Because how could a psychologist ever understand the human thought process that is involved when solving complex creative problems, that programming often poses?
I get tens of Windows-Virus-mails and attemted IIS infections per day.
And this makes Windows more insecure how? You're getting attempts, and emails, and from the sound of it, just that... attempts...
So how is it this the "standard winlot conclusion"?
The whitepaper lists two emails:
shollenbeck@verisign.com
mlarsen@verisign.com
Write them. I'm writing them something like the following.
Their intentions might be fine, but things such as intercepting "no host found", should be done at an as low level as possible.
Does Verisign localize it's service? Intercepting this, at the higest possible level, leaves no one else in to the game. It's not only wrong, it's shoddy service and plain bad design in a system such as the internet. Unless this is rectified, I will no longer do bussiness with Verisign.
Then you get into a battle of words of the meaning "dynamic", I use the word dynamic, in the way it was introduced, with the level 4 browsers, "DHTML" capabilities.
To say that Netscape 3 did "Dynamic" HTML doesn't hold up.
As for DOM content changing, doesn't hold either. Changing DOM content was one of the first things Netscape allowed, mostly via forms. Is changing the value of a form element truly "Dynamic" HTML? Only in the real sense of the meaning "dynamic", and not in the way it has achieved popularity, as Dynamic HTML in level 4 browser (colourfull stuff flying around).
DHTML was coined, as the combination of HTML providing structure, CSS providing presentation, and JavaScript providing logic.
If you just use HTML and JavaScript, you're just doing a plain HTML page with logic (like form checkers).
I would also note, that JavaScript object are already hash tables, so "simulating hash arrays" isn't really needed (or I fail to see where it becomes relevant?)
object["myprop"] == object.myprop
There's only one book JavaScript programmers need, the rhino book. It's all in that. Everything else is just experience, and cannot be conveyed by a bunch of scripts. Or if it can convey something, it's most likely because said reader didn't catch it in the Rhino book;)
What a boring story. First off, who doesn't know about Dvorak/QWERTY by now? Boring.
Second, that article is about as contentless as the average EULA from Microsoft.
Let's take a look at why these keyboards are quiet, and what the keyboards are sacrificing, if anything, to obtain this quietness.
Great, WHY DONT YOU THEN?
He doesn't. He shows us alot of images, and tells us what the keyboards are made off. End of story. Oops, yeah, forgot about the actual "sacrifice" part. But who was paying attention anyway?
I tried with both IE and Mozilla, and saw nothing. And I'm sorry about my first post, I'm new to Slashdot, and I hadn't selected the "plain old text":p
Augment it possibly with an image, that could prove incredibly usefull, but naturally, it would require "prefetching" of all links, and might be a bit slow at first. But I dont see why it shouldn't work. Or maybe grab all the h1 tags, or if the author didn't use a title attribute for the link, go and grab the title tag for the linked to page. It could be incredibly resource intensive, to be usable. Userfeedback, should not be more then 0.1 seconds, before it becomes noticable, and then you're just making the user wait.
But as others have commented, the browser has reached a usable stage. Look at the word processors, they have changed fundamentally in years. The only new thing tends to be colloborative features.
And I expect the web to do the same, as it becomes more and more integrated with daily work. No longer will be just "surf the web", like it was a static document. Imagine a intranet portal, where there could be live chat, annotaitions of pages and so on. And yeah, all these things exists in their rudimentary form, but no good implementation is out there. But I guess this is more then just the browser, it would require a big OS intergration, to be truly fluent (anyone smell something MS?).
What Marc doesn't see, is that the browser, as a standalone program, is essentially a document viewer. Just what does he want?
Aside from graphical browsing, and scripting, I fail to see any truly revolutionizing work from Netscape's side. SSL, HTML extensions, DHTML, are all "add ons", or logical conclusions for common needs (fx SSL).
