racial profile does exist and for good reason, just look at the prison population
Perfect example of classic irony. It looks like this person is saying, "black people have a higher tendency to commit crimes", but what she probably means is, "racial profiling leads to more black people in prison, which is where they belong."
I misread your post the first time, and Tubal-Cain probably did too. I was going to refute your argument, but then after re-reading your post, I figured it out. It starts with a double negative, and the first two sentences have little to do with the rest of your paragraph. You have a subtle, easy to miss transition between the sun and low level EM waves. In short, I agree with everything you say, but your writing was a little tough to read.
For those who don't know, CodeWeavers are the makers of Crossover Linux, which is a way to run Windows programs in Linux. You can also do similar on Mac with Crossover Mac. Crossover uses wine.
Here is a breakdown of the scientifict method used: http://xkcd.com/605/
... refusing access to the data used for their global climate averages and scientific studies.
I realize governments are really in to wasting money and all, but this is ridiculous. The UK government has spent who knows how much money on a completely worthless study. Studies mean nothing without data.
So to stop a DDoS attack on a server, they remove any and all access to that server?
Am I the only one seeing the irony here?
The post you responded to is misleading. According to this: http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/2523/1248672053880.png, this was an ACK attack, which causes problems not only for the directly attacked host, but for other users as well.
Ordinarily, a TCP connection is set up when you send a SYN packet to a website, such as 4chan, and then 4chan responds with a ACK, and then you respond again with a SYN-ACK.
Here is how an ACK attack works. I, the attacker, will send a SYN packet to 4chan, but I am pretending to be you, or your IP address. 4chan then sends an ACK packet to you, excepting a SYN-ACK in response. However, you did not initiate the connection, so you send a RST back to 4chan (or nothing at all, depending on your firewall settings).
Then I do it again. And again. I effectively flood both you and 4chan with meaningless traffic. Your traffic problems are even worse, because if you have a firewall blocking the RST packets, then 4chan will send you 4 ACK packets (depending on configuration) for every SYN packet I send them.
In this case, AT&T and other ISPs decided that the simplest solution to ending this DOS against their users was to block packets to and from 4chan (or a specific part of 4chan).
Self-signed certificates are NOT OKAY for production/public use.
OK. Presumably, if you don't believe that self-signed certificates are acceptable for public use, then you also do not believe that unencrypted connections are acceptable for public use. Did you know that Slashdot uses unencrypted connections? When you logged on to Slashdot to post your message, anybody in between could have easily got your username and password. If you and Slashdot had been using a self-signed certificate, it would have been less easy. Of course, a CA signed certificate would have been better.
That big scary page that Firefox shows you is EXACTLY what every browser should show you.
The problem most people have is Firefox is inconsistent. They show a big scary page for self-signed certificates, but they just let unencrypted connections pass through without warning. Personally, considering how much of the web is not encrypted, I don't think warning people for every unencrypted or poorly encrypted page is practical, so they should do away with it. Arbitrarily punishing web sites that use mediocre security, while giving those with no security a free pass is asinine.
Encryption is more or less worthless without proof-of-identity. Now, if you want to argue about how the the big CAs don't require much in the way of proof anymore, I'll agree with you.
So, you believe that the big CAs don't provide adequate security, but that every web site should have one anyway?
It should be noted that every version of AWStats is "too old" to recognize Bing as a search engine. The latest version as of now is 6.9, released in Dec 2008.
So, security is threatened because people can more easily communicate securely? But before VOIP, when more people used insecure phone channels, security was better? The solution to these security problems is to prevent encryption so that anybody with the right tools and knowledge can listen to any conversation?
"Unfortunately, if the patch falls under the usual EULA, then any legitimate use of the art assets outside of the Spore community becomes impossible."
Impossible! Nobody can penetrate their EULA! EULAs are like the devil's contract. Legally and spiritually binding.
However, most clauses that have been tested in courts have been found to be not enforceable, and I doubt that EA can actually claim ownership of the creations customers make with their tools.
Opening the source has several advantages: * if you have no money, you need models for free, and nobody will give you models for free if you aren't willing to give the code for free * it will allow you to use code repositories you otherwise couldn't or would have to pay for, such as launchpad, or savannah, or cvsdude. Your current solution for distributing programs isn't working. Error. The file could not be found.
Headline: Yelling At Telemarketers Leads To Arrest Truth (allegations):... allegedly told a sales representative... that he would burn down the building and kill the employees and their families.
If you don't know the difference, then you too could be a Slashdot "editor."
Any government process that features the army forcing a president out on a plane in his pajamas is at least as unacceptable as a crooked election keeping one in power.
That's pretty much what they did according to their own constitution.
Does this solution seem worthless to anybody else? It is less convenient to the users who have to download it, and it is full of potential problems, such as image hosting sites scanning their images for stuff like this and banning them, or simply resizing or compressing the images, and therefore corrupting the hidden data.
This solution is less convenient than the current one, which is to upload a torrent to a torrent hosting service, such as TPB or MiniNova, and then providing a link.
What can be done under Qt that can't be done under GTK? Is Qt more efficient in some way? What are advantages of Qt over GTK? I've never been clear on the differences... I just know they are different.
