I get the same problem running FF on OSX -- leaving it running for weeks on end basically watching youtube and it will suck up to 3.5 GB of RAM. Every version of FF I tried (i.e. all of them) _still_ leaks memory. I believe it is because of the Flash plugin, but haven't been able to pin down a repeatable test case.
When you use "about:memory", have all tabs closed, and the memory is still pegged at 1.5 GB, it tells me the developers don't understand the problem.
> : I don't see how not wanting to respect a cockroach makes me a xenophobe. *whoosh* You _completely_ missed the point. Any ideology taken to an extreme is never a good idea.
There is a time and a place to kill the little bastards (say if they are invading your home), and a time and a place to respect the uniqueness of how each animals helps the ecosystem (say when they help decompose dead things.)
> The primary failure with this argument is that it assumes something wrong about me, Correct. You have a lack of awareness of what constitutes life and how to respect it. The fact that you asked a question is proof that it is not an assumption.
> and one that doesn't even makes sense! Because you fail to see how everything is connected; How you treat others (especially lower life forms) demonstrates how well you understand that animals and plants have their own conscious and how by interacting with it at a deeper level you raise your own.
> who made us "stewards of this planet"? God? Please show me where I mentioned "God" ? The fact remains that it is a fact. Polluting the sky and water is immaturity and unsustainable. You are course to teat the earth as your literal "dumping ground", but as people grow up, most realize we have a responsibility to look after our home.
> you assume something I never said I did: That I don't treat other animals as sensitive, I was providing an answer to your question "I fail to see why we should regard other species the same way we do to ourselves." If you don't like the answer then you need to ask yourself "Why?"
The fact that you are unable to comprehend the answer is because you lack the awareness about the responsibility to look after the planet (animals and plants) by leaving it in a better state then we found it demonstrates my point succinctly. Extending the concept to plants: Does that mean we can't cut down trees? Of course not; lumber provides some very good benefits. Raping mother earth by clear cutting does not. Are you able to comprehend the contrast of the two paradigms?
Again, I'll re-iterate my first point: " Any ideology taken to an extreme is never a good idea."
Another example to help you "get it": Over-hunting certain animals to the point the extinction (such as the classic Bison) demonstrates man's greed and lack of awareness. I am not saying killing animals is wrong, as the ignorant PETAs and Vegans like to spout off -- the CRUX of my point I am saying "Are you aware of how you treat others?" If no, why not? You implicitly asked "Why should I be?" You are correct I did a poor job initially answering this; I have corrected this oversight. Again I will summarize:
How (well) you treat others (especially lower life forms) demonstrates how well you understand that animals and plants have their own conscious and how by interacting with it at a deeper level you raise your own.
If you find this concept difficult to understand, don't worry, you're in the same boat with almost everyone else. If you truly wish to understand this rather cryptic statement I will give this advice:
If you take the premise that EVERYTHING is conscious, see where it takes you.
I'm not saying you have to accept this fact -- but think about both sides of what it means to completely reject this premise AND explore what it means to completely accept this radical premise.
> You won't understand some animals' concepts FTFY. Just because _you_ don't understand some animal concepts does not infer that everyone is equally ignorant.
> Or you think they only should have the rights and their responsibilities should be transferred You keep talking about this non-existent thing called "rights". Rights only exist when you can enforce them. Does that mean they are a bad thing? Of course not, they provide a good foundation to build upon; But just because animals have no rights in context of humans, doesn't mea
> I too was a long-time KDE user (at least since the 2.0 days) -- the entire 4.x release has been one colossal fuck-up. > From what I understand Gnome went and did the same thing to their faithful.
Its sad to see the Linux community remains clueless about UI design.:-/ Everybody seems to be jumping on the tablet bandwagon not understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the traditional desktop and the same perspectives for tablets.
As one gets older I'm finding I just want a stable, standard, UI that just works. Sure Windows and OSX lack advanced features -- hell, they are barely contain the basic features, but they just work. Why is so hard to just treat users with respect -- both the novice and poweruser? You know, like giving options for "WindowShade" where users can roll up the window to just the title bar, having a title bar that doesn't take up the whole honky window width (BeOS did this perfect with "tab'd window titles), etc.
> I fail to see why we should regard other species the same way we do to ourselves. Because it reflects how you view yourself and is a slippery-slope to xenophobia. If you have no respect for another life form why should your life be respected? How would you like it if a superior life form used YOU as mere food?
