Anyone know how to auto close the parent / opener window without
confirmation? I have tried:
<script>
opener.window.close()
</script>
----I put it in the child html page, and nothing happen!!---
<script>
self.close()
</script>
---- I put this in the parent html page, and it ask me to confirm and
does not open the child page until I hit no... then the parent page
remains open-----
Is there a way to close parent page at the same time child page is
close or close parent page upon child page open?
Sincerely,
Perry
28  14203 
PerryC wrote: Anyone know how to auto close the parent / opener window without
confirmation?
Yes, I know how, in 90% or so of the cases.
I have tried:
<script>
opener.window.close()
</script>
----I put it in the child html page, and nothing happen!!---
You should have gotten a dialog window asking if you want to allow
script to close the window (what browser did you test it in?)
<script>
self.close()
</script>
---- I put this in the parent html page, and it ask me to confirm and
does not open the child page until I hit no... then the parent page
remains open-----
Yep, thats the way it works (some of the time)
Is there a way to close parent page at the same time child page is
close or close parent page upon child page open?
Yes, in 90% or so of the browsers on the web.
The Unconditional Truth will set you free though.
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/
OK, Randy, So you know how... do you mind sharing? I am not able to do
so... with the codes I put there... any insight? I am using IE6. How
can I get rid of the confirmation popup? Or, better yet, how can I open
the child window and close the parent window automatically? What code
to use??
Sincerely,
PC
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
Perry Cheng wrote: OK, Randy, So you know how... do you mind sharing? I am not able to
do so... with the codes I put there... any insight? I am using IE6.
How can I get rid of the confirmation popup? Or, better yet, how can
I open the child window and close the parent window automatically?
What code to use??
<snip>
The fact that Randy knows and is not telling is significant. An archive
search at groups.google.com will reveal the explanation/context and also
the code for the antisocial hack needed.
Richard.
OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
I did my homework before coming here... and ask... I did search not only
google, but also other places... all that is telling me is not exactly
what I have described here... (see previous posts). So, can you or
someone point to me where I can find these info?
What I really need is to click on a html file (run on my Desktop, not
for the web) and it will open up in full screen...
I was not able to do so, so, to get around it... I write another html
with javascripts to open the original html file (in full screen, without
toolbars...) However, now, I have 2 windows... so that is why I am
seeking a way to close the opener!
If someone can share how to accomplish my original intent, that will be
the best.
Sincerely,
Perry
*** Sent via Devdex http://www.devdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
Perry Cheng said:
OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
It's not related to hacking. He called it an antisocial hack.
In this case, it's a hack in the sense that it's code that does
something that you normally shouldn't do, and that shouldn't
really be expected to work, but that does work in some cases.
It's anti-social in the sense that closing a person's window is
extremely rude. Maybe they had some more use for it. In this
case, it's your own window, but people are still justified in
hesitating to post the code.
What I really need is to click on a html file (run on my Desktop, not
for the web) and it will open up in full screen...
I was not able to do so, so, to get around it... I write another html
with javascripts to open the original html file (in full screen, without
toolbars...) However, now, I have 2 windows... so that is why I am
seeking a way to close the opener!
But you don't need to close the opener from the new window.
Why not have the original window [try to] close itself after
opening the new window? You should have found methods to do
that in some browsers.
You might also look into HTA's, if what you want is an icon
on your Windows desktop that you can click and launch a web
application.
In article <ea**************************@posting.google.com >, pe******@yahoo.com enlightened us with... Anyone know how to auto close the parent / opener window without
confirmation?
You can't do that *without confirmation* in a normal internet
environment.
Use an HTA if it is for your own use on a windows PC with IE.
And it's
self.opener.close();
in the child window, IIRC.
--
--
~kaeli~
Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than
standing in a garage makes you a car. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Perry Cheng wrote: OK, Randy, So you know how... do you mind sharing? I am not able to do
so... with the codes I put there... any insight? I am using IE6. How
can I get rid of the confirmation popup? Or, better yet, how can I open
the child window and close the parent window automatically? What code
to use??
The reason you get the confirmation window is because you are attempting
to close a window that script didn't open. The way that script (or the
browser) determines whether you opened it with script or not is checking
the window.opener property.
