I could be wrong, but I was under the distinct impression that the iPhone would do POP3/IMAP4, just like pretty much every other phone released in the past 12-24 months.
"Businesses probably shouldn't rely on proprietary communications technology, because people will bitch and moan when they discover that it is, in fact, proprietary"
Plug FOAF, Atom and OpenID together on a blogging platform, and a public distributed social networking system is precisely what you have.
People use Facebook, MySpace, et al, because they require zero technical knowledge to use: the unfortunate downside is that people who do have technical smarts and still want to participate can't use open standards and their own hosting/platforms to do so.
Because in the telecoms world, it's not just your network.
Telecoms are a tightly regulated industry to prevent monopolies (which are very easy to create, especially given historical and geographical factors), and if you operate your network in a manner which classifies you as operating a public network, you need to play by the rules for running public telecoms networks.
If you don't like those rules, build a network just for yourself and your friends and keep it private.
NT handles Unicode character storage and manipulation just fine, yes.
Unicode font rendering (automatically selecting the a font which contains a particular character, because generally no font contains all Unicode characters, and if one did exist, it probably wouldn't be the text font in use) is a different matter altogether.
Mac OS X does sane font substitution when faces don't include a particular character. On Windows, AFAIK, typing a Japanese glyph when using a font that doesn't support that code point will result in the square block--on the Mac, the type renderer will find the closest visual match (in terms of style) for a font that does include the code point and use that for those glyphs.
Ah yes, the old "it doesn't work for me, so it can't possibly have worked for anybody else" mentality.
Why does everybody who's found a bug of some kind [in anything, not just Safari] assume the particular set of circumstances which trigger it (which are usually largely unknown to the user insofar as it relates to the software in question) are so common that everybody must be suffering from it?
If they've carried the keystrokes over from the Mac version, it'll be Cmd+Shift+[ and Cmd+Shift+], which on windows would be Ctrl+Shift+[ and Ctrl+Shift+]
It's a beta. Safari 3 hasn't been released yet. The only version number worth paying attention to is the build number (and that assumes it gets updated properly--I don't know what the updated version's is, but I assume it's not 522.11)
The issue there is that Mac OS X's own international character support does all the hard work for the applications: they don't generally need to worry about it. On Windows, it's a very different story, which means it'll take Apple more than a couple of days to make WebKit/Win32 deal with it all as elegantly as it does on OS X.
I think you'll find there is information about you in the public domain, you'd be in a distinct minority if there wasn't--good luck finding out who's got it, though! Beyond that, note that the likes of banks, credit reference agencies, etc., have special permission to go rifling through the hidden part of the electoral roll.
The simple fact is that unless you close your bank accounts, break the law by not registering on the electoral roll or the council tax register, live in accommodation in somebody else's name--or on the streets, don't have a telephone, and avoid anywhere that there's CCTV (rather difficult in the UK, at any rate), you're going to find it impossible from preventing third parties access to your personal information. Additionally, unless you pay extremely close scrutiny 100% of the time, you're not going to know who has it.
The DPA gives you the ability to get a copy of it, and make sure that it's correct. It prevents most organisations from keeping hold of it for longer than a few years (by which time it's likely irrelevant anyway), and it prevents them from distributing it unless you unwittingly gave them permission to do so like so many people do without realising it.
The statement of "it doesn't matter whether it is in the public domain or not, you cannot aggregate information unless you have consent" is either patent bollocks, or you have a warped view of "public domain"that doesn't match anybody else's. At all.
That does nothing about information in the public domain...which is all of the interesting stuff anyway. Beyond that, pretty much every company has a clause in its T&Cs that says it will merrily share any information you give with selected partners, even if they're not allowed to use it for marketing purposes. Plus it's not like anybody reads the agreements anyway, especially outside of online services. The way that modern business works means that getting goods and services isn't just about paying money any more, it's about paying money and handing over information. Don't hand it over, you'll have to go elsewhere... if you can find somewhere.
Seriously, the DPA has no teeth. It does information collecting services more favours than it hinders them.
No; the only real purpose of the Act is to make sure that the information in these massive databases is correct, under the auspices of doing some sort of favour to the public. It does nothing to stop them collecting information that you unwittingly make available, directly or otherwise.
There is a relatively ineffective legal framework governing how collected information can be disseminated, but it's not really stopped the likes of, say, the credit reference agencies from doing what they've always done--which invariably is far more insidious than anything Google gets up to (when Google starts being able to identify me and my habits by my postal address and provides a history of my activities to my bank when I apply for a loan, then I worry).
The Act really is about doing the collating companies a favour. You, as a member of the public, are encouraged to tell them when they've got their information about you wrong. They need never bother checking again: embittered citizens--marching on about how they've achieved some sort of victory by getting their postal address updated in some database--will do it for them!
Clueless people running $software don't keep it up to date! Film at 11!
