Firefox stores its bookmarks in a single bookmarks.html file, which you could access using IE?
Definitely - I do this at work (I need IE for testing web sites, can't use it at home). There's still a problem if you want to add a bookmark while using IE, but you could probably write a javascript bookmarklet/favelet to automagically copy an IE hyperlink to your Firefox bookmarks.html file.
I'd be interested in hearing which other banks do or don't work with "alternative" browsers
Britain's Co-operative Bank works fine with Firefox. I've been using their online banking with Firefox et al since Phoenix 0.6.
Interestingly, in my experience of UK sites, it's.gov.uk sites that tend not to be standards-compliant (let's not mince words here - if sites won't work with more than one browser, it's because they're not attempting to comply with published, long-standing stardards).
I take it that when you write "Conservatives" here you mean "UK Conservatives." I would argue that even the UK Conservatives are socialist from my viewpoint. Perhaps I am not well-acquainted with their platform, but my perspective is the the entire UK society is to the Left of that of the USA.
Aye, I do mean the (full title!) "Conservative and Unionist Party"! Part of my argument is that much of society, Worldwide, is to the Left of the USA. I'd see the Tories (the Conservative Party) as very right-of-centre, but I'd also see the Lib Dems as a right-wing party (somethign they might disagree with). In a similar vein, many (most?) countries have some system of national health care, without considering themselves Socialist - which is a long winded way of saying that, in this one respect, the US is out of step with everyone else. Note that this is not necessarily a bad thing: there was a time when being a Democratic Replublic was an abberation.
I know you're joking, but please don't be angry or resistant to my attempt to build bridges rather than walls.
Absolutely not. I tend to use humour to achieve the same, which isn't always sensible. Fairplay to you.
From my perspective, the entire UK socity, exempting a select few, is socialist. For example, most of everyone supports the (socialist) NHS. Am I off-base?
I'd suggest that your would be viewed as perverse by many (most) Conservatives. I take your point, while disagreeing with you, regarding the NHS: the UKs National Health Service represents the bare-minimum of health care provision, and is not, from my perspective that dissimilar to medicare. You're probably correct that most people in the UK support the NHS, though I'd argue - somewhat cynically - that the (Socialist) Government doesn't suport the NHS.
And what, pray tell, is "my ilk", from your point of view?
People who resort to generalizations! Apologies, I was being facetious in my original post.
Your complaint looks like yet another example of a British (forgive me if I slander you with that statement, but I don't know if you're English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh...) person condescending to a "culturally-inferior" American who doesn't want to accept that UK society is *still* the best damn thing on the planet.
I'm a Kiwi! Apologies if I appeared condescending: I happen to believe that, in many ways, the USA has represented, and sometimes continues to represent, the model for other countries to follow: neither the UK or New Zealand have a written constitution, for example. That does not excuse the genralizations portrayed as debate that US citizens (and others; it's by no means an American disease) sometimes exhibit.
Now perhaps I've pegged you all wrong, and you have every right to call me on it if I have. If so, then let's go ahead and talk like intelligent individuals and shy away from statements that sound like "That's NOT the way that WE do it HERE!"
Dammit, sir, I hate it when people come across all...reasonable! Your generalization aside, I may disagree with some of your points but you make them well.
Incidentally, and getting back to my original reply, I'm aware that many people would argue that Britain's Liberal Democrats are far closer to Socialism than Britain's Labour Party. I'm not sure I agree with that thesis, and I based my original response on how those parties view themselves, rather than how we may - or may not - view them.
You mean socialists, not progressives. Your ilk have gotten away with calling your 1950s-era class-war statism "progress" for far too long.
In the UK, the progressive party, the Liberal Democrats, oppose the war/occupation. The main Socialist party, the Labour Party (Tony Blair changed the party's constitution to describe the party as a "Democratic Socialist Party") supports the war.
"Your ilk" have got away with dubious and unfounded generalisations for far too long.
(Disclaimer: I do not now, nor have I ever, support the Liberal Democrats. I don't support the Labour Party, either. I just get pissed off at uneducated generalisations)
...my major(CE) requires a full year of co-op on the job experience. Will this be enough experience to give me an edge when I enter the job market?
