So let's see, Linksys makes generic crap. I'm not completely impressed with my NETGEAR device so I don't think they're that great either. Don't even get me started on how bad Belkin's stuff was. D-Link sounded good, but now this?
NOW what do we go with?
I do agree it's not a HUGE issue since it's able to be disabled, but it's still not good that it's an opt in thing. I'd be buying a piece of hardware to connect to the Internet. NOT a subscription service. It may be good for those not comfortable with computers, but still, not so comfortable with those that DO understand them.
Hopefully this will turn out to be excellent news if they can indeed keep these folks shut down and away from continuing their spamming.
My concerns though are the 35,000 computers being used to spam. How long before they're found again. Or maybe they already are being all used by others. Is there any way of getting these machines repaired or otherwise reported to their ISPs? I figure if they have stats on how many machines, they have info on the machines themselves. Heck if they're setup to "receive updates" for software or holes or whatnot, maybe a nice white hat hacking to "update" the software so it self destructs the wide open hole and patches exploitable holes so they're safe?
Oye. Oye oye. Cookies. I hear so many arguments about cookies and privacy and such. I seriously want to know what's so BAD about this? I still don't get it. It's not like they're looking in your living room or bedroom. It's not like they're listening in on phone conversations. It's not like they're gaining your SSN or mother's maiden name or such.
Programatically a cookie that has any info that you might want to consider "private" won't need anything like a userid in every cookie. Just the ones that pertain to the user ID for help with logging in.
Cookies are only sent to the domain or website that pertains to them. Ads on a website get their own cookies, separate from the website's cookies. So ads know an anonymous person in general geographical area (based on IP) has seen or clicked on specific ads that were generated on specific sites.
Do you think these people have time to go into THAT kind of detail? They probably just compile stats and say "7% of our clicks to this ad came from this site and the highest percentages came from these towns".
God forbid I become a stat. Oh wait I already am probably.
Seriously though: I think many people need to calm down and not see cookies as a big brother thing or anything that's a serious threat. The only serious threat would be a browser bug or exploit that allows any site to receive/view any cookie that it's not supposed to see.
And I don't see how even 20GB isn't "much larger" compared to a max of 2GB. 4GB if you happen to find a compatible non-SDHC card. But still atleast 5-10 more storage.
The article is being read incorrectly. "YouTube/All Other" is surpassing Yahoo!, meaning anything that is part of Google! could be included, such as the book, code and news searches. Or groups. Or Picasa. All combined.
Take a look at Microsoft's stats. It's split into Live and Microsoft.com/All Other
Except the reason Y2K wasn't a problem was because the majority of problems were all fixed BEFORE the time came around. Sure it was exaggerated, but this may have been A Good Thing or else companies wouldn't have gotten the clue that it was something that needed to be fixed.
While I like my Nintendo Wii, I would HARDLY find this as an acceptable solution. The other systems still have a MUCH LARGER size for storage. On upwards of 80GB. 2GB is not decent enough for this. There needs to be a place to permanently store downloadable content (e.g.: Rock Band DLC songs) and 2GB just isn't enough. External HD via USB maybe? Hardware upgrade?
Yes that's right. You can so buy an install a copy of OS X through iTunes for that new HD you purchased to replace a dead one without needing OS X already installed. Oops, oh wait, you need an operating system to do anything with a computer. So much for the idea of killing retail sales of OS X.
You completely misunderstood the article and the concept of OpenID.
The first thing you missed was the first word of the sentence: Initially. Right now they're getting off the ground. Development and testing takes time. It is much much easier to be an OpenID provider than it is to be an OpenID consumer. Which brings me to the other point: The brief idea of how OpenID works.
OpenID works in a way similar to a friend of yours trusting some of your friends. One site which you already have login authentication for (e.g., MySpace) allows you to login to other sites which support OpenID as a method of authentication. So if I had a user account on MySpace named ohtani, I would login to another site as www.myspace.com/ohtani. I am then redirected to the MySpace website to login if I am not already logged in, and asked to accept that MySpace can pass on the credentials to the site I'm logging in to. That link is then established and the OpenID supporting site marks me as authenticated as the MySpace user.
This is where it gets tricky for places like MySpace: Say I used Yahoo! as an OpenID provider. Or even my own website (which currently does indeed allow me to login with OpenID elsewhere). MySpace can't exactly have a user like me login to their service as my website and edit my profile. They have to have some form of a mechanism of creating the user at that point if that OpenID name has never been seen. But the user name used (the OpenID URI) is, well, odd for MySpace. So they'd probably ask one to choose a MySpace user name that would map to it. From there, MySpace would allow one to login to that account any time that OpenID is used for authentication. At least that's PROBABLY what will happen. Not all sites work like this. For example, LiveJournal (created by the very people who helped make OpenID) lets one login with an OpenID, but an account with that OpenID is then created with limited functionality. Friends and comments are allowed, but no posting to your own journal.
OpenID support doesn't require you to "create" an OpenID to use it. Your existing user ID on an OpenID provider IS your OpenID. Any site that becomes an OpenID provider is simply allowing you to use an OpenID name they specify to you (often in the form of username.domain.tld or domain.tld/username) to log in elsewhere. You do nothing but just use it elsewhere. There are popular sites supporting OpenID. There's also plug-ins for blogging software to support being an OpenID provider or consumer.
On a different note, with OpenID becoming more and more popular, this will mean that we DO have to be careful and come up with a mechanism for anti-spam via OpenID, especially in cases where the system is more automated like LiveJournal's. Or else a spammer could simply have one domain and with that domain an infinite number of users able to login by simply changing the OpenID slightly (e.g.: a.example.com, b.example.com, c.example.com, aa.example.com, etc)
Taking a look at the 2006 entry reminds me of a program I used to have to work on:
Essentially it was a giant checkbook for a city government organization for some sort of subsidized housing program. There were two numbers to be calculated along with a grand total (primary and interest maybe. I forget now) The code took about 10 minutes to execute and looked something like this... and yes this was unfortunately in Visual Basic
Well if you're THAT worried then take out the battery? I don't think any company has a way of tracking a signal from a device that doesn't even have power.
I think a lot of these comments missed the point. It's not that he's not thinking of saying no. It's that he doesn't know HOW to say no or what reasons to give. So telling him to "just say no" isn't sufficient and was a no brainer from the beginning.
I think the arguments I saw that were best boiled down to the fact that you are providing an information service, and that you're not selling the data. And the other thing is that they need to know the downfalls of somebody inexperienced bringing the whole server to a crawl.
Slashdot Mirror
His case has to be thrown out! I mean... come on, he's trying to sue the planet of pluto. Everybody knows it's not a planet!
Also I think somebody should take this list and do a remake of "We Didn't Start The Fire" using the list as lyrics.
Also why in the HELL is Jack Thompson NOT on this list!
So let's see, Linksys makes generic crap. I'm not completely impressed with my NETGEAR device so I don't think they're that great either. Don't even get me started on how bad Belkin's stuff was. D-Link sounded good, but now this?
NOW what do we go with?
I do agree it's not a HUGE issue since it's able to be disabled, but it's still not good that it's an opt in thing. I'd be buying a piece of hardware to connect to the Internet. NOT a subscription service. It may be good for those not comfortable with computers, but still, not so comfortable with those that DO understand them.
Not only could you get spam ABOUT viagra. It'll be spam FROM viagra!
A million paralyzed monkeys at a million typewriters!
Just like e-mail is only for old people
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/30/0034259&tid=215&tid=95&tid=1
Hopefully this will turn out to be excellent news if they can indeed keep these folks shut down and away from continuing their spamming.
My concerns though are the 35,000 computers being used to spam. How long before they're found again. Or maybe they already are being all used by others. Is there any way of getting these machines repaired or otherwise reported to their ISPs? I figure if they have stats on how many machines, they have info on the machines themselves. Heck if they're setup to "receive updates" for software or holes or whatnot, maybe a nice white hat hacking to "update" the software so it self destructs the wide open hole and patches exploitable holes so they're safe?
Oye. Oye oye. Cookies. I hear so many arguments about cookies and privacy and such. I seriously want to know what's so BAD about this? I still don't get it. It's not like they're looking in your living room or bedroom. It's not like they're listening in on phone conversations. It's not like they're gaining your SSN or mother's maiden name or such.
Programatically a cookie that has any info that you might want to consider "private" won't need anything like a userid in every cookie. Just the ones that pertain to the user ID for help with logging in.
Cookies are only sent to the domain or website that pertains to them. Ads on a website get their own cookies, separate from the website's cookies. So ads know an anonymous person in general geographical area (based on IP) has seen or clicked on specific ads that were generated on specific sites.
Do you think these people have time to go into THAT kind of detail? They probably just compile stats and say "7% of our clicks to this ad came from this site and the highest percentages came from these towns".
God forbid I become a stat. Oh wait I already am probably.
Seriously though: I think many people need to calm down and not see cookies as a big brother thing or anything that's a serious threat. The only serious threat would be a browser bug or exploit that allows any site to receive/view any cookie that it's not supposed to see.
And I don't see how even 20GB isn't "much larger" compared to a max of 2GB. 4GB if you happen to find a compatible non-SDHC card. But still atleast 5-10 more storage.
The article is being read incorrectly. "YouTube/All Other" is surpassing Yahoo!, meaning anything that is part of Google! could be included, such as the book, code and news searches. Or groups. Or Picasa. All combined.
Take a look at Microsoft's stats. It's split into Live and Microsoft.com/All Other
Except the reason Y2K wasn't a problem was because the majority of problems were all fixed BEFORE the time came around. Sure it was exaggerated, but this may have been A Good Thing or else companies wouldn't have gotten the clue that it was something that needed to be fixed.
