One feller's views on the state of everyday computer science & its application (and now, OTHER STUFF) who isn't rich enough to shell out for www.myfreakinfirst-andlast-name.com
Using 89% of the same design the blog had in 2001.
FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY!!!
Back-up your data and, when you bike,
always wear white.
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Affiliate links in green.
From a blog on the Washington Times website titled "Why haven't we outgrown fairy tales?" focused mainly on current show "Once Upon a Time" and some upcoming movies:
Maria Tatar, Harvard University folklore and mythology professor, explains why fairy tales and their fans are timeless.
I did a quick search for "copyright", which doesn't seem to appear [in the article here]. And copyright is the answer. Way to go, Dr. Tatar. Anything before 1923 is in the public domain in the United States. Nobody's going to sue you for copying Hansel and Gretel, no matter how badly you do it. These stories keep getting used because it's easier to repackage a past, successful plot than to create one from whole cloth, and there are no royalties to pay to the public domain. If you can license Batman, great. Otherwise, you're quickly drawn to what we all own, stories in the public domain. Did Shakespeare write one wholly original play? The question is why we don't force our government to go back to a copyright system that continually puts valuable property into the public domain for reuse -- and subsequent value we can all share successfully like the shows mentioned here. Copyright is supposed to feed the public domain once the value of exclusive ownership has been sapped for a fair period. Then it belongs to all of us. And let's face it, no idea is created in a bubble. We all contribute to society's values and mores. And society ultimately belongs to us. A little more about the history on the hijacking of copyright here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
As noted just after the launch of the first iOS 7 beta earlier this month, the operating system is capable of detecting when unauthorized Lightning cables or accessories are plugged into an iOS 7 device.
I may have a friend who grabbed a cheapie lightning cable from dx.com a while back for a latest-gen iPod, and the insanely inexpensive thing (I was to say it was $5 shipped or less) works great. Great with syncing, great with an iPod-ready car stereo receiver, just plain great.
I should Google sources back up, but I did wonder how this happened. I would think there are some easy ways to make an unauthorized cable based on existing batches from Apple, sort of how I understand Blu-Ray works. There are lots of "client" keys (my terminology; again, I should figure this all out), and each mfg gets a few to put into their machines. They only get decryption formulas for those keys. So if their machines are cracked (or, I suppose, folks believe a certain company let slip their key and formula), future Blu-Ray discs can be created to remove that decryption "path". So yes, you have to sacrifice that manufacturer's devices' forward-compatibility (or give them new firmware), but you at least stop the bleeding for future Blu-Ray printings.
So it'd seem if iOS 7 kills some cords that cheated in similar ways (if the analogy is appropriate at all), they'd kill some of their own. But I did figure Apple'd eventually kill some cords like my friend's, and you'd be stuck figuratively "watching old Blu-Rays", which here translates to "staying on an older version of iOS 6".
The producer who claims to have figured out the entire system does add...
Chang warns that several other companies have claimed to have achieved similar cracks, but that in iPhone5mod's testing those companies' cables still generate alerts under certain circumstances.
But I still want to see some cords stop working before I completely buy in that this is a practical issue. (And I wonder if any Blu-Ray players have been killed? I don't think so.)
Between 2008 and 2010, the equipment attached to Google's Street View vehicles not only collected 360-degree mapping images, but also data from unencrypted wireless networks within range. That included emails, passwords, photos, and chat logs.
I realized the cars were keeping track of WiFi names in areas, which makes some sense, as comparing WiFi hotpot names is a poor man's GPS, but I didn't realize they were firesheeping while they were at it. I can see some reasons to want to listen in just as a sort of corporate data-mining curiousity, but doesn't a smart (but evil) company at least contract out nasty work like that?
We looked through photographs of luxury watches, thinking about how they used orange as a pop color for branding or second hands. I offered opinions, but John tracked hex codes along with impressions in a Field Notes notebook. We arenโt afraid to sweat the details.
For some reason, the constant Vesper love on Daring Fireball over the last few days/weeks reminds me too much of Conan's excellent iPad 2 ad parody (sorry, Googled up this one and couldn't find an official link to the ad quickly). "One of my favorite things about the iPad 2 launch is that I get to keep this tight black shirt, which I think really pops against white backgrounds."
