So does that mean my game will stop locking up every time I join a game because idiotic admins put horrible bloated HTML bastardizations as their MOTD?
No, this is only an update for Steam itself. But this does indicate that Valve will probably be updating their games to use WebKit soon.
When my trivia game was hosted at EV1Servers (now part of The Planet company) I kept my root password on file with them at all times, and quite a few times support logged in and helped me with a problem, like telling me the reason my webserver went down was that the Warnings file in Apache had hit the Linux system limit.
This isn't GoDaddy the domain registrar looking for your passwords, this is GoDaddy the hosting provider wanting to log in to a customer's VPS that's running on their hardware, and most likely is calming down a paranoid admin if he's yelling at Slashdot about a "security breach" when support wanted to log in.
Nothing to see here... move along.
That would make sense if this was a dedicated server, but this is a VPS. With the two different VM systems I've administered VPSes with (OpenVZ and Xen), you're able to log into any virtual machine as root from the hardware node without a password, negating the need for any of the user's passwords. With OpenVZ it's just `vzctl enter [vpsid]`. There is no reason GoDaddy should be asking for passwords, let alone be automatically probing the VPSes to make sure the passwords on file are correct.
The affected government minister said that the website was accessed 3,727 times, and that this is 'akin to 3,727 attempts to turn the doorknob of an insecure office and kindly accept the highly confidential documents that the receptionist hands to you.'
Everything on the internet starts off as a group of reasonable, intelligent people. MMOers in the olden days were willing to take sudden extreme losses like having most of their stuff looted and being camped for a few hours, with the understanding that they themselves, with their guilds, were responsible for retribution. Butt then, as with everything, the size grows and the quality of the users and community gets diluted down. Now, we have things like MMOs like WoW where 90% of the effort put into them is just there for the first 6 months of your playing time, until you get to level 80 and just teleport between your favorite instances. The only cure is to start over from scratch.
Good thing we have EVE. People hate it because it's exactly what you described in your first two sentences. That just happens to be why I love it.
PunkBuster is awful. I don't need their shit running in the background 24/7. If MW2 used PB, I would not have purchased it.
The thing about VAC that people don't fucking get is that it runs on a delayed ban wave system. They don't ban people immediately for cheating. They want to flag as many cheaters as they can to keep the cheat writers guessing... then slam hundreds of cheaters with a ban all at once... often a week or more past the date they were flagged. This method is great for Team Fortress 2 and Counter-Strike, but unfortunately not so much with a server-less game like MW2. In TF2 and CS, you can ban people from your server and not have to put up with them (and some servers have votekick mods as well), but MW2 doesn't have servers, admins, votekick, cheat reporting.... none of it. And that's a major roadblock to many people for an otherwise-great game, and I'm hoping that perhaps Infinity Ward decides to try and recover the PC community's image of them and make it up to them with better anti-cheater features. But for now, they're just giving us the middle finger.
Still a good game, though, and I still play it. The cheating isn't nearly as rampant as it was when any jackass could pirate the game and essentially have infinite copies to play online after being banned, and this matchmaking system that everybody bitches about is, imo, better than dedicated servers. Dedicated servers in CoD4 are absolute shit. The CoD community is shit. The modding community that people cite in their pro-dedi argument is inexistant. Matchmaking lets me not have to deal with laggy servers with useless mods and stupid rules and hammer-happy admins. Thank you IW for matchmaking... now fix it.
Has anybody thought about the fact that this awful DRM might only be on the preview copies distributed to the media? I have no evidence or insider info that this might be the case, but I think this draconian DRM might only be in place to possibly delay pre-release leaks.
The gaming industry has had that happen to them too many times, and that's what I'm thinking this is for. There's no way in hell they would be able to get away with implementing this system on the retail game without a class-action lawsuit within the first month.
The only problem I have with the inclusion of only one race's campaign in each game is that I don't have an opportunity to practice anything but that race offline. The three races (at least in SC1, and I'm assuming this is still the case) are so completely different. You can't learn to play Terran and win every match and then switch to Protoss and expect to be any good. They don't just have the same set of buildings with different names. The three races have completely different technologies, build orders, units, and strategies. Perhaps if you play the game a lot, it might not be that hard to switch races, but the majority of people who will buy SC2 haven't played Starcraft in several years...... if ever...... so Blizzard had best put an offline or bot mode to run single missions of every race knowing that you won't be rushed by some kid in Korea.
