Well, there will be third party extensions for it, and those will block google/double clicks stuff. The open source nature of the browser pretty much guarantees it.
If Google created one that only blocked other companies ads, I imagine they would quickly run into issues with the likes of the SEC.
I run both software and hardware firewalls and am NATed within my network. Most of my service don't run on default ports. My passwords are strong and my Wifi is encrypted. I don't worry too much about about my internet connection, but I don't fully trust any of that.
Whatever format they use is going to have DRM, and likely some portion of that will at least autorun if it does not rootkit. I was thinking of last re-writable I used with public computer, 3.5" floppies, which more often then not came with viruses when I brought them home from school.
I don't trust anti-virus software. Zero-day exploits and all that. I trust my behavior. That does not include shoving any old random flash stick in my computer.
Very many people do not use AV software. Many people do not update their software as needed. Massive botnets and numerous reports from security companies are fair evidence of this. It would be a very ripe target for intentional malware, which are unlikely to be found by AV software, through Carpet Bombing, CODEX redirects and browser exploits related to 'extra features'.
No, a few decades later, I do not think the average user would be able to protect themselves, and while I am far from an average user I do mainly run Windows. When there are a panoply of better, safer and less expensive options for distribution, I would not expose my Windows box to a public flash drive that has been in the hands and computers of people I do not trust.
I guess I'm a little paranoid, but that does not mean they are not out to get me.
Why in the world would I stick a rented flash stick in any device I own? That's like connecting my computer with ever computer the flash stick has been in.
I swear, people remember nothing for health class.
Re:Good analysis. MOD PARENT UP.
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
About the worst they can do is not allow it to be hosted on the Chrome extensions website.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
This little guy right here is going to be Chrome's biggest problem, I think. An adblocker is something which I think is a major draw to Firefox, but how on earth can Google permit an Adblocker in their browser, when ads are their only (real) source of revenue?
It will support extensions and plug-ins eventually, and people will be able to develop whatever they want. If they try to stop folks, folks will just use Chromium or some cleverly named fork.
I mean it's not like Microsofts DRM pixie-dust can actually stop the fonts from being displayed. Once it's one your screen how many clicks before you can have it vectorized? Opps.
I think you'd loose hinting. I guess that's ok if you want to use the same point size as the webpage or don't care about it scaling correctly.
Well, that's what bothers me the most: that it's essentially an invitation for anyone, the less reputable and scrupled the better, to use those for a fishing expedition.
Now I'm all for leaks which actually prove _some_ kind of breech of law, contract, or such. You know, take one or two emails out of there that prove Chavez has done anything illegal, and publish or sell only those.
They don't feel like spending the resources to determine what is or is not incriminating. From a forensic point of view, even seemingly banal and innocuous e-mails can be massively condemning. You expect them to go though 3 years worth of e-mail looking for inconsistencies and Freudian slips that give incite into the actual motivations behind actions? To cross reference times, dates, contacts and content with all manner contracts and other actions by his government?
They are also doing this to make money, and as anyone who's done much work on e-bay can tell you a package of various good almost always has more perceived value than the individual items. It's fairly basic marketing.
Ethically? ehh... Well, he is a public figure, and they don't really have an expectation of privacy. I don't know how likely an honest formal inquiry is, and if there is evidence of misconduct it should come out.
It certainly seems like it is in poor taste at the very least, and does not seem like it is in keeping with what I understood their ethos to be.
1. I don't want to see ads. 2. I don't want ad companies tracking what I do online(either my IP address or allowing them access to my cookie-space). 3. I don't want to expose myself to the possibility of malicious scripts being run. 4. It bugs the heck out of my that marketing folks attempt to control my actions without me being aware of it, which is the point of 'building a brand' via advertising. 5. They make use of resources(time, bandwidth, memory, HDD space for caching) that I'd rather use for other things. 6. I really don't want to see ads.
No, safenet is bad, because their subsidiary violates the law, is unethical and helps the RIAA, and others, use the court system to bully people, who for the most part, are unable to defend themselves.
