I wonder if someone could come up with a Navigator 3 theme for Firefox that would configure the interface to the (vastly superior) Navigator 3 interface.
Give Mozilla a try. It has the Classic theme. It also can run Firefox plugins, has tabs, etc. It's also has more configuration options. Personally I think it's a much better browser than Firefox. Mozilla is everything Netscape 9 should be, but we have Mozilla, so who cares about Netscape?
Everyone who ran that script had a browser configured with default security. MySpace had protections in place to work with that security. Samy found a way around that protection and used it in a malicious manner.
Please learn that "because I can" is not an excuse for malicious behavior, or we might have to take your "live in our society" license away.
There's no harm in doing it as long as it doesn't get to the point where you're really shifting blame rather than protecting yourself.
Except that the original poster sounds like he's keeping a shitlist in case he gets fired for being incompetent or slacking. And then what is the list for? Extortion?
I played Stranger's Wrath, and like you said, it had an anti-corporate message. And it was funny! That seems like proof positive to me that entertaining and message can be mixed in a game.
I've been skeptical since forever when it comes to women authors, especially in male-oriented genres, but I read Robin Hobb's "Assassin's Apprentice", and it was quite good. I'd never would have guessed it was by a female author.
The only non-open thing about it is the Flash Player
Oh is that all? The same player that took years and a skipped version before decent(?) support for Linux came out? No thank you. I've had enough of proprietary solutions.
Now who knows fuck all about web programming? The reason why you think this is broken is because you don't know how the back button works. Seriously. Read the specification. The back button wasn't designed to provide a transparent view of the current system state. It was designed to allow the user to view what they have previously viewed.
I haven't looked at this in years (maybe since 2002), but back then IE did not follow the spec. The back button highlights perfectly the insanity of web development. The spec says that the page SHOULD be displayed as it was, and goes on to explain the pain this will cause developers if this is not done. However, IE ignored this and would refetch the page, depending on some byzantine combination of GET/POST and cache/expiration headers. It was quite a pain coming up with a combination that worked well for web applications. At the time major sites like Amazon had the back button wrong (you would get crappy error messages from the browser when you used it).
I have no idea what IE does today, or Firefox for that matter. However, I read the recent Slashdot story about a CSS book, and all the same nightmares of browser incompatibility, broken and hard to use specs, etc. still apply. Web development is hell. It would be nice to start over and see what a real thin client model would look like if it was done right.
What I am meaning when I say "Old school" is an engine that indexes content and lets the viewer decide what is important.
You know that Google has always used PageRank (link popularity) for this, and you admit it in your very next paragraph. Your point about "old school" makes no sense. Altavista was old school. Yahoo was old school. Google was never "old school".
Quite simply, how does a new, useful _but_ not necessarily popular opinion make it to page one of Google today? I don't think it can, yet it must for the web to be a true information leveller.
The answer is to make it popular (which I see you're trying to do by advertising your web pages on Slashdot). Google's not perfect, and the system is gamed a lot by search engine optimizers, but it's still the most useful search engine I know of. You're arguing for a return of Altavista, where I remember constantly scanning past 100 results to find what I was looking for. These days it's rare if I can't find what I want after a page or two of Google results.
But it seems you missed it. Humans make the bad decisions, not corporations. Those are the people who should be held responsible. Instead, what happens now is that only the corporation is punished, not the guy making decisions, except in rare cases. This has changed somewhat after Enron, but it still isn't the norm. If people were held personally responsible for their uncaring actions, they'd think twice before blindly following the corporate "make profit at all costs" culture.
What you are arguing for is "human-like" punishment of the coporation (which already exists -- they can but shut down, fined, dissolved, etc).
Ok, how about changing the cast of characters? Did you see the Slashdot story about Peter Jackson suing the producers of Lord of the Rings over unpaid royalties? He is using the courts to compel an independent audit. Seems completely legitimate to me, and my sympathies like with Jackson. However, when it comes to Microsoft vs Acme Corporation, the tendency is to recoil in horror/outrage/disgust, even though the principles are the same.
So I guess the answer is that the BSA can't just come barging into your offices if you tell them no at the door, but they can take you to court over it.
That works great if you are only responsible for yourself. Doesn't work so well for people getting paid to produce web pages that look reasonable. I agree with the sentiment though.