Clearly the competition between the major providers is pushing them to improve and excel.
You're right, it is. Verizon came out with FiOS, Comcast has been getting faster and faster and is now renaming their service to XFINITY and will start offering 100Mbps damn near everywhere over the next few months (that was announced long before this FCC decision). I can tell you from first-hand experience that Comcast has been getting much better in the uptime, speed, and customer service department lately, too. I have a 16Mbps connection from them and I can always get 16Mbps or more out of it. I don't know what TWC and Cox are doing... but surely they won't last long when Comcast is offering 100Mbps and people tell their city council that they want that and not this over-priced 6Mbps Time Warner crap.
No sir - that's why you host the proxy server OUTSIDE of your country of residence. Then you set it to route anything sent its way so it's not picky/choosy, and you also set it to NOT KEEP LOGS. Do you know ANYTHING about server configuration for privacy? Apparently NOT.
It doesn't matter where the server is hosted. If you're not dealing with one of those shady offshore hosting operations (that are very expensive and typically give you shit for bandwidth), then they will not accept anything less than your real personal information... and when they get letters (or worse, a subpoena) from the government, or when their ISP gets letters (again, or a subpoena) from the government, they will probably be more than willing to fuck with you. There's also the fact that it doesn't matter if your server keeps logs if the victim server keeps logs. Try again.
You are wrong because the LOIC does not 'bot' a computer. Bot = automated. You clicking the goddamned 'fire' button !=bot. English, let alone proper CS Terminology, is not your strong suit, I see. Botnets typically rely upon a command sent from an OUTSIDE SOURCE.
If I had known you would resort to debating semantics, I would have been more careful not to make that mistake. Do you have anything else to tell me about how that statement was wrong? I'm guessing not.
You stated - "In order for it to push enough packets, it cannot work through a proxy."
THIS IS BULLSHIT. Pure and simple. Go back to school, moron. You are wrong and arguing to save face is going to fail as long as your original incorrect statements stand. Plain and simple.
Again, I'm talking about free proxies that are out there on the internet. Of course you can pay for a high-bandwidth server with a stolen credit card and fake information through a VPN, and then DoS people through it to your heart's content... but when it gets to that amount of credit card fraud, you'd be better off from a legal standpoint just building up a 1000-node botnet and running it from an IRCd on a free shell.
I'm not talking about things that are possible. I'm talking about things that are feasible and make sense for the random dumbfucks on 4chan that see "DDOS ON AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT DOWNLOAD LOIC AND COME TO ANONNET!!!!!!!!!!11!" so they don't get thrown in prison.
That's what you get for not setting up your own dedicated proxies from a reliable data-hosting center.
But that would completely negate the reason for using a proxy, now wouldn't it? You use a proxy for anonymity... but oh let's rent a server and setup a proxy through it. What do you think will happen when your host gets letters from the government about your illegal activities?
Most DDoS attacks are done via high-bandwidth proxies - IE rootkitted/zombified machines. You simply send one command out (assuming you've got the bandwidth to simultaneously contact every proxy to send the flood command) and away you go.
Yes, that's called a botnet. Good job. If you had read my original post, you would know that I was specifically talking about the fact that these people are not using botnets... they're using LOIC on their own computers from their own connections.
Don't understand what PROXY means, do you? Go get a REAL IT job and maybe then you can talk, eh?
I understand perfectly what a proxy is, but I'm talking about the specific circumstances as what the article is reporting. Learn to read, you fucking moron.
As long as proxy and you have sufficient bandwidth, it doesn't fucking matter - you're restricted primarily by YOUR uploading speed if the proxy has a better pipeline than you.
BZZZZZZZT have you ever used a proxy that wasn't slow as balls? I haven't. And surely not a public one, and surely not a public one that wasn't simply an HTTP proxy.
I know that it's possible to DDoS through proxies... but does it work in practice? It does not.
But they almost certainly used a small botnet or at least the compromised machines of others to do the dirty work, so they would remain, er, anonymous.
