I just find the lib or dll for it and delete the damn thing. Flash is trash. Rumour has it that useful content has been delivered using Flash, but I've never seen it yet (and won't, now that I've deleted it on most/all machines that I use).
It's so simple. Don't include GPL'd source code in your source code and the GPL doesn't affect you. Or is it so unjust that you can't get something for nothing and claim it as your own?
The shell in Unix underlies the Unix permissions system.
You haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about. Not even a little.
Permissions are applied to files by the filesystem code, typically a kernel module.
The shell is a program that runs on top of the OS, interprets user commands and runs programs (as well as providing a programming language, in many cases). It is totally separable from the OS.
Maybe you meant capabilities, but again, this would typically be imposed by kernel code, with the shell utilizing the information provided. In no way could the shell be said to underly any of this.
You used punch cards only 15 years ago? (I'm assuming you didn't mean way "over 15 years ago".) I was in the last CS class I know of that used them at UIUC (doing FORTRAN on an IBM 360, I think) before they went TSO 27+ years ago, and I just assumed that was the last place anywhere to use that (at least in the first or second world). Bad assumption?
...use the font tag with absolute size values that break resizing by some browsers. (Netscape 4.x has this problem. Galeon, based on Mozilla, doesn't.)
I go to this site and am redirected to a LONG page about how Netscape sucks and I should use IE. Way down at the bottom is a link back to the regular site. Sorry, Bozo, but my choice of browser is not yours to quibble with (unless it's IE, of course, but that's a morality thing;-P ). The webmasturbator of that site can blow me.
Windows XP Embedded ("used for medical devices," amongst other things)
Giving new meaning to the "Blue Screen of Death". I hore I die before I end up on medical gear controled by Winblows.
Re:Becuase of Stupidity of course
on
Web Services
·
· Score: 2
even microsoft is pushing to not use http, merely because http was not
designed for this sort of thing.
No, microsoft is pushing to not use http because http is an open standard, which they can't control and use to lock in users. Microsoft's stand on http, referenced here, was, as usual, stone-bullshit, obvious to anyone with a little technical savvy.
the only cool part of the mozilla project is the engine, and that's only if you're a developer and interested in building your own browser.
You're entitled to your opinion, even though it's wrong.
XUL is very cool. Need a browser with no menus of buttons, as an interface to a web-based application for a control-freak client? I got Mozilla (in the M18 days) to do this with a few hours of messing around in the various xml files (and a very small bit of javascript hacks to stop that damn throbber from exiting). No C or C++ coding at all. And I am not a browser or Mozilla developer - perl coding is my speed.
Browser came up to a pre-determined URL and user had no visible way to go anywhere else. (Unfortunately, the project was cacelled before I figured how to inhibit the control-* keys, oh well....)
Here we go.... software that will only run on linux
or BSD or FreeBSD or OpenBSD or NetBSD or OSX or really silly comunistic non-commercial stuff like Solaris or AIX, which is the case for an awful lot of this Free and OpenSource stuff.
that you have to manualy compile the source code to binaries
yes, folks windows code automagically runs from source, no cpmpiling needed, ever. (You must be a BASIC fan.) Hey fellow, if you've got anything like a standardized confgiuration, you compile once (taking advantage of things like the fact that you no longer have 386 machines in your shop, so you can compile for Pentium and higher class machines) and install the binaries (which sort of happens in RPM, among other things).
and configure stupid fucking.conf files to get working.
.conf files are so cool to deal with. You can use diff to see changes. Use can use perl to make mass changes. They don't just "automagically" go corrupt on you like the Windows Registry does. And when you have a working config, you can just copy it at will from one machine to another, make the changes (if any) that this would be require, and this will WORK. Good motherfucking luck doing that with the registry. I fucking LOVE.conf files. They are in every way superior to the alternatives I've seen.
Bugs? Problems? Fix them your fucking self, thats why we give you the sauce code.
Since commercial code never has problems, and since if it did the vendors would fix it right away for free and since the Free and OpenSource folks issue immediately version 1.0 and then disappear from the face of the earth, I gues I see your point.
Let me know which bank so I can switch now.
