Slashdot Mirror

I did some Googling and apparently Chrome will send the following header when prefetching:

X-Purpose: instant

http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/webmasters-faq.html#instant

So it looks like it will be easy for me to block just as I have blocked Firefox prefetches.

How are they reaching these numbers? Every time I got to http://plus.google.com/ it says:
"Already invited? We've temporarily exceeded our capacity. Please try again soon."

Lot's of early adopters - sure... but where are any new numbers coming from!?!? seriously, cause I'd like to check it out. Is there a backdoor?

I've been using Google a long time, back even when it was nothing but a web search engine. When Google Mail first came out in its not so public form years ago, I managed to wrangle an invite from a friend of a friend, and I have happily used and enjoyed almost all the Google apps that have come out since. I log in to Google several times a day, constantly use Books, Earth, Maps, Docs, Blogger, and will miss Health big time. Chrome is my default browser. Google knows, or must know, how much I love their apps, I use them every day.

So,.... where's my Google+ invite? Five, 10, 20 million people have already been invited and joined up, even a bunch of them now banned. Seems like a lot of celebs were given one. Even invites given to their competitors. A lot of you have been given invites, and many of you don't even use or like Google. Hate them, even. But you got one. I don't want one of yours, I want an invite from Google, where I should be getting one from. But what am I offered? This https://services.google.com/fb/forms/googleplus site for to sign up for only news about when Google+ may soon be ready, and maybe some day, just maybe someone within Google will condescend to pass along an invite to a poor unknown long time Google user, maybe after about half the fricking world have already been given an invite. No one I know has an invite, no one they know has an invite, either. Just where are all these invites coming from?

Thanks, Google, for the consideration after all the love and support I've given you all these years. >:-(

The difference is in implementation. Link prefetching was already supported in Chrome (and Firefox), which fetches the page in the background and stores the results in cache. Chrome 13 goes a step farther, actually prerendering the page in the background if requested (including running Javascript).

Implementation details are here: http://code.google.com/chrome/whitepapers/prerender.html

It looks like they are going to try to address that with the upcoming Visibility API:

http://code.google.com/chrome/whitepapers/pagevisibility.html

However, it seems to be JavaScript based which, at least to me, is not a desirable way to determine whether or not the page is being pre-loaded.

At least Firefox sent a "X-moz: prefetch" header which I used to ignore the traffic on those requests.

Until Chrome finally adds most-recently-used tab order for switching between tabs, there are a lot of people who won't touch it, no matter what other changes you make to the browser.

it works if the domain admin has started the Google accounts transition. It is planed that this will be done automatically soon. Take note that the domain admin can control what Google services you will be able to use with you domain account

Blocking results in Google search is built into the search...the Chrome extension is just a better UI.

For known domains, Google has a page that lets you quickly add sites to block. Note that you must be logged in to your Google account for this to work.

For arbitrary domains, do a search, click on the link in the Google results, then click the "back" in your browser. The Google result will now have a "block" option.

You can turn on "Multiple sign-in" from your account settings page to get this to work: http://www.google.com/support/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=181599

You can add it manually: http://www.google.com/reviews/t.

Downloaded extension, blocked.

Link to extension, for people like me who don't get out too much: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nolijncfnkgaikbjbdaogikpmpbdcdef#

Desperate to get off the site, Cabibi quickly found an apparent ally: RemoveSlander.com. “You are not a criminal,” the website said reassuringly. “End this humiliating ordeal Bail out of Google. We can delete the mug-shot photo.”

Well, the best reaction would have been: contact the other mug-shots and start a " Block florida.arrests.org" campaign on Google. If there are enough of them, the florida.arrests.org will sunk into the oblivion.

Hey, should the /.-ers help? Like: log into your gmail account, do a search after "Florida mugshots" and use the "Block ... " feature?

