He said "pull it", where "it" is very vague indeed. He was just previously talking about the rescue effort, so it would make sense that he meant to say "pull [the rescue effort]". If he'd used a different term than "pull", it would have been blindingly obvious what he was on about. And the BBC, just like every other news agency on 9/11, was getting bad information from people running around screaming that the world was ending. They simply reported something incorrectly, which later turned out to happen - no evidence of them knowing what was happening. I think something weird happened on 9/11 - but those two pieces of "evidence" are easily explained away.
It isn't - that movie at the top is a demonstration, as you need the Photosynth plugin to actually use photosynth, and that most certainly isn't Flash. In fact, their labs page (the original location of photosynth) was in Silverlight.
Mod me down if anyone wants, but I get less nagging in IE than in FireFox. For one, updates to IE are performed in the background, and installed when the computer is turned off (or when the user elects to install them). In FireFox, sometimes it gets the new updates, and when I try to start it, it says "installing updates" and keeps me waiting for a minute or so before letting me use the web. Clearly I wanted to use the web from before I clicked the icon, so why does it think installing updates instead is a good idea? One of those usability things that just doesn't gel with me, I guess.
I hear ya. And yeah, ActionScript 3 is ECMAscript-compliant. It's a pretty good language, actually. It's been tied in very nicely with the flash "MovieClip" paradigm.
"Futility" is the word you're looking for. If you think the safety net of society is allowing most of the people to be killed by their own army, then you're doing it wrong.
You can do that in Flash quite easily. AS3 has this ExternalInterface class that can communicate with JavaScript, which in turn can update the DOM. Ideally Flash would do it itself, but I guess for compatibility they made it work that way. You can make a 10x10 Flash movie that is only AS3 - it's invisible, loads in a few seconds, and can do all kinds of things, such as robust and fast XML handling, communication over the web, etc. It's interesting stuff. Then there's the alternative of having a flash app load in the entire window, which can be fantastically useful (though easily abused).
1. Everyone stops using web apps 2. You stop using web apps
Considering option 1. will mean many people who actually like using web apps, and who use them to do work, will have to find some other way of working because evilviper doesn't approve of their preferred tools, I think option 2. might be better for everyone.
You != every other motherfucker on this planet. Once you realise that, hopefully/. will be free of these "get off my lawn" bullshit "I am the universe" posts.
As with all powerful technologies, it can easily be misused. Just because it's used for many fucked-up things doesn't mean to say it has a very useful part to play in the web. I've used it for navigation in sites before (shock! horror!), and it didn't break the site in any way. The site is still 100% accessible, can still be indexed perfectly by search engines, and works fine for people without flash or javascript. If your client wants a site with something that can only be done in flash, and which won't break the site, what's the problem? It's another tool in the chest. And please check out Google Maps' flash implementation - it shits all over the HTML/JavaScript one.
Scientists don't listen to people. They listen to evidence. Evolution has a shitload. Gravity has a shitload. Science has a shitload. The Bible has none. Favourable reviews don't count as evidence. You can take all the nice fuzzy-feeling stories from the bible if you want. Heck - go right ahead. Read about all that stuff - no problem. It's when the Bible (crafted in the bronze age) starts trying to explain things we had no idea of back then, which have since been identified, studied, classified, by scientists (with supporting evidence anyone can verify), that we have problems. People think the bible is inherently truthful, which is complete horseshit. It was written by men, it is flawed. Using an old book to teach science is fucking retarded. Not to mention the obvious marks of man's authorship all over the damn thing, but I digress. Bible != science. Using the Bible to learn science is like using science to learn religion. Retarded.
Nope. Saying "well, all civilians could be armed, so they'll all be treated as such" is not OK, no matter how you define what OK is, as it means innocent civilians, who never even thought of picking up arms, are being punished for the actions of others, by being endangered. Collective punishment, which this is eerily similar to, is illegal under the geneva conventions. Easy != OK.