You work with CSS and you can't figure out how to escape <angle brackets>? It's < and > if you use "HTML Formatted". Well, at least you previewed:)
This is a great book, but my binding cracked after 2 weeks.
It's probably cracked by design, so that it lays flat. (Credit: I had no idea O'Reilly books did this until reading reading a sibling post about an O'Reilly Python book; I'm just being more explicit and providing a link).
I don't buy too many books from O'Reilly recently, but the last one I bought, Python in a Nutshell [amazon.com] uses a rather novel binding that allows the book to lay flat and is quite durable. I assumed all O'Reilly books would use this newer system.
Hmm, interesting. I haven't bought an O'Reilly book for awhile, but this is good to know. I did some googling, and the binding style is called RepKover. Apparently they stopped using this binding as a cost saving measure in 2001 after the dotcom bust, and resumed it in 2004. They don't use it for all books though (some are too thin or too fat).
Still doesn't mean it follows Moore's Law. If it was just a simple matter of plugging in a computer chip, we'd have SED TV already at a good price. Unless you're an engineer familiar with the technology, it seems to me like you're making baseless assumptions. Neither you nore I have no idea what is driving the price of these TVs, what kinds of barriers the techs are encountering, etc.
Also, there are several classes of applications and problems that cannot be handled well with multiple cores, no matter how much you wish it would. You could have a 3Ghz single core vs. a 2GHz 128 core, and the 3GHz machine may be faster. I think the GHz race will need to continue someday, just not with silicon. Quantum computers here we come!
So, umm, what are these applications that can't benefit from parallel computers but that can benefit from quantum computers? It sounds like you think a quantum computer is just a really fast CPU. Not even close. Quantum computing is not useful for general computing.
I can't think of a single REAL WORLD task that is so massively un-parallelizable that I would prefer a single 3 GHz core over many 2 GHz cores.
Games. Go read some Carmack quotes. He wants a single CPU that goes faster, not many cores. Also, for my desktop I can't think of too many applications that will make use of more cores. I'm not confident that parallel optimization for your average application will occur. I'd definitely take a single 3GHz CPU over two 2GHz cores.
Oh please. Do you actually believe this bullshit story about surveyed "academicians" that inspired the feature? Do you actually think anybody on this project wasn't aware of their competitor, BlueJ, and hadn't seen it in action? The design was *clearly* lifted by somebody who had used BlueJ. Many of the people involved in the patent process must have known this, and they chose to go forward.
LCD does NOT suffer from burn-in. You're the second person in this thread to claim this... where is this misinformation coming from?
LCD burn in. Ok, technically on an LCD it's "image persistence", and unlike a plasma, you can fix it without degrading your television. But it's easy to see how this causes confusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Give Mozilla a try. It has the Classic theme. It also can run Firefox plugins, has tabs, etc. It's also has more configuration options. Personally I think it's a much better browser than Firefox. Mozilla is everything Netscape 9 should be, but we have Mozilla, so who cares about Netscape?
You're Just Plain full of shit there.
Everyone who ran that script had a browser configured with default security. MySpace had protections in place to work with that security. Samy found a way around that protection and used it in a malicious manner.
Please learn that "because I can" is not an excuse for malicious behavior, or we might have to take your "live in our society" license away.
Except that the original poster sounds like he's keeping a shitlist in case he gets fired for being incompetent or slacking. And then what is the list for? Extortion?
I'm pretty sure he wasn't. This guy's attitude about keeping a shitlist seems very real to me. Being cynical is a pretty common Slashdot trait.
Great. Now convince the rest of the world to disband their militaries too. Can't we all just get along?
Preview is your friend.
I played Stranger's Wrath, and like you said, it had an anti-corporate message. And it was funny! That seems like proof positive to me that entertaining and message can be mixed in a game.
I've been skeptical since forever when it comes to women authors, especially in male-oriented genres, but I read Robin Hobb's "Assassin's Apprentice", and it was quite good. I'd never would have guessed it was by a female author.
The biggest limitation on community involvement in MySQL is that you have to transfer copyright to MySQL so that they can sell it for profit.
Oh is that all? The same player that took years and a skipped version before decent(?) support for Linux came out? No thank you. I've had enough of proprietary solutions.