You either do it yourself and accept the consequences, or find a host with a clue. wordpress.com will even host it for you for the ultra-easy-free option (though they'll charge for extra features).
Just like... well, everything else you might run on a server. Including the OS.
There's an even better way. Kill.com,.net,.org, etc, and force everybody to register under ccTLDs. Have an active presence in multiple countries? No problem, register under as many ccTLDs as you like: the country's registry gets to decide the rules for each, so they can specify (if they wish) that you must have a physical address in that country in order to register, for example (I believe a few ccTLDs have this requirement as it stands).
The non-country-TLDs, with the exception of.int and.arpa, were a terrible idea from the start and should have been dropped a long time ago.
Er, no: ONE of those items mentioned has been delayed.
The AppleTV launched on time, I believe? The iPhone is still scheduled for the June release that was originally announced way back when the product was introduced. The only slippage was Leopard.
That's lovely, but the US does have a clear history of ignoring anything it doesn't deem "in its best interests" like...the International Criminal Court, whose jurisdiction it fails to recognise.
No; the only reason SIP works through NAPT now is because vendors got together and implemented lots of dirty hacks to make it happen. SIP as specified assumes that there is no translation going on, and that the local IP is the same as the source address in the packets that the destination will receive.
The fact that SIP had these problems from the outset is part of what made Skype so appealing: when Skype was launched, SIP setups were pretty much a no-go by the vast majority of consumers. Now, thankfully, things are a little different, but vendors had to work around the problems inherent in the SIP protocol to overcome that.
Increasingly, telcos are using SIP for trunking (where NAT/PAT/NAPT issues don't actually affect them on their own core networks), but I'm led to believe that newer implementations of H.323 are starting to emerge at the edge which cope far more effectively with NAT than SIP ever has.
According to my wife (a Scottish secondary school teacher who grew up in both Scotland and England), a lot of schools make Maths & English Highers compulsory, but the English schools' Maths A-Level is a lot harder than the Scottish Maths Higher... which would explain that.
Slashdot Mirror
MS, to an extent, but mostly RIM.
I could be wrong, but I was under the distinct impression that the iPhone would do POP3/IMAP4, just like pretty much every other phone released in the past 12-24 months.
"Businesses probably shouldn't rely on proprietary communications technology, because people will bitch and moan when they discover that it is, in fact, proprietary"
Film at 11.
Plug FOAF, Atom and OpenID together on a blogging platform, and a public distributed social networking system is precisely what you have.
People use Facebook, MySpace, et al, because they require zero technical knowledge to use: the unfortunate downside is that people who do have technical smarts and still want to participate can't use open standards and their own hosting/platforms to do so.
Because in the telecoms world, it's not just your network.
Telecoms are a tightly regulated industry to prevent monopolies (which are very easy to create, especially given historical and geographical factors), and if you operate your network in a manner which classifies you as operating a public network, you need to play by the rules for running public telecoms networks.
If you don't like those rules, build a network just for yourself and your friends and keep it private.
NT handles Unicode character storage and manipulation just fine, yes.
Unicode font rendering (automatically selecting the a font which contains a particular character, because generally no font contains all Unicode characters, and if one did exist, it probably wouldn't be the text font in use) is a different matter altogether.
Mac OS X does sane font substitution when faces don't include a particular character. On Windows, AFAIK, typing a Japanese glyph when using a font that doesn't support that code point will result in the square block--on the Mac, the type renderer will find the closest visual match (in terms of style) for a font that does include the code point and use that for those glyphs.
Ah yes, the old "it doesn't work for me, so it can't possibly have worked for anybody else" mentality.
Why does everybody who's found a bug of some kind [in anything, not just Safari] assume the particular set of circumstances which trigger it (which are usually largely unknown to the user insofar as it relates to the software in question) are so common that everybody must be suffering from it?
If they've carried the keystrokes over from the Mac version, it'll be Cmd+Shift+[ and Cmd+Shift+], which on windows would be Ctrl+Shift+[ and Ctrl+Shift+]
Neither release was 3 nor 3.0.1, really.
It's a beta. Safari 3 hasn't been released yet. The only version number worth paying attention to is the build number (and that assumes it gets updated properly--I don't know what the updated version's is, but I assume it's not 522.11)
And also, did you report the issue to Apple?
Er, you don't have to give an e-mail address to download it, just to sign up.
Leave the box blank and the check-box ticked and it still downloads.
The issue there is that Mac OS X's own international character support does all the hard work for the applications: they don't generally need to worry about it. On Windows, it's a very different story, which means it'll take Apple more than a couple of days to make WebKit/Win32 deal with it all as elegantly as it does on OS X.
Er, obviously there should be a "not" in the second sentence there...
No; the product is confirmed when Apple announce it.
It's confirmed because some partner might possibly maybe has designs on building such a device (especially when they work with other companies too).
The UK was an example close to hand; to the best of my knowledge no country in the EU fares any better.