But see, therein lies the hilarious part. These people don't know how to internet mastermind. They don't have botnets, and half of the people taking part in this "raid" probably have little more than a vague idea of what that word even means. They're using a tool called Low-Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC) which essentially turns your own computer into a voluntary self-controlled DoS bot. In order for it to push enough packets, it cannot work through a proxy.
So basically all these people are ddosing government servers without proxies. Surely, I'm not the only one that finds this incredibly funny. If I was Australia, I'd be packet sniffing right now and then sifting through logs to find everybody coming from an australian IP address.
I'm not sure it'd be such a pain. Windows already demands to restart after critical updates anyway. Couldn't it throw a flag to boot from a secondary, encrypted, trusted "update partition" that only the Windows root can edit, and only during shutdown, then use that to mount the disk as read-only and install updates? You could call it Microsoft SafeUpdate, part of the Trusted Computing Initiative. Heck, make the secondary partition an SSD, give the hardware manufacturers a reason to get behind it.
A lot of commentors seem to think that this is the final release of Apache. It is not. This is the final release of Apache 1.3... Apache HTTP Servers 2.0 and 2.2 are still being maintained.
(As an aside, can somebody explain to me how I ended up with 15 mod points? I've never seen this before)
but I refuse to be treated like a criminal just 'cos those in charge are trying to convince us of the existence of these so-called phantom terrorists!
Then you should be happy about these body scanners... they sure make the process much more swift, and you don't need to worry about being randomly selected for a lengthy pat-down when you're already running late for your flight. Terrorists do exist, and sure you can say "they won" because of what airport security is turning into, but guess what... they'd win even more if airport security wasn't this strict.
A much better approach, I think, is to have active enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists and to allow the League's traffic safety classes to be taken in lieu of a ticket for minor violations (just as we allow motorists to take a driver's ed class to get out of one minor violation per year). That way scofflaws eventually get funneled into the safety education system, but without the big up-front hit on adoption rate.
THIS
I think a licensing requirement would be a little over the top, but the problem is that you can't really maintain a "biking" record without some sort of identification, but having a requirement that you get a state ID in order to ride a bike on public wouldn't be THAT difficult to handle. I am in full support of police officers perhaps better enforcing street laws with bicyclists. There are just too many bicyclists out there that don't follow laws. There have been plenty of times where I'm driving sanely, down the middle of my lane, and a cyclist cuts me off. Oh and I just love it when I stop at a stop sign and then start crossing, then a biker just blows through the intersection and I almost hit him... and suddenly I'm the jackass.
I don't have anything against cyclists... just the ones who think they're better than people driving cars and therefore they deserve special treatment (which, to be honest, is most bikers in the bay area... and even bikers I know are willing to admit that).
One is drivers. I ride a (nonmotorized) bike to work twice a week. It would sure be nice if drivers here in the US showed that they had some clue that cyclists exist, etc.
It would also be awesome if cyclists would show that they aren't oblivious to drivers. "Share The Road" goes both ways, bro.
Literally NO ONE that I know uses Internet Explorer.
I believe the majority of that statistic is the result of corporate computer deployments where IE is pretty much the norm, and employees are unable to install their own browsers. That's why IE6 was at the top for so very long, even through the entirety of IE7's lifetime, because corporations hadn't taken the time to install new software like that en masse.
I'm glad to see that IE8 is on top now, though(*). Shows that corporations are perhaps finally realizing how utterly bad IE6 is and they're moving forward.
(*): this is not an endorsement of IE... I honestly can't stand it... just anything is better than IE6.
I honestly will gladly allow them to copyright the hell out of it IF they play in arenas that were not built by any public funds. Otherwise everything NFL must be Public domain.
The cities that host NFL teams (or all sports for that matter) aren't building the stadiums for the sake of the team. They build stadiums for revenue. It is an investment in which they make all their money back in a matter of a few years. A big revenue source is the tax on all the tickets and merchandise, but -- somebody correct me if I'm wrong -- I believe food sales, etc, are also managed by the city and so the revenue from that goes directly to them as well. They also make money from the team paying to use the stadium and the broadcast networks paying, maybe not specifically the rights to broadcast from there, but at least lease of the facilities and equipment. There's also additional money that comes in from the team themselves paying for room, food, and booze, as well as any fans that follow the team. Then there's the fact that there are several big games a year that attract people from all over the country to come give the hosting city tax and transportation revenue.