Good riddance. Heaven forbid you buy goods or services from an organiziation that won't get on the upgrade treadmill like good corporate citizens.
It's sad, but.NET is the future. MS simply has better marketing.
I think that some people, particularly some business people who understand the issues a little better (e.g. the upgrade treadmill, the reliability issues, the 'who owns your data' issues (though that last may be stretching it) are biginning to get it, even without being geeks. But numerically, you may be right. Even folks where I work who understand where I'm coming from and let me dabble in Linux still advise me to concentrate on niche areas, rather than going for everything, which they classify as "quixotic".
Congratulations. You just ensured you can't be emailed by anyone not running Internet Explorer.
This seems to work fine (the window comes upo with the right email address in the to: line and the '[Question]' tag in the subject: line) in Netscape 4.76
and Lynx Version 2.8.3rel.1
and Mozilla 0.9.7, which implies Netscape 6.x, and Galeon will work as well, though I haven't tested these.
present text that could have all been included in one page with fragment addresses and
where nothing intelligent happens for the case where the browser can't or won't execute javascript.
Where the fuck are these people coming from? Most professions have at least an implicit minimum IQ - a floor below which you just don't go. I think for webmasters, it's a ceiling, but it's way below where the floor should be.
But, I don't think you have the license to broadcast music in a company
I bought the CD. Fair use says I can share it with my friends. Unless RIAA can come up with a license agreement that I signed that says I don't own what I bought and paid for, they can kiss my ass.
And if piracy is denying the artist the fruits of his/her labor, then RIAA has committed more piracy than a billion Napster users.
Even if they were actually successful (not likely) in cleaning up the massive number of unintentional screw-ups in their code, the stuff they do intentionally is worse, including the Product Activation 'technology', their Secure Audio Path crapola (==selling their users's rights to the highest bidder), that abominable Plug'n'Play crap that just 'decides' to randomly re-configure your system hardware, and Anything.Net. Also, their gratutitous changes to file formats, communications protocols and APIs to enforce upgrades and preclude competition.
It's the stuff they do with full knowledge and intent that makes them un-trustworthy.
Second, even if you think breaking rule 2 is worthwhile to save a few seconds, the Mozilla implementation is badly broken. Consider downloading a 600MB ISO, and your / partition has 100MB free. Even though you name the file/usr/local/I_have_infinte_space_here/iso.iso, Mozilla continue to download it to, say,/tmp/DOWE392R.TMP, which can't work since this is in / and there's not enough room. It's arguable that once the file is named, Mozilla should rename it and move it if necessary, but if you don't start downloading until the file is named, then put it where the user told you to, the issue doesn't even arise. (Or if it does, it's the user's fault.)
Third, how much time are you actually saving? Except in the case you mentioned,where you're too silly to spend an extra 1/2 second to ensure that your download has actually started, the saving is trivial.
Fourth, you are rude and stupid. It's not asking that much that you spend an extra half second after clicking on a link to make sure it did what you expected.
You're forgetting something about IE (and maybe Moz too?): The file is downloaded in the background while waiting for the user to accept or deny the download,
Unfortunately, Mozilla has this behaviour. It has created all kinds of issues. I have argued in vain that the program should wait for the user to name the file before starting the download. Unfortunately, that is just too simple.
Re:Off-Topic, but technical implausibilty...
on
Review: Panic Room
·
· Score: 2
1. The idea was to save human lives, not destroy them by shutting off The Matrix without waking them up.
That makes sense.
2. The turnover rate is too low. An intermediate supply is needed.
That makes none. Intermediate supply of what? The AI machines were after heat and electricity.
3. If humans don't have a reality, they will make their own dream world, consciously or otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, how do you block FLASH from a server.
I just find the lib or dll for it and delete the damn thing. Flash is trash. Rumour has it that useful content has been delivered using Flash, but I've never seen it yet (and won't, now that I've deleted it on most/all machines that I use).
Windows 2000 runs fine on my Pentium 166, 64 MB RAM.
Not in my experience, but I was running Win2k Server with an app.
233M (or 266M) w/ 168MB of RAM and it's still a PIG.
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
It's so simple. Don't include GPL'd source code in your source code and the GPL doesn't affect you. Or is it so unjust that you can't get something for nothing and claim it as your own?
