This genuinely makes me sad. Nobody uses it, but it's a kick in the balls to all those old, historic web sites we grew up with. The pioneers of the web! What's the point of archive.org if eventually old web sites don't render any more as they used to?
Not sure if this is anything new. I once read that State + Federal laws in the U.S. make things so complicated, that almost everyone commits some crime or other every single day without knowing it. Sorry I don't have reference but it's an interesting thing.
There are rules for everything, nothing new there. Here, I'm not allowed to ride my bike without a helmet. People still jay-walk all the time.. probably an expression of quiet rebellion.:)
Why are we trying to go so far away from foodstuffs that mother natures put on earth for us...?
I'd like to see a list of all the non-natural, non-mother-nature foods you eat. Eg. most kinds of confectionery for a start. Do you take synthetic medicine to get better, or do you rely on mother nature for all your medicines? The hypocrisy of your position is astounding, as is your apparent blindness to it.
Do you think mother nature put entire species of fish here for us to completely wipe off the face of the Earth because we're hungry? That's the result of you eating fish, my friend. 80% of all fishing stocks in the world are near depletion right now. What about farming and selective breeding? Did mother nature put animals on Earth for us to breed and augment in any way we like? To treat animals as nothing but meat - devoid of respect as living creatures in their own right? No, all of that is artificial, it's man-made. That's what you are eating - animals turned into spiritless meat. We may as well breed them without brains, for all the consideration we give them as natural creatures.
So either so out and catch your own food by hand, you bleeding hypocrite, or admit you have no freaking idea what mother nature "intends" or what is "here for us". That common, human-centric world view of yours is the main reason we humans think we can trash this beautiful planet. Because it's all here "for us". What an awful, primitive way of looking at life.
Thank you for that information. We will keep that in mind while we work on the next version of our spambot.
jQuery is the way to go to get around most bots, which need to be quick and efficient, so can't be arsed running a complete Webkit implementation and loading a lot of extraneous JS & CSS just to put some crap in a form. That would be a far too inefficient way to scrape sites for forms - it's not even "scraping", it's loading the entire page in a browser every time, running the JS and checking the DOM when it's all done.
I assume not many bots are going to employ that method just to spam a contact page. Probably just the ones targeting high profile things, like Wordpress sites, with exploits.
Thanks, I'll try implementing the hidden common field (if there's already a phone field, I'd just call it "phonereal" or something and the hidden one stays "phone". Instead of hiding it, another tactic may be to put it inside a 1x1 pixel "overflow:hidden" DIV. You could also set the border to "none" and the input box very small, essentially hiding it in plain view. Or absolutely position it off the screen (eg. left: -100px). Or all of the above just to make sure. What's the idea of the CSS in a separate file? Why not in the HTML page, or even inline?
But my 99.99% successful tactic to date (over the past year anyway) has been to use a jQuery get() to call the form HTML from the web site. So, when the page first loads, there is no form at all, and no hint of a form being there. I can only assume bots are looking at the page and deciding there's "nothing to see here" and/or can't be bothered running a webkit client and loading a lot of JS - which is understandable if they need to be quick and efficient. So people see the forms, but bots seemingly don't. I've had maybe 10 "manual-looking" spams (ie. friendly one-liners) in a year, but nothing which looks like a bot (ie. elaborate, formal or includes links/html).
I think if both this and your "honey-pot" approach is combined, it might be a winner?
kind and good normal people have been known to turn it off under certain conditions, too fight or defend against that which they believe "evil"
Why is a statement like that, without any citation, modded 5 Interesting?
My guess is they don't switch it off, they just defer it and suffer for it afterwards. I'll wager there's more evidence for that in the armed forces than being able to turn empathy off. Even in the Milgram Experiment, which is often spoken of as evidence of the "inner psycho" in everyone, the participants - half of whom "killed" their human subjects - were very disturbed afterwards, troubled by dreams, some weeping by the end.