The building of a stadium is not some government subsidy... it is a huge source of revenue for the city that does so, and nobody is getting anything for free. The city does not in any way pay for the production of NFL presentations. Your "public domain" theory is very misguided.
Why? She illegally shared a huge number of songs. When caught, she tried to frame her kids for it. She tried to destroy evidence. She lied repeatedly under oath.
Lying under oath is perjury, and that is a criminal offense... something for a federal prosecutor to handle. Such matters do not apply in deciding an award in civil litigation, and for such matters to be taken into account and thereby have the award raised to an obscene amount would set dangerous precedent in future RIAA litigation regardless of whether the future defendants lie like Thomas-Rasset.
We can deal with the perjury later when this civil suit is dealt with, and for Thomas-Rasset to accept anything other than a decent penalty of perhaps several dollars per song would make her a coward in the eyes of the public, even though the more she pushes this case in the court system the more lawyer money she will have to pay for both parties... but that money wouldn't technically be a part of the "reward" and therefore wouldn't set precedent in future cases. She IS guilty, though, and WILL be paying money.
Well I installed Linux on my PS3 so that it could be a little more useful... running lightweight applications simply because those are the only things I can run (as opposed to because the applications I want to run happen to be lightweight) is more of a hassle than it's worth.
It's also kind of funny that people are saying 256MB isn't enough when that was a common amount for WinXP machines to have not so many years ago.
Ok. So it's only ipv6 if your DNS provider doesn't return IPv4 records for it... It's still not a good test for IPv6 connectivity.
Yes it is. A good DNS provider won't return records when there are none. OpenDNS earns money from ad placement on their bad hostname page, so when there isn't a valid record to a hostname, they return a server of their own. An honest DNS provider is a great test for IPv6 connectivity, though.
Slashdot Mirror
So does that mean my game will stop locking up every time I join a game because idiotic admins put horrible bloated HTML bastardizations as their MOTD?
No, this is only an update for Steam itself. But this does indicate that Valve will probably be updating their games to use WebKit soon.
When my trivia game was hosted at EV1Servers (now part of The Planet company) I kept my root password on file with them at all times, and quite a few times support logged in and helped me with a problem, like telling me the reason my webserver went down was that the Warnings file in Apache had hit the Linux system limit.
This isn't GoDaddy the domain registrar looking for your passwords, this is GoDaddy the hosting provider wanting to log in to a customer's VPS that's running on their hardware, and most likely is calming down a paranoid admin if he's yelling at Slashdot about a "security breach" when support wanted to log in.
Nothing to see here... move along.
That would make sense if this was a dedicated server, but this is a VPS. With the two different VM systems I've administered VPSes with (OpenVZ and Xen), you're able to log into any virtual machine as root from the hardware node without a password, negating the need for any of the user's passwords. With OpenVZ it's just `vzctl enter [vpsid]`. There is no reason GoDaddy should be asking for passwords, let alone be automatically probing the VPSes to make sure the passwords on file are correct.
My MAC address is only the business of me, my switch, and my router.
Second Life uses your MAC address as an identifier to ban you.
There, fixed that for you, Mr. Minister.
There, fixed that for you.
Everything on the internet starts off as a group of reasonable, intelligent people. MMOers in the olden days were willing to take sudden extreme losses like having most of their stuff looted and being camped for a few hours, with the understanding that they themselves, with their guilds, were responsible for retribution. Butt then, as with everything, the size grows and the quality of the users and community gets diluted down. Now, we have things like MMOs like WoW where 90% of the effort put into them is just there for the first 6 months of your playing time, until you get to level 80 and just teleport between your favorite instances. The only cure is to start over from scratch.
Good thing we have EVE. People hate it because it's exactly what you described in your first two sentences. That just happens to be why I love it.
PunkBuster is awful. I don't need their shit running in the background 24/7. If MW2 used PB, I would not have purchased it.
