Web designer should stop trying to think for the users,
I understand your position. However, as another web designer, I would love to at least have easy access to your preferences. Typically the browser settings would be a good indication of the user preferences. Possibly a better solution would be a "preferences" header. This way each user could set up things like "prefered size", "prefered resolution", "prefered font and size". These could be transmitted to the server and utilized appropriately.
And frankly, as someone who has done tech support, I KNOW that sometimes the experts do have to do the thinking for the end user...
You contradict yourself. You say judges are not supposed to make law, and then, yourself, point out that we have "inherited" British common law that allows them to do so.
It's not my statements that are contradictory, it is the legal system. I simply pointed out how things are supposed to work, and followed up with how they do work, and pointed out that I think that it is a VERY BAD THING(tm).
The Constitution specifically invests the power to make laws in the legislature, not the judiciary. Common law runs contrary to the seperation of the powers. Seperation of powers is as GOOD THING(tm) IMHO. A judge's judgement should be based on the law, not the judgement of other judges.
When a judge makes a decision there are no elected representatives present to debate and influence the decision. In many cases, the judge is appointed, not elected. In many cases, judges have the power to nullify a jury's decision. This, combined with the ability influence other decisions on related matters is just too much power to invest in one person.
If the law is not clear enough for all judges to base their decisions on the law itself, it should be handed back to the legislature to be fixed, not modified by judges.
Of course, this is just my opinion. Your milage may vary.
Publishing it is a crime because a judge said it was. That's really all it takes. So, you got that one wrong.
Judges do not make law. At least they are not supposed to here in the US. Judges do not have the Constitutional authority to declare anything a crime. Their function is to take laws passed by legislators, compare them to the actions of individuals, and to attempt to decide if those laws are violated by those actions.
Unfortunately, we inherited from the British the concept of "Common Law", which in effect allows Judges to -make- laws because their rulings affect the rulings of other judges. In my opinion, this is a VERY BAD IDEA(tm). It in effect allows individual judges, who may or may not have had any clue about the subject they are ruling on, to unilaterally change laws. It's like having bunches of little emperors running around each making their own laws.
Is there any way we could make Windows *more* virus/worm friendly?
Top 10 ways to make Windows *more* virus/worm friendly:
10. MS Virus SDK
9. "START virus" button on task bar
8. Paperclip with virus hints
7. "Auto replicate and spread" option in Outlook
6. WORM.CAB
5. Bundle virus protection in Windows
4. Require Windows virus updates be done via Hotmail
3. Virus32.dll
2. Tell Microsoft that people are giving away viruses for free in an "Un-American" way.
1. Two words: DOT NET
In the US, Congress can go ahead and pass any censorship law they want (and have done so in at least one instance.) It is up to the Supreme Court to nullify it if it is unconstitutional
It's not supposed to work that way, but unfortunately it does.
What the US needs (and Australia apparently even more so) is some teeth to the Constitutional laws. In the US, the Bill of Rights tells the government what it can NOT do. Unfortunately there are no criminal penalities when the government breaks those laws. If politicians started serving prison time for casting unconstitutional votes, I bet they'd stop.
All anyone can do now is be the loudest squeaky wheel. Anyone have any addresses (email or postal) where people all over the world can write and express, in a polite and civil way, their complete disapproval for this sort of thing?
From the article: Linux is developed in a so-called open-source environment in which the software code generally isn't owned by any one company. That, as well as programs such as music-sharing software from Napster Inc., means the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of talking to policymakers, he said.
Hmmm... I would think it means that the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of making software.
Competition and free market is what the US system is all about. Can't you just see the fear welling up in Bill Gate's eyes?
Although the idea of the "click" as obvious prior art, the actual patent touches on many idea's for the methodology of grabbing the cart information from the db, storing that data, and calling it later.
I'm going to file for a patent for "Using the side of the hand, without using any fingers, to activate and deactivate light switches with one flip of the switch". The patent doesn't exist, it's my idea, I MUST have the right to it.
The easiest is ripping up whatever they sent you and sending it back. A little added Elmers glue is always fun also. I always shove as much as will fit into the envelope. Pocket lint, coffee grounds, whatever. Make it bulge. Make it heavy. Make it messy.
Internet advertising is still in its infancy. I'm sure most of you have seen TV commercials from the 50's. They were really lame. Usually shows were sponsered by a company. The shows host would occasionally mention the product "And remember, The Detergent X Song and Dance Hour is brought to you by Detergent X, it get's you clothes clean".
Right now, I'm looking up at an ad from ThinkGeek. It's your standard rectangle, some interesting looking Swiss Army knives, and the words "Get yours at ThinkGeek".