Aww... c'mon guys, let's see how fast we can pull the carpet under the feet of the computer-savvy Florida ex-con named Rob Wiggen. I just did it, also blocking from my results the www.mugshots.com, mugshotsusa.com and a bunch of others (we should stop only when the real public records will get onto the first page).

http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/browse_thread/thread/6cdc99eaaba91855/09eb7f4c973349f2?hl=en#09eb7f4c973349f2
"This essay explain why luxury safer electric (or plug-in hybrid) cars should be free-to-the-user at the point of sale in the USA, and why this will reduce US taxes overall. Essentially, unsafe gasoline-powered automobiles in the USA pose a high cost on society (accidents, injuries, pollution, defense), and the costs of making better cars would pay for themselves and then some. This essay is an example of using post-scarcity ideology to understand the scarcity-oriented ideological assumptions in our society and how those outdated scarcity assumptions are costing our society in terms of creating and maintaining artificial scarcity."

Electrical security is just one more reason. Electric cars can help in balancing renewable energy shifts in a smart grid, too.

Interesting analysis by the numbers thanks.

Still, it is also true the cost of some commodities has declined during that time, too. Computing has dropped during that time. So has the cost of housing (good for some, bad for others). And probably the cost of employing labor has dipped a bit (which is both good and bad). The relative premium for some organic food items may be declining.

Solar panel prices have dropped in half, which has huge implications, as GE predicts by 2015 they will be cheaper to use than fossil fuels. That cheap clean energy will in turn eventually drive down other prices (see Julian Simon also).

Are there any other commodities that have gone down in cost during that time?

Quality for some things have also improved. Car quality has improved during that time for the same cost. Medicine has improved some. The internet has gotten better (more content, more choices). Mobile phones are way better for the same price in terms of features. It is hard to capture that in simple numbers.

Some of those commodity rises are also due to the rise of consumption in China.

Still, overall, I tend to agree with your economic pessimism. Our scarcity-oriented economic system built around an income-through-jobs link is unable to handle 21st century trends (especially from the rise of robotics and AI, coupled with limited demand like due to environmentalism).

On alternative economic approaches (by me):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vK-M_e0JoY
http://knol.google.com/k/beyond-a-jobless-recovery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Income_Guarantee

Lots of other suggestions cole ted by me here:
http://knol.google.com/k/beyond-a-jobless-recovery
"This article explores the issue of a "Jobless Recovery" mainly from a heterodox economic perspective. It emphasizes the implications of ideas by Marshall Brain and others that improvements in robotics, automation, design, and voluntary social networks are fundamentally changing the structure of the economic landscape. It outlines towards the end four major alternatives to mainstream economic practice (a basic income, a gift economy, stronger local subsistence economies, and resource-based planning). These alternatives could be used in combination to address what, even as far back as 1964, has been described as a breaking "income-through-jobs link". This link between jobs and income is breaking because of the declining value of most paid human labor relative to capital investments in automation and better design. Or, as is now the case, the value of paid human labor like at some newspapers or universities is also declining relative to the output of voluntary social networks such as for digital content production (like represented by this document). It is suggested that we will need to fundamentally reevaluate our economic theories and practices to adjust to these new realities emerging from exponential trends in technology and society."

"Velocity of money? No, it's about velocity of knowledge, freedom of the market, lower friction, and overall more wealth."

From: http://groups.google.com/group/openvirgle/msg/e4638f0fdd9f7ef1?hl=en

Banks' Observation on Money: "Money is a sign of poverty."

Fernhout's Corollary to Banks' Observation on Money: "The degree to which money needs to be handled in a society is inversely proportional to the abundance of imagination, skill, freedom, effort, and community present."

And mathematically:
      M = 1 / I * S * F * E * C

"If you are willing to work for a shadowy unaccountable government agency that loves to violate the rights of its own countrymen, well, you didn't have much character or moral/ethical fiber to begin with."

AC, The problem with this line of argument is that if no good people work there for that reason, it is bound to be even worse. It's a general problem with the US DOD more broadly. I feel the US military is being horribly misused by US politicans to fight wars whose main point seems to be to line the pockets of those in the war racket (see Smedly Butler), but, if only the worst of the worst join the US security forces because they are being misused, where does that leave us as a country?