They aren't bad because DRM is bad. They are bad because they do bad things.
This isn't to say that slashdot does not have a bit of an echo chamber effect, but you get that anywhere that the majority of people hold many of the same core values.
Well, puzzles that still involve skills and with multiple paths to completion.
Like, Time Attack in Shadow of Colossus. It's not a pure puzzle, and the action element is a big part of the replay, but solve the puzzles quickly still takes a bit of thought.
The only thing that makes userContent.css an excruciatingly painful experience is the fact that you actually have to _restart_ Firefox after making any changes. How 1994 is that?
So use stylish, unless you are running nightly builds or something.
Unless closed source OSX drivers are available, and the company chooses not to release a Linux version.
Which is the case for a lot of thermal transfer printers, specifically those produced by Toshiba, who does not write their own drivers for any OS and relies totally on third party drivers.
Right, a sysadmin should never expect a user to have common sense. I don't run any sort of resident AV stuff at home. Every computer at my job does, because people who use them are ignorant and don't know how to think before clicking.
All of it is loaded, but not as part of the OS, but as part of Outlook-- unless you change from the editor to something else from the default settings.
The cute part is they don't even need a criminal conviction. Somehow the state seizing your property winds up in the civil system where the burden of proof is much lower.
I was under the impression that technically it was still criminal, but because the charges are technically being brought against the item being seized. Because the rights of objects are not protected by the Bill of Rights, the requirements for due processes is far lower. Not that it makes it any less ridiculous.
The Founding Fathers are probably spinning in their graves over that one.
Who says this administration doesn't have plans for alternative energy? Our coal reserves pale in comparison to our supply of righteous indignation. All we need is a few pickaxes and some generators, and we are set.
Call the cops, get them to get an engineer out and -- more importantly -- a warrant for the drive. Despite 8 years of lawless Neo-Con rule, you still need a warrant for this kinda stuff.
Why would they need a warrant? You don't have any expectation of privacy when you are giving the drive to the Tech. The Tech can turn the drive over to the police without need for a warrant.
If I went to kinkos, and gave them a stack child porn to photocopy for me, the police would not need a warrant for those either.
As I see it the entire purpose of this is to be able to force PC Repair people to report illegal activities. Because they must have a licenses, and with the license comes legal obligation, they will likely be able to prosecute Repair folks for not reporting suspicious activities.
It's BS, but then I'll never live in Texas for a whole slew of reasons or bring my computer to a repair shop, so I don't care.
A lot of the rest of us find the idea of the death penalty to be extremely immoral, especially when its application is racially biased. We also see it as immoral to start wars, give guns of any sort to anyone that wants them, ignore the economic plight of our neighbors, and keep consenting adults from being happy in any way they choose as long as it doesn't directly affect our lives (nope, being disgusted by it doesn't count).
It's interesting that liberals would object to the death penalty for murderers, but have no problem murdering unborn children. Quite a few, in fact, support partial birth abortions (aka intact dilation and evacuation) through the 3rd trimester. Obama is one such liberal.
We require licenses of many different professions, doctors, medical professionals, accountants even. Sorry, but unfortunately, saying "I have plenty of happy customers that are willing to have me repair their computers" doesn't justify this anymore than a doctor practicing medicine without a license can say "but they're totally accepting of my care, even though I'm unlicensed."
Ok, so I won't do PC Repair, I'll be a Complementary and Alternative Computer Treatment expert.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, there will be third party extensions for it, and those will block google/double clicks stuff. The open source nature of the browser pretty much guarantees it.
If Google created one that only blocked other companies ads, I imagine they would quickly run into issues with the likes of the SEC.
I run both software and hardware firewalls and am NATed within my network. Most of my service don't run on default ports. My passwords are strong and my Wifi is encrypted. I don't worry too much about about my internet connection, but I don't fully trust any of that.
