All protocols must be acronyms ending in P. Gopher does not qualify and thus is never going to be "back". Perhaps it's time for someone to work on GopherP. Just don't drink it.
But I can guarantee that if I (or anyone else) popularizes MUPOTDP (My Ubiquitous Protocol Of The Day Protocol) and there's an Apache module and a client app ("browser") for it, the party is back on. And when the nannies find it, we'll just define YAANP (Yet Another Anti-Nanny Protocol) and an Apache module and a client and all is well and good.
The nannyists are driving the world toward protocol-spam. Sooner or later, they will have to concede defeat, as a means will be invented to quickly and efficiently change protocols on everything. Remember, necessity is the mother of invention and war is the father. This nanny-war will drive technological invention. Top it off with "lazy" programmers, and you'll soon see an automated system to change everything quickly. No technological system can regulate the internet. No legal system can keep up with it and simultaneously resist replacement by it.
Actually, it started happening when Blockbuster became synonymous with "video store".
In the small town I grew up in, there was (and still is) a small, locally-owned video store. They charged $2 for an overnight rental and extra nights were $1. They've always had a good selection, both movies and games. I think they finally raised their price a bit finally.
I recall feeling years ago that Blockbuster (which didn't yet have a store in that small town) was a ripoff. They would charge $5 for a 2-night rental and extra nights were $2. They were the only place I could rent a game when I visited my grandparents, and I hated them. Poor selection, way more expensive, and they'd slap you with as many extra fees as possible.
That small town now has a Blockbuster, but they haven't been able to edge the local guys out. I wonder why.
There's more to it than that. Paper reflects heavily diffused light from a source that you aren't looking at. Monitors are a source, and the light you see is as steady and undiffused as the source can emit. That's the reason your eyes get tired after just a few hours of computer use, but take many hours of reading a book (and usually some mental or physical fatigue also) before you feel the same level of eyestrain.
E = I * R. If I = 0, E = 0, and R could be anything and still not make a difference. Voltage requires current.
I expect the actual power difference to be microscopic.
Multiply by 1,310,720 (1280x1024) for the actual amount of juice used by a whole, single display. Now multiply by the number of displays in use (good luck with that one). Using multipliers of these magnitudes is guaranteed to raise even the tiniest, insignificant amount to something substantial.
If one of my "idiot friends" sends me an SMS message and I see that I've been charged for it, I'll bitch at the carrier for charging me for something I can't block. When they say they can block SMS, I'll ask why they didn't do it before (since I don't use SMS) and demand that they both block future SMS messages AND remove the charges from my bill.
It's not my fault they don't provide a messaging service I feel is worth paying for...
Your definition seems to be: "I send SMS messages frequently enough to use 100 to 150 of them a month. It doesn't bother me to pay extra money on my plan to get these."
My definition is: "SMS messages are annoying and I've never sent one, though I have recieved a few of them. I don't want to pay for crap I know I won't use, especially overpriced crap. Cut them out of the plan and save me some $$$."
See? Those of us complaining about the plan aren't unreasonable either, we just have different needs. Needs that aren't being catered to by AT&T. That's why there's so much bitching. One size does not fit all.
Better solution: No limit on the number of terms you can serve, but no incumbent can run for office. This way, you get competent people that have experience, but you don't get them cemented into their chair. There's always turnover, there's always change. No one person is allowed to stay long enough to skew things in their favor enough to matter.
For even more fun, require that no seat can be held by the same party twice in a row and see what happens. Democans won't vote for Republicrats and vice-versa, so you'll see umpteen new parties show up to fill in the spaces. THAT would be a thing of beauty.
Actually, I think most of us USA-ian/.-ers know better than to ask the government to "regulate" as it has been. What we really mean is:
1) The government should do its goddamn job and break these monopolistic fuckers up and keep them broken up. 2) The government should do its goddamn job and and quit regulating the big guys into monopoly power. 3) The government should do its goddamn job and get their fingers out of the fucking pie. 4) The government should do its goddamn job and regulate things fairly so that everyone can compete properly. (That's a very small amount of regulation)
Do you see a pattern here? I could probably list 100 more things that start with the same 8 words, but most of them would be offtopic. We'll save those for the next BushBash story.
