Anyone of us could hold the DNA to be resistant to anything. It doesn't matter what someone did or who they are*, you must keep everyone alive. Apparently there was a massive killing of humanity with a volcano, so we're not very versatile except for the different ethnic groups.
Clearly the bees that are alive were partly immune to at least one.
* People like Murderers, rapists. Then people who cannot take care of themselves like those with extreme learning difficulties. You have NO idea what the incapability of their genes could actually immune to. If they're too dangerous to keep around, stick em in a freezer.
You have to be prepared to put up with some nastiness if you want to stamp out the bad.
You do not solve real world problems without getting your hands dirty.
That spam is a small cry to what the damage causes to the spammer community. This forces spammers to change tactics and forums to take action. It is good when there is resistance to spammer efforts, look at BigBlue and how that crumbled from the response.
Crime only exacerbates if you do not resist it. This is resistance.
If you don't do anything...anything at all, then what do we expect? For the problem to disappear over night?
Your priorities are black or white; a spammer is more damaging to the web than a vigilante cracker. The cracker is in the right, he has justice on his side*.
Nobody in the IT industry can honestly think that quality actually gets you anywhere. It's marketing, lawyers and sales, advertisers that are the cockroaches that ruined innovation for good.
The Iphone, googol and whatever techcompany will do what it can to survive...
I hope Windows never goes obsolete and nor does my dumb phone.
This reminds me of Infantry, also bought by SOE I loved that game. It went p2p, I loved it enough to pay for it but then got stopped because it lost its 'feel'.
One is there until I close it. (a tab is just like any other tab but only loads when you click it) One persists until I delete it. (it's in a easy to find file on your hard disk)
At least the thing about tabs is that someone could see that *anyway* if they were behind me....so If I'm on a website and I want to browse it later, I just make a tab for it but it only loads if I click it.
I see that the way it was worded isn't very clear, I had a double take myeslf just now. I suppose the same applies to session files on your hard disk and that pretty much destroys my argument unless my tabs are synced online only...
I agree with you: the desktop environment should be doing this stuff. I like Windows Fences but it only applies to files and folders. I believe the reason is the difficulty to 'render' graphics, text and arbitrary media in desktop level code. With web layout rendering engines and Javascript and DOM, it's quicker to implement a snazzy interface that it would be in low level code.
It's sad to see that 'drag and drop', window algorithms, redraw algorithms are reimplemented again and again ontop of eachother without actually being used.
I've never used bookmarks properly. I just type in the topmost URL and then navigate to the page I want. Terrible, I know. There are many different ways to use the web, I've personally seen a lot of the following with friends and family:
Use search engine terms to get to websites
Put URL in search engine to get to websites
Use bookmarks to get everywhere: I know people who have a huge bookmark list, organised into folders
Use only one website and click links in comments/profiles from there (farcebook)
Use portal pages (Yahoo!, MSN, Google)
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it, which definitely beats loading 100s of tabs on startup...
I switch between browsers and computers so much that keeping my bookmarks sycned would be too hard to be worth it. A few years ago I was more of a explorative surfer, now I tend to limit myself to very few daily websites and go from there.
That's exactly the kind of notification I like. Either that or something similar but hopefully less annoying like the yellow bar in IE or Firefox nowadays.
When popups could set the positioning on your screen, that's a bad thing.
By allowing popups to appear outside the page rendering area, i.e, the bit below your tab bar and browser GUI and with small borders, it gives websites free reign and ability to create realistic popup windows that imitate software of your system, so people get suckered into installing legitimate looking spyware.
I am sure there are ways to 'overlay' ontop of a fullscreen application to make it clear that it is in actual fact, a web page. Even a small bar notification saying: 'Activated full screen mode. [Ok] [Exit fullscreen]
There has to be distinctions between local and remote software somehow. Web sites can appear pixel perfect renditions of local software and that is the problem. The only way you can solve that problem is make it more obvious what is on the page and what is not.
That makes sense. I understand what you're saying.
This guy give an example of that too but with Linux kernel modules. Since the developers are not 'creating' the derivative work, they let the user do that.
It also seems to be how CODECs are distributed in the Linux world: the media software is capable of using them but the do not include them. It's up to the user to supply them. I suppose it also applies to certain emulators that need the ROM BIOS to run.
I do not think the FSF ever has the kind of power over you unless you start using GPL software as a developer and you distribute.
