What about nationality?
380 karma · joined June 10, 2010
> I quickly downloaded it and began the installation process. That went well. I then performed the obligatory Microsoft reboot — it’s 2011 and the software still needs a computer restart, but whatever, I’ll live — and then I opened up the browser.
Wow, if I don't believe in the 'Holocaust', I'm not just an antisemitic, I'm also stupid.
> If the mountains of evidence (records, photos, films, testimony, artifacts) which converge to support the currently accepted interpretation are not sufficient grounds for belief in its reality, then what would be sufficient?
Since people who dare say that they have doubts about the 'Holocaust' are instantly labelled as antisemitic, I doubt that we will ever see evidence that does not support the 'Holocaust'.
What baffles me about this 'Holocaust' story is that it defies logic:
The Germans rounded up hundred thousands of Jewish people and killed them, while fighting both the Russians and the USA, just because they were evil.
You can conjure up mountains of evidence, but it still has plotholes.
Also in order to even begin understanding such a complex thing we require continuity. Why would the Germans do such a thing?
Example:
A killed B.
We should convict A.
But wait:
A killed B, because B wanted to murder A's wife C.
It's not the same.
You may have evidence that A killed B, but that's still not the full story.
So my conclusion is: the 'Holocaust' is not something you can easily prove or disprove of, it's too complex, we will never know what really happened because it's impossible to question the 'Holocaust', without being labelled as an antisemitic.
I neither deny nor confirm the existence of this so called 'Holocaust' because I wasn't there when it happened. And we all know history is written by the winners. I have witnessed first hand how much lies are contained within those history books, that's why I simply don't care and don't believe anything they say.
Also a lot of people died for stupid reasons not just the jews, I don't know what makes them more special than anybody else.
Downvoters: please elaborate before just downvoting because I hurt your beliefs.
> The performance improvements made by the use of DirectWrite and Direct2D allow a new class of Web application to be developed.
Sorry it does not allow anything, IE9 won't make IE8,IE7 and IE6 magically go away. Overall this whole article is pointless, it's just an IE9 praise completely out of touch with reality.
Loose the term 'web page', it's non-existent anymore.
> If it doesn't and you say for example use jQuery for a RIA your on the road to a big ball of mud.
If you don't know how to use it.
> Progressive enhancement is a concept best applied to web pages not applications.
Again: loose your vague buzzwords if you want anybody to take your comments seriously. Progressive enhancement is something that good webdevs do, and lame webdevs ignore, because they are too lazy to look into things.
> Ext.js 4 has full ARIA & 508a support. Your example of YUI does not.
This is a pure lie.
> Name one feature YUI has that Ext.js does not ?
> YUI does not have any decent RIA architecture support, for example MVC.
> YUI like jQuery is good for pages, not complex applications.
I think I have spent enough time on your trollish comments.
Does you claiming the opposite make your comment valuable?
> This is laughable. Microsoft and Google use jQuery for web pages. Not applications. Looks at Gmail and find jQuery there ???
Sorry, I can't take nobody seriously who uses meaningless buzzwords in this context. Your comment is laughable.
> If they want to waste their time and be overtaken by the competition who are making better use of resources they are entitled to make that poor judgement.
Again: poor assumption.
> It takes less resources to extend Ext.js that is does to replicate it.
What if the functionality inside Ext.js is not what you need? You can extend a hammer to make a tank, it's just not practical.
> Spreading FUD about a framework that is completely false is trollish behavior. I did not do that.
Your 1 day old account and your tone suggest otherwise.
You just called a group of people haters because they didn't support your ideals. I think this speaks for itself.
What does commercial-grade mean to you? How many users does that mean? How many tested platforms?
Microsoft and Google uses jQuery and not ExtJS, is that commercial-gradish enough for you? or they probably have "little (if any) real experience" according to you.
> If you go beyond a simple page you need a decent "heavyweight" framework, otherwise you just end up with a big ball of mud or writing your own.
This is a dubious claim, because:
- other people may actually be good at writing their own stuff
- ExtJS may not save you from writing custom stuff, because you may need stuff that aren't included
> Extjs happens to work extremely well for experienced JS devs.
> Illuminations is an outstanding plugin of serious pragmatic use.
Can you support these claims or you just wrote them down to justify your ideals?
> Oh and btw my forms work great - your obviously just a fool who blames the framework instead of your lack of ability which is the real cause.
You are obviously someone engaged in a trollish behavior for some reason.
ExtJS is a library not an API and I fail to see any connection between the JavaScript library you use and web pages or web apps.
> Ive wrote several big ExtJs apps, its not quick nor easy, but the result code is fully customisable, clean and re-usable.
Does it support progressive enhancement? Is it accessible?
> Which framework gives you as much powerful and customisable widgets, with a wide 'projet' approach as ExtJs ?