The reason I didn't post the code (as has been pointed out) is that its
anti-social to be closing windows without permission.
Do a search of the archives for "unconditional truth".
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/
Perry Cheng wrote: OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", and in the context
of software development, it just means developing and implementing an
algorithm that solves a problem. You confuse that with "cracking", a
common misconception, most certainly influenced by the media who tend
to speak of "evil hackers". Hackers are not bad, crackers are.
Hackers build, crackers destroy. As you destroy the reliability of the
user interface if you would succeed doing what you intend to do, you
would be a cracker.
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html>
PointedEars
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes: Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ...
You confuse that with "cracking", a common misconception,
It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define
the word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks
wood. Other meanings exist, and while a small minority insists that
it cannot mean someone who illegally accesses computers, that is the
common and accepted use of the word for the rest of the world.
<URL:http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/hack.html>
<URL:http://coscorrosa.com/writing/rants/hacker-cracker.php>
/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lr*@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes: Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ...
You confuse that with "cracking", a common misconception,
It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define
the word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks
wood. [...]
man jargon
PointedEars
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ...
You confuse that with "cracking", a common misconception,
It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define
the word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks
wood.
"hacker" has 3 meanings according to dictionary.com <url:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hacker />:
hack·er1 Audio pronunciation of "hacker" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hkr)
n. Informal
1. One who is proficient at using or programming a computer; a computer buff.
2. One who uses programming skills to gain illegal access to a computer network
or file.
3. One who enthusiastically pursues a game or sport: a weekend tennis hacker.
None of which involve "hacking" wood. I might modify the 3rd to read:
3. One who enthusiastically pursues a game, sport or hobby (computer
programming); a weekend tennis hacker, a weekend code hacker
which might be someone different from "one who is proficient at programming".
"hacker" has four meanings according to Merriam-Webster <url:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...nary&va=hacker />:
Main Entry: hack·er
Pronunciation: 'ha-k&r
Function: noun
1 : one that hacks
2 : a person who is inexperienced or unskilled at a particular activity <a
tennis hacker>
3 : an expert at programming and solving problems with a computer
4 : a person who illegally gains access to and sometimes tampers with
information in a computer system
In this definition, "one that hacks" is included, with "hack" defined as:
transitive senses
1 a : to cut or sever with repeated irregular or unskillful blows b : to cut or
shape by or as if by crude or ruthless strokes <hacking out new election
districts> c : ANNOY, VEX -- often used with off
2 : to clear or make by or as if by cutting away vegetation <hacked his way
through the brush>
3 a : to manage successfully <just couldn't hack the new job> b : TOLERATE <I
can't hack all this noise>
intransitive senses
1 a : to make chopping strokes or blows <hacked at the weeds>; also : to make
cuts as if by chopping <hacking away at the work force> b : to play inexpert
golf
2 : to cough in a short dry manner
3 : LOAF -- usually used with around
4 a : to write computer programs for enjoyment b : to gain access to a computer
illegally
So your claim about "hacking wood" being one particular interpretation is
substantiated, but it is by no means the "strictest" sense of the word.
Note that I would argue that "hacker" could also be defined as someone who
produces _bad_ computer programming, given that "one who hacks" is "to cut or
sever with repeated irregular or unskillful blows" why couldn't "one who hacks"
be "to program with repeated unskillful code"?
Other meanings exist, and while a small minority insists that
it cannot mean someone who illegally accesses computers, that is the
common and accepted use of the word for the rest of the world.
<URL:http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/hack.html>
<URL:http://coscorrosa.com/writing/rants/hacker-cracker.php>
The common and accepted use of the word depends on it's context. If I say "he
hacked at the tree" I doubt anyone would suggest he was attempting to tamper
with computer information contained in the tree. I would hope we can all agree
that "hacker" when related to computers means either:
1. an expert (or someone who is proficient) at programming and solving problems
with a computer (a computer buff);
2. a person who (uses programming skills to) illegally gains access to and
sometimes tampers with information in a computer system
The exact meaning depends on the personal point-of-view of the speaker and the
context in which it is used.
However, I agree that to the majority of people in non-computer related fields,
when presented with the word in a computer-related context, would define it as
2.