I think of ThinkGeek as a great site, but I can't help but compare that banner to "Detergent X gets your clothes clean", and I already have a Swiss army knife.
No, online advertising isn't very effective now, but it will grow up.
Imagine the richest country in the world not being able to choose their prez., simply b'cos some guy, somehwere didn't know how to properly use a punching machine!
I can understand why the rest of the world might see it that way. The fact is, those invalid ballots shouldn't count, and didn't count. The big uproar was caused by a sore looser that thought he might be able to steal an election by changing the rules AFTER the election. However, in the end, the system worked... regardless of how many people didn't like the outcome.
I'm seriously disturbed by the word "bipartisan". It seems to roll off the American tounge as easily as "non-partisan", and I keep hearing the words as if they were interchangable. They're very very different.
I'm an American, and I unfortunately have to agree that you are right in all too many cases. However, I expect every country has its share of morons.
Didn't I read somewhere that they gave them suicide pills for just such an event. I know I'd take the easy way out rather than suffocate.
Nasty way to go...
It wouldn't be a gasping-for-breath sort of suffocation. They would still be breathing. They would just run out of oxygen. They would get "drunk" due to the lack of oxygen getting to the brain, pass out, and never wake up. Some people have killed themselves by sitting in a closed garage with a running car. They start breathing carbon monoxide instead of oxygen. Same principle. There are much worse ways to go.
How the hell can a corporation take away your freedom? They can't. Only governments can do that. Yet you think more government is the answer...
I see your kind of flawed logic over and over. No corporation can possibly ever take away even one bit of your freedom.
Let's say we have a company called Big Evil Corporation. Let's say BEC is the worst the world has ever seen. Let's say they do every bad thing the law allows (notice the part about "law allows"). Let's even say they are a monopoly. We can even say Bill Gates runs it if that makes you think they are worse. Are you getting the picture? BEC is the absolute worst company ever.
Now... what freedoms have you lost?
You don't have to do business with this company. You are FREE to do business with others, start your own business, not do the kind of business BEC monopolizes, make BEC's goods (or provide BEC's services) for yourself, etc.
The only way you can loose freedom is when government steps in and passes laws limiting your choices. If your willing to invoke government in an effort to restrain the freedom of others (even if it's BEC) then you deserve to loose some of your freedoms too.
Let's face it, a company doesn't get to be BEC if it is not providing goods or services that LOTS of people want, however much you might disagree with their reasons for wanting it. It is precisely your attitude that prompts government to take action which actually decreases freedom, not increases it.
OH MY GHOD! Machine Code!? Wowie-gee! Praytell how is this faster than assembly? I've been an x86 assembly programmer for over 10 years and also program in several embedded processor varieties. I'd love to meet the guy who can properly optimize* P6 code better than a halfway decent compiler. I mean the guy must have a brain the size of ENIAC.
Reference was made several times in the article about the POOR optimizations of the compiler (he kept mentioning Microsoft compilers). Seems Microsoft (according to the article) lags about 3 years behind in getting their compilers to optimize for the newest processors. So, I suppose, the answer is that the compilers are not "halfway decent".
Because they now owe the albequerque journal $150.00
Hmmm... maybe you should charge the Albequerque Journal everytime someone uses a link you wrote to link to their site. For that matter, charge them for any reference to anything you write. Say, for instance, a reference to your name used in a court summons. And charge them for verbal references. If an employee tells their boss they saw that unpaid link, charge them for referencing your material. Charge them again when they reference your links to their lawyers. Charge the lawyers when they reference it to the judge. Charge the judge if a reference is made during the judgement. Etc., etc., etc.
Do we really want our government defining and enforcing protocols and standards for operating systems, desktop software and networking protocols?
I certainly don't. However, maybe a legal definition of what a "standard" is would be in order. That way Microsoft couldn't legally claim their products are standards compliant. They would either have to join the standards camp, or be known as the non-standard software company. As it is, they talk about "Microsoft Standards", an oxymoron people have accepted blindly.
This guy obviously has forgotten all the crap the world went through to change two digit dates to four digit dates...
Now he wants to change the whole calander?
Hell, that's about as likely as getting people to accept Unix time as the official world standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Web designer should stop trying to think for the users,
I understand your position. However, as another web designer, I would love to at least have easy access to your preferences. Typically the browser settings would be a good indication of the user preferences. Possibly a better solution would be a "preferences" header. This way each user could set up things like "prefered size", "prefered resolution", "prefered font and size". These could be transmitted to the server and utilized appropriately.
And frankly, as someone who has done tech support, I KNOW that sometimes the experts do have to do the thinking for the end user...
You contradict yourself. You say judges are not supposed to make law, and then, yourself, point out that we have "inherited" British common law that allows them to do so.