Also, when warfare is so ridiclously asymmetric as we're seeing, expecting people to play by the rules is ridiculous, as someone staring down the barrel of an M1A2 is going to do all they can to not be in that position in the first place, when their entire arsenal is an AK-47 and some cheap explosives. What to the west might be a "minor peacekeeping mission" is "life or death, protect my country, my people, my family, at all costs" to others. Just take a look at the Auxillary Units of World War 2 - uniforms be damned, if it's life or death. Everything is out of the window. It doesn't make sense when the commander in a tank is complaining about the targets he's sighting are wearing civilian clothes. I doubt any US troops would be in front of the enemy in such tiny numbers marching forwards to their slaughter. It's suicide, and everyone knows it, on both sides.
Well, this is going to sound weird (and I await any and all flamers/trolls), but I'm a web developer (php, actionscript), and I prefer IE over FireFox. I find IE does a few key things better than FireFox. I might be able to enable them in the FF options, but as long as IE works as I want, I don't feel the need to switch. The main thing is in IE, Ctrl+N makes an exact clone of the current window - your history is intact, and you end up back in the current page. I use that feature a lot when I have an idea based on what I'm reading, or if I want to revisit a page quickly. I also don't like how FireFox installs updates - I'm sure I can turn it off, but I really shouldn't have to disable a feature that makes me wait a minute or two to install updates. Surely that can be done in the background. Anyway, I digress - don't assume everyone who knows of FireFox wants to use it. I don't give a damn about standards when I'm surfing the net as a civilian - I just want websites that work, and I've yet to find any show-stoppers in IE.
Oh dear oh dear. "Will always be broken". No. Clearly, as other countries in the world have very effective welfare systems, you are clearly talking out of your ass. Nice try. You are clearly arguing some other point, and not how well welfare can work. I don't expect to change your mind - I just want an opposite opinion to yours next to your ridiculous assertions.
Scientists don't just believe things written in books unless there is good reason to, such as different teams achieving the same results, and published findings, all peer-reviewed. Comparing that to the bible is pretty silly, considering the only thing they have in common is the use of words. Obviously each and every scientist having to perform every experiment ever conducted throughout history is not good for humanity, hence science's incredible ability to score a line under each one, and allow science to progress. That is real science.
That's a great idea! Once all the welfare programs are ended, and NASA gets funding, maybe NASA can help society stabilise itself after the hospitals and prisons are full of people dying from starvation and people stealing to survive! That's a great idea! Fucking 'tard. Fix welfare - make it rehabilitation into the workforce - don't scrap it. That has to be the most selfish, short-sighted comment I've read on/. in a while. Just because *you* might not need welfare doesn't mean it's not required by society. Jesus christ I'm amazed someone has to spell it out to you, but then you seem like an American Republican, so I guess I shouldn't be that shocked. Though I bet you're going to tell me you're a Libertarian, which you think is something different from republican. Insanity: you have it.
I think it's called "Learning". It happens during campaigns, too. Or do you want politicians to not change their stances if they learn something, because they learned during a campaign? That seems like you only care about the outward appearance of a campaign as opposed to what's actually being said. "Candidate 1 hasn't changed his stance, so clearly he's the best candidate. I don't agree with what he says, but heck - he's consistent!". That sounds a bit retarded to me.
Nope. I'm just calling out folks who bitch and moan about where a technology came from, as opposed to what said technology actually does. It smacks of bullshit.
But it introduces the problem of a checkout person trying to figure out exactly what kind of produce is in the bag, causing every single person in the queue to be delayed. If you buy the produce, it makes sense only you get the time penalty. It might only be a few seconds for the person being served, but it adds up in long queues. I like the German way, personally. Quick, efficient, painless. Those ruthless Germans.
I prefer checkout to be as quick as possible, as not everyone in the queue is buying weighed goods. In our local shop you weigh your own produce, and at the checkout the barcodes are simply scanned, and you're away. It doesn't make a great deal of sense to have a person look up what the produce is when you already know what it is, especially when you can bag it, weigh it, and price it yourself. But I guess I'm not that lazy;)
Idiot. Seriously. Flash serves a very useful purpose. If you don't understand that, fine - don't get all sandgina-ey and bitch about it on slashdot. You're only making yourself look like an ass.