Personally, I prefer Qt because of the superior documentation. I think Nokia prefers Qt because they own it now. It's sort of like when Microsoft bought Hotmail, and moved the servers from FreeBSD to Windows. It wasn't because it was better, but because it was theirs.
The spammers WILL get your email address. Be it web trawling, google searchers, or stealing email address off of compromised computers, the spammers will get, and then resell, you email address.
Trying to keep the spammers from getting your email address is a lost cause, and not a battle worth fighting.
I don't get any spam at my personal account. No blacklisting or bayesian filters necessary. I just don't give my personal e-mail address to companies, nor do I display it on the Internet. I also have a sneakemail address that I only give to companies, and that one actually doesn't receive spam either. Go figure.
History. I haven't updated my front page in years.
Bullshit. Google could recognize that I don't want to view crap, and not index it. The good websites don't pull inappropriate tricks with their pages, the mediocre sites would eventually figure out that they aren't getting indexed by search engines, and improve, and the terrible sites would remain in obscurity, partying with geocities.
The web is a big place, and we don't have to put up with crap. Google actually has the power to make the web better by only indexing good pages, but they are doing this instead. In fact, if Google returns these crap pages in their indexes, and other search engines like Bing and Ask don't, that would be a one up for those other engines.
In an environment as big as the web, quality over quantity.
It's great that in the future Firefox might be better, but here and now, the latest stable version is 3.0.11, and while Firefox has many redeeming qualities, speed, memory usage and general performance is not one of them.
You test all the browsers except the most up-to-date version of the most popular one. In other words, the one that matters the most.
Benchmarks are for people who choose software. Only a small minority choose IE. In a way, IE8 was included. It failed to compete due to lack of necessary features.
An interesting strategy, but I don't think so. It would increase their install base for Microsoft Silverlight, but if they make Windows/IE users install something to watch video, their users would be just as likely to install Firefox.
Regardless of whether MS requires Silverlight to render video, as long as MS honors the video tag according to the spec, they won't be making things difficult for web developers. In order to do that, they would have to require MS specific tags or attributes for video, which is much more their style.
Slashdot Mirror
racial profile does exist and for good reason, just look at the prison population
Perfect example of classic irony. It looks like this person is saying, "black people have a higher tendency to commit crimes", but what she probably means is, "racial profiling leads to more black people in prison, which is where they belong."
I misread your post the first time, and Tubal-Cain probably did too. I was going to refute your argument, but then after re-reading your post, I figured it out. It starts with a double negative, and the first two sentences have little to do with the rest of your paragraph. You have a subtle, easy to miss transition between the sun and low level EM waves. In short, I agree with everything you say, but your writing was a little tough to read.
For those who don't know, CodeWeavers are the makers of Crossover Linux, which is a way to run Windows programs in Linux. You can also do similar on Mac with Crossover Mac. Crossover uses wine. Here is a breakdown of the scientifict method used: http://xkcd.com/605/
... refusing access to the data used for their global climate averages and scientific studies.
I realize governments are really in to wasting money and all, but this is ridiculous. The UK government has spent who knows how much money on a completely worthless study. Studies mean nothing without data.
So to stop a DDoS attack on a server, they remove any and all access to that server? Am I the only one seeing the irony here?
The post you responded to is misleading. According to this: http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/2523/1248672053880.png, this was an ACK attack, which causes problems not only for the directly attacked host, but for other users as well.
Ordinarily, a TCP connection is set up when you send a SYN packet to a website, such as 4chan, and then 4chan responds with a ACK, and then you respond again with a SYN-ACK.
Here is how an ACK attack works. I, the attacker, will send a SYN packet to 4chan, but I am pretending to be you, or your IP address. 4chan then sends an ACK packet to you, excepting a SYN-ACK in response. However, you did not initiate the connection, so you send a RST back to 4chan (or nothing at all, depending on your firewall settings).
Then I do it again. And again. I effectively flood both you and 4chan with meaningless traffic. Your traffic problems are even worse, because if you have a firewall blocking the RST packets, then 4chan will send you 4 ACK packets (depending on configuration) for every SYN packet I send them.
In this case, AT&T and other ISPs decided that the simplest solution to ending this DOS against their users was to block packets to and from 4chan (or a specific part of 4chan).
Self-signed certificates are NOT OKAY for production/public use.
OK. Presumably, if you don't believe that self-signed certificates are acceptable for public use, then you also do not believe that unencrypted connections are acceptable for public use. Did you know that Slashdot uses unencrypted connections? When you logged on to Slashdot to post your message, anybody in between could have easily got your username and password. If you and Slashdot had been using a self-signed certificate, it would have been less easy. Of course, a CA signed certificate would have been better.
That big scary page that Firefox shows you is EXACTLY what every browser should show you.
The problem most people have is Firefox is inconsistent. They show a big scary page for self-signed certificates, but they just let unencrypted connections pass through without warning. Personally, considering how much of the web is not encrypted, I don't think warning people for every unencrypted or poorly encrypted page is practical, so they should do away with it. Arbitrarily punishing web sites that use mediocre security, while giving those with no security a free pass is asinine.
