What are you talking about? Do you suggest that the Delete key is not needed because all these file-manager specific shortcuts combined with right-click context menus and what-mot can be used instead?
Are you trying to say that a relatively standard key is not needed because every single program has it's own proprietary multi-key shortcut to accomplish the same task?
Of course not. The question was how does one delete files without a delete key. That is all I answered. I do not believe that anywhere I made mention of, or implication that I thought removing the delete key was a good idea.
I am lacking the converter for my oldest (and use a generic one)... but it's a 1986 model with the original black AT cable) - it's "birthdate label" is in a pic in our blog post. I had an older one (16 days older) which I gave to my mom with a new computer - somewhere around 2 decades ago. She's went through 5 computers... same keyboard.:-)
Most of my other ones are a bit younger. This one (that I type on now) was born on Feb 5, 1996 in the UK (my only UK keyboard). A few other Model M's and three M13's in the mix (all with non-working Trackpoint IIs - ugh!!!).
But the Delete key??? How do you delete stuff (files, icons,...) without it?
Wow... I feel spoiled that I started computers in the day when there was no mouse or even GUI. Here's what you do (assuming Windows).
- Go to the icon/file/whatever (use the mouse to right-click it) - wait for context menu
- Hit "Shift D" to permanently delete it or hit "D" to move to recycle bin
Failing having a mouse, use the keyboard to change the selection to the one you want, hit Shift-F10 to pull up it's popup menu, then follow deletion steps above.
For multiple files, you can hold shift while selecting through them... mousing to another icon with shift engaged will select first, last and all files inbetween (deletion steps using keyboard the same as above once wanted files are selected).
One can use control while clicking to toggle individual ones... (deletion steps using keyboard the same as above once wanted files are selected).
Nothing personal against you, but do "newer" computer users really not realize that virtually everything already had shortcut/combo keys that worked fine on 101 key or 84 key keyboards? Or that ones could easily be assigned for the non-standard stuff (ie: multimedia/email/crapware buttons)? All these neat new keys (Windows, Combo Menu, etc) are simply one-click duplications of keyboard shortcuts that have existed for almost 30 years. With 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, the two/three key keyboard combinations were really not difficult to begin with.
I use constants but I hate caps lock.
1st, It's really easy to bump by accident.
2nd, when I type in constants, I often use underscores in them, far more frequently than numerals.
I would like a good old mechanical shift lock.
Something with a solid click to it so it's harder to accidentally engage.
When I type in constants, I hold one finger on the shift key and make do with the remaining three fingers on my left hand. I find that much easier than the decidedly odd behaviour.
Get an IBM Model M. The keycap has a chunk taken out of it next to the "A" key to make it more difficult to accidentally hit. Actually, all the keys are pretty much more difficult to accidentally hit due to the key design/layout (deeper left-right curves on the keycaps, generous "V" spacing between each key, etc), curvature of the layout (stepped rows), tactile/mechanical aspect, etc... and of course, they make great bludgeoning weapons that you can still use afterwards to type up the suicide note of the person you beat to death.... umm... not that I would know... I read that somewhere.... really.
Shift F10... works just as well, and since near the "beginning of time" (GUI/Windows/OS.2 speaking).
It's the reason I despise new keyboards with their extra keys (and reduced spacebar sizes). Any decent typist is more than capable of hitting CTRL-ESC or Shift-F10 or the rest of the pre-existing key combinations.
Though, yes, I do understand the benefit to the "not so savvy" computer user, or to the newer generation of computer users who don't realize that virtually all this stuff has had keyboard shortcuts for ages. So, to each their own.
That aside, I do hate some of the newer programs where they have decided to forgo enabling keyboard shortcuts.
Oh, Mr. Ballmer, give it a rest. Microsoft took a lot of flack over their privacy policies just recently. And it's been all over slashdot, so those who visit here know this to be true as well. The answer was their "new, simplified, we really care about such things" privacy policies, which made even "better" use of the term "Business Partner" (err, anyone who pays money to become such a designate). If you search Google, you'll find they have been taking criticism over their (lack of true) privacy policies for about ten years... and simply keep revising them to say the same thing in different words. Much like their new policy on releasing threat (malware) information (where they changed some terms to obsfucate the meaning... but pretty much left the meanings all the same as before).