I wrote this about the CIA, but it applies equally well to a place like the NSA:
"On dealing with social hurricanes (like the US CIA) "
http://www.pdfernhout.net/on-dealing-with-social-hurricanes.html
"This approximately 60 page document is a ramble about ways to ensure the CIA (as well as other big organizations) remains (or becomes) accountable to human needs and the needs of healthy, prosperous, joyful, secure, educated communities. The primarily suggestion is to encourage a paradigm shift away from scarcity thinking & competition thinking towards abundance thinking & cooperation thinking within the CIA and other organizations. I suggest that shift could be encouraged in part by providing publicly accessible free "intelligence" tools and other publicly accessible free information that all people (including in the CIA and elsewhere) can, if they want, use to better connect the dots about global issues and see those issues from multiple perspectives, to provide a better context for providing broad policy advice. It links that effort to bigger efforts to transform our global society into a place that works well for (almost) everyone that millions of people are engaged in. A central Haudenosaunee story-related theme is the transformation of Tadodaho through the efforts of the Peacemaker from someone who was evil and hurtful to someone who was good and helpful. Another theme is exploring the meaning, if true, of a allegation by Wayne Madsen about President Obama's deeper connection to the CIA than was otherwise known."

The thing is, we all need security. The issue is how to go about getting it in a non-ironic way, whcih I suggest here means focusing on intrinsic security and mutual security:
http://www.pdfernhout.net/recognizing-irony-is-a-key-to-transcending-militarism.html

One other alternative is for civilians to take on more of an interest in security and other public intelligence matters; see:
"The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensemaking etc."
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/2846ca1b6bee64e1

Why not allow both and let the userbase sort out who they do and do not add on their professional (cathedral) and personal (bazaar) accounts?

google won't let us filter out the comment spammers. They'd have to add a flag for each user as "real" or "anonymous coward" and then add a filter flag so we don't have to see the AC/spammers.

You can control who sees your posts in the circles. You cannot, more or less, control who spams your comments, for better or worse.

Circles are unidirectional, not bidirectional like other services.

A typical failure mode would be I add wiedzmin to my circles, and whenever you post, I spamflood your post comments, and there's nothing you can do about it at this time. Needless to say, I'm not going to behave like that using my real name, so you need not worry. Allowing an infinite collection of ACs in would only make it worse.

cooooool . i like this post :)))) i circle u if u too

The spamflood has already started. The biggest mistake Google is making is assuming that the owner of the account is the spammer (or conversely that the spammer actually cares about the fate of the account). That hasn't been true of email spam for years now, and it's not true of Google+ accounts.

Arguments about what constitutes a real name aside, Google has completely missed the boat where the nature of online identity is concerned. They may want a cathedral, but human society is far too bazaar (sorry) for that.

Laugh however much you like about Liberal Arts majors, but this is a classic case of mistakenly believing that an engineering solution exists for every problem.

More likely accounts would mostly be used for post spam than pure harassment. Browse /. and look at the score -5 to 0 posts for a good idea of what anonymous G+ would mostly look like.

No need. G+ is already looking like that.

You mean transmission like this? I had no idea Amazon was such a scofflaw!

They specifically state it does not need to be your real name.

Except that I am blocked because my name, Drew from Zhrodague, does not fit their Terms of Service. Google+ has my profile blocked:

Hi, Thank you for contacting us with regard to our review of the name you are trying to use in your Google Profile. After review of your appeal, we have determined that the name you want to use violates our Community Standards. You can review our name guidelines at http://www.google.com/support/+/bin/answer.py?answer=1228271 If you edit your name to comply with our policies in the future, please respond to this email so that we can re-review your profile. Sincerely, Duyen The Google Profiles Support Team

Well since Eric Raymond, who wrote the book, is using Google+ and is blogging about it (entries here, here, here and here), maybe someone should ask him.