--
Grant Wagner <gw*****@agricoreunited.com>
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 15:34:06 +0200, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ... You confuse
that with "cracking", a common misconception,
It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define the
word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks wood.
Other meanings exist, and while a small minority insists that it cannot
mean someone who illegally accesses computers, that is the common and
accepted use of the word for the rest of the world.
I love that when someting is used incorrectly by enough people it becomes
the correct way to use it.
Read:
Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution
by Steven Levy
ISBN: 0141000511
Great (and very entertaining) history of the microcomputer revolution.
Everything from MIT's electric train club to Apple, Microsoft, Sierra.
--
i.m.
The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history.
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Perry Cheng wrote:
OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact. On the contrary, its your
spellchecker that is *broken*.
And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker" and
you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the least.
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/
Ivan Marsh wrote: On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 15:34:06 +0200, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ... You confuse
that with "cracking", a common misconception,
It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define the
word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks wood.
Other meanings exist, and while a small minority insists that it cannot
mean someone who illegally accesses computers, that is the common and
accepted use of the word for the rest of the world.
I love that when someting is used incorrectly by enough people it becomes
the correct way to use it.
Read:
Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution
by Steven Levy
ISBN: 0141000511
Great (and very entertaining) history of the microcomputer revolution.
Everything from MIT's electric train club to Apple, Microsoft, Sierra.
I love when a single book citing that a word means something defines what the
word means. I think I'll write a book saying that the word "computer" means a
small, red fruit that comes from a tree, despite all dictionary definitions
and common-usage to the contrary.
Human language is what it is. And human language evolves. To "Xerox"
something is to photocopy it, blowing your nose with a "Kleenex" means you're
using a facial tissue. To "google" means to search the Internet for
information. And a "computer hacker" can be:
an expert (or someone who is proficient) at programming and solving problems
with a computer (a computer buff);
- or -
a person who (uses programming skills to) illegally gains access to and
sometimes tampers with information in a computer system
Deal with it.
--
Grant Wagner <gw*****@agricoreunited.com>
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 18:17:50 +0000, Grant Wagner wrote: Ivan Marsh wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 15:34:06 +0200, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
>
>> Yes, as "hacking" is jargon for "solving problems", ... You confuse
>> that with "cracking", a common misconception,
>
> It's a common misconception in some circles that they get to define
> the word "hacker". In the strictest sense, it means someone who hacks
> wood. Other meanings exist, and while a small minority insists that
> it cannot mean someone who illegally accesses computers, that is the
> common and accepted use of the word for the rest of the world.
I love that when someting is used incorrectly by enough people it
becomes the correct way to use it.
Read:
Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution by Steven Levy ISBN:
0141000511
Great (and very entertaining) history of the microcomputer revolution.
Everything from MIT's electric train club to Apple, Microsoft, Sierra.
I love when a single book citing that a word means something defines
what the word means.
Actually, the book talks to and about the people that made up the term.
I think I'll write a book saying that the word "computer" means a small,
red fruit that comes from a tree, despite all dictionary definitions and
common-usage to the contrary.
Then you'd be making the same mistake people make about "hacker".
Human language is what it is. And human language evolves. To "Xerox"
something is to photocopy it, blowing your nose with a "Kleenex" means
you're using a facial tissue. To "google" means to search the Internet
for information. And a "computer hacker" can be:
an expert (or someone who is proficient) at programming and solving
problems with a computer (a computer buff);
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
- or -
a person who (uses programming skills to) illegally gains access to and
sometimes tampers with information in a computer system
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
The second definition is as inaccurate as the first.
Deal with it.
I deal with stupid people every day.
--
i.m.
The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history.
Randy Webb wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Perry Cheng wrote: OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking??? Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact.
It seems more that it was pressed only once (as it is correct)
but returned three question marks. But you know what I mean.
On the contrary, its your spellchecker that is *broken*.
It is not, the typo os deliberate.
And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker" and
you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the least.
Yes, because it is part of (hacker) jargon, as I have (or was it another
poster?) already explained. If you would have read the Jargon File
(maintained by Eric S. Raymond, one of the most famous hackers), you
would have known. I am beginning to get bored of you playing stupid.
PointedEars
Randy Webb wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Perry Cheng wrote: OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to
hacking??? Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact.
