Let's just hope they never evolve to the level where they take up arms and declare war against us.
I think we're doing a fine job of fighting against ourselves. The chimps can just sit back and wait for us to kill each other and then they can rule the world. And we think we're smarter?
The keyword is that people agree to these license. If you don't agree, don't use the software. Or, you could buy more expensive software that comes such a guarantee. I can't think of any specific examples, but I'm sure the software that runs pacemakers has some sort of guarantee. However, it's very expensive.
Canadians between 12 and 24 years of age are responsible for 78 per cent of illegal music downloading, even though they make up only 21 per cent of the population, it says.
I'm sure this is supposed to say "are responsible for 78 per cent of illegal music downloading in Canada". I can't imagine that Canadians are responsible for the majority of illegal music downloading.
Who marked my post as redundant? Do you not have f*cking sense of humor? Of course it's redundant, that's the point. The whole f*ing article is redundant.
It doesn't directly help O'Reilly to make their competitor's books available
Right now the online book business is pretty small. O'Reilly could be considered a leader (if not the leader) in the online book market. They have a lot to gain if they can ride the wave as the market expands. Yes, there is a risk that someone else could beat them but they have a distinct advantage as early movers. If the market grows, everybody in the market wins especially the leaders.
Of course Tim O'Reilly is going to in favor of the Google Library Project. O'Reilly's Safari Bookshelf is already putting the content of books online (for a fee though).
No offense, but I question your experience in the real world.
I run my own web design/development company and have built many web sites for both myself and customers. I am the webmaster for sites that get thousands of unique visitors a day. I have built web applications using several different server-side and client-side technologies including PHP, MySQL, ASP.NET, MS SQL, Java, JavaScript, XML, XSLT, CSS, and AJAX.
Bottom line, from an honest commercial development perspective, it's kinda hard to think of IE as "non-standard".
Yes, IE is the de-facto "standard" as far as what people use to browse the web. This does not mean that it adheres to standards such as those created by the W3C. I am not suggesting that it is possible as a web developer to create web applications that are strictly standards-compliant and do not work in IE. Obviously if 85% (or something like that) of people use IE then web sites I build need to work in IE.
If you can get this to work with backgrounds and the like in style sheets then I haven't found it.
Yes, I have gotten Alpha PNGs to work in both IE and standards-based browsers. First, you need to detect the users web browser. If they are using IE you need use IE's AlphaImageLoader otherwise you just use the plain old PNG. The problem is that the AlphaImageLoader will set Alpha transparencies on all of your content, not just the background. To get around this you need to place your content into layers and play around with the z-index. I forget exactly how I got it working but if you want more detailed info just reply to this and I will check my code to see how I did it. I would post the URL here but the site is under construction so I don't think the customer would appreciate me posting it on Slashdot.
"For many, IE is just not broken," said Johnston in explaining the small dip in Internet Explorer.
Yes, but for many web developers IE is broken. It's annoying having to write one set of code to run in the non-standard IE environment and then another set of code to work in the standards-based browsers. Take for example Alpha Transparency for PNG images. You can get it to work in IE by using Microsoft's method but you can't just slap a PNG in with alpha transparency and expect it to work in IE.
b) took it on the road and used it to perform mind control on chickens
Well, with a powerful enough cluster I'm sure I could simulate the inner workings of a chickens mind. Well not exactly mind control, it could help predict and manipulate the behaviour of chickens. I'm sure there would be some scientific use in this besides, of course, biting the heads off of chickens.
With Linux and other freely available open source software components for clustering and improvements in commodity hardware, the situation now is quite different. You can build powerful clusters with a very small budget and keep adding extra nodes based on need.
Yea, I'd like to build one but I'm not sure what I'd use it for. Does that mean I'm a geek?
Good question. I don't claim to be an expert but the few things I've noticed are around missing or inconsistent alt attributes on images. Seeing a "*" as the alt attribute is pretty common on Slashdot. This doesn't help to describe the image very well. Also, I've noticed alt attributes missing from images all together. In addition, I've seen images that contain text and then the alt attribute for the image is a different string of text. Maybe there's an expert on accessibility reading this who can expand/clarify on these points a bit? One thing I will say is that a few of the problems I've noticed seem to have been fixed when Slashdot updated it's CSS. Also, you make a good point when you say that Slashdot is very text based. Perhaps Slashdot is more accessible than I am giving it credit for. I don't directly know anybody who is visually impaired that reads Slashdot, they could probably help with this discussion.
