In buisiness I learned that you're a fool to act without the advice of a lawyer.
while it doensn't mean wrongdoing, Steve Jobs is paying for his *own* lawyer -- above and beyond the legal representation from a law firm retained by Apple.
Say the universe does "curve" back in on itself. And, suppose further, that it's "soccer ball shaped."
Does that mean we could be able to see *through* one of 20 ("primary"?) facets in the sky -- and see the half-or-so of the facets on the far-end of that adjacent soccer ball?
...like a repeated, mirrored image in a kaleidoscope?
Imagine that there are a whole bunch of glowing points on the surface of the balloon.
Now imagine that those points change color as they get "older" -- say, when the balloon was small, those points were "white" or "blue" hot.
Finally, imagine that with the balloon at its current size, those points are now all "yellow" or "red" hot.
The thing is, not enough time has elapsed for the current state of every point to be communicated to the point that you're at. That information does not travel instantaneously.
In fact, the expansion of the balloon itself may guarantee that you can *never* know anything about the prior state of a point that is sufficiently far away.
When you look out at the sky at those points that are "far away" -- you are, in a sense, seeing those points as they were on the surface of that balloon when that balloon was much smaller.
It's about what the rules of the game are.
You can keep what's yours, so long as you got it fair and square.
But when power concentrated so much that it tips the whole playing field, creating a vortex that sucks-up ever more power -- then we've all got a problem.
That system is so powerful that it gets people like you thinking: "I earned what's mine -- my neighbor can go screw himself."
So what -- you're better off than your neighbor -- but are you better, in absolute terms, than you could be in all possible worlds?
The reality is that the system doesn't have to be the way it is -- and we could all be a lot better off.
But, come to think of it:
Perhaps your self-righteous indignation results from how gleeful you are that you're doing better than someone else -- and you just don't want that imbalance disrupted, because then that good feelin' will go away.
Human injustice is due to character flaws and spiritual emptiness(ego pride selfishness etc) and Marxism always wants to hide that fact behind superficial economics.
Addressing your first point: The ability of people's behaviors and intentions to affect reality clearly DO depend environment, conditions, and *context.* (your second point is rubbish: that's not what "Marxism" is -- and Moglin's lecture wasn't even about Marxism.)
So, if the power of intention is mitigated by context, then OF COURSE you can re-structure society and its rules to shape the collective result of peoples' behaviors toward a particular outcome.
At a minimum, it doesn't matter if those behaviors are the result of "character flaws" -- or even whether those flaws are genetic, biological, or social in origin. (although, the point I'm making is even stronger if those "character flaws" are found to be social/environmental in origin.)
For example:
In a hierarchical system where vast power can be concentrated into the hands of a few decision makers -- one "bad apple" can more easily create "evil" results that harm everyone else. In a a system where power is distributed more evenly, that ability for a "bad apple" to do harm would be diminished.
Notice that it's irrelevant whether everyone has those same character flaws, to greater or lesser degree. (It just so happens, BTW, that the system we do have puts exactly those kinds of bad apples in positions of power -- that's just an emergent property of that system perpetuating itself.)
Haven't you ever wondered whether it's the system we have now that leads to things like: externalities, global warming, and psychopathic corporations? -- Or was that all just the result of immutable, inner character flaws?
You will be fine if at lowest, core level you store your document data as XHTML -- or better, XML w/ an appropriate, fine-tuned schema.
XSL makes it *trivial* to translate that data into HTML. (or leave it as XHTML, if the browser, or client device supports it.)
This translation can be pre-rendered, or done in real-time as a page or document is rendered and served. (yes, XSL is fast enough.)
Done right, you can future-proof the data that underlies your pages, documents, and user interfaces. You can share the same data between pdfs, Flash interactives, and web pages, necessary. You could even translate that data into other XML -- say, if you improve or extend your schema.
...but you *must* start by having the data stored in a micro-addressable format -- i.e:"XML."
Make that data your bi*tch, and it'll do what you want.
I can't believe you all fell for this!!
C'mon: Gluing a 2-button-USB-mouse circuit board to your Macbook???
How 'bout using the built-in "CTRL-Click?"
(Doesn't even need to be configured via the control panel -- like the two-finger-trackpad gesture.)
Many utilities are subsidized by either local municipalities, states, or the federal government. (And obviously, "public roadways" are like this.)
However, even if these were "all paid-for by the customers" -- there is still the economy-of-scale that benefits everyone by making the services cheaper.
And, if every White landlord in some city decides they won't rent to non-whites, how are people of color to peacefully respond? Boycotting the utilities might make sense.
