Does this seem like a way for Microsoft to require people to mark their pages as "standards compliant" in a Microsoft-specified syntax?
It seems like IE8 users would click the compatibility mode button not because they think the site should render better in IE7, but because it doesn't look right. Won't this populate Microsoft's "render as IE7" list with sites that are just poorly rendered in IE8? Surely this can't be what's going on. It'd be a train wreck in progress. Any good, standards-compliant pages IE8 can't render very well get rendered even more poorly unless you put MS markup in them?
Can't be.
My guess is that MS are engaged in some kind of gambit to pollute the existing DOCTYPE standard somehow, by requiring browser-specifying markup, but it's not clear to me exactly how. Well, IE8 is here. We'll see what happens.
After a little searching I've only found references to Ron Fournier spreading the lie:
"He [Gore] claimed credit for inventing the Internet, and comics had a punch line for months." [November 13, 1999]
"Gore, who once claimed to have invented the Internet, e-mailed Bush and said Democrats won't air TV ads purchased with unlimited, unregulated donations called 'soft money' unless Republicans do so first." [March 15, 2000]
As much as this might be an attempt to trot out the tired and embarrassing net invention misquote, it may actually be fairly correct as phrased.
More accurately, sponsoring legislation in the early 90s to help commercialize the Internet probably contributed greatly to the specific timing of the boom. (Though there'd have been no way to know exactly when.)
Please, if anyone's ever inclined to say "Al Gore invented the Internet", learn to stop embarrassing yourself. You've bought into an intentional misphrasing. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp I think it might have been Rove who invented the smear.
Re:Who cares about history majors...now scientists
on
Cosmetic Neurology
·
· Score: 1
For those following at home:
mrchaotica refers to The Singularity in essence as a "game design bug".
Not in all voting tabulation systems. Note that for some systems, localized calculations do not simply aggregate to result in universal calculations. Thus, universal calculations require access to each individual ballot.
Some systems, like First Past The Post (a.k.a. Plurality) can be embarrassingly parallelized. But Plurality is also embarrassingly bad.
The conclusions from this article's "Report of the Commission on Electronic Voting" agree with yours:
Comparison with Paper Voting
Following the comparative assessment against the paper system of voting that it was requested to carry out, the Commission has concluded that, in terms of secrecy and accuracy, the paper system is moderately superior overall to the chosen electronic system as currently proposed (and in some respects only marginally so) and that, subject to the Commission's recommendations being implemented, the chosen system has the potential to deliver greater accuracy than the paper system and can provide similarly high levels of secrecy.
Indeed, not "extremely accurate". The next sentence is critical to note.
"dedicated to eliminating restrictions of people's right to use, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. It does so by protecting these rights through the GNU General Public License."
What they're talking about is generative freedom. Freedom that's built into the softwares and licenses that the organization and proponents build and use.
Funny you should say that. There are other plugins for viewing molecular models, including CHIME and Jmol. I would recommend Jmol.
But, yeah, if you've got a molecular model built in VRML for some reason (rather than a standard molecular format), you can share that with people.
I build molecular and other kinds of models for customers and demonstrate them via VRML before having them physically "printed". Specialty need, really. Any 3D format (that can nicely render point clouds) would do. I look forward to a nice, standardized, well-adopted format. Something that comes with your browser would be great.
Any pleasing and distracting experience is a potential addiction. So, yes, gaming is addictive.
And the act of playing games can itself be harmful. RSI, time sunk (opportunity costs; responsibilities neglected), and stress. In small enough doses these things aren't bad. But the more pleasing the gaming experience and the more distraction you need, the greater your inclination for larger doses.
Delay of gratification (known to some as "spannungsbogen") is something we should all learn and practice from early on. Teach your children well.
