While it would please me to no end for everyone to dump Flash in favor of HTML5+SVG+SMIL/Javascript, the fact is that one or more pieces of software needs to be written to replace the Flash authoring tools. There are many SVG programs, but those don't do everything needed.
The start-up is first to market (by definition), and a huge multinational corporation does not turn on a dime. Nor will they chase after every new idea, nor will they always identify which ideas are the most important ones in the market for the future.
You aren't being judicious enough with your use of W3C specifications. Shouldn't something like SMIL (Javascript too, if you wanted) allow for some basic synchronization between the audio and the SVG animation?
In that the societies mentioned were consuming much faster than the resource could renew itself, I think it to be a valid comparison. Nothing mentioned in the article involved replanting of trees, to my knowledge, but maybe someone knows differently.
A telecomm regulator there said "Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?
If they have a great wall type firewall that everything goes through, they could filter the facebook traffic and replace the offending images with ones that had text reading "A fatwah is declared upon the creators of this disgraceful contest".
Good luck finding the original creators, unless just any scapegoat will do.
Modest fine my ass. If the stories about Schlumberger's test team being prevented by BP from running the tests and needing to call in a helocopter to GTFO before the shit hit the fan is true, BP's in deep shit.
I'm using the Vimperator extension and don't care what the UI looks like, you insensitive clod!
(Also, it's not as if Chrome is the only browser that pre-loads. IE pretty much does it, unless they changed that behavior as part of the "damn, now we actually do have to separate the browser from the OS" initiative.)
Well one thing's for certain: they got the magic ages wrong. Female humans don't mentally mature until around 20. And males?! Those animals aren't even remotely mature until around 25! Out of fairness, the age limit can't be unequal; therefore, I insist that no one 25 years of age or older be permitted to inflict sexual acts upon another younger than 25 years!
If you want to give more to Wolfire, at least, you can also consider pre-ordering the sequel Overgrowth; it's still in production, but if you pre-order, you get a weekly alpha version of the game to fool around with and to make content.
Of course, that money doesn't get split out to the other devs (who probably also have new games in production) or to charity, so if you're not concerned about getting something more for your additional money, nobody's stopping you from buying in a second time.
We can debate whether software should be patentable all day, but video codecs are a pretty clear example of a piece of software that are very expensive to develop and probably do need some kind of patent protection.
So, no one would have made significant progress into lossy multimedia compression if it weren't for patents which cover the algorithms and/or implementation details? What was gained by society through the use of patents? Was it worth the massive costs (monetary, temporal, lack of legal certainty) being imposed on it?
And in a very screwy way, that's actually how the whole patent game is "supposed" to work, i.e., find some reasonable amount to charge for a license, then do it.
As with proprietary software and copyright, perfect enforcement of the law would be just as disastrous as not enforcing at all, so they only care if you're a big-enough fish, and if you're small and are going to get away with infringing, they'd rather you use their product (codecs covered by their patents) and increase the network effect than use somebody else's product (codecs not covered by their patents).
Many "client" applications require server functionality. If ISPs decide to call the no-server bluff and break this functionality, people will not put up with that shit.
Shouldn't it be INTERNET <- PORT80, PORT443? You're talking about outbound traffic firewalling, right? Inbound is explainable by the limitations imposed by NAT.
The first–and only–time I have ever plagiarized was for a project in the fifth grade. We were doing a project using the HyperCard clone HyperStudio, and instead of spending my time understanding the material, I copied a bunch of encyclopedia articles, substituted in some synonyms, changed some word order, pasted the resulting text into the project, then spent most of my time finding sound clips. Basically, I viewed the project more as a technology demonstration than an actual academic exercise. I'm not sure that it ever crossed my mind that I was doing something I should not have done.
Needless to say, my teacher was not amused. He informed me (correctly) that this sort of thing would have gotten me in serious trouble if I had done this the next year. The idea of cheating in my favor has never received consideration since then, and I would rather fail silently than turn in something in dishonesty; the experience was just that traumatizing. Of course, I respected the man, so disappointing him was much more likely to have had an effect on me.
Although our academic environments (ideally) attempt to convey the fact that cheating is wrong, the sad reality is that it happens all the time in the real world, and people who are able to lie, cheat, and steal yet get away with it are celebrated and envied, so people who are less gifted at the lie-cheat-steal game will doubtlessly try to duplicate these efforts with varying amounts of success.
My guess is that most teachers at the junior high / middle school level aren't detecting plagiarism at anywhere near the frequency with which it happens. Probably because they don't get paid enough to put up with teaching children of that age.
Meh, I'm just going to end up ranting aimlessly. I was not a typical student, so I should not expect that those things which worked for me will work for others.