Yes...and no. It'll give you an edge over graduates who haven't got a year's experience. However, it won't guarantee you a job. My advice is to leave nothing to chance - work on free projects, network, attend every free lecture, seminar, conference you can, see if you can supplement working full-time co-op with working part-time voluntary, etc. If it sounds like a lot of work remember that it's only for a year or so, and then you'll be worrying about tax returns, not job seeking.
First of all, SQL databases can be installed and played with on your PC. Its close enough to the "big" databases to get your foot in the door. No one expects a new grad to have mastered the latest vedrsion of Oracle.
A lot of big, enterprise-level databases can be downloaded freely - Oracle, DB2, etc, either as full-but-don't-use-commercially or as trial versions. Experience - even on a personal project - with even one enterprise RDBMS would probably be considered by a potential employer if you could show them some code, say some stored procedures and some maintenance code like Bash scripts to back-up.
I agree with the parent poster - choose one specialty and know it comfortably. Don't try and be a jack-of-all-trades: it's not credible for a recent graduate, and employers will usually expect you to learn-on-the-job, anyway. Look to picking up, say, networking skills, once you've found a job.
My favourite was a billboard campaign for The Economist magazine I saw in Seven Sisters, a dirt-poor part of Hackney, a dirt-poor London borough: "If you read The Economist, get your chauffeur to honk the horn." Needless to say, my salary was sub-iPod at the time...
I was watching for this on BBC News 24 and they continued to show [parliamentary debates]
Aye, that pissed me off. Worst yet, though, was Bert Rutan mentioning that he was watching the whole thing courtesy of a tail-mounted camera - dammit! I so wanted to see that live, and I just knew the British media would screw it up. Also, did you notice that much of the News 24 footage of Space Ship One landing had the craft obscured by the News 24 "breaking news" banner? Clowns.
(Disclaimer: I wuv my BBC, etc, just wish they could get the important things in life right...)
I think we need a new poll, now that it has successfully landed.
It'd be interesting to see what would happen if the editors reset the poll: I'm betting a lot more people would be willing to be on the maiden flight now it's happened;)
Errr... no. Used to be - not now. One's (Rolls Royce Plc) a UK-based aero-engine maker, t'other's (Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited) a German-owned car manufacturer.
When I sit down in front of the TV I become a veg. Anything not easy is just plain to hard to do.
Damn, that's true. Why is it that I can write shell scripts and debug Perl, but have never been able to program my VCR? Selective stupidity - or lack of tin-foil hat?;)
Not wishing to be pedantic, but Rolls Royce is a UK PLC (NB. this Rolls Royce makes aircraft engines, not shiny luxery cars)
One point I've not seen made re: Airbus is that it's a consortium of various national aerospace companies - truly the worst analogy Microsoft could have dredged up. The closest match to AIrbus in the IT world would be - well, Linux, maybe, but that makes Airbus sound far more cool than they really are;)
why every Windows machine in the world shares drive C: at all times as \\IP-address\C$ by default and always, always, always re-enables it at reboot even if you explicitly turn it off
Pet hate o'mine. MS have this tool, MS Baseline Security Advisor, which is actually quite good for hardening Windows - one of the recommendations it makes (every time I run it...) is to disable the default C: share. If only...
There was a/.poll on this a few months back, asking which was the most-hated prefix/suffix (other options were "i", "e", "cyber", etc). But I don't just despise "My" for applications - I've had to maintain code where a clueless developer called everything myVar, myVar2, etc.
Disclaimer: I quite like MySQL. It's just the name that stinks. Hopefully MyUID will follow that trend - or find a better name.
That wasn't my comment, though I did say that Allied forces - inadvertently - were the first to deliberately bomb civilians: after one Luftwaffe bomber released its bomb load in error over a civilian area (Braintree in Essex, I think).
Just to clarify: the Luftwaffe during 1940 were targetting RAF fields, and did not want to waste munitions bombing civilian targets. (RAF) Bomber Command also did not want to attack civilian targets - partly due to humanitarian concerns, partly due to the sheer lack of munitions in Britain at the time. Bomber Command's policy changed once it was believed that the Luftwaffe were deliberately attacking civilian targets.
Lest I be accused of being an apologies for Hitler, I condemn whole-heartedly Nazi attrocities. The Luftwaffe has already bombed cities in Spain, Poland, the Low Countries and France. The reason they didn't - yet (1939, 1940) - in Britain was due to Hitler's perverse idea that Britain could be "swayed". Fortunately he was wrong; unfortunately it didn't matter in the long-run. And that's the moral: In War, Innocent People Die. No matter how careful either side is.
