Or better yet. You can sneak a playboy into a church. Then go to the media about how your son found a play boy in church. Those no good bible thumping smut peddlers!!!!!
You can't use words like "socially conservative" becuse it will just get used to death, and then nothing makes sense. Like the parent poster who was comparing modern conservatives, conservatives, liberals and modern liberals. What is with this monder and non modern? Why are people trying to make classes and sub classes of polictal groups? Soon these words are just going to be thrown around. Soon we will have:
Hillary Clinton - Modern Socially Neo Conservative Old School Liberal
Huh... That is suprising. I thought if anything it would have been moderated interesting. I was just providing some food for thought.
Although, it can relate to the analogy of Ford Taurus beating a Ferrari, because that analogy is flawed in this discussion of Microsoft going after Google. Where Google is a company that specializes in Search Engines, and simply cataloging the internet so people can find what they want. Much like Ferrari which is a race team that specializes in building race cars. Compare that to Microsoft that is a company that makes shit loads of software. Operating System, search engines, portals , business software, gaming systms, etc, etc.. Is more like Ford that also makes Pickup trucks, minivans, sports cars, economy, luxury cars, muscle cars, SUVs, etc, etc...
So if the original poster wanted to use cars for an analogy, the proper one would have been Ford vs. Ferrari, and not Ford Taurus vs. Ferrari (360 Modena?)
In which case as I pointed out from History is that Ford has beaten Ferrari. So it's possible that Microsoft can beat Google at there own game.
Ford caught ferrari years ago, back in the day when Enzo Ferrari was still alive. His whole entire engineering department quit on him because they were tired of his wife stickiing her nose where it didn't belong.
Becuase of this he was then willing to sell his company. One of the interested buyers was Ford. They had a meeting with Ferrari, with all the paperwork ready for him to sign. He looked it over, turned to his friend and said "Let's go get lunch" and never came back. This pissed off the guys at Ford and they vowed to beat Ferrari at his own game. That is when they introduced the original GT40 which cames 1st, 2nd and 3rd (I believe) at LeMans.
And thus, that is how Ford kicked Ferrari's ass. Although, I don't know how difficult that was considering that Ferrari's engineering team left him. Regardless though, it was still a massive accomplishment for Ford.
c-level is an adjective used in a variety of industries to refer "chief" or highest-level executives. The term arises from an urge to group together the alphabet soup of acronyms (CEO, CFO, COO etc.) found in the upper echelons of the corporate world.
When I saw that the vogon ships were not yellow. I almost ran out of the theater. I was SO pissed off. IT RUINED THE MOVIE FOR ME!!!
Flamebait + 1.
I know what you are saying. I agree with you on some accounts. From dicussions with the director which I've read on slashdot, and other places, they kept on saying that things were edited for pacing issues. This was one of the things that I noticed in the beginning of the movie. The pace was fast, really fast. When the vogons were reading the poetry, it went by so fast, that the joke was lost. That is where the pace should have slowed down to halt to show just how bad the vogon poetry is. It's supposed to make the audience cringe, and then pick up the pace again. It seemed like everything was just flying by. So yes, I see what you are saying. Then again, on the other hand. The opening credits with the Dolphins singing a broadway musical about thanks for all the fish was brilliant. I absolutely loved it.
Even though some of the classical jokes from before were glossed over, I still thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Also the field of slapping shovel creatures was great. That is something that wouldn't work at all in the book, or radio series, but worked really well in the movie.
Also remember that lots of the changes where douglas' idea.
I agree. It's as if everyone believed that the earth was flat. Then through intelligence, and testing, we come to believe that the world is indeed round.
Then we fly into space, we take photos of the planet, and we know for fact, that indeed the earth is round. It's a giant blue marble.
Then somebody argues that no, that's not indeed true. IT REALLY IS FLAT! God just makes adjustments to everyones cameras and eyes so that it does look like a sphere. He just changes the light in order to test their faith.
Dennis Miller: I don't wanna go on a RANT here but America's foreign policy makes about as much sense as Beowolf having sex with Robert Fulton at the first Battle of Antietam. I mean when a neo-conservative defenstrates it's like Raskalnakov filibuster dioxymonohydrostinate.