I saw an interesting doco following up of the participants, can't remember what it was called. They all spoke of how deeply it affected them. Some to the point of seeking help, one was inspired to study psychology I think. Those aren't the reactions of people who "turn off empathy".
They could have easily charged for business pages. Any pages, really. Personal profiles would still be free.
But that ship sailed long ago. I've no idea why they didn't think of charging some small fee for pages. Or at least for access to the metrics and info that go along with pages. Stuff business and organisations would actually be happy to pay for, given the exposure.
Actually no, that's a common misconception. Humans and apes both evolved, along different paths, from a common ape-like ancestor. That is, we evolved from "primates", not "apes". People often equate the two, but they have different meanings. "Primate" is like an umbrella term. "Ape" is a specific type of primate.
Actually, the fact that people commonly say "humans evolved from apes" has been picked up by some tricky Creationists. Their argument goes: "If humans evolved from apes, then why are apes still around? Surely they'd be gone, replaced by us!"
Once you understand the "ape" thing is just a mistake in language, and people should really be saying "primate", then of course that Creationist argument has no meaning. They just say that to try to appeal to the odd individual who might go, "oh yeah.. they dun got a point!"
A dog is a man-made creation that has no relation to evolutionary development.
Seriously, that opinion deserves to be called out as inexcusable ignorance in this day and age. Did you actually listen in school?
Evolution happens when animals breed. It doesn't matter if it's horses breeding in the wild, dogs in a kennel, hamsters up my ass or mice in a laboratory. DNA is exchanged, genes are mixed, errors occur, changes result and that's evolution. Stop going to church group and pick up a book.
Social services are appropriate where there is an absolute goal. [...] However, we don't need fast Internet connectivity
You don't *need* all those nice trees along the sidewalks and roads. You don't *need* so many public spaces, parks, benches, etc. So why don't you privatise parks, public toilets and tree maintenance? You don't *need* your mail delivered to your post-box. Get off your butt and pick it up at the privatised post office. Personal delivery is extra, baby.
Also it depends what you think fast internet will bring. Building roads builds infrastructure needed for commerce. Wider roads allow traffic to move faster. There are benefits to this for the entire community, the entire economy. Faster internet isn't just about just getting your streaming MTV.
scripts are being dumbed-down so that they translate better into foreign markets, especially China
I wonder if there's a bit of Anglo superiority in that approach. Certainly wads of irony, as Chinese films have some of the most expansive and complicated plots around. Even the classic Chinese "western" - the Kung Fu action flick - have characterisation that makes most H/w blockbusters seem childish.
To think "complex" (by H/w standards) plots can't translate well to a Chinese market is just the height of stupidity.
There is actually benefit to using covered printers
FWIW, in the old days of dot-matrix printers, sound covers were common for big printers in offices. Interesting that we would make covers for a product that emits a bit of bothersome noise, but not for one that emits airborne particles.
And yet if you give governments the power to ban things because they are "depraved" suddenly everyone despised by the people in power are all depraved.
That's a lovely bubble you're living in. Things have been banned because they were "depraved" or otherwise distasteful for... I don't know... FOREVER. Ask a gay person.
We've still working on government taking that "men are created equal" part seriously. Not quite there yet. Eventually we'll get onto protection for whistle-blowers.. free speech my arse.
We cannot give up our very souls for security because all we'll truely be secure in is our own shame.
However the "soul" is a human invention, as is torture, so your point is moot. Oh wait, no, torture isn't actually a human invention; the disregard for suffering of other beings as a means to an end is one of the cornerstones of the natural world. From being slowly digested alive, or eaten from the inside by someone's parasitic young, to being used as a recreational plaything by a cat or a killer whale. It's all good for Mother Nature.
And you're complaining about us behaving like veritable saints; making someone suffer for an infinitesimal proportion of their life, in order to gain information that might save many other people from greater suffering? Mother Nature, if she were manifest as a human being, would be aghast at your attitude.
The XBox was the last successful entrance that they've made into a new arena.
