I like to create a sentence that works as an acronym, where I could possibly insert a number. Such as:
"Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day."
The password would be: gamafahe4ad
This makes the password hard to guess, yet easy to recall.
if somebody is content with IE and wants to go on using it, good for them. It's a free country.
Sure it's a free country, I agree. However, by free country, I'm assuming you mean people are free in their ability to choose (for example, they can choose between Firefox and IE). If IE is bundled with the Windows operating system, and people buy Windows (for Windows, not IE) are people really making a choice at all concerning what browser they use?
I don't believe taking the first thing that's given to you is an act of choice; I'd call it an act of laziness, or -- possibly -- an act of stupidity, even if the first thing you were given was Firefox. Now, if I was to give you a browser and a very detailed explanation of why I gave you that browser, possibly telling you why I DIDN'T give you the other, than I'd be giving you solution and a reason why you should use that solution*. In short, I'd be setting you up to make a choice, even if your choice is not to use the browser I recommended to you. In my opinion, new Windows/IE users don't even know there is a choice, and Microsoft is either knowingly taking advantage of the ignorant or its people are simply caught up in thier own hype (which, unfortunately for them, has a paycheck attached to it).
In the end, people will do whatever turns out to be good for them, and with Windows/IE, people think the first thing given to them is good (it's like your first car/home/computer that you eventually ruined or sold). It's our responsiblity to tell them there's something better in the world, and -- I think -- it's a failing of Microsoft for not adopting ANY truth-in-advertising. Unfortunately, we can't directly control Microsoft, so the only thing we can do is slowly dwindle down the market share until Microsoft decides they have to step up. We've made in-roads so far (Microsoft IS making IE7), but I think, unfortunately, there's still a long way to go.
* Microsoft is doing this too, but I believe Microsoft is telling you to use their browser because it equals $$$ for them. I don't think they really care about the goals of the end user.
although you made a joke, you have a valid point. when text itself doesn't correctly display emotions, we need something else -- like tags and emoticons -- to better express what we're saying. but, even then, can people really discern what we actually mean?
the above was supposed to be in call caps, but slashdot called me lame.
I'm demented? I'M DEMENTED!? Well, tally hoe, scally wag. If I had a rare/epic for everytime someone told me that, well... I'd be playing World of Warcraft!
I was just about to believe you until you started calling everyone retards. Apparently, Slashdot is "a great place to win friends and alienate friends and be a total douche and do things like make everything think you're going to commit suicide or hook up with some older guy or harass each other or whatever other mundane crap pops into [people's] heads."
"their development tools are top-notch [if all you want to do is get something done quick that lacks artistic value and any type of coding standard...]"
I wouldn't quite associate college drop-outs with PHP and MySQL. Cause ya know -- I'm still in college (but I can learn PHP and MySQL without a class because it's free and open). Go figure!
Re:Scientists need to stop playing God!
on
The Los Alamos Bug
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
who is to say that we are not expressly ALLOWED to do this
Intead of thinking from an authoritative (religious) standpoint, think from something more broad: Ethics. Stealing and killing, under Kantianism, would be unethical; if everyone stole, we'd have no belongings, and if everyone killed, there'd be no life. Similarly, under a utilitarian view, most stealing and killing would produce far more bad than good. If we created new life, we could possibly mess with the integrity of our own; similarly, creating our own life *may* produce more bad than good. Finally, under the social contract that we call the Constitution, doing either would violate our own foundations as a society. Whether or not religious texts say not to is beside the point; if we all want to live together, there are some things that we should and shouldn't do.
How can creation be evil
Well... who says we can create life? Just because we are physically able to, do we have a forum that will support both the current life and the new life? How do we know the life we create will not greatly alter the life now? If we create life, what will be it's predators? Us? Why can't we bring animals, fruit or plants from one country to the next? Is it because of plague/sickness, or could that animal/fruit/plant run rampant in a habitat that has no predators? Does Australia ring a bell? If we can't answer all of these (and most likely more) questions, then we are probably not suited for creating life. If we are not suited for creating life, then any life we do create will probably -- however inadvertantly -- become something dubbed as "evil".
Mod parent down! He's the one who said there's fingerprints everywhere. If it makes you feel good, go to the toilet seat in my house and stick a piece of tape the bowl. After you're done giggling, have a good time figuring out whether it's even my finger, let alone the one I use on the scanner.
True, we can't control whether or not the programs call home, but then again, these programs will now become a service -- and with that, the license agreements you acknowledge might actually become enforceable (for both you and the service provider). As above: You don't like it (or the license), don't use it. However, if you like the service so much (a.k.a, a service of high quality), you might just give up a small amount of privacy. Look at your university/institution for instance; I'm sure they've got your social security number.
I'm the usual open-source advocate (like most slashdotters), so I'm a little biased. When I had to do a project in C#/ASP.NET, it was terrible. Most of the problem came from huge amount of public variables, that had names like "Controls", and "Text" (consider the html table class -- I'm not sure of the name). What do these do? If you don't know, there's nothing to infer from these -- if I add something, what happens? If you add both (considering the table class), which takes precidence? Do they both show up? Will an exception be throw? (NO!). As well, in contrast with PHP, the documentation is horrible. I couldn't go to the MSDN website and find all the details of the class I was working with -- usually, I got a "This is how it's instanciated" and maybe some small example. I didn't get any in and out details about what adding a control to the table may do, and what I could do with it afterwards. Of course, some programming is left to experience, this was not helpful at all. From a fully funded product like C# and ASP.NET, I'd expect much better documentation than that -- documentation that I don't have to pay for, and not rely on a 3rd party book to tell me. Good documentation should come from Microsoft.