Movie studios today are more like marketing companies then movies that actually want to create a decent story. There are exceptions, but they are mostly intereseted in making money. They are in the business of making money. That is why you are seeing so many geek movies, lord of the rings, xmen, spiderman, x2, spiderman 2, daredevil, hulk, elektra, etc, etc... The reasoning is that these movies are already "pre sold". They are garunteed that no matter how bad it is there will be enough geeks who will HAVE to go see it because they are a fan of the work. That way they are garunteed a return of MONEY. Money money money.
That is why we see movies like Transformers or Doom being made. If Sin City does well and makes a lot of money. I don't think a movie studio is going to give two shits if the director is in a union or not. If they can use him to make money, they will try to.
If they want Rodriguez, the union is not going to stop them.
I do admit that there are people out there that are more interested in making a good movie then money. Although, even when I rent "Finding Neverland" I'm still __FORCED__ to watch a commercial for a Chevrolet Montana Mini Van if i want to watch the movie.
Now, please do not reply how they are not actually coming to my house and tieing me down to the couch to watch it. If they do not let you fast forward or skip beyond a commercial, there intention is to make you watch it.
I'm not all that technical, so I might have gotten this wrong. But did this person just admit that IE is not apart of the operating system, but it just relies on APIs built into the opeating sytem? Therefore it can be removed from the opeating system?
Hello? Wasn't this an issue of the monopoly law suit? That it CAN'T be removed from the operating system?
I must be wrong, so somebody please clear this up for me. Can somebody explain this to me in lamen's terms?
Also, he says that the IE development process prevents them from introducing bugs into the software? Then how does stuff like viewing.jpgs become a security flaw? Is it that there development process is just not up to snuff? Or is it the APIs that the use from the operating system that are flawed? So it's not the browser, that's flawed, it's the operating system? That makes me feel better. Also regarding a user experience the difference between the operating system is null?
You're 100% right, I absolutely agree with you. We struggle with the same problem at work. Adding and adding on to something, and ending up with a bunch of hacks. So we do spend a lot and lot of time re-building stuff, and re-thinking it.
I think I might submit some ideas to the CSS working group. Maybe we can make a difference.
Maybe it is a good thing that IE is not implementing it. If it is flawed, and they implement it, and everyone uses it. We will be stuck with it. It would be creating legacy CSS.
It is really sad though, because everyone just wants compatibility between browsers.
Oh I absolutely agree with you. I've been saying the same thing. Why use something to simulate a table, when the tag is designed exactly for that.
The idea is that it would look like a table, but it would very much act like a list. What is beautiful about it, is that you can set a width on the elements, and just let them fill an area. So there is no need to worry about setting up rows. When an element gets to the edge of it's container, it just wraps to the next line. It makes data that comes out from a script beautiful, because you don't have to program in the end and start of a row. You just let it fill in the area. Also if the area that it is filling in is a dynamic width, it means that it still fills beautifully.
That is the sort of stuff that should be made super easy and super clear. It would make life so much easier for everybody.
That is rather funny. I admit, that I do look like an ass. That's learn me to not think through my post.
I still stick by my statement though that CSS could be greatly improved. I think the way they are doing display is counter intuitive, and could be made much simpler.
But now, how do you go forward without creating legacy CSS?
Why would anybody want to use display: inline-block. The article I link to says "The real use of this value is when you want to give an inline element a width. In some circumstances some browsers don't allow a width on a real inline element, but if you switch to display: inline-block you are allowed to set a width." How many times are people going to run into a situation to need this? The typical solution would be to have a
and make it float left or right. The only benefit of this is that you can make the block appear where the span starts, but regardless it's almost useless because the text around it wraps in that weird way.
They keep on developing useless things like this, when they really should be focussing on making the stuff that everyone does super simple easy to do, and super clean.
For a long time I've been trying to get a list that will appear like a table. You can make a list set them to display as inline. It works, but then you can not set a width, which then makes it useless. It works in IE, but not firefox. Or you can do all the "HACKS" can you believe that people actually call it __HACKS__, which is to make them float:left. This works, except that if your elements text-wraps, and god forbid that they do, then your whole display gets messed up.
Again, useless.
CSS could be sooo damn good, it's so close to being so unbelievably good, except it falls flat on it's face.
Personally I agree with you. We should have css and html totally seperate. CSS is currently focusing on the elements of a layout. This is not full control of the layout which people keep on claiming it is. It is an improvement over plain old html. But they need to focus on elements and also the full layout.
Ideally I would imagine html being only used for grouping information. Then using CSS you can manipulate those groups of information into columns, lists, floating elements, etc, etc...
Let's get away from exploiting "hacks" until they become the standard way of doing something and make something that works from the start.
