Supporting? Dude... didn't Microsoft invent the concept of Asynchronous Javascript and XML with there XMLHTTP / XMLHttpRequest?
*sigh*
This is a stupid fucking meme. I wish it would die.
Many web developers used tricks with javascript and hidden frames to implement "AJAX" (another stupid fucking meme) long before Microsoft implemented XMLHttpRequest. Microsoft developers working on the web-based version of MS-Outlook were using those techniques, as well; they asked the web development team to implement XMLHttpRequest, which a *lot* of people wanted, as it simplified the whole process.
The same could be said of MS-Windows, as well, except it isn't even free if your time *is* worthless. But that all misses the point.
The "free" in Linux is "Freedom." The freedom to code, the freedom to use, the freedom from lock-in issues. The "no-cost" part of "free" just happens to be a nice side-effect.
Here in Australia, we have not seen much evidence that we have to be afraid of our government unless we're committing crimes.
Here in the good ol' US of A, it will soon be a big-time major crime to own software that can copy movies and music. What happens when it's a crime to use Linux? What happens when it's a crime to post something offensive on the fucking internet? What happens when that self-satisfied mother fucker who calls himself our President decides that calling our President a self-satisfied mother fucker is a crime? What happens when owning a copy of Brokeback Mountain is a crime?
We used to make fun of the USSR for requiring papers at all times. That was a common device in many of our spy movies-- "Your papers are not in order." That's exactly what a national ID card is: your papers, all bundled up in a single device. It's easy to abuse, and I believe it *will* be abused. And, ultimately, it is antithetical to liberty.
What happens when it is a crime to not have your national ID on you while walking down the street?
Well, actually, if anyone was going to trademark xmlHttpRequest as a technology, it should be Microsoft, because they invented it,.
No they didn't. They created a Javascript function called xmlHttpRequest, but people were doing the same thing using hidden frames or windows well before Microsoft implemented the function. Microsoft was trying to do some fancy-shmancy stuff with their web interface for Outlook, using the same technique others had been using for about a year. Claiming they invented it is like claiming Exakta invented the camera just because they made the first SLR.
It was nice they implemented it, though. It made life a little easier. Not a lot, but a little.
I hate him. I hate his irritating voice, his big ears, and his small stature. I fucking hate Ross Perot.
He made a liar out of me. I had told my brother there was no way in hell a third party stood a chance in this country, and along comes Ross to garner a substantive portion of the vote. Ape-fucker.
19% isn't a "small fraction", particularly in light of the power that the two major parties wield.
Especially considering how nutso he seemed at the end. I know a lot of that was media manipulation, but he sure seemed nutso. My brother thinks he didn't want to win, like Richard Pryor in _Brewster's Millions_.
Unfortunately, I think the two parties have learned their lesson. Now third parties are pretty much locked out. The increasingly-vehement rhetoric between party lines has galvanized party constituents so they are less likely to stray. "Red" vs. "Blue" has turned us into rival gangs, with all the hate and anger focused against the other gang, rather than against the leaders of the gangs who take turns bending over the Statue of Liberty and fucking her green copper ass.
An acquaintance of mine (let's call him Jim) has recently gone through a fairly harrowing ordeal. He and his family sued the Catholic church because Jim was molested as a child by a priest. Part of the original agreement was that this priest would never be around children again.
Yeah. The church merely shuffled the priest around, to various places with children. The church doesn't even bother to take these things seriously.
Funny, isn't it? We need a 100% intrusive government to stop.01% of crime. Meanwhile, Head Start is getting slashed into non-existence, "No Child Left Behind" is destroying an already-faulty education system, and 8.3 million children live without health insurance. 1500 children die each year from neglect and abuse. And so on.
"Because you know if you play New Kids on the Block albums backwards they sound better. "Oh come on, Bill, they're the New Kids, don't pick on them, they're so good and they're so clean cut and they're such a good image for the children." Fuck that! When did mediocrity and banality become a good image for your children? I want my children to listen to people who fucking ROCKED! I don't care if they died in puddles of their own vomit! I want someone who plays from his fucking HEART!"
