Posts by Ted Dannington 26 publicly visible posts • joined 20 Aug 2009
I appreciate you used the word "cookie" to try and give non-savvy users a clue about what's happening, but look at all the retardation you've caused in the comments. Cuhh.
This is not "cookies", in the slightest. This is "local storage", a very different thing with a very different purpose. Hence it being different. Cuhh.
*I* tend to assume that anyone browsing without JavaScript in 2011 is incompetent. Incompetent at living in the real world. Incompetent at not living in a fantasy world where JavaScript can bring down the entire internet.
Herp, de derp, de do.
Oh dear chap, do try living in the real world at some point in your life.
Laws can change. The act of speeding (so defined as merely "driving faster than the little number at the side of the road") is not an absolute offence; breaking into someone's house is. You're trying to draw an analogy between something which doesn't *in and of itself* *always* harm someone else, and something which does.
"Speeding" doesn't *necessarily* cause accidents. Driving too fast for the conditions might; not paying attention to the road ahead and your immediate surroundings might. These are not the same, and the incidence of overlap is irrelevant.
Analogy fail.
Oh, *please*.
Your analogy is so invalid I'm falling asleep right here. Was there a perfectly functional existing system like the internet already in existence when the internet was invented? No, no there wasn't. So your analogy of your stupid "dashcom" alternate DNS system to "the internet" completely falls over.
Your sole argument being invalid, we're then still at the state of the previous poster being the last word on this discussion. These retarded ideas have been tried before, and failed, for the same reason this one will. Mostly: because they're retarded. There is no problem to solve (from the end users point of view, which is where the votes will be cast, as it is they who provide your currency (aka traffic)).
I'm sorry but I wasn't aware that every single person launching their LOICs had been proven to be partaking of illegal filesharing. Whatever proof you have of this, which I'm assuming you do have given the self assured nature of your posts, would be very good to have presented to all of us so we can all be as informed and hence righteous as you.
Deliver away.
Alternately, given that you have no idea of the correlation between illegal firesharers and the people using DDoS as protest methods, you could stop being such a silly sausage.
This is not a bubble. This is how life as we know it is going to continue. Nobody is going to do to Facebook what Facebook "did" to MySpace because the people now using Facebook and giving it the bigger status were never using MySpace in the first place. They have a platform which works for them, and aren't jumpship sorts, always looknig for what's next. They are everyday tech-un-savvy sorts. Unless Facebook does something to turn its audience off, its audience will stay there indefinitely. The in-crown and focus of attention may shift to some bright new darlings but Facebook is the defacto social network for your average normo.
I guess it'd be nice if everything were laid out in a nice tabular format too, and if CSS didn't make everything so different and hard to read! What's all this user-participation on the web about, while we're at it?
OnMouseOver is a perfectly valid and useful tool. It was dumb of them to leave a hole open, but not for doing hover-based things. Hover-based things can make stuff miles faster. Try using X-mouse for a while, then living without it, and you'll see.
No it's pretty clear cut. The right of the other people to get to sleep and be able to function properly is greater than her right to make a bunch of noise, and it's /she/ who should be purchasing sound proofing gear as it's her noise affected the other people, not them deciding to be disturbed by it. If you say she has no choice in making these noises, they sure as hell have no choice being woken up by them, and why should they expect to have to deal with it?
P3P was a completely retarded waste of time from the outset. There was nothing at all to stop people from having a perfectly safe-looking P3P policy that no browser would flag a warning about, and then actually doing completely different things with user data in reality.
Unless they propose standardising every single business in the world's backend systems and call centres etc on a single platform so that P3P can interface with it and reflect what's actually happening, or, making having an honest P3P policy part of law so that lying about it will carry some penalty, it'll never work. And I really hope neither of those things happen.
Stupid W3C.
So you ban this extreme sort of thing, and you're happy. For a while everything's good, and Daily Mail readers such as yourself the nation over rejoice.
Time passes and after a while stuff on the scale of Saw and Hostel starts to look distinctly tasteless. With anything more severe being banned, these are now the most severe thing about, and surely, if Grotesque deserved the banhammer, why don't these?
Time passes and with no Saws or Hostels about, the violence portrayed in Tarantino films starts to look distinctly hardcore.
In the end you're left with Bambi, but even that gets censored as the murder scene is far too graphic.
Slippery slopes!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
