Slashdot Mirror

Buh? Have you seen 10.7 yet?

- The sidebar has been given a mystifying bath to get rid of any hints of colour, so you have to actually look at the shape or read the word before clicking
- "Devices" isn't there by default, and when you restore it's at the bottom of the sidebar, unlike every release of OS X up until now.
- Where'd my scrollbar go? Why am I scrolling the wrong way?
- Luna-like buttons? Weren't they a poor imitation of Aqua? Not that that is still there... all hints of Aqua's 3D-popping is gone for flat rounded corners (not necessarily a bad thing...)
- There's a new window button to go "Full Screen". But it's not consistent - the app has to support it. So you can't expect the feature on all your old apps.
- "System Preferences have been shuffled, consolidated, and renamed in every major releases of Mac OS X. Lion doesn't disappoint." http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7.ars/17

You can say Apple's interface is better, but you can't say it's stable.

...except for the entire 3rd page. http://arstechnica.com/apple/guides/2011/08/does-this-metric-make-my-company-look-big.ars/3

Wordperfect was originally written for a DataGeneral minicomputer back in 1979. It was hugely popular on minicomputers and Unix long before there was an Amiga. It was popular in the legal profession even back then.

For many years WordPerfect 5.1 was the most portable word processing document in the world.

Wordperfect fell from popularity many believe mainly because Microsoft engineered Windows beginning with W95 to prevent it from functioning correctly, particularly with printing. Novell sued in 2004, and seven years later the case is still winding through the courts. It's suspected that Novell's new owner Attachmate will accept a quiet settlement and let the WordPerfect lawsuit die. Attachmate is a privately held corporation and no information about the composition of their ownership is available.

Though Novell/Attachmate still own the lawsuit, Novell sold the product on to Corel in 1996. WordPerfect is still available in WordPerfect Office X5 from Corel, who bought the app in 1996. Microsoft invested in Corel in October of 2000. The last native Linux version, 8.1 released in 2004, didn't sell well as Linux adoption at that time was still very low. The last Linux version, 9.0, was released in 2000. Relying on Wine, performance was unsat. Some diehards still use the application. Novell also retained rights and merged the product into their own productivity suite, GroupWise, which is widely regarded as best avoided.

Way back when WordPerfect was good for its day. Since 1995 it's been an application that is uniformly rejected by its main host OS. To this day printing in WordPerfect in Windows is unreliable and quirky. Despite this, it's no longer a cross-platform application. Current versions run only on Windows now. Some think that Microsoft's investment of $135M in 2000 in a nearly-bankrupt Corel in October of 2000 might have influenced this decision somewhat. At that time Corel's founder Michael Cowpland was accused of insider trading and theft in August of 2000, an issue that was later disproved and settled when his trades were proved to be extremely ill-advised. A suspicious person might even think the accusation were an application of extreme leverage, given a decade of hindsight.

Michael Cowpland deserves his own post - an alumni of precursors to Bell Labs, Nortel Networks and others he cofounded Mitel Networks, founded Corel (which originally stood for COwpland REsearch Labs) and bought control of ZIM Labs. He did a lot of cool stuff.

I don't know what this has to do with the fine article though. WordPerfect was always a commercial application and is still. Source code has never been available, or it would have been fixed long ago.

I've always seen Chrome as a way for Google to stimulate other browsers to be better and drive innovation. Every since Chrome came onto the scene, showing off its fast rendering and javascript engine, other browser companies have had to step up their game

That's true, and that may have been the initial intent, but they've been pushing the Chrome browser like practically no other product of theirs. A Chrome ad appears on Youtube pages very frequently, in several formats, and "types" of ads (some are animated, some are still images saying something like "browser faster"), and they keep making oddball viral-ish Chrome campaigns. I can't think of any product they push this hard (although Google+ may change that).

Chrome market share has been rising inexorably since its release.

It's not just a tech demo anymore. They want the browser market.

