Exchange webmail works fine in Firefox and Safari as of late. I'm not sure which patch fixed this, but it started working for me 2-3 months ago. Enjoy:)
Pardon my ignorance, but how is OpenVZ different from Xen? If there is little difference, why not just make a bigger push behind Xen rather than attempt to get their own IP into the kernel.
At UTD, they actually removed them in favor of regular urinals in the administrative MP building. And yes, they smelled horrid from the moment they were installed.
Not sure if this has been posted yet on slashdot, but Outlook Web Access (the web based interface that comes with exchange) now works in firefox, mozilla, safari, and opera. Maybe M$ is actually going after web standards *g*
I guess I really should put more thought into my posts...
What I mean is, the internet makes it too easy to do certain things. It makes it almost too easy to do research, shopping, and even education. I guess my title wasn't quite appropriate, but I figure somebody might appreciate the "Something Awful reference." In a way, I wanted to almost tie this post to the IDE (rottign the brain) article the other day. The internet allows you to do things very quickly, not necessarily smartly. Don't get me wrong, I love the internet, but I think we rely too much on it.
As to the opiate reference. Yes, I do understand where that reference comes from. No, I don't think it's entirely misplaced. People can find anything they want on the internet to keep them occupied so they won't be doing more important things. This is not just limited to blogs and porn. Almost everything on the internet consumes our time and energy. It would definitly be interesting to see how Marx, Locke, Plato and the other great philosophers on government and society would deal with the internet. It put people from all levels of society on a fairly level playing field, especially here and at wikipedia. Where else can a young polynesian schoolboy with minimal english mix with intellectuals and actually argue with them, but yet again, the internet makes it easy to do so. Without the internet, the same young schoolboy would have to work that much harder to interact with people in the elites (many would argue become a better person in the process).
Who knows... All I know is that when people are given something that makes it easier to get on with their lives, they don't exploit it fully and become better people. They just waste the extra time they have, and therefore, they are more stupid in the process.
Matt
P.S. Should it be internet or Internet? I can never remember that one.
Seriously, the Internet makes it almost too easy to access information. If I want pizza, I go online and order it. If I want a movie, I go online and order it. To submit homework, I go online to submit it. To get a job, I email applications and lookup company profiles on the internet. I guess the Internet is the new opiate for the masses.
I will admit upfront that I have a strong dislike for the UN.
If we turn Internet regulation over to an International organization, that organization will be a political one making decions that make the most political sense. The problem is, any time a political decision is made, the best decision in terms of technology and science is usually ignored. The internet works just fine the way it is. Spam may be a problem, but the FREE MARKET has come up with many different solutions that work just fine. If people would use the solutions available along with a dose of common sense, spam would no longer be an issue. Also, if something else needs changing, the free market will do what needs to be done. This is all the "oversight" that the internet needs. Lastly, I don't mean to sound prejuiced, but the Internet was developed in the US so shouldn't its regulation stay in the US at least for the time being?
So IBM developed the PC and brought the current rendition to market. Fortunately for us and for all PC users they allowed their designs to be copied (clones anyone) thus putting apple forever in the dark. Since they did this, market forces have determined that IBM should no longer be in the PC business. Frankly, who cares? There are thousdands of other businesses that makes PCs now. The only reason I would care is if Lenovo gets the IP that encompasses the PC they may try to charge royalties for anyone using their IP to make a producat (go frivalous patents!).
Why do we need another processor to control physics? Can't this be done by the CPU itself? With Intel and AMD both bring dual-core to the desktop I see no reason that one of those two cores can't be used in games for physics and AI. Speaking of AI, won't we now need an AI expansion board? Maybe they'll call it AIPU? It also seems like it would be much easier for game programmers to code for a dual core system than to provide support for an entirely new hardware component.
I know this would totally suck because the user would lose his contacts and all his information, but isn't it possible to do a hard reset on these devices which cause all the original software to be reloaded thus wiping out the vir(us/ii)?
>>Empirical evidence has shown, time and time again, that low level languages like C and Forth produce more efficient, faster, and easier to maintain code than today's so called high level languages. Why is this important? Because they (the IT world, who simply wants to sell you a new compiler every year for $2,000) try to push stuff like encapsulation and polymorphism down your throat as the saving grace and you simply accept it as fact because you don't know any better. If you're not bit shifting hot registers at runtime then you're not programming. Plain and simple. You're just plugging different blocks together and hoping like hell it will work. How would you feel if they designed bridges like that? I wouldn't feel too secure driving across a bridge that was designed like today's non open source software programs are.
.
First of all, C and Fortran are not low level languages. Sure, they are not object oriented, but they are by no means low level languages. A low level language like Assembly is only a step above machine language. A higher level level language (C, etc) is further removed from machine language and must be compiled. Another distinction is that a higher level language is designed to be closer to a natural language and as such higher level languages are easier to read and code.
Just wanted to throw that out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo search has used Google and AltaVista at different points in the past.