Slashdot Mirror
He said "pull it", where "it" is very vague indeed. He was just previously talking about the rescue effort, so it would make sense that he meant to say "pull [the rescue effort]". If he'd used a different term than "pull", it would have been blindingly obvious what he was on about. And the BBC, just like every other news agency on 9/11, was getting bad information from people running around screaming that the world was ending. They simply reported something incorrectly, which later turned out to happen - no evidence of them knowing what was happening. I think something weird happened on 9/11 - but those two pieces of "evidence" are easily explained away.
Open source gives you that freedom if there are open source alternatives out there. Which isn't all the time.
It isn't - that movie at the top is a demonstration, as you need the Photosynth plugin to actually use photosynth, and that most certainly isn't Flash. In fact, their labs page (the original location of photosynth) was in Silverlight.
Mod me down if anyone wants, but I get less nagging in IE than in FireFox. For one, updates to IE are performed in the background, and installed when the computer is turned off (or when the user elects to install them). In FireFox, sometimes it gets the new updates, and when I try to start it, it says "installing updates" and keeps me waiting for a minute or so before letting me use the web. Clearly I wanted to use the web from before I clicked the icon, so why does it think installing updates instead is a good idea? One of those usability things that just doesn't gel with me, I guess.
I hear ya. And yeah, ActionScript 3 is ECMAscript-compliant. It's a pretty good language, actually. It's been tied in very nicely with the flash "MovieClip" paradigm.
"Futility" is the word you're looking for. If you think the safety net of society is allowing most of the people to be killed by their own army, then you're doing it wrong.
You can do that in Flash quite easily. AS3 has this ExternalInterface class that can communicate with JavaScript, which in turn can update the DOM. Ideally Flash would do it itself, but I guess for compatibility they made it work that way. You can make a 10x10 Flash movie that is only AS3 - it's invisible, loads in a few seconds, and can do all kinds of things, such as robust and fast XML handling, communication over the web, etc. It's interesting stuff. Then there's the alternative of having a flash app load in the entire window, which can be fantastically useful (though easily abused).
So we can fix this in two ways:
1. Everyone stops using web apps
2. You stop using web apps
Considering option 1. will mean many people who actually like using web apps, and who use them to do work, will have to find some other way of working because evilviper doesn't approve of their preferred tools, I think option 2. might be better for everyone.
You != every other motherfucker on this planet. Once you realise that, hopefully /. will be free of these "get off my lawn" bullshit "I am the universe" posts.
As with all powerful technologies, it can easily be misused. Just because it's used for many fucked-up things doesn't mean to say it has a very useful part to play in the web. I've used it for navigation in sites before (shock! horror!), and it didn't break the site in any way. The site is still 100% accessible, can still be indexed perfectly by search engines, and works fine for people without flash or javascript. If your client wants a site with something that can only be done in flash, and which won't break the site, what's the problem? It's another tool in the chest. And please check out Google Maps' flash implementation - it shits all over the HTML/JavaScript one.
No. Not even close.
Scientists don't listen to people. They listen to evidence. Evolution has a shitload. Gravity has a shitload. Science has a shitload. The Bible has none. Favourable reviews don't count as evidence. You can take all the nice fuzzy-feeling stories from the bible if you want. Heck - go right ahead. Read about all that stuff - no problem. It's when the Bible (crafted in the bronze age) starts trying to explain things we had no idea of back then, which have since been identified, studied, classified, by scientists (with supporting evidence anyone can verify), that we have problems. People think the bible is inherently truthful, which is complete horseshit. It was written by men, it is flawed. Using an old book to teach science is fucking retarded. Not to mention the obvious marks of man's authorship all over the damn thing, but I digress. Bible != science. Using the Bible to learn science is like using science to learn religion. Retarded.
Nope. Saying "well, all civilians could be armed, so they'll all be treated as such" is not OK, no matter how you define what OK is, as it means innocent civilians, who never even thought of picking up arms, are being punished for the actions of others, by being endangered. Collective punishment, which this is eerily similar to, is illegal under the geneva conventions. Easy != OK.