Everyone has the right to free and unfettered speech. Even if that speech is stuff like, "I'm glad that this guy's dad is dead. I hope this guy goes to hell and gets raped by squirrells [sic]."
I don't think I'm politically correct. I might be; it's hard to know yourself. I know I'm pretty liberal. I love democracy, and I think the US should give it a try. But, with all that baggage, I'm not sure all speech is modded down just because it's not PC.
Often, it's modded down because it's just fucking stupid.
It is strange timing; I visited Digg for the first time last night because an article of mine had 300 diggs. Kinda cool. But I couldn't get into it, really. It's an interesting concept, but who's got that kind of time?
. . . those other sites do not play into what MicroSoft sees as the "integrity" of their product.
Which integrity might that be? The same integrity that allows malware to infect a machine to the point where it can poison the hosts file? The same integrity that spawned the anti-malware business in the first place?
Yeah. Microsoft is big on integrity, both moral and technical.
A court of law has determined that Microsoft is a monopoly. One of the anti-trust regulations specifies that you cannot use your monopoly power to force your way into another market; that was the heart of the conviction against Microsoft in the Netscape case. Microsoft used their monopoly to oust Netscape as the dominant browser by bundling, which is illegal.
Now they are using that same monopoly power to take over the anti-malware market.
I'm rather ambivilent about this. On one hand, it is just one more case of Microsoft waiting for a market to mature, then forcing their way into it. On the other hand, this market wouldn't exist if it wasn't for their own shoddy products, so it's really Microsoft's reponsibility to fix it. However, malware protection software isn't the correct answer, it's just the most expedient, with a potential for additional profit.
All-in-all, it's just Microsoft's usual game: own the system, rig the system, use that to take over another system. Keep secrets, and act all coy when your secrets are discovered.
Science advanced in the past from a strong belief in a deity and an investigation of "all creation" as a spiritual act.
Not to quibble, but researchers advanced from a strong belief in a deity. Science evolved (no pun intended) from rationalists who had a strong belief in a deity, or deities. The proto-scientsts may have been motivated to discover the naturual world to better understand the Nature of God; but the knowledge that came from that research was not dependent on belief.
As an epistemology, science has proven itself as the best tool available. I agree we should teach science as philosophy, and discuss how it differs from other epistemologies. This should not occur in an applied science class as typically taught in secondary school here in the states.
Perhaps there should be a distinction between "science" class and "applied science" classes such as biology. However, to suggest that science as an epistemology is somehow lacking is disengenuous without some evidence that it is lacking. To do this in a class in which the body of knowledge being studied has come exclusively from application of the scientific method would simply muddy the waters, not clear them, nor teach young'uns to question assumptions.
To be fair, New Orleans has been seeking government help in levee reinforcement for some time now. A fairly decent appropriations was stopped not too long before New Orleans was flooded last year.
To be fair, I'm not sure why anyone would want to live in New Orleans anyway. Nor in the midwest, where snowstorms hit all the time and the states ask for federal funds for disaster relief; nor in the southern states that are struck by hurricanes and ask for disaster relief; nor in the central states that are hit by tornadoes and ask for disaster relief; nor those people who live in the flood plains and ask for disaster relief.
All y'all should be moving someplace safe and predictable.
Not me. Chances are, the evil guy in the business suit is well-funded by more evil people in business suits; the evil person in teh Che Guevera shirt probably stands alone, and is less-powerful.
Business evil begets business evil. Personal evil dies alone.
Belief in evolution as a primary cause is just as much an act of religious faith as believing in God, because we observe only the results, not the process itself.
I'm not sure where you are going with this. What about those of us who accept the theory of evolution as the most likely description of the process that shapes and changes biospheres?... how evolution created... may be a poor phrasing, but it certainly doesn't equate to a belief in a super-being as first mover. As described, evolution is a natural process, and belief in natural processes is certainly more rational than believing in God.
I mention this because it opens a possible wedge of attack by creationists, namely that mutations in non-reproductive cells won't get passed on and so cannot contribute to evolution.
