when i read this post, i checked how much ram did my FF use: 45MB, that is indeed quite a lot. just as a test, i minimized FF and the memory usage dropped to 517k. i put it back on full size and it was 9mb and now increased to 28mb. that's still too much, but half of the memory usage gone from a simple minimize/maximize!:)
of course, IE is a lot worse on this and many more fields, and while FF is actively developed, IE is not, even though micro$oft says it is.
i am a kid with perfect vision, so i don't usually have problems with font size, but i do with font color. many webmasters (webmasters, not browsers) set the background color for something (in CSS, or pure HTML, or maybe even using JS, doesn't matter) but leave the text color on default.
since i use my computer at night, everything except the monitor is dark in the room. so i like darker stuff, and have a dark theme set for my OS's GUI. so and since my default background color is dark, the default text color is white. there's nothing wrong with that - but there are whole loads of webmasters who apparently ignore the fact that not everyone is using the same default colors as they do. so as a result, their page sets the background color to white, and since the webmaster's default text color is black, he sees the page perfectly when he tests it. but when i check it, i always have to ctrl+a the entire text to be able to read it, as you (but not the webmasters) know, white on white is not quite readable.
but this is getting quite offtopic. so lets get back on the painful subject of IE7 - painful as in yet another IE we'll suffer from -, this move is obviously because of Mozilla/FF, but i still doubt they'll do anything important to fix the bugs. since i'd need to make 2 versions of every page on my site, one for the standards (which is sent to real browsers) and one with invalid code (which is sent to ie) to make it work in ie, i chose to simply ignore ie. when an user enters my site, a JS will check whether he's using an ie or not, and if so, he gets politely asked to revise his browser (a message box saying "your browser sucks ass"), and that's about it. if he chose to use, he'll have to live with the bugs it has. using ie is like going through a minefield. normally you'd step just ahead of you, as that's the logical way to make yourself go forward with your legs. but in a minefield, you have to carefully watch where you step. in ie, each "mine" represents a bug. using ie is about carefully dodging bugs, occasionally being able to do something; using a real browser such as Firefox is about doing what you want. sadly, seeing the web as it was intended to be has one bad side-effect, which is having to dodge webmasters mistakes, like the white on white color scheme i mentioned above. in ie, that would mean if you managed to get to the buggy page, you would say "oh, fuck, yet another mine to dodge"; in FF, you just get an extension like greasemonkey and do a simple fix for the webmaster's mistake if you want, and/or you can just wait until the webmaster fixes his mistake (which isn't likely).
so, in short, seeing the web as it is, including mistakes in it, is better than seeing what ie things it is.
the link you provided is truly an excellent example. "The account you are trying to view has been suspended."
free speech is free speech. you shouldn't be sent to jail for saying "i'll bomb the government" or something, for which you will get jailed. you should only get jailed if you are proven to have been planning/organizing something illegal, not just because you said so.
humor in comments is definietly not a bad thing. general political/cultural humor neither, as long as it doesn't refer to things not "visible" from other countries through the media or something.
i guess a good example to this would be: bad:// tamas gaspar miklos can suck my dick// who the fuck from/* wee, i'm commenting a comment */ another country would know who TGM is?
good:// monica lewinsky can suck my dick/* monica lewinsky is much more likely to be well-known in other countries, she has shown the word that doing some nice mo ves on a famous dick makes you famous, too. */
anyway, i usually don't put much comments in my code, especially not in code like my server which i most likely won't release to other people. but in open source code i add some general comments where things are not obvious. read the source code, too.:)// here we explain why too much comments are bad
that's good too, but a raw "your browser sucks ass" message is better than everything. it makes people realise that their browser sucks ass more than they thought. at least that's what i see on people after they attempt to look at my site with IE.
Except that if they did their site correctly, it would work on any browser already.
not true. for example, my site, as far as i know, fully complies with html standards. it works fine with FireFox, Opera, etc. but i still have to do it 2 ways for ie users. it's also been reported that my page's menu (JS + CSS) doesn't work all that well on Konqueror. there is no way to make a more complex page work on any browser, as there are worthless browsers like IE, and too many users are using it to ignore them. but i don't care, i just put an ie-only alert() in my page saying "your browser sucks ass" for those who aren't concerned about switching to FF yet.:D
carbon dating is one thing they use to measure ages of things. i don't really remember how accure it is, but i don't think its accurate enough for 190 million years.