It's not my statements that are contradictory, it is the legal system. I simply pointed out how things are supposed to work, and followed up with how they do work, and pointed out that I think that it is a VERY BAD THING(tm).
The Constitution specifically invests the power to make laws in the legislature, not the judiciary. Common law runs contrary to the seperation of the powers. Seperation of powers is as GOOD THING(tm) IMHO. A judge's judgement should be based on the law, not the judgement of other judges.
When a judge makes a decision there are no elected representatives present to debate and influence the decision. In many cases, the judge is appointed, not elected. In many cases, judges have the power to nullify a jury's decision. This, combined with the ability influence other decisions on related matters is just too much power to invest in one person.
If the law is not clear enough for all judges to base their decisions on the law itself, it should be handed back to the legislature to be fixed, not modified by judges.
Of course, this is just my opinion. Your milage may vary.
Publishing it is a crime because a judge said it was. That's really all it takes. So, you got that one wrong.
Judges do not make law. At least they are not supposed to here in the US. Judges do not have the Constitutional authority to declare anything a crime. Their function is to take laws passed by legislators, compare them to the actions of individuals, and to attempt to decide if those laws are violated by those actions.
Unfortunately, we inherited from the British the concept of "Common Law", which in effect allows Judges to -make- laws because their rulings affect the rulings of other judges. In my opinion, this is a VERY BAD IDEA(tm). It in effect allows individual judges, who may or may not have had any clue about the subject they are ruling on, to unilaterally change laws. It's like having bunches of little emperors running around each making their own laws.
Ocassionally turf wars, called appeals, occur.
The problem, obviously, is that the encryption is not desgiend to protect a copyright holder, sadly enough.
I suppose the only solution is to patent "A means for encoding and decoding filenames to and from Pig Latin". Where'd I put that patent form?
Is there any way we could make Windows *more* virus/worm friendly?
Top 10 ways to make Windows *more* virus/worm friendly:
10. MS Virus SDK
9. "START virus" button on task bar
8. Paperclip with virus hints
7. "Auto replicate and spread" option in Outlook
6. WORM.CAB
5. Bundle virus protection in Windows
4. Require Windows virus updates be done via Hotmail
3. Virus32.dll
2. Tell Microsoft that people are giving away viruses for free in an "Un-American" way.
1. Two words: DOT NET
In the US, Congress can go ahead and pass any censorship law they want (and have done so in at least one instance.) It is up to the Supreme Court to nullify it if it is unconstitutional
It's not supposed to work that way, but unfortunately it does.
What the US needs (and Australia apparently even more so) is some teeth to the Constitutional laws. In the US, the Bill of Rights tells the government what it can NOT do. Unfortunately there are no criminal penalities when the government breaks those laws. If politicians started serving prison time for casting unconstitutional votes, I bet they'd stop.
All anyone can do now is be the loudest squeaky wheel. Anyone have any addresses (email or postal) where people all over the world can write and express, in a polite and civil way, their complete disapproval for this sort of thing?
From the article:
Linux is developed in a so-called open-source environment in which the software code generally isn't owned by any one company. That, as well as programs such as music-sharing software from Napster Inc., means the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of talking to policymakers, he said.
Hmmm... I would think it means that the world's largest software maker has to do a better job of making software.
Competition and free market is what the US system is all about. Can't you just see the fear welling up in Bill Gate's eyes?
Although the idea of the "click" as obvious prior art, the actual patent touches on many idea's for the methodology of grabbing the cart information from the db, storing that data, and calling it later.
I'm going to file for a patent for "Using the side of the hand, without using any fingers, to activate and deactivate light switches with one flip of the switch". The patent doesn't exist, it's my idea, I MUST have the right to it.
When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption.
- popular applications from IE to Office regularly "update" the user's operating system to whatever was latest at the time that product was released.
So, if you install Office 97 on Windows 2000 does that give you Windows 1997?
I comment sparsly. Typically I only comment the items I think I myself might forget down the road. I've got one word for you: Deadlines.
Beauty, no; job security, yes.
You also might be charged with sending biological waste without the proper containment/labeling.
I guess this means sending my tonsils is out of the question?
Anyone ever tell you you're a buzzkill?
The easiest is ripping up whatever they sent you and sending it back. A little added Elmers glue is always fun also. I always shove as much as will fit into the envelope. Pocket lint, coffee grounds, whatever. Make it bulge. Make it heavy. Make it messy.
Internet advertising is still in its infancy. I'm sure most of you have seen TV commercials from the 50's. They were really lame. Usually shows were sponsered by a company. The shows host would occasionally mention the product "And remember, The Detergent X Song and Dance Hour is brought to you by Detergent X, it get's you clothes clean".