I think you'll find there is information about you in the public domain, you'd be in a distinct minority if there wasn't--good luck finding out who's got it, though! Beyond that, note that the likes of banks, credit reference agencies, etc., have special permission to go rifling through the hidden part of the electoral roll.
The simple fact is that unless you close your bank accounts, break the law by not registering on the electoral roll or the council tax register, live in accommodation in somebody else's name--or on the streets, don't have a telephone, and avoid anywhere that there's CCTV (rather difficult in the UK, at any rate), you're going to find it impossible from preventing third parties access to your personal information. Additionally, unless you pay extremely close scrutiny 100% of the time, you're not going to know who has it.
The DPA gives you the ability to get a copy of it, and make sure that it's correct. It prevents most organisations from keeping hold of it for longer than a few years (by which time it's likely irrelevant anyway), and it prevents them from distributing it unless you unwittingly gave them permission to do so like so many people do without realising it.
The statement of "it doesn't matter whether it is in the public domain or not, you cannot aggregate information unless you have consent" is either patent bollocks, or you have a warped view of "public domain"that doesn't match anybody else's. At all.
That does nothing about information in the public domain...which is all of the interesting stuff anyway. Beyond that, pretty much every company has a clause in its T&Cs that says it will merrily share any information you give with selected partners, even if they're not allowed to use it for marketing purposes. Plus it's not like anybody reads the agreements anyway, especially outside of online services. The way that modern business works means that getting goods and services isn't just about paying money any more, it's about paying money and handing over information. Don't hand it over, you'll have to go elsewhere... if you can find somewhere.
Seriously, the DPA has no teeth. It does information collecting services more favours than it hinders them.
No; the only real purpose of the Act is to make sure that the information in these massive databases is correct, under the auspices of doing some sort of favour to the public. It does nothing to stop them collecting information that you unwittingly make available, directly or otherwise.
There is a relatively ineffective legal framework governing how collected information can be disseminated, but it's not really stopped the likes of, say, the credit reference agencies from doing what they've always done--which invariably is far more insidious than anything Google gets up to (when Google starts being able to identify me and my habits by my postal address and provides a history of my activities to my bank when I apply for a loan, then I worry).
The Act really is about doing the collating companies a favour. You, as a member of the public, are encouraged to tell them when they've got their information about you wrong. They need never bother checking again: embittered citizens--marching on about how they've achieved some sort of victory by getting their postal address updated in some database--will do it for them!
Clueless people running $software don't keep it up to date! Film at 11!
You either do it yourself and accept the consequences, or find a host with a clue. wordpress.com will even host it for you for the ultra-easy-free option (though they'll charge for extra features).
Just like... well, everything else you might run on a server. Including the OS.
There's an even better way. Kill .com, .net, .org, etc, and force everybody to register under ccTLDs. Have an active presence in multiple countries? No problem, register under as many ccTLDs as you like: the country's registry gets to decide the rules for each, so they can specify (if they wish) that you must have a physical address in that country in order to register, for example (I believe a few ccTLDs have this requirement as it stands).
.int and .arpa, were a terrible idea from the start and should have been dropped a long time ago.
The non-country-TLDs, with the exception of
No.
n al.dtd) doesn't have to be a URL. It could be a URN, or some other kind of URI.
The URI there (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitio
In other words, it's just an identifier--using a URL was just a nice easy way of making sure it was unique.
Er, no: ONE of those items mentioned has been delayed.
The AppleTV launched on time, I believe? The iPhone is still scheduled for the June release that was originally announced way back when the product was introduced. The only slippage was Leopard.
That's lovely, but the US does have a clear history of ignoring anything it doesn't deem "in its best interests" like...the International Criminal Court, whose jurisdiction it fails to recognise.
No; the only reason SIP works through NAPT now is because vendors got together and implemented lots of dirty hacks to make it happen. SIP as specified assumes that there is no translation going on, and that the local IP is the same as the source address in the packets that the destination will receive.
The fact that SIP had these problems from the outset is part of what made Skype so appealing: when Skype was launched, SIP setups were pretty much a no-go by the vast majority of consumers. Now, thankfully, things are a little different, but vendors had to work around the problems inherent in the SIP protocol to overcome that.
Increasingly, telcos are using SIP for trunking (where NAT/PAT/NAPT issues don't actually affect them on their own core networks), but I'm led to believe that newer implementations of H.323 are starting to emerge at the edge which cope far more effectively with NAT than SIP ever has.
Sun is using the Classpath exception to specifically prevent this problem from occurring.
A piece of malware that alters DNS servers is trivial.
.bank is a whole heap lower...
Suddenly the barrier-for-entry for
According to my wife (a Scottish secondary school teacher who grew up in both Scotland and England), a lot of schools make Maths & English Highers compulsory, but the English schools' Maths A-Level is a lot harder than the Scottish Maths Higher... which would explain that.