Anybody can start up an open source project, but most of them never get to the point where the project is usable and well-made. The only exceptional new project I've seen lately is Ruby on Rails...
erm... dude.. have you heard of Mozilla? Mozilla Firefox is currently on the way to taking IE's crown away. Mozilla Thunderbird is on the way to taking outlook's crown away. this comment is being written in FF.
and the most beautiful thing is even though microsoft does recognise FF and TB as ie and outlook's rivals, but does not seem to be pissed out enough to try to stop the project (which is usually their way of competing), and that's because ie and outlook comes with winflop. so if someone buys a copy of winflop, then immediately deletes the crappy ie and outlook from it to repla ce it with FF and TB, microsoft will still get the same amount of money and they don't even have to use more bandwidth for the update services of ie.
there are several different cases. one case is if someone tells me about a band that i might like. i don't want to waste time and money on buying a cd i'm not even sure i'll like or not. so i download a few mp3s for free. if i don't like them, i won't download any more mp3s - if i do, most likely the recording companies are gonna be happy anyway. there are bands that i really like yet all (well, most) of the mp3s i have from there are from the net for free. that means no money from me to the recording companies (who cares about them anyway? i like the band, not the record company). in that case i'll go to their concerts where i'll pay much more than i'd pay for a CD and it's usually not a ripoff either as i get drunk and generally feel good - both the fans and the artists are happy.:) and that way the record companies aren't really involved, the band gets paid and not organizations like the riaa.
so basically if i like the band i'll eventually pay more for their concerts than i'd pay for their cd's. if i don't like a band it's not likely i'll keep downloading their music anyway. all the fuss about it is by the money-grabbing record companies. no real band has ever complained about people having the right to do whatever they want with the music. it's only the record companies who suppose that i'd buy CD's from them if i wouldn't have the music already from the net. without the record companies life would be much easier for everyone. if bands didn't have to get a record company for cd manufacturing and stuff, they'd get a lot more money for what they do and the consumers/fans wouldn't have to deal with all this bullshit. and of course, the only way to do that is to make a website and sell downloads. no stupid crap like drm or any of that shit limiting the customer - just good old mp3. if people aren't tied down by all this copyright bullshit they won't be leeching stuff just for spite.
so you're saying at the "beginning of universe", when matter and antimatter were both very common in this galaxy, instead of all antimatter starting a reaction with matter, some unknown energy kept antimatter in deposits, and apparently that unknown energy even had some intelligence to it, while sometimes letting a few atoms into the antimatter, and the energy sustains itself using 2 or 4 atoms worth of gamma rays (1 atom + 1 antimatter atom usually creates about 512 electron volts of gamma rays), and the aliens can easily change the direction of this energy... hmmmmm.
you expect me to believe that?:D (of course you don't, but let's assume...)
Aliens are able to extract antimatter from large deposits found naturally occuring in various parts of the galaxy
in thirty years or so, the galaxy will run out of easily-mined antimatter
new technologies are arising that can mine sparse antimatter fields that may have been too expensive to mine using earlier methods
WTF?
first, there are no antimatter deposits. at least not in this galaxy - if there were, they'd already been destroyed by matter-antimatter reaction. second, even if there were antimatter deposits, how the fuck would anyone mine them? wtf?:D the only way would be if the mining machinery would be made of antimatter (and of course everything in the vicinity), and so would be its operators. but if the aliens are made of antimatter (which isn't really likely in a galaxy where the matter to antimatter percentage is more than 99.99%), then why'd they want to mine antimatter deposits, which, by the way, don't exist?
think about that a bit, i doubt there's a logical answer.:)
other than that, you're right, life's been rough outside planet Geo (which we call Earth) since the 80-year war.
yeah, maybe.:) today we use particle accelerators, dunno the percentage but i think it's like 40 antimatter molecules are formed in most tests. so 10 grams per year for $1.75 trillin isn't so bad afterall.:D
but producing antimatter is not the only big problem, storage is pretty problematic too. you can't just put it in a tank, you'd effectively create an antimatter bomb. (56kg antimatter + 56kg "normal" matter (112kg), 100% combustion)
wtf? assuming you mean a tankful of antimatter fuel (say, 56kg): today 10 grams of antimatter costs 1.75 trillion dollars, so that means 56kg of antimatter costs 98000 trillion dollars. that means
1 zarbo = 326 666 666 666 666 666 dollars
not only is that quite a big currency, but these aliens seem to have some connection with satan afterall.
