The right tool for the right job. HTML isn't intended for the purpose. PDF was designed for the explicit purpose of taking it to pretty much any computer and opening up, while preserving the formatting, fonts and content that is in the PDF.
HTML is getting better, but it's really not an acceptable solution when you're requiring a number of files per page. Sure, you could zip them all up, but at the end of the day it's the wrong tool for the job.
As far as PDFs go, there's nothing wrong with them that removing the extra functionality couldn't fix. Most of the problems are purely because somebody decided that it would be cool to do more than just format and display documents. Sort of like what happened at MS that gave us word macro viruses.
It's called Adobe Reader, because it reads PDF files, the notion that in this day and age you can have a program that doesn't write out its preferences somewhere is questionable at best. As soon as a program needs to write to disk for any purpose at all, there's going to be the possibility of it being exploited.
I'm not sure where you got the idea that a reader wouldn't do any of those things. A program with any utility at all is going to write to the disk, use the network and/or access DLLS. Unless you're coding the equivalent of a pet rock, you're going to be doing at least one of those things with any program you write.
Well, the vulnerabilities in PDF, if I'm understanding it correctly, are largely a matter of bugs in Acrobat and the scripting abilities that Acrobat supports. Failing to implement the scripting alone would probably go a fair ways towards securely viewing PDFs.
That's sort of the the point. I'm not a good programmer, but when I code, I tend to use Perl, I focus on making the code legible and typically don't take on much with it. Perl works well with that, but there's plenty of folks that use Perl for things that it's not really intended for and don't have any idea what maintainable code should look like.
Ultimately GIGO, you need more than a study like this to determine whether or not Perl is better than a randomly generated programming language. Ultimately, I would be extremely surprised if it were generally true as there's plenty of things in any language that are necessary but wouldn't be guaranteed to be randomly generated.
You can make a program that's illegible, blaming Perl for the incompetence or sloth of the people that are writing the code is hardly a fair. What about all those C programs where code is being run from random other files without concern for organization or maintainability?
There's no knowledge involved, just download rom manager and it downloads and installs the ROM for you. At no point does it require any technical knowledge whatsoever to accomplish.
With my game-changin paradigm I'm going to totally disrupt outside of the box with my synergistic relationships and realize great efficiencies of scale by outsourcing labor to an aggressive team of PR strategists in China.
Probably just another pro-Apple troll post. By the time a handset is truly no longer being supported by Android, chances are good that it's out of warranty and you may as well just unlock it and install a custom firmware.
Unless you were dumb enough to get a phone that was tightly locked down with a custom UI, in which case it kind of serves you right.
Only if you were dumb enough to buy a locked phone, the rest of us unlocked our phones when we got them and installed CyanogenMod or something similar. And those that were dumb enough to get a locked down phone are still in a better position than with the iPhone as once they do jailbreak it, they can install one of several custom firmwares.
I don't think that Google ever unlocked the last functionality built into the Nexus One handset. I haven't run stock firmware for a while because Google wasn't providing support for hardware that I paid for. It took them quite a while to provide the color notifications, and ultimately didn't provide the user with a way of changing the colors, and I'm not sure that stock firmware allows the user to use the built in FM receiver.
You're joking, right? Name one streaming competitor that has a catalog as large as Netflix's? Seriously, as bad as Netflix's catalog is, it does dwarf pretty much everybody elses catalog combined if you eliminate duplicates.
The Dreamworks deal wasn't a terribly bright idea if it cost them that much money. There's tons of content out there that they don't have and if they're going to throw that much money down the drain on that small number of movies, then they're going to have to increase the cost of the service by quite a bit more than what they currently have.
Also, the reason they increased the price had nothing to do with licensing fees, they said so themselves, I'm not sure where people got the idea that licensing fees were related.
In addition to the risk of popping it, you have to realize that there's a tremendous amount of energy there, it's sort of like how you can have a magnitude 5 earthquake and then have a magnitude 9 a few months later, there's just so much energy involved that you're not going to have a relatively minor thing like that bleeding off enough energy for it to make much of a difference.
No, the largest eruption on record only gave like a year of cooled weather, and while these are likely to be substantially larger eruptions, an eruption large enough to produce a climate change mooting atmospheric change would probably go a long ways towards ending life as we know it.