..your new Cadillac over a cliff.
I hate Adobe for how they (ab)used DMCA to abuse Dmitry.
But I hate Flash for how most webmasturbators choose to inflict it on the web.
Woe is me - I don't know what to think here <g>
The shell in Unix underlies the Unix permissions system.
You haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about. Not even a little.
Permissions are applied to files by the filesystem code, typically a kernel module.
The shell is a program that runs on top of the OS, interprets user commands and runs programs (as well as providing a programming language, in many cases). It is totally separable from the OS.
Maybe you meant capabilities, but again, this would typically be imposed by kernel code, with the shell utilizing the information provided. In no way could the shell be said to underly any of this.
Back and Forward were removed from most context menus
This sounds idiotic. Hopefully, Galeon will fix this.
You used punch cards only 15 years ago? (I'm assuming you didn't mean way "over 15 years ago".) I was in the last CS class I know of that used them at UIUC (doing FORTRAN on an IBM 360, I think) before they went TSO 27+ years ago, and I just assumed that was the last place anywhere to use that (at least in the first or second world). Bad assumption?
...use the font tag with absolute size values that break resizing by some browsers. (Netscape 4.x has this problem. Galeon, based on Mozilla, doesn't.)
I go to this site and am redirected to a LONG page about how Netscape sucks and I should use IE. Way down at the bottom is a link back to the regular site. Sorry, Bozo, but my choice of browser is not yours to quibble with (unless it's IE, of course, but that's a morality thing ;-P ). The webmasturbator of that site can blow me.
If that fails,..
Windows XP Embedded ("used for medical devices," amongst other things)
Giving new meaning to the "Blue Screen of Death". I hore I die before I end up on medical gear controled by Winblows.
even microsoft is pushing to not use http, merely because http was not designed for this sort of thing.
No, microsoft is pushing to not use http because http is an open standard, which they can't control and use to lock in users. Microsoft's stand on http, referenced here, was, as usual, stone-bullshit, obvious to anyone with a little technical savvy.
Congratulations! You have now found the joy of doing something that Microsoft developers have taken for granted for at least the past 5 years.
Interesting. This is done without writing new code? Or do you write some very short VB-script that uses the IE bits integrated into the OS?
In any event, IE is not what I'd want build apps on (see the 'using back button in IE is dangerous" article, as well 47 other Bugtraq listings...)
'Using the Back Button in IE is dangerous'.
That was supposed to be 'Using IE is dangerous'.
the only cool part of the mozilla project is the engine, and that's only if you're a developer and interested in building your own browser.
You're entitled to your opinion, even though it's wrong.
XUL is very cool. Need a browser with no menus of buttons, as an interface to a web-based application for a control-freak client? I got Mozilla (in the M18 days) to do this with a few hours of messing around in the various xml files (and a very small bit of javascript hacks to stop that damn throbber from exiting). No C or C++ coding at all. And I am not a browser or Mozilla developer - perl coding is my speed.
Browser came up to a pre-determined URL and user had no visible way to go anywhere else. (Unfortunately, the project was cacelled before I figured how to inhibit the control-* keys, oh well....)
Most of the time people run stupid third-rate programs like Go!Zilla or Gator or dare I say anything based on linux!
Let's see... The thread was about microsoft tech support drones. Running linux? They don't support that.
Or maybe you're saying that running something on a linux box would automagically affect the Windows box? How'sm that supposed to work?
Or maybe you're just a dumbshit that doesn't know what the fuck he's trying to say? Yeah, that covers it.
Here we go.... software that will only run on linux
.conf files to get working.