Look, Daring Fireball's great. It's one of my favorite rss reads every day. I own the shirt. And I love the sort of critical deconstruction he does in stuff like the recent, "Itโs Been a While Since Iโve Done the Thing Where I Quote the Entirety (or Nearly So) of an Article and Then Dissect/Comment Upon It Line-by-Line, but I Do Still Have a Taste for It, Even Though in This Particular Case Itโs a Month Late."
But if I was going to get overly excited about a note-taking app that I thought I'd designed like it was built in proverbial Cupertino, well, my blog's RSS feed would look a lot DF's does now.
Do you really have to drink the AppleAid to make a good iOS app? And is this pretentious orange-watching efficiently produce a better app experience for Jane and Joe User? Or are these guys just fooling the crud out of themselves? (And why don't they just have the click sound fade out a bit more each time you use it until it's silent? Then you don't need a "sounds" setting. See, I've listened to the podcasts too...)
(I should probably also admit I think the lines between advert and helpful post are blurring on the site a bit. There were two or three (iirc) posts on App Store app pricing right before Vesper came out that, surprise, recommended that paying more for apps in general would be a good/fair thing. Even if I don't disagree, I felt a little hoodwinked when it became clear that was just the sort of conundrum Gruber, as part of the marketing wing of ye olde Q-branch (? If Apple has to pay someone in Brazil for iPhone, I'm not sure the wisdom of "Q-branch") had just waded through weeks earlier, if not exactly at the time he was posting. It's an interesting and pixel-pushing conflict of interest, but it's still a conflict of interest, even if someone claims they're not a journalist. (Who is, today?) As interesting as it is to watch their hobbyist start-up flame on, the release unmistakeably shifts and colors the rest of Daring Fireball in a way that I can't say I find comforting.)
Is that The Wrong Way to do things? Yes, but when you're developing pages outside of the full MVC regalia, well, it's the quickest. I don't really want to set up PartialView stuff just to fine-tune some javascript. Thanks, um, Anaksunamun.
EDIT 20140409: That's all wrong. WriteLine literally (and only) shoves the file in. If you have code to process in the embedded file, it won't display. That is, if I WriteFile another aspx page that itself has a WriteFile call, it'll pop out like...
<% Response.WriteFile("WorkflowTemplate.aspx") %>
... in your page, rather than actually writing the nested aspx file.
Many Visual Studio users have a solution tree structure with multiple projects and solution folders that are organized as a deep hierarchy. To avoid visual pollution, users want only those projects expanded that are being actively developed (often with many of the projectโs child nodes recursively collapsed). To accomplish this task, they have to manually collapse each node recursively โ an onerous chore if one has a deeply nested solution tree. The Collapse Selection in Solution Explorer extension addresses this particular issue by enabling the user to recursively collapse multiple nodes with a single click.
Thank heavens (and SO). Wonder why it took me that long to Google it up.
Add that second entry, close and reopen your aspx file, and poof, aspx is happy. Hope I didn't post that earlier, b/c that would mean I was too stupid to look it back up on my own blog. But I probably have.
Share it over a file share
Instead of having people reference your local repository, you can put your repository on a file share. [instructions follow...]
I keep wondering the best way to get git started at work, and keep over-engineering. The best route could be to set up repos on a shared drive.
From the above page:
# First we navigate to the repository place and will create a new project-X dir
$ cd /share/git
$ mkdir project-X
$ cd project-X
# now we initialize this directory
# but instead of using git init, we use git --bare init "A short aside about
# what git means by bare: A default git repository assumes that you will be
# using it as your working directory, so git stores the actual bare repository
# files in a .git directory alongside all the project files. Remote
# repositories don't need copies of the files on the filesystem unlike working
# copies, all they need are the deltas and binary what-nots of the repository
# itself. This is what "bare" means to git. Just the repository itself."
$ git --bare init
# First go to your local repository
$ cd $HOME/project-X
# Then make the link to the shared repository
$ git remote add origin file:///share/git/project-X
# We push to the remote repository
$ git push origin master
The postings on this site are [usually] my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of any employer, past or present, or other entity. About Our Author