so, assuming 1 zarbo = 3.26*10^17 usd, an UFO equipped with a tractor beam (useful feature) costs 195 600 000 000 000 000 000 dollars, aka 1.956*10^20 dollars, aka 600 zarbos.
we should ask the aliens about the secret of a good economy. or the secret of ripping customers off at UFO showrooms.
i often see Googlebot and msnbot in my server's logs. what do you say if we do a "demonstration" by letting Googlebot do what it wants but kicking msnbot the hell out?:)
the 60Hz signal in the AC powerlines is usually "thrown away", few line-powered clocks use it, and that's about it. if the AC frequency can be modulated, that wouldn't render most home appliances useless and would provide a way to transmit data through the powerlines. the problem is that it would be a one-way connection, yet it would be slower than a satellite broadcast, which means it would bring no new advantages at all. you'd still need a phone line to send data back.
about the RF interference, the 60Hz signal creates interference already and varying that frequency wouldn't make it more annoying.
about 4 hours left until the EU council decides wether european programmers will have the right to program without paying a license fee for each instruction they use. it's so senseless. if people will be able to patent telling a CPU what to do is like patenting to tell someone to do something. i can't really see any real uses for it but a lot of ways to exploit it. if it will get codified, probably the last continent where people are free will be lost...
my websites have joined the web demonstration before yesterday. let's just hope intelligence will win over the self-enslaving corporate bullshit coming from america.
(offtopic) "Quick, sing me the BUDAPEST NATIONAL ANTHEM!!" rofl.:D
Slashdot Mirror
when i read this post, i checked how much ram did my FF use: 45MB, that is indeed quite a lot. just as a test, i minimized FF and the memory usage dropped to 517k. i put it back on full size and it was 9mb and now increased to 28mb. that's still too much, but half of the memory usage gone from a simple minimize/maximize! :)
of course, IE is a lot worse on this and many more fields, and while FF is actively developed, IE is not, even though micro$oft says it is.
i am a kid with perfect vision, so i don't usually have problems with font size, but i do with font color. many webmasters (webmasters, not browsers) set the background color for something (in CSS, or pure HTML, or maybe even using JS, doesn't matter) but leave the text color on default. since i use my computer at night, everything except the monitor is dark in the room. so i like darker stuff, and have a dark theme set for my OS's GUI. so and since my default background color is dark, the default text color is white. there's nothing wrong with that - but there are whole loads of webmasters who apparently ignore the fact that not everyone is using the same default colors as they do. so as a result, their page sets the background color to white, and since the webmaster's default text color is black, he sees the page perfectly when he tests it. but when i check it, i always have to ctrl+a the entire text to be able to read it, as you (but not the webmasters) know, white on white is not quite readable. but this is getting quite offtopic. so lets get back on the painful subject of IE7 - painful as in yet another IE we'll suffer from -, this move is obviously because of Mozilla/FF, but i still doubt they'll do anything important to fix the bugs. since i'd need to make 2 versions of every page on my site, one for the standards (which is sent to real browsers) and one with invalid code (which is sent to ie) to make it work in ie, i chose to simply ignore ie. when an user enters my site, a JS will check whether he's using an ie or not, and if so, he gets politely asked to revise his browser (a message box saying "your browser sucks ass"), and that's about it. if he chose to use, he'll have to live with the bugs it has. using ie is like going through a minefield. normally you'd step just ahead of you, as that's the logical way to make yourself go forward with your legs. but in a minefield, you have to carefully watch where you step. in ie, each "mine" represents a bug. using ie is about carefully dodging bugs, occasionally being able to do something; using a real browser such as Firefox is about doing what you want. sadly, seeing the web as it was intended to be has one bad side-effect, which is having to dodge webmasters mistakes, like the white on white color scheme i mentioned above. in ie, that would mean if you managed to get to the buggy page, you would say "oh, fuck, yet another mine to dodge"; in FF, you just get an extension like greasemonkey and do a simple fix for the webmaster's mistake if you want, and/or you can just wait until the webmaster fixes his mistake (which isn't likely). so, in short, seeing the web as it is, including mistakes in it, is better than seeing what ie things it is.
