/A Displays only first and last lines for each set of differences. /B Performs a binary comparison. /C Disregards the case of letters. /L Compares files as ASCII text. /LBn Sets the maximum consecutive mismatches to the specified number of
lines. /N Displays the line numbers on an ASCII comparison. /T Does not expand tabs to spaces. /U Compare files as UNICODE text files. /W Compresses white space (tabs and spaces) for comparison. /nnnn Specifies the number of consecutive lines that must match after a
mismatch.
Anybody have any success with the Mozilla ActiveX Control? (Check the bottom of the linked page for a patcher tool intended to replace instances of the IE control with instances of the Mozilla control.)
None of my ancestors are from India (that I know of).
My ancestry is mostly Anglo-Scotch-Irish. I do have some Native American ancestry (if that's what you're referring to, I said "native-born", not "Native American", but yes, some of my ancestors were Original Americans -- Cherokee, Blackfoot, and Pomunkee, to be exact), and one known African-American ancestor. Not that any of that matters. I don't consider myself any more or less American than someone whose last name is Tsang or Fernandez or Kaminski.
Oh, and before you or anybody else tries to lay a guilt trip on me concerning the fact that some of my ancestors drove other ancestors of mine off their land, or even owned some of them, don't bother -- I had nothing to do with that, I don't practice slavery, genocide, or forced resettlement and don't condone any of those things, so fuck off.
What I do share responsibility for is what the current US government is doing, and why I consider it not just my right but my duty as a good American (and a good citizen of the planet) to do my bit to help vote it out of office.
The point I was trying to make is that all of my ancestors have lived in what's now the US since the mid-1600s. That makes me about as "native" as anybody. Let's face it, at some point everybody's ancestors originated somewhere else and were at some point in history either immigrants or invaders.
> Which country should they vote in? The one they left years ago or the one they lived in for decades?
Whatever country they're citizens of. If they want to vote where they live, they should become naturalised. If I decide that I'd rather vote in Oz than in the US (which, given the current US regime's predeliction for police-state-ism, what with Shrub's clone of the Reichssicherhauptamt, is starting to look like an attractive option), then that's what I'll do.
> I've heard the idea batted around that only those > residents of the actual States should get the > right to vote as they're vote has a direct bearing > on the policies that will affect them, whereas > expats are removed from such policies by living in > foreign countries.
Yeah, I've heard lots of ignorant and unfair ideas batted around in my time, too...
We're just as American as you are, thank you very much. And it's not like we're unaffected by US Government policy... For example -- you think Americans living abroad are exempt from paying taxes? If the US declared war on Australia tomorrow (granted, that's an unlikely event, but nevertheless), do you think the Aussie would just let me hop the next flight out of Brisbane Internaitonal back to LA? Hell, no -- I'd be interned as an enemy national.
In addition, living abroad gives us a unique advantage in seeing just how US foreign policy affects other countries and US relations with them.
> This suggestion also leads to the debate about > allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote.
Apples and oranges. And what, pray tell, is there to "debate"? Answer: Zero. Nada. Zilch.
If immigrants can qualify for US citizenship, then they get to vote in US elections. Non-citizens are not allowed to vote. I think that's pretty easy to understand.
As for me, I was born and raised in the USA of native-born American parents; my American ancestors fought in the Revolution, the Civil War, and both World Wars; I hold a US passport; I pay US taxes. I am definitely a US citizen, and I definitely am enitled to vote in US elections.
Some people obviously have very fucked up ideas about what "citizen" means and no clue as to what it's like to be considered a foreigner.
WTF are you talking about? It's been in Symantec's definitions for 2 days (I got it yesterday in the defs dated 18 January). You should update more often.
On the contrary, my sites use CSS and JS extensively but don't break if people's browsers don't support them. One of the reasons that I use CSS on my sites so that it doesn't matter what the user's screen res is. Or even if they *have* a screen. Which, if you actually knew anything about CSS, then you would know that (a) this is one of the things that CSS is for and (b) designers and developers with a clue know what "graceful degradation" means and how to implement it.
You OTOH must be one of those ignorami who think that "CSS = pixels" and that F0N7 74G5 4R3 0H 50 l337, eh?
You argument's not helped by the fact that you apparently think that "CSS JavaScript" is one word.
Kindly grow a pair, log in, and let me know who you are so I may add you to my Boneheads List or STFU and quit wasting packets because you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
> There are some of us who think that CSS and JavaScript were busted from the beginning.
Really? Who? Care to name some names?
> I like to compare CSS and JS to ricing out a webpage, with things like Wings and Body kits.
Right. I like to compare it having a few more options in personal transportation than sticking wheels and a motor into a packing crate and calling it a car.
