a window that is too small for them, leaving content off both the right and left sides of the window. It's bad enough that I should have to scroll right to read lines of text, but to say I should have to scroll left as well to see the start of the first line is too much! Especially when it is impossible to do so! (Using Mozilla 1.3 as I am not permitted to upgrade this system from Redhat 6.2.)
If sites were designed properly to work with whatever space is provided gracefully, I wouldn't have to break them myself to fit. A pity I even have to override the HTML align attribute though.
Really, the only time I'd want my browser maximized is if I were playing a Flash game where having my mouse pointer stray off of the window could bring something else forward at a critical point during the game.
I used to work at a web design company. They were so bad that they had Courier font bold and reduced to size 2 on their home page, resulting in the letter "a" looking practically like a solid yellow slug on a Mac.
I was their first hire that knew enough about Javascript to do mouseovers. That, plus providing optimizations of several of their clients' websites got me hired (reduced the transfer size of one page by more than 75% by introducing a client-side imagemap).
I left not long after the boss demanded I put together a frameset that constrained the usable content area of any browser window to at most 640x480, which he then used for the company's website. The website stayed with that design until the registrations for its domains lapsed.
You can watch the demise of digitalh2o.com on The Wayback Machine. Or at least, what pages there will load.
"It's a typo."
No, I think the positives for this could far outway the negatives. Just think about how great it would be to have a window view of the outside world, even though you're in the middle of the building...
How about some more practical uses, like allowing you to see through the back of 5-foot-high-and-wide road construction signs inconveniently placed so that they block your view of oncoming traffic when you need to make a turn.
Of course, invisible objects aren't really invisible; they only look that way.
With the capabilities of some phones, such malware could be used to send untraceable junk faxes, spam, dDoMS (multiple services), telemarketing to numbers on the donotcall list (and gathering unlisted cell phone numbers for marketing), defeating legal phone taps, even distributed wardialing to find that elusive number for Protovision.
Whatever nefarious purpose which would require laundering your identity onto another unwitting victim could be done with a worm infecting cell phones, especially if it can spread quickly without user interaction and can establish a channel to listen to for orders (a hacked website). We're not there yet, but it won't be much longer.
Create 3 seperate sequences and pause the VCR (while it's recording) in between each sequence.
Unfortunately the resulting epic has no convenient places whence to pause where timing won't be critical. At least, not until the final unified credits sequence.
Or, export all of your sequences as stand alone DV files and put them into a playlist in Quicktime Player. Redirect the DV output through the bridge.
Now that's a thought. QuickTime Pro does have basic editing ability. Simple concatenation of the clips should be possible, provided QuickTime itself can handle such a long sequence.
Another considered destination was the hard drive as a large DVD-compliant image. Or possibly MPEG4 if it could compress enough without too much quality loss as I have an MPEG4-compliant DVD player now (though it doesn't say it supports MPEG4 on DVD-R). But keeping it in DV would leave open the ability to send the stream to the TV over the DV bridge.
I should have thought of that myself. Thank you, log0n, for your help! I now have multiple avenues of thought to follow for this project.
burning the purchased tracks to a DVD-R for safe keeping, deleting all protected files from iTunes, then dropping in all the unprotected files.
So now, i have no simple way of going thru my whole library picking out the previously protected now unprotected file.
Well, you have a list of all your unprotected files on your DVD-R. Just deprotect them again, apply the fix to the newly deprotected files, then use them to replace the same tracks in your iTunes library.
Sure it does; it just doesn't let you encode your content at the necessary bit rate to do it. If your >120min video is already MPEG-2 encoded at a bit rate that would fit, iDVD would indeed let you put it on a disc.
They won't sell Compressor with the necessary variable bit rate encoding with iDVD at that price. So you need to buy the more advanced software to enable that ability, or third party software that will do it for you.
You should try my problem: I want to put together a seamless 6 hour epic version of three movies for putting on a single VHS tape in SLP, but Final Cut Pro won't let me create a Sequence longer than 4 hours nor seamlessly play back a series of Sequences over my video bridge.