It seems more that it was pressed only once (as it is correct)
but returned three question marks. But you knew what I meant.
On the contrary, its your spellchecker that is *broken*.
It is not (which spellchecker?), the typo is deliberate.
And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker"
and you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the
least.
Yes, because it is part of (hacker) jargon, as I have (or was it another
poster then?) already explained. If you would have read the Jargon File
(maintained by Eric S. Raymond, one of the most famous hackers), you
would have known. I am beginning to get bored of you playing stupid.
PointedEars
Ivan Marsh said:
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
The original definition of a word is often interesting
trivia, but it doesn't carry as much weight as you seem
to expect when discussing the current meaning of a word.
There are many examples of English words and phrases that
have evolved to mean exactly the opposite of their original
definitions.
JRS: In article <x5********************@comcast.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Randy Webb <hi************@aol.com> posted at
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:21:32 : Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact. On the contrary, its your
spellchecker that is *broken*.
And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker" and
you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the least.
Little things please little minds.
Those considering the meaning of "hack", and thus "hacker", should
consult a proper printed dictionary of the English language, such as
Chambers'. The word has more established meanings than some of you are
aware of.
BTW, never accuse anyone who hacks of "hackery"; use "hacking". The
etymology of "hackery" is entirely different.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk DOS 3.3, 6.20; Win98. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links.
PAS EXE TXT ZIP via <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/00index.htm>
My DOS <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/batfiles.htm> - also batprogs.htm.
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
<snip> ... . If you would have read the Jargon File (maintained
by Eric S. Raymond, one of the most famous hackers), ...
<snip>
I have always thought that any attempt to convey meaning with language
is most likely to be successful if it uses as little jargon a practical.
In discussing javascript we have little choice but use some terms that
could reasonably be described as jargon (and certainly must sound like
it to the uninitiated) but there seems little to be gained from going
out and looking for additional jargon to introduce.
Richard.
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 15:30:48 -0700, Lee wrote: Ivan Marsh said:
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
The original definition of a word is often interesting trivia, but it
doesn't carry as much weight as you seem to expect when discussing the
current meaning of a word.
It's time the real hackers took the word back.
There are many examples of English words and phrases that have evolved
to mean exactly the opposite of their original definitions.
In the case of "hacker" it's important trivia. True hackers are why the
computer revolution happened and the internet became what it is.
Hacker didn't evolve. It was co-opted by the media that never bothered to
find out what it really meant. It had it's meaning changed before it ever
had a common usage.
That's incompetence not evolution.
Amusing from a previous post (don't know who wrote it):
"Humann language is what it is. And human language evolves. To "Xerox"
something is to photocopy it, blowing your nose with a "Kleenex" means
you're using a facial tissue. To "google" means to search the Internet for
information."
Xerox meant to copy something ... it still means to copy something.
Kleenex meant facial tissue ... it still means facial tissue. Google meant
to search ... it still means to search.
Good examples.
--
i.m.
The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history.
Ivan Marsh wrote: Lee wrote: Ivan Marsh said:
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
The original definition of a word is often interesting trivia, but
it doesn't carry as much weight as you seem to expect when
discussing the current meaning of a word.
It's time the real hackers took the word back.
Anyone genuinely adept at the solving of problems (with computers or
otherwise) would perceive the futility of the effort, given the weight
of numbers favouring the "popular" interpretation of the word. It would
probably be more practical to think up a new label (assuming that some
sort of label is seen as desirable/necessary).
<snip> Amusing from a previous post (don't know who wrote it):
"Humann language is what it is. And human language evolves. To
"Xerox" something is to photocopy it, blowing your nose with a
"Kleenex" means you're using a facial tissue. To "google" means
to search the Internet for information."
Xerox meant to copy something ... it still means to copy something.
Kleenex meant facial tissue ... it still means facial tissue.
Google meant to search ... it still means to search.
Xerox is the name of a manufacturer of copiers (among other things) and
presumably the decided upon the name before Xerox sold a single copier,
which presumably preceded it becoming a description of the act of
copying. Whoever though up the name may have perceived it as meaning
something completely different. Much the same is true of Kleenex and
Google.
Good examples.