Successful by what measure? Exposure for Microsoft, yes, and that's surely very valuable to the company. Successful as in it became popular, yes. But it is not a profitable product. In 2003, MS gaming division lost US$348 million per quarter. That's some price to pay for what amounts to nothing but MS marketing spend. What was gained? For a product to be "successful", it should float on its own, not perpetually buoyed up by tax-deductible division losses.
All that money down the drain, and STILL they are alienating users from a new product. Same is happening with Windows 8. Someone somewhere is a bad product manager.
Or perhaps it is one of the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression" - 8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
Similar to one of the "Twelve Techniques for Suppressing Discussion" - 4. Dismiss a reasonable response as one of the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression".
There is of course software used to look at this stuff but it cannot realistically be run on the dock during a very tight turnaround
Why don't they simply have sensors built into the ship? They can measure stress directly without having to guess, and load up appropriately. Seems an obvious thing to do, so I assume there must be a reason why they don't?
Visual Studio is a great development environment, but you'll have to deploy to Asure, whereas you have more choices with Java, including Amazon and Google Linux clouds).
This is utterly incorrect. Azure is just an option. You can deploy a.NET web app to ANY Windows server which is running IIS. From common-as-muck shared hosting companies, to Amazon or Rackspace and anywhere in between..NET was around long before Azure.
Slashdot Mirror
> No!!! They removed the blink tag!
This genuinely makes me sad. Nobody uses it, but it's a kick in the balls to all those old, historic web sites we grew up with. The pioneers of the web! What's the point of archive.org if eventually old web sites don't render any more as they used to?
Mozilla is firmly in the pay of the big web advertisers and want to make sure their buddies are not inconvenienced.
Great. Now it's the military-prison-industrial-congressional-browser complex. One day the complexity of the complex is going to give us a complex.
We are all criminals.
Not sure if this is anything new. I once read that State + Federal laws in the U.S. make things so complicated, that almost everyone commits some crime or other every single day without knowing it. Sorry I don't have reference but it's an interesting thing.
There are rules for everything, nothing new there. Here, I'm not allowed to ride my bike without a helmet. People still jay-walk all the time.. probably an expression of quiet rebellion. :)
Why are we trying to go so far away from foodstuffs that mother natures put on earth for us...?
I'd like to see a list of all the non-natural, non-mother-nature foods you eat. Eg. most kinds of confectionery for a start. Do you take synthetic medicine to get better, or do you rely on mother nature for all your medicines? The hypocrisy of your position is astounding, as is your apparent blindness to it.
Do you think mother nature put entire species of fish here for us to completely wipe off the face of the Earth because we're hungry? That's the result of you eating fish, my friend. 80% of all fishing stocks in the world are near depletion right now. What about farming and selective breeding? Did mother nature put animals on Earth for us to breed and augment in any way we like? To treat animals as nothing but meat - devoid of respect as living creatures in their own right? No, all of that is artificial, it's man-made. That's what you are eating - animals turned into spiritless meat. We may as well breed them without brains, for all the consideration we give them as natural creatures.
So either so out and catch your own food by hand, you bleeding hypocrite, or admit you have no freaking idea what mother nature "intends" or what is "here for us". That common, human-centric world view of yours is the main reason we humans think we can trash this beautiful planet. Because it's all here "for us". What an awful, primitive way of looking at life.
It isn't like most of us (in the west) are starving or anything.
And there we have it, a prime (no pun intended) example of that common 1st-world hubris that sustains most of the problems in the world.
Thank you for that information. We will keep that in mind while we work on the next version of our spambot.
jQuery is the way to go to get around most bots, which need to be quick and efficient, so can't be arsed running a complete Webkit implementation and loading a lot of extraneous JS & CSS just to put some crap in a form. That would be a far too inefficient way to scrape sites for forms - it's not even "scraping", it's loading the entire page in a browser every time, running the JS and checking the DOM when it's all done.
