I doubt that. Not for this kind case... MS would deffinitly not want the kinda of publicity that would come with discriminading against the blind/dissabled people.
They will just count on the fact that most people won't care. Have you seen any public relations backlash due to the numerous corporate (or worse: governmental) IE-only or javascript mandatory pages? I sure haven't... although those cases effectively discriminate against the blind, makeing it impossible (or difficult) to access said content using a lynx browser and a braille line. For an especially funny example, point your IE browser to the "Tommy rumor" page. Then, try the same thing again with konqueror, netscape or lynx, or just with java script switched off. Yes, Tommy Hilfiger doesn't care whether you have the right color of skin when you wear his clothes, but he sure doesn't want you to browse his site if you're blind! And have you noticed any publicity backlash against this? I sure haven't...disabled people just don't have the same kind of clout that the blacks have.
It would just be much easier for them to make it comapatable in the first place.
Yes, it would be much easyer for them, but they like so much more to behave like pricks. Have you ever tried calling up a web design firm because of their IE-only page? Most claim it would be very difficult to make it compatible with other browsers, where in reality a simple browse-source reveals that they are intentionnally shutting out other browsers. Certain web design companies even have the gall to attempt to pressure their customers to not make their pages compatible, even after delivery (needless to say, we just ignored their feeble attempts of intimidation...eventually, they mirrored our site under their own URL, with the anti-disability provisions put back into place...)
Then they would probaly have a very big lawsuit coming their way.
Indeed, but...
And they would probably loose quite badly.
Yes, but only after dragging out the suit for 10 years. After which time, the object of the suit will be deemed obsolete, and the affair will be quietly shelved before any penalties are decided.
But what if Micro$oft removes the possibility of logging in via the keyboard?
And what if this spreads to web sites as well, and it becomes very hip to log in to your favorite weblog via clicks on an image, rather than HTTP passwords?
You can have alternatives in life, you know
Correct. But certain companies are striving very hard to remove the privilege of choice, at least as far as computers are concerned;-)
If you knew Sun was charging for StarOffice why would you assume they could still give it away for free, or below cost?
Resellers and packagers often get a much better deal than the public at large (OEM pricing). It would have been possible that Mandrake got a much better price on SO than the public, and thus still be able to profitably include SO in the basic membership.
...stay very current on his Lotus Notes patches. Indeed, from now on, whenever news of a Lotus Notes security hole pops up on Securityfocus or elsewhere, guess who the script kiddies will try it out against first?
If you release GPL projects anomyous you can as good use a public domain "license", or maybe a BSD license, if the copyright holder doesn't really exist as stated, who could possibly enforce GPL infringements???
Just include a file with a public key somewhere in your package, and keep the private key. If the need arises, you can then come out of your anonymity and prove you are indeed the author by using the private key to sign a declaration to that effect.
Of course, I just have to be careful not to use any of my open source code for anything at work.
What if it the code has already been released (months, years) before having been used at work? (Should be easy to prove... just check a couple of mirror ftp sites)? In that case, how would it be any different from any other Open Source Code that you just downloaded and used at work?
Re:page widening is a form of terrorism
on
IBM 120GXP Revisited
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
Maybe you can't fix a browser, but you can chose one that works;-) Konqueror!
Print out the EULA, strike the offending paragraphs out, have it notarized, and send a copy in a certified letter to Microsoft, with a note saying that their signature (on delivery of letter) is acceptance of the ammended terms.
End of story.
They won't dare fight you on this, because if they win, it would basically invalidate the whole EULA concept: if a click can be considered to be agreement, so can a signature for a certified letter...
Indeed. Leaving it longer does not really prolong the fun (there is only one brief flash of lightning anyways), but it might spew out tiny glass shards all over your microwave oven...
It seems the wizards who made Konqueror do not want me to have wide pages.
Neither do those that made netscape communicator. Nor mozilla. Or of any other web browser (n.b.: exploder is not a browser...). I think that should settle the question "who's at fault".
Under this definition, Clinton is definately guilty of treason...
Really? Which "enemy" did he aid? (No, aiding the Republicans by his foolish behavior doesn't count. In the context of this article, enemy means "military enemy", not "political opponent").
I fail to see how software distibution could be considered treason. Has slashdot just been duped again?
Wouldn't that fall under giving them aid and comfort? Giving the ennemy vital information (such as the source code of weapons control systems) sure helps (aids) them, doesn't it?
Third attempt: more or less same setup as previously, but a little less water in the "load" glass, and using a larger cork, so that the mine could stand upright without leaning against the bottle. A spark appeared already early on in the experiment, but didn't cause a ball. However, the same candle-flavored fumes started appearing again. Then it hit me: they came from the cork, which was heated by the pencil mine stuck into it. Indeed, the cork had small traces of burn. Still no plasmoid, alas.