Negotiation among businesses is different from negotiation among nations: in the latter, the negotiations proper should be private, but the discussions of the needs of stakeholders and of the outcome must be public. It's just that, in this particular case, "stakeholder" was construed to exclude citizen-licensers and citizen-licensees and only include large business interests. Therefore, because not only will the process not take our needs into account, they won't even acknowledge them, the retaliatory steps of forcing the negotiations proper to be partially transparent through leaks and of demanding that the negotiations be fully transparent (with the full knowledge that this will not be agreed to) have been taken.
I think it's perfectly reasonable, but then again I am not an executive whose wealthy fiefdom is under assault from a change in economics due to technological advances.
I rarely dial out when driving. I hate doing it too. Most of the time if I receive a call, I'll let it go.
So what I want is a separate voicemail greeting or some other way of communicating status which will let me say that I'm on my goddamn way, so stop calling me to ask where I am. Because as it is right now, I can't effectively communicate the difference between this and my usual "I don't feel like taking your call." (There is a difference.)
So really, phone systems need to be designed better for this use case.
Re:Who cares how? The better question is why the b
on
How Did Wikileaks Do It?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Do note that WikiLeaks spent real money to send real journalists to the actual Iraq to speak to real eyewitnesses and the very children who survived the attack. This was part of the verification process, and I do not see why this additional information gathered to provide context to the video should not also be used to voice some sort of opinion about the ongoing injustices that happen as part of wars. We civilians, removed from the locus of this conflict, tend to marginalize the innocent victims in our own personal evaluations of the war.
FWIW, I don't think that the pilots should ever be punished harshly at this point, as they likely were indeed operating within rules of engagement, as the military concluded. The root cause of the errors lies farther up the chain of command.
Also, remember that this is also about the CYA actions on the part of the military. If they had told Reuters, "Hey, our guys seriously fucked up," and perhaps paid the families of the journalists restitution (which would be the least they could do to somehow attempt to make right), and made significant changes to the rules of engagement, it wouldn't be quite as bad. But of course, this is probably not an isolated incident, and Wikileaks has footage of something in Afghanistan IIRC.
And again, they need money to operate. There is enough of a PR component in all of this that one might consider whether money potentially derived through increased exposure played a factor in this. If so, that's one hell of a calculated gamble.
Slashdot Mirror
Better off pressuring websites to dump flash.
While it would please me to no end for everyone to dump Flash in favor of HTML5+SVG+SMIL/Javascript, the fact is that one or more pieces of software needs to be written to replace the Flash authoring tools. There are many SVG programs, but those don't do everything needed.
And what if the US keeps software patents and then forces it on the world or a significant part thereof a la TRIPS?
The start-up is first to market (by definition), and a huge multinational corporation does not turn on a dime. Nor will they chase after every new idea, nor will they always identify which ideas are the most important ones in the market for the future.
Um, more the other way around.
You aren't being judicious enough with your use of W3C specifications. Shouldn't something like SMIL (Javascript too, if you wanted) allow for some basic synchronization between the audio and the SVG animation?
In that the societies mentioned were consuming much faster than the resource could renew itself, I think it to be a valid comparison. Nothing mentioned in the article involved replanting of trees, to my knowledge, but maybe someone knows differently.
SLAY THOSE WHO INSULT FREE SPEECH
Still, I'm sure that successful troll was quite successful.
A telecomm regulator there said "Facebook will be re-opened once we erase the pages that contain the obnoxious images." And how do they propose to do that?
If they have a great wall type firewall that everything goes through, they could filter the facebook traffic and replace the offending images with ones that had text reading "A fatwah is declared upon the creators of this disgraceful contest".
Good luck finding the original creators, unless just any scapegoat will do.
Also: BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT FREE SPEECH
Modest fine my ass. If the stories about Schlumberger's test team being prevented by BP from running the tests and needing to call in a helocopter to GTFO before the shit hit the fan is true, BP's in deep shit.
SLAY THOSE WHO INSULT FREE SPEECH
(The filter cares not for those who are sarcastic.)
I'm using the Vimperator extension and don't care what the UI looks like, you insensitive clod!
(Also, it's not as if Chrome is the only browser that pre-loads. IE pretty much does it, unless they changed that behavior as part of the "damn, now we actually do have to separate the browser from the OS" initiative.)
Well one thing's for certain: they got the magic ages wrong. Female humans don't mentally mature until around 20. And males?! Those animals aren't even remotely mature until around 25! Out of fairness, the age limit can't be unequal; therefore, I insist that no one 25 years of age or older be permitted to inflict sexual acts upon another younger than 25 years!
Not even a frickin' press release.
Is somebody just trying to generate a few cheap click-throughs? A few unique hits?
Your phalanx unit successfully defends against an attack from an enemy battleship.
Lugaru's got a demo.
If you want to give more to Wolfire, at least, you can also consider pre-ordering the sequel Overgrowth; it's still in production, but if you pre-order, you get a weekly alpha version of the game to fool around with and to make content.
