1) What encoding do URLs use? ASCII. What does ASCII stand for? American Standard Code for Information Interchange. What do Americans use? English. ASCII was specifically created with English in mind, as it includes the 26 letters used in English, but none of the other fancy/accented characters from other popular Latin-derived languages, such as French or Spanish (where are the ç or ñ?).
2) Dutch is not a Latin-derived language, but German-based. Also, doesn't Dutch have 27 letters?
3) The classic Latin alphabet contained only 23 letters, not counting uppercase.
And as PitaBred kindly pointed out, I'm not being Ameri/Anglo-centric; I was born and partially educated in China, and naturalized, as well as currently residing, in Canada. But you really can't deny that the DNS system was created with the English charset in mind.
Oh, sorry, universities are private establishments around here, AFAIK. Still, as a public establishment, wouldn't the police be even more within their rights to remove what is essentially a public disturbance?
...trying to make it seem enforcing English-only URLs are forcing people who cannot understand English to learn a new language? All they have to do is learn to reproduce the URL with their keyboard; nobody really needs to understand the meaning of the URL to do that. When you think about it, is google an English word? Let's pretend it's a word in Martian, does that mean we need to learn Martian to get to www.google.com?
An URL is just a representation, anyway. Sure, if its meaning actually has some relation to the actual content, it might serve someone who tries to find websites by entering www..com better, but most people I know use search engines, anyway. In fact, as a native Chinese writer, I find typing the occasional Chinese character more time consuming because I have to switch to the Chinese IME; I'd rather URLs are all English.
I don't know if this can be called a non-violent protest. What is the kid protesting? Apparently the library policy to check everyone's ID at night. Now, the library is a private establishment, and can set whatever policy they want. If the kid does not agree with the policies then he has no right to be on their property, at which point he becomes a trespasser, which is prosecutable by law.
If he really wanted to protest all he has to do is speak to the library's administrator. Refusing to leave their property while trespassing is in no way any kind of protest, and there's no reason to believe he'll change anything through it.
He has a right to be where he PAYS to be at and do what he was PAYING to as long as he agrees with the private establishment's policies. If he does not, the establishment has a right to get the police to escort him off their grounds for trespassing, which is a criminal offense in most jurisdictions. Since he refuses be escorted, the police obviously has the right to use force to stop a crime.
Well, generally when you physically try to restrain someone it's known as assault. When you do it to a police officer the consequences become much, much worse. The very immediate of which relates to the fact that they now have the right to defend themselves, which, as most police officers go, involve billy clubs, mace, and possibly guns if the situation became dangerous enough. I'm not saying what the police did here was right, but trying to physically stop a police officer is the worst thing you can do. Taking a picture/video to report to the proper authorities, like this student, is probably the best course of action.
I'm sure if I was trying to get the poor and oppressed to help me with my revolution, I'd be all about the liberty and freedom and whatnot, too. Of course, if I actually believed that I wouldn't have let the slave trade in my new country last for almost another hundred years.
Think of the licenses as more training than "permission". Say in real life, you have a nunchaku. Sure, nobody knows that you don't know how to use it... but it's probably not a good idea to just pick it up and start flailing it around.
What's the point of allowing people outside China to access the Chinese wiki, but censoring the rest of Wikipedia? It still allows access to incoming information.
A good example is the Tiananmen Square Massacre. I'm not sure about the accuracy of facts (I Am Not A Historian... how accurate can you get on controversial topics, anyway?), but it cites multiple sources with several different opinions on topics like the death toll (it cites a pretty well-known protester claiming that various sources report the number of deaths as ranging from 200 to 4000, and also cites Beijing's mayor claiming there are only about 200 dead).
For those who can't read Chinese, the article is pretty objective in nature and cites multiple sources with varying opinion on topics such as the death toll.
...Just like any other controversial topic in the English wiki. It even has a disputed notice. Are you somehow suggesting that vandalism is related to censorship? The English wiki probably has many times more locked articles than its Chinese counterpart.