You'll get about 100 more points if you ask him on G+

https://plus.google.com/108967323530519754654/posts

One of his recent blog / G+ posts is kinda relevant to this discussion:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3514

So, teachers are all potential pedophiles, eh?

Yes. Where the fuck have you been the last twenty years? Hell, I knew a fifteen year old girl who befriended a PE teacher in her district online and within a week, he made a trip to her home while her mother was gone for the day and they banged. It happens all the time. Read the news, if you doubt me. Just don't set a Google News Alert on the keywords, because it'll be filling your inbox.

http://www.google.com/search?q=teacher+sex+with+student

FOSS, as advantageous as it is in value (in many cases) contributes against the velocity of money by allowing consumers to pocket money which would otherwise "move" as a result of bundled software licenses.

That's the most broken windows thinking I've seen in a while.

When is Windows thinking not broken?

For a car analogy, see http://books.google.com/patents/about?id=p5BXAAAAEBAJ and the half dozen or so patents that reference it.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with David Hahn?

"Knew or should have known" is not the standard for willful infringement. Since In re Seagate Tech., LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) the test for willful infringement has been recklessness. That is, "to establish willful infringement, a patentee must show by clear and convincing evidence that the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent." 497 F.3d at 1371. That is a higher standard than it was pre-Seagate, when the standard was closer to what you stated.

I haven't tried it myself but what I heard about was this: http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/ . Looks like other than Ruby those are native? Weather or not they're usable is a different question entirely...

Personally I really like Ruby, but if it runs like mud and can't really do anything through JRuby then I'll have to pass on it.

The only useful thing Edison actually invented was the lightbulb. Most everything else was invented by his staff and patented under the Edison company. His rejection of AC in the face of its clear benefits and his insistence on 'magnetic ore mining' as the future way to dig for gold shows he didn't have much creative talent.

He killed thousands of dogs and cats, including horses and an elephant. Read the book "The Electric Chair: An Unnatural American History". Here's a link to an electronic version from Google: http://books.google.com/books?id=nSLU3ge91NoC&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Specifically pages 74 and 77-79 (and others) talk about the animals he murdered. He really was a sadistic bastard.

The technology itself isn't bullshit, but what is bullshit is that Euclideon is taking credit for other people's work.

They say they've invented the methods and algorithms behind it all, well that's just pure fantasy. Here's what Euclideon is basing there technology off of:

http://research.nvidia.com/publication/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees-analysis-extensions-and-implementatio [nvidia.com]
http://artis.imag.fr/Publications/2009/CNLE09/ [artis.imag.fr]

Here's video from 2009 which looks better than Euclideon's videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HScYuRhgEJw [youtube.com]

They might also be using other people's source code (legally though, it's released under the Apache license): http://code.google.com/p/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees/ [google.com]

Furthermore, it's not "unlimited detail", you will always have a limited amount of RAM and disk space, therefore you have limits to your detail, even with procedural content generation. But your effective compression rate is 1-bit per voxel, so 20 billion voxels = 2.5GB, so you need to utilize dynamic content streaming from disk to the GPU.

Don't bother, they're taking credit for other people's work. You want to know how their technology works? Here's a couple of research papers:

http://research.nvidia.com/publication/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees-analysis-extensions-and-implementatio
http://artis.imag.fr/Publications/2009/CNLE09/

Want some source code? http://code.google.com/p/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees/
Want a video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HScYuRhgEJw

Euclideon is just spinning up the marketing bullshit and trying to make a profit off of it all. They don't even have good lighting, they're just doing forward shading for each voxel ray-cast intersection using diffuse lighting with a single global point light source. And they haven't demonstrated robust animation yet.