Indeed. The event I was refering to occured in 1940, as part of the build up to Operation Sealion (the abortive invasion of Britain that never occured).
PS. I studied history in a British University. Does that count? Though I appreciate you telling me that London is a civilian city...;)
My point is: that one should not condemn an entire nation for the actions of part - even all - of the armed forces. I'm not sure I understand the additional points you're raising about whether I understand the difference between actions commited by {arbitrary quantity of soldiers} and {another arbitrary quantity of soldiers}.
I believe that one Nazi bomber made a mistake, and dropped its bomb-load in the wrong area. Churchill (who had no way of knowing that it was an isolated incident) responded, and the Blitz began.
Hitler was evil, but he was also a pragmatist (or at least was surrounded, in the early years of the war, by smarter people than he). His goal was to invade Britain, not waste munitions bombing soft targets. He wanted hard targets - airfields and radar stations, etc - taken out ready for Operation Sealion.
Of course, later on in the war, Hitler was more than happy to wreak "vengeance" on Britain with the V-weapons. By then pragmatism was irrelevant.
If there's one lesson I've taken from the Blitz it's the obvious one: In Wars, Innocent People Die.
The thousands of Japanese troops who took part deserved to be tried for war-crimes.
The reamining million Japanese civilians who were either (a) ignorant of Japanese crimes, even actions, in Nanking, (b) opposed to Japanese occupation of part of China, or (c) apathetic should not be lumped together with those who commited crimes. By the same token, "all US citizens should be condemned for My Lai". Bullshit. The original post was a generalisation: God, I hate fools who extrapolate and deal in stereotypes.
Slashdot Mirror
Or a really steep roof, or spire. Also, why build it on an ice-floe - why not build it over frozen land?
Firefox stores its bookmarks in a single bookmarks.html file, which you could access using IE?
Definitely - I do this at work (I need IE for testing web sites, can't use it at home). There's still a problem if you want to add a bookmark while using IE, but you could probably write a javascript bookmarklet/favelet to automagically copy an IE hyperlink to your Firefox bookmarks.html file.
I'd be interested in hearing which other banks do or don't work with "alternative" browsers
Britain's Co-operative Bank works fine with Firefox. I've been using their online banking with Firefox et al since Phoenix 0.6.
Interestingly, in my experience of UK sites, it's .gov.uk sites that tend not to be standards-compliant (let's not mince words here - if sites won't work with more than one browser, it's because they're not attempting to comply with published, long-standing stardards).
I take it that when you write "Conservatives" here you mean "UK Conservatives." I would argue that even the UK Conservatives are socialist from my viewpoint. Perhaps I am not well-acquainted with their platform, but my perspective is the the entire UK society is to the Left of that of the USA.
Aye, I do mean the (full title!) "Conservative and Unionist Party"! Part of my argument is that much of society, Worldwide, is to the Left of the USA. I'd see the Tories (the Conservative Party) as very right-of-centre, but I'd also see the Lib Dems as a right-wing party (somethign they might disagree with). In a similar vein, many (most?) countries have some system of national health care, without considering themselves Socialist - which is a long winded way of saying that, in this one respect, the US is out of step with everyone else. Note that this is not necessarily a bad thing: there was a time when being a Democratic Replublic was an abberation.
I know you're joking, but please don't be angry or resistant to my attempt to build bridges rather than walls.
Absolutely not. I tend to use humour to achieve the same, which isn't always sensible. Fairplay to you.
From my perspective, the entire UK socity, exempting a select few, is socialist. For example, most of everyone supports the (socialist) NHS. Am I off-base?
I'd suggest that your would be viewed as perverse by many (most) Conservatives. I take your point, while disagreeing with you, regarding the NHS: the UKs National Health Service represents the bare-minimum of health care provision, and is not, from my perspective that dissimilar to medicare. You're probably correct that most people in the UK support the NHS, though I'd argue - somewhat cynically - that the (Socialist) Government doesn't suport the NHS.
And what, pray tell, is "my ilk", from your point of view?
People who resort to generalizations! Apologies, I was being facetious in my original post.