I've had periods of extreme gaming immersion, sometimes with great negative impact. The most recent bout was roughly eight years of FPS (Tribes, CS, and UT2K4). Part of what predisposed me to this was, I believe, the bullying I experienced growing up. Made me more inclined to engage in fighting. Specifically I had a chip on my shoulder and wanted to beat the shit out of people. Not in my daily life, but I loved doing it in video games where the entire point was combat. And I got good at it and it was really gratifying. I earned my peer accolades ("OMG HAX!") and ranked well on the stats servers. But there was a cost: Years of chronically elevated cortisol and epinephrine (adrenaline) levels primed me for health issues. Then some stressful situations that might have been taken in stride instead threw me over the top.
I liked the adrenaline at first. I am now overly sensitive to it.
I know the plural of anecdote is not "data", but I just wanted to share my experience with those on a similar trajectory. Moderation, my friends. Gaming is not without its effects.
I received a call 15 minutes later from FBI Agent Allyn Lynd. Mr. Lynd would not tell me why he raided our datacenter or what he was looking for. He also accused me of hiding inside my house in Ovilla, Texas. I was actually in Phoenix, Arizona when this happened. I told him that, and he told me that he was "getting the dogs" after me, and hung up on me. I found out from an employee that there were 15 police cars and a SWAT team at my home in Ovilla.
Geez, the CEO must be a real criminal to merit that treatment. Better pre-emptively pull out his toenails.
As I understand it, yes, you're right. I was casting about for third declension words ending in -us. Corpus and genus are indeed neuter third declension words, and I shouldn't have used them as examples since octopus is masculine. Knowing that octopus was odd (masculine, ending in -us yet not a second declension; third declension yet ending in -us), I tried to qualify my description with "a kind of third declension... term", but having used the other terms still amounts to a red herring. (It helps to know that the term is not actually octopus, but a spelling with a bar over the u -- a long u.)
I was hoping that the unexpected stem + ending results of genus and corpus would throw people completely off trying to get to a Latin pluralization so that there wouldn't need to be a discussion of octopus's oddity. But this probably only really opened the door for clever yet unsuspecting folk to create (the following is wrong) "octopora" (the preceding is wrong) . I apologize if anyone went that route.
If you want to pluralize octupus in Latin, the term is indeed octopodes.
Looking for simplistic rules to guide your ethics is not really the answer.
I can understand the urge, though. There's lots of good eats out there that would suck to have to give up because we eventually figure out they suffer. But being morally responsible actually means doing the thinking that's involved to understand whether suffering happens, and taking the actions that you can to minimize it.
Don't fall for the trick that "octopi" can be found in some dictionaries.
It's a kind of third declension Latin term (from a Greek term) so it's like corpus or genus rather than campus or focus. The plural of genus is genera, the plural of corpus is corpora. I'd stick with the English pluralization, octopuses.
Whatever they're called, it's probably for the best that you avoid causing them suffering. I'm with you on that.
The fact that people make files of particular formats is not relevant. That they might be told to take a screen capture, for example, with the words "make a JPG of your screen" would instead be a relevant scenario. See the difference? Let's try this:
"here's a tissue for your nose" "here's a Kleenex for your nose"
I don't think we're really at the point of taking this particular "brand" (MP3) as a generic term, so I'm guessing GGP really did mean for people to make MP3s. I'm guessing this (excessive level of) specification was not because he or she thoroughly equates "MP3" with "recording", but more likely because they are accustomed to conceiving of recordings as MP3s. That is, they distinguish between the general concept of recording and the specific encoding by which it can be done, but generally thinks of recordings with a particular codec.
My response is, "No, using a JPG for a screenshot would be silly for what's currently on my screen, when I can get better compression and lossless reproduction with any number of indexed color formats." Similarly, "There are formats other than MP3 and I might suggest that if you're really paranoid you may not want to give the eavesdroppers anything extra to work with, including encoding artifacts in your decoy background sound. Perhaps you really mean recording instead of accidentally overspecifying."
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone know if this is still in effect?
http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/02/19/ie8-standards-mode-opt-in/
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/12/03/compatibility-view-improvements-to-come-in-ie8.aspx
Does this seem like a way for Microsoft to require people to mark their pages as "standards compliant" in a Microsoft-specified syntax?