Ballmer, you aren't fooling anyone with the rewording in the privacy policies... go back to throwing chairs and stop trolling here.
Odd, when every malformed URL has went to MS since time immemorial. And odd, that if you read their privacy statement, TOS, and EULA, you will find they claim to have the right to do exactly these things.
Do you suspect they actually dont do those things, but just like mentioning (errr... burying) them in their various docs about their products and services?
If it works, and works well enough, that will make up for the tangled web of code, so long as it is not too horribly mangled. Sometimes the perfectly designed and combed over implementation loses to the patched together monstrosity because the first one is never released, or is released late, and the second one is out early enough. Sometimes economics trumps an implementation whose code could be read as poetry.
Cobbled together tangled code Far more elegant and hasn't won (in some cases, yet)
Windows OS/2 / Linux / BeOS / MacOSX
Internet Explorer Firefox/Chrome/Safari
MS Bob An Etch-A-Sketch/Kid with crayons/anything really
A great idea that is hacked together with shell scripts and kilometers of spaghetti code can make someone a fortune and (lame as it sounds) change the world.
Not quite. A great idea that is hacked together will almost certainly be "borrowed" and better implemented by someone else, making them a fortune. The world still gets changed, I suppose.
For example, storylines are not inherently subject to copyright, which is lucky for every "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl" romance author.
I think you should have went with a car analogy... honestly, how many slashdotters will understand the analogy you used?
Oops, thanks... I was thinking the Toyota/Tesla/Panasonic deal for some reason... either that or some mention by Panasonic that they intended to make replaceable battery packs for everyone interested. Thanks for the fix!
Copyright law, as specified in the DMCA, is different in that it spells out differences. Willful infringement, and such. Intentional or commercial/for-profit infringement (for music sharing for instance) and not. Some are civil violations, some are criminal. Some of the criminal ones require willful violations (such as this), others (certain civil aspects, such as file sharing) do not.
That's a grossly limited summary that doesnt even come close to covering all bases, and IANAL, thus wont go into more depth on it, but if you read the thing, you'll get an idea of what I am discussing.
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say, but if it is what you think it is, you're wrong in just assuming such, and the law does not allow such assumptions in criminal prosecutions.
Here's an example. I have 4 shelves (and 2 more boxes) of CDs that I have collected over the years. I ALWAYS burn them to mp3 and then DONT use the CDs ever again (except in the case of a bad mp3 or lost file). I used to go through the "scratched disk, buy another" routine (back in the day before mp3's) but have learned my lesson. I don't pirate music. It's all bought-and-paid-for-CDs-turned-to-mp3s. I had my PS2 modded... and made copies of some of my heavily played disks... then put the originals someplace safe. Why? Not because I played pirated games, but instead because I was tired of having bought FF7 THREE damn times, and FF8 TWO times, as my original PS1 had eaten 2 and 1 copies respectively. I don't give out copies, I dont download copies... but I also sure as hell don't wanna have to buy another "OEM" version because it gets fucked up in the player or in handling.
I dont think I've ever seen such happen in any such case brought on by the BSA, ESA, RIAA or MPAA before. Sure, there've been ones where the judge used common sense and was stern... but this judge truly went all out to put the ESA and the prosecutors in their places.
Makes one wonder if they've pulled other shenanigans in his court before or on the cynical side, if they didn't contribute to his last reelection campaign.
Or one of us is the slashdotter who lives in his basement, and set him straight on things when he came home from work/court one day during the trial.;-)
And the kid absolutley did not just hack his X-box. He had a small business selling modded X-boxes to other people, and was recorded by an agent doing exactly that.
I absolutely think that modding should be allowed for several reasons - so I am not siding with the prosecution here. I am just trying to make the facts clear to everyone.
Lemme just correct a few things for you. He was NOT recorded by agents. He was recorded by an ESA Lackey - who broke the law in doing so. He supposedly sold a service of modding xBox consoles... not selling modded consoles. That would actually be worse if it weren't for the fair use claim (he could have claimed he didnt mod the consoles, that someone else did - but that's not the case here, he was taped doing the mod).