Supposedly one of the current patents in the lawsuits is over a grid of icons. Possibly just a square grid? You could maybe go for a hex grid like some of the later Windows Mobile 6.5 variations. Nothing very specific here, but maybe it helps. http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/04/bad-touchwiz-apple-sues-samsung-for-patent-violations.ars

I noted the idiots from arstechnica (not all of them, some are my friends online, DosFreak being one), they're the ones that "turned me on" to it actually going on online, "way back" in 1998 or thereabouts & later in 2003 (they stalked me all over the place online, talk about freaks/sick, etc.-et al).

E.G./I.E.-> First, they were caught red-handed in it pulling it @ MajorGeeks (possibly its predecessor 3dFiles.com, not sure anymore) & gave the owners + admins headaches, & later @ Windows IT Pro Mag forums also... caught in it, both times no less: Talk about DUMB, or rather, not giving a hoot about their personal reputations!

Funniest part is, I caught one of their forums members who blasphemously called himself "GOD" doing it @ arstechnica itself, & he sent me all these bogus harassing emails along with "another fellow" MWNH (The Man With No Head), who was using the SAME EMAIL (talk about stupid) ACCOUNT !

Yes - it was he (or rather, both are same fellow), & he tried to "lie his way out" in front of 1,000's there to no avail saying they were "sharing an email account" (yea, right...).

I ribbed on him for it, & it all stemmed from a simple question to they all:

"What have any of you EVER coded that has done well online or in publications etc. in the trade/field of the computer sciences in comparison to what I've shown you some of what I have?"

Not a SINGLE ONE had, not a one (& they were supposed to be the "big brains" online yea... not!).

The one I noted called "GOD" was in particular a real prick (he is also known as "The Man With No Head" there, funny that, considering he has SO MANY HEADS (identities there)).

I said to he in response (which set him off & he made that stupid mistake of getting caught):

"Only 'GOD' writes code with no bugs - because the CODE WITH NO LINES HAS NO BUGS... & you 'must have faith' that it actually works & will do the job, since 'God' wrote it!"

Everyone started laughing @ he there, & that 'multiple persona' of his "oddly disappeared" (again, 'not').

Nicest/funniest part was that folks there actually enjoyed my humor & said I was the funniest person they ever had there, here -> http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=550261

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM "FUNNIEST ARSIAN EVER" POST:

"dotorg Registered: Apr 23, 2002 Posts: 14814 Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:09 am I miss Crommy, JJ, APK, and Frank (the Spank). All made my crappy days at work better."

Ah, anyhow/anyways:

* I guess what I'm trying to say is, you have to be PRETTY STUPID to do that kind of underhanded LOW bullshit to be honest about it in using multiple pseudonym trolling online...

Simply because, once you're caught in it, & odds are STRONG you will be (because one of your "pals" (yea, right, there's NO LOVE AMONG DEMONS) will probably get 'ticked off" @ you & blow you in for it with that "illustrious type" (not)).

(And folks wonder WHY I don't bother registering here... Oh, I would, except AndyK was a member here before I, & I do not think he posts here anymore, not for years, but, he "locks me out" of "APK" & I won't settle for being anyone else but me... because "I don't care about anyone else but me" (quoting "DROWNING POOL" here -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DysNAn68Dqc&feature=related )

APK

P.S.=> Plus, there's an old adage of "Everything comes out of the wash" so-to-speak, sooner or later is why I stated what I have & used that example. I can't respect anyone that pulls it... it's the province of what I personally call "NOT MEN" (in other words, weasels) - & then when they get "busted" for it? They have to live it down, problem is... you can NEVER really "live down" that type of b.s. imo @ least because nobody will trust you

Apple will probably come out with what you want (again)!

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/07/future-iphone-may-use-near-field-magnetic-resonance-wireless-chargingnewer-wireless-charging-tech-may-be-in-store-for-future-iphone.ars

He is probably referring to this.

Actually the benchmarks show that the 2011's are pretty much on par with the 2010's, within 3-4 FPS. I wouldn't call that significant.

http://lowendmac.com/bookrev/11br/0805.html

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/07/intel-integrated-graphics-not-hampering-sandy-bridge-macs.ars

All the bench marks show the intel integrated graphics are signigficantly worse than the NVIDIA discrete graphics chip in the previous generation of MacBook Air.