.conf files are so cool to deal with. You can use diff to see changes. Use can use perl to make mass changes. They don't just "automagically" go corrupt on you like the Windows Registry does. And when you have a working config, you can just copy it at will from one machine to another, make the changes (if any) that this would be require, and this will WORK. Good motherfucking luck doing that with the registry. I fucking LOVE .conf files. They are in every way superior to the alternatives I've seen.
or BSD or FreeBSD or OpenBSD or NetBSD or OSX or really silly comunistic non-commercial stuff like Solaris or AIX, which is the case for an awful lot of this Free and OpenSource stuff.
that you have to manualy compile the source code to binaries
yes, folks windows code automagically runs from source, no cpmpiling needed, ever. (You must be a BASIC fan.) Hey fellow, if you've got anything like a standardized confgiuration, you compile once (taking advantage of things like the fact that you no longer have 386 machines in your shop, so you can compile for Pentium and higher class machines) and install the binaries (which sort of happens in RPM, among other things).
and configure stupid fucking
Bugs? Problems? Fix them your fucking self, thats why we give you the sauce code.
Since commercial code never has problems, and since if it did the vendors would fix it right away for free and since the Free and OpenSource folks issue immediately version 1.0 and then disappear from the face of the earth, I gues I see your point.
Let me know which bank so I can switch now.
Good riddance. Heaven forbid you buy goods or services from an organiziation that won't get on the upgrade treadmill like good corporate citizens.
It's sad, but .NET is the future. MS simply has better marketing.
I think that some people, particularly some business people who understand the issues a little better (e.g. the upgrade treadmill, the reliability issues, the 'who owns your data' issues (though that last may be stretching it) are biginning to get it, even without being geeks. But numerically, you may be right. Even folks where I work who understand where I'm coming from and let me dabble in Linux still advise me to concentrate on niche areas, rather than going for everything, which they classify as "quixotic".
Congratulations. You just ensured you can't be emailed by anyone not running Internet Explorer.
This seems to work fine (the window comes upo with the right email address in the to: line and the '[Question]' tag in the subject: line) in Netscape 4.76
and Lynx Version 2.8.3rel.1
and Mozilla 0.9.7, which implies Netscape 6.x, and Galeon will work as well, though I haven't tested these.
- links use Javascript to
- popup one of several other windows to
- present text that could have all been included in one page with fragment addresses and
- where nothing intelligent happens for the case where the browser can't or won't execute javascript.
Where the fuck are these people coming from? Most professions have at least an implicit minimum IQ - a floor below which you just don't go. I think for webmasters, it's a ceiling, but it's way below where the floor should be.But, I don't think you have the license to broadcast music in a company
I bought the CD. Fair use says I can share it with my friends. Unless RIAA can come up with a license agreement that I signed that says I don't own what I bought and paid for, they can kiss my ass.
And if piracy is denying the artist the fruits of his/her labor, then RIAA has committed more piracy than a billion Napster users.
Even if they were actually successful (not likely) in cleaning up the massive number of unintentional screw-ups in their code, the stuff they do intentionally is worse, including the Product Activation 'technology', their Secure Audio Path crapola (==selling their users's rights to the highest bidder), that abominable Plug'n'Play crap that just 'decides' to randomly re-configure your system hardware, and Anything.Net. Also, their gratutitous changes to file formats, communications protocols and APIs to enforce upgrades and preclude competition.
It's the stuff they do with full knowledge and intent that makes them un-trustworthy.
Anything else is dangerous, silly and irritating.
Second, even if you think breaking rule 2 is worthwhile to save a few seconds, the Mozilla implementation is badly broken. Consider downloading a 600MB ISO, and your / partition has 100MB free. Even though you name the file
Third, how much time are you actually saving? Except in the case you mentioned,where you're too silly to spend an extra 1/2 second to ensure that your download has actually started, the saving is trivial.
Fourth, you are rude and stupid. It's not asking that much that you spend an extra half second after clicking on a link to make sure it did what you expected.
You're forgetting something about IE (and maybe Moz too?): The file is downloaded in the background while waiting for the user to accept or deny the download,
Unfortunately, Mozilla has this behaviour. It has created all kinds of issues. I have argued in vain that the program should wait for the user to name the file before starting the download. Unfortunately, that is just too simple.
1. The idea was to save human lives, not destroy them by shutting off The Matrix without waking them up.
;-P
That makes sense.
2. The turnover rate is too low. An intermediate supply is needed.
That makes none. Intermediate supply of what? The AI machines were after heat and electricity.
3. If humans don't have a reality, they will make their own dream world, consciously or otherwise.
How do you make a dream world "consciously"?
You need to find some better answers, d00d.