Remember Rox Desktop? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROX_Desktop
Very similar to how mac os works. Lay down a base system with the common libraries in a central location. Apps are just custom folders with a very specific directory structure. It's not horrible, as an end user it's kind of nice. It will lead to security whack-a-mole issues when common but non-core libs have issues, but nothing's perfect.
You're kind of conflating two issues. It isn't so much about security (so password protection doesn't apply). Nor is it about robots.txt (vivid wants to be found).
The issue is that what vivid would like to have happen is that if an 18+ year old person were to google for 'return to booby island' he would find links to or images from vivid entertainment.
If someone underage were to search for the same thing, google should magically know and display more appropriate images.
The current industry standard comes up a little short WRT robots.txt since it's a binary statement and what they're really after is conditional qualifiers. Essentially they're looking for a way to express situations when that content is valid to display or not.
Now, all of this comes with a big grain of salt. The actual article and opinions expressed are... not very reasonable or well thought out IMO.
Oh, the abuse is a side issue. I understood the article as someone trying to push the burden of not displaying smut onto google. The reality is that had they implemented a sane robots.txt file in the first place, this would never have happened.
So, from the perspective of liability, IMO the webmaster is responsible for exercising due diligence in creating a robots.txt that would have prevented booby thumbnails from turning up on google when little johnny was searching for legos (spelled 'big titty chicks', but he really meant legos... his mom swears).
Now, in that circumstance abuse or compliance of the contents of a robots.txt file still falls to the site owner and not some third party (google).
Are there flaws in my idea? Certainly, it's the product of 5 minutes of thought and a bit of sarcasm. However, it seems to me that demanding google or any other search engine not show porn it spidered is silly especially since google actually honors robots.txt. Were the situation different I would argue that if a webmaster doesn't want something spidered you should adhere to that.
The OP brings up a very good issue. Webmasters should have a means to tell search engines what type of content is ok to index vs what kind is not. For instance, a plain text file at the document root that spelled out what subpaths were ok to spider and cache or not. We could establish a convention for this directive. Perhaps a convention of calling this file of directives something consistent across sites... a 'robots.txt' if you will. Oh..... wait.....
Seriously though, perhaps it is time to extend robots.txt to include more metadata about more conditions where content can be spidered. Simple augmentation of paths with a few tags such as NSFW, Pr0n, and goatse could go a long way to helping.... blah blah.. insert semantic web tripe here....
Easy, they use one of those free intarweb things from AOL that come in the mail. THen they download a newer copy of a virus with an newer signature that comcast cant find!!! See!! Its MAGIClA opadufalkfjal;sdfjk
You know you can do this yourself right? Setup a box that has an SSL/TLS enabled version of sendmail. Its supported in sendmail 8.11. It'll alow several methods of authenticating for mail relaying. From passwords to certificates. Once you have that setup, get sslwrap and wrap your pop/imap services. I've set this up for the company I work for. IE and Netscape support SSLwrapped Imap just fine. Same thing for pop. Fetchmail can be compiled to support this also. The SSL/TLS stuff is detailed
here
Info on sslwrap can be found on freshmeat. Or you can apt-get it:)
Of course this all depends on your defintion of secure. It covers the authentication part in a layer of crypto, but it doesnt cover the SMTP relaying part. It can, but both servers need to support it. However in conjunction with gpg/pgp, it may be acceptable. Hope this helps.
So I guess I should be overjoyed at being a second class gamer? Its very frustrating seeing news like this, while game support for GNU/Linux seems to be rapidly maturing. I regularly play Quake3 and Unreal Tournament in GNU/Linux. In fact, I've dropped windows entirely now that my current favorite games are available and quite playable.
I'm not sure what's better. Having a second rate port done more as a nice gesture, or just dual booting and playing the game in its full featured mode.
Perhaps everyone would be pleased if Epic would consider outsourcing the port. Let Loki do it. They did an excellent job on Heretic 2. And as far as I know, have ported Direct 3D games.
Who knows. There may well be a nice little market for companys who perfect the art of porting games across platforms.
Of course, this will only work if people loose their allergy to spending money on software. If you don't like spending money on commercial software, thats all well and good. Just dont clamor for a port of game XYZ then balk at spending actuall money on an actual commercial product. Hypocracy doesn't do the community justice.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember Rox Desktop? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROX_Desktop Very similar to how mac os works. Lay down a base system with the common libraries in a central location. Apps are just custom folders with a very specific directory structure. It's not horrible, as an end user it's kind of nice. It will lead to security whack-a-mole issues when common but non-core libs have issues, but nothing's perfect.