Anyone reading this should also read how Cisco lied and got him arrested in Canada ... there's a link right below the description but I'm posting it again here as well:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110722/02351315202/how-cisco-justice-department-conspired-to-try-to-destroy-one-mans-life-daring-to-sue-cisco.shtml

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/a-pound-of-flesh-how-ciscos-unmitigated-gall-derailed-one-mans-life.ars/1

On what basis is Aaron Barr a "star" anywhere, much less a conference about computer security??

When your (former) company is the poster child for how not to do security, I would think your main reason for showing up at DefCon would be if you wanted to be publicly humiliated.

Quality control....

I think he means this sort of thing. Yes, you can get a quality Android device (although I seem to recall Xoom's getting panned for being glitchy) but you don't necessarily GET a quality Android device.

Yes, freedom of choice and all that. Wonderful thing. But at least some of us are talking about how the iPad is the tablet for that enormous (and apparently profitable) swath of Appliance People that wander blankly through malls and upscale stores through this great country of ours.

Of course, YMMV. I'd like to see a Slashdot poll on what level of sophistication and openness can be found in everyone's coffee machine. How many coffee makers have been hacked to run FreeBSD? Who raises their own coffee plants? Is there an app for that?

This six month old story on Ars mentioned more details on the program and 2 of the other major concessions they had to make to get the merger approved. Hiring Meredith Attwell Baker away from the FCC was probably a big help also.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/low-cost-broadband-key-to-comcastnbcu-merger-deal.ars

Lion also has all new privilege separation framework to help with that. From the Siracusa review :

"The idea is to break up a complex application into individual processes, each of which requires only the few entitlements necessary to perform a specific subset of the application's total capabilities.
[...]
Another example from Lion is the Preview application, which completely isolates the PDF parsing code (another historic source of exploits) from all access to the file system."

Together with the sandboxing it sounds pretty robust though time will have to tell.

So I'm puzzled about who might be behind all this "MS is only attacked because it's so popular" propaganda

Might have something to do with the fact that the first machine to fall at Pwn2Own since its inception in 2007 has been a Mac, every time. (2011 Pwn2Own writeup)

The magic word is "Zero-Day". If you find 10 exploits for Windows a month before Pwn2Own, chances are high every single one of them have been exploited by somebody else the day of the contest - meaning you can't win with them. While Charlie Miller will dig out something he has found for last years contest, but nobody else did in the meantime.

So yeah, the fact that Macs keep "winning" Pwn2Own proves that Windows is attacked more. Not that its safer.

This is a shill article because the lie is so fucking obvious to detect. First of all, Android is made by the Open Handset Alliance. Google is of course a very major player in it same as Nokia was a major player in Symbian BUT it is called an alliance for a reason. Google doesn't work on it alone.

So basically Google and a LOT of other players pooled their resources to create a product they could all benefit from and made it available for "free". So? MS used its monopoly resources to create a product nobody else can use for free. Apple used it fast wealth to create a product nobody else can use or even create gadgets for without paying them and they often just refuse to license stuff.

Who is being the bad guy again? Oh of course, Google for being less evil. What people forget about Googles "Don't be evil" slogan is that doesn't say "Be good" it just means don't be as evil as the rest... and in American Business, that is a pretty low standard.

While the parallels between MS of the 90's and Google are exxxxtremely thin --- it works only if you squint REAAAALLLY hard and use a sarcastic dismissive voice :) --- its not a huge stretch to say that Google, and Google alone, controls the features, look&feel, and direction of Android, leveraging close source applications through which they acquire customers, usage, and derive monetization. From Ars Technica, "In fact, development of the Android private branch and the roadmap is controlled by Google, with little input from external parties or the Open Handset Alliance members" http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2011/08/study-android-is-least-open-of-open-source-mobile-platforms.ars And from Droid Life: "Google has really started to enforce 'non-fragmentation clauses', giving the Android team the final say on how much can be tweaked on their stock code" http://www.droid-life.com/2011/03/31/google-tightens-the-android-reigns-time-to-start-controlling-fragmentation/ This enforcement, allegedly, is through access to the very valuable closed-source Google suite of applications -- without which the Android device doesn't do much more than boot. See http://www.gomonews.com/the-android-vs-cyanogen-story-has-google-shot-itself-in-the-foot-by-shooting-down-developer/ That said, no question that its been good (to date) for consumers - it just seems like the contrast between the public stance of Android and the behind-the-scenes shenanigans is... interesting.