Guess what, it is possible to animate voxel octrees, but Euclideon never came up with the method either. Some researcher in Germany came up with a working solution for his bachelor's thesis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl6PE_n6zTk

Euclideon is unjustly taking credit for other people's hard work. They say they've invented the methods and algorithms behind it all, well that's just pure fantasy. Here's what Euclideon is basing there technology off of:

http://research.nvidia.com/publication/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees-analysis-extensions-and-implementatio
http://artis.imag.fr/Publications/2009/CNLE09/

Here's video from 2009 which looks better than Euclideon's videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HScYuRhgEJw

They might also be using other people's source code (legally though, it's released under the Apache license): http://code.google.com/p/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees/

Furthermore, it's not "unlimited detail", you will always have a limited amount of RAM and disk space, therefore you have limits to your detail, even with procedural content generation.

Stop virally spreading this video, you're only helping Euclideon profit from more page views and attention.

No poofters!

heya,

Yeah, I have to agree with the parent and all the other repliers.

This is frigging ridiculous - my old Nokia could record my calls fine. Heck, Windows Mobile 6.5 phones can record the damn call.

Yet on Android - the inablity to record calls has been an outstanding bug for what...2 years?

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=2117

And guess what - it's also currently ranked number *eight* by users for Android bugs:

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/list?can=2&q=&sort=-stars&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary%20Stars

I think it goes to show that Google isn't very good at the "listening to user's part". Lol. I mean, they make cool projects, and I'm sure they're brilliantly smart and all. But actually listening to users is definitely not their forte. Pft.

All the current workarounds require you to root your phone, and even then, work reliably on all handsets they will not...

If this trojan can actually do what it claims to do - I hope somebody dissects it, and packages the functionality into an application on Android Market.

Cheers,
Victor

heya,

Yeah, I have to agree with the parent and all the other repliers.

This is frigging ridiculous - my old Nokia could record my calls fine. Heck, Windows Mobile 6.5 phones can record the damn call.

Yet on Android - the inablity to record calls has been an outstanding bug for what...2 years?

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=2117

And guess what - it's also currently ranked number *eight* by users for Android bugs:

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/list?can=2&q=&sort=-stars&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary%20Stars

I think it goes to show that Google isn't very good at the "listening to user's part". Lol. I mean, they make cool projects, and I'm sure they're brilliantly smart and all. But actually listening to users is definitely not their forte. Pft.

All the current workarounds require you to root your phone, and even then, work reliably on all handsets they will not...

If this trojan can actually do what it claims to do - I hope somebody dissects it, and packages the functionality into an application on Android Market.

Cheers,
Victor

Whichever one runs on FreeBSD: http://images.google.com/images?q=freebsd

Also commonly packaged as "brake cleaner" (except in California).

The stuff does evaporate very quickly, at least in the quantities I'm familiar with. I use it as a general-purpose cleaner/degreaser on all kinds of stuff, and I keep a can of it in the basement to quickly and quietly dispatch any of the horrible spiders that can be found down there.

Also commonly packaged as "brake cleaner" (except in California).

The stuff does evaporate very quickly, at least in the quantities I'm familiar with. I use it as a general-purpose cleaner/degreaser on all kinds of stuff, and I keep a can of it in the basement to quickly and quietly dispatch any of the horrible spiders that can be found down there.

Laundering money through the lotto is a fairly common way to do it. Common enough that I don't feel I need a reference, but here's a few:
http://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+use+a+lottery+for+money+laundering

You're exaggerating a bit, I think. Don't get me wrong -- you're on the right track, but I think you are extrapolating beyond what the evidence allows.

First, and foremost, everything we do is based upon a risk and value assessment. We may not consider it as such, and we may not even be consciously aware we are doing it, but the process happens in each and every one of us in every decision we make. Stand eyeball to eyeball with a cop...for what? If I am looking at a $50 speeding ticket vs. half a day in court, it's not worth it except possibly for pride. Even if you only make ten or twelve bucks an hour -- and I make well over that figure -- then spending 4-5 hours sitting in traffic court to fight the ticket is a waste of my time and money. Sure, the cop might be wrong, but even IF I can prove it, it's a Pyrrhic Victory. Furthermore, I think people *are* starting to stand up to abuses of authority. Have you seen what's happening at our airports? TSO's aren't LEO's, but they are still in a position of authority, and more and more people are starting to echo John Tyner's "Don't touch my junk!" rallying cry.

