I'm perfectly happy if that particular combination of bullshit never works on any platform! Anyone seeking to implement such a thing is either a) a deployer of malware, b) someone with malicious intent, or b) not a real web developer. None of which persuades me that I want anything to do with a site they've "developed"...
You have 2 b)'s there, so I guess I'll add a c): designer of custom online training courses which the customer views through a project management test site which displays the course inside an iframe to allow it to be wrapped with a resolution switcher and bug report/feedback form. I'm sure you knew that, though. But that's hardly the point, the point is that it is yet another stupid edge-case bug in IE that hints at fundamentally poor design decisions in the browser itself, and requires me to spend time researching and fixing a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place and for which I cannot bill anybody.
Also, what's the difference between a deployer of malware and someone with malicious intent?
I'd like to comment on what happens when you vote another party into office, but I've never seen that happen.
Good god, a little fact checking after my comment shows that the last president who was not a Democrat or a Republican was Zachary Taylor / Millard Fillmore, elected in 1848 (Taylor died in office, leaving Fillmore as president). That's 12 years before Lincoln was elected to his first term. It's the same year that John Quincy Adams died.
If only ALL THIS had come out before the 2012 elections things would be different now !!
They probably would have been a lot like the 2008 elections. A lot of promises about how things need to change and rights need to be preserved followed up with exactly dick to show for any of those promises. This is what happens when you vote a Democrat or a Republican into office. I'd like to comment on what happens when you vote another party into office, but I've never seen that happen.
but also those policies that facilitate higher birthrates in White women and higher educational standards and after-birth care for all Russian children.
That has nothing to do with restricting homosexuality. A gay man is not going to go out and impregnate a women just because you made homosexuality illegal. It's just going to drive the behavior underground. The points you listed have everything to do with xenophobia and nothing to do with homosexuality (or any sexuality, really).
Linux is descended from Unix, and Unix spent its formative years in University labs where students would routinely prank each other.
When I was in my first year of computer science and learned about C's fork command, I immediately logged onto the Solaris cluster and put a fork inside an infinite loop. With sheer joy I compiled my deviously clever application, and executed a.out as I scanned the lab to watch in delight as everyones sessions started failing, as my masterstroke software began consuming unlimited resources, exponentially! HAHAHA!
The hell you say! Only just yesterday I had the joy, the pure joy I tell you, to debug an IE8 issue where it would show an error message helpfully informing the user that the website was unreachable because I had the audacity to send a PDF file over HTTPS and include the standard headers to disable caching. So now my application is technically broken for everything else in that it might allow caching of those PDF files, but hey, at least IE8 works with it again.
IE8 is seriously a pure joy to work with. Any developer who has set up a page which features HTTPS and a Flash movie inside an iframe trying to launch an external URL to an Office file (but only with Office installed!) knows what I'm talking about.
the fact that it's a gauss gun implies that metal is pretty central to the design... which can't be 3d printed at this point in time.
Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say "3D printed" at will to old ladies. There is a pestilence upon this land, nothing is sacred. Even those who arrange and design guns are under considerable economic stress in this period in history.
Guns are my trade. I am a gunner. My name is Roger the Gunner. I arrange, design, and sell guns.
According to WHO, there are 285 million visually impaired people, so about 90% of the population of the US. 39 million of those are completely blind, which equates to a country the size of Poland or Argentina.
In otherowrds, there's tons of better ways to spend all the billions injected into this project.
Yeah, we would probably be better off spending that $2.5 billion on another 8 or 9 days in Afghanistan (at the low, low price of just $300 million per day).
Haha, no, I'm only kidding. Only a complete idiot would think that $2.5 billion (which represents 0.06% of the US federal budget for FY 2013) to send an entire science laboratory to another planet is a waste of money. This country is full of money wasters, ground-breaking science missions are not part of those. Look at the defense budget if you want to talk about trimming the fat, not the science budget. The NSA in particular seems to have quite a lot of money that it doesn't need (or shouldn't be using).
And now you've broken form autofilling, which means that real people now need to fill out a lot more fields than they do if you have a CAPTCHA.
That's true. It's not really necessary to randomize all of the fields, but it makes another good test if none of the regular fields are filled out or if they all have the same text in them. It's really only necessary to add fields with certain names that would trigger a bot to fill them out ("subject", "message", "comments", etc), and another suggestion was made to use CSS to target the field's parent element and hide that, which wouldn't require Javascript.
I think it's worth spending time on though, I use it for all of the contact forms I set up and it does a good job to stop spam. The best thing about it is that "normal" users never even come into contact with it, they don't even see it. The hidden field thing would need to be tested with screen readers though to make sure they also don't pick up the hidden fields. It also counts on bots being lazy and not actually rendering the page, which they might end up doing.
Defeating a human reading the source code is not the point. The point is to defeat a bot reading the source code. Another solution that was pointed out was to use CSS to target the hidden element's parent and hide that through regular CSS, which would eliminate the Javascript. Now you're talking about a bot that renders the entire page and fills out the form visually, which is not common (if done at all).
Any solution that uses images fails. You need to account for blind people. Hidden form fields are the answer! Don't require people to do anything extra!
Perhaps show four photographs and ask the user to click on the one that doesn't belong (maybe the kitten out of a picture of 4 cats).
Yeah, that will totally solve the problem for blind people.
Hidden fields, people, the answer is hidden fields. Hide fields from people using Javascript, bots still find them, if they're filled out reject the form.
Add some fields which start out as regular text fields but then hide them with Javascript. You can give them labels or default values like "Don't change this" in case someone doesn't have Javascript enabled. Give the real fields in your form random names. For the hidden fields, give them names like "subject" or "comments" or "url" (don't use common names for personal info like "email", "fname" etc that the browser might automatically fill out). When they submit the form, check for values in those hidden fields (either any value at all, or a value different than the default). If they are filled out, reject the form. Hiding the fields with Javascript will work for virtually everyone and it doesn't require real people to do anything extra. This will fail against bots that bother to actually render the page or bots that specifically target your site (which can be remedied if you randomize all field names and store the random names in the session to match them up when the form gets submitted), but those are far less common than bots that just get the HTML and parse it to look for form actions and field names.
I think it is hilarious that they (and you, apparently) really think that the technology will be available within 10 years to survive more than a couple days on Mars if they even got there.
What technology is missing? They do not have to develop new technology for this mission. We've constructed spacecraft in Earth orbit and launched people to them, we've landed spacecraft on both the moon and Mars, we can communicate through space, we have systems for producing oxygen, water, and food. What else is missing? You realize that the entire initial base will already be built by the time they even launch the people, right? By the time they lift off from Earth they will already know if the oxygen generators are producing oxygen, if the food generators are producing food, if the solar panels are producing power, etc.
New supplies, and new colonists, would arrive every 2 years.
Also, shows like "Big Brother" work well for TV by the precise fact that they are very cheap to produce. The "Winner" gets half a million dollars. Most actors on popular sit-coms get paid more than that per episode.
These aren't actors, and they aren't getting paid. Their job is to set up a colony on Mars. They don't exactly need money.
I wonder if they even have the bandwidth to send back TV quality signals from Mars. What happens when it's on the far side of the sun? They will need to set up relay satellites to ensure they can always get a good signal.
They've done a feasibility study which consulted space experts from around the world. I'm pretty sure things like bandwidth and receiving a signal would have been high on their discussion list, considering that's how the project gets funded.
If you want to read more about it before poking holes in what they plan to do, you can check their FAQ or road map. The road map calls for 2 video streams by 2021, 2 years before people land, with a minimum of 4 streams by 2025, when the second team lands. The habitat (6 landers) and 2 rovers will already be on the planet by the time the first team lands, with 5 more landers just a few weeks behind them. Communication will go through a satellite orbiting Mars, and presumably there will be a relay satellite at one of the L4 or L5 points.
Even then I've seen lots of pictures from the Mars but I don't think I've seen too many videos.
That's because transmission of video from Mars has never been a priority. Here, it's a priority.
"Information", like a picture of your juvenile daughter taking a dick in her ass, should be free? Why should that "information" be free, who does that possibly benefit? What, because it's not your daughter? What about when it is, you have no problem with everyone having free access to those pictures?
I'm definitely no government apologist, but using the old "information should be free" line about pictures of children getting sexually abused is making quite a stretch out of the word "information".
Slashdot Mirror
I'm perfectly happy if that particular combination of bullshit never works on any platform! Anyone seeking to implement such a thing is either a) a deployer of malware, b) someone with malicious intent, or b) not a real web developer. None of which persuades me that I want anything to do with a site they've "developed"...
You have 2 b)'s there, so I guess I'll add a c): designer of custom online training courses which the customer views through a project management test site which displays the course inside an iframe to allow it to be wrapped with a resolution switcher and bug report/feedback form. I'm sure you knew that, though. But that's hardly the point, the point is that it is yet another stupid edge-case bug in IE that hints at fundamentally poor design decisions in the browser itself, and requires me to spend time researching and fixing a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place and for which I cannot bill anybody.
Also, what's the difference between a deployer of malware and someone with malicious intent?
Only candidates that would would try to put an end to the corruption and abuse of power in the American system these days would be Ron or Rand Paul.
Or Gary Johnson, or John Huntsman, or Jill Stein, or several other people who didn't manage to make it onto prime-time national debates.
I'd like to comment on what happens when you vote another party into office, but I've never seen that happen.
Good god, a little fact checking after my comment shows that the last president who was not a Democrat or a Republican was Zachary Taylor / Millard Fillmore, elected in 1848 (Taylor died in office, leaving Fillmore as president). That's 12 years before Lincoln was elected to his first term. It's the same year that John Quincy Adams died.
If only ALL THIS had come out before the 2012 elections things would be different now !!
They probably would have been a lot like the 2008 elections. A lot of promises about how things need to change and rights need to be preserved followed up with exactly dick to show for any of those promises. This is what happens when you vote a Democrat or a Republican into office. I'd like to comment on what happens when you vote another party into office, but I've never seen that happen.
but also those policies that facilitate higher birthrates in White women and higher educational standards and after-birth care for all Russian children.
That has nothing to do with restricting homosexuality. A gay man is not going to go out and impregnate a women just because you made homosexuality illegal. It's just going to drive the behavior underground. The points you listed have everything to do with xenophobia and nothing to do with homosexuality (or any sexuality, really).
Linux is descended from Unix, and Unix spent its formative years in University labs where students would routinely prank each other.
When I was in my first year of computer science and learned about C's fork command, I immediately logged onto the Solaris cluster and put a fork inside an infinite loop. With sheer joy I compiled my deviously clever application, and executed a.out as I scanned the lab to watch in delight as everyones sessions started failing, as my masterstroke software began consuming unlimited resources, exponentially! HAHAHA!
Stupid buzzkill admins..
Webmasters are tired of IE 8
The hell you say! Only just yesterday I had the joy, the pure joy I tell you, to debug an IE8 issue where it would show an error message helpfully informing the user that the website was unreachable because I had the audacity to send a PDF file over HTTPS and include the standard headers to disable caching. So now my application is technically broken for everything else in that it might allow caching of those PDF files, but hey, at least IE8 works with it again.
IE8 is seriously a pure joy to work with. Any developer who has set up a page which features HTTPS and a Flash movie inside an iframe trying to launch an external URL to an Office file (but only with Office installed!) knows what I'm talking about.
the fact that it's a gauss gun implies that metal is pretty central to the design... which can't be 3d printed at this point in time.
Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say "3D printed" at will to old ladies. There is a pestilence upon this land, nothing is sacred. Even those who arrange and design guns are under considerable economic stress in this period in history.
Guns are my trade. I am a gunner. My name is Roger the Gunner. I arrange, design, and sell guns.
Most Americans would actually say "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave", instead of switching the words Free and Brave.
Your idiocy is showing.
honestly would probably result in a very negative user reaction as thousands of people drop and break their phones.
And who would be at fault there?
I'll hazard a guess: because they used an iPhone 3GS when they shot the video and pictures.
Um, how many blind people ARE there?
According to WHO, there are 285 million visually impaired people, so about 90% of the population of the US. 39 million of those are completely blind, which equates to a country the size of Poland or Argentina.
The entire mission is cited at about $2.5 billion. The US federal budget for FY2013 calls for over $3.8 trillion in expenditures.
In otherowrds, there's tons of better ways to spend all the billions injected into this project.
Yeah, we would probably be better off spending that $2.5 billion on another 8 or 9 days in Afghanistan (at the low, low price of just $300 million per day).
Haha, no, I'm only kidding. Only a complete idiot would think that $2.5 billion (which represents 0.06% of the US federal budget for FY 2013) to send an entire science laboratory to another planet is a waste of money. This country is full of money wasters, ground-breaking science missions are not part of those. Look at the defense budget if you want to talk about trimming the fat, not the science budget. The NSA in particular seems to have quite a lot of money that it doesn't need (or shouldn't be using).
And now you've broken form autofilling, which means that real people now need to fill out a lot more fields than they do if you have a CAPTCHA.
That's true. It's not really necessary to randomize all of the fields, but it makes another good test if none of the regular fields are filled out or if they all have the same text in them. It's really only necessary to add fields with certain names that would trigger a bot to fill them out ("subject", "message", "comments", etc), and another suggestion was made to use CSS to target the field's parent element and hide that, which wouldn't require Javascript.
I think it's worth spending time on though, I use it for all of the contact forms I set up and it does a good job to stop spam. The best thing about it is that "normal" users never even come into contact with it, they don't even see it. The hidden field thing would need to be tested with screen readers though to make sure they also don't pick up the hidden fields. It also counts on bots being lazy and not actually rendering the page, which they might end up doing.
Defeating a human reading the source code is not the point. The point is to defeat a bot reading the source code. Another solution that was pointed out was to use CSS to target the hidden element's parent and hide that through regular CSS, which would eliminate the Javascript. Now you're talking about a bot that renders the entire page and fills out the form visually, which is not common (if done at all).
Any solution that uses images fails. You need to account for blind people. Hidden form fields are the answer! Don't require people to do anything extra!
Perhaps show four photographs and ask the user to click on the one that doesn't belong (maybe the kitten out of a picture of 4 cats).
Yeah, that will totally solve the problem for blind people.
Hidden fields, people, the answer is hidden fields. Hide fields from people using Javascript, bots still find them, if they're filled out reject the form.
you have to see and interpret what's going on in the scene
You realize that many of the people complaining about captchas are blind, right?
Add some fields which start out as regular text fields but then hide them with Javascript. You can give them labels or default values like "Don't change this" in case someone doesn't have Javascript enabled. Give the real fields in your form random names. For the hidden fields, give them names like "subject" or "comments" or "url" (don't use common names for personal info like "email", "fname" etc that the browser might automatically fill out). When they submit the form, check for values in those hidden fields (either any value at all, or a value different than the default). If they are filled out, reject the form. Hiding the fields with Javascript will work for virtually everyone and it doesn't require real people to do anything extra. This will fail against bots that bother to actually render the page or bots that specifically target your site (which can be remedied if you randomize all field names and store the random names in the session to match them up when the form gets submitted), but those are far less common than bots that just get the HTML and parse it to look for form actions and field names.
To me, a colony is a settlement that will become self sufficient through production of goods or through trade.
You're welcome to define "colony" however you want, as long as you allow the rest of us to continue using the dictionary definition.
I think it is hilarious that they (and you, apparently) really think that the technology will be available within 10 years to survive more than a couple days on Mars if they even got there.
What technology is missing? They do not have to develop new technology for this mission. We've constructed spacecraft in Earth orbit and launched people to them, we've landed spacecraft on both the moon and Mars, we can communicate through space, we have systems for producing oxygen, water, and food. What else is missing? You realize that the entire initial base will already be built by the time they even launch the people, right? By the time they lift off from Earth they will already know if the oxygen generators are producing oxygen, if the food generators are producing food, if the solar panels are producing power, etc.
With no way to send additional supplies
New supplies, and new colonists, would arrive every 2 years.
Also, shows like "Big Brother" work well for TV by the precise fact that they are very cheap to produce. The "Winner" gets half a million dollars. Most actors on popular sit-coms get paid more than that per episode.
These aren't actors, and they aren't getting paid. Their job is to set up a colony on Mars. They don't exactly need money.
I wonder if they even have the bandwidth to send back TV quality signals from Mars. What happens when it's on the far side of the sun? They will need to set up relay satellites to ensure they can always get a good signal.
They've done a feasibility study which consulted space experts from around the world. I'm pretty sure things like bandwidth and receiving a signal would have been high on their discussion list, considering that's how the project gets funded.
If you want to read more about it before poking holes in what they plan to do, you can check their FAQ or road map. The road map calls for 2 video streams by 2021, 2 years before people land, with a minimum of 4 streams by 2025, when the second team lands. The habitat (6 landers) and 2 rovers will already be on the planet by the time the first team lands, with 5 more landers just a few weeks behind them. Communication will go through a satellite orbiting Mars, and presumably there will be a relay satellite at one of the L4 or L5 points.
Even then I've seen lots of pictures from the Mars but I don't think I've seen too many videos.
That's because transmission of video from Mars has never been a priority. Here, it's a priority.
Information should be free.
"Information", like a picture of your juvenile daughter taking a dick in her ass, should be free? Why should that "information" be free, who does that possibly benefit? What, because it's not your daughter? What about when it is, you have no problem with everyone having free access to those pictures?
I'm definitely no government apologist, but using the old "information should be free" line about pictures of children getting sexually abused is making quite a stretch out of the word "information".