And btw, I wouldn't use that banner for one reason: I don't promote IE download under no circumstances. IE8/9 may be hot now, but it will suck just as bad in a few years as IE6 now.
The problem with multiply cores is that they have to access memory among other shared resources which really hurts when one core blocks out the other one. Modern operating systems try to be smart about multiply cores, but still twice the core count does not mean twice the speed.
For some reason I can't take this post seriously, it's like a typical troll post, it claims a lot of things but doesn't even try to back them up properly.
There is something we call competition in a free market. Example: when only IE was relevant, Microsoft couldn't care less about making IE better, but when things started to heat up, Microsoft took up the challenge and made IE a lot better.
Apple shipping a default browser and whatnot is good, but not letting developers compete with them is terrible.
Here is an example when Apple was forced to relax it's restrictions: http://my.opera.com/community/countup/
- software can be patented
- math cannot be patented
- all software is basically math
(very simple interpretation, but it scales)
You can always find something that is not right.
> Adam and Eve were perfect. Then they chose not to be perfect.
According to the bible, they didn't know exactly what will happen if they eat from the tree, hence they didn't chose, they were tricked. If they were perfect they should have asked God before they tasted it. The story kind of makes me feel that humans were created to be fools according to the bible.
The story condemns curiosity which is one of the best human traits, without it, we'd be still in the stone age. And of course a hood 'nerd' has to be curious.
> God wanted people to have the ability to love Him of their own free will.
Why not just create love, it would save a lot of time, I know love is not a substance to us... but someone almighty could surely create it.
> Because Satan still serves a purpose. I'm not entirely sure of all of it, but the main purpose seems to be to provide an obvious choice for us. God or Satan, who do you want to serve?
This sounds like God is playing a game with Satan, a very cruel game if you ask me and pointless too, because God knows how it will end anyway. And it also seems that he doesn't kill Satan because then he'd be bored.
About the free will thing:
Let's say you create robots and program them slightly differently. And let then interact with each other. In their view they have free will, in your context however you know exactly what they gonna do, you could calculate it all in advance. So in the end we may not even have free will, we are just complicated.
Se my other comments here, I am not saying that God does not exist, I am saying that the Christian religion is probably wrong about it, it can't be that way.
Here is another plot hole, if god is indeed almighty he could simple strike down all foes instantly. And what are the other angels doing? don't they have free will are they just robots? If Satan is indeed a fallen angel than God, really screwed up, which is again a problem because he is almighty and all knowing.
> The tree was a test for mankind which Satan made Adam and Eve fail.
If god is almighty and all knowing and have created man, and even sees the future, he would have known the outcome in advance, so basically there would have been no reason to do it.
> There's a whole set of rules, that's why he won't kill Satan just now.
Then God is probably not that almighty if he has to stick to rules, instead of hurling a lighting bolt or a ball of fire at Satan.
I am not saying that God can't exist, I am saying that the Christian definition is impossible, a god can't be all of these at once:
- almighty
- all knowing(could see even the future)
- be good/nice whatever
- be perfect
- have free will
And I don't even want to get into Jesus, that would be a huge topic by itself.
No, someone does not believe in the Christian religion because it doesn't make sense. It is self-contradictory, it has so many contradictions that it's impossible to accept it without feeling like an idiot. You could probably find zillions of contradictions, here are some of my favorites:
If god is almighty and sees the future, how come he didn't think of that on damn tree in the middle of paradise?
If god is perfect, how come he failed at making man perfect too?
If god is almighty and the enemy of Satan, how come he doesn't just kill Satan?
If god is good and almighty how come there are so much innocents suffering in the world? Probable answer: because he tests people. But if he sees the future it's needless.
And so on, you get the picture, when the clerics are done sorting these questions out drop me a note.
My method is to remove people who are offline most of the time, so that they don't get to see my online status in return. I think that online status should be mutual, if I can't see them, they shouldn't be able to see me.
Open source software is something both Microsoft and Apple should embrace. If I were them, I would devise a way to enable even GPLv3 apps to coexist.
I thought multi-tasking is a programmer/freelancer skill. There were times when I undertook 5 projects the same time. I was helped by the fact that not all clients were in the same timezone, though I still had to quickly shift between projects and I had no problem with that, I didn't feel that it was anything special.
About information filtering: I go trough HN's full RSS feed along with other news sources I have in my Google reader.
I think the mind manages to create some sort of independent representation of thoughts, sometimes I can't remember if I have seen a movie in English or Hungarian.
I's ridiculous that Yahoo engineers still didn't figure this out yet. The new Yahoo Mail is yet another example, if I access it with a modern browser that it doesn't know, it immediately bitches that it may not work on it, but it would probably not bitch about IE6.
Seriously, Yahoo should get it's act together and stop acting like it's 1995.