So I'm puzzled about who might be behind all this "MS is only attacked because it's so popular" propaganda

Might have something to do with the fact that the first machine to fall at Pwn2Own since its inception in 2007 has been a Mac, every time.
(2011 Pwn2Own writeup)
Wikipedia link of the whole sorry history

In the first contest, Dino A. Dai Zovi and Shane Macaulay worked together to take down the first MacBook Pro.[5] On the second day of the conference Macauley sent an email which redirected the user to a malicious site. The site was able to infect the machine with a client-side Javascript vulnerability which allowed arbitrary command execution

In the 2008 contest, a successful exploit of Safari caused Mac OS X to be the first OS to fall in a hacking competition....

Etc, ad naseum.

Financial incentive? Check. Mac hacked? Check.

I may be way off-beam here but I think Android is open source and IE isn't.

You think very wrong.

... and people here told me I was an idiot and didn't know what I was talking about and on and on and on. Good to know, at least, I'm not the only one.

But I do see .NET for what it could have been -- the application programming API for the migration to the next Windows OS which isn't Win32/64 compatible. Microsoft still doesn't have the balls to shift to a brand new OS the way Apple did. But they should have done that a long, long time ago.

That's because you are an idiot....... Along with everyone who didn't want to do any research, as @Kensai7 has already said ars has been over this extensively. It is not going away. Maybe another link to the article will help people understand: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/06/windows-8-for-software-developers-the-longhorn-dream-reborn.ars

What other arguments would you like to see than this study?

Maybe World of Goo is a good example. A great indie game that got great reviews. Still 90% of people pirated it while it didn't even cost that much. Later they even offered pay-what-you-want model, but still the piracy rate is the same. Another indie game also had 90% piracy. It's just the norm, it has nothing to do with how good the game is. People just rather pirate than buy, if they can. I'm not surprised companies are looking for DRM methods, even if just to keep the piracy out for a little bit during the first few weeks so that people who want to play it buy it because they cant pirate it.

Microsoft *is* apparently building .Net closer in to the OS with Windows 8 - this was the vision for Longhorn (out of it we got much of what makes .Net 3+ awesome today) - but with Jupiter, this is apparently becoming a reality. - the announcement will be at http://buildwindows.com/
more info: http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/06/windows-8-for-software-developers-the-longhorn-dream-reborn.ars/2

Either way, .Net is still a very exciting ecosystem to be involved with, there's some mind blowing stuff going in and around it, and it is still an extremely viable development platform for a, quite frankly, huge percentage of the worlds top companies & financial institutions. Articles and questions like this always amaze me with their naivety of what is happening in the business world.

But the new standard's gonna be the web, and not even Microsoft can stop that.

And it doesn't appear they plan to, at least for now.

Submitter clearly has no idea. See here.

According to an Ars Technica article, .NET will be first-class citizen in Windows 8.

All examples of usage of the extradition has been where the act has been illegal in both countries, *and* the US has been able to show that some of the act was carried out in the US.

What about Richard O'Dwyer of TVShack fame? http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/big-content-unveils-latest-antipiracy-weapon-extradition.ars/

The legality of linking It's not clear whether O'Dwyer has even committed a crime under UK law. O'Dwyer is not accused of hosting infringing content himself. Instead, his site provided links to content hosted by other websites. In December, a British judge ruled in favor of TV-Links, a website that, like Tvshack, offered links to video content, some of it infringing.

There was also a guy (nivenhbro) in the Ars Technica forums who conducted pretty crazy nuclear experiments at home. Apparently, he ended up irradiating himself. =/ People in the forum were split between giving him cautious engineering advice and flat out telling him to stop immediately. Finally, one guy apparently called the FBI on him.