Also, when warfare is so ridiclously asymmetric as we're seeing, expecting people to play by the rules is ridiculous, as someone staring down the barrel of an M1A2 is going to do all they can to not be in that position in the first place, when their entire arsenal is an AK-47 and some cheap explosives. What to the west might be a "minor peacekeeping mission" is "life or death, protect my country, my people, my family, at all costs" to others. Just take a look at the Auxillary Units of World War 2 - uniforms be damned, if it's life or death. Everything is out of the window. It doesn't make sense when the commander in a tank is complaining about the targets he's sighting are wearing civilian clothes. I doubt any US troops would be in front of the enemy in such tiny numbers marching forwards to their slaughter. It's suicide, and everyone knows it, on both sides.
Well, this is going to sound weird (and I await any and all flamers/trolls), but I'm a web developer (php, actionscript), and I prefer IE over FireFox. I find IE does a few key things better than FireFox. I might be able to enable them in the FF options, but as long as IE works as I want, I don't feel the need to switch. The main thing is in IE, Ctrl+N makes an exact clone of the current window - your history is intact, and you end up back in the current page. I use that feature a lot when I have an idea based on what I'm reading, or if I want to revisit a page quickly. I also don't like how FireFox installs updates - I'm sure I can turn it off, but I really shouldn't have to disable a feature that makes me wait a minute or two to install updates. Surely that can be done in the background. Anyway, I digress - don't assume everyone who knows of FireFox wants to use it. I don't give a damn about standards when I'm surfing the net as a civilian - I just want websites that work, and I've yet to find any show-stoppers in IE.
Oh dear oh dear. "Will always be broken". No. Clearly, as other countries in the world have very effective welfare systems, you are clearly talking out of your ass. Nice try. You are clearly arguing some other point, and not how well welfare can work. I don't expect to change your mind - I just want an opposite opinion to yours next to your ridiculous assertions.
Scientists don't just believe things written in books unless there is good reason to, such as different teams achieving the same results, and published findings, all peer-reviewed. Comparing that to the bible is pretty silly, considering the only thing they have in common is the use of words. Obviously each and every scientist having to perform every experiment ever conducted throughout history is not good for humanity, hence science's incredible ability to score a line under each one, and allow science to progress. That is real science.
Telling the truth != bashing. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's bashing. He has a point.
It's a shame apostrophes don't cost money.
That's a great idea! Once all the welfare programs are ended, and NASA gets funding, maybe NASA can help society stabilise itself after the hospitals and prisons are full of people dying from starvation and people stealing to survive! That's a great idea! Fucking 'tard. Fix welfare - make it rehabilitation into the workforce - don't scrap it. That has to be the most selfish, short-sighted comment I've read on /. in a while. Just because *you* might not need welfare doesn't mean it's not required by society. Jesus christ I'm amazed someone has to spell it out to you, but then you seem like an American Republican, so I guess I shouldn't be that shocked. Though I bet you're going to tell me you're a Libertarian, which you think is something different from republican. Insanity: you have it.
I think it's called "Learning". It happens during campaigns, too. Or do you want politicians to not change their stances if they learn something, because they learned during a campaign? That seems like you only care about the outward appearance of a campaign as opposed to what's actually being said. "Candidate 1 hasn't changed his stance, so clearly he's the best candidate. I don't agree with what he says, but heck - he's consistent!". That sounds a bit retarded to me.
Aaah - Libertarian. The "selfish republicans". Nice. Bitter Old Guy indeed.
Nope. I'm just calling out folks who bitch and moan about where a technology came from, as opposed to what said technology actually does. It smacks of bullshit.
But it introduces the problem of a checkout person trying to figure out exactly what kind of produce is in the bag, causing every single person in the queue to be delayed. If you buy the produce, it makes sense only you get the time penalty. It might only be a few seconds for the person being served, but it adds up in long queues. I like the German way, personally. Quick, efficient, painless. Those ruthless Germans.
I prefer checkout to be as quick as possible, as not everyone in the queue is buying weighed goods. In our local shop you weigh your own produce, and at the checkout the barcodes are simply scanned, and you're away. It doesn't make a great deal of sense to have a person look up what the produce is when you already know what it is, especially when you can bag it, weigh it, and price it yourself. But I guess I'm not that lazy ;)
Idiot. Seriously. Flash serves a very useful purpose. If you don't understand that, fine - don't get all sandgina-ey and bitch about it on slashdot. You're only making yourself look like an ass.
Video is being delivered as a proper file. Original->FLV. Ta-daah!