On Wikipedia. That's just because everytime someone takes computer related activities out of the section on psychological dependence one of the admins puts it back in a few minutes later. Even if it happens at 3am.
To the vast majority of users, Netscape was the Internet.
Google has since taken that place. Google is the Internet to many people. So much so that Google has felt compelled to to prevent the genericizing of their mark.
Well I'd better do some googling to find out about that.
That seems rather inefficient to me. A few browser tabs on an online dating site followed by a few MSN conversations and he could get date in my experience.
Problem this time is, the US and Europe aren't going to let Russia roll their tanks into every Eastern European nation bulldozing their people into submission.
I have not in my lifetime seen any amount of guts displayed by the Europeans (or at least the Western ones) over any issue whatsoever. There is absolutely nothing that would lead me (or the Russians) to believe for a second that they would stand up and do anything of consequence. Hitler himself could reincarnate, and Europe would do the Neville Chamberlain thing all over again. And as for us in the US, I don't know that we'd really fight Russia over an Eastern European country. Just look what we did when the Russians rolled their tanks into Georgia. Still though, I suppose we sent aid and a few diplomats, military advisors and some military hardware. That's more than the rest of the Europeans did, as usual (and we also had the excuse of already being in two other wars).
Western Europe != France and Germany. The rest of Nato would likely back Eastern Europe. And the US would intervene to help once pictures of civillians getting blown to bits appeared on CNN. It took the world a while to act in Kosovo, but I think most of it would if the Russians actually attacked a Nato country.
Hell, I think even the French and Germans would fight once the rest of Nato did, they did in Kosovo.
The worst thing is that these idiots overwhelming back the Democrats and then whine about them losing elections, not realising that being backed by people like them not really helpful for any party.
It's even more unfair in that Democrat foreign policy is actually quite conventional, something else the moonbats complain about when they actually win.
If you heard a report back in 2000 that Saddam Hussein had had yet another person killed, you'd think it was just par for the course. If rumor was that Bush allowed another fat-cat single-source contracting deal with his friends, you'd think it was probably true. Why? Because it falls in with that person's modus operandi.
Putin's Russia has been a very dangerous place for anyone who has opposed him, or even tried to investigate what was happening under him. Many are dead, exiled or in jail. So while I won't automatically put this in the "It's true" category, it does belong firmly in "Most likely true."
That can't be right! I know George Bush is a very bad man and thus anyone that criticizes him must be as pure as the driven snow.
Surely it can't be the case that politicians other than US Republicans do evil things to stay in power? That would mean I'd have to decide issues in a world full of shades of rather dark gray rather than a nice simple black and white world where the US is always wrong and its opponents are always right.
Oh that is the least of the precautions. I profit nicely from the current state of affairs and I have no intention of jeopardizing myself. I am one of the people taking advantage of you. Every once in awhile I have enough free time to feel a little guilty about what I am participating in and attempt a little education. Inevitably some good citizen like yourself comes along and tells me I am fucking them so well he barely notices. I feel better about myself. I made an effort to inform but I realize people deserve what they get and I am invigorated to fuck them harder when I get back to work. Thanks.
Wow! You sound like a real badass. There was I thinking you were posting from your mother's basement.
Sad to learn that you think the threats we face have anything to do with democracy or a lame duck president. You really are paying attention to the wrong things - exactly as you are suppose to do.
Unlike you who's the only one who can see can see the conspiracy I suppose?
Good job you're posting it as an AC on slashdot, that's sure to alert the world to the threat.
Glad you recognize that the rise of fascism in the 1930's tool place under a different historical context from modern democratic America with a lame duck President.
By "contemptuous attitude by the MSM" you presumably mean that people laugh at you when you tell them they're living in a fascist state
No fool, he means things like the MSM barely questioning the need to go to war in places like Iraq, echoing the administration all the way and, in the few meager attempts to give anti-war points of view coverage, being dismissive and ganging up on them - often on direct orders from corporate management.
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying.
And face it, you don't read well. He didn't say it was here just that all the pieces were in place. The same pieces, by the way, many US corps are selling and testing in China now. Oh, but it could never happen here, right? It's not as if most Americans have their heads up their asses...
Yeah just like the Holocaust happened in US after IBM had tested out the technology in Germany. Oh wait.
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying
Why? It's easier and cheaper to discredit dissidents these days than to imprison them, and has the nice side effect that it doesn't make martyrs of them. Make someone with specific views appear to be such a crackpot that they're ostracised by the rest of society and you can build your political prisons entirely in their minds with very low upkeep costs.
All crackpots claim they've been discredited by some sort of ill defined conspiracy. The truth is usually that they've lost the argument and now no one is interested in them.