And your proof of this is.... ?
Horizontal gene transfer to gametes would allow pretty much any genetic material to enter the reproductive cycle, even viable, proven mutations in other parts of the body, or (even more likely) from some other genetic material.
It turns out that genetic material is promiscuous. Bacteria and viruses like to exchange genetic material with all kinds of things, including you and me.
Absolutely. And like the domestic spying issue or fabricated evidence for war in Iraq accusations, there's no incentive to investigate and uncover the truth (whatever the truth might be).
I'm scared there may be more like Abramoff, and I'm pissed nobody is doing anything about it.
The hesitation to address the issues speaks more about their guilt than any other evidence.
Yeah. I got on today looking for the one good 1 April funny article that was likely to appear. Instead I'm greeted with "OMG!!! Ponies!!!!"
Then I find out it's all about trying to attract a female readership? Yeah, I know it's 1 April. I know it's a joke. It's just *sooooo* funny, too: attracting female readership means dumbing it down! hahaha! I get it! LOL!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!
Yeah. I used to brag that computer science was a great place for females as well as males, because us geeks are accepting and understanding, and we don't suffer from the mysogeny of our construction-working, sports-watching brethren.
Thanks for proving me wrong, Slashdot. Thanks for shouting out what amounts to a wolf-whistle. We can now officially start referring to females as "skirts," or "gams," or "dames," or best yet, "broads."
I fucking loved the 1950s. Let's relive them.
And now I know why there aren't more females in computer science, or IT in general.
Slashdot Mirror
Supporting? Dude ... didn't Microsoft invent the concept of Asynchronous Javascript and XML with there XMLHTTP / XMLHttpRequest?
*sigh*
This is a stupid fucking meme. I wish it would die.
Many web developers used tricks with javascript and hidden frames to implement "AJAX" (another stupid fucking meme) long before Microsoft implemented XMLHttpRequest. Microsoft developers working on the web-based version of MS-Outlook were using those techniques, as well; they asked the web development team to implement XMLHttpRequest, which a *lot* of people wanted, as it simplified the whole process.
Microsoft did *not* invent AJAX.
But they did make it easier.
"Linux is only free if your time is worthless."
The same could be said of MS-Windows, as well, except it isn't even free if your time *is* worthless. But that all misses the point.
The "free" in Linux is "Freedom." The freedom to code, the freedom to use, the freedom from lock-in issues. The "no-cost" part of "free" just happens to be a nice side-effect.
Here in Australia, we have not seen much evidence that we have to be afraid of our government unless we're committing crimes.
Here in the good ol' US of A, it will soon be a big-time major crime to own software that can copy movies and music. What happens when it's a crime to use Linux? What happens when it's a crime to post something offensive on the fucking internet? What happens when that self-satisfied mother fucker who calls himself our President decides that calling our President a self-satisfied mother fucker is a crime? What happens when owning a copy of Brokeback Mountain is a crime?
We used to make fun of the USSR for requiring papers at all times. That was a common device in many of our spy movies-- "Your papers are not in order." That's exactly what a national ID card is: your papers, all bundled up in a single device. It's easy to abuse, and I believe it *will* be abused. And, ultimately, it is antithetical to liberty.
What happens when it is a crime to not have your national ID on you while walking down the street?
"Ver are your papers, Comrade?"
Well, actually, if anyone was going to trademark xmlHttpRequest as a technology, it should be Microsoft, because they invented it,.
No they didn't. They created a Javascript function called xmlHttpRequest, but people were doing the same thing using hidden frames or windows well before Microsoft implemented the function. Microsoft was trying to do some fancy-shmancy stuff with their web interface for Outlook, using the same technique others had been using for about a year. Claiming they invented it is like claiming Exakta invented the camera just because they made the first SLR.
It was nice they implemented it, though. It made life a little easier. Not a lot, but a little.
I hate him. I hate his irritating voice, his big ears, and his small stature. I fucking hate Ross Perot.
