Might not have access to a PHP server, or sufficient access to the server to install PHP (or similar)
There's a (admittedly minor) performance hit using server-side includes; if you can pre-generate the HTML in advance (which effectively is what Dreamweaver does with library items) you avoid this.
I've got to admit though, my first thought was "server side includes".
I swear Cocal Cola are the main reason I drink coffee. One thing I've always thought about Microsoft is, at least they're less un-ethical than some of their fellow corporations. Just out of curiousity, anyone know what Microsoft's policy on organised labour is?
When I last transitted at LAX, the security staff there did at least ask me to leave my bags unlocked. I still believe a preferrable method is to make you unlock the bags for the inspection, so you can witness that they aren't stealing anything/putting incriminating items inside, and then allowing you to lock the bags again afterwards. Once they've done that, if any reason arises to be suspicious of my bags airport security can cheerfully break the locks off - I'm happy to be inconvenienced in the name of security, provided the authorities take reasonable steps to ensure I won't be.
Another way would be for the TSA to just open your bags in front of you, allowing you to lock the bags with your favoured lock once the inpsection was over. This method has the advantage that your suitcases aren't unlocked all the way from LAX to your home airport. Curiously, it's the method preferred by security-savvy airport security across most of the Globe. Exactly why the TSA don't do this is beyond me.
I'm not a stock-market "player", but surely belief in the business model and/or the product are criteria for purchasing stock, not shorting stock? I'd have thought (usual, obligatory disclaimer...) that a complete lack of belief in SCO (and a complete lack of awareness of their product) is a totally logical reason to short SCO, and a reasonable, nay, ethical investment decision.
I'd even go so far as to say it's a shame this attitude isn't what the stock market is all about these days.
After WWII (the war's over, remember. We won - it's how we conduct the peace, or occupation, that's at issue) we were discriminating in the buildings that were hit; though, to be fair, there was very little (any?) German and Japanese opposition to occupation.
We also didn't invite Allied companies to set-up shop in the occupied zones. We also enjoyed widespread support Internationally.
Many thanks for that. Interestingly, it exposed a flaw in my thinking: I made the assumption that terrorism == foreign; precisely the kind of assumption I began by criticising... Live and (hopefully) learn!
Maybe the original poster meant "It can never be done while we're bombing the civilian population, bombing mosques [dammit! Don't these people remember the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade! All buildings are fair game!], appointing our own favoured companies to run the economy, etc"???
Just out of curiousity, why does POTUS trip echelon more than "the President"? I thought POTUS would only tend to be used by "insiders", terrorists would tend to use phrases like "that running dog of Western Imperialism"/"that son of the Great Satan", etc.
Disclaimer: my knowledge of US politics largely comes from TV
Coincidentally I was fortunate to spend most of the '80s living in Oman (north, round Muscat, though I did occasionally get to visit Dhofar and stare at a distant border with the then Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen).
I couldn't agree with you more. Creating martyrs never works; improving infrastructure (schools, hospitals, roads) usually works. Within 10 years Communist insurgency in Oman was limited to geurillas crossing the border from Yemen: the local Dhofaris had no sympathies for the insurgents.
One thing that annoys me is this apparent belief that "Omigod! There's this new threat, terrorism!
Terrorism isn't a new threat in the USA, and it certainly ain't a new threat in the rest of the World. Leaving aside the flippant, UK-centric, remark that the USA was founded out of terrorism ("one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter", etc) the USA has had the Weathermen, the UNAbomber, various militias, etc. Even "Christian" terrorists have been murdering doctors and blowing up clinics.
(I was going to say how terrorism as a threat is overrated, but I can't think of a way to say it without cheapening the ordeal of everyone who's ever suffered in a terrorist attrocity. Suffice it to say that there is suffering caused by many, many other things that we choose to ignore)
Damn! Just caught your comment about Echelon. No more trans-atlantic flights for this bad boy!
Fair enough - don't you think the parties concerned should be honest about it though? From what I've read so far AA and USTSA denied that there was any sharing of data - why?
If my GP (doctor) asks me if it's OK to share my medical history with a surgeon I'm unlikely to object. If she fails to ask my permission I will object strongly. If she lies, and claims that she didn't share my data - well, that's worthy of more than just an objection.