This is quite different from people in truly totalitarian societies who argued for a more open political system. No one seriously disagrees with those arguments but the tiny minority that run society found it easier to lock them up than to allow a more open system which would have exposed their corruption and brutality.
I'm sure you consider yourself a Solzhenitsyn-like dissident bravely fighting oppression, but actually you're totally free to argue for your ideas, it's just that no one is interested in them.
I've read Solzhenitsyn and you Sir are no Solzhenitsyn;-)
Just be aware that people in some countries or areas of countries are less welcoming to Americans and that you will have to expect them trying to get you into heated discussions about American presidents, especially Bush...
Meaning in Sweden if you say you are from the US/UK to the average arsehole in a bar you'll spend the rest of the conversation parrying passive aggressive comments about US/UK foreign policy, racism, bad food, etc.
For example, it took a *long* time for average, German-blooded, Christian German citizens to start getting locked up for political opposition in Nazi Germany... "and then they came for me". America *is* fascist at the moment, but it's still at the stage of "they came for the Jews" (except this time it's Arabs/Muslims). And we have a ridiculously small Muslim population, hence the lack of fascistic activities towards most people.
Bullshit, Dachau was the first concentration camp and the majority of prisoners initially were politicals, i.e. supporters of other political parties who were locked up soon after the Nazis assumption of absolute power.
I like Opera much more the IE or FF, but this whole "breaking web standards" rant is retarded. IE implemented features before there was a standard way to do them. The standards came later and did things differently. Lots of sites used the Microsoft version and ignored the 'standard'. Microsoft would be dumb to break those sites, and if they did people just won't upgrade.
The web standards camp seems kind of Trotskyist. You'd think they're the left wing, but if you happened to make a website that claims to conform to web standards but doesn't, the idealists turn into Joe Arpaio, America's Toughest Sheriff. "YOU MADE A MISTAKE AND YOUR WEBSITE SHOULD BREAK. I don't care if 80% of your websites stop working. I'll put you all in jail, where you will wear pink pajamas and eat 15 cent sandwiches and work on a chain gang. And I don't care if the whole county is in jail. The law is the law."
On the other hand, we have the pragmatic, touchy feely, warm and fuzzy engineering types. "Can't we just default to IE7 mode? One line of code... Zip! Solved!"
Secretly? Here's what I think is going to happen. The IE8 team going to tell everyone that IE8 will use web standards by default, and run a nice long beta during which they beg people to test their pages with IE8 and get them to work. And when they get closer to shipping, and only 32% of the web pages in the world render properly, they'll say, "look guys, we're really sorry, we really wanted IE8 standards mode to be the default, but we can't ship a browser that doesn't work," and they'll revert to the pragmatic decision. Or maybe they won't, because the pragmatists at Microsoft have been out of power for a long time. In which case, IE is going to lose a lot of market share, which would please the idealists to no end, and probably won't decrease Dean Hachamovitch's big year-end bonus by one cent.
And perhaps if faced with large costs as a result of poor decisions in the past, companies might be inclined not to repeat the same stupid mistakes again.
No, they just won't upgrade to IE8.
It's sort of hard to convince people to upgrade to a product that punishes them with 'large costs' for their 'stupid mistakes' to make sure they don't repeat them.
It seems to me all you are saying is that the US is a couple of years behind the curve. Give it a little more time.
We already have the "free speech zones". The secret camps. The torture policy. The contemptuous attitude of the MSM toward any idea not created in the echo chamber. And if Denver proves anything, the police state is equipped to the hilt. Another push or two on the law front before a McCain Supreme Court and we are there.
By "contemptuous attitude by the MSM" you presumably mean that people laugh at you when you tell them they're living in a fascist state?
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying. The very fact that you're able to whine about fascism shows you're not living under it.
Yeah, because American intelligence agencies have morals!
No, but they are under some sort of civillian political control. In Russia and China intelligence agencies control YOU (If YOU=the civillian politicians). US intelligence agencies are actually controlled by the law whereas in Russia or China they operate completely outside it.
But I'm sure loads of Americans will now tell me that the US is as bad or worse than countries that do this
70 something Beijing residents get their house taken away by politically well connected developers. They apply for a permit to protest and are punished by being sent to a reeducation through labour camp without any trial.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually Psychological Dependence (i.e. compulsive WOW playing) is generally considered to be a type of addiction:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_dependence#Psychological_dependency
On Wikipedia. That's just because everytime someone takes computer related activities out of the section on psychological dependence one of the admins puts it back in a few minutes later. Even if it happens at 3am.
On the upside she's very unlikely to cheat on him. Plus if she gets too fat he can just hide cheetos for a couple of days.
To the vast majority of users, Netscape was the Internet.
Google has since taken that place. Google is the Internet to many people. So much so that Google has felt compelled to to prevent the genericizing of their mark.