Perhaps somebody knows better, but the way that the effect works, you need a huge change the next year and it diminishes each year as the particles fall out of the atmosphere.
My hunch is basically that it would give us some breathing room, but in the long run we'd still have to get our house in order as we're running out of oil and eventually we'll get to the point where the atmosphere is warming again.
Nice trolling. The reason why your tax dollars should pay for it is that children don't have any control over whom their parents are. You were lucky enough not to be born to somebody that couldn't afford to have children and in civilized parts of the world there's a safety net for that.
And your Chase example is really poor, if you pay the IRS on time you also can avoid paying any extra fees. The IRS doesn't make money without people paying taxes, Chase OTOH gets a percentage cut out of every single transaction you make. So, in other words you end up essentially paying 3% or something like that on top of each and every purchase in order to use the card.
As for the social safety net, you've paid into social security and if you're unable to work due to disability you're not going to starve to death like you would in many parts of the world, it's not a very good safety net, but thanks to the Democrats it still exists.
Personally, I like having roads, a social safety net and a military to prevent invaders from taking over. All of which benefit regularly from pork barrel politics. It's pretty much the only reason why the infrastructure has yet to completely collapse.
They raised the prices by 60% and are providing no additional value. They also opted not to give the customers any indication or evidence that they would be receiving any benefit for the money. There are still competitors out there, but switching isn't always a viable option and in some cases can be pretty inconvenient.
That whole customers are free bullshit doesn't fly when there is no alternative to Netflix's streaming service which is comparable.
Basically if that's the case, then they were dumping and ought to be sued for the related antitrust violations.
As for streaming, the streaming selection sucks, I mean seriously, few releases from the last couple years, selection constantly changing, and what's worse they'll have only certain seasons out of a TV series, the remainder are only provided via DVD.
That's all well and good, but it's really hard for me to believe that it's really costing them that much more to stream movies than it is to send DVDs in the mail. Licensing fees or not.
Monopoly position isn't necessary to get sued for antitrust violations. I'm not sure in this case that tying IE to the computer isn't the same antitrust violation that it was back in the 90s. There is more competition now than there was then, so MS might get away with it, but it's questionable as to whether it's really any less illegal than it was back then.
Also having a monopoly isn't necessarily grounds for being sued either. Right now Amazon is more or less a vertically integrated monopoly in books, they publish, print and distribute books, basically everything except write them. At this stage, I wouldn't expect them to be sued for antitrust violations as they're largely disruptive and increasing the value that consumers can expect for their money.
As opposed to Google which is the main source of revenue for Mozilla. The point is that diversification is good, it was always somewhat of a risk to be getting that large a portion of total revenue from a competitor.
The point of it is diversification. Mozilla is still heavily dependent upon Google for revenue, and even with this switch that will remain the case, but it will somewhat lessen the need for Mozilla to keep in good with Google to keep the dollars flowing.
Also it gives those of us that avoid using Google an alternative that helps fund Mozilla.
I take it you haven't used Bing lately, probably the only advantage that I see to Google is that Google has more granularity with the bots. In practice, I don't typically notice that results from things I'm looking for are reliable when they're less than a day or two old anyways, as they're frequently unanswered posts or in progress.
When I experimented with Bing, I found that the quality was pretty similar to what Google was offering, by which I mean it sucked just as much. I've since moved over to duckduckgo.com which seems to do better than either one in most cases.
The problem is that I want my Senators bringing home the bacon, but don't particularly want Senators from other states doing the same. The problem there is basically that there's a few ways in which this can work its way out, one that nobody gets to because everybody is blocking everybody else, and the second being that pork gets distributed at home.
One of the downsides to elected officials is that they have to convince people to vote for them whenever they're up for re-election which means that you find pork coming home. Consequently the previously mentioned options tend to settle on pork.
If there are not external clues, then all directions are essentially equal.
Plus, you don't typically find yourself in a position where there genuinely are no external clues. Either you have the sun if you're above ground and outside or you have walls if you're inside or underground. Pretty much the only exception would be fog at night.
You're missing the point, if it's able to move down a slope without needing a power source, that does have practical applications. On top of that, you could give it a power source and then not have to worry about running out of hill.
Your a jackass. I take it you don't have anything better to do with your life than to grammar troll slashdot. If you're so offended by typos and a lack of editing, you probably shouldn't be reading summaries here.