The evidence was tainted, and there was no clear chain of custody (ummm... Microsoft to do the evaluation? There's an impartial third party!).
The ESA, government and ??AA caught being sneaky and underhanded in order to fuck over another citizen? I'm surprised it's even news except when the tallies of nefarious activities they've been caught at passes each 100/1000/n+^10 milestone. And yet they still get to do business.
This story is definitely news. The judge went back and read up on the DMCA, allowed for a fair use claim as reasons to mod the things, and then slammed the prosecutors for each and every mistake and lie and crime they committed.
I dont think I've ever seen such happen in any such case brought on by the BSA, ESA, RIAA or MPAA before. Sure, there've been ones where the judge used common sense and was stern... but this judge truly went all out to put the ESA and the prosecutors in their places.
Please tell me you are kidding, right? We aren't just talking about a bulk discount. We are talking about a battery that, as far as I know, is made specifically for this vehicle (as there aren't any off-the-shelf batteries for this capacity, operating conditions, etc). That means there is a huge overhead specifically for these 10,000 batteries.
I suspect you mean the generic cells that Panasonic is making for the Volt? Casings, electronics, etc, are one thing. But the battery cells are truly not that (or any) different from others of their class.
And there's new technologies (including silicon based) that will supplant them before long... or so we are promised.
I can see this directly leading to Google becoming very slightly less popular for search. There were many good reasons to use AltaVista back in its day..
THAT is the most MINOR issue of this. For instance, the TRUE reason the RIAA applauds this is because it gives them grounds for MASSIVE lawsuits. Remember the whole DMCA, and everyone's claims of inability to (at reasonable cost) search out infringing links to remove? Google will very soon be proving they can do so, which opens up the door to lawsuits and them no longer being covered by the DMCA, which has provisions that balance the cost associated with filtering out such content (the whole "undue" hardship portion).
Wait and see... the RIAA have gotta be having a big party over this... lawsuits next (once it's been implemented, has a track record the RIAA can point to proving it works, and enough people do manual searches). That will then be tied to a request for Google's search records and numerous other things. This should be "fun".
I'm at a loss to see what an antivirus software needs with social networking integration. Can you explain; perhaps I'm missing something.
My guess would be it has something to do with, oh, I dunno... the plethora of times people have gotten infected watching videos, playing games, clicking on links, looking at attached images, and so on, on sites like Facebook and MySpace (you know... social networking sites).
I think a lot of people visit those sites nowadays...;-)
If you have to run Windows, the Microsoft Security Essentials package is excellent. I haven't had the urge to uninstall it yet (unlike Avast and AVG), and it doesn't noticeably slow your system. It's free if you have a valid Windows license...
I too have found MSE to be excellent, except for catching the latest pieces of malware, having the ability to ensure a thorough scan is performed, social networking integration, good cross-browser integration and other "minor" stuff like that.
After failing (in the past and recently) to find highly publicized malware that I knew was on a machine (for instance, in the not so recently arena: Antivirus XP anyone? or Whistler? (three months late to that party)) or failing to remove all of the infection, I tried other packages. All but one other found the infected files.
But other than that... it's great! Perhaps it's good for a machine that isn't regularly exposed to the newest and latest pieces of malware... but a number of our customers do not fit that category (nor has MSE proven to be a valid option for them... as we've had to disinfect quite a few machines with other software, deinstall MSE, and install something else).
SCOTUS justices serve "during good behavior," not for life, so if the bribes are egregious enough, well...
True. And as I said, it wasn't indication that any of them were being bribed. I was pointing out that the reasoning ("they serve for life, so why would they accept bribes?") was irrelevant to whether or not they could be, would be or were being bribed.
Though one other things... your sentence should probably have read: "so if the bribes are egregious enough, and they get caught, well..."
Slashdot Mirror
Nice!
What are you talking about? Do you suggest that the Delete key is not needed because all these file-manager specific shortcuts combined with right-click context menus and what-mot can be used instead?
Are you trying to say that a relatively standard key is not needed because every single program has it's own proprietary multi-key shortcut to accomplish the same task?
Of course not. The question was how does one delete files without a delete key. That is all I answered. I do not believe that anywhere I made mention of, or implication that I thought removing the delete key was a good idea.