I would gladly write up a spec and make some illustrations, but I don't have the time to argue my ideas with the CSS working group, because I'm pretty sure most would disagree with me. Plus, I've already spent to much time on this subject.
Disclaimer: This is not a rant saying that microsoft is right in not using CSS2. If anything it's the opposite, we are so despeartely in need of standards across the board.
He started a business called honest Eds, which is now a landmark in Toronto. Imagine a crummy little store, with a GIANT "Honest Ed's" sign, and thousands and thousands of light bulbs lit up just like the las vegas strip. All the lights turn off/on in the usual patterns.
One thing to note also, I don't know if this is true, but one of his marketing gimmicks was to stand infront of his store with a big fist of $1 dollar bills. He would bet people walking by that they couldn't go into his store and buy something the liked for a dollar. Regardless if it worked or not, people did go inside and find all of his great deals.
I donated some money to the Firefox new york times campaign. None of us were notified when the ad was coming out, so we got suprised when it did. You guys apologized and said that you would mail us all posters if we requested.
Well, I requested a poster, and I've never seen it. What's the deal with that? Have you not sent any out, or is it because I live in another country, that you have not sent it to me because it costs to much to ship?
Anyway, I didn't put up a fuss, because I assumed that the whole thing got dropped.. So what heppend?
I guess this is the point where jokes about France start, or *cough* viet nam *cough*.
Re:Like a lesbian on the Titanitc
on
Datamining the NSA
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
I don't get it.
I understand why a lesbian would be going down.
I understand why the titanic would be going down.
I don't understand why a lesbian on the titanic would be going down any harder, then a lesbian not on the titanic. I would actually see it the other way around. I assume that it would be because the lesbian is going down and the ship is going down so it's "going down * 2". But if your on a ship that's going down, you wouldn't be going down on your partner.. So it would actually be "going down * 1" or rather, "plain old going down".
Hehe... The sillyness of slashdot. I'm sorry, when I saw the lesbian reference, I had to make a comment.
I agree with you, but I had an experience that was the exact opposite once.
I once went to a bar to meet up with some "internet" friends of mine. I don't see these people that often so when i walk into the meeting place, I just look for the geeks. We can identify our own kind right away. Well I went into this one bar and right by the door was a bunch of geeks. So I start to walk over and they notice me, and they give me a weird look. These obviously were not MY geeks. Ok ok, that doesn't happen often, so the next geeks I should find will be mine. So I keep on walking and BAM more geeks... but there not the ones I'm looking for. So I start walking all over the place, and there are geeks everywhere. Everyone wearing prim and proper IT work clothes, and with there satchel back pacs. I could have yelled out "Who read's/." or "Who uses firefox" and not only would everybody not looked at me weird, they would have probably raised there hands.
Well I eventually found my friends... but man, I've never seen so many nerds in one place before. It was border line scary.
Does anybody else think that underpin is a little to similar to undermine? I read the post, and I couldn't figure out why Google would want to be so mean to Firefox/Mozilla. They just hired the lead programmer, google is the homepage for firefox, so why would the be so mean, why google, why?!? Then I looked it up, and underpin is a positive not a negative.
I've been reading his book, and there was one story that I found funny in it.
Before the olympics in Atlanta, he went down there with his CSG group to asses the security for the games with the people responsible. They were standing in the olympic village and he said something along the lines of:
"So, it appears that the Olympic village is simply the Atlanta Tech Campus"
All people in charge of the security measures nodded their heads.
"It is also true that there is a nuclear reactor on this campus"
Half of the people nodded their heads.
"I also bet that there are spent fuel rods for that reactor, and as I can see here, there is almost no security for this reactor"
No body nodded their heads, and instead fummbled for their cellphones to make the proper arangements.
I thought that was funny, and I thought you other geeks might also like it.
Slashdot Mirror
Or better yet. You can sneak a playboy into a church. Then go to the media about how your son found a play boy in church. Those no good bible thumping smut peddlers!!!!!
Oh gawd.
To me, it looks like a barbeque lighter + cigarette lighter + and some heat sinks.
But I know that I'm wrong.
So you crazy star wars fans.. what's it made out of?