The thing about VAC that people don't fucking get is that it runs on a delayed ban wave system. They don't ban people immediately for cheating. They want to flag as many cheaters as they can to keep the cheat writers guessing... then slam hundreds of cheaters with a ban all at once... often a week or more past the date they were flagged. This method is great for Team Fortress 2 and Counter-Strike, but unfortunately not so much with a server-less game like MW2. In TF2 and CS, you can ban people from your server and not have to put up with them (and some servers have votekick mods as well), but MW2 doesn't have servers, admins, votekick, cheat reporting.... none of it. And that's a major roadblock to many people for an otherwise-great game, and I'm hoping that perhaps Infinity Ward decides to try and recover the PC community's image of them and make it up to them with better anti-cheater features. But for now, they're just giving us the middle finger.
Still a good game, though, and I still play it. The cheating isn't nearly as rampant as it was when any jackass could pirate the game and essentially have infinite copies to play online after being banned, and this matchmaking system that everybody bitches about is, imo, better than dedicated servers. Dedicated servers in CoD4 are absolute shit. The CoD community is shit. The modding community that people cite in their pro-dedi argument is inexistant. Matchmaking lets me not have to deal with laggy servers with useless mods and stupid rules and hammer-happy admins. Thank you IW for matchmaking... now fix it.
Has anybody thought about the fact that this awful DRM might only be on the preview copies distributed to the media? I have no evidence or insider info that this might be the case, but I think this draconian DRM might only be in place to possibly delay pre-release leaks.
The gaming industry has had that happen to them too many times, and that's what I'm thinking this is for. There's no way in hell they would be able to get away with implementing this system on the retail game without a class-action lawsuit within the first month.
The only problem I have with the inclusion of only one race's campaign in each game is that I don't have an opportunity to practice anything but that race offline. The three races (at least in SC1, and I'm assuming this is still the case) are so completely different. You can't learn to play Terran and win every match and then switch to Protoss and expect to be any good. They don't just have the same set of buildings with different names. The three races have completely different technologies, build orders, units, and strategies. Perhaps if you play the game a lot, it might not be that hard to switch races, but the majority of people who will buy SC2 haven't played Starcraft in several years...... if ever...... so Blizzard had best put an offline or bot mode to run single missions of every race knowing that you won't be rushed by some kid in Korea.
Clearly the competition between the major providers is pushing them to improve and excel.
You're right, it is. Verizon came out with FiOS, Comcast has been getting faster and faster and is now renaming their service to XFINITY and will start offering 100Mbps damn near everywhere over the next few months (that was announced long before this FCC decision). I can tell you from first-hand experience that Comcast has been getting much better in the uptime, speed, and customer service department lately, too. I have a 16Mbps connection from them and I can always get 16Mbps or more out of it. I don't know what TWC and Cox are doing... but surely they won't last long when Comcast is offering 100Mbps and people tell their city council that they want that and not this over-priced 6Mbps Time Warner crap.
Your friends may talk shit about Comcast, but they have no idea how good Xfinity is, but damnit they have gotta be better than comcast.
Comcast isn't changing their name... they're just renaming their service. It's going to be Comcast Xfinity now.
No sir - that's why you host the proxy server OUTSIDE of your country of residence. Then you set it to route anything sent its way so it's not picky/choosy, and you also set it to NOT KEEP LOGS. Do you know ANYTHING about server configuration for privacy? Apparently NOT.
It doesn't matter where the server is hosted. If you're not dealing with one of those shady offshore hosting operations (that are very expensive and typically give you shit for bandwidth), then they will not accept anything less than your real personal information... and when they get letters (or worse, a subpoena) from the government, or when their ISP gets letters (again, or a subpoena) from the government, they will probably be more than willing to fuck with you. There's also the fact that it doesn't matter if your server keeps logs if the victim server keeps logs. Try again.
You are wrong because the LOIC does not 'bot' a computer. Bot = automated. You clicking the goddamned 'fire' button !=bot. English, let alone proper CS Terminology, is not your strong suit, I see. Botnets typically rely upon a command sent from an OUTSIDE SOURCE.
If I had known you would resort to debating semantics, I would have been more careful not to make that mistake. Do you have anything else to tell me about how that statement was wrong? I'm guessing not.
You stated - "In order for it to push enough packets, it cannot work through a proxy."
THIS IS BULLSHIT. Pure and simple. Go back to school, moron. You are wrong and arguing to save face is going to fail as long as your original incorrect statements stand. Plain and simple.