Actually, the page is locked due to vandalizing and a dispute notice is put up, just like any other controversial article. And just like other articles, the article itself is pretty objective. As for the death toll specifically, the article says that the number of deaths is disputed; it cites one of the protesters Chai Ling as saying in a recording: "Some say there are about 200 dead, but some claim there are more than 4000. I am not sure of the exact numbers, either." Again, just like any "free" wiki article - explains the controversy and cites an objective source instead of making groundless assertions.
So yeah, I really wish people would stop making snide remarks as if the Chinese wiki is the government's parade ground, without even taking a look at it. Controversial topics aren't really censored, and it operates pretty much like the rest of Wikipedia when it comes to these topics. You have to remember that in the end, it's still managed by Wikipedia moderators, who ideally will try their utmost to ensure that articles are accurate and objective.
>>It's saying of the 20% that's mis-diagnosed, Google correctly identified 58% of those.
I think it's saying whereas a trained medical professional will mis-diagnose 20% of the time, Joe Blow can do it on Google and be right 58% of the time.
>> And do you know what 60%+of the time the CCTV watchers are watching? The cute girls (maybe even undersage schoolgirls: nobody's
>> whatching THEM watching CCTV) in short skirts.
Oh noes. And this is a problem for your average citizen how? I'm sure there are lots of people who enjoy looking at cute/underage girls in short skirts. Do you want all of them watched/arrested/tortured? Does this somehow offend your personal sensibilities? Well y'know what, it's not a crime.
>> You happy about that happening to your sister? Mum? Daughter?overflow
Now what does this have to do with anything? Do you have some kind of sister/mom/daughter complex or something? Oh noes, strangers are looking at my sister/mom/daughter on the street, I better make sure they're covered from head to toe so people can't look at them! I guess those guys in the Middle East we keep fighting against for "women's rights" had it right after all.
Read your own quote. What exactly does "introduced to the Japanese market in April that year" mean to you? Sony put the product on the market in April, 2003. Samsung and JVC are the ones that didn't get to the market until 2005.
I believe the word for your condition in general is FLAMING IDIOT. Literally an idiot who flames.
The first Blu-ray Disc recorder was unveiled by Sony on March 3, 2003, and was introduced to the Japanese market in April that year.
I'm sorry, but you must realize that a) Sony is a Japan-based company and b) the U.S. does not constitute the entirety of "the market". Also, nowhere within your quote did it mention that the Blu-Ray specs were not finalized in 2003.
It's the Lacrymosa from Mozart's Requiem. And it's spelt kyrie, which is Greek for "Lord".
Really though, considering the size of the image they're hosting, they can't even use a 320kbps mp3 or something to accompany it? My track is only about 7MB.
Slashdot Mirror
1) What encoding do URLs use? ASCII. What does ASCII stand for? American Standard Code for Information Interchange. What do Americans use? English. ASCII was specifically created with English in mind, as it includes the 26 letters used in English, but none of the other fancy/accented characters from other popular Latin-derived languages, such as French or Spanish (where are the ç or ñ?).
2) Dutch is not a Latin-derived language, but German-based. Also, doesn't Dutch have 27 letters?
3) The classic Latin alphabet contained only 23 letters, not counting uppercase.
And as PitaBred kindly pointed out, I'm not being Ameri/Anglo-centric; I was born and partially educated in China, and naturalized, as well as currently residing, in Canada. But you really can't deny that the DNS system was created with the English charset in mind.
Oh, sorry, universities are private establishments around here, AFAIK. Still, as a public establishment, wouldn't the police be even more within their rights to remove what is essentially a public disturbance?
An URL is just a representation, anyway. Sure, if its meaning actually has some relation to the actual content, it might serve someone who tries to find websites by entering www..com better, but most people I know use search engines, anyway. In fact, as a native Chinese writer, I find typing the occasional Chinese character more time consuming because I have to switch to the Chinese IME; I'd rather URLs are all English.
If he really wanted to protest all he has to do is speak to the library's administrator. Refusing to leave their property while trespassing is in no way any kind of protest, and there's no reason to believe he'll change anything through it.