Your complaint looks like yet another example of a British (forgive me if I slander you with that statement, but I don't know if you're English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh ...) person condescending to a "culturally-inferior" American who doesn't want to accept that UK society is *still* the best damn thing on the planet.
I'm a Kiwi! Apologies if I appeared condescending: I happen to believe that, in many ways, the USA has represented, and sometimes continues to represent, the model for other countries to follow: neither the UK or New Zealand have a written constitution, for example. That does not excuse the genralizations portrayed as debate that US citizens (and others; it's by no means an American disease) sometimes exhibit.
Now perhaps I've pegged you all wrong, and you have every right to call me on it if I have. If so, then let's go ahead and talk like intelligent individuals and shy away from statements that sound like "That's NOT the way that WE do it HERE!"
Dammit, sir, I hate it when people come across all...reasonable! Your generalization aside, I may disagree with some of your points but you make them well.
Incidentally, and getting back to my original reply, I'm aware that many people would argue that Britain's Liberal Democrats are far closer to Socialism than Britain's Labour Party. I'm not sure I agree with that thesis, and I based my original response on how those parties view themselves, rather than how we may - or may not - view them.
You mean socialists, not progressives. Your ilk have gotten away with calling your 1950s-era class-war statism "progress" for far too long.
In the UK, the progressive party, the Liberal Democrats, oppose the war/occupation. The main Socialist party, the Labour Party (Tony Blair changed the party's constitution to describe the party as a "Democratic Socialist Party") supports the war.
"Your ilk" have got away with dubious and unfounded generalisations for far too long.
(Disclaimer: I do not now, nor have I ever, support the Liberal Democrats. I don't support the Labour Party, either. I just get pissed off at uneducated generalisations)
Yes...and no. It'll give you an edge over graduates who haven't got a year's experience. However, it won't guarantee you a job. My advice is to leave nothing to chance - work on free projects, network, attend every free lecture, seminar, conference you can, see if you can supplement working full-time co-op with working part-time voluntary, etc. If it sounds like a lot of work remember that it's only for a year or so, and then you'll be worrying about tax returns, not job seeking.
And good luck!
First of all, SQL databases can be installed and played with on your PC. Its close enough to the "big" databases to get your foot in the door. No one expects a new grad to have mastered the latest vedrsion of Oracle.
A lot of big, enterprise-level databases can be downloaded freely - Oracle, DB2, etc, either as full-but-don't-use-commercially or as trial versions. Experience - even on a personal project - with even one enterprise RDBMS would probably be considered by a potential employer if you could show them some code, say some stored procedures and some maintenance code like Bash scripts to back-up.
I agree with the parent poster - choose one specialty and know it comfortably. Don't try and be a jack-of-all-trades: it's not credible for a recent graduate, and employers will usually expect you to learn-on-the-job, anyway. Look to picking up, say, networking skills, once you've found a job.
Are there really some companies dedicated to entertaining dwarves ???
I believe the politically correct term is small adults ;)
My one time using VNC (ThinVNC, IIRC) was over a dial-up connection. Unacceptable doesn't even begin to describe it.
SSH over a LAN? Bloody luxery! (Obligatory "Kids these days" comment)
God I loathe rich people marketing campaigns...
My favourite was a billboard campaign for The Economist magazine I saw in Seven Sisters, a dirt-poor part of Hackney, a dirt-poor London borough: "If you read The Economist, get your chauffeur to honk the horn." Needless to say, my salary was sub-iPod at the time...
I was watching for this on BBC News 24 and they continued to show [parliamentary debates]
Aye, that pissed me off. Worst yet, though, was Bert Rutan mentioning that he was watching the whole thing courtesy of a tail-mounted camera - dammit! I so wanted to see that live, and I just knew the British media would screw it up. Also, did you notice that much of the News 24 footage of Space Ship One landing had the craft obscured by the News 24 "breaking news" banner? Clowns.
(Disclaimer: I wuv my BBC, etc, just wish they could get the important things in life right...)
I think we need a new poll, now that it has successfully landed.
It'd be interesting to see what would happen if the editors reset the poll: I'm betting a lot more people would be willing to be on the maiden flight now it's happened ;)
It's the same Rolls-Royce.
Errr... no. Used to be - not now. One's (Rolls Royce Plc) a UK-based aero-engine maker, t'other's (Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited) a German-owned car manufacturer.
