If we can't hold the executives responsible at least we can make sure noone will ever trust them again when they promise "don't worry, you won't be held responsible".
While the executive branch is more at fault for strong arming the telecos I don't think the public is well served by granting amnesty for ignoring the law.
Also telling people "if we ask you to do something illegal that doesn't mean we won't punish you later" is a good way to make it harder for govt branches to get illegal help from private entities.
Ooooh, now you're going to hear from the libertarians or what they call themselves these days that preach taking as much as you can and crushing as many people as possible is the ideal market because when only the strongest survive there will be some sort of equilibrium.
Do you seriously think the W3C tried to make everything the exact opposite of MS's implementation? MS is a freaking PART of the W3C. IE does read some parts of the standard, the problem is it reads some of that completely wrong. If IE just ignored everything that's part of the standard and not 100% in IE that'd be a lot less trouble but as it is you have to feed IE some seriously nonsensical data to exploit its rendering bugs to get what you want. If MS wants IE to be a competing standard they should just publish a freaking spec and adhere to it (between IE6 and 7 there were many changes that broke lots of IE hack code websites), make it official that that thing doesn't use the standard, don't pretend it does and then have it fuck up badly if anyone takes them seriously.
Do you think the other browsers were using that standard before it was out? They had to implement it afterwards too. MS didn't bother with it. What Opera is saying is that MS should stop forcing their browser on everyone if they can't be arsed to make it properly.
The ODF people came along and whined and whined that OOXML was making bugs the standard and ODF was technically superior. But if you save Excel spreadsheets into ODF, my guess is that the ones that rely on this sort of thing will stop working.
As it should. Bugs should be fixed, when you do a workaround based on faulty behaviour (i.e. work out of spec) you shouldn't expect it to work with any future version. If bugs are fixed quickly enough that won't cause much rewriting as the number of scripts with workarounds is very small. MS procrastinated and is reaping what it sowed.
I don't think putting a tag "x years ahead" on things like this makes sense. We're talking about math, right? I don't consider progress there a function of time but of inspiration. The NSA might have gotten lucky and found algorithms decades before the public thought of them or they might not be as lucky and have to use the public release, overall I'd expect the distribution there to be pretty random. A quantum computer is a lot of practical science, I think that does involve much more time than math and isn't as easy to get ahead on.
It's easy but it requires an active choice which most people won't bother with or even know about. IE doesn't require any choice beyond not doing anything which is an inherent advantage.
As for the Windows Authentication thing, that really doesn't sound like something other browsers can even implement if they want to. That's the issue here, MS has a monopoly so whenever they decide to ignore standards everyone has to use their way and often it's simply not possible to do so. They are a convicted monopoly too so they are not allowed to do that.
What, you expect them to create an OS, take a majority share of the market and then bundle their own browser with it just to play on even footing with IE?
Do you think that if Windows didn't come with IE that anyone would voluntarily pick IE?
MS gets the option: Either no browser or a program that downloads and installs the browser the user chooses. If they break the latter to favour IE in any way, slap 'em with a heavy daily fine until they fix it. Shipping Windows with no browser would be a pretty bad idea.
This is about content producers you ignorant dolt. They don't have the option of changing the user's browser and most users only have that broken piece of shit that is IE. In order to serve most customers they have to create a completely mangled website just so IE breaks it just enough to look right. In other words, you are forced to use IE.
When did the W3C try to challenge IE? Also how is this a fair competition when one browser ships as the default for 90% of the PCs out there just because it's bundled and welded into the OS they come with?
Internet? this isn't about the internet, jsut the software used to access it and that can be regulated easily. Doesn't need to be airtight since it's only about removing IE's advantage, not about preventing the use of IE completely.
Knowing FTP is the easy part (it has a help if you need it) but there's no list of download ftps for browsers so you'd have to learn that from somewhere else. Who'd even THINK of the words Firefox or Opera being related to webbrowsing?
Yeah but we don't have to worry about those, they'd have a hard time even measuring the signals, never mind doing anything to reach us. A more advanced one is probably better at detecting and travelling and might live in a larger volume of space since they might be capable of feasible interplanetary travel and habitation.
Slashdot Mirror
If we can't hold the executives responsible at least we can make sure noone will ever trust them again when they promise "don't worry, you won't be held responsible".
While the executive branch is more at fault for strong arming the telecos I don't think the public is well served by granting amnesty for ignoring the law.
Also telling people "if we ask you to do something illegal that doesn't mean we won't punish you later" is a good way to make it harder for govt branches to get illegal help from private entities.
I read that as "Telecom Immunity Shot Down". Too bad...