Huge drama etc. This is the original thread (with gems like "I got that shit wrong. I am breeding plutonium 239. I got it messed up." and "I am laying off the x-rays for a while. I figured my latest dose to be about 50rem, so I am going to play it safe for a bit."), and this is a followup thread.

There was also a guy (nivenhbro) in the Ars Technica forums who conducted pretty crazy nuclear experiments at home. Apparently, he ended up irradiating himself. =/ People in the forum were split between giving him cautious engineering advice and flat out telling him to stop immediately. Finally, one guy apparently called the FBI on him.

Huge drama etc. This is the original thread (with gems like "I got that shit wrong. I am breeding plutonium 239. I got it messed up." and "I am laying off the x-rays for a while. I figured my latest dose to be about 50rem, so I am going to play it safe for a bit."), and this is a followup thread.

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/07/renewable-power-booms-in-developing-world-as-it-tops-nuclear-in-the-us.ars

Maybe they didn't, maybe they did. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/lulzsec-spokesman-in-court-after-police-find-750k-passwords-on-his-pc.ars Who knows...

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/internet-abuzz-with-claims-that-uk-police-picked-up-the-wrong-topiary.ars

It's possible that they are tossing the police ringers.

And get ready for the screwiness of copyright law to come into play.

It's already happened, with groups doing DMCA notifications on sites containing 3D shape files.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/the-next-napster-copyright-questions-as-3d-printing-comes-of-age.ars

I wonder what the wrapper on the Apple iPrinter3D will have. "Please don't steal... " ...? (Like how the iPods all say "please don't steal music").

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock does

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server & back to you).

8.) AdBlock does

WHERE YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED IT (Opera allows for this, in its "by site" preferences, or using NoScript on FF)?

* Well, then? You are NOT "trackable" by this...

Beating DNSBL logging can be "blown by" as well by hardcoding your favs. into your HOSTS file (but it won't beat deep packet inspection, NOR defend vs. BGP exploits, but encryption can hinder DPI even)...

Some folks noted TOR, but that slows you down (not as bad as anonymous proxies do though)... new NEWS/NewsFlash:

TOR has "weaknesses" with apps that have "hardcodes" to certain DNS servers (there are those, like Windows Update for instance, as perhaps NOT the "best example" since for the most part it's a good thing, but it is one)....

Plus, face it: IF you *THINK* those highly anonymous proxies &/or TOR endpoints do NOT have a HIGH %-age of them setup by law enforcement nowadays? You're OUTTA YOUR MIND!

(That's the 1st thing I'd do were I out to 'track & control' wrongdoers online - I'd setup honeypots by the truckload!)

NOW, You KNOW I have to post this now also, as I always do, in favor of HOSTS files & "layered security" over things like AdBlock, DNS Servers, & even Firewalls + Antivirus/AntiSpyware alone:

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make D

WHERE YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED IT (Opera allows for this, in its "by site" preferences, or using NoScript on FF)?

* Well, then? You are NOT "trackable" by this...

Beating DNSBL logging can be "blown by" as well by hardcoding your favs. into your HOSTS file (but it won't beat deep packet inspection, NOR defend vs. BGP exploits, but encryption can hinder DPI even)...

Some folks noted TOR, but that slows you down (not as bad as anonymous proxies do though)... new NEWS/NewsFlash:

TOR has "weaknesses" with apps that have "hardcodes" to certain DNS servers (there are those, like Windows Update for instance, as perhaps NOT the "best example" since for the most part it's a good thing, but it is one)....

Plus, face it: IF you *THINK* those highly anonymous proxies &/or TOR endpoints do NOT have a HIGH %-age of them setup by law enforcement nowadays? You're OUTTA YOUR MIND!

(That's the 1st thing I'd do were I out to 'track & control' wrongdoers online - I'd setup honeypots by the truckload!)