Although, it can relate to the analogy of Ford Taurus beating a Ferrari, because that analogy is flawed in this discussion of Microsoft going after Google. Where Google is a company that specializes in Search Engines, and simply cataloging the internet so people can find what they want. Much like Ferrari which is a race team that specializes in building race cars. Compare that to Microsoft that is a company that makes shit loads of software. Operating System, search engines, portals , business software, gaming systms, etc, etc.. Is more like Ford that also makes Pickup trucks, minivans, sports cars, economy, luxury cars, muscle cars, SUVs, etc, etc...
So if the original poster wanted to use cars for an analogy, the proper one would have been Ford vs. Ferrari, and not Ford Taurus vs. Ferrari (360 Modena?)
In which case as I pointed out from History is that Ford has beaten Ferrari. So it's possible that Microsoft can beat Google at there own game.
Becuase of this he was then willing to sell his company. One of the interested buyers was Ford. They had a meeting with Ferrari, with all the paperwork ready for him to sign. He looked it over, turned to his friend and said "Let's go get lunch" and never came back. This pissed off the guys at Ford and they vowed to beat Ferrari at his own game. That is when they introduced the original GT40 which cames 1st, 2nd and 3rd (I believe) at LeMans.
And thus, that is how Ford kicked Ferrari's ass. Although, I don't know how difficult that was considering that Ferrari's engineering team left him. Regardless though, it was still a massive accomplishment for Ford.
Huh?
I can't wait to get my 1p0d
When I saw that the vogon ships were not yellow. I almost ran out of the theater. I was SO pissed off. IT RUINED THE MOVIE FOR ME!!!
Flamebait + 1.
I know what you are saying. I agree with you on some accounts. From dicussions with the director which I've read on slashdot, and other places, they kept on saying that things were edited for pacing issues. This was one of the things that I noticed in the beginning of the movie. The pace was fast, really fast. When the vogons were reading the poetry, it went by so fast, that the joke was lost. That is where the pace should have slowed down to halt to show just how bad the vogon poetry is. It's supposed to make the audience cringe, and then pick up the pace again. It seemed like everything was just flying by. So yes, I see what you are saying. Then again, on the other hand. The opening credits with the Dolphins singing a broadway musical about thanks for all the fish was brilliant. I absolutely loved it.
Even though some of the classical jokes from before were glossed over, I still thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Also the field of slapping shovel creatures was great. That is something that wouldn't work at all in the book, or radio series, but worked really well in the movie.
Also remember that lots of the changes where douglas' idea.
Then we fly into space, we take photos of the planet, and we know for fact, that indeed the earth is round. It's a giant blue marble.
Then somebody argues that no, that's not indeed true. IT REALLY IS FLAT! God just makes adjustments to everyones cameras and eyes so that it does look like a sphere. He just changes the light in order to test their faith.
WTF is wrong with these people?
That is why we see movies like Transformers or Doom being made. If Sin City does well and makes a lot of money. I don't think a movie studio is going to give two shits if the director is in a union or not. If they can use him to make money, they will try to.
If they want Rodriguez, the union is not going to stop them.
I do admit that there are people out there that are more interested in making a good movie then money. Although, even when I rent "Finding Neverland" I'm still __FORCED__ to watch a commercial for a Chevrolet Montana Mini Van if i want to watch the movie.
Now, please do not reply how they are not actually coming to my house and tieing me down to the couch to watch it. If they do not let you fast forward or skip beyond a commercial, there intention is to make you watch it.
Hello? Wasn't this an issue of the monopoly law suit? That it CAN'T be removed from the operating system?
I must be wrong, so somebody please clear this up for me. Can somebody explain this to me in lamen's terms?
Also, he says that the IE development process prevents them from introducing bugs into the software? Then how does stuff like viewing .jpgs become a security flaw? Is it that there development process is just not up to snuff? Or is it the APIs that the use from the operating system that are flawed? So it's not the browser, that's flawed, it's the operating system? That makes me feel better. Also regarding a user experience the difference between the operating system is null?
I confused.
I think I might submit some ideas to the CSS working group. Maybe we can make a difference.
Maybe it is a good thing that IE is not implementing it. If it is flawed, and they implement it, and everyone uses it. We will be stuck with it. It would be creating legacy CSS.
It is really sad though, because everyone just wants compatibility between browsers.
The idea is that it would look like a table, but it would very much act like a list. What is beautiful about it, is that you can set a width on the elements, and just let them fill an area. So there is no need to worry about setting up rows. When an element gets to the edge of it's container, it just wraps to the next line. It makes data that comes out from a script beautiful, because you don't have to program in the end and start of a row. You just let it fill in the area. Also if the area that it is filling in is a dynamic width, it means that it still fills beautifully.