When I sit down in front of the TV I become a veg. Anything not easy is just plain to hard to do.
Damn, that's true. Why is it that I can write shell scripts and debug Perl, but have never been able to program my VCR? Selective stupidity - or lack of tin-foil hat? ;)
Sad but true: we have a client who prints out emails so he can fax back the reply...
create a startup batch script, put 'net share c$ /d' in it.
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
There - not much different from editing a linux config file :)
Easy when you know how ;)
Most aircraft engines are made by GE.
Not wishing to be pedantic, but Rolls Royce is a UK PLC (NB. this Rolls Royce makes aircraft engines, not shiny luxery cars)
One point I've not seen made re: Airbus is that it's a consortium of various national aerospace companies - truly the worst analogy Microsoft could have dredged up. The closest match to AIrbus in the IT world would be - well, Linux, maybe, but that makes Airbus sound far more cool than they really are ;)
why every Windows machine in the world shares drive C: at all times as \\IP-address\C$ by default and always, always, always re-enables it at reboot even if you explicitly turn it off
Pet hate o'mine. MS have this tool, MS Baseline Security Advisor, which is actually quite good for hardening Windows - one of the recommendations it makes (every time I run it...) is to disable the default C: share. If only...
<aol>I agree.</aol>
There was a /.poll on this a few months back, asking which was the most-hated prefix/suffix (other options were "i", "e", "cyber", etc). But I don't just despise "My" for applications - I've had to maintain code where a clueless developer called everything myVar, myVar2, etc.
Disclaimer: I quite like MySQL. It's just the name that stinks. Hopefully MyUID will follow that trend - or find a better name.
That wasn't my comment, though I did say that Allied forces - inadvertently - were the first to deliberately bomb civilians: after one Luftwaffe bomber released its bomb load in error over a civilian area (Braintree in Essex, I think).
Just to clarify: the Luftwaffe during 1940 were targetting RAF fields, and did not want to waste munitions bombing civilian targets. (RAF) Bomber Command also did not want to attack civilian targets - partly due to humanitarian concerns, partly due to the sheer lack of munitions in Britain at the time. Bomber Command's policy changed once it was believed that the Luftwaffe were deliberately attacking civilian targets.
Lest I be accused of being an apologies for Hitler, I condemn whole-heartedly Nazi attrocities. The Luftwaffe has already bombed cities in Spain, Poland, the Low Countries and France. The reason they didn't - yet (1939, 1940) - in Britain was due to Hitler's perverse idea that Britain could be "swayed". Fortunately he was wrong; unfortunately it didn't matter in the long-run. And that's the moral: In War, Innocent People Die. No matter how careful either side is.
Indeed. The event I was refering to occured in 1940, as part of the build up to Operation Sealion (the abortive invasion of Britain that never occured).
PS. I studied history in a British University. Does that count? Though I appreciate you telling me that London is a civilian city... ;)
My point is: that one should not condemn an entire nation for the actions of part - even all - of the armed forces. I'm not sure I understand the additional points you're raising about whether I understand the difference between actions commited by {arbitrary quantity of soldiers} and {another arbitrary quantity of soldiers}.
I believe that one Nazi bomber made a mistake, and dropped its bomb-load in the wrong area. Churchill (who had no way of knowing that it was an isolated incident) responded, and the Blitz began.
Hitler was evil, but he was also a pragmatist (or at least was surrounded, in the early years of the war, by smarter people than he). His goal was to invade Britain, not waste munitions bombing soft targets. He wanted hard targets - airfields and radar stations, etc - taken out ready for Operation Sealion.
Of course, later on in the war, Hitler was more than happy to wreak "vengeance" on Britain with the V-weapons. By then pragmatism was irrelevant.
If there's one lesson I've taken from the Blitz it's the obvious one: In Wars, Innocent People Die.
The thousands of Japanese troops who took part deserved to be tried for war-crimes.
The reamining million Japanese civilians who were either (a) ignorant of Japanese crimes, even actions, in Nanking, (b) opposed to Japanese occupation of part of China, or (c) apathetic should not be lumped together with those who commited crimes. By the same token, "all US citizens should be condemned for My Lai". Bullshit. The original post was a generalisation: God, I hate fools who extrapolate and deal in stereotypes.