I suspect the poster meant client-side variations of VB. MS wanted VB-script in browsers to compete with client-side JavaScript.
The plan failed and VB-script is mostly dead on the client-side, but indeed is still common server-side, in desktop apps (as VBA), and for OS scripting.
Time for an ad-intrusion rating system, somewhat like movie ratings. A site and/or ads that want to be rated would pay to be audited and rated. Browsers would have to option of skipping sites with poor ratings and/or shutting off images, JS, etc.
Because sites would risk losing traffic if they have poorly-rated ads, they'd have an incentive to pay for being rated and monitored.
It would probably take a mutual agreement among at least a few big tech companies to get enough momentum to take hold.
Jeb, Colin, Rove, Mitt, et. al. have been known to do problematic things with email and/or computer equipment, YET Republicans didn't seem to care at the time. Now it's The Most Important Issue in the World!
It appears to be opportunistic drama-kinging* to me.
We had 3 choices here, an area with a relatively large population. Choice A sucked badly so we tried B. But B sucked badly also so we were just about to try C, when C merged with B, and now we only have A and B, and they both suck.
I suspect it's "realistic" for conservatives to accept that 90+% percent of climatologists lie for money because most conservatives themselves do and believe that's normal in the work-place: it's a "salesy" world, after all. That's the only coherent explanation I can find for believing such a huge portion of scientists would flat out lie. You are welcome to offer another explanation.
Trump is neither conservative nor liberal, so this whole Facebook bias brouhaha may not even apply him.
He'd probably crash any AI bot designed to test for conservative/liberal bias, exposing all the edge cases where the rule coder thought, "Naw, no politician would ever say anything wacky enough to expose this little hole."
Hard to tell a liberal apart from a conservative these days.
Simple:
The conservative politician takes bribes from plutocrats and polluters to claim global warming is fake and that tax-cuts for the rich creates more jobs.
The liberal politician takes bribes from plutocrats and polluters, claims global warming is real and that tax-cuts for the the rich will not create more jobs, YET lets polluters pollute and gives tax-cuts to the rich anyhow.
Batteries and fat fryers. What could possibly go wrong?
They could take "freshly cooked" to the max if you receive the chicken uncooked, and push a button on the box to fry it at your table or in your car on the way home.
"You can't connect the dots looking forward," Jobs passionately said, "you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something -- your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever...
Ironic, since the Republicans got their Senate majority in part by the running of ads claiming O is spying on citizens. (Disclaimer: the group who created the ad may be independent of actual Senate candidates.)
Most content comes from "developed" nations because such nations have more entertainment consumers and people who can afford devices to play/run content. Therefore such nations have a vested interest in reinforcing intellectual property (IP). Piracy thus "hurts" the less-developed nations less, and therefore there is less incentive to enforce IP laws there.
Developed nations generally have higher average IQ's because they have better education systems and better average nutrition.
These two factors are likely unrelated. Correlation is not necessarily causation.
So when people the like the FBI director make asinine statements like how people will switch to non US crypto technologies and message platforms only 'theoretically' they should respond with laughter.
That guy should just shut up. Lobbying is NOT his damned job. The agency can publish a normal position paper and then move on.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does that make any difference?
All 3 choices were crappy:
1. Own personal server
2. Commercial service, like AOL
3. State Dept. regular email server (which got hacked, by the way).
Why should any one be elevated above the other? It's like a choice between a Yugo, Pinto, and Chevy Chevette.
I'm sure you are both an email lawyer and a mind reader. Congratulations!
I suspect the poster meant client-side variations of VB. MS wanted VB-script in browsers to compete with client-side JavaScript.
The plan failed and VB-script is mostly dead on the client-side, but indeed is still common server-side, in desktop apps (as VBA), and for OS scripting.
Time for an ad-intrusion rating system, somewhat like movie ratings. A site and/or ads that want to be rated would pay to be audited and rated. Browsers would have to option of skipping sites with poor ratings and/or shutting off images, JS, etc.
Because sites would risk losing traffic if they have poorly-rated ads, they'd have an incentive to pay for being rated and monitored.
It would probably take a mutual agreement among at least a few big tech companies to get enough momentum to take hold.
Jeb, Colin, Rove, Mitt, et. al. have been known to do problematic things with email and/or computer equipment, YET Republicans didn't seem to care at the time. Now it's The Most Important Issue in the World!
It appears to be opportunistic drama-kinging* to me.
* Gender rotation to be PC
Um, do you have direct evidence of this motivation, or do you claim to be a mind-reader?
Gonna be a hoot when they include themselves in their "Top 10 entertainment hacks" video.
I wouldn't know, due to our lousy ISP the images of the sky look orange, the sun is stuck behind an upload spinner, and water looks metallic.
(Maybe I should try that outdoor walking thing muggles talk about.)
We had 3 choices here, an area with a relatively large population. Choice A sucked badly so we tried B. But B sucked badly also so we were just about to try C, when C merged with B, and now we only have A and B, and they both suck.
I suspect it's "realistic" for conservatives to accept that 90+% percent of climatologists lie for money because most conservatives themselves do and believe that's normal in the work-place: it's a "salesy" world, after all. That's the only coherent explanation I can find for believing such a huge portion of scientists would flat out lie. You are welcome to offer another explanation.
The regular State Dept. email server was ALSO "insecure". It got hacked.
And I doubt Trump is the kind who is careful about IT policy. He's not careful about anything, except maybe his hair.
Trump is neither conservative nor liberal, so this whole Facebook bias brouhaha may not even apply him.
He'd probably crash any AI bot designed to test for conservative/liberal bias, exposing all the edge cases where the rule coder thought, "Naw, no politician would ever say anything wacky enough to expose this little hole."
Simple:
The conservative politician takes bribes from plutocrats and polluters to claim global warming is fake and that tax-cuts for the rich creates more jobs.
The liberal politician takes bribes from plutocrats and polluters, claims global warming is real and that tax-cuts for the the rich will not create more jobs, YET lets polluters pollute and gives tax-cuts to the rich anyhow.
So, they shot the bias claims full of holes, eh.
I abused my Roomba in oh so many ways. I'm going to jail and Hell.
Whadda deal!, you get:
1. Fried chicken
2. Phone charger
3. Mini-TARDIS
Kentucky Fried Marketers
They could take "freshly cooked" to the max if you receive the chicken uncooked, and push a button on the box to fry it at your table or in your car on the way home.
Worked for Jar Jar also
Staffers were probably thinking, "Oh good, a big juicy user-signup bonus check!", not unlike the no-doc loan grab that crashed the world economy.
Ironic, since the Republicans got their Senate majority in part by the running of ads claiming O is spying on citizens. (Disclaimer: the group who created the ad may be independent of actual Senate candidates.)
It's okay, our stupid ideas are protected by the DMCA, which the Godless commies haven't swiped yet.
Hotties licking ice-cream could perhaps trigger certain thoughts that lead to problems. You can't rule it out.
Most content comes from "developed" nations because such nations have more entertainment consumers and people who can afford devices to play/run content. Therefore such nations have a vested interest in reinforcing intellectual property (IP). Piracy thus "hurts" the less-developed nations less, and therefore there is less incentive to enforce IP laws there.
Developed nations generally have higher average IQ's because they have better education systems and better average nutrition.
These two factors are likely unrelated. Correlation is not necessarily causation.
That guy should just shut up. Lobbying is NOT his damned job. The agency can publish a normal position paper and then move on.