It would be indirect -- but it could be used to put pressure on Landlords for the lower cost service they get. This is like what happened w/ the boycotting of Bus services down south 40 years ago -- it wasn't just about the busses, themselves. Those boycotts affected the whole economy.
Of course, that's not really feasible -- because those utilities are essential life services -- and their almost always *monopolies* -- often regulated by *governament.* (so, should they lobby the "government" to enable anti-discrimination laws?...and History repeats itself.)
The current anti-discrimination laws seem much simpler and cleaner to me.
Why are all these ignorant comments getting modded-up, here?
These anti-discrimination laws don't really affect your "freedom of association" in any tangible way -- for example, they don't affect who you choose as a roommate -- or even landlords who live in a *different* unit -- as long as they own under a certain number of units. In these close-quarter circumstances, you can legally discriminate in any way you want.
Part of the basis for these laws is that every landlord accrues benefit to their property from the public till: the national defense, public utilities, the roadways. How about if you discriminate, you get disconnected from these benefits -- or you pay more?
The alternative to anti-discrimination laws -- in housing, or any other area -- is to have a balkanized, segregated America -- far worse than it is now. Do you really want to go back to that? Statistically speaking, a majority of./ users are likely white -- and all these questions seem quite "academic" to most of you. Many of you seem like you could care less, as long as your abstract pie-in-the-sky Libertarian ideals are upheld.
So, what about landlords who own massive high-rise apartments in a major city? You want to allow *them* to discriminate? F*** you. We've been there already.
And, no: "the free market" is not going to sort it out. The alternative to these anti-discrimination laws is a total lack of social cohesion, chaos, secession and possibly violence.
For any critical, publicly-accessible site where you want anyone and everyone to go -- AJAX may be a poor choice, unless you can get every AJAX (and JavaScript) feature to "degrade" in some useful manner.
However, if you're making the front-end to some administrative application for a corporation w/ a locked-down browser spec, then AJAX could be essential, and more than just a buzzword.
(...and it's *still* useful for many mass-marketed sites, e.g.: feature-rich web apps like gmail and google maps.)
I find it interesting that the review mentions XSLT, which, IMHO, is very powerful:
You can completely separate most display logic from the "data" and business logic. (...which can be handled before the XSL transformation, and done such that you get XML nodes to feed into your transformations.)
It may seem complicated at first, but there are so many advantages:
1.) you get the layout of the site defined in a declarative manner, basically as as data. (and that XSL "code" can be easily analyzed or transformed, itself.)
2.) you can disentangle a lot of markup from your PHP/ASP[VBS/JScript]/Python code.
3.) The output of your XSLT transformation can be fed into other transformations.
4.) Your XSLT is highly portable across platforms, even between server vs. client-side rendering. (Although, it bums me out that Microsoft has decided to not support XSL 2.0.)
5.) Manipulating an X/HTML dom via a browser's built-in XSLT processor is much faster than using JavaScript only. (E.g.: using JavaScript-only to traverse a DOM in order to select, merge, append, and move nodes...)
I'd be curious to know what this book has to say on the matter.
Arnie didn't use the word "passionate," and he said something that was, indeed, offensive to me and others:
"I mean, they (Cubans and Puerto Ricans) are all very hot...they have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them and together that makes it,"
Someone please tell me what "Latino blood" is, and how and what traits it pre-determines?
I expect my elected representatives and executives to NOT be racist -- even in private.
"I mean, they (Cubans and Puerto Ricans) are all very hot...they have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them and together that makes it," he said.
Yes, this is racist.
Someone please tell me what "Latino blood" is, and how and what traits it pre-determines?
One of the 4 Mozilla developers is leading a tour for them, talking causually:
"It's always been a danger, but it looms like a shadow over every-thing we've built here. But things have developed that will ensure security. I've just made a deal that will keep Microsoft out of here forever."
Suddenly, a door in hallway slides open... Horror!...Bill Gates rises from his seat at the far end of long dining table...
Slashdot Mirror
What if their technology uses this, like the Star Trek communicator?
;)
In buisiness I learned that you're a fool to act without the advice of a lawyer.
while it doensn't mean wrongdoing, Steve Jobs is paying for his *own* lawyer -- above and beyond the legal representation from a law firm retained by Apple.
okay, you win.
Y'know, I have a question about that:
Say the universe does "curve" back in on itself. And, suppose further, that it's "soccer ball shaped."
Does that mean we could be able to see *through* one of 20 ("primary"?) facets in the sky -- and see the half-or-so of the facets on the far-end of that adjacent soccer ball?