It sound like you'd be happier just chunking out ASCII. Why don't you just do that? Meanwhile, if you can't even come up with anything as original as or thought-provoking as "In Soviet Russia, CSS styles YOU!!" then kindly STFU and let the rest of us get on with building usable browser-based apps?
> Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market, it's using its resources to make a better and cheaper product, which then runs the little guys out of the market.
(Here goes my karma... Oh well...)
Wrong.
It's about using its resources to *buy* better and cheaper products, etc., etc. (IE, NT, Excel, Visio,...)
Henceforth I will be modding down and adding to my Enemies List anyone who links to wilwheaton.org. I hope that others will do likewise.
(P.S. Just in case you missed the last couple of days, wilwheaton.org has NOTHING to do with Wil Wheaton. I can appreciate a funny, creative troll as well as the next slashbot, and that is neither. What would be funny is if Wil sued your sorry arse and took you to the cleaners.)
> IAAPN (I Am A Punctuation Nazi): the headline should read "Microsoft Word Forms' Passwords Cracked" or "Microsoft Word Forms's Passwords Cracked".
Apparently IKEGBTYD (I Know English Grammar Better than You Do): Wrong. Nouns being used in a partitive or atttributive sense are not possessives and do not require apostrophe + s. (You say "C compiler" and "dog food", and not "C's compiler" and "dog's food", right?)
The headline is correct. Hard to believe since this is./, but true.
> Mozilla will be a thousand times more useful if it could offer an IE-compatibility mode (Javascript model, plugins) which works on Unix platforms.
NoooOOOOoooOOooOoooOOO!!!!
Then Microsoft wins and standards don't mean anything. The task which must be accomplished is to get site developers to code to standards, in which case 90% of the compatibility issues disappear (and the Web becomes about 75% safer due to the disappearance of ActiveWreX crap).
> They're quite prepared to install junk like bonzai buddy and various dancing things on their desktop but categorically refuse to try another browser. "I use Internet Explorer", they say and look at me like I just suggested they make love to the electric pencil sharpener.
Oooh, I feel your pain. Although I think I've just about persuaded my mom to switch to Mozilla Mail -- she likes what I've told her about Baynesian filtering of spam and the fact that little greebies can't install themselves on her system just by viewing the email they're embedded in.
>...they failed completely to incoperate the rising new mark-up technologies like XML-Signature or WebCGM. If this development continues this year, Mozilla might lose it's technical lead to IE or Opera.
Are you just pulling this stuff out of your arse, or what? Neither of these are new (WebCGM has been around since '99), both are fairly irrelevant, and WebCGM is a binary format in any case.
Given the *cough* rapid pace of MSIE development *cough* these days, if Mozilla stood stockstill for the next two years, it wouldn't lose any ground to IE (which still doesn't support all of DOM Level 2), and Opera is also still playing catch-up, although it's farther along than MSIE.
It would be nice if they'd start including SVG support in the standard releases, though. Especially since the Adobe SVG plugin for Moz/NS is broken and appears likely to stay that way for some time.
> hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now.
Then you lose cross-platform consistency and the ability to use themes with custom widgets. I like being able to use the same standards-compliant browser that looks and behaves the same on Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.
Check out themes.mozdev.org, or -- if you know HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, then you can learn XUL and build your own.
I like the browser/email combo, use Moz 1.5, and hope they'll continue to develop it. I'm not terribly interested in replacing one app with 4 (browser, email, HTML editor, IRC).
WTF is this guy smoking? (And can I have some please?)
IBM has right on its side AND fabulously deep pockets, whereas SCO is quite likely to implode in another quarter or two, since it has *no* seriously marketable products or services (and seems hell-bent on doing everything it possibly can to scare and/or piss off any potential new customers, to boot). Big Blue can well and truly afford to wait SCO out.
IBM has every reason NOT to settle the suit, and every reason to pursue it until SCO is a glassy, smoking crater.
Slashdot Mirror
Been caught out a few times, eh?
Yes, beware of twitter, for he posts only the most vile and pernicious truths!
Now either log in and stand behind your attempts at character assassination, or STFU.
Better yet, just STFU.
Anybody have any success with the Mozilla ActiveX Control? (Check the bottom of the linked page for a patcher tool intended to replace instances of the IE control with instances of the Mozilla control.)
That's pretty sad when nearly 30 minutes after you posted that troll, nobody's thought it worth the trouble of modding down, eh?
(P.S. Lots of folks who use Windows don't trust MS-funded studies, either. Fucktard.)
> Toohey's eh? Not a bad call. Try Toohey's Old if you get a chance next time you're here.
I've yet to bring myself to try Victoria Bitters -- it's those initials, they give me the heebiejeebies.