We are stewards for this planet -- the environment includes animals. If you wish to treat them like mere things instead of conscious lifeforms that feel pain, etc. you are of course free to do that, just be aware of the consequences for doing so. Remaining ignorant of the different levels of consciousness tells people that you are just another dumb animal higher up in the food chain. When you exercise your choice in doing the least harm to all (living) things that shows great wisdom and self respect.
> Should ants and termites pay for land taxes and be prosecuted for property damage? Uh, you DO realize that animals have been around for MILLIONS of years and do not bother with the primitive concept of money, right?
> Is there a serious problem with authors sharing names?
For the FIRST and LAST time, names are NOT unique; they are a just a convenient label as history clearly shows: Henry I, Henry II, Henry III,... Henry VIII, etc.
Unique numbers are the only proper way to solve this problem once and for all.
> All justices, judges, and magistrates accept that corporations are legal persons. This is neither surprising, nor debatable, and is a fundamental part of Common Law tradition.
Total nonsense. Corporations became legal persons OVER time.
Date Decision, Legal Right Affirmed 1889 "Minneapolis and St. L. R. Co. v. Beckwith", Right for judicial review on state legislation 1893 "Noble v. Union River Logging R. Col", Right for judicial review for rights infringement by federal legislation 1906 "Hale v. Henkel", Protection "against unreasonable searches and seizures (4th) 1908 "Armour Packing C. v. United States", Right to trial by jury (6th) 1922 "Pennsylvania Coal Co. V. Mahon", Right to compensation for government takings 1962 "Fong Foo v. United States", Right to freedom from double jeopardy (5th) 1970 "Ross v. Bernhard", Right to trial by jury in civil case (7th) 1976 "Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Consumer Council)", Right to free speech for purely commercial speech (1st) 1978 "First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti", Right to corporate political speech (1st) 1986 "Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. Public Utility Commn of California", Right against coerced speech (1st) Reference: http://cnx.org/content/m17314/latest/
> Because otherwise, they couldn't own property, and could not be sued. At one time in America they couldn't OWN other corporations. This limited the collateral damage they could do. This was a GOOD thing.
> Let's have a hypothetical. The fact that OWNERS wanted to separate their liability is based on thing: Greed.
Corporations pay no death tax (estate tax) because corporations NEVER die. That fact right there is a HUGE problem. It slowly strips the wealth (power) out of individuals and consolidates it -- total anathema to the original intent of State and Federal separation and balance of power.
What, you have no self control and are that much a slave to a TV series? I feel sad for you.
One of the nice things about getting the DVD/BluRay is that you can just watch episodes back to back. "Batch" watching is more optimal use of time; plus you can burn thru the story, finish the series off and watch the next series.
> Some people actually believe that reiki is legit
Just because you've never done distance healing doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Scientists are still ignorant to the causes of electricity, gravity, only discovered 4 of the 6 fundamental forces, let alone don't have a fucking clue what consciousness is, so why are you surprised they don't understand energy healing?
Guess what traditional medicine doesn't always work either.
Like any modality of healing the standard disclaim needs to apply: Your Mileage May Vary. If it does then great! If not then try something else until it does.
Tossing the baby out with the bathwater just because your dogma of "doesn't work for you" being applied to everyone is plain stupidity and ignorance.
You missed Canadian Reginald Aubrey Fessende for the wireless telephone;-)
Who first used the word and the method of continuous waves?
Who was first to transmit voice over radio?
Who devised a detector for continuous waves?
Who first used the method, and the word heterodyne?
Who was first to send two-way wireless telegraphy messages across the Atlantic ocean?
Who was first to send wireless telephony (voice) across the Atlantic Ocean?
Who made the world's first wireless broadcast (voice and music)?
> i have NO fucking clue why but women just love that damned thing and funnily enough Age of Empires I of all games
Generally, Men love to Destroying. i.e. "Fuck it, or Fuck it up" (which is why First Person Shooters sell so well) Women love Creating and Relationships (which is why The Sims has so many women playing)
It's not rocket science - to study game design is to study psychology, Yin / Yang, etc.
The general public -- who don't give a shit about copyright laws (the *basis* for Civilization is sharing) -- and don't realize that the justification for censorship is piracy ?
Or the Content creators who don't realize that copyright is dead regardless of what outdated laws say and are trying whatever way they can to regain control over people sharing content? (Unfortunately they never studied Physics or they would realize Newton's Second Law applies on the internet: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.)
ALL (legal) Laws are relative. The sooner we ditch the absurdity of copyright other imaginary property the sooner we all can get on with sharing our culture with one another.