I haven't looked at this in years (maybe since 2002), but back then IE did not follow the spec. The back button highlights perfectly the insanity of web development. The spec says that the page SHOULD be displayed as it was, and goes on to explain the pain this will cause developers if this is not done. However, IE ignored this and would refetch the page, depending on some byzantine combination of GET/POST and cache/expiration headers. It was quite a pain coming up with a combination that worked well for web applications. At the time major sites like Amazon had the back button wrong (you would get crappy error messages from the browser when you used it).
I have no idea what IE does today, or Firefox for that matter. However, I read the recent Slashdot story about a CSS book, and all the same nightmares of browser incompatibility, broken and hard to use specs, etc. still apply. Web development is hell. It would be nice to start over and see what a real thin client model would look like if it was done right.
You know that Google has always used PageRank (link popularity) for this, and you admit it in your very next paragraph. Your point about "old school" makes no sense. Altavista was old school. Yahoo was old school. Google was never "old school".
The answer is to make it popular (which I see you're trying to do by advertising your web pages on Slashdot). Google's not perfect, and the system is gamed a lot by search engine optimizers, but it's still the most useful search engine I know of. You're arguing for a return of Altavista, where I remember constantly scanning past 100 results to find what I was looking for. These days it's rare if I can't find what I want after a page or two of Google results.
But it seems you missed it. Humans make the bad decisions, not corporations. Those are the people who should be held responsible. Instead, what happens now is that only the corporation is punished, not the guy making decisions, except in rare cases. This has changed somewhat after Enron, but it still isn't the norm. If people were held personally responsible for their uncaring actions, they'd think twice before blindly following the corporate "make profit at all costs" culture.
What you are arguing for is "human-like" punishment of the coporation (which already exists -- they can but shut down, fined, dissolved, etc).
Ok, how about changing the cast of characters? Did you see the Slashdot story about Peter Jackson suing the producers of Lord of the Rings over unpaid royalties? He is using the courts to compel an independent audit. Seems completely legitimate to me, and my sympathies like with Jackson. However, when it comes to Microsoft vs Acme Corporation, the tendency is to recoil in horror/outrage/disgust, even though the principles are the same.
So I guess the answer is that the BSA can't just come barging into your offices if you tell them no at the door, but they can take you to court over it.
That works great if you are only responsible for yourself. Doesn't work so well for people getting paid to produce web pages that look reasonable. I agree with the sentiment though.
You work with CSS and you can't figure out how to escape <angle brackets>? It's < and > if you use "HTML Formatted". Well, at least you previewed :)
It's probably cracked by design, so that it lays flat. (Credit: I had no idea O'Reilly books did this until reading reading a sibling post about an O'Reilly Python book; I'm just being more explicit and providing a link).
Hmm, interesting. I haven't bought an O'Reilly book for awhile, but this is good to know. I did some googling, and the binding style is called RepKover. Apparently they stopped using this binding as a cost saving measure in 2001 after the dotcom bust, and resumed it in 2004. They don't use it for all books though (some are too thin or too fat).
When did Google "buy into" blogging? Google has always been about being heavily linked to. That was the driving idea of their search engine.
Still doesn't mean it follows Moore's Law. If it was just a simple matter of plugging in a computer chip, we'd have SED TV already at a good price. Unless you're an engineer familiar with the technology, it seems to me like you're making baseless assumptions. Neither you nore I have no idea what is driving the price of these TVs, what kinds of barriers the techs are encountering, etc.
Yes, that's been the case for at least 4 years now. That's why there's been the push for multiple cores. The Free Lunch is Over
So, umm, what are these applications that can't benefit from parallel computers but that can benefit from quantum computers? It sounds like you think a quantum computer is just a really fast CPU. Not even close. Quantum computing is not useful for general computing.
Games. Go read some Carmack quotes. He wants a single CPU that goes faster, not many cores. Also, for my desktop I can't think of too many applications that will make use of more cores. I'm not confident that parallel optimization for your average application will occur. I'd definitely take a single 3GHz CPU over two 2GHz cores.
Oh please. Do you actually believe this bullshit story about surveyed "academicians" that inspired the feature? Do you actually think anybody on this project wasn't aware of their competitor, BlueJ, and hadn't seen it in action? The design was *clearly* lifted by somebody who had used BlueJ. Many of the people involved in the patent process must have known this, and they chose to go forward.
LCD burn in. Ok, technically on an LCD it's "image persistence", and unlike a plasma, you can fix it without degrading your television. But it's easy to see how this causes confusion.