Something that is "immoral" is "against or not adhering to morals". Now, the question then is what are morals?
Directly from Wiki: "Morality is a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions are right or wrong."
Each of us has our own culture, religion, philosophies, and beliefs. Therefore, each of us has our own set of morals as well. Thus, what is immoral to one person is not immoral to another.
I might consider premarital sex to be immoral. You might not. Bob might think homosexuality is immoral, I might not. Jonny might think that eating pixie sticks on sundays is immoral. The rest of us don't.
So, perhaps, in your mind the only things that are immoral are those that harm unconsenting individuals, but in many people's minds... Immorality encompasses much more.
I find it mind boggling that anyone actually modded the parent up to +5 insightful.
Lets see... Google could either go along with the government (and alert its users that they're being censored) or be blocked. Now, last I checked, Google is a company... Not a so-called-christian/republican/freedom-fighter organization. They're in it to make money, not to uphold your democratic agenda.
They did no evil. Nor did they necessarily do any good.
Dammit. Before I read this comment, I actually thought about reading the article. But if the author actually refers to MySpace as being "part of" or "using" "Web ""2.0"" then screw it.
As an aside ever trying running MySpace.com through a validator? Its funny... Try it.
It will "work". Sort of similar to how the Exchange Webclient "works" in Firefox and Opera. It has all sorts of neat features in IE, that are completely replicable in standards-compliant browsers, but the developers just didn't take the time to do it.
So, in my opinion, if they do make a web-based version of Office, it will work minimally in all browsers. But, it will not have all of the "features" that are available if you use it in IE.
...What? Google Earth is impossible to use? My 15 year old brother doesn't seem to have any problem using it quite fluidly.
AJAX is doomed to failure? Its been in use for over 5 years... which is a pretty good chunk of time considering the age of the internet.
Re:This browser is important
on
IE7 Leaked
·
· Score: 1
IE4 was the standard... IE5 was the standard... IE6 was the standard. What makes you think that IE7 won't be? Because 15% of the internet population don't use IE anymore? Thats great... but that means that 85% STILL DO.
"Personally I can allow myself to code XHTML 1.1 and not care about IE"
So... I take it that you're not a professional web developer? You would not have many clients for very long. Despite the fact that we love {firefox|opera|safari|konqueror}, the average client does not... and does not care if your site is XHTML 1.1 compliant. They care that the maximum number of people can view and use their site.
The internet isn't ideal... far from it... but this is the internet that we live in.
Re:This browser is important
on
IE7 Leaked
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
This could possibly be because "normal" users don't go to W3Schools. Only people who have some kind of interest in learning web development go there. People who have interest in web development are much more likely to be using Firefox/Safari/Konqueror/Opera because they read sites like Slashdot where they are constantly bombarded by anti-IE rhetoric.
And what about those who did it before it was known as AJAX... while it was known as AJAX... and will continue doing so after it has lost its popularity?
Just because some shmucks like to use it as a buzzword, does not mean that it is not a useful technique.
Slashdot Mirror
No... Not really.
Something that is "immoral" is "against or not adhering to morals". Now, the question then is what are morals?
Directly from Wiki: "Morality is a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions are right or wrong."
Each of us has our own culture, religion, philosophies, and beliefs. Therefore, each of us has our own set of morals as well. Thus, what is immoral to one person is not immoral to another.
I might consider premarital sex to be immoral. You might not. Bob might think homosexuality is immoral, I might not. Jonny might think that eating pixie sticks on sundays is immoral. The rest of us don't.
So, perhaps, in your mind the only things that are immoral are those that harm unconsenting individuals, but in many people's minds... Immorality encompasses much more.
I find it mind boggling that anyone actually modded the parent up to +5 insightful. Lets see... Google could either go along with the government (and alert its users that they're being censored) or be blocked. Now, last I checked, Google is a company... Not a so-called-christian/republican/freedom-fighter organization. They're in it to make money, not to uphold your democratic agenda. They did no evil. Nor did they necessarily do any good.
Dammit. Before I read this comment, I actually thought about reading the article. But if the author actually refers to MySpace as being "part of" or "using" "Web ""2.0"" then screw it. As an aside ever trying running MySpace.com through a validator? Its funny... Try it.
It will "work". Sort of similar to how the Exchange Webclient "works" in Firefox and Opera. It has all sorts of neat features in IE, that are completely replicable in standards-compliant browsers, but the developers just didn't take the time to do it. So, in my opinion, if they do make a web-based version of Office, it will work minimally in all browsers. But, it will not have all of the "features" that are available if you use it in IE.
...What? Google Earth is impossible to use? My 15 year old brother doesn't seem to have any problem using it quite fluidly. AJAX is doomed to failure? Its been in use for over 5 years... which is a pretty good chunk of time considering the age of the internet.
The problem with using bugs.... is that bugs get fixed. (Sometimes)
This article: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/zombiecopy
IE4 was the standard... IE5 was the standard... IE6 was the standard. What makes you think that IE7 won't be? Because 15% of the internet population don't use IE anymore? Thats great... but that means that 85% STILL DO. "Personally I can allow myself to code XHTML 1.1 and not care about IE" So... I take it that you're not a professional web developer? You would not have many clients for very long. Despite the fact that we love {firefox|opera|safari|konqueror}, the average client does not... and does not care if your site is XHTML 1.1 compliant. They care that the maximum number of people can view and use their site. The internet isn't ideal... far from it... but this is the internet that we live in.
This could possibly be because "normal" users don't go to W3Schools. Only people who have some kind of interest in learning web development go there. People who have interest in web development are much more likely to be using Firefox/Safari/Konqueror/Opera because they read sites like Slashdot where they are constantly bombarded by anti-IE rhetoric.
And what about those who did it before it was known as AJAX... while it was known as AJAX... and will continue doing so after it has lost its popularity? Just because some shmucks like to use it as a buzzword, does not mean that it is not a useful technique.