> 3) Enact campaign finance reforms of some sort (the biggest and most challenging issue, though one in which there are many avenues along which to make advances).
Spot on. Money needs to be *completely* removed from politics as a factor otherwise you end up with a death-spiral of who can outbid buying off the public.
The sensible way would to pool ALL donations, and split the balance every month.
I would add the other political reform would be is get rid of the parties, and focus on the *issues*, not this juvenile mudslinging crap that does nothing.
The root problem is most Americans don't give a shit, to actually DO anything to change the existing system.
-- The best part apart of the US is Capitalism. The worst part about the US, ironically, is also Capitalism.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice summary.
It seems tech companies constantly need to keep innovating or slowly be made irrelevant by your competition.
> Hey Firefox devs, maybe you should ask all the people who reject upgrading why they refuse to upgrade.
This a thousand times over!
> Maybe you should switch off MS Windows?
I get the same problem running FF on OSX -- leaving it running for weeks on end basically watching youtube and it will suck up to 3.5 GB of RAM. Every version of FF I tried (i.e. all of them) _still_ leaks memory. I believe it is because of the Flash plugin, but haven't been able to pin down a repeatable test case.
When you use "about:memory", have all tabs closed, and the memory is still pegged at 1.5 GB, it tells me the developers don't understand the problem.
I keep hoping they will fix it one of these days.
> : I don't see how not wanting to respect a cockroach makes me a xenophobe.
*whoosh* You _completely_ missed the point. Any ideology taken to an extreme is never a good idea.
There is a time and a place to kill the little bastards (say if they are invading your home), and a time and a place to respect the uniqueness of how each animals helps the ecosystem (say when they help decompose dead things.)
> The primary failure with this argument is that it assumes something wrong about me,
Correct. You have a lack of awareness of what constitutes life and how to respect it. The fact that you asked a question is proof that it is not an assumption.
> and one that doesn't even makes sense!
Because you fail to see how everything is connected; How you treat others (especially lower life forms) demonstrates how well you understand that animals and plants have their own conscious and how by interacting with it at a deeper level you raise your own.
> who made us "stewards of this planet"? God?
Please show me where I mentioned "God" ? The fact remains that it is a fact. Polluting the sky and water is immaturity and unsustainable. You are course to teat the earth as your literal "dumping ground", but as people grow up, most realize we have a responsibility to look after our home.
> you assume something I never said I did: That I don't treat other animals as sensitive,
I was providing an answer to your question "I fail to see why we should regard other species the same way we do to ourselves."
If you don't like the answer then you need to ask yourself "Why?"
The fact that you are unable to comprehend the answer is because you lack the awareness about the responsibility to look after the planet (animals and plants) by leaving it in a better state then we found it demonstrates my point succinctly. Extending the concept to plants: Does that mean we can't cut down trees? Of course not; lumber provides some very good benefits. Raping mother earth by clear cutting does not. Are you able to comprehend the contrast of the two paradigms?
Again, I'll re-iterate my first point: " Any ideology taken to an extreme is never a good idea."
Another example to help you "get it":
Over-hunting certain animals to the point the extinction (such as the classic Bison) demonstrates man's greed and lack of awareness. I am not saying killing animals is wrong, as the ignorant PETAs and Vegans like to spout off -- the CRUX of my point I am saying "Are you aware of how you treat others?" If no, why not? You implicitly asked "Why should I be?" You are correct I did a poor job initially answering this; I have corrected this oversight. Again I will summarize:
How (well) you treat others (especially lower life forms) demonstrates how well you understand that animals and plants have their own conscious and how by interacting with it at a deeper level you raise your own.
If you find this concept difficult to understand, don't worry, you're in the same boat with almost everyone else. If you truly wish to understand this rather cryptic statement I will give this advice:
I'm not saying you have to accept this fact -- but think about both sides of what it means to completely reject this premise AND explore what it means to completely accept this radical premise.
> You won't understand some animals' concepts
FTFY. Just because _you_ don't understand some animal concepts does not infer that everyone is equally ignorant.
> Or you think they only should have the rights and their responsibilities should be transferred
You keep talking about this non-existent thing called "rights". Rights only exist when you can enforce them. Does that mean they are a bad thing? Of course not, they provide a good foundation to build upon; But just because animals have no rights in context of humans, doesn't mea
> I too was a long-time KDE user (at least since the 2.0 days) -- the entire 4.x release has been one colossal fuck-up.