...Oh, and by the way, some schmuck will find a way to blow up planes with or without data sharing, internment, shoot-to-kill policies, bloody-great walls, compulsory ID cards, razing villages, etc.
NB. I'm not suggesting that all of the above are current tactics against terrorism: they have all been tried at some point in recent history.
To me it seems louder - but who am I to argue with the research?! I can think of numerous reasons that do explain the finding:
"Normal" conversations do not announce their commencement with a 10 second burst of "Ride of the Valkyries";
"Normal" conversations are intermittent; one participant ums-or-ahs, then starts reading a newspaper, goes off to the toilet, falls asleep. In contrast cell conversations are like morse - full-on, stop, full-on, stop...
Cell conversations are one-sided, which we associate with rudeness: sure those two commuters are having a private conversation, but - in theory - we feel could join in (if we wanted to. Which we don't)
Cell conversations are frequently annoying in their own right: imagine a conversation that went something like this: Honey! Honey! Come here a minute!
I'm busy - can it wait? No! C'm here!
Alright, what do you want? I'm on the bus.
If I didn't remember a little UNIX from mumbledy-mumble years ago....
Sorry, I missed that: how many years ago?!
I've got to agree with you about Linux/desktop. Using Linux on the desktop is a powerful teaching tool, I've learnt a lot, but I still wouldn't feel comfortable using it as my main workstation OS (Server, no problem, it's just on the desktop I'm uncomfortable).
Which distro are you using? I've got a "Show Desktop" icon on my Mandrake (9.1) distro - is that what you're missing?
I've struggled with dependency-hell on Mandrake, and I'm prepared to believe that it's a PEBCAK rather than a real problem, but c'mon! I'm not (that) stupid, I should be able to easily install packages. Sure, apt-for-rpm sounds good, but I still need to install it first.
Ack! I just spent a good part of Easter trying to create a text file ".ant-global-properties" and wondering why Windows wouldn't let me, and how I could get round it! Next time, mate, try posting before the holiday!
I so badly want to agree with you, but there are industries where employers are required by law to monitor employees' correspondence. Take a look at where instant messaging has not largely eroded email - you'll see the banking and legal industries, industries where there are typically legal obligations on employers to record much of what their employees do.
...doesn't mean I like it, or would particularly want to work in such an industry, but I recognise why certain employers must do this.
You raise an interesting point - what would happen in the US to an application developed largely in Cuba? I can't see most European countries having a problem with it, except indirectly (can't be partners with US companies because you use Cuban products -- can they still do that?) but how would it play in the US?
My (negative) views on the use of mobile phones by some people is based on living in the UK.
Actually, I agree with a lot of your points, I'm probably more easily angered than you;)
However, your last point: then why are you listening in the first place? deserves a short response: because I have no choice. Two people holding a conversation at normal volume is easy to ignore; one person shouting at a plastic box taped to his head - that's not so easy to ignore.
Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that in South East Asia, where mobile phone use is very high, the younger generation tend to talk more quietly at their phones, while the older generation get baffled by new technology and fall back to shouting! Hopefully countries where mobile phone use is still at the novelty point will change towards more respectful use as the novelty fades. I don't hold out much hope, though...
Strongly agree, and additionally I can see how a golf-course could easily allow Scotts' grass to spread: by going bankrupt. Britain, and I would imagine the USA and elsewhere, is full of disfiguring former industrial sites. I have no hope that a golf-club's first thought on realising bankruptcy would be "better dig up the greens - mustn't let our GMO grass contaminate the wider environment."
It's a development server, at home. I have better things to do with money/tech than devote it to work.
...but yes, I am an idiot.
Re:Less monoculture
on
Linux in Canada
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Linux plays nicely with the BSDs, Solaris, OS X, and most other operating systems
I was off work, ill, and working from home (I'm a web-developer - SunONE-ASP on Raq boxes) and needed my girlfriend's XP laptop to talk to my server. Normally that's no problem - server runs Samba. But I didn't have SunONE ASP, so I had to use Microsoft IIS ASP (the server's dual-boot). Could I get a Windows XP laptop to talk to a Windows 2000 server? Could I hell! Now I accept I'm not the most capable Windows admin, but c'mon! How hard can it be!