When you choose to include a library in your product and therefore depend on it, you are agreeing to the terms. If you don't agree with the terms, that doesn't mean you can still use the library. That's called a violation and is taking without giving back.
I don't know what the Win32 terms are but I doubt they are as infective as GPL. Anyone got any header files handy?
You're right but I just looked at the manual for that software: you need Administrator privileges to run that director plugin. After which you can run with normal privileges, in which case, if you're admin to begin with, you can do anything anyway, you don't need to use sneaky tactics like peeking at what the user sees or pretending to be the user.
This reminds me of Windows. It's impossible to override certain key combinations like CTRL+ALT+DELETE.
It's kind of obvious: you don't let a program ever, imitate the user in the same context. Web browsers should never have been able to create windows 'outside' of the rendering area to boot (unless full screen)... browsers should never have been able to 'see' what the user sees in regard to links...Internet explorer showing contents of C:\...and so on...
If you implement a rendering/parsing engine in PHP, as a plugin to Wordpress, the 'bridge' or interface to Wordpress itself ends there.
After that, you are simply processing a data format. It's not like a RSS feed becomes GPL when you parse one from another site in a Wordpress plugin...
GPL product ---> format ---> output does not make the format GPL
It's only if
output --- GPL --- input then the input is GPL.
In the sense of an OS language, the GPL product is reading the format and producing a result. It's not the other way round.
An open source image renderer does not make an image GPL An open source browser does not make the (X)HTML(5) GPL A OSS OS does not make the files you use GPL
Using a GPL library makes your product GPL Making a plugin for a GPL program makes your plugin GPL (but only if it calls the GPL library)
Slashdot Mirror
This is why you have to keep people alive.
Anyone of us could hold the DNA to be resistant to anything. It doesn't matter what someone did or who they are*, you must keep everyone alive. Apparently there was a massive killing of humanity with a volcano, so we're not very versatile except for the different ethnic groups.
Clearly the bees that are alive were partly immune to at least one.
* People like Murderers, rapists. Then people who cannot take care of themselves like those with extreme learning difficulties. You have NO idea what the incapability of their genes could actually immune to. If they're too dangerous to keep around, stick em in a freezer.
You have to be prepared to put up with some nastiness if you want to stamp out the bad.
You do not solve real world problems without getting your hands dirty.
That spam is a small cry to what the damage causes to the spammer community. This forces spammers to change tactics and forums to take action. It is good when there is resistance to spammer efforts, look at BigBlue and how that crumbled from the response.
Crime only exacerbates if you do not resist it. This is resistance.
If you don't do anything...anything at all, then what do we expect? For the problem to disappear over night?
Your priorities are black or white; a spammer is more damaging to the web than a vigilante cracker. The cracker is in the right, he has justice on his side*.
* Only if he is a good cracker.
It's a shade of gray.
Make a filter that detects his notifications and deletes the account automatically.
He is trying to help and he is fighting.
What are you doing about it? You're not helping anyone except of course protecting your advertising on your site.
How much are your antibiotics?
Highly recommend RequestPolicy.
This is business.
Nobody in the IT industry can honestly think that quality actually gets you anywhere. It's marketing, lawyers and sales, advertisers that are the cockroaches that ruined innovation for good.
The Iphone, googol and whatever techcompany will do what it can to survive...
I hope Windows never goes obsolete and nor does my dumb phone.
No, the GP is right.
Get a history book and try and work out if US military action is for the greater good or to secure 'capitalism', oil, gems or whaterver.
Occams razor.
OrangeTide, GP avoids a company because they have poor obnoxious marketing practices and maybe even because they steal ideas.
I block them too but it doesn't make it any less annoying (such as at work or on someone else's PC) or take any responsibility like boycotting does.
Hiding the symptoms (blocking adverts) doesn't cure the disease (bad business).
We should vote with our wallets by avoiding Netflix products and NOT enter non-academic non-work programming competitions...
This reminds me of Infantry, also bought by SOE I loved that game. It went p2p, I loved it enough to pay for it but then got stopped because it lost its 'feel'.
Apparently it's free now.
One is there until I close it. (a tab is just like any other tab but only loads when you click it)
One persists until I delete it. (it's in a easy to find file on your hard disk)
At least the thing about tabs is that someone could see that *anyway* if they were behind me. ...so If I'm on a website and I want to browse it later, I just make a tab for it but it only loads if I click it.