Again, I'm talking about free proxies that are out there on the internet. Of course you can pay for a high-bandwidth server with a stolen credit card and fake information through a VPN, and then DoS people through it to your heart's content... but when it gets to that amount of credit card fraud, you'd be better off from a legal standpoint just building up a 1000-node botnet and running it from an IRCd on a free shell.
I'm not talking about things that are possible. I'm talking about things that are feasible and make sense for the random dumbfucks on 4chan that see "DDOS ON AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT DOWNLOAD LOIC AND COME TO ANONNET!!!!!!!!!!11!" so they don't get thrown in prison.
That's what you get for not setting up your own dedicated proxies from a reliable data-hosting center.
But that would completely negate the reason for using a proxy, now wouldn't it? You use a proxy for anonymity... but oh let's rent a server and setup a proxy through it. What do you think will happen when your host gets letters from the government about your illegal activities?
Most DDoS attacks are done via high-bandwidth proxies - IE rootkitted/zombified machines. You simply send one command out (assuming you've got the bandwidth to simultaneously contact every proxy to send the flood command) and away you go.
Yes, that's called a botnet. Good job. If you had read my original post, you would know that I was specifically talking about the fact that these people are not using botnets... they're using LOIC on their own computers from their own connections.
Don't understand what PROXY means, do you? Go get a REAL IT job and maybe then you can talk, eh?
I understand perfectly what a proxy is, but I'm talking about the specific circumstances as what the article is reporting. Learn to read, you fucking moron.
BZZZZZT! Wrong!
As long as proxy and you have sufficient bandwidth, it doesn't fucking matter - you're restricted primarily by YOUR uploading speed if the proxy has a better pipeline than you.
BZZZZZZZT have you ever used a proxy that wasn't slow as balls? I haven't. And surely not a public one, and surely not a public one that wasn't simply an HTTP proxy.
I know that it's possible to DDoS through proxies... but does it work in practice? It does not.
But they almost certainly used a small botnet or at least the compromised machines of others to do the dirty work, so they would remain, er, anonymous.
But see, therein lies the hilarious part. These people don't know how to internet mastermind. They don't have botnets, and half of the people taking part in this "raid" probably have little more than a vague idea of what that word even means. They're using a tool called Low-Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC) which essentially turns your own computer into a voluntary self-controlled DoS bot. In order for it to push enough packets, it cannot work through a proxy.
So basically all these people are ddosing government servers without proxies. Surely, I'm not the only one that finds this incredibly funny. If I was Australia, I'd be packet sniffing right now and then sifting through logs to find everybody coming from an australian IP address.
I'm not sure it'd be such a pain. Windows already demands to restart after critical updates anyway. Couldn't it throw a flag to boot from a secondary, encrypted, trusted "update partition" that only the Windows root can edit, and only during shutdown, then use that to mount the disk as read-only and install updates? You could call it Microsoft SafeUpdate, part of the Trusted Computing Initiative. Heck, make the secondary partition an SSD, give the hardware manufacturers a reason to get behind it.
RootKit() {
if ( RecoveryPartitionPresent() == 1 ) {
WriteRandomShit(RecoveryPartition);
}
}
A lot of commentors seem to think that this is the final release of Apache. It is not. This is the final release of Apache 1.3... Apache HTTP Servers 2.0 and 2.2 are still being maintained.
(As an aside, can somebody explain to me how I ended up with 15 mod points? I've never seen this before)
but I refuse to be treated like a criminal just 'cos those in charge are trying to convince us of the existence of these so-called phantom terrorists!
Then you should be happy about these body scanners... they sure make the process much more swift, and you don't need to worry about being randomly selected for a lengthy pat-down when you're already running late for your flight. Terrorists do exist, and sure you can say "they won" because of what airport security is turning into, but guess what... they'd win even more if airport security wasn't this strict.
A much better approach, I think, is to have active enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists and to allow the League's traffic safety classes to be taken in lieu of a ticket for minor violations (just as we allow motorists to take a driver's ed class to get out of one minor violation per year). That way scofflaws eventually get funneled into the safety education system, but without the big up-front hit on adoption rate.