I am lacking the converter for my oldest (and use a generic one)... but it's a 1986 model with the original black AT cable) - it's "birthdate label" is in a pic in our blog post. I had an older one (16 days older) which I gave to my mom with a new computer - somewhere around 2 decades ago. She's went through 5 computers... same keyboard. :-)
Most of my other ones are a bit younger. This one (that I type on now) was born on Feb 5, 1996 in the UK (my only UK keyboard). A few other Model M's and three M13's in the mix (all with non-working Trackpoint IIs - ugh!!!).
But the Delete key??? How do you delete stuff (files, icons, ...) without it?
Wow... I feel spoiled that I started computers in the day when there was no mouse or even GUI. Here's what you do (assuming Windows).
- Go to the icon/file/whatever (use the mouse to right-click it) - wait for context menu
- Hit "Shift D" to permanently delete it or hit "D" to move to recycle bin
Failing having a mouse, use the keyboard to change the selection to the one you want, hit Shift-F10 to pull up it's popup menu, then follow deletion steps above.
For multiple files, you can hold shift while selecting through them... mousing to another icon with shift engaged will select first, last and all files inbetween (deletion steps using keyboard the same as above once wanted files are selected).
One can use control while clicking to toggle individual ones... (deletion steps using keyboard the same as above once wanted files are selected).
Nothing personal against you, but do "newer" computer users really not realize that virtually everything already had shortcut/combo keys that worked fine on 101 key or 84 key keyboards? Or that ones could easily be assigned for the non-standard stuff (ie: multimedia/email/crapware buttons)? All these neat new keys (Windows, Combo Menu, etc) are simply one-click duplications of keyboard shortcuts that have existed for almost 30 years. With 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, the two/three key keyboard combinations were really not difficult to begin with.
I use constants but I hate caps lock. 1st, It's really easy to bump by accident.
2nd, when I type in constants, I often use underscores in them, far more frequently than numerals.
I would like a good old mechanical shift lock.
Something with a solid click to it so it's harder to accidentally engage.
When I type in constants, I hold one finger on the shift key and make do with the remaining three fingers on my left hand. I find that much easier than the decidedly odd behaviour.
Get an IBM Model M. The keycap has a chunk taken out of it next to the "A" key to make it more difficult to accidentally hit. Actually, all the keys are pretty much more difficult to accidentally hit due to the key design/layout (deeper left-right curves on the keycaps, generous "V" spacing between each key, etc), curvature of the layout (stepped rows), tactile/mechanical aspect, etc... and of course, they make great bludgeoning weapons that you can still use afterwards to type up the suicide note of the person you beat to death.... umm... not that I would know... I read that somewhere.... really.
Shift F10... works just as well, and since near the "beginning of time" (GUI/Windows/OS.2 speaking). It's the reason I despise new keyboards with their extra keys (and reduced spacebar sizes). Any decent typist is more than capable of hitting CTRL-ESC or Shift-F10 or the rest of the pre-existing key combinations. Though, yes, I do understand the benefit to the "not so savvy" computer user, or to the newer generation of computer users who don't realize that virtually all this stuff has had keyboard shortcuts for ages. So, to each their own. That aside, I do hate some of the newer programs where they have decided to forgo enabling keyboard shortcuts.
Get a Man's keyboard. I never have that problem on my Model Ms.
Same here... :-)
The IBM Model M: The World's Greatest PC Keyboard!!!
Oh, Mr. Ballmer, give it a rest. Microsoft took a lot of flack over their privacy policies just recently. And it's been all over slashdot, so those who visit here know this to be true as well. The answer was their "new, simplified, we really care about such things" privacy policies, which made even "better" use of the term "Business Partner" (err, anyone who pays money to become such a designate). If you search Google, you'll find they have been taking criticism over their (lack of true) privacy policies for about ten years... and simply keep revising them to say the same thing in different words. Much like their new policy on releasing threat (malware) information (where they changed some terms to obsfucate the meaning... but pretty much left the meanings all the same as before).
Ballmer, you aren't fooling anyone with the rewording in the privacy policies... go back to throwing chairs and stop trolling here.
Odd, when every malformed URL has went to MS since time immemorial. And odd, that if you read their privacy statement, TOS, and EULA, you will find they claim to have the right to do exactly these things.