Now, this is not to mention the fight with Visual Studio to make the WYSIWYG editor do what I want... but that's a different story.
Slashdot Mirror
Right. That's why they were originally called the fourth estate.
I'm going to hold you to that.
I don't.
If this were open-source, you could file a bug report.
I like to create a sentence that works as an acronym, where I could possibly insert a number. Such as: "Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day." The password would be: gamafahe4ad This makes the password hard to guess, yet easy to recall.
You mean that word that you just wrote? The one with quotes around it?
Sure it's a free country, I agree. However, by free country, I'm assuming you mean people are free in their ability to choose (for example, they can choose between Firefox and IE). If IE is bundled with the Windows operating system, and people buy Windows (for Windows, not IE) are people really making a choice at all concerning what browser they use?
I don't believe taking the first thing that's given to you is an act of choice; I'd call it an act of laziness, or -- possibly -- an act of stupidity, even if the first thing you were given was Firefox. Now, if I was to give you a browser and a very detailed explanation of why I gave you that browser, possibly telling you why I DIDN'T give you the other, than I'd be giving you solution and a reason why you should use that solution*. In short, I'd be setting you up to make a choice, even if your choice is not to use the browser I recommended to you. In my opinion, new Windows/IE users don't even know there is a choice, and Microsoft is either knowingly taking advantage of the ignorant or its people are simply caught up in thier own hype (which, unfortunately for them, has a paycheck attached to it).
In the end, people will do whatever turns out to be good for them, and with Windows/IE, people think the first thing given to them is good (it's like your first car/home/computer that you eventually ruined or sold). It's our responsiblity to tell them there's something better in the world, and -- I think -- it's a failing of Microsoft for not adopting ANY truth-in-advertising. Unfortunately, we can't directly control Microsoft, so the only thing we can do is slowly dwindle down the market share until Microsoft decides they have to step up. We've made in-roads so far (Microsoft IS making IE7), but I think, unfortunately, there's still a long way to go.
* Microsoft is doing this too, but I believe Microsoft is telling you to use their browser because it equals $$$ for them. I don't think they really care about the goals of the end user.
Is that a link to the trojan or the porn site?
I was pretty much under the impression that Firefox already one-upped Microsoft. And don't go off about how IE7 is better -- IE7 isn't here yet.
Microsoft's sure not appealing to me!
Personally, I welcome our very small robot overlords.
...just watched the movie Firewall.
although you made a joke, you have a valid point. when text itself doesn't correctly display emotions, we need something else -- like tags and emoticons -- to better express what we're saying. but, even then, can people really discern what we actually mean? the above was supposed to be in call caps, but slashdot called me lame.
I'm demented? I'M DEMENTED!? Well, tally hoe, scally wag. If I had a rare/epic for everytime someone told me that, well... I'd be playing World of Warcraft!
Toodles.
I was just about to believe you until you started calling everyone retards. Apparently, Slashdot is "a great place to win friends and alienate friends and be a total douche and do things like make everything think you're going to commit suicide or hook up with some older guy or harass each other or whatever other mundane crap pops into [people's] heads."
"their development tools are top-notch [if all you want to do is get something done quick that lacks artistic value and any type of coding standard...]"
I wouldn't quite associate college drop-outs with PHP and MySQL. Cause ya know -- I'm still in college (but I can learn PHP and MySQL without a class because it's free and open). Go figure!
Mod parent down! He's the one who said there's fingerprints everywhere. If it makes you feel good, go to the toilet seat in my house and stick a piece of tape the bowl. After you're done giggling, have a good time figuring out whether it's even my finger, let alone the one I use on the scanner.
True, we can't control whether or not the programs call home, but then again, these programs will now become a service -- and with that, the license agreements you acknowledge might actually become enforceable (for both you and the service provider). As above: You don't like it (or the license), don't use it. However, if you like the service so much (a.k.a, a service of high quality), you might just give up a small amount of privacy. Look at your university/institution for instance; I'm sure they've got your social security number.
Well...
I'm the usual open-source advocate (like most slashdotters), so I'm a little biased. When I had to do a project in C#/ASP.NET, it was terrible. Most of the problem came from huge amount of public variables, that had names like "Controls", and "Text" (consider the html table class -- I'm not sure of the name). What do these do? If you don't know, there's nothing to infer from these -- if I add something, what happens? If you add both (considering the table class), which takes precidence? Do they both show up? Will an exception be throw? (NO!). As well, in contrast with PHP, the documentation is horrible. I couldn't go to the MSDN website and find all the details of the class I was working with -- usually, I got a "This is how it's instanciated" and maybe some small example. I didn't get any in and out details about what adding a control to the table may do, and what I could do with it afterwards. Of course, some programming is left to experience, this was not helpful at all. From a fully funded product like C# and ASP.NET, I'd expect much better documentation than that -- documentation that I don't have to pay for, and not rely on a 3rd party book to tell me. Good documentation should come from Microsoft.
Now, this is not to mention the fight with Visual Studio to make the WYSIWYG editor do what I want... but that's a different story.
I hope this helps.