Second, perhaps most people have never written their elected officials (I have, FWIW), but I would argue that's more a reflection on how little effect most people expect it to have. Sure, you can vote for "the other guy", but what do you do when he's just the other side of the coin from the crook in office now? Look how well it worked with Barak Obama. Hope and change? Yeah, right. More like "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." My elected officials didn't give a rip about my opinion until Sharon Cissna started saying the same thing. Whatever. At least they're paying a little more attention to the issue now.

What you and others call "whining on the Internet" sounds an awful lot like building a base of support to me. Sure, I could go off half-cocked on my pet issue, but is one person going to draw a lot of media attention? How about if I can rally a hundred people to march outside the Federal Building downtown? NOW I might gather some attention. What if I can get a thousand people to rally with me? You see, you are exemplifying yet another problem with Americans: we have microwave, MTV attention spans. If I can't get satisfaction with 30 seconds, I'm not interested. You see people whining but not doing anything. I see a critical mass building. You are expecting people to flash into action, but have you ever seen what happens when you put a match in a cap full of gasoline? Sure, you get a big flame...for about ten seconds until it burns out. But if you take your time gathering tinder, then kindling, then some branches, then some logs, get it all in place and ONLY THEN strike the match, you get a bonfire. If you want to change the country, it will take a really huge freaking bonfire, not a cap full of gasoline. Patience, grasshopper.

Yeah, we're too comfortable in the U.S. We have a lot to lose, and the majority of the country still hasn't lost enough for it to be worth risking what they still have. But the more Washington squeezes Joe the Plumber, the less he has to lose. Sooner or later, the politicians will realize that Americans have had enough and try to make things right...or the nation will collectively grow a pair and kick the crooks out. I'm hoping for the former; the latter would not be pleasant.

They're finally merging the search and URL bars, which I'm sure some Slashdotters will scream bloody murder over, but which I can't help but think it's about time.

When I'm using a browser like this I type http://google.com/ in the address bar and search from there. I'm not sure why anybody other than retards would do searches from the address bar? I sure as hell would never gift addresses or my complete browsing history to google via their suggestive search.

Yes

No, that's not even roughly correct. It would be a circle with a diameter of about 124 miles.

Which is also incorrect, it's about 61.8 miles.

If my Math-Fu is not failing me.

sqrt ( 12000 / 2 * Pi ) = 43.7 mile radius.

The math is weak in this one :)

The formula for the area of a circle is pi * r^2 (really, Slashdot, you don't allow the ASCII ii symbol?) Solving for r gives us sqrt(12000/pi) which turns out to be about 61.8 miles. As other posters have pointed out this is suspiciously close to 100 km, leading one to believe that it's an estimate and not necessarily accurate. It does mean that you might be able to deliver internet to space by the most common definition :)

Right on! What's more...

Alien & Aliens. Now THAT would be a movie.

doesn't this qualify? There's even a video game

It can be done, see NotScript: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/odjhifogjcknibkahlpidmdajjpkkcfn

>> currently an extension like NoScript for Firefox is practically impossible to implement in Chrome

Not true - see NotScripts: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/odjhifogjcknibkahlpidmdajjpkkcfn

Works very well.

I don't know of any ABP equivalents, there may not be any; I use Privoxy anyway, which is really a much more capable tool than ABP and does a lot more for the security and privacy conscious.

Has Google TiSP come to Dundee?

http://www.google.com/tisp/install.html

"Stealing democracy, one billion dollars at a time."

just hover with your mouse over the text "NYSE Euronext" on the map.

Is this the project? and if so are you calming that code in the gov.nj.framework namespace wasn't written for anyone in particular?

Unofficial tools exist. There's no mystery, Apple releases tools on their platform which support their platform just like MS does or pretty much every vendor since the dawn of time. Why the hell would they want to waste all that effort to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux ?