If civilization 1000 years from now will be a continuity of our own, they will have probably most of the records we and people in between wished to preserve, plus a lot of junk. While not absolutely everything, it'll still tell quite a lot, even compared to the "good'ol analogue past".
If there will be no continuity...well, with our current development that would probably mean a catastrophe that makes middle ages look like vacations on tropical beach. Not only digital records would fall victim to this en masse.
A variant of NoScript is built in, likewise for very comprehensive keyboard-only navigation (you can't expect that other browsers/extensions, to which you are used, will copy Opera functionality in exactly the same way)
Feedreader is built in.
DownThemAll is trivial to implement in UserJS; apart from that Opera can list all links on given page.
The reason why some sites don't work well in Opera is that webdevs at your place still think in terms of browser monopoly, "we can just target IE", only they exchanged it for browser duopoly "we can just target IE and Gecko". I think it will improve though, with Webkit on the rise, which is similarly standards-compliant and nonstandards-intolerant to Opera. Yeah, a bit chicken and egg problem.
Once your part of the web becomes browser-agnostic, Opera will work great. Like it is here to a large degree; current stats:
- Gecko 46.8%
- IE 42.8%
- Opera 8.4%
- Webkit 2%
Even better in one neighbouring country, IMHO:
- IE 41%
- Opera 31.9%
- Gecko 24.5%
- Webkit 2.6% And not because of much larger Opera usage; as you can see, they seem to go towards roughly equal usage share of all major engines (with Webkit/Chrome (no Macs here...) having also relatively more rapid uptake), of which I would be glad the most. Everybody could use the engine/browser they simply like more.
BTW, content-wise, my part of the web is rather poor so I usually browse through "IE & Gecko" dominated part...and it's already good IMHO (though that might have something to do with the kinds of sites I browse...)
Tab Mix Plus - sorta built in, similarly to the above, only more (of course other browsers won't copy functionalities from Opera in the same way as they are implemented in Opera) - it has sligthly different ways of navigating tabs, also no need for scrolling in menu listing tabs (no matter how many), also treeview in sidebar, and..."hold down RMB and move scrollwheel"
I haven't heard about Liveheaders funcionality though; I guess it could be done with UserJS.
Mehhh...in every thread about Opera those misconceptions.
Adblock - http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/ that's basically the same list that Adblock addon uses. It certainly blocks everything just as well. And the functionality itself is built in, no messing around with plugins. According to my buddy who moved from FF to Opera, style file works slightly better at hiding empty spots. And, if something isn't blocked, you have a nice way of blocking this and similar elements through Opera UI.
GreaseMonkey - you do understand Opera pioneered also this functionality, right? Check UserJS (it is capable of running many GreaseMonkey scripts btw)
FxIF - built in. Didn't it ever occured to you to just right click on the frakking image and bring up properties?
del.icio.us, Twitter - something wrong with bookmarklets placed within one click, on navigation bar?
I guess the main problem of Opera is that people assume, because of beeing used to other apps, that there's now way it can pack so much in so little executable, so properly/speedy implemented.
...It definitely feels faster than the other major browsers...
Especially since it remains fully responsive with much bigger number of open tabs than other browsers. So...you just open interesting pages in new tabs by middleclick where they load without locking the UI (Opera is quite multithreaded AFAIK) and wait, ready, for you (yeah, in that light I'm not that interested in Opera Turbo feature...perhaps when I'll be on 3G)
Plus it has several properly implemented ways of navigating said large number of tabs tabs (you don't have scroll tabbar or "window" menu, sidebar has treeview, and..."hold down RMB and, without releasing, move scrollwheel"), and also full keyboard navigation.
They're definitely doing more, for example image recompression (perhaps using better at low quality setting format than jpeg, like jpeg2000, for example?)
But bringing up Slashdot after typing in address bar "/." and hitting enter is the default behavior in every Opera installation on the planet (well, at least I'm sure about the desktop ones)
Makes you wonder how cool place to work Opera Software ASA must be...;p
That was, somewhat, also my point - by showing original poster that there are more profound, unanswered questions about theological concept of "soul", like "what it is actually?" and "does it exist anyway?"
However, IMO, you can't equate in a discussion "soul" with consciousness, like you seem to did when answering my 1st question. It gives undeserved legitimacy to the "soul" concept.
Their UI is not in Qt, they are using only some elements from given 3rd party toolkits/platforms (like file selector), but the the UI of Opera itself is developed in-house.
Possibly weird feel of UI? I remember it was really an issue at the beginning - Opera uses its own UI toolkit, with a bit different feel (I don't mean look!) than most UIs; not slower btw, quite the contrary.
Well, yeah, but that's just semantics / attaching values to particular event based on its "goodness" to us.
When it comes to underlying causes of occurence both amazing "miracles" and unspeakable tragedies follow common pattern, that dictated by statistic odds.
... I still remain extremely skeptical, however, that humanity will ever see the emergence of truly strong (human level or greater) AI. It is worth remembering that strong AI is a fundamentally and profoundly atheistic concept; the possibility of it more or less presumes a definitely atheistic universe as a prerequisite. For those of us who believe in the existence of God, (or at least the soul) the idea (at least in terms of non-biologically generated, acorporeal AI, a la SkyNET; AI derived biomechanically is a seperate concept) therefore has some fairly serious problems.
The answer to this dilemma is a very simple one, IMHO.
Namely, we have NO confirmed processes that would absolutelly require "supernatural" influence (no, there are no solid miracles - nobody ever survived decapitation, no human has grown back an amputated leg; things which people call miracles often originate, in medical examples, from misunderstanding of statistical probablities: natural mechanisms of your body can triumph over seemingly very bad ods, just like they can succumb to very minor dangers (why isn't it a miracle when somebody dies from common flu?)).
In every past instance where religions assumed supernatural influence required, it was shown, eventually, that those were purely natural processes. We have no instance where it was shown that, indeed, naturalistic approach isn't enough (we do have many things we don't know how to explain yet, but no evidence that they can't be explained by naturalistic approach). And actually, rate of "big" miracles greatly lessened over time, in accordance with our developments of better information gathering and transmitting means (you really think that's just a coincidence?)
So...why sociocultural artifact/meme "human intelligence is special, doesn't fit with the Universe" be any different? Especially that a) we have evidence suggesting it's a product of adaptation b) we have no evidence suggesting supernatural influence c) we have no evidence that would prevent strong AI from existing.
Will this civilisation/planet/universe see emergence of strong AI? I don't know.
Slashdot Mirror
And you think "see all links" view in Opera doesn't have filtering by given phrase (say, ".jpg") why, exactly?
Oh yeah, you haven't ever used it in more capacity than naked FF or IE.
(I seem to remember also specifically mentioning UserJS apart from "see all links"; hmmm...must be getting old)
If civilization 1000 years from now will be a continuity of our own, they will have probably most of the records we and people in between wished to preserve, plus a lot of junk. While not absolutely everything, it'll still tell quite a lot, even compared to the "good'ol analogue past".
If there will be no continuity...well, with our current development that would probably mean a catastrophe that makes middle ages look like vacations on tropical beach. Not only digital records would fall victim to this en masse.
Ehhh...
A variant of NoScript is built in, likewise for very comprehensive keyboard-only navigation (you can't expect that other browsers/extensions, to which you are used, will copy Opera functionality in exactly the same way)
Feedreader is built in.
DownThemAll is trivial to implement in UserJS; apart from that Opera can list all links on given page.
When will you see the pattern?
The reason why some sites don't work well in Opera is that webdevs at your place still think in terms of browser monopoly, "we can just target IE", only they exchanged it for browser duopoly "we can just target IE and Gecko". I think it will improve though, with Webkit on the rise, which is similarly standards-compliant and nonstandards-intolerant to Opera. Yeah, a bit chicken and egg problem.
Once your part of the web becomes browser-agnostic, Opera will work great. Like it is here to a large degree; current stats:
- Gecko 46.8%
- IE 42.8%
- Opera 8.4%
- Webkit 2%
Even better in one neighbouring country, IMHO:
- IE 41%
- Opera 31.9%
- Gecko 24.5%
- Webkit 2.6%
And not because of much larger Opera usage; as you can see, they seem to go towards roughly equal usage share of all major engines (with Webkit/Chrome (no Macs here...) having also relatively more rapid uptake), of which I would be glad the most. Everybody could use the engine/browser they simply like more.
BTW, content-wise, my part of the web is rather poor so I usually browse through "IE & Gecko" dominated part...and it's already good IMHO (though that might have something to do with the kinds of sites I browse...)
Opera uses its own UI toolkit. Qt is only used in things like file selector in Linux version.
Opera uses Qt practically only for functionalities like file selector in Linux version. It really uses its own UI toolkit.
Hence the "more profound, unanswered questions" in my post.
Adblock - built in (check this post http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1256745&cid=28208737 )
Firebug - built in.
Flashblock - built in.
Tab Mix Plus - sorta built in, similarly to the above, only more (of course other browsers won't copy functionalities from Opera in the same way as they are implemented in Opera) - it has sligthly different ways of navigating tabs, also no need for scrolling in menu listing tabs (no matter how many), also treeview in sidebar, and..."hold down RMB and move scrollwheel"
I haven't heard about Liveheaders funcionality though; I guess it could be done with UserJS.
Mehhh...in every thread about Opera those misconceptions.
Adblock - http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/ that's basically the same list that Adblock addon uses. It certainly blocks everything just as well. And the functionality itself is built in, no messing around with plugins. According to my buddy who moved from FF to Opera, style file works slightly better at hiding empty spots. And, if something isn't blocked, you have a nice way of blocking this and similar elements through Opera UI.
GreaseMonkey - you do understand Opera pioneered also this functionality, right? Check UserJS (it is capable of running many GreaseMonkey scripts btw)
FxIF - built in. Didn't it ever occured to you to just right click on the frakking image and bring up properties?
del.icio.us, Twitter - something wrong with bookmarklets placed within one click, on navigation bar?
I guess the main problem of Opera is that people assume, because of beeing used to other apps, that there's now way it can pack so much in so little executable, so properly/speedy implemented.
Well, if they're using different, better, image compression format like jpeg2000 than perhaps more blurry, but not more blocky ;p
But essentially - yeah.
Remember that you can always turn off Turbo feature with one click if you don't see enough details...
...It definitely feels faster than the other major browsers...
Especially since it remains fully responsive with much bigger number of open tabs than other browsers. So...you just open interesting pages in new tabs by middleclick where they load without locking the UI (Opera is quite multithreaded AFAIK) and wait, ready, for you (yeah, in that light I'm not that interested in Opera Turbo feature...perhaps when I'll be on 3G)
Plus it has several properly implemented ways of navigating said large number of tabs tabs (you don't have scroll tabbar or "window" menu, sidebar has treeview, and..."hold down RMB and, without releasing, move scrollwheel"), and also full keyboard navigation.
They're definitely doing more, for example image recompression (perhaps using better at low quality setting format than jpeg, like jpeg2000, for example?)
But bringing up Slashdot after typing in address bar "/." and hitting enter is the default behavior in every Opera installation on the planet (well, at least I'm sure about the desktop ones)
Makes you wonder how cool place to work Opera Software ASA must be... ;p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomePNA
While technically possible...it's not really financially viable.
For example to a place which has more opportunities ATM and/or much lower living costs...all the while getting their 30%.
That was, somewhat, also my point - by showing original poster that there are more profound, unanswered questions about theological concept of "soul", like "what it is actually?" and "does it exist anyway?"
However, IMO, you can't equate in a discussion "soul" with consciousness, like you seem to did when answering my 1st question. It gives undeserved legitimacy to the "soul" concept.
Well, then by equating theological concept of soul with consciousness you totally missed the point of my post.
Their UI is not in Qt, they are using only some elements from given 3rd party toolkits/platforms (like file selector), but the the UI of Opera itself is developed in-house.
BTW, there are Gnome/Ubuntu skins too.
Possibly weird feel of UI? I remember it was really an issue at the beginning - Opera uses its own UI toolkit, with a bit different feel (I don't mean look!) than most UIs; not slower btw, quite the contrary.
But you can get used to it quite fast.
Those are servers of Opera (the company). And they've been doing this for quite some time with their Opera Mini (for Java mobile phones).
Well, yeah, but that's just semantics / attaching values to particular event based on its "goodness" to us.
When it comes to underlying causes of occurence both amazing "miracles" and unspeakable tragedies follow common pattern, that dictated by statistic odds.
What does that have to do with theological concept of soul?
...
I still remain extremely skeptical, however, that humanity will ever see the
emergence of truly strong (human level or greater) AI. It is worth remembering that
strong AI is a fundamentally and profoundly atheistic concept; the possibility of it more or less presumes a definitely atheistic universe as a prerequisite. For those of us who believe in the existence of God, (or at least the soul) the idea (at least
in terms of non-biologically generated, acorporeal AI, a la SkyNET; AI derived
biomechanically is a seperate concept) therefore has some fairly
serious problems.
The answer to this dilemma is a very simple one, IMHO.
Namely, we have NO confirmed processes that would absolutelly require "supernatural" influence (no, there are no solid miracles - nobody ever survived decapitation, no human has grown back an amputated leg; things which people call miracles often originate, in medical examples, from misunderstanding of statistical probablities: natural mechanisms of your body can triumph over seemingly very bad ods, just like they can succumb to very minor dangers (why isn't it a miracle when somebody dies from common flu?)).
In every past instance where religions assumed supernatural influence required, it was shown, eventually, that those were purely natural processes. We have no instance where it was shown that, indeed, naturalistic approach isn't enough (we do have many things we don't know how to explain yet, but no evidence that they can't be explained by naturalistic approach). And actually, rate of "big" miracles greatly lessened over time, in accordance with our developments of better information gathering and transmitting means (you really think that's just a coincidence?)
So...why sociocultural artifact/meme "human intelligence is special, doesn't fit with the Universe" be any different? Especially that a) we have evidence suggesting it's a product of adaptation b) we have no evidence suggesting supernatural influence c) we have no evidence that would prevent strong AI from existing.
Will this civilisation/planet/universe see emergence of strong AI? I don't know.
Do we know of anything that would prevent it? NO!
...The problem is: would this AI be different due to the lack of a soul? Does it lack a soul, even? These are theological questions. ...
Oh, they go much further than that: what IS a soul? Does it exist, even?
...the Asus EEE induced second coming of the Netbook and its liklings...
Wasn't it really induced by OLPC XO-1? Have we forgotten about it already?