He has a right to be where he PAYS to be at and do what he was PAYING to as long as he agrees with the private establishment's policies. If he does not, the establishment has a right to get the police to escort him off their grounds for trespassing, which is a criminal offense in most jurisdictions. Since he refuses be escorted, the police obviously has the right to use force to stop a crime.
Well, generally when you physically try to restrain someone it's known as assault. When you do it to a police officer the consequences become much, much worse. The very immediate of which relates to the fact that they now have the right to defend themselves, which, as most police officers go, involve billy clubs, mace, and possibly guns if the situation became dangerous enough. I'm not saying what the police did here was right, but trying to physically stop a police officer is the worst thing you can do. Taking a picture/video to report to the proper authorities, like this student, is probably the best course of action.
I'm sure if I was trying to get the poor and oppressed to help me with my revolution, I'd be all about the liberty and freedom and whatnot, too. Of course, if I actually believed that I wouldn't have let the slave trade in my new country last for almost another hundred years.
You know in Lord of the Rings? What's up with the elves and dwarves and whatnot? How believable is THAT? Would never happen in real life.
Think of the licenses as more training than "permission". Say in real life, you have a nunchaku. Sure, nobody knows that you don't know how to use it... but it's probably not a good idea to just pick it up and start flailing it around.
From what I've seen, all the campers brought fold up chairs and even comforters. I wouldn't have any trouble sleeping like that.
What's the point of allowing people outside China to access the Chinese wiki, but censoring the rest of Wikipedia? It still allows access to incoming information.
A good example is the Tiananmen Square Massacre. I'm not sure about the accuracy of facts (I Am Not A Historian... how accurate can you get on controversial topics, anyway?), but it cites multiple sources with several different opinions on topics like the death toll (it cites a pretty well-known protester claiming that various sources report the number of deaths as ranging from 200 to 4000, and also cites Beijing's mayor claiming there are only about 200 dead).
For those who can't read Chinese, the article is pretty objective in nature and cites multiple sources with varying opinion on topics such as the death toll.
...Just like any other controversial topic in the English wiki. It even has a disputed notice. Are you somehow suggesting that vandalism is related to censorship? The English wiki probably has many times more locked articles than its Chinese counterpart.
So yeah, I really wish people would stop making snide remarks as if the Chinese wiki is the government's parade ground, without even taking a look at it. Controversial topics aren't really censored, and it operates pretty much like the rest of Wikipedia when it comes to these topics. You have to remember that in the end, it's still managed by Wikipedia moderators, who ideally will try their utmost to ensure that articles are accurate and objective.
I think it's saying whereas a trained medical professional will mis-diagnose 20% of the time, Joe Blow can do it on Google and be right 58% of the time.
Where's the itsatrap tag?
Oh noes. And this is a problem for your average citizen how? I'm sure there are lots of people who enjoy looking at cute/underage girls in short skirts. Do you want all of them watched/arrested/tortured? Does this somehow offend your personal sensibilities? Well y'know what, it's not a crime.
>> You happy about that happening to your sister? Mum? Daughter?overflow
Now what does this have to do with anything? Do you have some kind of sister/mom/daughter complex or something? Oh noes, strangers are looking at my sister/mom/daughter on the street, I better make sure they're covered from head to toe so people can't look at them! I guess those guys in the Middle East we keep fighting against for "women's rights" had it right after all.
I believe the word for your condition in general is FLAMING IDIOT. Literally an idiot who flames.
I'm sorry, but you must realize that a) Sony is a Japan-based company and b) the U.S. does not constitute the entirety of "the market". Also, nowhere within your quote did it mention that the Blu-Ray specs were not finalized in 2003.
And Blu-Ray has been on the market since 2003. Do the math.
Is this a problem somehow? Does it make the image less worthy of our haughty viewing? Oh noes, the guy isn't a purporter of alternative software!
Really though, considering the size of the image they're hosting, they can't even use a 320kbps mp3 or something to accompany it? My track is only about 7MB.
And you sound like a spelling Nazi. Not even a grammar Nazi, just a spelling Nazi.
These two facts aren't necessarily related; there are many factors which affect the murder rate.