Of course, that money doesn't get split out to the other devs (who probably also have new games in production) or to charity, so if you're not concerned about getting something more for your additional money, nobody's stopping you from buying in a second time.
We can debate whether software should be patentable all day, but video codecs are a pretty clear example of a piece of software that are very expensive to develop and probably do need some kind of patent protection.
So, no one would have made significant progress into lossy multimedia compression if it weren't for patents which cover the algorithms and/or implementation details? What was gained by society through the use of patents? Was it worth the massive costs (monetary, temporal, lack of legal certainty) being imposed on it?
And in a very screwy way, that's actually how the whole patent game is "supposed" to work, i.e., find some reasonable amount to charge for a license, then do it.
As with proprietary software and copyright, perfect enforcement of the law would be just as disastrous as not enforcing at all, so they only care if you're a big-enough fish, and if you're small and are going to get away with infringing, they'd rather you use their product (codecs covered by their patents) and increase the network effect than use somebody else's product (codecs not covered by their patents).
It is a mechanical error. The mechanics are electrochemical, but still...
Many "client" applications require server functionality. If ISPs decide to call the no-server bluff and break this functionality, people will not put up with that shit.
Shouldn't it be INTERNET <- PORT80, PORT443? You're talking about outbound traffic firewalling, right? Inbound is explainable by the limitations imposed by NAT.
It's only an anecdote, but...
The first–and only–time I have ever plagiarized was for a project in the fifth grade. We were doing a project using the HyperCard clone HyperStudio, and instead of spending my time understanding the material, I copied a bunch of encyclopedia articles, substituted in some synonyms, changed some word order, pasted the resulting text into the project, then spent most of my time finding sound clips. Basically, I viewed the project more as a technology demonstration than an actual academic exercise. I'm not sure that it ever crossed my mind that I was doing something I should not have done.
Needless to say, my teacher was not amused. He informed me (correctly) that this sort of thing would have gotten me in serious trouble if I had done this the next year. The idea of cheating in my favor has never received consideration since then, and I would rather fail silently than turn in something in dishonesty; the experience was just that traumatizing. Of course, I respected the man, so disappointing him was much more likely to have had an effect on me.
Although our academic environments (ideally) attempt to convey the fact that cheating is wrong, the sad reality is that it happens all the time in the real world, and people who are able to lie, cheat, and steal yet get away with it are celebrated and envied, so people who are less gifted at the lie-cheat-steal game will doubtlessly try to duplicate these efforts with varying amounts of success.
My guess is that most teachers at the junior high / middle school level aren't detecting plagiarism at anywhere near the frequency with which it happens. Probably because they don't get paid enough to put up with teaching children of that age.
Meh, I'm just going to end up ranting aimlessly. I was not a typical student, so I should not expect that those things which worked for me will work for others.
Negotiation among businesses is different from negotiation among nations: in the latter, the negotiations proper should be private, but the discussions of the needs of stakeholders and of the outcome must be public. It's just that, in this particular case, "stakeholder" was construed to exclude citizen-licensers and citizen-licensees and only include large business interests. Therefore, because not only will the process not take our needs into account, they won't even acknowledge them, the retaliatory steps of forcing the negotiations proper to be partially transparent through leaks and of demanding that the negotiations be fully transparent (with the full knowledge that this will not be agreed to) have been taken.
I think it's perfectly reasonable, but then again I am not an executive whose wealthy fiefdom is under assault from a change in economics due to technological advances.
I rarely dial out when driving. I hate doing it too. Most of the time if I receive a call, I'll let it go.
So what I want is a separate voicemail greeting or some other way of communicating status which will let me say that I'm on my goddamn way, so stop calling me to ask where I am. Because as it is right now, I can't effectively communicate the difference between this and my usual "I don't feel like taking your call." (There is a difference.)
So really, phone systems need to be designed better for this use case.
Do note that WikiLeaks spent real money to send real journalists to the actual Iraq to speak to real eyewitnesses and the very children who survived the attack. This was part of the verification process, and I do not see why this additional information gathered to provide context to the video should not also be used to voice some sort of opinion about the ongoing injustices that happen as part of wars. We civilians, removed from the locus of this conflict, tend to marginalize the innocent victims in our own personal evaluations of the war.
FWIW, I don't think that the pilots should ever be punished harshly at this point, as they likely were indeed operating within rules of engagement, as the military concluded. The root cause of the errors lies farther up the chain of command.
Also, remember that this is also about the CYA actions on the part of the military. If they had told Reuters, "Hey, our guys seriously fucked up," and perhaps paid the families of the journalists restitution (which would be the least they could do to somehow attempt to make right), and made significant changes to the rules of engagement, it wouldn't be quite as bad. But of course, this is probably not an isolated incident, and Wikileaks has footage of something in Afghanistan IIRC.
And again, they need money to operate. There is enough of a PR component in all of this that one might consider whether money potentially derived through increased exposure played a factor in this. If so, that's one hell of a calculated gamble.