• (disco)

    Give Up Coffee For Beautiful Breasts

    But… I don't drink coffee… what do I do‽

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK

    Coffee... Breasts... Coffee... Breasts...

    Sorry, ladies.

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Give Up Coffee For Beautiful Breasts

    *looks at mug*

    *looks down*

    ...

    *goes for more coffee*

    Filed under: i like my breasts as they are thank you very much

  • (disco)

    I'm glad to see that the Daily WTF.

  • (disco)

    Also oh hey, someone still does right-click blocking in 2015? Yikes, we've figured out how to bypass it back in the days of IE6 at the very least...

  • (disco)

    I blame the French supermarket and not the Belgium beer for the first one

  • (disco)

    Well, I drink coffee very rarely ...

  • (disco)

    Also, when did Seagate change their logo? The old one looked prettier!

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj
    Maciejasjmj:
    Also oh hey, someone still does right-click blocking in 2015? Yikes, we've figured out how to bypass it back in the days of IE6 at the very least...
    Plus don't some browsers have anti-right-click-hijack protection now? I seem to remember seeing something like that in Firefox, at least.
  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Plus don't some browsers have anti-right-click-hijack protection now?

    F12*? I haven't seen anything like this.

    I can see how it would be useful to capture right-clicks (say, in a JS-based game), and I don't see how the browser could differentiate between a legit capture and a hijack.

    *it's a bit annoying since it doesn't seem Chrome allows you to target and jump to an element from the dev console, but it does its job

    Filed under: UNLIKE THE MODS HERE

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj
    Maciejasjmj:
    I haven't seen anything like this.
    I may be remembering wrong… Anyway, I did find a Chrome extension that stops websites hijacking right-clicks: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/enable-right-click/hhojmcideegachlhfgfdhailpfhgknjm?hl=en
  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj
    Maciejasjmj:
    I can see how it would be useful to capture right-clicks (say, in a JS-based game)

    Have Dropbox? Try it there.

    Maciejasjmj:
    I don't see how the browser could differentiate between a legit capture and a hijack.

    I'm kinda in favour of having the browser ask when it detects an event handler hooking into right clicking. Because I would let some sites do it (see above), and was actually thinking of adding right clicking to something I'm working on, but am uneasy about it seeing how flaky it can be.

    Now, sure, that can be abused as well (provide legitimate wanted functionality on some elements and then be a jerk when you try right clicking somewhere else), but at least it gives you some control.

  • (disco)

    Didn't know Microsoft Lose Weight was out already.

    Maciejasjmj:
    *it's a bit annoying since it doesn't seem Chrome allows you to target and jump to an element from the dev console, but it does its job
    [image]

    Unless you meant something else?

  • (disco) in reply to kirb
    kirb:
    Unless you meant something else?

    When you right-click and select "Inspect Element", you get the DOM tree unrolled to that element. You can't, AFAIK, open the dev console and get some "target an element" option which would achieve the same result without right-clicking.

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj

    Click the top-left search button, that lets you select an element. Works exactly as right click –> inspect element from there.

  • (disco)

    Features Features Features Features Mushroom, Mushroom!

    ...

    Sorry.

    [size=8]not sorry[/size]

  • (disco) in reply to kirb
    kirb:
    Click the top-left search button, that lets you select an element. Works exactly as right click –> inspect element from there.

    Oh hey, I missed that somehow. Probably assumed it's some textual search.

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj
    Maciejasjmj:
    Oh hey, I missed that somehow. Probably assumed it's some textual search.
    It's not the most intuitive icon; the Firefox one is an arrow cursor over a rectangle, IIRC, which to me anyway is a bit more intuitive
  • (disco) in reply to aliceif
    aliceif:
    Also, when did Seagate change their logo? The old one looked prettier!
    Back in January. Dive into the stream of the Living Logo!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qkfk7SP2x7E

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK

    IE has a rectangle with a cursor, too!

    I think Chrome is doing it wrong.

  • (disco) in reply to aliceif
    aliceif:
    IE has a rectangle with a cursor, too!

    I think Chrome is doing it wrong.

    So did old Opera. The one that had it working properly first!

    So yes, I agree that WebKit is the one who got it wrong. And other browsers do now, too, because they all use WebKit...

    Fanboy text in small print. Avoidance suggested.

    I should have put this text in the beginning of the post, right?

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    But… I don't drink coffee… what do I do‽

    Start.

  • (disco)

    Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!

  • (disco)

    This reminds me of when our local newspaper went through a period of the owners trying to cut costs, during the 2008 recession. Unfortunately cutting actual compositor costs could be a step too far, as the owners discovered when a full page car dealer ad appeared with the dealer name at the top, and a whole page of lorem ipsum except, in the middle, a box with the words "Who's chasing the copy?"

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    But… I don't drink coffee… what do I do‽

    Ignore the replies above and go for the politically correct feminist solution; learn to accept your breasts as they are and reject the patriarchal male gaze. Of course, if that fails, there's always a boob job.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    , and a whole page of lorem ipsum except, in the middle, a box with the words "Who's chasing the copy?"

    Nice. Was that a resume-generating event?

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    Of course, if that fails, there's always a boob job.
    Nah; natural or nothin' f'me!
  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Nah; natural xor nothin' f'me!

    FTFY.

  • (disco) in reply to DCRoss

    Now we know what Ballmer's really doing after ceasing to be Microsoft's chief chair launcher.

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Nah; natural or nothin' f'me!

    well, augmentations are definitely out for me, I just don't get the point of them. not in the slightest.

    reductions though? those can make a world of positive difference. particularly if you're trying to carry a large cup size on a small frame. that's a great way to get back trouble.

    of course most important is feeling confident and secure with your body. if either is going to help and poses no significant, long termmedical downsides then.... well it's your body and your life. (just don't ask me to understand your reasons. Respect them yes, understand them.... not so much.)

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj

    Chrome has built-in protection from that kind of DoS attack.

    [image]

    It's so GUI that a blakeyrat could do it!

  • (disco) in reply to accalia
    accalia:
    if either is going to help and poses no medical downsides then...

    All surgery has potential medical downsides. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done, but the risk of complications is always non-zero.

  • (disco) in reply to accalia
    accalia:
    reductions though? those can make a world of positive difference. particularly if you're trying to carry a large cup size on a small frame. that's a great way to get back trouble.
    A reduction doesn't add anything; it's still all natural after. So by my standards, reductions are fine :)

    Of course, if someone wants augmentation, I won't stop them; the most I'll do is say 'It's not necessary' ;)

  • (disco) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    All surgery has potential medical downsides. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done, but the risk of complications is _always_ non-zero.

    a valid point. clarified (hopefully) my opriginal post.

  • (disco) in reply to FrostCat
    FrostCat:
    Nice. Was that a resume-generating event?

    Well, it was in the UK so it would have been a CV-generating event (just another example of two different languages with some words in common, like "and"). But I have no idea, I just saw the page.

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Of course, if someone wants augmentation, I won't stop them; the most I'll do is say 'It's not necessary'

    What about after a mastectomy? Or to correct a noticeable difference in size?

  • (disco) in reply to abarker

    Same answer ;)

  • (disco) in reply to RaceProUK
    RaceProUK:
    Same answer ;)

    In those situations, the woman's mental health care practitioner may disagree with you. In the second scenario, it may lead to back problems, so it may even be necessary for her physical well being.

  • (disco) in reply to abarker

    And they would be right to follow the advice of a medical professional over some random hedgy :P

Leave a comment on “Nothing Refreshes like Lorem Ipsum”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article