Whatever format they use is going to have DRM, and likely some portion of that will at least autorun if it does not rootkit. I was thinking of last re-writable I used with public computer, 3.5" floppies, which more often then not came with viruses when I brought them home from school.
I don't trust anti-virus software. Zero-day exploits and all that. I trust my behavior. That does not include shoving any old random flash stick in my computer.
Very many people do not use AV software. Many people do not update their software as needed. Massive botnets and numerous reports from security companies are fair evidence of this. It would be a very ripe target for intentional malware, which are unlikely to be found by AV software, through Carpet Bombing, CODEX redirects and browser exploits related to 'extra features'.
No, a few decades later, I do not think the average user would be able to protect themselves, and while I am far from an average user I do mainly run Windows. When there are a panoply of better, safer and less expensive options for distribution, I would not expose my Windows box to a public flash drive that has been in the hands and computers of people I do not trust.
I guess I'm a little paranoid, but that does not mean they are not out to get me.
Why in the world would I stick a rented flash stick in any device I own? That's like connecting my computer with ever computer the flash stick has been in.
I swear, people remember nothing for health class.
About the worst they can do is not allow it to be hosted on the Chrome extensions website.
This little guy right here is going to be Chrome's biggest problem, I think. An adblocker is something which I think is a major draw to Firefox, but how on earth can Google permit an Adblocker in their browser, when ads are their only (real) source of revenue?
It will support extensions and plug-ins eventually, and people will be able to develop whatever they want. If they try to stop folks, folks will just use Chromium or some cleverly named fork.
FOSS is a beautiful thing.
swarm bunch of kids, pre-tax deductions, home owner, and a good tax accountant.
I'm single, don't have kids, don't own a home, and take the standard deduction.
I make significantly less, but pay a much higher tax rate.
I mean it's not like Microsofts DRM pixie-dust can actually stop the fonts from being displayed. Once it's one your screen how many clicks before you can have it vectorized? Opps.
I think you'd loose hinting. I guess that's ok if you want to use the same point size as the webpage or don't care about it scaling correctly.
Well, that's what bothers me the most: that it's essentially an invitation for anyone, the less reputable and scrupled the better, to use those for a fishing expedition.
Now I'm all for leaks which actually prove _some_ kind of breech of law, contract, or such. You know, take one or two emails out of there that prove Chavez has done anything illegal, and publish or sell only those.
They don't feel like spending the resources to determine what is or is not incriminating. From a forensic point of view, even seemingly banal and innocuous e-mails can be massively condemning. You expect them to go though 3 years worth of e-mail looking for inconsistencies and Freudian slips that give incite into the actual motivations behind actions? To cross reference times, dates, contacts and content with all manner contracts and other actions by his government?
They are also doing this to make money, and as anyone who's done much work on e-bay can tell you a package of various good almost always has more perceived value than the individual items. It's fairly basic marketing.
Ethically? ehh... Well, he is a public figure, and they don't really have an expectation of privacy. I don't know how likely an honest formal inquiry is, and if there is evidence of misconduct it should come out.
It certainly seems like it is in poor taste at the very least, and does not seem like it is in keeping with what I understood their ethos to be.
1. I don't want to see ads.
2. I don't want ad companies tracking what I do online(either my IP address or allowing them access to my cookie-space).
3. I don't want to expose myself to the possibility of malicious scripts being run.
4. It bugs the heck out of my that marketing folks attempt to control my actions without me being aware of it, which is the point of 'building a brand' via advertising.
5. They make use of resources(time, bandwidth, memory, HDD space for caching) that I'd rather use for other things.
6. I really don't want to see ads.
DRM is bad and hence SafeNet is bad as well.
No, safenet is bad, because their subsidiary violates the law, is unethical and helps the RIAA, and others, use the court system to bully people, who for the most part, are unable to defend themselves.
They aren't bad because DRM is bad. They are bad because they do bad things.
This isn't to say that slashdot does not have a bit of an echo chamber effect, but you get that anywhere that the majority of people hold many of the same core values.