> From what I understand Gnome went and did the same thing to their faithful.
Its sad to see the Linux community remains clueless about UI design. :-/ Everybody seems to be jumping on the tablet bandwagon not understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the traditional desktop and the same perspectives for tablets.
As one gets older I'm finding I just want a stable, standard, UI that just works. Sure Windows and OSX lack advanced features -- hell, they are barely contain the basic features, but they just work. Why is so hard to just treat users with respect -- both the novice and poweruser? You know, like giving options for "WindowShade" where users can roll up the window to just the title bar, having a title bar that doesn't take up the whole honky window width (BeOS did this perfect with "tab'd window titles), etc.
> I fail to see why we should regard other species the same way we do to ourselves.
Because it reflects how you view yourself and is a slippery-slope to xenophobia. If you have no respect for another life form why should your life be respected? How would you like it if a superior life form used YOU as mere food?
We are stewards for this planet -- the environment includes animals. If you wish to treat them like mere things instead of conscious lifeforms that feel pain, etc. you are of course free to do that, just be aware of the consequences for doing so. Remaining ignorant of the different levels of consciousness tells people that you are just another dumb animal higher up in the food chain. When you exercise your choice in doing the least harm to all (living) things that shows great wisdom and self respect.
> Should ants and termites pay for land taxes and be prosecuted for property damage?
Uh, you DO realize that animals have been around for MILLIONS of years and do not bother with the primitive concept of money, right?
> Is there a serious problem with authors sharing names?
For the FIRST and LAST time, names are NOT unique; they are a just a convenient label as history clearly shows: Henry I, Henry II, Henry III, ... Henry VIII, etc.
Unique numbers are the only proper way to solve this problem once and for all.
Also worth reading:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2469/how-can-a-corporation-be-legally-considered-a-person
http://www.uuworld.org/ideas/articles/157829.shtml
> All justices, judges, and magistrates accept that corporations are legal persons. This is neither surprising, nor debatable, and is a fundamental part of Common Law tradition.
Total nonsense. Corporations became legal persons OVER time.
Date Decision, Legal Right Affirmed
1889 "Minneapolis and St. L. R. Co. v. Beckwith", Right for judicial review on state legislation
1893 "Noble v. Union River Logging R. Col", Right for judicial review for rights infringement by federal legislation
1906 "Hale v. Henkel", Protection "against unreasonable searches and seizures (4th)
1908 "Armour Packing C. v. United States", Right to trial by jury (6th)
1922 "Pennsylvania Coal Co. V. Mahon", Right to compensation for government takings
1962 "Fong Foo v. United States", Right to freedom from double jeopardy (5th)
1970 "Ross v. Bernhard", Right to trial by jury in civil case (7th)
1976 "Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Consumer Council)", Right to free speech for purely commercial speech (1st)
1978 "First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti", Right to corporate political speech (1st)
1986 "Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. Public Utility Commn of California", Right against coerced speech (1st)
Reference:
http://cnx.org/content/m17314/latest/
Also see:
http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=314
Specificaly, "The Corporation complete film transcript (PDF)"
http://hellocoolworld.com/files/TheCorporation/Transcript_finalpt1%20copy.pdf
http://hellocoolworld.com/files/TheCorporation/Transcript_finalpt2%20copy.pdf
> Because otherwise, they couldn't own property, and could not be sued.
At one time in America they couldn't OWN other corporations. This limited the collateral damage they could do. This was a GOOD thing.
> Let's have a hypothetical.
The fact that OWNERS wanted to separate their liability is based on thing: Greed.
Corporations pay no death tax (estate tax) because corporations NEVER die. That fact right there is a HUGE problem. It slowly strips the wealth (power) out of individuals and consolidates it -- total anathema to the original intent of State and Federal separation and balance of power.
It would behoove you to watch "The Corporation"
Wow, you must really hate Jonny Cash (singer) or John Cash (id/blizzard programmer) :-/
> Option 3 is wait a year for DVD
What, you have no self control and are that much a slave to a TV series? I feel sad for you.
One of the nice things about getting the DVD/BluRay is that you can just watch episodes back to back. "Batch" watching is more optimal use of time; plus you can burn thru the story, finish the series off and watch the next series.
> Some people actually believe that reiki is legit
Just because you've never done distance healing doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Scientists are still ignorant to the causes of electricity, gravity, only discovered 4 of the 6 fundamental forces, let alone don't have a fucking clue what consciousness is, so why are you surprised they don't understand energy healing?
Guess what traditional medicine doesn't always work either.