Well I'd better do some googling to find out about that.
Trees don't grow on... Well, yes they do, but Rome wasn't built in one day either.
Would be nice, but it's too slow for any of us now living to use it.
We'll gene splice them so that they can very quickly when fed on a high nutrient liquid like animal blood.
That seems rather inefficient to me. A few browser tabs on an online dating site followed by a few MSN conversations and he could get date in my experience.
Why would you want to have 10 webcams running?
Have you been saving that up in some kind of .txt file, waiting for your chance at first post?
It's a quote from Proust.
http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/proust.htm
Hence the subject "First Proust!"
If Monty Python had made this joke anyone repeating it here would have got modded up.
I have not in my lifetime seen any amount of guts displayed by the Europeans (or at least the Western ones) over any issue whatsoever. There is absolutely nothing that would lead me (or the Russians) to believe for a second that they would stand up and do anything of consequence. Hitler himself could reincarnate, and Europe would do the Neville Chamberlain thing all over again. And as for us in the US, I don't know that we'd really fight Russia over an Eastern European country. Just look what we did when the Russians rolled their tanks into Georgia. Still though, I suppose we sent aid and a few diplomats, military advisors and some military hardware. That's more than the rest of the Europeans did, as usual (and we also had the excuse of already being in two other wars).
Western Europe != France and Germany. The rest of Nato would likely back Eastern Europe. And the US would intervene to help once pictures of civillians getting blown to bits appeared on CNN. It took the world a while to act in Kosovo, but I think most of it would if the Russians actually attacked a Nato country.
Hell, I think even the French and Germans would fight once the rest of Nato did, they did in Kosovo.
The worst thing is that these idiots overwhelming back the Democrats and then whine about them losing elections, not realising that being backed by people like them not really helpful for any party.
It's even more unfair in that Democrat foreign policy is actually quite conventional, something else the moonbats complain about when they actually win.
If you heard a report back in 2000 that Saddam Hussein had had yet another person killed, you'd think it was just par for the course. If rumor was that Bush allowed another fat-cat single-source contracting deal with his friends, you'd think it was probably true. Why? Because it falls in with that person's modus operandi.
Putin's Russia has been a very dangerous place for anyone who has opposed him, or even tried to investigate what was happening under him. Many are dead, exiled or in jail. So while I won't automatically put this in the "It's true" category, it does belong firmly in "Most likely true."
That can't be right! I know George Bush is a very bad man and thus anyone that criticizes him must be as pure as the driven snow.
Surely it can't be the case that politicians other than US Republicans do evil things to stay in power? That would mean I'd have to decide issues in a world full of shades of rather dark gray rather than a nice simple black and white world where the US is always wrong and its opponents are always right.
Wow, mods are touchy tonite!
I prefer the term Karma Pimp.
Oh that is the least of the precautions. I profit nicely from the current state of affairs and I have no intention of jeopardizing myself. I am one of the people taking advantage of you. Every once in awhile I have enough free time to feel a little guilty about what I am participating in and attempt a little education. Inevitably some good citizen like yourself comes along and tells me I am fucking them so well he barely notices. I feel better about myself. I made an effort to inform but I realize people deserve what they get and I am invigorated to fuck them harder when I get back to work. Thanks.
Wow! You sound like a real badass. There was I thinking you were posting from your mother's basement.
Sad to learn that you think the threats we face have anything to do with democracy or a lame duck president. You really are paying attention to the wrong things - exactly as you are suppose to do.
Unlike you who's the only one who can see can see the conspiracy I suppose?
Good job you're posting it as an AC on slashdot, that's sure to alert the world to the threat.
Glad you recognize that the rise of fascism in the 1930's tool place under a different historical context from modern democratic America with a lame duck President.
By "contemptuous attitude by the MSM" you presumably mean that people laugh at you when you tell them they're living in a fascist state
No fool, he means things like the MSM barely questioning the need to go to war in places like Iraq, echoing the administration all the way and, in the few meager attempts to give anti-war points of view coverage, being dismissive and ganging up on them - often on direct orders from corporate management.
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying.
And face it, you don't read well. He didn't say it was here just that all the pieces were in place. The same pieces, by the way, many US corps are selling and testing in China now. Oh, but it could never happen here, right? It's not as if most Americans have their heads up their asses...
Yeah just like the Holocaust happened in US after IBM had tested out the technology in Germany. Oh wait.
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying
Why? It's easier and cheaper to discredit dissidents these days than to imprison them, and has the nice side effect that it doesn't make martyrs of them. Make someone with specific views appear to be such a crackpot that they're ostracised by the rest of society and you can build your political prisons entirely in their minds with very low upkeep costs.
All crackpots claim they've been discredited by some sort of ill defined conspiracy. The truth is usually that they've lost the argument and now no one is interested in them.