It seems like IE8 users would click the compatibility mode button not because they think the site should render better in IE7, but because it doesn't look right. Won't this populate Microsoft's "render as IE7" list with sites that are just poorly rendered in IE8? Surely this can't be what's going on. It'd be a train wreck in progress. Any good, standards-compliant pages IE8 can't render very well get rendered even more poorly unless you put MS markup in them?
Can't be.
My guess is that MS are engaged in some kind of gambit to pollute the existing DOCTYPE standard somehow, by requiring browser-specifying markup, but it's not clear to me exactly how. Well, IE8 is here. We'll see what happens.
When is IE6 End-Of-Lifed?
Looks like IE6 gets updates until mid-2010.
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifesupsps/
After a little searching I've only found references to Ron Fournier spreading the lie:
I don't know who came up with it.
As much as this might be an attempt to trot out the tired and embarrassing net invention misquote, it may actually be fairly correct as phrased.
More accurately, sponsoring legislation in the early 90s to help commercialize the Internet probably contributed greatly to the specific timing of the boom. (Though there'd have been no way to know exactly when.)
Please, if anyone's ever inclined to say "Al Gore invented the Internet", learn to stop embarrassing yourself. You've bought into an intentional misphrasing. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp I think it might have been Rove who invented the smear.
For those following at home:
mrchaotica refers to The Singularity in essence as a "game design bug".
OMG HAX
Keep in mind that legality is only somewhat correlated to morality. It certainly is not prescriptive.
The concept of "it's not fair" is pretty subtle. Be careful about how you try to discuss it.
Require the paper printout to be manually taken from the printer and placed in a ballot box.
And/or tally quantity of voters going through a booth and compare to quantity of votes coming from a booth.
I believe this is actually a known and accepted design.
Not in all voting tabulation systems. Note that for some systems, localized calculations do not simply aggregate to result in universal calculations. Thus, universal calculations require access to each individual ballot.
Some systems, like First Past The Post (a.k.a. Plurality) can be embarrassingly parallelized. But Plurality is also embarrassingly bad.
The conclusions from this article's "Report of the Commission on Electronic Voting" agree with yours:
Cool. May I just be the first to thank you pre-emptively for what good service you may do in the future? I think it's awesome.
Any pleasing and distracting experience is a potential addiction. So, yes, gaming is addictive.
Indeed, not "extremely accurate". The next sentence is critical to note.
"dedicated to eliminating restrictions of people's right to use, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. It does so by protecting these rights through the GNU General Public License."
What they're talking about is generative freedom. Freedom that's built into the softwares and licenses that the organization and proponents build and use.
Please don't forget that RMS does believe in copyright for certain uses.
It's easy to get a simplistic (simplistic == "too simple") understanding of his and the FSF's positions.
Funny you should say that. There are other plugins for viewing molecular models, including CHIME and Jmol. I would recommend Jmol.
But, yeah, if you've got a molecular model built in VRML for some reason (rather than a standard molecular format), you can share that with people.
I build molecular and other kinds of models for customers and demonstrate them via VRML before having them physically "printed". Specialty need, really. Any 3D format (that can nicely render point clouds) would do. I look forward to a nice, standardized, well-adopted format. Something that comes with your browser would be great.
Any pleasing and distracting experience is a potential addiction. So, yes, gaming is addictive.
And the act of playing games can itself be harmful. RSI, time sunk (opportunity costs; responsibilities neglected), and stress. In small enough doses these things aren't bad. But the more pleasing the gaming experience and the more distraction you need, the greater your inclination for larger doses.
Delay of gratification (known to some as "spannungsbogen") is something we should all learn and practice from early on. Teach your children well.
I've had periods of extreme gaming immersion, sometimes with great negative impact. The most recent bout was roughly eight years of FPS (Tribes, CS, and UT2K4). Part of what predisposed me to this was, I believe, the bullying I experienced growing up. Made me more inclined to engage in fighting. Specifically I had a chip on my shoulder and wanted to beat the shit out of people. Not in my daily life, but I loved doing it in video games where the entire point was combat. And I got good at it and it was really gratifying. I earned my peer accolades ("OMG HAX!") and ranked well on the stats servers. But there was a cost: Years of chronically elevated cortisol and epinephrine (adrenaline) levels primed me for health issues. Then some stressful situations that might have been taken in stride instead threw me over the top.