I see that the way it was worded isn't very clear, I had a double take myeslf just now. I suppose the same applies to session files on your hard disk and that pretty much destroys my argument unless my tabs are synced online only...
I agree with you: the desktop environment should be doing this stuff. I like Windows Fences but it only applies to files and folders. I believe the reason is the difficulty to 'render' graphics, text and arbitrary media in desktop level code. With web layout rendering engines and Javascript and DOM, it's quicker to implement a snazzy interface that it would be in low level code.
It's sad to see that 'drag and drop', window algorithms, redraw algorithms are reimplemented again and again ontop of eachother without actually being used.
I use Tree Style Tabs and combined with Vimperator. Never going back.
This guy made ubiquity which I like too, judging from the video, they have a big sense of direction which is nice.
I've never used bookmarks properly. I just type in the topmost URL and then navigate to the page I want. Terrible, I know. There are many different ways to use the web, I've personally seen a lot of the following with friends and family:
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it, which definitely beats loading 100s of tabs on startup...
I switch between browsers and computers so much that keeping my bookmarks sycned would be too hard to be worth it. A few years ago I was more of a explorative surfer, now I tend to limit myself to very few daily websites and go from there.
That's exactly the kind of notification I like. Either that or something similar but hopefully less annoying like the yellow bar in IE or Firefox nowadays.
When popups could set the positioning on your screen, that's a bad thing.
By allowing popups to appear outside the page rendering area, i.e, the bit below your tab bar and browser GUI and with small borders, it gives websites free reign and ability to create realistic popup windows that imitate software of your system, so people get suckered into installing legitimate looking spyware.
I am sure there are ways to 'overlay' ontop of a fullscreen application to make it clear that it is in actual fact, a web page. Even a small bar notification saying: 'Activated full screen mode. [Ok] [Exit fullscreen]
There has to be distinctions between local and remote software somehow. Web sites can appear pixel perfect renditions of local software and that is the problem. The only way you can solve that problem is make it more obvious what is on the page and what is not.
year ...should have bought a Windows.
NEXT year will be the of the Linux desktop!
Yes, it will. Stop looking at me funny!
That makes sense. I understand what you're saying.
This guy give an example of that too but with Linux kernel modules. Since the developers are not 'creating' the derivative work, they let the user do that.
It also seems to be how CODECs are distributed in the Linux world: the media software is capable of using them but the do not include them. It's up to the user to supply them. I suppose it also applies to certain emulators that need the ROM BIOS to run.
I do not think the FSF ever has the kind of power over you unless you start using GPL software as a developer and you distribute.
Can a software user 'violate' the GPL?
When you choose to include a library in your product and therefore depend on it, you are agreeing to the terms. If you don't agree with the terms, that doesn't mean you can still use the library. That's called a violation and is taking without giving back.
I don't know what the Win32 terms are but I doubt they are as infective as GPL. Anyone got any header files handy?
You're right but I just looked at the manual for that software: you need Administrator privileges to run that director plugin. After which you can run with normal privileges, in which case, if you're admin to begin with, you can do anything anyway, you don't need to use sneaky tactics like peeking at what the user sees or pretending to be the user.
The horse has bolted so to speak.
Only if the user invoked the fullscreenedness should it be permitted. I think in that way it would very difficult for software to 'fake' your desktop.
This reminds me of Windows. It's impossible to override certain key combinations like CTRL+ALT+DELETE.
It's kind of obvious: you don't let a program ever, imitate the user in the same context. Web browsers should never have been able to create windows 'outside' of the rendering area to boot (unless full screen)... browsers should never have been able to 'see' what the user sees in regard to links...Internet explorer showing contents of C:\...and so on...
If you implement a rendering/parsing engine in PHP, as a plugin to Wordpress, the 'bridge' or interface to Wordpress itself ends there.
After that, you are simply processing a data format. It's not like a RSS feed becomes GPL when you parse one from another site in a Wordpress plugin...
I disagree, my understanding is that:
GPL product ---> format ---> output
does not make the format GPL
It's only if
output --- GPL --- input
then the input is GPL.
In the sense of an OS language, the GPL product is reading the format and producing a result. It's not the other way round.
An open source image renderer does not make an image GPL
An open source browser does not make the (X)HTML(5) GPL
A OSS OS does not make the files you use GPL
Using a GPL library makes your product GPL
Making a plugin for a GPL program makes your plugin GPL (but only if it calls the GPL library)
Am I right?