The thing is, not enough time has elapsed for the current state of every point to be communicated to the point that you're at. That information does not travel instantaneously.
In fact, the expansion of the balloon itself may guarantee that you can *never* know anything about the prior state of a point that is sufficiently far away.
When you look out at the sky at those points that are "far away" -- you are, in a sense, seeing those points as they were on the surface of that balloon when that balloon was much smaller.
('ere...)It's about what the rules of the game are. You can keep what's yours, so long as you got it fair and square.
But when power concentrated so much that it tips the whole playing field, creating a vortex that sucks-up ever more power -- then we've all got a problem. That system is so powerful that it gets people like you thinking: "I earned what's mine -- my neighbor can go screw himself."
So what -- you're better off than your neighbor -- but are you better, in absolute terms, than you could be in all possible worlds? The reality is that the system doesn't have to be the way it is -- and we could all be a lot better off.
But, come to think of it:
Perhaps your self-righteous indignation results from how gleeful you are that you're doing better than someone else -- and you just don't want that imbalance disrupted, because then that good feelin' will go away.
So, if the power of intention is mitigated by context, then OF COURSE you can re-structure society and its rules to shape the collective result of peoples' behaviors toward a particular outcome.
At a minimum, it doesn't matter if those behaviors are the result of "character flaws" -- or even whether those flaws are genetic, biological, or social in origin. (although, the point I'm making is even stronger if those "character flaws" are found to be social/environmental in origin.)
For example:
In a hierarchical system where vast power can be concentrated into the hands of a few decision makers -- one "bad apple" can more easily create "evil" results that harm everyone else. In a a system where power is distributed more evenly, that ability for a "bad apple" to do harm would be diminished.
Notice that it's irrelevant whether everyone has those same character flaws, to greater or lesser degree. (It just so happens, BTW, that the system we do have puts exactly those kinds of bad apples in positions of power -- that's just an emergent property of that system perpetuating itself.)
Haven't you ever wondered whether it's the system we have now that leads to things like: externalities, global warming, and psychopathic corporations? -- Or was that all just the result of immutable, inner character flaws?
It just means multiplication is not commutative!
;)
2*(0*infinity) != (2*0)*infinity
I work at a tech company in Massachusetts.
MSFT has obviously monopoly leveraged *huge* extra costs on virtually all businesses in this state and others.
Does anyon know if there's any such thing as a "corporate petition" that I could pesuade my company to join?
If it's taxable -- or otherwise treated like "income" -- does it then get treated like any other "work:"
When I loose my loot, is that now a write-off? (is it like investment depreciation, or a gambling loss?)
Am I running a "business" -- and can I hire in-game "employees" ?
When my skills decline, can I consider myself unemployed?
Can I avail myself of anti-discrimination laws?
Can I retire and collect social security?
When you think about it, it's pretty absurd.
You will be fine if at lowest, core level you store your document data as XHTML -- or better, XML w/ an appropriate, fine-tuned schema.
...but you *must* start by having the data stored in a micro-addressable format -- i.e:"XML."
XSL makes it *trivial* to translate that data into HTML. (or leave it as XHTML, if the browser, or client device supports it.)
This translation can be pre-rendered, or done in real-time as a page or document is rendered and served. (yes, XSL is fast enough.)
Done right, you can future-proof the data that underlies your pages, documents, and user interfaces. You can share the same data between pdfs, Flash interactives, and web pages, necessary. You could even translate that data into other XML -- say, if you improve or extend your schema.
Make that data your bi*tch, and it'll do what you want.
I can't believe you all fell for this!! C'mon: Gluing a 2-button-USB-mouse circuit board to your Macbook??? How 'bout using the built-in "CTRL-Click?" (Doesn't even need to be configured via the control panel -- like the two-finger-trackpad gesture.)
Question:
Can Bootcamp or Parallels be used to run a IIS + win2K server on this? (Apple XServe)
Thanks.
Many utilities are subsidized by either local municipalities, states, or the federal government. (And obviously, "public roadways" are like this.)
...and History repeats itself.)
However, even if these were "all paid-for by the customers" -- there is still the economy-of-scale that benefits everyone by making the services cheaper.
And, if every White landlord in some city decides they won't rent to non-whites, how are people of color to peacefully respond? Boycotting the utilities might make sense.
It would be indirect -- but it could be used to put pressure on Landlords for the lower cost service they get. This is like what happened w/ the boycotting of Bus services down south 40 years ago -- it wasn't just about the busses, themselves. Those boycotts affected the whole economy.