It's clearly impossible in the US to criticize the government, or even have imagery of the president with a bullet hole in his head on the tob banner of your web site
the link you provided is truly an excellent example. "The account you are trying to view has been suspended."
free speech is free speech. you shouldn't be sent to jail for saying "i'll bomb the government" or something, for which you will get jailed. you should only get jailed if you are proven to have been planning/organizing something illegal, not just because you said so.
humor in comments is definietly not a bad thing. general political/cultural humor neither, as long as it doesn't refer to things not "visible" from other countries through the media or something.
// tamas gaspar miklos can suck my dick // who the fuck from /* wee, i'm commenting a comment */ another country would know who TGM is?
// monica lewinsky can suck my dick /* monica lewinsky is much more likely to be well-known in other countries, she has shown the word that doing some nice mo
:) // here we explain why too much comments are bad
/* oh, fuck */
i guess a good example to this would be:
bad:
good:
ves on a famous dick makes you famous, too. */
anyway, i usually don't put much comments in my code, especially not in code like my server which i most likely won't release to other people. but in open source code i add some general comments where things are not obvious.
read the source code, too.
that's good too, but a raw "your browser sucks ass" message is better than everything. it makes people realise that their browser sucks ass more than they thought.
at least that's what i see on people after they attempt to look at my site with IE.
Except that if they did their site correctly, it would work on any browser already.
:D
not true.
for example, my site, as far as i know, fully complies with html standards. it works fine with FireFox, Opera, etc. but i still have to do it 2 ways for ie users. it's also been reported that my page's menu (JS + CSS) doesn't work all that well on Konqueror. there is no way to make a more complex page work on any browser, as there are worthless browsers like IE, and too many users are using it to ignore them.
but i don't care, i just put an ie-only alert() in my page saying "your browser sucks ass" for those who aren't concerned about switching to FF yet.
carbon dating is one thing they use to measure ages of things. i don't really remember how accure it is, but i don't think its accurate enough for 190 million years.
the thing is, the Mozilla community both maintains its projects and creates new ones. mind you, they have 75 million members.
Anybody can start up an open source project, but most of them never get to the point where the project is usable and well-made. The only exceptional new project I've seen lately is Ruby on Rails...
erm... dude.. have you heard of Mozilla? Mozilla Firefox is currently on the way to taking IE's crown away. Mozilla Thunderbird is on the way to taking outlook's crown away. this comment is being written in FF.
and the most beautiful thing is even though microsoft does recognise FF and TB as ie and outlook's rivals, but does not seem to be pissed out enough to try to stop the project (which is usually their way of competing), and that's because ie and outlook comes with winflop. so if someone buys a copy of winflop, then immediately deletes the crappy ie and outlook from it to repla ce it with FF and TB, microsoft will still get the same amount of money and they don't even have to use more bandwidth for the update services of ie.
Whereas claiming that 1 zarbo = 326 666 666 666 666 666 dollars is the very epitome of reality.
and so is claiming that it isn't.
Unless they're actually lifting money into orbit or offshoring the design, the money is being spent in the US.
yes, that's why he said "they are spending all the money in some far off land".
there are several different cases. one case is if someone tells me about a band that i might like. i don't want to waste time and money on buying a cd i'm not even sure i'll like or not. so i download a few mp3s for free. if i don't like them, i won't download any more mp3s - if i do, most likely the recording companies are gonna be happy anyway. :)
there are bands that i really like yet all (well, most) of the mp3s i have from there are from the net for free. that means no money from me to the recording companies (who cares about them anyway? i like the band, not the record company). in that case i'll go to their concerts where i'll pay much more than i'd pay for a CD and it's usually not a ripoff either as i get drunk and generally feel good - both the fans and the artists are happy.
and that way the record companies aren't really involved, the band gets paid and not organizations like the riaa.
so basically if i like the band i'll eventually pay more for their concerts than i'd pay for their cd's. if i don't like a band it's not likely i'll keep downloading their music anyway. all the fuss about it is by the money-grabbing record companies. no real band has ever complained about people having the right to do whatever they want with the music. it's only the record companies who suppose that i'd buy CD's from them if i wouldn't have the music already from the net.
