Explain how it's "mined" (digging for something of value) or "executed" (these are not POST requests). It's still private in the sense that no human is doing anything with the links - no machine is even receiving the contents of the linked page.
Yes, but why should Microsoft care about such a poorly developed application? They're not accessing sensitive information in the HEAD request. If a HEAD or GET performs an action that changes data or causes physical action, then that's not Microsoft's problem. It doesn't matter that the RFC allows it - it's very poor practice and that's been proven time and again in the real world.
This is protecting consumers from compromised consumers. There's nothing malicious about it. And there's really no reason to complain.
As someone else pointed out, they do a HEAD request anyway - not GET. They're not accessing any data from the URL - just assessing whether it's a redirect to a known malware link.
I don't see any reason at all to have a problem with that. Whether there's a username/password OR a hash. They're not getting any user-specific data from it.
Especially since, according to the article, they are only doing HEAD requests. They could just as well be taking information directly out of the URL and storing it in a database and nobody would ever know. I don't understand the problem with verifying that the link is both not in a malware database and also not a redirect to one.
A competent web developer does not perform data-changing action off a GET request. That's ignoring the other problem of including the username/password in the URL.
The only things that get washed in ammonia are what make up pink slime, which is rapidly declining in use. And that's only ground meat made from waste trimmings. A big hunk of steak is not going to come anywhere near ammonia. And wash is a rather poor choice of words. Exposed to vapor is more like it.
Why would anyone waste time developing a growth medium if the meat itself might not have a viable future? You work on one step of the chain at a time. If this meat is worth anything, then it makes sense to come up with your own growth medium.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they despise profanity but couldn't resist the joke. I don't really enjoy it myself.
Further, _all_ anti-biotics should be on a rotating schedule
All of medicine already does it. Except for a longer time - and when the patent expires, the medicine never goes back into rotation.
A consumer router is about the same size as an access point and often contains access point functionality. You're being pedantic without a cause.
Carbon dioxide that is warmer than ambient air will float away. Unless you happen to keep your thermostat below -80 degrees Celsius.
Took me a second to see you already beat me to the punchline and even executed it much better. All carbon is burned up.
Ashes white-colored because the carbon has combined with oxygen and flown away. You have no carbon materials of any kind there.
Shake and bake due to climate change.
And I helped!
I think you missed the whole point - they don't sell through dealers.
Explain how it's "mined" (digging for something of value) or "executed" (these are not POST requests). It's still private in the sense that no human is doing anything with the links - no machine is even receiving the contents of the linked page.
Yes, but why should Microsoft care about such a poorly developed application? They're not accessing sensitive information in the HEAD request. If a HEAD or GET performs an action that changes data or causes physical action, then that's not Microsoft's problem. It doesn't matter that the RFC allows it - it's very poor practice and that's been proven time and again in the real world.
This is protecting consumers from compromised consumers. There's nothing malicious about it. And there's really no reason to complain.
Related:
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/WellIntentioned-Destruction.aspx
As someone else pointed out, they do a HEAD request anyway - not GET. They're not accessing any data from the URL - just assessing whether it's a redirect to a known malware link.
I don't see any reason at all to have a problem with that. Whether there's a username/password OR a hash. They're not getting any user-specific data from it.
Which probably doesn't have near as much influence in North Carolina as coal-fired electricity.
Buy it where?
You'd have to buy it use. Tesla doesn't have dealerships anywhere - not just in NC.
cars that do not use fire for propulsion
Coal-fired power charges these things just fine.
Especially since, according to the article, they are only doing HEAD requests. They could just as well be taking information directly out of the URL and storing it in a database and nobody would ever know. I don't understand the problem with verifying that the link is both not in a malware database and also not a redirect to one.
Well then, I see nothing wrong with it. It makes perfect sense and it does the least access necessary.
HTTP HEAD request to check for a response code of 200 vs. 301 or 302.
A competent web developer does not perform data-changing action off a GET request. That's ignoring the other problem of including the username/password in the URL.
**woosh***, then THUD!
What about the fetuses who died to give their blood serum to make the growth medium?
Just wait until the in-vitro cow meat has its own "Matrix" to run and play in.
The only things that get washed in ammonia are what make up pink slime, which is rapidly declining in use. And that's only ground meat made from waste trimmings. A big hunk of steak is not going to come anywhere near ammonia. And wash is a rather poor choice of words. Exposed to vapor is more like it.
Why would anyone waste time developing a growth medium if the meat itself might not have a viable future? You work on one step of the chain at a time. If this meat is worth anything, then it makes sense to come up with your own growth medium.
Because there's plenty of people who do things like eat vegetarian just to have an identity and a common interest with other people.