They are examples of the way words come into popular usage and gain
meaning where they may originally have had none. The evolution of
language might be better expressed with a word such as "cool", which at
one time expressed no more than relative temperature (and/or the loss of
temperature).
Richard.
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Randy Webb wrote:
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Perry Cheng wrote:
OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact.
It seems more that it was pressed only once (as it is correct)
but returned three question marks. But you know what I mean.
That is highly doubtful, since most newbies will add multiple question
marks to attempt to emphasize the question. On the contrary, its your spellchecker that is *broken*.
It is not, the typo os deliberate.
Then you should learn proper English and how to spell appropriately. And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker" and
you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the least.
Yes, because it is part of (hacker) jargon, as I have (or was it another
poster?) already explained. If you would have read the Jargon File
(maintained by Eric S. Raymond, one of the most famous hackers), you
would have known. I am beginning to get bored of you playing stupid.
No, I have no need, nor desire, to read anything by Eric S. Raymond as I
already know what a hacker is and how to spell broken. If you had the
first clue what you were talking about, this would be more than hilarious.
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/
Randy Webb wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Randy Webb wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Perry Cheng wrote:
> OK, Richard... I am puzzled... what I am asking is related to hacking???
Your Question Mark key is borken. [psf 2.3]
No, it worked perfectly. 3 times in fact.
It seems more that it was pressed only once (as it is correct)
but returned three question marks. But you know what I mean.
That is highly doubtful, since most newbies will add multiple question
marks to attempt to emphasize the question.
Which is still bad style. And all this in a sub-thread about the meaning of the word "hacker" and
you continue to mis-spell the word broken? Interesting to say the least.
Yes, because it is part of (hacker) jargon, as I have (or was it another
poster?) already explained. If you would have read the Jargon File
(maintained by Eric S. Raymond, one of the most famous hackers), you
would have known. I am beginning to get bored of you playing stupid.
No, I have no need, nor desire, to read anything by Eric S. Raymond as I
already know what a hacker is and how to spell broken. If you had the
first clue what you were talking about, this would be more than hilarious.
You are who has not the any clue what and who
you are talking about. Go read some documents.
<http://catb.org/~esr/>
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/>
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/H/hacker.html>
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/B/borken.html>
EOD
PointedEars
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
[question mark key, used repeatedly] Which is still bad style.
Yes, that was never in question. But the key isn't broken.
Go read some documents.
I think most of the people in this particular discussion are quite
familiar with The Jargon File. However, as the name imlies, it is
a reference for jargon, not the common use of the words (if any).
In a forum as diverse and international as a Usenet group, using
jargon makes messages harder to understand, and should be considered
bad style. Not as bad as exchanging words with phonetically equivalent
letter combinations, but it still detracts from readability.
/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lr*@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <Po*********@nurfuerspam.de> writes:
[question mark key, used repeatedly]
Which is still bad style.
Yes, that was never in question. But the key isn't broken.
[_] You have understood.
[X] Your irony detector is borken. Go read some documents.
I think most of the people in this particular discussion are quite
familiar with The Jargon File. However, as the name imlies, it is
a reference for jargon, not the common use of the words (if any).
In a forum as diverse and international as a Usenet group, using
jargon makes messages harder to understand, and should be considered
bad style. Not as bad as exchanging words with phonetically equivalent
letter combinations, but it still detracts from readability.
What you forgot is that this Jargon File is but a collection of
jargon created by hackers, the people who originally built Usenet
and keep it running which is (therefore) still full of jargon:
ASAP, FAQ, FOAD, IM(H)O, LOL, ROTFL, RTFM, TIA, just to mention
some of them. Even smileys are a part of that. This group is a
part of Usenet. To refuse or even ignore all this means to
refuse or ignore the very nature of this medium, like it or not.
F'up2 poster (BTW another part of that *Usenet* jargon)
PointedEars
Ivan Marsh wrote: On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 18:17:50 +0000, Grant Wagner wrote:
I love when a single book citing that a word means something defines
what the word means.
Actually, the book talks to and about the people that made up the term.
Then the people who "made up the term" made the same mistake you're making
now. At the time hacker was used by the people in the book, it did have
anything to do with computers. Therefore at _that_ time _they_ were using the
word "hacker" incorrectly.