Slashdot Mirror
The right tool for the right job. HTML isn't intended for the purpose. PDF was designed for the explicit purpose of taking it to pretty much any computer and opening up, while preserving the formatting, fonts and content that is in the PDF.
HTML is getting better, but it's really not an acceptable solution when you're requiring a number of files per page. Sure, you could zip them all up, but at the end of the day it's the wrong tool for the job.
As far as PDFs go, there's nothing wrong with them that removing the extra functionality couldn't fix. Most of the problems are purely because somebody decided that it would be cool to do more than just format and display documents. Sort of like what happened at MS that gave us word macro viruses.
It's called Adobe Reader, because it reads PDF files, the notion that in this day and age you can have a program that doesn't write out its preferences somewhere is questionable at best. As soon as a program needs to write to disk for any purpose at all, there's going to be the possibility of it being exploited.
I'm not sure where you got the idea that a reader wouldn't do any of those things. A program with any utility at all is going to write to the disk, use the network and/or access DLLS. Unless you're coding the equivalent of a pet rock, you're going to be doing at least one of those things with any program you write.
Well, the vulnerabilities in PDF, if I'm understanding it correctly, are largely a matter of bugs in Acrobat and the scripting abilities that Acrobat supports. Failing to implement the scripting alone would probably go a fair ways towards securely viewing PDFs.
That's sort of the the point. I'm not a good programmer, but when I code, I tend to use Perl, I focus on making the code legible and typically don't take on much with it. Perl works well with that, but there's plenty of folks that use Perl for things that it's not really intended for and don't have any idea what maintainable code should look like.
Ultimately GIGO, you need more than a study like this to determine whether or not Perl is better than a randomly generated programming language. Ultimately, I would be extremely surprised if it were generally true as there's plenty of things in any language that are necessary but wouldn't be guaranteed to be randomly generated.
Sounds more like an issue of EBCAK.
You can make a program that's illegible, blaming Perl for the incompetence or sloth of the people that are writing the code is hardly a fair. What about all those C programs where code is being run from random other files without concern for organization or maintainability?
There's no knowledge involved, just download rom manager and it downloads and installs the ROM for you. At no point does it require any technical knowledge whatsoever to accomplish.
With my game-changin paradigm I'm going to totally disrupt outside of the box with my synergistic relationships and realize great efficiencies of scale by outsourcing labor to an aggressive team of PR strategists in China.
Probably just another pro-Apple troll post. By the time a handset is truly no longer being supported by Android, chances are good that it's out of warranty and you may as well just unlock it and install a custom firmware.
Unless you were dumb enough to get a phone that was tightly locked down with a custom UI, in which case it kind of serves you right.
Only if you were dumb enough to buy a locked phone, the rest of us unlocked our phones when we got them and installed CyanogenMod or something similar. And those that were dumb enough to get a locked down phone are still in a better position than with the iPhone as once they do jailbreak it, they can install one of several custom firmwares.
I don't think that Google ever unlocked the last functionality built into the Nexus One handset. I haven't run stock firmware for a while because Google wasn't providing support for hardware that I paid for. It took them quite a while to provide the color notifications, and ultimately didn't provide the user with a way of changing the colors, and I'm not sure that stock firmware allows the user to use the built in FM receiver.
You're joking, right? Name one streaming competitor that has a catalog as large as Netflix's? Seriously, as bad as Netflix's catalog is, it does dwarf pretty much everybody elses catalog combined if you eliminate duplicates.
The Dreamworks deal wasn't a terribly bright idea if it cost them that much money. There's tons of content out there that they don't have and if they're going to throw that much money down the drain on that small number of movies, then they're going to have to increase the cost of the service by quite a bit more than what they currently have.
Also, the reason they increased the price had nothing to do with licensing fees, they said so themselves, I'm not sure where people got the idea that licensing fees were related.
In addition to the risk of popping it, you have to realize that there's a tremendous amount of energy there, it's sort of like how you can have a magnitude 5 earthquake and then have a magnitude 9 a few months later, there's just so much energy involved that you're not going to have a relatively minor thing like that bleeding off enough energy for it to make much of a difference.
No, the largest eruption on record only gave like a year of cooled weather, and while these are likely to be substantially larger eruptions, an eruption large enough to produce a climate change mooting atmospheric change would probably go a long ways towards ending life as we know it.