Moral: Linux plays nice with other operating systems. Windows barely gets along with earlier versions of Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Two (possible) reasons:
I've got to admit though, my first thought was "server side includes".
I swear Cocal Cola are the main reason I drink coffee. One thing I've always thought about Microsoft is, at least they're less un-ethical than some of their fellow corporations. Just out of curiousity, anyone know what Microsoft's policy on organised labour is?
I find that the ol' gun to the head makes my employees much more productive
Hey! Do you work for AT&T as well?
When I last transitted at LAX, the security staff there did at least ask me to leave my bags unlocked. I still believe a preferrable method is to make you unlock the bags for the inspection, so you can witness that they aren't stealing anything/putting incriminating items inside, and then allowing you to lock the bags again afterwards. Once they've done that, if any reason arises to be suspicious of my bags airport security can cheerfully break the locks off - I'm happy to be inconvenienced in the name of security, provided the authorities take reasonable steps to ensure I won't be.
Another way would be for the TSA to just open your bags in front of you, allowing you to lock the bags with your favoured lock once the inpsection was over. This method has the advantage that your suitcases aren't unlocked all the way from LAX to your home airport. Curiously, it's the method preferred by security-savvy airport security across most of the Globe. Exactly why the TSA don't do this is beyond me.
To be fair, there is also the lion school of legal practice...fierce, brave, tenacious. Unfortunately the rats, vultures and sharks tend to dominate.
Wow, for the first time ever in my /. posting history, it's actually relevant to add: IANAL.
I'm not a stock-market "player", but surely belief in the business model and/or the product are criteria for purchasing stock, not shorting stock? I'd have thought (usual, obligatory disclaimer...) that a complete lack of belief in SCO (and a complete lack of awareness of their product) is a totally logical reason to short SCO, and a reasonable, nay, ethical investment decision.
I'd even go so far as to say it's a shame this attitude isn't what the stock market is all about these days.
After WWII (the war's over, remember. We won - it's how we conduct the peace, or occupation, that's at issue) we were discriminating in the buildings that were hit; though, to be fair, there was very little (any?) German and Japanese opposition to occupation.
We also didn't invite Allied companies to set-up shop in the occupied zones. We also enjoyed widespread support Internationally.
Many thanks for that. Interestingly, it exposed a flaw in my thinking: I made the assumption that terrorism == foreign; precisely the kind of assumption I began by criticising... Live and (hopefully) learn!
*cough* Oman *cough*
Maybe the original poster meant "It can never be done while we're bombing the civilian population, bombing mosques [dammit! Don't these people remember the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade! All buildings are fair game!] , appointing our own favoured companies to run the economy, etc" ???
Just out of curiousity, why does POTUS trip echelon more than "the President"? I thought POTUS would only tend to be used by "insiders", terrorists would tend to use phrases like "that running dog of Western Imperialism"/"that son of the Great Satan", etc.
Disclaimer: my knowledge of US politics largely comes from TV
Coincidentally I was fortunate to spend most of the '80s living in Oman (north, round Muscat, though I did occasionally get to visit Dhofar and stare at a distant border with the then Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen).
I couldn't agree with you more. Creating martyrs never works; improving infrastructure (schools, hospitals, roads) usually works. Within 10 years Communist insurgency in Oman was limited to geurillas crossing the border from Yemen: the local Dhofaris had no sympathies for the insurgents.
Fascinating link, by the way.
One thing that annoys me is this apparent belief that "Omigod! There's this new threat, terrorism!
Terrorism isn't a new threat in the USA, and it certainly ain't a new threat in the rest of the World. Leaving aside the flippant, UK-centric, remark that the USA was founded out of terrorism ("one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter", etc) the USA has had the Weathermen, the UNAbomber, various militias, etc. Even "Christian" terrorists have been murdering doctors and blowing up clinics.
(I was going to say how terrorism as a threat is overrated, but I can't think of a way to say it without cheapening the ordeal of everyone who's ever suffered in a terrorist attrocity. Suffice it to say that there is suffering caused by many, many other things that we choose to ignore)
Damn! Just caught your comment about Echelon. No more trans-atlantic flights for this bad boy!