Do you suspect they actually dont do those things, but just like mentioning (errr... burying) them in their various docs about their products and services?
Weird, it showed my arrows in the preview...
Cobbled together tangled code /-/ Far more elegant and hasn't won (in some cases, yet)
Windows /-/ OS/2 / Linux / BeOS / MacOSX
Internet Explorer /-/ Firefox/Chrome/Safari
MS Bob /-/ An Etch-A-Sketch/Kid with crayons/anything really
If it works, and works well enough, that will make up for the tangled web of code, so long as it is not too horribly mangled. Sometimes the perfectly designed and combed over implementation loses to the patched together monstrosity because the first one is never released, or is released late, and the second one is out early enough. Sometimes economics trumps an implementation whose code could be read as poetry.
Cobbled together tangled code Far more elegant and hasn't won (in some cases, yet)
Windows OS/2 / Linux / BeOS / MacOSX
Internet Explorer Firefox/Chrome/Safari
MS Bob An Etch-A-Sketch/Kid with crayons/anything really
A great idea that is hacked together with shell scripts and kilometers of spaghetti code can make someone a fortune and (lame as it sounds) change the world.
Not quite. A great idea that is hacked together will almost certainly be "borrowed" and better implemented by someone else, making them a fortune. The world still gets changed, I suppose.
Hi Mr. Gates, are you speaking from experience?
[/endhumorattempt]
Oh, I think plenty of Slashdotters get the first two parts of the analogy. It's that final step that always seems just a little too elusive...
LoL, I stand corrected!!! :-)
(did I actually just type LoL in a post?)
For example, storylines are not inherently subject to copyright, which is lucky for every "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl" romance author.
I think you should have went with a car analogy... honestly, how many slashdotters will understand the analogy you used?
Oops, thanks... I was thinking the Toyota/Tesla/Panasonic deal for some reason... either that or some mention by Panasonic that they intended to make replaceable battery packs for everyone interested. Thanks for the fix!
Copyright law, as specified in the DMCA, is different in that it spells out differences. Willful infringement, and such. Intentional or commercial/for-profit infringement (for music sharing for instance) and not. Some are civil violations, some are criminal. Some of the criminal ones require willful violations (such as this), others (certain civil aspects, such as file sharing) do not.
That's a grossly limited summary that doesnt even come close to covering all bases, and IANAL, thus wont go into more depth on it, but if you read the thing, you'll get an idea of what I am discussing.
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say, but if it is what you think it is, you're wrong in just assuming such, and the law does not allow such assumptions in criminal prosecutions.
Here's an example. I have 4 shelves (and 2 more boxes) of CDs that I have collected over the years. I ALWAYS burn them to mp3 and then DONT use the CDs ever again (except in the case of a bad mp3 or lost file). I used to go through the "scratched disk, buy another" routine (back in the day before mp3's) but have learned my lesson. I don't pirate music. It's all bought-and-paid-for-CDs-turned-to-mp3s. I had my PS2 modded... and made copies of some of my heavily played disks... then put the originals someplace safe. Why? Not because I played pirated games, but instead because I was tired of having bought FF7 THREE damn times, and FF8 TWO times, as my original PS1 had eaten 2 and 1 copies respectively. I don't give out copies, I dont download copies... but I also sure as hell don't wanna have to buy another "OEM" version because it gets fucked up in the player or in handling.
I dont think I've ever seen such happen in any such case brought on by the BSA, ESA, RIAA or MPAA before. Sure, there've been ones where the judge used common sense and was stern... but this judge truly went all out to put the ESA and the prosecutors in their places.
Makes one wonder if they've pulled other shenanigans in his court before or on the cynical side, if they didn't contribute to his last reelection campaign.
Or one of us is the slashdotter who lives in his basement, and set him straight on things when he came home from work/court one day during the trial. ;-)
Whoa ... lets get the facts straight here :-)
And the kid absolutley did not just hack his X-box. He had a small business selling modded X-boxes to other people, and was recorded by an agent doing exactly that.
I absolutely think that modding should be allowed for several reasons - so I am not siding with the prosecution here. I am just trying to make the facts clear to everyone.