As for "next time" -- I quite like it here, not planning on leaving anytime soon, thanks.
I've got used to driving on the left now, you see, and I don't want to be forced to re-learn (again).
> We could just threaten you with exporting more Fosters...
Nukes trump Foster's but only just barely. (I like Toohey's myself.)
> there are no flights direct from Brisbane to LA, you have to go to Sydney first
Never been to Sydney, I've always gone via Auckland.
> I presume you are an Indian.
None of my ancestors are from India (that I know of).
My ancestry is mostly Anglo-Scotch-Irish. I do have some Native American ancestry (if that's what you're referring to, I said "native-born", not "Native American", but yes, some of my ancestors were Original Americans -- Cherokee, Blackfoot, and Pomunkee, to be exact), and one known African-American ancestor. Not that any of that matters. I don't consider myself any more or less American than someone whose last name is Tsang or Fernandez or Kaminski.
Oh, and before you or anybody else tries to lay a guilt trip on me concerning the fact that some of my ancestors drove other ancestors of mine off their land, or even owned some of them, don't bother -- I had nothing to do with that, I don't practice slavery, genocide, or forced resettlement and don't condone any of those things, so fuck off.
What I do share responsibility for is what the current US government is doing, and why I consider it not just my right but my duty as a good American (and a good citizen of the planet) to do my bit to help vote it out of office.
The point I was trying to make is that all of my ancestors have lived in what's now the US since the mid-1600s. That makes me about as "native" as anybody. Let's face it, at some point everybody's ancestors originated somewhere else and were at some point in history either immigrants or invaders.
> Which country should they vote in? The one they left years ago or the one they lived in for decades?
Whatever country they're citizens of. If they want to vote where they live, they should become naturalised. If I decide that I'd rather vote in Oz than in the US (which, given the current US regime's predeliction for police-state-ism, what with Shrub's clone of the Reichssicherhauptamt, is starting to look like an attractive option), then that's what I'll do.
> So, is it which culture you beleive in, or which country you pay taxes to?
That's irrelevant. I'm a US citizen with the rights, responsibilities, and liabilities that go along with being one.
> I've heard the idea batted around that only those
> residents of the actual States should get the
> right to vote as they're vote has a direct bearing
> on the policies that will affect them, whereas
> expats are removed from such policies by living in
> foreign countries.
Yeah, I've heard lots of ignorant and unfair ideas batted around in my time, too...
We're just as American as you are, thank you very much. And it's not like we're unaffected by US Government policy... For example -- you think Americans living abroad are exempt from paying taxes? If the US declared war on Australia tomorrow (granted, that's an unlikely event, but nevertheless), do you think the Aussie would just let me hop the next flight out of Brisbane Internaitonal back to LA? Hell, no -- I'd be interned as an enemy national.
In addition, living abroad gives us a unique advantage in seeing just how US foreign policy affects other countries and US relations with them.
> This suggestion also leads to the debate about
> allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote.
Apples and oranges. And what, pray tell, is there to "debate"? Answer: Zero. Nada. Zilch.
If immigrants can qualify for US citizenship, then they get to vote in US elections. Non-citizens are not allowed to vote. I think that's pretty easy to understand.
As for me, I was born and raised in the USA of native-born American parents; my American ancestors fought in the Revolution, the Civil War, and both World Wars; I hold a US passport; I pay US taxes. I am definitely a US citizen, and I definitely am enitled to vote in US elections.
Some people obviously have very fucked up ideas about what "citizen" means and no clue as to what it's like to be considered a foreigner.
WTF are you talking about? It's been in Symantec's definitions for 2 days (I got it yesterday in the defs dated 18 January). You should update more often.
On the contrary, my sites use CSS and JS extensively but don't break if people's browsers don't support them. One of the reasons that I use CSS on my sites so that it doesn't matter what the user's screen res is. Or even if they *have* a screen. Which, if you actually knew anything about CSS, then you would know that (a) this is one of the things that CSS is for and (b) designers and developers with a clue know what "graceful degradation" means and how to implement it.
You OTOH must be one of those ignorami who think that "CSS = pixels" and that F0N7 74G5 4R3 0H 50 l337, eh?
You argument's not helped by the fact that you apparently think that "CSS JavaScript" is one word.
Kindly grow a pair, log in, and let me know who you are so I may add you to my Boneheads List or STFU and quit wasting packets because you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
Thank you.
> There are some of us who think that CSS and JavaScript were busted from the beginning.
Really? Who? Care to name some names?
> I like to compare CSS and JS to ricing out a webpage, with things like Wings and Body kits.
Right. I like to compare it having a few more options in personal transportation than sticking wheels and a motor into a packing crate and calling it a car.