According to Science the Placebo effect should NOT even exist, but it does.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18524911.600-13-things-that-do-not-make-sense.html
It is a proven fact that the mind can effect the body's biochemistry.
See Morris Goodman's story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfKn92klPeU
http://www.inspiresoul.com/miracle-man-proof-that-your-mind-is-bigger-than-any-science/
Like any modality of healing the standard disclaim needs to apply: Your Mileage May Vary. If it does then great! If not then try something else until it does.
Tossing the baby out with the bathwater just because your dogma of "doesn't work for you" being applied to everyone is plain stupidity and ignorance.
Wait 20 years, you'll have your answer...
In the meantime the rest of use are fascinated with real footage.
The URZI UFO Case - The Full Story - Authentic & Complete
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_09AQClOIQ
At 54:12 - 54:28 there are some great hi-res shots! The craft(s) definitely look Pleiadian.
The answer to "Are we alone?" will spawn a million questions ...
Spot on for the wired telephone.
You missed Canadian Reginald Aubrey Fessende for the wireless telephone ;-)
Who first used the word and the method of continuous waves?
Who was first to transmit voice over radio?
Who devised a detector for continuous waves?
Who first used the method, and the word heterodyne?
Who was first to send two-way wireless telegraphy messages across the Atlantic ocean?
Who was first to send wireless telephony (voice) across the Atlantic Ocean?
Who made the world's first wireless broadcast (voice and music)?
Fascinating read!
http://www.ieee.ca/millennium/radio/radio_radioscientist.html
> i have NO fucking clue why but women just love that damned thing and funnily enough Age of Empires I of all games
Generally,
Men love to Destroying. i.e. "Fuck it, or Fuck it up" (which is why First Person Shooters sell so well)
Women love Creating and Relationships (which is why The Sims has so many women playing)
It's not rocket science - to study game design is to study psychology, Yin / Yang, etc.
Uh, you *do* realize that ALL (legal) laws are arbitrary right?
Legalism != Morality
Prohibition (in the US) was a perfect example of this.
> that I not attempt to ... use the included artwork to produce offensive documents,
As much as I hate wikipedia I'm going to have to call [Citation] on this one part ...
Thanks for the link !
Please mod parent up -- its not to often you get jazzed about a modern fileystem design and implementation !
I propose developers rename GIMP to end that stupid joke one and for all:
Photo
Image
Manipulation
Program
*ducks* (With apologies to Futurama and Uranus / Urectum. =)
--
TSA: Molesting children since 2001 !
> before it wakes people up to what is going on.
Who?
The general public -- who don't give a shit about copyright laws (the *basis* for Civilization is sharing) -- and don't realize that the justification for censorship is piracy ?
Or the Content creators who don't realize that copyright is dead regardless of what outdated laws say and are trying whatever way they can to regain control over people sharing content? (Unfortunately they never studied Physics or they would realize Newton's Second Law applies on the internet: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.)
ALL (legal) Laws are relative. The sooner we ditch the absurdity of copyright other imaginary property the sooner we all can get on with sharing our culture with one another.
Ah the gool 'ol days of goatse links.
Hmm, ok, maybe not.
=)
> The US has declared wars on drugs, terrorism, copyright violations, crackers, and a whole host of other things.
Yup, gotta love when a government goes after inanimate objects or ideas instead of people actually causing the actual problem.
The problem is Americans have no balls to repeal bad laws.
All good points.
> 3) Enact campaign finance reforms of some sort (the biggest and most challenging issue, though one in which there are many avenues along which to make advances).
Spot on. Money needs to be *completely* removed from politics as a factor otherwise you end up with a death-spiral of who can outbid buying off the public.
The sensible way would to pool ALL donations, and split the balance every month.
I would add the other political reform would be is get rid of the parties, and focus on the *issues*, not this juvenile mudslinging crap that does nothing.
The root problem is most Americans don't give a shit, to actually DO anything to change the existing system.
--
The best part apart of the US is Capitalism. The worst part about the US, ironically, is also Capitalism.
> Saying greed causes financial collapses is like saying gravity causes plane crashes;
Total nonsense analogy.
How did the plane leave the ground *in the first place* ??
So gravity causes a plane sitting on the ground to crash??
The magic words you are looking for is called "temporal ant-ialiasing", but otherwise your post is spot on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_anti-aliasing
I *really* wish they had shot the hobbit at 96 Hz (24 *4) to get above the critical 60 Hz and approach the "good-enough" 72 Hz.