Lemme just correct a few things for you. He was NOT recorded by agents. He was recorded by an ESA Lackey - who broke the law in doing so. He supposedly sold a service of modding xBox consoles... not selling modded consoles. That would actually be worse if it weren't for the fair use claim (he could have claimed he didnt mod the consoles, that someone else did - but that's not the case here, he was taped doing the mod).
The evidence was tainted, and there was no clear chain of custody (ummm... Microsoft to do the evaluation? There's an impartial third party!).
At least, that's what I see... then again, IANAL.
The ESA, government and ??AA caught being sneaky and underhanded in order to fuck over another citizen? I'm surprised it's even news except when the tallies of nefarious activities they've been caught at passes each 100/1000/n+^10 milestone. And yet they still get to do business.
This story is definitely news. The judge went back and read up on the DMCA, allowed for a fair use claim as reasons to mod the things, and then slammed the prosecutors for each and every mistake and lie and crime they committed.
I dont think I've ever seen such happen in any such case brought on by the BSA, ESA, RIAA or MPAA before. Sure, there've been ones where the judge used common sense and was stern... but this judge truly went all out to put the ESA and the prosecutors in their places.
Please tell me you are kidding, right? We aren't just talking about a bulk discount. We are talking about a battery that, as far as I know, is made specifically for this vehicle (as there aren't any off-the-shelf batteries for this capacity, operating conditions, etc). That means there is a huge overhead specifically for these 10,000 batteries.
I suspect you mean the generic cells that Panasonic is making for the Volt? Casings, electronics, etc, are one thing. But the battery cells are truly not that (or any) different from others of their class.
And there's new technologies (including silicon based) that will supplant them before long... or so we are promised.
I can see this directly leading to Google becoming very slightly less popular for search. There were many good reasons to use AltaVista back in its day..
THAT is the most MINOR issue of this. For instance, the TRUE reason the RIAA applauds this is because it gives them grounds for MASSIVE lawsuits. Remember the whole DMCA, and everyone's claims of inability to (at reasonable cost) search out infringing links to remove? Google will very soon be proving they can do so, which opens up the door to lawsuits and them no longer being covered by the DMCA, which has provisions that balance the cost associated with filtering out such content (the whole "undue" hardship portion).
Wait and see... the RIAA have gotta be having a big party over this... lawsuits next (once it's been implemented, has a track record the RIAA can point to proving it works, and enough people do manual searches). That will then be tied to a request for Google's search records and numerous other things. This should be "fun".
I'm at a loss to see what an antivirus software needs with social networking integration. Can you explain; perhaps I'm missing something.
My guess would be it has something to do with, oh, I dunno... the plethora of times people have gotten infected watching videos, playing games, clicking on links, looking at attached images, and so on, on sites like Facebook and MySpace (you know... social networking sites).
I think a lot of people visit those sites nowadays... ;-)
What's a decent free one to use?
If you have to run Windows, the Microsoft Security Essentials package is excellent. I haven't had the urge to uninstall it yet (unlike Avast and AVG), and it doesn't noticeably slow your system. It's free if you have a valid Windows license...
I too have found MSE to be excellent, except for catching the latest pieces of malware, having the ability to ensure a thorough scan is performed, social networking integration, good cross-browser integration and other "minor" stuff like that.
After failing (in the past and recently) to find highly publicized malware that I knew was on a machine (for instance, in the not so recently arena: Antivirus XP anyone? or Whistler? (three months late to that party)) or failing to remove all of the infection, I tried other packages. All but one other found the infected files.
But other than that... it's great! Perhaps it's good for a machine that isn't regularly exposed to the newest and latest pieces of malware... but a number of our customers do not fit that category (nor has MSE proven to be a valid option for them... as we've had to disinfect quite a few machines with other software, deinstall MSE, and install something else).
SCOTUS justices serve "during good behavior," not for life, so if the bribes are egregious enough, well...
True. And as I said, it wasn't indication that any of them were being bribed. I was pointing out that the reasoning ("they serve for life, so why would they accept bribes?") was irrelevant to whether or not they could be, would be or were being bribed.
Though one other things... your sentence should probably have read: "so if the bribes are egregious enough, and they get caught, well..."