I assume not many bots are going to employ that method just to spam a contact page. Probably just the ones targeting high profile things, like Wordpress sites, with exploits.
Thanks, I'll try implementing the hidden common field (if there's already a phone field, I'd just call it "phonereal" or something and the hidden one stays "phone". Instead of hiding it, another tactic may be to put it inside a 1x1 pixel "overflow:hidden" DIV. You could also set the border to "none" and the input box very small, essentially hiding it in plain view. Or absolutely position it off the screen (eg. left: -100px). Or all of the above just to make sure. What's the idea of the CSS in a separate file? Why not in the HTML page, or even inline?
But my 99.99% successful tactic to date (over the past year anyway) has been to use a jQuery get() to call the form HTML from the web site. So, when the page first loads, there is no form at all, and no hint of a form being there. I can only assume bots are looking at the page and deciding there's "nothing to see here" and/or can't be bothered running a webkit client and loading a lot of JS - which is understandable if they need to be quick and efficient. So people see the forms, but bots seemingly don't. I've had maybe 10 "manual-looking" spams (ie. friendly one-liners) in a year, but nothing which looks like a bot (ie. elaborate, formal or includes links/html).
I think if both this and your "honey-pot" approach is combined, it might be a winner?
> "Add this to the developing scarcity of water due to global warming and the prospects for a peaceful future do not bode well."
"The short period of relative peace in a small section of human society won't last much longer into the future."
FTFY.
kind and good normal people have been known to turn it off under certain conditions, too fight or defend against that which they believe "evil"
Why is a statement like that, without any citation, modded 5 Interesting?
My guess is they don't switch it off, they just defer it and suffer for it afterwards. I'll wager there's more evidence for that in the armed forces than being able to turn empathy off. Even in the Milgram Experiment, which is often spoken of as evidence of the "inner psycho" in everyone, the participants - half of whom "killed" their human subjects - were very disturbed afterwards, troubled by dreams, some weeping by the end.
I saw an interesting doco following up of the participants, can't remember what it was called. They all spoke of how deeply it affected them. Some to the point of seeking help, one was inspired to study psychology I think. Those aren't the reactions of people who "turn off empathy".
They could have easily charged for business pages. Any pages, really. Personal profiles would still be free.
But that ship sailed long ago. I've no idea why they didn't think of charging some small fee for pages. Or at least for access to the metrics and info that go along with pages. Stuff business and organisations would actually be happy to pay for, given the exposure.
Humans Evolved from Apes
Actually no, that's a common misconception. Humans and apes both evolved, along different paths, from a common ape-like ancestor. That is, we evolved from "primates", not "apes". People often equate the two, but they have different meanings. "Primate" is like an umbrella term. "Ape" is a specific type of primate.
Actually, the fact that people commonly say "humans evolved from apes" has been picked up by some tricky Creationists. Their argument goes: "If humans evolved from apes, then why are apes still around? Surely they'd be gone, replaced by us!"
Once you understand the "ape" thing is just a mistake in language, and people should really be saying "primate", then of course that Creationist argument has no meaning. They just say that to try to appeal to the odd individual who might go, "oh yeah.. they dun got a point!"
A dog is a man-made creation that has no relation to evolutionary development.
Seriously, that opinion deserves to be called out as inexcusable ignorance in this day and age. Did you actually listen in school?
Evolution happens when animals breed. It doesn't matter if it's horses breeding in the wild, dogs in a kennel, hamsters up my ass or mice in a laboratory. DNA is exchanged, genes are mixed, errors occur, changes result and that's evolution. Stop going to church group and pick up a book.
something that only humans and apes were known to do
Octopuses, Crows and various birds, potentially mice.
Social services are appropriate where there is an absolute goal. [...] However, we don't need fast Internet connectivity
You don't *need* all those nice trees along the sidewalks and roads. You don't *need* so many public spaces, parks, benches, etc. So why don't you privatise parks, public toilets and tree maintenance? You don't *need* your mail delivered to your post-box. Get off your butt and pick it up at the privatised post office. Personal delivery is extra, baby.