NOW, You KNOW I have to post this now also, as I always do, in favor of HOSTS files & "layered security" over things like AdBlock, DNS Servers, & even Firewalls + Antivirus/AntiSpyware alone:

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make D

The ruling focuses on how having a different arrangement of bonds in the DNA that is isolated is enough to distinguish it in its natural state. But the court was faced with briefs that suggested this was a dangerous line of reasoning, since elements like lithium are reactive enough that they only exist naturally as part of a chemical compound. Does this mean that someone can patent pure lithium? The court indicated the answer is no, because "elemental lithium is the same element whether it is in the earth or isolated." That would also seem to be true of a gene whether it is in the body or isolated, as the dissent pointed out; the decision doesn't elaborate on where it sees a difference.

source: http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/07/appeals-court-overrules-lower-court-upholds-breast-cancer-gene-test.ars

I'm a scientist... so I do read quite a few journals / journal articles every month... but only in my specific area. To keep up with science in general I like the coverage over at Arstechnica: http://arstechnica.com/science/

It covers a really wide range of topics and is generally very insightful. They also always link to publications on the particular subject so you can read more if the story really piqued your interest.

I agree with reading about it on the Internet. I like RSS, but I've found it homogenizes my content so that things don't jump out at me and the really interesting stories get buried with all the mediocre ones. So I keep the following list of bookmarks to check on a weekly basis:

ABC (Australia) Science, ABC (US) Science, Air & Space Magazine, ARKive, Ars Technica, BBC SciTech News, CBS Sci-Tech News, Chet Raymo, Cosmos News, Current: Science, Discover, Discovery News, Edge, Economist Science, EurekAlert!, Flyp media, Futurity, h+, Inkling Magazine, LiveScience, Massimo Pigliucci, Mother Jones Environment, MSNBC Science News, National Geographic News, National Public Radio (US), Natural History Magazine, New Scientist, New York Times Science, New Yorker Science, Newsweek Science, Orion, PhysOrg, Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, R&D Magazine, Ripley's Believe It or Not!, Science Daily, Scientific American, Seed Magazine, Science Cheerleader, Science News, Schrodinger's Kitten, Slashdot Science, Smithsonian, Space.com, The Technium, Time Magazine Science, USA Today Science, US News & World Report Science, Wired News, World Changing

I enjoy reading the articles on Slashdot, following the links, and then looking around on the websites of the links that hold the science-related articles. Besides many of the blogs mentioned, I enjoy Ars Technica http://arstechnica.com/ although it is mainly tech, video games, tech policy (I particularly like the Law & Disorder section), and physics.

Not to sound unoriginal, but that's the only one off the top of my head that I can think of that hasn't been mentioned. Before the pay wall, I read a lot of the New York Times sections on Technology, Science, and Medical Science (yes, the New York Times if heavily liberal but I don't mind so much personally - stay out of the Opinion section if you are not a fan). I also usually skim the USA Today's Science section, and read Wired, PhysOrg, and the NASA blogs (http://www.nasa.gov/).

Also, a book I am reading now called 'Who's Afraid of Schrödinger's Cat' by Ian Marshall and Danah Zohar (Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Afraid-Schr%C3%B6dingers-Guide-Science-Thinking/dp/0688161073 ) is a very enjoyable overview of a lot of what they call the 'New Thinking'. Unfortunately it was published in 1997, so its a little behind (as am I), but still a very good read for the scientific layman.

Sciencedaily is good, but the sheer volume of content is very difficult to keep up with.

I personally like arstechnica's science coverage. Their articles are *always* well researched and written and usually very interesting. http://arstechnica.com/science/

Only the top 1,000 IPs (for now). Makes perfect sense for PayPal, and its pretty easy to do. "Anonymous", huh. Idiots.

More information and analysis on ars.

What he said was ambiguous. Highly partisan people can't help but express themselves this way though. He wants to raise money. He wants to make sure the Republican wins. He happens to also have the motive and opportunity to ensure that that happens. This is very bad. The state shouldn't be using bullshit voting equipment like that anyway, but the fact that this guy is so openly partisan just feeds the suspicion. We need secure, accountable machines. The damn courts seem to be no help on this subject. Texas courts have let this stuff slide already. It's insane. It only seems to happen because those in power want to keep things the way they are. That's the system that got them into power, after all.