Fair enough - don't you think the parties concerned should be honest about it though? From what I've read so far AA and USTSA denied that there was any sharing of data - why?
If my GP (doctor) asks me if it's OK to share my medical history with a surgeon I'm unlikely to object. If she fails to ask my permission I will object strongly. If she lies, and claims that she didn't share my data - well, that's worthy of more than just an objection.
...Oh, and by the way, some schmuck will find a way to blow up planes with or without data sharing, internment, shoot-to-kill policies, bloody-great walls, compulsory ID cards, razing villages, etc.
NB. I'm not suggesting that all of the above are current tactics against terrorism: they have all been tried at some point in recent history.
To me it seems louder - but who am I to argue with the research?! I can think of numerous reasons that do explain the finding:
Honey! Honey! Come here a minute!
I'm busy - can it wait?
No! C'm here!
Alright, what do you want?
I'm on the bus.
A million monkeys...
If I didn't remember a little UNIX from mumbledy-mumble years ago....
Sorry, I missed that: how many years ago?!
I've got to agree with you about Linux/desktop. Using Linux on the desktop is a powerful teaching tool, I've learnt a lot, but I still wouldn't feel comfortable using it as my main workstation OS (Server, no problem, it's just on the desktop I'm uncomfortable).
Which distro are you using? I've got a "Show Desktop" icon on my Mandrake (9.1) distro - is that what you're missing?
I've struggled with dependency-hell on Mandrake, and I'm prepared to believe that it's a PEBCAK rather than a real problem, but c'mon! I'm not (that) stupid, I should be able to easily install packages. Sure, apt-for-rpm sounds good, but I still need to install it first.
Ack! I just spent a good part of Easter trying to create a text file ".ant-global-properties" and wondering why Windows wouldn't let me, and how I could get round it! Next time, mate, try posting before the holiday!
I so badly want to agree with you, but there are industries where employers are required by law to monitor employees' correspondence. Take a look at where instant messaging has not largely eroded email - you'll see the banking and legal industries, industries where there are typically legal obligations on employers to record much of what their employees do.
...doesn't mean I like it, or would particularly want to work in such an industry, but I recognise why certain employers must do this.
You raise an interesting point - what would happen in the US to an application developed largely in Cuba? I can't see most European countries having a problem with it, except indirectly (can't be partners with US companies because you use Cuban products -- can they still do that?) but how would it play in the US?
My (negative) views on the use of mobile phones by some people is based on living in the UK.
Actually, I agree with a lot of your points, I'm probably more easily angered than you ;)
However, your last point: then why are you listening in the first place? deserves a short response: because I have no choice. Two people holding a conversation at normal volume is easy to ignore; one person shouting at a plastic box taped to his head - that's not so easy to ignore.
Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that in South East Asia, where mobile phone use is very high, the younger generation tend to talk more quietly at their phones, while the older generation get baffled by new technology and fall back to shouting! Hopefully countries where mobile phone use is still at the novelty point will change towards more respectful use as the novelty fades. I don't hold out much hope, though...
That should, of course, have been "... pace about randomly..." Who swapped the "submit" and "preview" buttons round! ;)
Two questions:
Strongly agree, and additionally I can see how a golf-course could easily allow Scotts' grass to spread: by going bankrupt. Britain, and I would imagine the USA and elsewhere, is full of disfiguring former industrial sites. I have no hope that a golf-club's first thought on realising bankruptcy would be "better dig up the greens - mustn't let our GMO grass contaminate the wider environment."
It's a development server, at home. I have better things to do with money/tech than devote it to work.
...but yes, I am an idiot.
Linux plays nicely with the BSDs, Solaris, OS X, and most other operating systems
I was off work, ill, and working from home (I'm a web-developer - SunONE-ASP on Raq boxes) and needed my girlfriend's XP laptop to talk to my server. Normally that's no problem - server runs Samba. But I didn't have SunONE ASP, so I had to use Microsoft IIS ASP (the server's dual-boot). Could I get a Windows XP laptop to talk to a Windows 2000 server? Could I hell! Now I accept I'm not the most capable Windows admin, but c'mon! How hard can it be!
Moral: Linux plays nice with other operating systems. Windows barely gets along with earlier versions of Windows.