THIS
I think a licensing requirement would be a little over the top, but the problem is that you can't really maintain a "biking" record without some sort of identification, but having a requirement that you get a state ID in order to ride a bike on public wouldn't be THAT difficult to handle. I am in full support of police officers perhaps better enforcing street laws with bicyclists. There are just too many bicyclists out there that don't follow laws. There have been plenty of times where I'm driving sanely, down the middle of my lane, and a cyclist cuts me off. Oh and I just love it when I stop at a stop sign and then start crossing, then a biker just blows through the intersection and I almost hit him... and suddenly I'm the jackass.
I don't have anything against cyclists... just the ones who think they're better than people driving cars and therefore they deserve special treatment (which, to be honest, is most bikers in the bay area... and even bikers I know are willing to admit that).
One is drivers. I ride a (nonmotorized) bike to work twice a week. It would sure be nice if drivers here in the US showed that they had some clue that cyclists exist, etc.
It would also be awesome if cyclists would show that they aren't oblivious to drivers. "Share The Road" goes both ways, bro.
Literally NO ONE that I know uses Internet Explorer.
I believe the majority of that statistic is the result of corporate computer deployments where IE is pretty much the norm, and employees are unable to install their own browsers. That's why IE6 was at the top for so very long, even through the entirety of IE7's lifetime, because corporations hadn't taken the time to install new software like that en masse.
I'm glad to see that IE8 is on top now, though(*). Shows that corporations are perhaps finally realizing how utterly bad IE6 is and they're moving forward.
(*): this is not an endorsement of IE... I honestly can't stand it... just anything is better than IE6.
\
I honestly will gladly allow them to copyright the hell out of it IF they play in arenas that were not built by any public funds. Otherwise everything NFL must be Public domain.
The cities that host NFL teams (or all sports for that matter) aren't building the stadiums for the sake of the team. They build stadiums for revenue. It is an investment in which they make all their money back in a matter of a few years. A big revenue source is the tax on all the tickets and merchandise, but -- somebody correct me if I'm wrong -- I believe food sales, etc, are also managed by the city and so the revenue from that goes directly to them as well. They also make money from the team paying to use the stadium and the broadcast networks paying, maybe not specifically the rights to broadcast from there, but at least lease of the facilities and equipment. There's also additional money that comes in from the team themselves paying for room, food, and booze, as well as any fans that follow the team. Then there's the fact that there are several big games a year that attract people from all over the country to come give the hosting city tax and transportation revenue.
The building of a stadium is not some government subsidy... it is a huge source of revenue for the city that does so, and nobody is getting anything for free. The city does not in any way pay for the production of NFL presentations. Your "public domain" theory is very misguided.
b) A lot of porn online is DRM free, so why so much porn in BitTorrent?
Because porn subscriptions are $30-40/mo.
......how I know this is irrelevant
Why? She illegally shared a huge number of songs. When caught, she tried to frame her kids for it. She tried to destroy evidence. She lied repeatedly under oath.
Lying under oath is perjury, and that is a criminal offense... something for a federal prosecutor to handle. Such matters do not apply in deciding an award in civil litigation, and for such matters to be taken into account and thereby have the award raised to an obscene amount would set dangerous precedent in future RIAA litigation regardless of whether the future defendants lie like Thomas-Rasset.
We can deal with the perjury later when this civil suit is dealt with, and for Thomas-Rasset to accept anything other than a decent penalty of perhaps several dollars per song would make her a coward in the eyes of the public, even though the more she pushes this case in the court system the more lawyer money she will have to pay for both parties... but that money wouldn't technically be a part of the "reward" and therefore wouldn't set precedent in future cases. She IS guilty, though, and WILL be paying money.
Well I installed Linux on my PS3 so that it could be a little more useful... running lightweight applications simply because those are the only things I can run (as opposed to because the applications I want to run happen to be lightweight) is more of a hassle than it's worth.
It's also kind of funny that people are saying 256MB isn't enough when that was a common amount for WinXP machines to have not so many years ago.
Yeah, and it wasn't enough.
Ok. So it's only ipv6 if your DNS provider doesn't return IPv4 records for it... It's still not a good test for IPv6 connectivity.
Yes it is. A good DNS provider won't return records when there are none. OpenDNS earns money from ad placement on their bad hostname page, so when there isn't a valid record to a hostname, they return a server of their own. An honest DNS provider is a great test for IPv6 connectivity, though.