I made a great find at Costco about 3 weeks ago. A palette on an endcap with 9 Wiis left on it. On a busy Saturday. It seems to be slowing a bit... But not much. That was the 3rd (and final) palette of them they sold that day, each one containing about 30 Wiis. And by the time I circled the store, they were all gone.
Then again, it was at Costco, and the Sample Grannies are all at the other end of the store handing out food. If there's one thing that can trump the Wii, it's free food. Maybe that accounts for the delay...
The DS is a three-year-old system. The first year was lackluster and easily skipped. The second year was when the first major swell of good games arrived. The third year was when it became a household name and stomped the competition soundly back into the hole from which they crawled.
The Wii will be only slightly different; it became a household name sooner. The first year is still going to be lackluster. The second year and beyond will be good. The competition may not be as fully stomped as the DS's competition, but there will be boot marks and other evidence of kicking.
Mario made a great transition into 3D. Zelda, not so much. Sure, it was worth a try. And they made a good effort. But I will always disagree with calling Zelda 64 a "classic". It's an unwieldy 3D mess with a large fanbase. I don't consider myself a "purist", but I just couldn't stand Zelda in 3D. I'll take Four Swords Adventures (Zelda for Dummies) over OOT or WW any day. And there's just no comparison to something as epic as LTTP.
You don't need to count cards or use a device to make better than even at blackjack. A simple set of rules is all that is needed. The probabilities of the next card being a given value and its effect on your current hand's value is all that is needed.
Easy example: The dealer is showing something from 2 to 6. You have 12 or higher. Result? Stand. There's a good chance your next card will cause you to go bust, and there's a huge chance that the dealer will have to hit (only an ace and a 6 would cause otherwise) and a similar chance as you have of him going bust. In most cases, you'll win this hand.
See? No card counting needed, no cheating needed. And you'll probably win. Just study the game and understand the probable outcomes and possible failures (yes, you can lose money) and play accordingly. Bet with your head, not with your balls. Blackjack isn't a competition against the other players at the table, only with the dealer.
Of course lists aren't allowed in paragraphs. How could they be? If you're writing a paragraph, and you then start writing a list, have you not in fact finished the paragraph first?
Whoops, you missed the part in the summary about the "widespread adoption of CSS" driving this change of heart about HTML 5. Using CSS requires intimate working knowledge of the box model. To a developer (or at least the guy making websites), a p is functionally equivalent to a div, and they're frequently treated as interchangeable. And why shouldn't they be? Paragraphs are just divisions of text. Now, suddenly, there's this change that makes it ok to put ul's into divs, but not into p's. Now they're not interchangeable. Instead of having the desired effect of encouraging the use of tags that mean what they're used for (p for paragraph instead of just dumping text onto the page and breaking it with br's), we're going to see a wholesale abandonment of a tag that lost a useful ability. The p went from being a normal block container to being a crippled block container that can't contain lists. It will be ignored and divs will be used in its place.
In English English (the Queen's, I guess), they say the word "schedule" as shed-jule. In American English (or the highway, bitches), we say the same word as sked-jule.
It's not enough of a difference to make the word difficult to understand in everyday speech, but just enough difference to make everyone in earshot of the "foreign" way giggle when they hear it. Especially us "dumb" Americans, since we like to make fun of anything that sounds different (including each other, and anyone from Boston, the "deep south", or Minnesota can vouch for this).
Slashdot Mirror
No.
All protocols must be acronyms ending in P. Gopher does not qualify and thus is never going to be "back". Perhaps it's time for someone to work on GopherP. Just don't drink it.
No, HTTP is over. Maybe even SMTP and POP.
But I can guarantee that if I (or anyone else) popularizes MUPOTDP (My Ubiquitous Protocol Of The Day Protocol) and there's an Apache module and a client app ("browser") for it, the party is back on. And when the nannies find it, we'll just define YAANP (Yet Another Anti-Nanny Protocol) and an Apache module and a client and all is well and good.
