Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Free Willy! (Score 1) 411

by znrt (#47951135) Attached to: Scotland Votes No To Independence

The UK is a very fascist country, not free at all. It is ruled by evil Lords and a corrupt politican caste and voters have a choice between evil and evil.

in a sense almost any country in the world is. 20th century fascisms as such are passé (reviving, though), but the same elites that fostered those control and practically own today's democracies. through the media (just substitute the blunt and lurid state propaganda with overwhelming disinformation by private media owned by those same elites), through coercion of representatives and financial control of states. besides ideology, in the end fascism was all about the big money and today it's no different, it's just a more stable and efficient system. it's also more tolerable for the populace, and people do have more or less free speech, but speech doesn't matter that much and they rarely get to decide on really relevant issues, if at all. so yes, the same sort of people that ruled fascist regimes rules more or less today's democracies, unilaterally making decisions that affect millions.

Comment: Re:What's old is new again (Score 1) 40

by znrt (#47920751) Attached to: Browser To Facilitate Text Browsing In Emergencies

There will always be some circumstance when bandwidth is limited.

this isn't just about bandwith, but enabling a fallback sms transport.

But that won't stop everyone from "modernizing" their sites into things that won't work in low bandwidth browsers.

modernizing the hell out of the web is just fine as long as you provide fallback, and any professional would honor this basic accessibility principle unless requirements stated otherwise. and they often do. much of the industry just doesn't care because the requirement is milk the cash cows, and there's cows enough to bother with the few alienated. it isn't even a difficult or expensive "best practice" to follow, at all. it just requires a bit of thought, maybe a bit of extra code. nothing heroic. just, you know, being professional. - not interested, it's not shiny. we have no time for this! hey, that's what capitalism has done to us! :o)

Comment: Re: No, no. Let's not go there. Please. (Score 1) 903

by znrt (#47901113) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

Many atheist have a belief that god does not exist.

many? all atheists believe there is no god, by definition.

They want others to join them in their belief.

some atheists might want to actively fight religious views and beliefs from invading public and private aspects of life in society. these are "atheist activists".

the primary goal of atheist activism would be to enforce laicism: to set a "no-bullshit" common ethical ground where anything could be discussed rationally, keeping religious beliefs in the private sphere where spiritual stuff belongs, and where nobody should ever give a crap about each others'. turns out this is way harder than it seems.

Sounds like a religion to me.

looks like a damn big stretch to me.

promoting laicism is the daunting task of convincing every other breed of theist to keep their gods for themselves and off the discussion table, so everybody can discuss. religion is about letting a reduced council with privileged connection to some random god decide, so there's no discussion at all.

ofc there might exist "atheist activist" groups with their own agendas (i don't really know much about them, and i'm an atheist). but they're still that: activist groups. in comparision, religions are goddamned megacorporations, most specially middle-east and western ones that have been doing just that for centuries, at large, directly engaged in social and individual control, all of them entrenched in power still to this day.

Comment: Re:Responsive Web Design (Score 1) 161

by znrt (#47811189) Attached to: New HTML Picture Element To Make Future Web Faster

a possible mitigation is designing "mobile first" (an industry meme that actually makes sense for a change). this forces to focus on providing core functionality in limited space (i.e.: clarifying what the core functionality is in the first place), from there expand to desktop version. it's not a silver bullet but IF you want to go the "responsive" route it can help and is the way to go. ofc also in maintenance. if that extra column (whatever) doesn't fit well int the mobile version then it might be woth reconsidering if it is a worthy feature at all, or if it's time to start over ... maybe with separate designs.

sure "responsive" adds a great deal of complexity, and usually results in poorer interfaces and performance (sorry, i should have said "user experience") in general. it should be avoided but it's just all the rage now. guess what, i stopped arguing long ago, i just enjoy laughing my ass of when things get really surreal, which they often do!

Comment: Re:Responsive Web Design (Score 1) 161

by znrt (#47810609) Attached to: New HTML Picture Element To Make Future Web Faster

Nothing sucks worse than making a desktop window smaller because you just want to keep one part visible while you work with something else and having the site spontaneously implode into a mobile version

current users aren't supposed to be able to do that without extra help or risking injury. didn't you notice the window managers / desktops most of them are using? split the screen? are you nuts???

by they way, *their* fix for your problem would be eradicating desktop design versions completely. "develop once, works in every device". why should we go through the hassle of developing a desktop version for elitists like you if we're anyway served well enough with a single tap mobile interface, which is what our average collective brain can afford to handle! go away!

Comment: Re:No natural enemies (Score 1) 212

by znrt (#47809417) Attached to: Radioactive Wild Boars Still Roaming the Forests of Germany

There are no predators - ZERO predators, in German forests.

indeed. why?

For you ideology trumps reason?

see above.

of course you didn't count predators for fun. I read in UK there are boar farms for hunting (yeah, humans do exist who find great pleasure in shooting at animals from a safe distance with riffles, go figure). I also read about an alleged wild boar population surge in germany in 2008, but thas was some reuters news, pretty vague and sensationalistic, could as well be surreptitious advertising. if you could share any reliable sources on the subject i'd appreciate it, tia.

Comment: Re:Lucky Them (Score 1) 127

by znrt (#47798543) Attached to: Microsoft Shutting Down MSN Messenger After 15 Years of Service

its about this idea that the software license is not only so much less than any trace of ownership but that its very use can be restricted/disabled at any time

you disabled it yourself by upgrading to w7. if you don't want to find yourself locked up in a walled garden, you shouldn't walk into them, no matter how large or cool they may appear at first. besides, this thread is about discontinuation of *services*, not about software compatibility, so wrong place to shed your otherwise futile tears. you might learn the lesson, though.

Comment: Re:little ridiculous (Score 1) 94

by znrt (#47794157) Attached to: Google Introduces HTML 5.1 Tag To Chrome

because "responsive" already meant "exhibiting consistently fast reaction". in that sense, designs can't be responsive at all. implementations might be.

funny thing is that what you call "responsive design" is actually "2 or more designs" implemented together. this usually comes at the cost of extra resource usage and, if anything, this overhead can only negatively impact overall "responsiveness". so "responsive pages" are likely to be less responsive by definition. see the nonsense?

it's semantical nonsense because it reuses a term that expressed an overall characteristic of something, to refer to a particular feature of it. it's confusing.

btw responding to changes in the size of the viewport or container wasn't even new, it's a cool feature that had been already around for decades on many platforms and was called "dynamic layout" or "fluid layout" or simply "using a layout manager". ok, that might not be catchy enough for current buzzword standards, but choosing "responsive" for it was really lame.

Comment: Re:retro is always popular... (Score 2) 94

by znrt (#47790359) Attached to: Google Introduces HTML 5.1 Tag To Chrome

use of tables for top-bottom layout was the one thing css should have relied on and even promoted, but they chose to bury it, and brought up that bizarre bottom-top layout model that barely mimics what tables already did in a natural way. it was about semantics, thay said. but, hey! now you got plenty of semantics! we have col_sm_4, and even col-md-1!!

Comment: Re:talk about "old tech" (Score 1) 94

by znrt (#47790281) Attached to: Google Introduces HTML 5.1 Tag To Chrome

You have to base it on the VIEWPORT, but that's VARIABLE because the USER can change that shit.

not if you manage to sheep users to use the same dumb ui model, which is why everyone is carving to accomplish exactly that (a copycat of apple's, which is shiny and famous and cool, all the way down from google to ubuntu, crashing through several windows)

"It's curtains for you, Mighty Mouse! This gun is so futuristic that even *I* don't know how it works!" -- from Ralph Bakshi's Mighty Mouse

Working...