Slashdot Mirror
Because how could a psychologist ever understand the human thought process that is involved when solving complex creative problems, that programming often poses?
And I suppose you will cover bandwidth costs? I don't know why people have some strange idea, that things are free online...
The whitepaper lists two emails: shollenbeck@verisign.com mlarsen@verisign.com Write them. I'm writing them something like the following. Their intentions might be fine, but things such as intercepting "no host found", should be done at an as low level as possible. Does Verisign localize it's service? Intercepting this, at the higest possible level, leaves no one else in to the game. It's not only wrong, it's shoddy service and plain bad design in a system such as the internet. Unless this is rectified, I will no longer do bussiness with Verisign.
Sadly, Google is subject to locality (and thus, legality.)
Then you get into a battle of words of the meaning "dynamic", I use the word dynamic, in the way it was introduced, with the level 4 browsers, "DHTML" capabilities. To say that Netscape 3 did "Dynamic" HTML doesn't hold up. As for DOM content changing, doesn't hold either. Changing DOM content was one of the first things Netscape allowed, mostly via forms. Is changing the value of a form element truly "Dynamic" HTML? Only in the real sense of the meaning "dynamic", and not in the way it has achieved popularity, as Dynamic HTML in level 4 browser (colourfull stuff flying around).
"often with CSS"? That doesn't even make sense.
;)
DHTML was coined, as the combination of HTML providing structure, CSS providing presentation, and JavaScript providing logic.
If you just use HTML and JavaScript, you're just doing a plain HTML page with logic (like form checkers).
I would also note, that JavaScript object are already hash tables, so "simulating hash arrays" isn't really needed (or I fail to see where it becomes relevant?)
object["myprop"] == object.myprop
There's only one book JavaScript programmers need, the rhino book. It's all in that. Everything else is just experience, and cannot be conveyed by a bunch of scripts. Or if it can convey something, it's most likely because said reader didn't catch it in the Rhino book
Would it be fair use to "thumbnail" a song, by using a low bitrate mp3 sampling?
Just when is "thumbnailing" thumbnailing? What if I scale an image down 1%? 50%?
While not binding, this is kinda interesting.
What a boring story. First off, who doesn't know about Dvorak/QWERTY by now? Boring.
Second, that article is about as contentless as the average EULA from Microsoft.
Great, WHY DONT YOU THEN?
He doesn't. He shows us alot of images, and tells us what the keyboards are made off. End of story. Oops, yeah, forgot about the actual "sacrifice" part. But who was paying attention anyway?
http://www.the-underdogs.org/ ?
:p
I tried with both IE and Mozilla, and saw nothing. And I'm sorry about my first post, I'm new to Slashdot, and I hadn't selected the "plain old text"
Augment it possibly with an image, that could prove incredibly usefull, but naturally, it would require "prefetching" of all links, and might be a bit slow at first. But I dont see why it shouldn't work. Or maybe grab all the h1 tags, or if the author didn't use a title attribute for the link, go and grab the title tag for the linked to page. It could be incredibly resource intensive, to be usable. Userfeedback, should not be more then 0.1 seconds, before it becomes noticable, and then you're just making the user wait. But as others have commented, the browser has reached a usable stage. Look at the word processors, they have changed fundamentally in years. The only new thing tends to be colloborative features. And I expect the web to do the same, as it becomes more and more integrated with daily work. No longer will be just "surf the web", like it was a static document. Imagine a intranet portal, where there could be live chat, annotaitions of pages and so on. And yeah, all these things exists in their rudimentary form, but no good implementation is out there. But I guess this is more then just the browser, it would require a big OS intergration, to be truly fluent (anyone smell something MS?). What Marc doesn't see, is that the browser, as a standalone program, is essentially a document viewer. Just what does he want? Aside from graphical browsing, and scripting, I fail to see any truly revolutionizing work from Netscape's side. SSL, HTML extensions, DHTML, are all "add ons", or logical conclusions for common needs (fx SSL).