Now you're claiming that _that_ meaning is the "one true meaning" and that
everyone else is "wrong".
an expert (or someone who is proficient) at programming and solving
problems with a computer (a computer buff);
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
Right, the original definition of hacker is "one who hacks".
a person who (uses programming skills to) illegally gains access to and
sometimes tampers with information in a computer system
Which is NOT the original definition of hacker.
Right, the original definition of hacker is "one who hacks".
The second definition is as inaccurate as the first.
Better get on the phone to Merriam-Webster then.
The definition you insist is the "one true defintion" is as inaccurate, or
accurate, as all the rest. The word changes meaning given the point-of-view of
the user of the word, and the context in which it appears.
I'll say it again because you seem to be missing the point. When these
computer people defined the word "hacker" to mean _anything_, _they_ were
mis-using the word "hacker". Now you're saying any meaning other then the one
_they_ defined in relation to computers is a mis-use. Deal with it.
I deal with stupid people every day.
I didn't say deal with stupid people. I said that language evolves, and that
you should accept that what a word means now is not what a word may mean in 2,
5 or 10 years, or even 6 months. People "surf" the World Wide Web, they "logon
to" Web sites that don't provide any authentication challenge. People use DSL
"modems" and hit the power switch on their "CPU". Perhaps you should spend
your time doing something more productive then trying to get everyone to agree
with your definition of "hacker" and calling them stupid when they understand
what you obviously do not.
--
Grant Wagner <gw*****@agricoreunited.com>
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:00:29 +0000, Grant Wagner wrote: Ivan Marsh wrote: I deal with stupid people every day.
Perhaps you should spend your time doing something more productive then
trying to get everyone to agree with your definition of "hacker" and
calling them stupid when they understand what you obviously do not.
Says the guy that posted his reply to the wrong group in the wrong thread.
You must be a hacker.
--
i.m.
The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: J P Singh |
last post by:
Hi Guys
Wonder if someone can help me with this.
I have a form where a user clicks a button which gives them a pop up windows
to allow them to add the data. The user adds the data and click...
|
by: Alan |
last post by:
When using "window.close", a dialog box ask u to comfirm, how to disable
it
?
|
by: Marshall Dudley |
last post by:
I have an application where in a shopping cart checkout a popup appears
which suggests other items that may go with what was ordered with a
button to add these items to the cart. When the button...
|
by: louise raisbeck |
last post by:
I have this scenario (simplified)
function addnewdata () {
check for partial match already in db for information entered by user
if (partialmatch succeeds) {
open new window aspx page (using...
|
by: MichaelK |
last post by:
What's the best way to close current window silently after finished a
process.
I'm using the the javascritpt window.close() or top.window.close(), but it
fires a confirmation window.
Just want to...
|
by: Jaggu |
last post by:
Hi ,
I need to close main window, once the child window succesfully opens
else main window to remain. In my case when I close the main window
immediately after the "window.open()" as mentioned...
|
by: Toccoa |
last post by:
After considerable googling - I mean searching with Google(r) - I
could not find javascript on a button or <a href=... to close a
window in the latest versions of IE and FireFox.
There seemed...
|
by: michal.podlewski |
last post by:
Hi All,
I have a problem with a simple (as I thought till now) thing:
I want to make a link in a child-window which would change site in the
parent-window and along with closing child window. The...
|
by: =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bA==?= |
last post by:
I am looking for a java script to close a web form that I can attatch to a
button click event. I am using vs2005, c#.
Thanks
--
Paul G
Software engineer.
|
by: Charles Arthur |
last post by:
How do i turn on java script on a villaon, callus and itel keypad mobile phone
|
by: ryjfgjl |
last post by:
If we have dozens or hundreds of excel to import into the database, if we use the excel import function provided by database editors such as navicat, it will be extremely tedious and time-consuming...
|
by: BarryA |
last post by:
What are the essential steps and strategies outlined in the Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA) roadmap for aspiring data scientists? How can individuals effectively utilize this roadmap to progress...
|
by: nemocccc |
last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
|
by: Sonnysonu |
last post by:
This is the data of csv file
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
2 3
2 3
3
the lengths should be different i have to store the data by column-wise with in the specific length.
suppose the i have to...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However,...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
| |