While I like my Nintendo Wii, I would HARDLY find this as an acceptable solution. The other systems still have a MUCH LARGER size for storage. On upwards of 80GB. 2GB is not decent enough for this. There needs to be a place to permanently store downloadable content (e.g.: Rock Band DLC songs) and 2GB just isn't enough. External HD via USB maybe? Hardware upgrade?
Oops misread an ad, thought it was out NOW. Apparently it's out in October.
Welp, there's always android for now.
You know a organization knows what they're doing on the web when their landing page is titled NEW PAGE 1 and was made with FrontPage 5.0
I've been on road runner for some time and it seems to have a decent speed and not have a bandwidth limit based on protocol.
I'm aware some companies are doing this, but some companies != all companies.
Yes that's right. You can so buy an install a copy of OS X through iTunes for that new HD you purchased to replace a dead one without needing OS X already installed. Oops, oh wait, you need an operating system to do anything with a computer. So much for the idea of killing retail sales of OS X.
Damn you beat me to it.
You completely misunderstood the article and the concept of OpenID.
The first thing you missed was the first word of the sentence: Initially. Right now they're getting off the ground. Development and testing takes time. It is much much easier to be an OpenID provider than it is to be an OpenID consumer. Which brings me to the other point: The brief idea of how OpenID works.
OpenID works in a way similar to a friend of yours trusting some of your friends. One site which you already have login authentication for (e.g., MySpace) allows you to login to other sites which support OpenID as a method of authentication. So if I had a user account on MySpace named ohtani, I would login to another site as www.myspace.com/ohtani. I am then redirected to the MySpace website to login if I am not already logged in, and asked to accept that MySpace can pass on the credentials to the site I'm logging in to. That link is then established and the OpenID supporting site marks me as authenticated as the MySpace user.
This is where it gets tricky for places like MySpace: Say I used Yahoo! as an OpenID provider. Or even my own website (which currently does indeed allow me to login with OpenID elsewhere). MySpace can't exactly have a user like me login to their service as my website and edit my profile. They have to have some form of a mechanism of creating the user at that point if that OpenID name has never been seen. But the user name used (the OpenID URI) is, well, odd for MySpace. So they'd probably ask one to choose a MySpace user name that would map to it. From there, MySpace would allow one to login to that account any time that OpenID is used for authentication. At least that's PROBABLY what will happen. Not all sites work like this. For example, LiveJournal (created by the very people who helped make OpenID) lets one login with an OpenID, but an account with that OpenID is then created with limited functionality. Friends and comments are allowed, but no posting to your own journal.
OpenID support doesn't require you to "create" an OpenID to use it. Your existing user ID on an OpenID provider IS your OpenID. Any site that becomes an OpenID provider is simply allowing you to use an OpenID name they specify to you (often in the form of username.domain.tld or domain.tld/username) to log in elsewhere. You do nothing but just use it elsewhere. There are popular sites supporting OpenID. There's also plug-ins for blogging software to support being an OpenID provider or consumer.
On a different note, with OpenID becoming more and more popular, this will mean that we DO have to be careful and come up with a mechanism for anti-spam via OpenID, especially in cases where the system is more automated like LiveJournal's. Or else a spammer could simply have one domain and with that domain an infinite number of users able to login by simply changing the OpenID slightly (e.g.: a.example.com, b.example.com, c.example.com, aa.example.com, etc)
BSD and GNU/Linux probably isn't for your grandmother either.
Just because you use Linux and the command line doesn't mean everybody uses Linux and the command line.
Don't get me wrong, I use command line a lot. I use keyboard shortcuts too over the mouse. But I wouldn't want to see it die. And it won't
How is this "off topic"? Jeez mods need to look harder. Come on. "Limbo of the lost" Game. This is very on topic.
Taking a look at the 2006 entry reminds me of a program I used to have to work on:
Essentially it was a giant checkbook for a city government organization for some sort of subsidized housing program. There were two numbers to be calculated along with a grand total (primary and interest maybe. I forget now) The code took about 10 minutes to execute and looked something like this... and yes this was unfortunately in Visual Basic
Label1.Caption = Function1
Label2.Caption = Function2
GrandTotal.Caption = Function1 + Function2
Some of the functions themselves were already bloated to begin with. That ontop of calling both of them twice was just kinda nasty though.
Turn it sideways and watercool it? While you're at it, throw some D's on it.
Well if you're THAT worried then take out the battery? I don't think any company has a way of tracking a signal from a device that doesn't even have power.
I think a lot of these comments missed the point. It's not that he's not thinking of saying no. It's that he doesn't know HOW to say no or what reasons to give. So telling him to "just say no" isn't sufficient and was a no brainer from the beginning.
I think the arguments I saw that were best boiled down to the fact that you are providing an information service, and that you're not selling the data. And the other thing is that they need to know the downfalls of somebody inexperienced bringing the whole server to a crawl.