It sound like you'd be happier just chunking out ASCII. Why don't you just do that? Meanwhile, if you can't even come up with anything as original as or thought-provoking as "In Soviet Russia, CSS styles YOU!!" then kindly STFU and let the rest of us get on with building usable browser-based apps?
> Oddly enough, the one time Russia was conquered by outsiders... ... it was from the *East*.
> The code was removed from the final release.
And guess what? It didn't NEED to be in the final release -- by then the damage was done.
The rumour mill got hold of "Windows won't run on DR-DOS" and DR-DOS nosedived soon after.
> Microsoft's 'monopoly' isn't about using it's power to force little guys out of the market, it's using its resources to make a better and cheaper product, which then runs the little guys out of the market.
...)
(Here goes my karma... Oh well...)
Wrong.
It's about using its resources to *buy* better and cheaper products, etc., etc. (IE, NT, Excel, Visio,
NOTICE:
Henceforth I will be modding down and adding to my Enemies List anyone who links to wilwheaton.org. I hope that others will do likewise.
(P.S. Just in case you missed the last couple of days, wilwheaton.org has NOTHING to do with Wil Wheaton. I can appreciate a funny, creative troll as well as the next slashbot, and that is neither. What would be funny is if Wil sued your sorry arse and took you to the cleaners.)
> IAAPN (I Am A Punctuation Nazi): the headline should read "Microsoft Word Forms' Passwords Cracked" or "Microsoft Word Forms's Passwords Cracked".
./, but true.
Apparently IKEGBTYD (I Know English Grammar Better than You Do): Wrong. Nouns being used in a partitive or atttributive sense are not possessives and do not require apostrophe + s. (You say "C compiler" and "dog food", and not "C's compiler" and "dog's food", right?)
The headline is correct. Hard to believe since this is
> It's the same thing with md5-passwords on Linux...
MD5 is available on many platforms, including Windows: http://www.fourmilab.ch/md5/
So is SHA1.
> Everybody here has a high ID number. The smart people with low ID numbers left long ago
Kindly speak for yourself, thanks.
Get the TabBrowser extensions. Everything you could ever think of that you'd want tabs to do, these do it. And then some.
I also highly recommend the PrefBar add-on.
> Mozilla will be a thousand times more useful if it could offer an IE-compatibility mode (Javascript model, plugins) which works on Unix platforms.
NoooOOOOoooOOooOoooOOO!!!!
Then Microsoft wins and standards don't mean anything. The task which must be accomplished is to get site developers to code to standards, in which case 90% of the compatibility issues disappear (and the Web becomes about 75% safer due to the disappearance of ActiveWreX crap).
> They're quite prepared to install junk like bonzai buddy and various dancing things on their desktop but categorically refuse to try another browser. "I use Internet Explorer", they say and look at me like I just suggested they make love to the electric pencil sharpener.
Oooh, I feel your pain. Although I think I've just about persuaded my mom to switch to Mozilla Mail -- she likes what I've told her about Baynesian filtering of spam and the fact that little greebies can't install themselves on her system just by viewing the email they're embedded in.
> ...they failed completely to incoperate the rising new mark-up technologies like XML-Signature or WebCGM. If this development continues this year, Mozilla might lose it's technical lead to IE or Opera.
Are you just pulling this stuff out of your arse, or what? Neither of these are new (WebCGM has been around since '99), both are fairly irrelevant, and WebCGM is a binary format in any case.
Given the *cough* rapid pace of MSIE development *cough* these days, if Mozilla stood stockstill for the next two years, it wouldn't lose any ground to IE (which still doesn't support all of DOM Level 2), and Opera is also still playing catch-up, although it's farther along than MSIE.
It would be nice if they'd start including SVG support in the standard releases, though. Especially since the Adobe SVG plugin for Moz/NS is broken and appears likely to stay that way for some time.
> hopefully they will start using native widgets rather than the ugly GTK like widgets being used now.
Then you lose cross-platform consistency and the ability to use themes with custom widgets. I like being able to use the same standards-compliant browser that looks and behaves the same on Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.
Check out themes.mozdev.org, or -- if you know HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, then you can learn XUL and build your own.
I like the browser/email combo, use Moz 1.5, and hope they'll continue to develop it. I'm not terribly interested in replacing one app with 4 (browser, email, HTML editor, IRC).
WTF is this guy smoking? (And can I have some please?)
IBM has right on its side AND fabulously deep pockets, whereas SCO is quite likely to implode in another quarter or two, since it has *no* seriously marketable products or services (and seems hell-bent on doing everything it possibly can to scare and/or piss off any potential new customers, to boot). Big Blue can well and truly afford to wait SCO out.
IBM has every reason NOT to settle the suit, and every reason to pursue it until SCO is a glassy, smoking crater.