FAIK courts don't care that much about downloading but uploading is copyright infringement.
Put a link to the CD drive in their quickstart bar and they'll shut up quickly.
Ooooh, now you're going to hear from the libertarians or what they call themselves these days that preach taking as much as you can and crushing as many people as possible is the ideal market because when only the strongest survive there will be some sort of equilibrium.
If the plaintiff dismisses a case can he bring it again at a later date or is the matter considered settled then?
When is P2P actually fair use?
Coming soon to Japan: Remote-operated 1:1 scale Gundams rampaging through Tokyo.
Do you seriously think the W3C tried to make everything the exact opposite of MS's implementation? MS is a freaking PART of the W3C. IE does read some parts of the standard, the problem is it reads some of that completely wrong. If IE just ignored everything that's part of the standard and not 100% in IE that'd be a lot less trouble but as it is you have to feed IE some seriously nonsensical data to exploit its rendering bugs to get what you want. If MS wants IE to be a competing standard they should just publish a freaking spec and adhere to it (between IE6 and 7 there were many changes that broke lots of IE hack code websites), make it official that that thing doesn't use the standard, don't pretend it does and then have it fuck up badly if anyone takes them seriously.
Do you think the other browsers were using that standard before it was out? They had to implement it afterwards too. MS didn't bother with it. What Opera is saying is that MS should stop forcing their browser on everyone if they can't be arsed to make it properly.
The ODF people came along and whined and whined that OOXML was making bugs the standard and ODF was technically superior. But if you save Excel spreadsheets into ODF, my guess is that the ones that rely on this sort of thing will stop working.
As it should. Bugs should be fixed, when you do a workaround based on faulty behaviour (i.e. work out of spec) you shouldn't expect it to work with any future version. If bugs are fixed quickly enough that won't cause much rewriting as the number of scripts with workarounds is very small. MS procrastinated and is reaping what it sowed.
The current bottom-of-the-page fortune is "cascades". How utterly appropriate.
I don't think putting a tag "x years ahead" on things like this makes sense. We're talking about math, right? I don't consider progress there a function of time but of inspiration. The NSA might have gotten lucky and found algorithms decades before the public thought of them or they might not be as lucky and have to use the public release, overall I'd expect the distribution there to be pretty random. A quantum computer is a lot of practical science, I think that does involve much more time than math and isn't as easy to get ahead on.
Destruction of evidence is considered evidence of guilt.
It's easy but it requires an active choice which most people won't bother with or even know about. IE doesn't require any choice beyond not doing anything which is an inherent advantage.
As for the Windows Authentication thing, that really doesn't sound like something other browsers can even implement if they want to. That's the issue here, MS has a monopoly so whenever they decide to ignore standards everyone has to use their way and often it's simply not possible to do so. They are a convicted monopoly too so they are not allowed to do that.
MS wasn't exactly required to cease development on IE after 6.0.
I don't really care about SVG, I'd rather see proper markup interpretation.
kdebase-dev? Is that really something only Konqueror needs?
What, you expect them to create an OS, take a majority share of the market and then bundle their own browser with it just to play on even footing with IE?
Do you think that if Windows didn't come with IE that anyone would voluntarily pick IE?
MS gets the option: Either no browser or a program that downloads and installs the browser the user chooses. If they break the latter to favour IE in any way, slap 'em with a heavy daily fine until they fix it. Shipping Windows with no browser would be a pretty bad idea.
This is about content producers you ignorant dolt. They don't have the option of changing the user's browser and most users only have that broken piece of shit that is IE. In order to serve most customers they have to create a completely mangled website just so IE breaks it just enough to look right. In other words, you are forced to use IE.
When did the W3C try to challenge IE? Also how is this a fair competition when one browser ships as the default for 90% of the PCs out there just because it's bundled and welded into the OS they come with?
Internet? this isn't about the internet, jsut the software used to access it and that can be regulated easily. Doesn't need to be airtight since it's only about removing IE's advantage, not about preventing the use of IE completely.
They're finally sure it's not a communist conspiracy to... uh... ??? and Profit!?
Depends on your definition of "safe". It does make some quite safe backups.
Knowing FTP is the easy part (it has a help if you need it) but there's no list of download ftps for browsers so you'd have to learn that from somewhere else. Who'd even THINK of the words Firefox or Opera being related to webbrowsing?
Yeah but we don't have to worry about those, they'd have a hard time even measuring the signals, never mind doing anything to reach us. A more advanced one is probably better at detecting and travelling and might live in a larger volume of space since they might be capable of feasible interplanetary travel and habitation.