You're kind of conflating two issues. It isn't so much about security (so password protection doesn't apply). Nor is it about robots.txt (vivid wants to be found).
The issue is that what vivid would like to have happen is that if an 18+ year old person were to google for 'return to booby island' he would find links to or images from vivid entertainment.
If someone underage were to search for the same thing, google should magically know and display more appropriate images.
The current industry standard comes up a little short WRT robots.txt since it's a binary statement and what they're really after is conditional qualifiers. Essentially they're looking for a way to express situations when that content is valid to display or not.
Now, all of this comes with a big grain of salt. The actual article and opinions expressed are... not very reasonable or well thought out IMO.
Oh, the abuse is a side issue. I understood the article as someone trying to push the burden of not displaying smut onto google. The reality is that had they implemented a sane robots.txt file in the first place, this would never have happened.
So, from the perspective of liability, IMO the webmaster is responsible for exercising due diligence in creating a robots.txt that would have prevented booby thumbnails from turning up on google when little johnny was searching for legos (spelled 'big titty chicks', but he really meant legos... his mom swears).
Now, in that circumstance abuse or compliance of the contents of a robots.txt file still falls to the site owner and not some third party (google).
Are there flaws in my idea? Certainly, it's the product of 5 minutes of thought and a bit of sarcasm. However, it seems to me that demanding google or any other search engine not show porn it spidered is silly especially since google actually honors robots.txt. Were the situation different I would argue that if a webmaster doesn't want something spidered you should adhere to that.
The OP brings up a very good issue. Webmasters should have a means to tell search engines what type of content is ok to index vs what kind is not. For instance, a plain text file at the document root that spelled out what subpaths were ok to spider and cache or not. We could establish a convention for this directive. Perhaps a convention of calling this file of directives something consistent across sites... a 'robots.txt' if you will. Oh..... wait.....
Seriously though, perhaps it is time to extend robots.txt to include more metadata about more conditions where content can be spidered. Simple augmentation of paths with a few tags such as NSFW, Pr0n, and goatse could go a long way to helping.... blah blah.. insert semantic web tripe here....
Even at ~32 feet you are at 1 atmosphere extra pressure.
vs
Third, at 10m (~33 ft) you are at 2ATM pressure, not 1ATM!
At sea level on dry land you are under 1 ATM. If you dive down ~32ft you will be under 2ATM which is.... wait for it..... one EXTRA.
Easy, they use one of those free intarweb things from AOL that come in the mail. THen they download a newer copy of a virus with an newer signature that comcast cant find!!! See!! Its MAGIClA opadufalkfjal;sdfjk
Hood makes sense. What do you call the top of a motor? Thats where things like the head gasket, and terms like header come from.
You know you can do this yourself right? Setup a box that has an SSL/TLS enabled version of sendmail. Its supported in sendmail 8.11. It'll alow several methods of authenticating for mail relaying. From passwords to certificates. Once you have that setup, get sslwrap and wrap your pop/imap services. I've set this up for the company I work for. IE and Netscape support SSLwrapped Imap just fine. Same thing for pop. Fetchmail can be compiled to support this also. The SSL/TLS stuff is detailed here
:)
Info on sslwrap can be found on freshmeat. Or you can apt-get it
Of course this all depends on your defintion of secure. It covers the authentication part in a layer of crypto, but it doesnt cover the SMTP relaying part. It can, but both servers need to support it. However in conjunction with gpg/pgp, it may be acceptable. Hope this helps.
So I guess I should be overjoyed at being a second class gamer? Its very frustrating seeing news like this, while game support for GNU/Linux seems to be rapidly maturing. I regularly play Quake3 and Unreal Tournament in GNU/Linux. In fact, I've dropped windows entirely now that my current favorite games are available and quite playable.
I'm not sure what's better. Having a second rate port done more as a nice gesture, or just dual booting and playing the game in its full featured mode.
Perhaps everyone would be pleased if Epic would consider outsourcing the port. Let Loki do it. They did an excellent job on Heretic 2. And as far as I know, have ported Direct 3D games.
Who knows. There may well be a nice little market for companys who perfect the art of porting games across platforms.
Of course, this will only work if people loose their allergy to spending money on software. If you don't like spending money on commercial software, thats all well and good. Just dont clamor for a port of game XYZ then balk at spending actuall money on an actual commercial product. Hypocracy doesn't do the community justice.