Just because people say something it dosn't make it correct. Linux is a kernel not a name for a full OS , xerox is a company not a copying machine , hover is a company not an alternat word for vacume.
Quite correct, which is why you won't be upset when I point out the following mistakes in your reply:
You are correct that what you should do depends on your server. With Apache, you can use RewriteRules to generate the appropriate redirect headers. If you're using some sort of server-processed filetype like PHP, you can specify additional HTTP headers there.
The key is that you shouldn't redirect with HTML. You should redirect with HTTP. I'm not sure how the W3C could make it any easier than it already is to do redirects properly, though.
I'd much rather go see this movie than the current stupid flicks such as "The Pacifier"
Have you actually seen "The Pacifier"? My girlfriend and I took her little brother and sister to it, and I thought it was pretty good. To each one's own, I suppose.
No, I bet you do, if only minimal. I bet you give that word document a name, so you know what to look for when you need to edit that document. I bet you probably also save word documents to a specific folder.
Both of these are regular filesystem data that are required to write the data to disk. I was referring to things like "Title," "Author," "Keywords," etc., that show up when you do File -> Properties in Word. Those require additional effort to populate, and I personally don't populate them.
Most humans like being able to organize their personnal things, this system will bring that ability on the humble PC a step closer.
I organize my files with their name and their location. If both of these are descriptive and distinctive enough, no other data about the file is necessary.
WinFS allows the user to perform searches based on the metadata of the stored item
So where's the metadata come from? If it's dependent on the end user filling it in when they save the file to disk, I don't hold out a lot of hope for the usefulness of this idea. I rarely add any additional information about the files I save (e.g., Microsoft Word documents), and I don't know anyone who does.
I had heard some rumors along those lines, too. They'd have to do an incredible job to get me interested, though. They'd have to inspire interest in characters not yet seen AND overcome the odd-numbered-movie curse that seems to have plagued Star Trek since the beginning. I'm not saying I don't think they can do it, but I must admit to some skepticism.
Assuming this will actually happen, I wonder who's going to be in it. Last I heard, Patrick Stewart explicitly said he wasn't going to be in another Trek movie, so I somehow doubt that it'll be the TNG cast. And frankly, that's the only cast that would make a Trek movie worthwhile for me to see.
Okay, this is my last comment on this, because too much time has been spent on such a trivial matter already, but I had to point out the following contradiction in your last post:
The People from the United States are Americans
The Citizen of the United States of America are not Americans
I don't follow your argument here, please ellaborate.
I can see some validity behind your argument for the French term, though I find it unlikely that it will come into widespread global use.
You continue to say that calling citizens of the USA "Americans" is wrong, which is incorrect even if the rest of your argument were accepted. We still live on an American continent, and are therefore Americans.
You're perfectly welcome to call yourself American as well, being from Canada; just be aware that there would likely be misunderstanding from the large number of those that consider "American" to mean "from the United States of America." Just don't say that people from the United States of America aren't Americans, because obviously we are, by at least one definition of the word.
Yes , I agree totally with your point , people do make that mistake all the time and are not corrected
I wouldn't call it a mistake, more like an ambiguity.
citizen of the United States = Etats-Unians
Well, that has the same problem "American" does, doesn't it? I mean, the USA isn't the only United States in the world. Another poster in this thread pointed out that it's fully "United States of Mexico" south of us, so we can't very well call ourselves "United Statesians" either.
My point, however, is that it's just a name. The reason people say "American" and mean someone from the USA is because it's shorter to say than to spell it all out. It's not because they don't think Canada or Mexico or any other country isn't part of an American continent. It's because "Canadian" and "Mexican" are faster to say than "person from the USA."
Perhaps if you could come up with a name for us citizens of the USA that's similar in length and time to say to "American" people could start using that instead. Any ideas?
Perhaps if he's French Canadian like I presume yourself to be, but most people tend to call citizens of the United States of America simply "Americans."
Re:How do I automatically kill history in Firefox?
on
Firefox 1.0.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Just because people say something it dosn't make it correct .
Linux is a kernel not a name for a full OS , xerox is a company not a copying machine , hover is a company not an alternat word for vacume.
Quite correct, which is why you won't be upset when I point out the following mistakes in your reply:
dosn't
hover (should be Hoover)
alternat
vacume
Thank you, that is all.
One word...Strategery. ...Lockbox.
I'm pretty sure they're using Linux in the context of GNU/Linux in this case. As in Linux distributions, not specifically and entirely the kernel.
You are correct that what you should do depends on your server. With Apache, you can use RewriteRules to generate the appropriate redirect headers. If you're using some sort of server-processed filetype like PHP, you can specify additional HTTP headers there.