without the record companies life would be much easier for everyone. if bands didn't have to get a record company for cd manufacturing and stuff, they'd get a lot more money for what they do and the consumers/fans wouldn't have to deal with all this bullshit. and of course, the only way to do that is to make a website and sell downloads. no stupid crap like drm or any of that shit limiting the customer - just good old mp3. if people aren't tied down by all this copyright bullshit they won't be leeching stuff just for spite.
it's more than safe to say startrek is helplessly unrealistic. :)
so you're saying at the "beginning of universe", when matter and antimatter were both very common in this galaxy, instead of all antimatter starting a reaction with matter, some unknown energy kept antimatter in deposits, and apparently that unknown energy even had some intelligence to it, while sometimes letting a few atoms into the antimatter, and the energy sustains itself using 2 or 4 atoms worth of gamma rays (1 atom + 1 antimatter atom usually creates about 512 electron volts of gamma rays), and the aliens can easily change the direction of this energy... hmmmmm.
:D (of course you don't, but let's assume...)
you expect me to believe that?
Aliens are able to extract antimatter from large deposits found naturally occuring in various parts of the galaxy
:)
in thirty years or so, the galaxy will run out of easily-mined antimatter
new technologies are arising that can mine sparse antimatter fields that may have been too expensive to mine using earlier methods
WTF?
first, there are no antimatter deposits. at least not in this galaxy - if there were, they'd already been destroyed by matter-antimatter reaction. second, even if there were antimatter deposits, how the fuck would anyone mine them? wtf?:D the only way would be if the mining machinery would be made of antimatter (and of course everything in the vicinity), and so would be its operators. but if the aliens are made of antimatter (which isn't really likely in a galaxy where the matter to antimatter percentage is more than 99.99%), then why'd they want to mine antimatter deposits, which, by the way, don't exist?
think about that a bit, i doubt there's a logical answer.
other than that, you're right, life's been rough outside planet Geo (which we call Earth) since the 80-year war.
yeah, maybe. :) today we use particle accelerators, dunno the percentage but i think it's like 40 antimatter molecules are formed in most tests. so 10 grams per year for $1.75 trillin isn't so bad afterall. :D
but producing antimatter is not the only big problem, storage is pretty problematic too. you can't just put it in a tank, you'd effectively create an antimatter bomb. (56kg antimatter + 56kg "normal" matter (112kg), 100% combustion)
antimatter fuel - 30 zarbos
wtf?
assuming you mean a tankful of antimatter fuel (say, 56kg):
today 10 grams of antimatter costs 1.75 trillion dollars, so that means 56kg of antimatter costs 98000 trillion dollars. that means
1 zarbo = 326 666 666 666 666 666 dollars
not only is that quite a big currency, but these aliens seem to have some connection with satan afterall.
so, assuming 1 zarbo = 3.26*10^17 usd, an UFO equipped with a tractor beam (useful feature) costs 195 600 000 000 000 000 000 dollars, aka 1.956*10^20 dollars, aka 600 zarbos.
we should ask the aliens about the secret of a good economy.
or the secret of ripping customers off at UFO showrooms.
(try to think of anything else that 95% of people in the world hate, that isn't illegal as a result?)
i can think of one. it's called the united states of america.
i often see Googlebot and msnbot in my server's logs. what do you say if we do a "demonstration" by letting Googlebot do what it wants but kicking msnbot the hell out? :)
the 60Hz signal in the AC powerlines is usually "thrown away", few line-powered clocks use it, and that's about it. if the AC frequency can be modulated, that wouldn't render most home appliances useless and would provide a way to transmit data through the powerlines. the problem is that it would be a one-way connection, yet it would be slower than a satellite broadcast, which means it would bring no new advantages at all. you'd still need a phone line to send data back. about the RF interference, the 60Hz signal creates interference already and varying that frequency wouldn't make it more annoying.
about 4 hours left until the EU council decides wether european programmers will have the right to program without paying a license fee for each instruction they use. it's so senseless. if people will be able to patent telling a CPU what to do is like patenting to tell someone to do something. i can't really see any real uses for it but a lot of ways to exploit it. if it will get codified, probably the last continent where people are free will be lost... my websites have joined the web demonstration before yesterday. let's just hope intelligence will win over the self-enslaving corporate bullshit coming from america. (offtopic) "Quick, sing me the BUDAPEST NATIONAL ANTHEM!!" rofl. :D