Fourth attempt: Figuring that strength of microwaves might depend on orientation, I broke a small piece off the mine, and stuck it into the cork, horizontally, rather than vertically. Soon indeed sparks, and then a ball of fire appeared, but unfortunately the pleasure was rather short-lived: the plasmoid set fire to the plastic bottle, and thus I had to stop the mess. Ok, I'll have to hunt for a suitable glass vessel.
Having no suitable sperical vessel ready, I used a sawed-off plastic mineral water bottle. Having no tooth-picks ready either, I just stuck the match itself into the cork. As recommended in a previous Slashdot story about the subject, I removed the revolving plate, and put a glass of water into the back.
First attempt: the match always went out before it could produce any plasma ball. D'oh
Second attempt: rather than using a match, I stuck a long pencil mine into the cork, and set the oven to thirty seconds. 29 seconds of nothing. Then a loud whizz, and the time ran out before it could get any more interesting (should've set it to a minute).
However, this one second of action was enough to fill the bottle with a mysterious thick white fume. Question: is this the nytrogen oxyde that the article speaks about, or was it only the plastic burning (other than the fumes, there were no obvious traces of burn on the bottle). Worrying that the fumes might be toxic, I didn't repeat the experiment.
If you do and it melts the glass, will it attack the ceiling of the microwave itself next? =)
No. Actually, as soon as the plasmoid touches a conductive (metal) surface, it shorts out and just collapses. The purpose of the glass vessel is not to protected the ceiling of the microvave oven, but rather to protect the plasmoid;-)
That's why they suggest also putting a small glass of water inside, along with the experiment.
Re:You don't need a "vessel" and this is old news
on
Science in the Microwave
·
· Score: 4, Informative
You can do it without the glass vessel.
Yes, but without a glass vessel, the ball lightning will be too short-lived. Indeed, due to higher temperature, it raises up, and as soon as it reaches the metal ceiling of the nuker, it collapses. The glass vessel makes sure that it can get to the metal, and hence it will stay longer (contact with glass doesn't make the plasmoid collapse, because glass doesn't conduct electricity).
I just wonder whether the shape is important, or whether an inverted drinking glass would also do the job.
While there I noticed they rented laptops - but the only Internet connectivity was through ethernet which didn't help at the beach.
That's probably exactly the reason why they don't have wireless. Y'a know, it gets kinda expensive if you have to clean or replace the laptops each week because of sand in the drives...
Yes, and 198.81.209.16 is at IBM ( yktgi01e0-s1.watson.ibm.com). So, don't panic if you see any 198.81 in your webserver logs.
Re:Not quite as bad as it seems
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Once you think about how Google's rankings work, you can easily figure out how to game the system. That's why Dave Winer (token head of all webloggers) is usually the first result of a search on 'Dave'.
Oh the irony. The second link for "Dave" does indeed go to Dave Whiner's "scripting news" site, but the topmost article on that page says that "google bombing" is just a phantasy...
Slashdot Mirror
Then use a real browser instead...
They will just count on the fact that most people won't care. Have you seen any public relations backlash due to the numerous corporate (or worse: governmental) IE-only or javascript mandatory pages? I sure haven't... although those cases effectively discriminate against the blind, makeing it impossible (or difficult) to access said content using a lynx browser and a braille line. For an especially funny example, point your IE browser to the "Tommy rumor" page. Then, try the same thing again with konqueror, netscape or lynx, or just with java script switched off. Yes, Tommy Hilfiger doesn't care whether you have the right color of skin when you wear his clothes, but he sure doesn't want you to browse his site if you're blind! And have you noticed any publicity backlash against this? I sure haven't...disabled people just don't have the same kind of clout that the blacks have.
It would just be much easier for them to make it comapatable in the first place.
Yes, it would be much easyer for them, but they like so much more to behave like pricks. Have you ever tried calling up a web design firm because of their IE-only page? Most claim it would be very difficult to make it compatible with other browsers, where in reality a simple browse-source reveals that they are intentionnally shutting out other browsers. Certain web design companies even have the gall to attempt to pressure their customers to not make their pages compatible, even after delivery (needless to say, we just ignored their feeble attempts of intimidation...eventually, they mirrored our site under their own URL, with the anti-disability provisions put back into place...)
Indeed, but...
And they would probably loose quite badly.
Yes, but only after dragging out the suit for 10 years. After which time, the object of the suit will be deemed obsolete, and the affair will be quietly shelved before any penalties are decided.
But what if Micro$oft removes the possibility of logging in via the keyboard?
And what if this spreads to web sites as well, and it becomes very hip to log in to your favorite weblog via clicks on an image, rather than HTTP passwords?
You can have alternatives in life, you know
Correct. But certain companies are striving very hard to remove the privilege of choice, at least as far as computers are concerned ;-)
Resellers and packagers often get a much better deal than the public at large (OEM pricing). It would have been possible that Mandrake got a much better price on SO than the public, and thus still be able to profitably include SO in the basic membership.