Of course, that's not really feasible -- because those utilities are essential life services -- and their almost always *monopolies* -- often regulated by *governament.* (so, should they lobby the "government" to enable anti-discrimination laws?
The current anti-discrimination laws seem much simpler and cleaner to me.
Why are all these ignorant comments getting modded-up, here?
./ users are likely white -- and all these questions seem quite "academic" to most of you. Many of you seem like you could care less, as long as your abstract pie-in-the-sky Libertarian ideals are upheld.
These anti-discrimination laws don't really affect your "freedom of association" in any tangible way -- for example, they don't affect who you choose as a roommate -- or even landlords who live in a *different* unit -- as long as they own under a certain number of units. In these close-quarter circumstances, you can legally discriminate in any way you want.
Part of the basis for these laws is that every landlord accrues benefit to their property from the public till: the national defense, public utilities, the roadways. How about if you discriminate, you get disconnected from these benefits -- or you pay more?
The alternative to anti-discrimination laws -- in housing, or any other area -- is to have a balkanized, segregated America -- far worse than it is now. Do you really want to go back to that? Statistically speaking, a majority of
So, what about landlords who own massive high-rise apartments in a major city? You want to allow *them* to discriminate? F*** you. We've been there already.
And, no: "the free market" is not going to sort it out. The alternative to these anti-discrimination laws is a total lack of social cohesion, chaos, secession and possibly violence.
OLEDs are cool and all, and support color...
But if they used e-paper for each key, couldn't this be used in laptops and other low-power devices?
So, tell me if I'm getting this right, A C...
The Zune was set-up to fail -- in order to sabotage future market demand for a similarly-featured product?
**AND** this strategy is part of the Circle of Life and the eternal struggle of Man?
You just have to know when to apply it.
...and it's *still* useful for many mass-marketed sites, e.g.: feature-rich web apps like gmail and google maps.)
For any critical, publicly-accessible site where you want anyone and everyone to go -- AJAX may be a poor choice, unless you can get every AJAX (and JavaScript) feature to "degrade" in some useful manner.
However, if you're making the front-end to some administrative application for a corporation w/ a locked-down browser spec, then AJAX could be essential, and more than just a buzzword.
(
I find it interesting that the review mentions XSLT, which, IMHO, is very powerful:
You can completely separate most display logic from the "data" and business logic. (...which can be handled before the XSL transformation, and done such that you get XML nodes to feed into your transformations.)
It may seem complicated at first, but there are so many advantages:
1.) you get the layout of the site defined in a declarative manner, basically as as data. (and that XSL "code" can be easily analyzed or transformed, itself.)
2.) you can disentangle a lot of markup from your PHP/ASP[VBS/JScript]/Python code.
3.) The output of your XSLT transformation can be fed into other transformations.
4.) Your XSLT is highly portable across platforms, even between server vs. client-side rendering.
(Although, it bums me out that Microsoft has decided to not support XSL 2.0.)
5.) Manipulating an X/HTML dom via a browser's built-in XSLT processor is much faster than using JavaScript only. (E.g.: using JavaScript-only to traverse a DOM in order to select, merge, append, and move nodes...)
I'd be curious to know what this book has to say on the matter.
White nationalism is the default position of the republican party -- maybe it's hard to notice if you're white.
While we're at it, can someone please
Repeal
all
SECRET
LAWS!?
Arnie didn't use the word "passionate," and he said something that was, indeed, offensive to me and others:
"I mean, they (Cubans and Puerto Ricans) are all very hot...they have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them and together that makes it,"
Someone please tell me what "Latino blood" is, and how and what traits it pre-determines?
I expect my elected representatives and executives to NOT be racist -- even in private.
"I mean, they (Cubans and Puerto Ricans) are all very hot...they have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them and together that makes it," he said.
Yes, this is racist. Someone please tell me what "Latino blood" is, and how and what traits it pre-determines?
Just who are the "we," and who are the "them"?
I take it, Black people are not only the "them" -- there are none of "them" on Slashdot? (and: "engineered"?)
Oh, really?
Your post offer quite a distorted version of "reality" -- and it's hard to perceive your ignorance as being "funny."
One of the 4 Mozilla developers is leading a tour for them, talking causually:
"It's always been a danger, but it looms like a shadow over every-thing we've built here. But things have developed that will ensure security. I've just made a deal that will keep Microsoft out of here forever."
Suddenly, a door in hallway slides open... Horror! ...Bill Gates rises from his seat at the far end of long dining table...