Exchange webmail works fine in Firefox and Safari as of late. I'm not sure which patch fixed this, but it started working for me 2-3 months ago. Enjoy :)
Pardon my ignorance, but how is OpenVZ different from Xen? If there is little difference, why not just make a bigger push behind Xen rather than attempt to get their own IP into the kernel.
At UTD, they actually removed them in favor of regular urinals in the administrative MP building. And yes, they smelled horrid from the moment they were installed.
Not sure if this has been posted yet on slashdot, but Outlook Web Access (the web based interface that comes with exchange) now works in firefox, mozilla, safari, and opera. Maybe M$ is actually going after web standards *g*
What I mean is, the internet makes it too easy to do certain things. It makes it almost too easy to do research, shopping, and even education. I guess my title wasn't quite appropriate, but I figure somebody might appreciate the "Something Awful reference." In a way, I wanted to almost tie this post to the IDE (rottign the brain) article the other day. The internet allows you to do things very quickly, not necessarily smartly. Don't get me wrong, I love the internet, but I think we rely too much on it.
As to the opiate reference. Yes, I do understand where that reference comes from. No, I don't think it's entirely misplaced. People can find anything they want on the internet to keep them occupied so they won't be doing more important things. This is not just limited to blogs and porn. Almost everything on the internet consumes our time and energy. It would definitly be interesting to see how Marx, Locke, Plato and the other great philosophers on government and society would deal with the internet. It put people from all levels of society on a fairly level playing field, especially here and at wikipedia. Where else can a young polynesian schoolboy with minimal english mix with intellectuals and actually argue with them, but yet again, the internet makes it easy to do so. Without the internet, the same young schoolboy would have to work that much harder to interact with people in the elites (many would argue become a better person in the process).
Who knows... All I know is that when people are given something that makes it easier to get on with their lives, they don't exploit it fully and become better people. They just waste the extra time they have, and therefore, they are more stupid in the process.
Matt
P.S. Should it be internet or Internet? I can never remember that one.
Seriously, the Internet makes it almost too easy to access information. If I want pizza, I go online and order it. If I want a movie, I go online and order it. To submit homework, I go online to submit it. To get a job, I email applications and lookup company profiles on the internet. I guess the Internet is the new opiate for the masses.
I hereby join the angry mob willing to kill, rape, and pillage for silent servers.
Link
Google knows about the slashdot effect.
I will admit upfront that I have a strong dislike for the UN.
If we turn Internet regulation over to an International organization, that organization will be a political one making decions that make the most political sense. The problem is, any time a political decision is made, the best decision in terms of technology and science is usually ignored. The internet works just fine the way it is. Spam may be a problem, but the FREE MARKET has come up with many different solutions that work just fine. If people would use the solutions available along with a dose of common sense, spam would no longer be an issue. Also, if something else needs changing, the free market will do what needs to be done. This is all the "oversight" that the internet needs. Lastly, I don't mean to sound prejuiced, but the Internet was developed in the US so shouldn't its regulation stay in the US at least for the time being?
I got the large copy from a mirror. It's Here
/. effect.
It should survive the
So IBM developed the PC and brought the current rendition to market. Fortunately for us and for all PC users they allowed their designs to be copied (clones anyone) thus putting apple forever in the dark. Since they did this, market forces have determined that IBM should no longer be in the PC business. Frankly, who cares? There are thousdands of other businesses that makes PCs now. The only reason I would care is if Lenovo gets the IP that encompasses the PC they may try to charge royalties for anyone using their IP to make a producat (go frivalous patents!).
Why do we need another processor to control physics? Can't this be done by the CPU itself? With Intel and AMD both bring dual-core to the desktop I see no reason that one of those two cores can't be used in games for physics and AI. Speaking of AI, won't we now need an AI expansion board? Maybe they'll call it AIPU? It also seems like it would be much easier for game programmers to code for a dual core system than to provide support for an entirely new hardware component.
I know this would totally suck because the user would lose his contacts and all his information, but isn't it possible to do a hard reset on these devices which cause all the original software to be reloaded thus wiping out the vir(us/ii)?
>>Empirical evidence has shown, time and time again, that low level languages like C and Forth produce more efficient, faster, and easier to maintain code than today's so called high level languages. Why is this important? Because they (the IT world, who simply wants to sell you a new compiler every year for $2,000) try to push stuff like encapsulation and polymorphism down your throat as the saving grace and you simply accept it as fact because you don't know any better. If you're not bit shifting hot registers at runtime then you're not programming. Plain and simple. You're just plugging different blocks together and hoping like hell it will work. How would you feel if they designed bridges like that? I wouldn't feel too secure driving across a bridge that was designed like today's non open source software programs are. . First of all, C and Fortran are not low level languages. Sure, they are not object oriented, but they are by no means low level languages. A low level language like Assembly is only a step above machine language. A higher level level language (C, etc) is further removed from machine language and must be compiled. Another distinction is that a higher level language is designed to be closer to a natural language and as such higher level languages are easier to read and code. Just wanted to throw that out there.
The thing is, I bet Microsoft already has the patent and is sitting on it.