Yeah - they probably won't enjoy the game at all as a result of that. And, you know, being blind.
But they may still want to read the review. I read about things I don't or can't use and I'm sure you do too. Actually, this has been one thing that has annoyed me about Slashdot for awhile. They don't seem to care about accessibility. I run a web site that has about 200 users and at least on of them is blind. If my little web site with 200 users can be accessible, then why can't Slashdot get there act together when they have hundreds of thousands of users?
You make a good point. Yes, it is easier for the "bad" guys to find the security holes in open source software. This comes down to a question of trust. Do you trust that there are more "good" guys looking for security holes then "bad" guys? If so, then the "good" guys will catch the security problems before the "bad" guys the majority of the time. Speaking of trust, do you trust closed source software vendors to find and fix their security holes? If given the choice to fix a security hole that only they know about or add a feature that will help sell their software what decision do you think they will make?
Is the closed source code of Windows preventing us from actively defending our systems?
Yes. We are at the mercy of Microsoft to patch the systems for us. At least with Open Source you have potentially thousands of programmers looking for security holes and reporting those security problems.
This is yet another reminder that no matter how dominant a company may seem there will someday be another company that comes along and replaces them. It's just a matter of when and how. Look at Novell, for example. Who that they would lose there dominance in local area networks? Yes, eventually even Microsoft will be replaced.
Slashdot Mirror
TTTech has offered to drop its legal action against Mangan, court records show, and pay him three months of severance, if he retracts his statements.
This doesn't sound like much after all he's been through.
Let's just hope they never evolve to the level where they take up arms and declare war against us.
I think we're doing a fine job of fighting against ourselves. The chimps can just sit back and wait for us to kill each other and then they can rule the world. And we think we're smarter?
The keyword is that people agree to these license. If you don't agree, don't use the software. Or, you could buy more expensive software that comes such a guarantee. I can't think of any specific examples, but I'm sure the software that runs pacemakers has some sort of guarantee. However, it's very expensive.
Repeat after me: Correlation does not imply causation.
Yes, it's like this classic example:
Increased ice cream sales in NYC on a given day linked to increased crime rate.
Of course if it's hot out, both ice cream sales and crime are going to increase but they have nothing to do with each other directly.
Canadians between 12 and 24 years of age are responsible for 78 per cent of illegal music downloading, even though they make up only 21 per cent of the population, it says.
I'm sure this is supposed to say "are responsible for 78 per cent of illegal music downloading in Canada". I can't imagine that Canadians are responsible for the majority of illegal music downloading.
(Score:1, Redundant)
Who marked my post as redundant? Do you not have f*cking sense of humor? Of course it's redundant, that's the point. The whole f*ing article is redundant.
Pete and Repeat are on a boat, Pete jumps off, who's left . . . ?
Repeat.
It doesn't directly help O'Reilly to make their competitor's books available
Right now the online book business is pretty small. O'Reilly could be considered a leader (if not the leader) in the online book market. They have a lot to gain if they can ride the wave as the market expands. Yes, there is a risk that someone else could beat them but they have a distinct advantage as early movers. If the market grows, everybody in the market wins especially the leaders.
Of course Tim O'Reilly is going to in favor of the Google Library Project. O'Reilly's Safari Bookshelf is already putting the content of books online (for a fee though).
Um, I think you meant "failure" not "fanless".
A Fanless Graphics Card
Did anybody else read this as a graphics card that nobody likes?
Slashdotted already. Maybe they can put the article on one of these devices and send one to each of us?
A real geek would know what to use it for.
I can think of a hundred things to use it for. The only problem is that none of them have any practical application to my life.
No offense, but I question your experience in the real world.
I run my own web design/development company and have built many web sites for both myself and customers. I am the webmaster for sites that get thousands of unique visitors a day. I have built web applications using several different server-side and client-side technologies including PHP, MySQL, ASP.NET, MS SQL, Java, JavaScript, XML, XSLT, CSS, and AJAX.
Bottom line, from an honest commercial development perspective, it's kinda hard to think of IE as "non-standard".