The key is that you shouldn't redirect with HTML. You should redirect with HTTP. I'm not sure how the W3C could make it any easier than it already is to do redirects properly, though.
Then click back twice fast. Works in Opera. Or you could just open the history on the back button and select the page before the redirecting one.
OR...people could take the time to write websites correctly.
haha, no, but I have heard of Who Does Work When You've Got Slashdot.org?
Am I the only one who wasn't aware of ANY of these "planet" websites?
I'd much rather go see this movie than the current stupid flicks such as "The Pacifier"
Have you actually seen "The Pacifier"? My girlfriend and I took her little brother and sister to it, and I thought it was pretty good. To each one's own, I suppose.
I imagine that the greatest difficulty will be with the reading of information from that solution, too. :)
No, I bet you do, if only minimal. I bet you give that word document a name, so you know what to look for when you need to edit that document. I bet you probably also save word documents to a specific folder.
Both of these are regular filesystem data that are required to write the data to disk. I was referring to things like "Title," "Author," "Keywords," etc., that show up when you do File -> Properties in Word. Those require additional effort to populate, and I personally don't populate them.
Most humans like being able to organize their personnal things, this system will bring that ability on the humble PC a step closer.
I organize my files with their name and their location. If both of these are descriptive and distinctive enough, no other data about the file is necessary.
WinFS allows the user to perform searches based on the metadata of the stored item
So where's the metadata come from? If it's dependent on the end user filling it in when they save the file to disk, I don't hold out a lot of hope for the usefulness of this idea. I rarely add any additional information about the files I save (e.g., Microsoft Word documents), and I don't know anyone who does.
GSOS? Sounds vaguely religious... :)
Just wait until it gets viruses and spyware.
Gives new meaning to the concept of "bot network," doesn't it?
Only if you login. ;)
Perhaps you should upgrade to a tinfoil ski mask, just to be safe.
I had heard some rumors along those lines, too. They'd have to do an incredible job to get me interested, though. They'd have to inspire interest in characters not yet seen AND overcome the odd-numbered-movie curse that seems to have plagued Star Trek since the beginning. I'm not saying I don't think they can do it, but I must admit to some skepticism.
Assuming this will actually happen, I wonder who's going to be in it. Last I heard, Patrick Stewart explicitly said he wasn't going to be in another Trek movie, so I somehow doubt that it'll be the TNG cast. And frankly, that's the only cast that would make a Trek movie worthwhile for me to see.
Okay, this is my last comment on this, because too much time has been spent on such a trivial matter already, but I had to point out the following contradiction in your last post:
:)
The People from the United States are Americans
The Citizen of the United States of America are not Americans
Well, I've fed this troll enough.
The "of" make it a mistake and not an ambiguity.
I don't follow your argument here, please ellaborate.
I can see some validity behind your argument for the French term, though I find it unlikely that it will come into widespread global use.
You continue to say that calling citizens of the USA "Americans" is wrong, which is incorrect even if the rest of your argument were accepted. We still live on an American continent, and are therefore Americans.
You're perfectly welcome to call yourself American as well, being from Canada; just be aware that there would likely be misunderstanding from the large number of those that consider "American" to mean "from the United States of America." Just don't say that people from the United States of America aren't Americans, because obviously we are, by at least one definition of the word.
Yes , I agree totally with your point , people do make that mistake all the time and are not corrected
:)
I wouldn't call it a mistake, more like an ambiguity.
citizen of the United States = Etats-Unians
Well, that has the same problem "American" does, doesn't it? I mean, the USA isn't the only United States in the world. Another poster in this thread pointed out that it's fully "United States of Mexico" south of us, so we can't very well call ourselves "United Statesians" either.
I'm open to any further suggestions.
My point, however, is that it's just a name. The reason people say "American" and mean someone from the USA is because it's shorter to say than to spell it all out. It's not because they don't think Canada or Mexico or any other country isn't part of an American continent. It's because "Canadian" and "Mexican" are faster to say than "person from the USA."
Perhaps if you could come up with a name for us citizens of the USA that's similar in length and time to say to "American" people could start using that instead. Any ideas?
You mean Etats-Unians, not Americans
Perhaps if he's French Canadian like I presume yourself to be, but most people tend to call citizens of the United States of America simply "Americans."
x (Paranoia) is what you're looking for.
This is Slashdot, where anyone will disagree with you about anything!
:P
No way, you're completely wrong about that!
after all blowing shit up is so much more important than dialog...
;)
Dude, have you heard the dialog in I and II? I'll take shit blowing up over that crap any day.