How can anyone label this as informative?! It is utter bullshit. If it's a joke it might be labeled funny. The area of the fiber as almost nothing to do the amount of information it can transmit (disregard multimode singlemode etc.).
Well, it's vaguely correct in the sense that single-mode fibre (which is thinner) can be run faster than multi-mode fibre (which is thicker), but yeah, it's not exactly +N, Informative for N > 0
You have faith in the peer reviewed physics journal? You must not know any of the peers, or have any insight into the review process. Trust me, its a mess.
That may be the case, but unless you're a physicist, you're still better off trusting the journals than your own pathetic knowledge. It's much like reading an article about computer security in Wired. Is it likely to be inaccurate/simplistic/stupid? Yes. Is it still better advice than what most non-techies can come up with on their own? Yes.
The journals are still far more credible than, say, Answers in Genesis, or Time Cube.
Raph Koster knows it. Why other MMO developers have historically ignored this rule over and over again, I'm not sure.
Well, for FPS games where centisecond network latency makes a big difference, it's done for performance reasons. For systems where latency isn't as much of an issue, maybe it's a cost-reduction issue: processing that clients do is processing power that you don't have to pay for in your server farm.
But honestly, I think it's probably more of a case of too many "game programmers" who haven't done enough of anything else to have learned about writing code for use in an adversarial environment.
There are standards that actually work for the kind of censorship you want. PICS is one of them. There is also various filtering software that you can get. None of these require special top-level domains.
There are significant technical and logistical problems with using top-level domains to categorize content the the purpose of censorship. In 2004, the IETF published RFC 3675, which documented some of these problems. I suggest you read it.
Using JS for something like this is a bad idea. Thanks to CNet's JavaScript hysteria (see below), more and more people seem to be turning JS off these days.
Tough. If you're tech-savvy enough to disable JavaScript, then you're tech-savvy enough to know better than to use MSIE. If I'm going to cater to IE users at all, I'll cater to the ones who legitimately don't know how to use anything else.
This means that parents will most likely have an easier time protecting their children from these sites and these sites will be more tightly regulated and easier to scrutinize by authorities
NO IT DOESN'T. Please at least pretend you've read RFC 3675.
That may be part of the reason, but not understanding users isn't the reason why we're still finding exploitable vulnerabilities in software like Firefox, OpenSSL, GnuPG, OpenSSH, and Linux.
And don't even get me started on Windows. Try reading Raymond Chen's blog for a partial list of reasons why writing robust software for Windows is so difficult, if not impossible. You'll have to think, because Raymond seems to completely miss a lot of the design problems when he describes their solutions.
Unless someone makes a specially modified MySQL for a closed device (TiVo?), redistributes the source code with the modifications but under the same license ("...GPLv2 or any later version"), and then you leverage that you have accepted the software under any later version (GPLv3 specifically) to legally force the manufacturer to release encryption keys and free up any patents he owns.
And then you get laughed out of court.
Seriously, do you people even bother to try to understand something before you spout garbage like this?
I haven't seen the Netopsystems FEAD Optimizer on Linux...
But acroread is still pretty slow and bloated compared to xpdf. It has a few more features (like filling in PDF forms), but I need those features so rarely that I could really just install acroread when I need it, and uninstall it when I'm done.
Using acroread to view PDFs on Linux is a mistake, generally speaking.
IIRC, the fragment part of the URL shows up in a Referer header, but it shouldn't be in the GET or POST request URI (but, interestingly, Apache seems to tolerate it).
Slashdot Mirror
We won't, because this is actually a smart move.
It's a smart move, of course, because it makes Fedora more like Debian.
/me dodges incoming bullets
In kdawsoviet Slashdot, robbery, theft, and copyright infringement mean the same thing... uh... to YOU.
I'm sorry.
Well, it's vaguely correct in the sense that single-mode fibre (which is thinner) can be run faster than multi-mode fibre (which is thicker), but yeah, it's not exactly +N, Informative for N > 0
Interesting. I wonder if we could make some nifty antennas out of that.
That may be the case, but unless you're a physicist, you're still better off trusting the journals than your own pathetic knowledge. It's much like reading an article about computer security in Wired. Is it likely to be inaccurate/simplistic/stupid? Yes. Is it still better advice than what most non-techies can come up with on their own? Yes.
The journals are still far more credible than, say, Answers in Genesis, or Time Cube.
On Linux? No.
Even on *BSD, isn't that /sbin?
Well, for FPS games where centisecond network latency makes a big difference, it's done for performance reasons. For systems where latency isn't as much of an issue, maybe it's a cost-reduction issue: processing that clients do is processing power that you don't have to pay for in your server farm.
But honestly, I think it's probably more of a case of too many "game programmers" who haven't done enough of anything else to have learned about writing code for use in an adversarial environment.
WTF are you talking about? Yeah, Linux is only a kernel. That's a problem the various distros take care of. What's your point?
There are standards that actually work for the kind of censorship you want. PICS is one of them. There is also various filtering software that you can get. None of these require special top-level domains.
There are significant technical and logistical problems with using top-level domains to categorize content the the purpose of censorship. In 2004, the IETF published RFC 3675, which documented some of these problems. I suggest you read it.
Or, at a minimum, use browsershots.org.
Tough. If you're tech-savvy enough to disable JavaScript, then you're tech-savvy enough to know better than to use MSIE. If I'm going to cater to IE users at all, I'll cater to the ones who legitimately don't know how to use anything else.
by mackyrae (999347) Alter Relationship on Sunday January 07, @09:07PM (#17503698)
(http://www.myspace.com/maco)
Code without hacks. I never used a hack, yet my sites always turned out how I wanted them.
(Emphasis mine)
How do you propose to create a useful decentralized name resolution system where the names are meaningful?
RFC 3675
NO IT DOESN'T. Please at least pretend you've read RFC 3675.
If that many people are really driving drunk, good.
That may be part of the reason, but not understanding users isn't the reason why we're still finding exploitable vulnerabilities in software like Firefox, OpenSSL, GnuPG, OpenSSH, and Linux.
And don't even get me started on Windows. Try reading Raymond Chen's blog for a partial list of reasons why writing robust software for Windows is so difficult, if not impossible. You'll have to think, because Raymond seems to completely miss a lot of the design problems when he describes their solutions.
... because nobody really knows what Web 2.0 means.
And then you get laughed out of court.
Seriously, do you people even bother to try to understand something before you spout garbage like this?
It's not quite that simple. That would screw up the copyright-assignment contracts other developers have with the FSF.
I haven't seen the Netopsystems FEAD Optimizer on Linux...
But acroread is still pretty slow and bloated compared to xpdf. It has a few more features (like filling in PDF forms), but I need those features so rarely that I could really just install acroread when I need it, and uninstall it when I'm done.
Using acroread to view PDFs on Linux is a mistake, generally speaking.
IIRC, the fragment part of the URL shows up in a Referer header, but it shouldn't be in the GET or POST request URI (but, interestingly, Apache seems to tolerate it).
My prediction: Google + some XML-based format = problem solved.
That's the second-biggest website I've ever seen, 99.
Isn't it "meet the new new SCO, same as the old new SCO"?