...stay very current on his Lotus Notes patches. Indeed, from now on, whenever news of a Lotus Notes security hole pops up on Securityfocus or elsewhere, guess who the script kiddies will try it out against first?
Just include a file with a public key somewhere in your package, and keep the private key. If the need arises, you can then come out of your anonymity and prove you are indeed the author by using the private key to sign a declaration to that effect.
What if it the code has already been released (months, years) before having been used at work? (Should be easy to prove... just check a couple of mirror ftp sites)? In that case, how would it be any different from any other Open Source Code that you just downloaded and used at work?
Maybe you can't fix a browser, but you can chose one that works ;-) Konqueror!
They won't dare fight you on this, because if they win, it would basically invalidate the whole EULA concept: if a click can be considered to be agreement, so can a signature for a certified letter...
Indeed. Leaving it longer does not really prolong the fun (there is only one brief flash of lightning anyways), but it might spew out tiny glass shards all over your microwave oven...
... can be found here.
Neither do those that made netscape communicator. Nor mozilla. Or of any other web browser (n.b.: exploder is not a browser...). I think that should settle the question "who's at fault".
Really? Which "enemy" did he aid? (No, aiding the Republicans by his foolish behavior doesn't count. In the context of this article, enemy means "military enemy", not "political opponent").
Agreed, but for perjury, not for treason.
Wouldn't that fall under giving them aid and comfort? Giving the ennemy vital information (such as the source code of weapons control systems) sure helps (aids) them, doesn't it?
Third attempt: more or less same setup as previously, but a little less water in the "load" glass, and using a larger cork, so that the mine could stand upright without leaning against the bottle. A spark appeared already early on in the experiment, but didn't cause a ball. However, the same candle-flavored fumes started appearing again. Then it hit me: they came from the cork, which was heated by the pencil mine stuck into it. Indeed, the cork had small traces of burn. Still no plasmoid, alas.
Fourth attempt: Figuring that strength of microwaves might depend on orientation, I broke a small piece off the mine, and stuck it into the cork, horizontally, rather than vertically. Soon indeed sparks, and then a ball of fire appeared, but unfortunately the pleasure was rather short-lived: the plasmoid set fire to the plastic bottle, and thus I had to stop the mess. Ok, I'll have to hunt for a suitable glass vessel.
First attempt: the match always went out before it could produce any plasma ball. D'oh
Second attempt: rather than using a match, I stuck a long pencil mine into the cork, and set the oven to thirty seconds. 29 seconds of nothing. Then a loud whizz, and the time ran out before it could get any more interesting (should've set it to a minute). However, this one second of action was enough to fill the bottle with a mysterious thick white fume. Question: is this the nytrogen oxyde that the article speaks about, or was it only the plastic burning (other than the fumes, there were no obvious traces of burn on the bottle). Worrying that the fumes might be toxic, I didn't repeat the experiment.
this .page .is .not .very .wide .i .like .wide .pages .i .like .the .work .that .klerck .does .to .make .pages .wide .it . brightens .up .my .otherwise .miserable .day .to .come .to .slashdot .and .see .those .nice .wide .pages .just .goes . to .show .how .lame .cmdr .taco .and .co .are .they .cant .even .fix .a .simple .page .widening .bug .and .they .accuse . microsoft .coders .of .being .lame .let .he .who .is .without .sin .cast .the .first .stone .or .something .like .that .Whats .happened .to .egg .troll .recently .i .miss .egg .troll .he .was .one .of .the .good .trolls .now .we .are .left .with .fuckwits .like .robo .troll .arrg .
Maybe you also need to put it into a link; unfortunately, I have no IE to test it...
No. Actually, as soon as the plasmoid touches a conductive (metal) surface, it shorts out and just collapses. The purpose of the glass vessel is not to protected the ceiling of the microvave oven, but rather to protect the plasmoid ;-)
That's why they suggest also putting a small glass of water inside, along with the experiment.
Yes, but without a glass vessel, the ball lightning will be too short-lived. Indeed, due to higher temperature, it raises up, and as soon as it reaches the metal ceiling of the nuker, it collapses. The glass vessel makes sure that it can get to the metal, and hence it will stay longer (contact with glass doesn't make the plasmoid collapse, because glass doesn't conduct electricity).
I just wonder whether the shape is important, or whether an inverted drinking glass would also do the job.
Another Anderson, Arthur Anderson, are also noted for their bone-headed decisions...
That's probably exactly the reason why they don't have wireless. Y'a know, it gets kinda expensive if you have to clean or replace the laptops each week because of sand in the drives...
Yes, and 198.81.209.16 is at IBM ( yktgi01e0-s1.watson.ibm.com). So, don't panic if you see any 198.81 in your webserver logs.
Oh the irony. The second link for "Dave" does indeed go to Dave Whiner's "scripting news" site, but the topmost article on that page says that "google bombing" is just a phantasy...