Also it depends what you think fast internet will bring. Building roads builds infrastructure needed for commerce. Wider roads allow traffic to move faster. There are benefits to this for the entire community, the entire economy. Faster internet isn't just about just getting your streaming MTV.
It’s a perplexing problem that has led some to call for Internet access to be treated as a public utility
How can anyone suggest something so un-American!
scripts are being dumbed-down so that they translate better into foreign markets, especially China
I wonder if there's a bit of Anglo superiority in that approach. Certainly wads of irony, as Chinese films have some of the most expansive and complicated plots around. Even the classic Chinese "western" - the Kung Fu action flick - have characterisation that makes most H/w blockbusters seem childish.
To think "complex" (by H/w standards) plots can't translate well to a Chinese market is just the height of stupidity.
There is actually benefit to using covered printers
FWIW, in the old days of dot-matrix printers, sound covers were common for big printers in offices. Interesting that we would make covers for a product that emits a bit of bothersome noise, but not for one that emits airborne particles.
And yet if you give governments the power to ban things because they are "depraved" suddenly everyone despised by the people in power are all depraved.
That's a lovely bubble you're living in. Things have been banned because they were "depraved" or otherwise distasteful for... I don't know... FOREVER. Ask a gay person.
We've still working on government taking that "men are created equal" part seriously. Not quite there yet. Eventually we'll get onto protection for whistle-blowers.. free speech my arse.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
Wait, what's this.. very small, fine print underneath.. can't make it out.. something about "national security" and "in the national interest"...
a good idea. This would send a positive message to arrogant governments everywhere.
As it did with Obama.
Thanks, Obama.
We cannot give up our very souls for security because all we'll truely be secure in is our own shame.
However the "soul" is a human invention, as is torture, so your point is moot. Oh wait, no, torture isn't actually a human invention; the disregard for suffering of other beings as a means to an end is one of the cornerstones of the natural world. From being slowly digested alive, or eaten from the inside by someone's parasitic young, to being used as a recreational plaything by a cat or a killer whale. It's all good for Mother Nature.
And you're complaining about us behaving like veritable saints; making someone suffer for an infinitesimal proportion of their life, in order to gain information that might save many other people from greater suffering? Mother Nature, if she were manifest as a human being, would be aghast at your attitude.
It's for the good of the species, after all.
The XBox was the last successful entrance that they've made into a new arena.
Successful by what measure? Exposure for Microsoft, yes, and that's surely very valuable to the company. Successful as in it became popular, yes. But it is not a profitable product. In 2003, MS gaming division lost US$348 million per quarter. That's some price to pay for what amounts to nothing but MS marketing spend. What was gained? For a product to be "successful", it should float on its own, not perpetually buoyed up by tax-deductible division losses.
And now this:
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/158279-microsoft-is-losing-it-over-the-xbox-one-if-you-dont-have-the-internet-stick-with-the-xbox-360
All that money down the drain, and STILL they are alienating users from a new product. Same is happening with Windows 8. Someone somewhere is a bad product manager.
Or perhaps it is one of the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression" - 8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
Similar to one of the "Twelve Techniques for Suppressing Discussion" - 4. Dismiss a reasonable response as one of the "Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression".
There is of course software used to look at this stuff but it cannot realistically be run on the dock during a very tight turnaround
Why don't they simply have sensors built into the ship? They can measure stress directly without having to guess, and load up appropriately. Seems an obvious thing to do, so I assume there must be a reason why they don't?
Visual Studio is a great development environment, but you'll have to deploy to Asure, whereas you have more choices with Java, including Amazon and Google Linux clouds).
This is utterly incorrect. Azure is just an option. You can deploy a .NET web app to ANY Windows server which is running IIS. From common-as-muck shared hosting companies, to Amazon or Rackspace and anywhere in between. .NET was around long before Azure.