You make no sense. Android is a much more open platform than Oracle-owned Java will ever be.

Except when the company refuses to give us the source code.

With JavaSE, I can get the source code to the current Java version at any time, under the GPLv2 license from the Mercurial repository on the OpenJDK site. It's JavaME that's the problem there, because it's intentionally being withheld.

(JavaEE is being ignored here, as it's just a set of standards that has about 10 different implementations, half of which are open source).

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

FROM http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34532122

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

FROM http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34532122

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions via NSLOOKUP, PINGS, &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

6.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs

A custom HOSTS file: To block out advertising, period! It's my bandwidth I pay for, for one thing (yours too), out of pocket - I want ALL of what I paid for (not just some, not 1/2... ALL!). It's apparently not only your money's worth being reamed by ad networks, but now also your privacy (as well as adbanners being shown & proven to harbor malicious script malware @ times since around 2004 as well (more than just a few times in fact)).

Not only do you surf NOTICEABLY FASTER using one, but also safer as well, and you get all of the bandwidth you pay for too (triple bonus).

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

FROM http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34532122

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw ->

A custom HOSTS file: To block out advertising, period! It's my bandwidth I pay for, for one thing (yours too), out of pocket - I want ALL of what I paid for (not just some, not 1/2... ALL!). It's apparently not only your money's worth being reamed by ad networks, but now also your privacy (as well as adbanners being shown & proven to harbor malicious script malware @ times since around 2004 as well (more than just a few times in fact)).

Not only do you surf NOTICEABLY FASTER using one, but also safer as well, and you get all of the bandwidth you pay for too (triple bonus).

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

FROM http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907528&cid=34532122

Now?

20++ ADVANTAGES OF HOSTS FILES OVER DNS SERVERS &/or ADBLOCK ALONE for added layered security:

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program).

2.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

HOSTS files are NOT BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked, proving HOSTS files are a better solution for this because they cannot be blocked & detected for, in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."

and

"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!

----

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF, Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 4-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, hosts do (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw ->

Sanitation: Like the government garbage strikes in NYC, where trash piled up for weeks? A private company would get the trash picked up (unless prevented from doing so by "labor laws").

Medicine: Government has run up the costs, and slowed the pace of innovation. When rich Canadians need surgery they leave their socialized system for the semi-socialized US system.

Education: Like in Atlanta, where the government schools cheat to get money? The more control government has gained over education, the worse it has become. Or the fact that almost half of all US high school graduates are functionally illiterate.

Wine: I have no idea what that has to do with government.

Public Order: Wars in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Panama, the Baltics. That's just a sample of the US's "public order" this century. If we look at the last century, we can add the Holocaust, the Soviet purges, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, Mao's cleansing, and countless other atrocities. Cops commit more murders in the US than they prevent, and as in the cases of Jose Guerena or John T. Williams, they get away with it. I refrain from murder, rape, and theft because it's wrong, not because it's illegal. And the vast majority of the population does as well.

Irrigation: All the irrigation systems I know of are private. But I don't claim any level of expertise in the field.

Roads: High quality roads, indeed! A private firm would see a bridge (or a road) as an asset to be maintained, in order to reduce the risk of lawsuits, and maintain revenue. To government it's an expense with nothing new and shiny to show the voters.

Fresh water: That would be fairly difficult to do in private industry...at least the way we do it now. But it's not done at the federal level. The farther control of something gets from the people, the worse it seems to get.

Public Health: Is having idiots scream that we're all going to die from the bird flu, or the swine flu, or the flying pigs flu a good thing?

Other than those things, government is responsible for hundreds of millions of murders, stealing wealth from its owners and diverting it to those with political connections (particularly banks and military contractors), and generally slowing the progress of our society.

After the 1984 debacle, they promised not to do it again. Then they did it again. http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2010/12/amazons-latest-kindle-deletion-erotic-incest-themed-fiction.ars