The nannyists are driving the world toward protocol-spam. Sooner or later, they will have to concede defeat, as a means will be invented to quickly and efficiently change protocols on everything. Remember, necessity is the mother of invention and war is the father. This nanny-war will drive technological invention. Top it off with "lazy" programmers, and you'll soon see an automated system to change everything quickly. No technological system can regulate the internet. No legal system can keep up with it and simultaneously resist replacement by it.
It sounds cliché, but resistance is futile.
Now all that's left is for Captain Kirk to yell "DENNY CRANE!" as he tackles a pissed off alien and beats the hell out of it.
Actually, it started happening when Blockbuster became synonymous with "video store".
In the small town I grew up in, there was (and still is) a small, locally-owned video store. They charged $2 for an overnight rental and extra nights were $1. They've always had a good selection, both movies and games. I think they finally raised their price a bit finally.
I recall feeling years ago that Blockbuster (which didn't yet have a store in that small town) was a ripoff. They would charge $5 for a 2-night rental and extra nights were $2. They were the only place I could rent a game when I visited my grandparents, and I hated them. Poor selection, way more expensive, and they'd slap you with as many extra fees as possible.
That small town now has a Blockbuster, but they haven't been able to edge the local guys out. I wonder why.
There's more to it than that. Paper reflects heavily diffused light from a source that you aren't looking at. Monitors are a source, and the light you see is as steady and undiffused as the source can emit. That's the reason your eyes get tired after just a few hours of computer use, but take many hours of reading a book (and usually some mental or physical fatigue also) before you feel the same level of eyestrain.
an applied *voltage*, but no current flows
Then there's no voltage either. Why?
E = I * R. If I = 0, E = 0, and R could be anything and still not make a difference. Voltage requires current.
I expect the actual power difference to be microscopic.
Multiply by 1,310,720 (1280x1024) for the actual amount of juice used by a whole, single display. Now multiply by the number of displays in use (good luck with that one). Using multipliers of these magnitudes is guaranteed to raise even the tiniest, insignificant amount to something substantial.
You have contextd deactivated. Fire it up and try again.
Unfortunately, you're wrong.
I recall buying The Legend of Zelda in 1988 with 50 of my hard-earned dollars.
Well, you know why they're called "women", right?
They bring woe to men.
Kinda, but I think it would be more like this:
"By making simple phones that moronic soccer moms and other random varieties of yokel can understand, and pricing to fleece said yokel appropriately."
Unfortunately, the cell service providers have forgotten (or ignored) the minority of us that aren't dumb.
The brain has some kick-ass error correction built-in. That's why your statement can stay readable when condensed to this:
Thkfly, ntrl lngag hs evlvd engh rdndncy to prvd fr frly rlibl err crrctn.
Even better, it's compressed, and can be decompressed by using the error correction already present and running. Score!
If one of my "idiot friends" sends me an SMS message and I see that I've been charged for it, I'll bitch at the carrier for charging me for something I can't block. When they say they can block SMS, I'll ask why they didn't do it before (since I don't use SMS) and demand that they both block future SMS messages AND remove the charges from my bill.
It's not my fault they don't provide a messaging service I feel is worth paying for...
a decent SMS plan
I think we differ in what this part means.
Your definition seems to be: "I send SMS messages frequently enough to use 100 to 150 of them a month. It doesn't bother me to pay extra money on my plan to get these."
My definition is: "SMS messages are annoying and I've never sent one, though I have recieved a few of them. I don't want to pay for crap I know I won't use, especially overpriced crap. Cut them out of the plan and save me some $$$."
See? Those of us complaining about the plan aren't unreasonable either, we just have different needs. Needs that aren't being catered to by AT&T. That's why there's so much bitching. One size does not fit all.
Sooo.... When does DoomMail happen? I want to be able to run around my various mailboxes and delete spam with a BFG.
Awesome. I wish someone with mod points would read this (and mod appropriately).
Solution: term limits.
Better solution: No limit on the number of terms you can serve, but no incumbent can run for office. This way, you get competent people that have experience, but you don't get them cemented into their chair. There's always turnover, there's always change. No one person is allowed to stay long enough to skew things in their favor enough to matter.
For even more fun, require that no seat can be held by the same party twice in a row and see what happens. Democans won't vote for Republicrats and vice-versa, so you'll see umpteen new parties show up to fill in the spaces. THAT would be a thing of beauty.