That is the sort of stuff that should be made super easy and super clear. It would make life so much easier for everybody.
I still stick by my statement though that CSS could be greatly improved. I think the way they are doing display is counter intuitive, and could be made much simpler.
But now, how do you go forward without creating legacy CSS?
I think the CSS working group are not focusing on CSS achieving it's full potential.
Take a look at the display properties
Why would anybody want to use display: inline-block. The article I link to says "The real use of this value is when you want to give an inline element a width. In some circumstances some browsers don't allow a width on a real inline element, but if you switch to display: inline-block you are allowed to set a width." How many times are people going to run into a situation to need this? The typical solution would be to have a
and make it float left or right. The only benefit of this is that you can make the block appear where the span starts, but regardless it's almost useless because the text around it wraps in that weird way.They keep on developing useless things like this, when they really should be focussing on making the stuff that everyone does super simple easy to do, and super clean.
For a long time I've been trying to get a list that will appear like a table. You can make a list set them to display as inline. It works, but then you can not set a width, which then makes it useless. It works in IE, but not firefox. Or you can do all the "HACKS" can you believe that people actually call it __HACKS__, which is to make them float:left. This works, except that if your elements text-wraps, and god forbid that they do, then your whole display gets messed up.
Again, useless.
CSS could be sooo damn good, it's so close to being so unbelievably good, except it falls flat on it's face.
Personally I agree with you. We should have css and html totally seperate. CSS is currently focusing on the elements of a layout. This is not full control of the layout which people keep on claiming it is. It is an improvement over plain old html. But they need to focus on elements and also the full layout.
Ideally I would imagine html being only used for grouping information. Then using CSS you can manipulate those groups of information into columns, lists, floating elements, etc, etc...
Let's get away from exploiting "hacks" until they become the standard way of doing something and make something that works from the start.
I would gladly write up a spec and make some illustrations, but I don't have the time to argue my ideas with the CSS working group, because I'm pretty sure most would disagree with me. Plus, I've already spent to much time on this subject.
Disclaimer: This is not a rant saying that microsoft is right in not using CSS2. If anything it's the opposite, we are so despeartely in need of standards across the board.
Here is a link to the wiki page.
He started a business called honest Eds, which is now a landmark in Toronto. Imagine a crummy little store, with a GIANT "Honest Ed's" sign, and thousands and thousands of light bulbs lit up just like the las vegas strip. All the lights turn off/on in the usual patterns. One thing to note also, I don't know if this is true, but one of his marketing gimmicks was to stand infront of his store with a big fist of $1 dollar bills. He would bet people walking by that they couldn't go into his store and buy something the liked for a dollar. Regardless if it worked or not, people did go inside and find all of his great deals.
Well, I requested a poster, and I've never seen it. What's the deal with that? Have you not sent any out, or is it because I live in another country, that you have not sent it to me because it costs to much to ship?
Anyway, I didn't put up a fuss, because I assumed that the whole thing got dropped.. So what heppend?
I guess this is the point where jokes about France start, or *cough* viet nam *cough*.
I understand why a lesbian would be going down.
I understand why the titanic would be going down.
I don't understand why a lesbian on the titanic would be going down any harder, then a lesbian not on the titanic. I would actually see it the other way around. I assume that it would be because the lesbian is going down and the ship is going down so it's "going down * 2". But if your on a ship that's going down, you wouldn't be going down on your partner.. So it would actually be "going down * 1" or rather, "plain old going down".
Hehe... The sillyness of slashdot. I'm sorry, when I saw the lesbian reference, I had to make a comment.
I once went to a bar to meet up with some "internet" friends of mine. I don't see these people that often so when i walk into the meeting place, I just look for the geeks. We can identify our own kind right away. Well I went into this one bar and right by the door was a bunch of geeks. So I start to walk over and they notice me, and they give me a weird look. These obviously were not MY geeks. Ok ok, that doesn't happen often, so the next geeks I should find will be mine. So I keep on walking and BAM more geeks... but there not the ones I'm looking for. So I start walking all over the place, and there are geeks everywhere. Everyone wearing prim and proper IT work clothes, and with there satchel back pacs. I could have yelled out "Who read's /." or "Who uses firefox" and not only would everybody not looked at me weird, they would have probably raised there hands.
Well I eventually found my friends... but man, I've never seen so many nerds in one place before. It was border line scary.
*sigh*, All is well.