Encryption is more or less worthless without proof-of-identity. Now, if you want to argue about how the the big CAs don't require much in the way of proof anymore, I'll agree with you.
So, you believe that the big CAs don't provide adequate security, but that every web site should have one anyway?
It should be noted that every version of AWStats is "too old" to recognize Bing as a search engine. The latest version as of now is 6.9, released in Dec 2008.
So, security is threatened because people can more easily communicate securely? But before VOIP, when more people used insecure phone channels, security was better? The solution to these security problems is to prevent encryption so that anybody with the right tools and knowledge can listen to any conversation?
"Unfortunately, if the patch falls under the usual EULA, then any legitimate use of the art assets outside of the Spore community becomes impossible."
Impossible! Nobody can penetrate their EULA! EULAs are like the devil's contract. Legally and spiritually binding.
However, most clauses that have been tested in courts have been found to be not enforceable, and I doubt that EA can actually claim ownership of the creations customers make with their tools.
Opening the source has several advantages:
* if you have no money, you need models for free, and nobody will give you models for free if you aren't willing to give the code for free
* it will allow you to use code repositories you otherwise couldn't or would have to pay for, such as launchpad, or savannah, or cvsdude. Your current solution for distributing programs isn't working. Error. The file could not be found.
Here is a small list of sites where you can find free 3D models: http://wntrknit.freeshell.org/free-3d-meshes.html
Headline: Yelling At Telemarketers Leads To Arrest ... allegedly told a sales representative ... that he would burn down the building and kill the employees and their families.
Truth (allegations):
If you don't know the difference, then you too could be a Slashdot "editor."
Run Debian Stable. Have a few members of DOD join the Debian Security Team. Everybody wins/profits!
Any government process that features the army forcing a president out on a plane in his pajamas is at least as unacceptable as a crooked election keeping one in power.
That's pretty much what they did according to their own constitution.
That is one funky constitution.
If you use firefox, then you are the moron using unbounded buffers.
Your explanation makes a lot of sense. However, it does not match up with my observations. For example, this code segfaults at line 10:
Using gcc 4.3.2-2 from Debian repos.
Does this solution seem worthless to anybody else? It is less convenient to the users who have to download it, and it is full of potential problems, such as image hosting sites scanning their images for stuff like this and banning them, or simply resizing or compressing the images, and therefore corrupting the hidden data.
This solution is less convenient than the current one, which is to upload a torrent to a torrent hosting service, such as TPB or MiniNova, and then providing a link.
...you insensitive clod. ...and screeching while stealing stuff is generally considered a bad idea in my profession.
What can be done under Qt that can't be done under GTK? Is Qt more efficient in some way? What are advantages of Qt over GTK? I've never been clear on the differences... I just know they are different.
Personally, I prefer Qt because of the superior documentation. I think Nokia prefers Qt because they own it now. It's sort of like when Microsoft bought Hotmail, and moved the servers from FreeBSD to Windows. It wasn't because it was better, but because it was theirs.
You can just burn the iso to a DVD, if you prefer, but it is a 1GB image so CD is out of the question.
Correction. The iso is 380 MB, so burning to a CD would work just fine.
The spammers WILL get your email address. Be it web trawling, google searchers, or stealing email address off of compromised computers, the spammers will get, and then resell, you email address. Trying to keep the spammers from getting your email address is a lost cause, and not a battle worth fighting.
I don't get any spam at my personal account. No blacklisting or bayesian filters necessary. I just don't give my personal e-mail address to companies, nor do I display it on the Internet. I also have a sneakemail address that I only give to companies, and that one actually doesn't receive spam either. Go figure.
History. I haven't updated my front page in years.
You last updated that page 8 months ago.
Bullshit. Google could recognize that I don't want to view crap, and not index it. The good websites don't pull inappropriate tricks with their pages, the mediocre sites would eventually figure out that they aren't getting indexed by search engines, and improve, and the terrible sites would remain in obscurity, partying with geocities.
The web is a big place, and we don't have to put up with crap. Google actually has the power to make the web better by only indexing good pages, but they are doing this instead. In fact, if Google returns these crap pages in their indexes, and other search engines like Bing and Ask don't, that would be a one up for those other engines.
In an environment as big as the web, quality over quantity.
It's great that in the future Firefox might be better, but here and now, the latest stable version is 3.0.11, and while Firefox has many redeeming qualities, speed, memory usage and general performance is not one of them.
You test all the browsers except the most up-to-date version of the most popular one. In other words, the one that matters the most.
Benchmarks are for people who choose software. Only a small minority choose IE. In a way, IE8 was included. It failed to compete due to lack of necessary features.
An interesting strategy, but I don't think so. It would increase their install base for Microsoft Silverlight, but if they make Windows/IE users install something to watch video, their users would be just as likely to install Firefox.
Regardless of whether MS requires Silverlight to render video, as long as MS honors the video tag according to the spec, they won't be making things difficult for web developers. In order to do that, they would have to require MS specific tags or attributes for video, which is much more their style.
Trolls are given mod points too.