I liked the adrenaline at first. I am now overly sensitive to it.
I know the plural of anecdote is not "data", but I just wanted to share my experience with those on a similar trajectory. Moderation, my friends. Gaming is not without its effects.
Do we know for a fact a warrant was not used? This is my point.
Being rude to some guy on a telephone isn't the same thing as a warrantless seizure.
I'm all for screaming about civil injustice. But I'm all against screaming about a reality you only expected instead of the one that actually exists.
Before we let run wild our confirmation biases...
We might wait on news of what the raid is actually about? Man, trotting out the partisanship at this point is pretty ugly.
Speaking of jerky behavior, the agent in charge of the raid was reported by the CEO to have said:
Geez, the CEO must be a real criminal to merit that treatment. Better pre-emptively pull out his toenails.
Ha.
Anyway, the page is a clever idea.
Here's another interpretation to add to the list: Some of the sites that the page pulls images from are Slashdotted.
It's worthwhile research to dig up, good luck with that. Sorry about the rabble.
It won't work -- transparently trying to make religious conservatives look idiotic -- people here are too smart for that.
You need to be a bit more subtle instead of being an outright ridiculous parody.
Well, I hope more people actually care about the feelings of "cheap and abundant" animal life.
As I understand it, yes, you're right. I was casting about for third declension words ending in -us. Corpus and genus are indeed neuter third declension words, and I shouldn't have used them as examples since octopus is masculine. Knowing that octopus was odd (masculine, ending in -us yet not a second declension; third declension yet ending in -us), I tried to qualify my description with "a kind of third declension ... term", but having used the other terms still amounts to a red herring. (It helps to know that the term is not actually octopus, but a spelling with a bar over the u -- a long u.)
I was hoping that the unexpected stem + ending results of genus and corpus would throw people completely off trying to get to a Latin pluralization so that there wouldn't need to be a discussion of octopus's oddity. But this probably only really opened the door for clever yet unsuspecting folk to create (the following is wrong) "octopora" (the preceding is wrong) . I apologize if anyone went that route.
If you want to pluralize octupus in Latin, the term is indeed octopodes.
Looking for simplistic rules to guide your ethics is not really the answer.
I can understand the urge, though. There's lots of good eats out there that would suck to have to give up because we eventually figure out they suffer. But being morally responsible actually means doing the thinking that's involved to understand whether suffering happens, and taking the actions that you can to minimize it.
Don't fall for the trick that "octopi" can be found in some dictionaries.
It's a kind of third declension Latin term (from a Greek term) so it's like corpus or genus rather than campus or focus. The plural of genus is genera, the plural of corpus is corpora. I'd stick with the English pluralization, octopuses.
Whatever they're called, it's probably for the best that you avoid causing them suffering. I'm with you on that.
The fact that people make files of particular formats is not relevant. That they might be told to take a screen capture, for example, with the words "make a JPG of your screen" would instead be a relevant scenario. See the difference? Let's try this:
"here's a tissue for your nose"
"here's a Kleenex for your nose"
I don't think we're really at the point of taking this particular "brand" (MP3) as a generic term, so I'm guessing GGP really did mean for people to make MP3s. I'm guessing this (excessive level of) specification was not because he or she thoroughly equates "MP3" with "recording", but more likely because they are accustomed to conceiving of recordings as MP3s. That is, they distinguish between the general concept of recording and the specific encoding by which it can be done, but generally thinks of recordings with a particular codec.
My response is, "No, using a JPG for a screenshot would be silly for what's currently on my screen, when I can get better compression and lossless reproduction with any number of indexed color formats." Similarly, "There are formats other than MP3 and I might suggest that if you're really paranoid you may not want to give the eavesdroppers anything extra to work with, including encoding artifacts in your decoy background sound. Perhaps you really mean recording instead of accidentally overspecifying."