Right now, I'm looking up at an ad from ThinkGeek. It's your standard rectangle, some interesting looking Swiss Army knives, and the words "Get yours at ThinkGeek".
I think of ThinkGeek as a great site, but I can't help but compare that banner to "Detergent X gets your clothes clean", and I already have a Swiss army knife.
No, online advertising isn't very effective now, but it will grow up.
Imagine the richest country in the world not being able to choose their prez., simply b'cos some guy, somehwere didn't know how to properly use a punching machine!
I can understand why the rest of the world might see it that way. The fact is, those invalid ballots shouldn't count, and didn't count. The big uproar was caused by a sore looser that thought he might be able to steal an election by changing the rules AFTER the election. However, in the end, the system worked... regardless of how many people didn't like the outcome.
I'm seriously disturbed by the word "bipartisan". It seems to roll off the American tounge as easily as "non-partisan", and I keep hearing the words as if they were interchangable. They're very very different.
I'm an American, and I unfortunately have to agree that you are right in all too many cases. However, I expect every country has its share of morons.
I prefer paper and a pencil. Reliable and more difficult to forge.
Hell, I'd perfer Florida's current system.
Didn't I read somewhere that they gave them suicide pills for just such an event. I know I'd take the easy way out rather than suffocate.
Nasty way to go...
It wouldn't be a gasping-for-breath sort of suffocation. They would still be breathing. They would just run out of oxygen. They would get "drunk" due to the lack of oxygen getting to the brain, pass out, and never wake up. Some people have killed themselves by sitting in a closed garage with a running car. They start breathing carbon monoxide instead of oxygen. Same principle. There are much worse ways to go.
I hate my ISP. So to help consume their bandwidth, here is my very own mirror.........
They actually seem to be handling it OK. I'm getting around 50K/sec... and you know there has to be a lot of people sucking this file.
You're equating criminal activity with taking away freedom. I suppose you're less free because of Bonnie and Clyde?
How the hell can a corporation take away your freedom? They can't. Only governments can do that. Yet you think more government is the answer...
I see your kind of flawed logic over and over. No corporation can possibly ever take away even one bit of your freedom.
Let's say we have a company called Big Evil Corporation. Let's say BEC is the worst the world has ever seen. Let's say they do every bad thing the law allows (notice the part about "law allows"). Let's even say they are a monopoly. We can even say Bill Gates runs it if that makes you think they are worse. Are you getting the picture? BEC is the absolute worst company ever.
Now... what freedoms have you lost?
You don't have to do business with this company. You are FREE to do business with others, start your own business, not do the kind of business BEC monopolizes, make BEC's goods (or provide BEC's services) for yourself, etc.
The only way you can loose freedom is when government steps in and passes laws limiting your choices. If your willing to invoke government in an effort to restrain the freedom of others (even if it's BEC) then you deserve to loose some of your freedoms too.
Let's face it, a company doesn't get to be BEC if it is not providing goods or services that LOTS of people want, however much you might disagree with their reasons for wanting it. It is precisely your attitude that prompts government to take action which actually decreases freedom, not increases it.
OH MY GHOD! Machine Code!? Wowie-gee! Praytell how is this faster than assembly? I've been an x86 assembly programmer for over 10 years and also program in several embedded processor varieties. I'd love to meet the guy who can properly optimize* P6 code better than a halfway decent compiler. I mean the guy must have a brain the size of ENIAC.
Reference was made several times in the article about the POOR optimizations of the compiler (he kept mentioning Microsoft compilers). Seems Microsoft (according to the article) lags about 3 years behind in getting their compilers to optimize for the newest processors. So, I suppose, the answer is that the compilers are not "halfway decent".
Because they now owe the albequerque journal $150.00
Hmmm... maybe you should charge the Albequerque Journal everytime someone uses a link you wrote to link to their site. For that matter, charge them for any reference to anything you write. Say, for instance, a reference to your name used in a court summons. And charge them for verbal references. If an employee tells their boss they saw that unpaid link, charge them for referencing your material. Charge them again when they reference your links to their lawyers. Charge the lawyers when they reference it to the judge. Charge the judge if a reference is made during the judgement. Etc., etc., etc.
Do we really want our government defining and enforcing protocols and standards for operating systems, desktop software and networking protocols?
I certainly don't. However, maybe a legal definition of what a "standard" is would be in order. That way Microsoft couldn't legally claim their products are standards compliant. They would either have to join the standards camp, or be known as the non-standard software company. As it is, they talk about "Microsoft Standards", an oxymoron people have accepted blindly.
This guy obviously has forgotten all the crap the world went through to change two digit dates to four digit dates...
Now he wants to change the whole calander?
Hell, that's about as likely as getting people to accept Unix time as the official world standard.