Perhaps somebody knows better, but the way that the effect works, you need a huge change the next year and it diminishes each year as the particles fall out of the atmosphere.
My hunch is basically that it would give us some breathing room, but in the long run we'd still have to get our house in order as we're running out of oil and eventually we'll get to the point where the atmosphere is warming again.
Nice trolling. The reason why your tax dollars should pay for it is that children don't have any control over whom their parents are. You were lucky enough not to be born to somebody that couldn't afford to have children and in civilized parts of the world there's a safety net for that.
And your Chase example is really poor, if you pay the IRS on time you also can avoid paying any extra fees. The IRS doesn't make money without people paying taxes, Chase OTOH gets a percentage cut out of every single transaction you make. So, in other words you end up essentially paying 3% or something like that on top of each and every purchase in order to use the card.
As for the social safety net, you've paid into social security and if you're unable to work due to disability you're not going to starve to death like you would in many parts of the world, it's not a very good safety net, but thanks to the Democrats it still exists.
Personally, I like having roads, a social safety net and a military to prevent invaders from taking over. All of which benefit regularly from pork barrel politics. It's pretty much the only reason why the infrastructure has yet to completely collapse.
They raised the prices by 60% and are providing no additional value. They also opted not to give the customers any indication or evidence that they would be receiving any benefit for the money. There are still competitors out there, but switching isn't always a viable option and in some cases can be pretty inconvenient.
That whole customers are free bullshit doesn't fly when there is no alternative to Netflix's streaming service which is comparable.
Basically if that's the case, then they were dumping and ought to be sued for the related antitrust violations.
As for streaming, the streaming selection sucks, I mean seriously, few releases from the last couple years, selection constantly changing, and what's worse they'll have only certain seasons out of a TV series, the remainder are only provided via DVD.
That's all well and good, but it's really hard for me to believe that it's really costing them that much more to stream movies than it is to send DVDs in the mail. Licensing fees or not.
Monopoly position isn't necessary to get sued for antitrust violations. I'm not sure in this case that tying IE to the computer isn't the same antitrust violation that it was back in the 90s. There is more competition now than there was then, so MS might get away with it, but it's questionable as to whether it's really any less illegal than it was back then.
Also having a monopoly isn't necessarily grounds for being sued either. Right now Amazon is more or less a vertically integrated monopoly in books, they publish, print and distribute books, basically everything except write them. At this stage, I wouldn't expect them to be sued for antitrust violations as they're largely disruptive and increasing the value that consumers can expect for their money.
As opposed to Google which is the main source of revenue for Mozilla. The point is that diversification is good, it was always somewhat of a risk to be getting that large a portion of total revenue from a competitor.
The point of it is diversification. Mozilla is still heavily dependent upon Google for revenue, and even with this switch that will remain the case, but it will somewhat lessen the need for Mozilla to keep in good with Google to keep the dollars flowing.
Also it gives those of us that avoid using Google an alternative that helps fund Mozilla.
I take it you haven't used Bing lately, probably the only advantage that I see to Google is that Google has more granularity with the bots. In practice, I don't typically notice that results from things I'm looking for are reliable when they're less than a day or two old anyways, as they're frequently unanswered posts or in progress.
When I experimented with Bing, I found that the quality was pretty similar to what Google was offering, by which I mean it sucked just as much. I've since moved over to duckduckgo.com which seems to do better than either one in most cases.
The problem is that I want my Senators bringing home the bacon, but don't particularly want Senators from other states doing the same. The problem there is basically that there's a few ways in which this can work its way out, one that nobody gets to because everybody is blocking everybody else, and the second being that pork gets distributed at home.
One of the downsides to elected officials is that they have to convince people to vote for them whenever they're up for re-election which means that you find pork coming home. Consequently the previously mentioned options tend to settle on pork.
If there are not external clues, then all directions are essentially equal.
Plus, you don't typically find yourself in a position where there genuinely are no external clues. Either you have the sun if you're above ground and outside or you have walls if you're inside or underground. Pretty much the only exception would be fog at night.
You're missing the point, if it's able to move down a slope without needing a power source, that does have practical applications. On top of that, you could give it a power source and then not have to worry about running out of hill.
Your a jackass. I take it you don't have anything better to do with your life than to grammar troll slashdot. If you're so offended by typos and a lack of editing, you probably shouldn't be reading summaries here.