This is quite different from people in truly totalitarian societies who argued for a more open political system. No one seriously disagrees with those arguments but the tiny minority that run society found it easier to lock them up than to allow a more open system which would have exposed their corruption and brutality.
I'm sure you consider yourself a Solzhenitsyn-like dissident bravely fighting oppression, but actually you're totally free to argue for your ideas, it's just that no one is interested in them.
I've read Solzhenitsyn and you Sir are no Solzhenitsyn ;-)
Just be aware that people in some countries or areas of countries are less welcoming to Americans and that you will have to expect them trying to get you into heated discussions about American presidents, especially Bush...
Meaning in Sweden if you say you are from the US/UK to the average arsehole in a bar you'll spend the rest of the conversation parrying passive aggressive comments about US/UK foreign policy, racism, bad food, etc.
For example, it took a *long* time for average, German-blooded, Christian German citizens to start getting locked up for political opposition in Nazi Germany... "and then they came for me". America *is* fascist at the moment, but it's still at the stage of "they came for the Jews" (except this time it's Arabs/Muslims). And we have a ridiculously small Muslim population, hence the lack of fascistic activities towards most people.
Bullshit, Dachau was the first concentration camp and the majority of prisoners initially were politicals, i.e. supporters of other political parties who were locked up soon after the Nazis assumption of absolute power.
Care to substantiate this (rather b0mbastic) claim?
Fixed that for you.
I like Opera much more the IE or FF, but this whole "breaking web standards" rant is retarded. IE implemented features before there was a standard way to do them. The standards came later and did things differently. Lots of sites used the Microsoft version and ignored the 'standard'. Microsoft would be dumb to break those sites, and if they did people just won't upgrade.
Here's a good article
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/03/17.html
The web standards camp seems kind of Trotskyist. You'd think they're the left wing, but if you happened to make a website that claims to conform to web standards but doesn't, the idealists turn into Joe Arpaio, America's Toughest Sheriff. "YOU MADE A MISTAKE AND YOUR WEBSITE SHOULD BREAK. I don't care if 80% of your websites stop working. I'll put you all in jail, where you will wear pink pajamas and eat 15 cent sandwiches and work on a chain gang. And I don't care if the whole county is in jail. The law is the law."
On the other hand, we have the pragmatic, touchy feely, warm and fuzzy engineering types. "Can't we just default to IE7 mode? One line of code ... Zip! Solved!"
Secretly? Here's what I think is going to happen. The IE8 team going to tell everyone that IE8 will use web standards by default, and run a nice long beta during which they beg people to test their pages with IE8 and get them to work. And when they get closer to shipping, and only 32% of the web pages in the world render properly, they'll say, "look guys, we're really sorry, we really wanted IE8 standards mode to be the default, but we can't ship a browser that doesn't work," and they'll revert to the pragmatic decision. Or maybe they won't, because the pragmatists at Microsoft have been out of power for a long time. In which case, IE is going to lose a lot of market share, which would please the idealists to no end, and probably won't decrease Dean Hachamovitch's big year-end bonus by one cent.
I hope they do the pragmatic thing.
And perhaps if faced with large costs as a result of poor decisions in the past, companies might be inclined not to repeat the same stupid mistakes again.
No, they just won't upgrade to IE8.
It's sort of hard to convince people to upgrade to a product that punishes them with 'large costs' for their 'stupid mistakes' to make sure they don't repeat them.
It seems to me all you are saying is that the US is a couple of years behind the curve. Give it a little more time.
We already have the "free speech zones". The secret camps. The torture policy. The contemptuous attitude of the MSM toward any idea not created in the echo chamber. And if Denver proves anything, the police state is equipped to the hilt. Another push or two on the law front before a McCain Supreme Court and we are there.
By "contemptuous attitude by the MSM" you presumably mean that people laugh at you when you tell them they're living in a fascist state?
Face it if you were right, you'd have been shipped off to a camp ages ago like poor Wang Xiuying. The very fact that you're able to whine about fascism shows you're not living under it.
South Korean, Taiwanese and Japanese are better at Pizza delivery too.
Yeah, because American intelligence agencies have morals!
No, but they are under some sort of civillian political control. In Russia and China intelligence agencies control YOU (If YOU=the civillian politicians). US intelligence agencies are actually controlled by the law whereas in Russia or China they operate completely outside it.
But I'm sure loads of Americans will now tell me that the US is as bad or worse than countries that do this
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1834474,00.html
70 something Beijing residents get their house taken away by politically well connected developers. They apply for a permit to protest and are punished by being sent to a reeducation through labour camp without any trial.
Hey, I know! Maybe we could recycle all the journal jokes from the last 8 threads about Reiser!
In Soviet Russia, Reiser fsck YOU!