Does it contain the ability to disable the 'Awesome Bar' completely?
No, even better, now when you use Ctrl+Tab it brings up ugly cluttered previews of the tabs, rather than just switching between them.
Now you'll have 2 things to hate about the UI.
Well, puzzles that still involve skills and with multiple paths to completion.
Like, Time Attack in Shadow of Colossus. It's not a pure puzzle, and the action element is a big part of the replay, but solve the puzzles quickly still takes a bit of thought.
The only thing that makes userContent.css an excruciatingly painful experience is the fact that you actually have to _restart_ Firefox after making any changes. How 1994 is that?
So use stylish, unless you are running nightly builds or something.
Why don't people convert MP3s to FLAC?
That's great.
To clarify the concept of a non-Euclidean space, consider the fictional TARDIS device in the British science fiction television series "Dr. Who".
of course, neither Linux UI developers nor Elder Gods respect design patents.
Unless closed source OSX drivers are available, and the company chooses not to release a Linux version.
Which is the case for a lot of thermal transfer printers, specifically those produced by Toshiba, who does not write their own drivers for any OS and relies totally on third party drivers.
Bah, it's terrible. The non-euclidean window manager gives me the worst headaches.
Any special reason I can't use the one at my house?
Right, a sysadmin should never expect a user to have common sense. I don't run any sort of resident AV stuff at home. Every computer at my job does, because people who use them are ignorant and don't know how to think before clicking.
All of it is loaded, but not as part of the OS, but as part of Outlook-- unless you change from the editor to something else from the default settings.
The cute part is they don't even need a criminal conviction. Somehow the state seizing your property winds up in the civil system where the burden of proof is much lower.
I was under the impression that technically it was still criminal, but because the charges are technically being brought against the item being seized. Because the rights of objects are not protected by the Bill of Rights, the requirements for due processes is far lower. Not that it makes it any less ridiculous.
The Founding Fathers are probably spinning in their graves over that one.
Who says this administration doesn't have plans for alternative energy? Our coal reserves pale in comparison to our supply of righteous indignation. All we need is a few pickaxes and some generators, and we are set.
Call the cops, get them to get an engineer out and -- more importantly -- a warrant for the drive. Despite 8 years of lawless Neo-Con rule, you still need a warrant for this kinda stuff.
Why would they need a warrant? You don't have any expectation of privacy when you are giving the drive to the Tech. The Tech can turn the drive over to the police without need for a warrant.
If I went to kinkos, and gave them a stack child porn to photocopy for me, the police would not need a warrant for those either.
As I see it the entire purpose of this is to be able to force PC Repair people to report illegal activities. Because they must have a licenses, and with the license comes legal obligation, they will likely be able to prosecute Repair folks for not reporting suspicious activities.
It's BS, but then I'll never live in Texas for a whole slew of reasons or bring my computer to a repair shop, so I don't care.
A lot of the rest of us find the idea of the death penalty to be extremely immoral, especially when its application is racially biased. We also see it as immoral to start wars, give guns of any sort to anyone that wants them, ignore the economic plight of our neighbors, and keep consenting adults from being happy in any way they choose as long as it doesn't directly affect our lives (nope, being disgusted by it doesn't count).
It's interesting that liberals would object to the death penalty for murderers, but have no problem murdering unborn children. Quite a few, in fact, support partial birth abortions (aka intact dilation and evacuation) through the 3rd trimester. Obama is one such liberal.
Source?
We require licenses of many different professions, doctors, medical professionals, accountants even. Sorry, but unfortunately, saying "I have plenty of happy customers that are willing to have me repair their computers" doesn't justify this anymore than a doctor practicing medicine without a license can say "but they're totally accepting of my care, even though I'm unlicensed."
Ok, so I won't do PC Repair, I'll be a Complementary and Alternative Computer Treatment expert.
export of coltan has been blamed for fuelling war in the Congo.
Does the Congo have any exports that haven't been blamed for fueling war?