Yes, IE is the de-facto "standard" as far as what people use to browse the web. This does not mean that it adheres to standards such as those created by the W3C. I am not suggesting that it is possible as a web developer to create web applications that are strictly standards-compliant and do not work in IE. Obviously if 85% (or something like that) of people use IE then web sites I build need to work in IE.
If you can get this to work with backgrounds and the like in style sheets then I haven't found it.
Yes, I have gotten Alpha PNGs to work in both IE and standards-based browsers. First, you need to detect the users web browser. If they are using IE you need use IE's AlphaImageLoader otherwise you just use the plain old PNG. The problem is that the AlphaImageLoader will set Alpha transparencies on all of your content, not just the background. To get around this you need to place your content into layers and play around with the z-index. I forget exactly how I got it working but if you want more detailed info just reply to this and I will check my code to see how I did it. I would post the URL here but the site is under construction so I don't think the customer would appreciate me posting it on Slashdot.
"For many, IE is just not broken," said Johnston in explaining the small dip in Internet Explorer.
Yes, but for many web developers IE is broken. It's annoying having to write one set of code to run in the non-standard IE environment and then another set of code to work in the standards-based browsers. Take for example Alpha Transparency for PNG images. You can get it to work in IE by using Microsoft's method but you can't just slap a PNG in with alpha transparency and expect it to work in IE.
b) took it on the road and used it to perform mind control on chickens
Well, with a powerful enough cluster I'm sure I could simulate the inner workings of a chickens mind. Well not exactly mind control, it could help predict and manipulate the behaviour of chickens. I'm sure there would be some scientific use in this besides, of course, biting the heads off of chickens.
With Linux and other freely available open source software components for clustering and improvements in commodity hardware, the situation now is quite different. You can build powerful clusters with a very small budget and keep adding extra nodes based on need.
Yea, I'd like to build one but I'm not sure what I'd use it for. Does that mean I'm a geek?
Good question. I don't claim to be an expert but the few things I've noticed are around missing or inconsistent alt attributes on images. Seeing a "*" as the alt attribute is pretty common on Slashdot. This doesn't help to describe the image very well. Also, I've noticed alt attributes missing from images all together. In addition, I've seen images that contain text and then the alt attribute for the image is a different string of text. Maybe there's an expert on accessibility reading this who can expand/clarify on these points a bit? One thing I will say is that a few of the problems I've noticed seem to have been fixed when Slashdot updated it's CSS. Also, you make a good point when you say that Slashdot is very text based. Perhaps Slashdot is more accessible than I am giving it credit for. I don't directly know anybody who is visually impaired that reads Slashdot, they could probably help with this discussion.
Despite one million reports of violations, the FTC has filed only 14 lawsuits and levied only four fines.
Wow, that's only 0.0014% of reports turning into lawsuits.
Yeah - they probably won't enjoy the game at all as a result of that. And, you know, being blind.
But they may still want to read the review. I read about things I don't or can't use and I'm sure you do too. Actually, this has been one thing that has annoyed me about Slashdot for awhile. They don't seem to care about accessibility. I run a web site that has about 200 users and at least on of them is blind. If my little web site with 200 users can be accessible, then why can't Slashdot get there act together when they have hundreds of thousands of users?
Yea, and I'm sure blind people appreciate the alt attributes on the img tags.
You make a good point. Yes, it is easier for the "bad" guys to find the security holes in open source software. This comes down to a question of trust. Do you trust that there are more "good" guys looking for security holes then "bad" guys? If so, then the "good" guys will catch the security problems before the "bad" guys the majority of the time. Speaking of trust, do you trust closed source software vendors to find and fix their security holes? If given the choice to fix a security hole that only they know about or add a feature that will help sell their software what decision do you think they will make?
Is the closed source code of Windows preventing us from actively defending our systems?
Yes. We are at the mercy of Microsoft to patch the systems for us. At least with Open Source you have potentially thousands of programmers looking for security holes and reporting those security problems.
This is yet another reminder that no matter how dominant a company may seem there will someday be another company that comes along and replaces them. It's just a matter of when and how. Look at Novell, for example. Who that they would lose there dominance in local area networks? Yes, eventually even Microsoft will be replaced.