Actually, I think most of us USA-ian /.-ers know better than to ask the government to "regulate" as it has been. What we really mean is:
1) The government should do its goddamn job and break these monopolistic fuckers up and keep them broken up.
2) The government should do its goddamn job and and quit regulating the big guys into monopoly power.
3) The government should do its goddamn job and get their fingers out of the fucking pie.
4) The government should do its goddamn job and regulate things fairly so that everyone can compete properly. (That's a very small amount of regulation)
Do you see a pattern here? I could probably list 100 more things that start with the same 8 words, but most of them would be offtopic. We'll save those for the next BushBash story.
I made a great find at Costco about 3 weeks ago. A palette on an endcap with 9 Wiis left on it. On a busy Saturday. It seems to be slowing a bit... But not much. That was the 3rd (and final) palette of them they sold that day, each one containing about 30 Wiis. And by the time I circled the store, they were all gone.
Then again, it was at Costco, and the Sample Grannies are all at the other end of the store handing out food. If there's one thing that can trump the Wii, it's free food. Maybe that accounts for the delay...
The DS is a three-year-old system. The first year was lackluster and easily skipped. The second year was when the first major swell of good games arrived. The third year was when it became a household name and stomped the competition soundly back into the hole from which they crawled.
The Wii will be only slightly different; it became a household name sooner. The first year is still going to be lackluster. The second year and beyond will be good. The competition may not be as fully stomped as the DS's competition, but there will be boot marks and other evidence of kicking.
"Wiiwii", to be followed by "WiiThrii".
Mario made a great transition into 3D. Zelda, not so much. Sure, it was worth a try. And they made a good effort. But I will always disagree with calling Zelda 64 a "classic". It's an unwieldy 3D mess with a large fanbase. I don't consider myself a "purist", but I just couldn't stand Zelda in 3D. I'll take Four Swords Adventures (Zelda for Dummies) over OOT or WW any day. And there's just no comparison to something as epic as LTTP.
You don't need to count cards or use a device to make better than even at blackjack. A simple set of rules is all that is needed. The probabilities of the next card being a given value and its effect on your current hand's value is all that is needed.
Easy example: The dealer is showing something from 2 to 6. You have 12 or higher. Result? Stand. There's a good chance your next card will cause you to go bust, and there's a huge chance that the dealer will have to hit (only an ace and a 6 would cause otherwise) and a similar chance as you have of him going bust. In most cases, you'll win this hand.
See? No card counting needed, no cheating needed. And you'll probably win. Just study the game and understand the probable outcomes and possible failures (yes, you can lose money) and play accordingly. Bet with your head, not with your balls. Blackjack isn't a competition against the other players at the table, only with the dealer.
Of course lists aren't allowed in paragraphs. How could they be? If you're writing a paragraph, and you then start writing a list, have you not in fact finished the paragraph first?
Whoops, you missed the part in the summary about the "widespread adoption of CSS" driving this change of heart about HTML 5. Using CSS requires intimate working knowledge of the box model. To a developer (or at least the guy making websites), a p is functionally equivalent to a div, and they're frequently treated as interchangeable. And why shouldn't they be? Paragraphs are just divisions of text. Now, suddenly, there's this change that makes it ok to put ul's into divs, but not into p's. Now they're not interchangeable. Instead of having the desired effect of encouraging the use of tags that mean what they're used for (p for paragraph instead of just dumping text onto the page and breaking it with br's), we're going to see a wholesale abandonment of a tag that lost a useful ability. The p went from being a normal block container to being a crippled block container that can't contain lists. It will be ignored and divs will be used in its place.
It could also be a description of her lack of snugness after she has let everything in.
Allow me to translate into non-baby-talk.
In English English (the Queen's, I guess), they say the word "schedule" as shed-jule.
In American English (or the highway, bitches), we say the same word as sked-jule.
It's not enough of a difference to make the word difficult to understand in everyday speech, but just enough difference to make everyone in earshot of the "foreign" way giggle when they hear it. Especially us "dumb" Americans, since we like to make fun of anything that sounds different (including each other, and anyone from Boston, the "deep south", or Minnesota can vouch for this).