He made a liar out of me. I had told my brother there was no way in hell a third party stood a chance in this country, and along comes Ross to garner a substantive portion of the vote. Ape-fucker.
19% isn't a "small fraction", particularly in light of the power that the two major parties wield.
Especially considering how nutso he seemed at the end. I know a lot of that was media manipulation, but he sure seemed nutso. My brother thinks he didn't want to win, like Richard Pryor in _Brewster's Millions_.
Unfortunately, I think the two parties have learned their lesson. Now third parties are pretty much locked out. The increasingly-vehement rhetoric between party lines has galvanized party constituents so they are less likely to stray. "Red" vs. "Blue" has turned us into rival gangs, with all the hate and anger focused against the other gang, rather than against the leaders of the gangs who take turns bending over the Statue of Liberty and fucking her green copper ass.
Not that I'm angry or anything.
An acquaintance of mine (let's call him Jim) has recently gone through a fairly harrowing ordeal. He and his family sued the Catholic church because Jim was molested as a child by a priest. Part of the original agreement was that this priest would never be around children again.
Yeah. The church merely shuffled the priest around, to various places with children. The church doesn't even bother to take these things seriously.
You are absolutely fucking brilliant, my anonymous friend. That'd follow the Bush doctrine for the eradication of terrorism in America:
The terrorists hate us for our freedom, so let's just get rid of the freedom and they'll no longer hate us.
Funny, isn't it? We need a 100% intrusive government to stop .01% of crime. Meanwhile, Head Start is getting slashed into non-existence, "No Child Left Behind" is destroying an already-faulty education system, and 8.3 million children live without health insurance. 1500 children die each year from neglect and abuse. And so on.
"Because you know if you play New Kids on the Block albums backwards they sound better. "Oh come on, Bill, they're the New Kids, don't pick on them, they're so good and they're so clean cut and they're such a good image for the children." Fuck that! When did mediocrity and banality become a good image for your children? I want my children to listen to people who fucking ROCKED! I don't care if they died in puddles of their own vomit! I want someone who plays from his fucking HEART!"
Everyone has the right to free and unfettered speech. Even if that speech is stuff like, "I'm glad that this guy's dad is dead. I hope this guy goes to hell and gets raped by squirrells [sic]."
I don't think I'm politically correct. I might be; it's hard to know yourself. I know I'm pretty liberal. I love democracy, and I think the US should give it a try. But, with all that baggage, I'm not sure all speech is modded down just because it's not PC.
Often, it's modded down because it's just fucking stupid.
It is strange timing; I visited Digg for the first time last night because an article of mine had 300 diggs. Kinda cool. But I couldn't get into it, really. It's an interesting concept, but who's got that kind of time?
/.
I guess I could give up
. . . those other sites do not play into what MicroSoft sees as the "integrity" of their product.
Which integrity might that be? The same integrity that allows malware to infect a machine to the point where it can poison the hosts file? The same integrity that spawned the anti-malware business in the first place?
Yeah. Microsoft is big on integrity, both moral and technical.
A court of law has determined that Microsoft is a monopoly. One of the anti-trust regulations specifies that you cannot use your monopoly power to force your way into another market; that was the heart of the conviction against Microsoft in the Netscape case. Microsoft used their monopoly to oust Netscape as the dominant browser by bundling, which is illegal.
Now they are using that same monopoly power to take over the anti-malware market.
I'm rather ambivilent about this. On one hand, it is just one more case of Microsoft waiting for a market to mature, then forcing their way into it. On the other hand, this market wouldn't exist if it wasn't for their own shoddy products, so it's really Microsoft's reponsibility to fix it. However, malware protection software isn't the correct answer, it's just the most expedient, with a potential for additional profit.
All-in-all, it's just Microsoft's usual game: own the system, rig the system, use that to take over another system. Keep secrets, and act all coy when your secrets are discovered.
Science advanced in the past from a strong belief in a deity and an investigation of "all creation" as a spiritual act.
Not to quibble, but researchers advanced from a strong belief in a deity. Science evolved (no pun intended) from rationalists who had a strong belief in a deity, or deities. The proto-scientsts may have been motivated to discover the naturual world to better understand the Nature of God; but the knowledge that came from that research was not dependent on belief.
As an epistemology, science has proven itself as the best tool available. I agree we should teach science as philosophy, and discuss how it differs from other epistemologies. This should not occur in an applied science class as typically taught in secondary school here in the states.
Perhaps there should be a distinction between "science" class and "applied science" classes such as biology. However, to suggest that science as an epistemology is somehow lacking is disengenuous without some evidence that it is lacking. To do this in a class in which the body of knowledge being studied has come exclusively from application of the scientific method would simply muddy the waters, not clear them, nor teach young'uns to question assumptions.
Yeah, creationists are easily bored.
or they could be politically motivated. I wonder how many of the global warming supporters are to the political left?
I dunno. How many global-warming ignorers are on the right?
didn't bush put more funding for this very research instead of signing kyoto?
No. He just didn't sign Kyoto.
To be fair, New Orleans has been seeking government help in levee reinforcement for some time now. A fairly decent appropriations was stopped not too long before New Orleans was flooded last year.
To be fair, I'm not sure why anyone would want to live in New Orleans anyway. Nor in the midwest, where snowstorms hit all the time and the states ask for federal funds for disaster relief; nor in the southern states that are struck by hurricanes and ask for disaster relief; nor in the central states that are hit by tornadoes and ask for disaster relief; nor those people who live in the flood plains and ask for disaster relief.
All y'all should be moving someplace safe and predictable.
Like the moon.
Not me. Chances are, the evil guy in the business suit is well-funded by more evil people in business suits; the evil person in teh Che Guevera shirt probably stands alone, and is less-powerful.
Business evil begets business evil. Personal evil dies alone.
I can't say I'm crazy about them choosing Microsoft as a partner, but at least the state is doing something constructive.
Dude, cutting off your penis to keep from having premarital sex is not "constructive." That's about what this amounts to.
Belief in evolution as a primary cause is just as much an act of religious faith as believing in God, because we observe only the results, not the process itself.
... how evolution created ... may be a poor phrasing, but it certainly doesn't equate to a belief in a super-being as first mover. As described, evolution is a natural process, and belief in natural processes is certainly more rational than believing in God.
I'm not sure where you are going with this. What about those of us who accept the theory of evolution as the most likely description of the process that shapes and changes biospheres?
I mention this because it opens a possible wedge of attack by creationists, namely that mutations in non-reproductive cells won't get passed on and so cannot contribute to evolution.
And your proof of this is.... ?
Horizontal gene transfer to gametes would allow pretty much any genetic material to enter the reproductive cycle, even viable, proven mutations in other parts of the body, or (even more likely) from some other genetic material.
It turns out that genetic material is promiscuous. Bacteria and viruses like to exchange genetic material with all kinds of things, including you and me.
Absolutely. And like the domestic spying issue or fabricated evidence for war in Iraq accusations, there's no incentive to investigate and uncover the truth (whatever the truth might be).
I'm scared there may be more like Abramoff, and I'm pissed nobody is doing anything about it.
The hesitation to address the issues speaks more about their guilt than any other evidence.
So, what, you're trolling for 11-year-old girls?
Sickos.
Yeah. I got on today looking for the one good 1 April funny article that was likely to appear. Instead I'm greeted with "OMG!!! Ponies!!!!"
Then I find out it's all about trying to attract a female readership? Yeah, I know it's 1 April. I know it's a joke. It's just *sooooo* funny, too: attracting female readership means dumbing it down! hahaha! I get it! LOL!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!
Yeah. I used to brag that computer science was a great place for females as well as males, because us geeks are accepting and understanding, and we don't suffer from the mysogeny of our construction-working, sports-watching brethren.
Thanks for proving me wrong, Slashdot. Thanks for shouting out what amounts to a wolf-whistle. We can now officially start referring to females as "skirts," or "gams," or "dames," or best yet, "broads."
I fucking loved the 1950s. Let's relive them.
And now I know why there aren't more females in computer science, or IT in general.