IE's faults are more about age than anything else. As an internet user since the mid 90s, I can attest that, when IE became widespread, it was amazing when compared to Netscape, which was the sluggish and crashed often, although it did keep up with standards (something I didn't care about then, but appreciate now). IE now is much like the Netscape of yesteryear - the thing everyone used to use, but that they abandoned once they got a better alternative.
Now, IE has been around so long that its every exploit is well-known and a lot of software (both malicious and innocent) is made specifically for it. I'll draw a lot of flak for it but Firefox now is approaching IE - it was once the amazingly fast super-browser that was bound to replace its predecessor, but now has been replaced in the hearts of many by the likes of Chrome, the even newer and faster browser. It's simple enough - the older a piece of software gets, the more bloated it gets and the more exploits are discovered for it.
It's all about finding the right balance. I prefer Firefox because it has what I consider the best balance - supports newest standards, has lots of addons that are mostly unavailable for other browsers, and is still fairly fast. This rant was mostly unrelated to the topic, but I had to correct some people in the thread.
It's the Skynet?
In all seriousness, it sounds awesome and it's good to know that they're using the right tools for the job (perl to organize, postgreSQL to manage large amounts of data).
I have to be. This isn't the 90s - adblocking is trivial, with built-in protection from popup windows with most browsers (admittedly IE doesn't do it well, but that's no surprise) and with addons like ABP you can stop yourself from seeing the ads.
Many of the people who view this site are involved in web design and own websites. I think that we should just stop with all these ads. They pay the website owner virtually nothing if pay-per-click, and even pay-per-view gives pittance. All the profits are funneled to people like Google. Ultimately, websites should do as slashdot does - have no ads for members. Even if your website has high bandwidth costs, ads just look unprofessional. I know this has been examined before, but I think those people who conclude that people will choose ads above cost are wrong - they ignore another crucial thing: speed. A website that loads quickly will be loved by users, it's one of the reasons why Google's web search succeeded. If there were no ads, everyone's web browsing would be noticeably faster and more enjoyable.
ABP isn't just blocking ads - it's a boycott. No ads viewed, no revenue gained.
Use resulting number to chart IT support performance, assuming that the network + server uptime and stability is more important than user inconvenience. You could decide that anything above a certain threshold is too much, or use it to compare personnel with each other.
You don't trust the big AV companies, yet you trust Microsoft?
I admit, shipping Windows with an antivirus is a good idea, but it has been for years - most pre-installed copies have a trial version of Norton or McAfee on them.
The fact that it was McAfee saying that makes me laugh... but even so, it's likely their product will be better than any Microsoft AV will be. Why? Not that Microsoft will make the worst AV, but it's about dedication. "Internet Security" companies like Norton and McAfee only control a niche market (firewall/AV software), so they will prop up their flagship products as much as they can, because without them, they're sunk. A company like Microsoft won't have to maintain it out of necessity, and this could easily go the way of FrontPage, OneCare, Money (as mentioned in TFS), Picture It!, and other products that it shed like excess skin as the years went on.
How many of these articles are going to keep making it on/.?
Last time the iPhone was used to make the cover art of some magazine, which was of course comparable to the moon landing.
I know that this sounds like trolling, and by some definitions it may be, but I think that even an objective reader (someone who *isn't* sick of hearing how the iPhone cured cancer) would find this particular "article" incredibly pandering.
If I were *looking* for hype and gimmicks, there's always digg.
I agree. They seem to be posted here all the time, and show the iPhone as having these amazing new features, features that have often already been done. I don't have a problem with it - I just think that it isn't balanced (i.e.: seeing who has already done/is working on that feature).
How much are you willing to bet that he just said that for the reporters (or was told to say that BY the reporters)? If I were 11, I would be bragging away. Also, 1st comment is right - he rushed through on an easy degree. He should come back when he gets his doctorate - that's the real test. Just as an anecdote - I could have been taking university courses at 15 or 16 (virtually anyone with a grade 9-level education can, since the rest is basically rehashing and enhancing on whatever is already learned), but many universities simply do not allow minors to enroll, whether they have a high school diploma or not. It's likely there was an exception made for him, and he was also likely homeschooled (unless he got his HS diploma by age 9).
This is similar to the 9-year-old judge and all 'prodigies'. Many of them, especially ones in objective fields deserve their degrees, but you wonder sometimes about whether connections made more of a difference in trailblazing a path for his future.
Just tell them you use Linux, even if you don't. They'll probably be able to add you to a white list.
That's assuming that they allow Linux. I've been to places where the netadmins do not allow non-Windows computers on the network. Not actually blocked, but against the rules - mainly out of laziness. It could be a similar situation here.
Solution A: run Linux.
Solution B: run Windows, but encrypt all your important data. It'll be able to monitor your browsing, but if it's spying on your browser there's not much else you can do besides try using an obscure browser (if the program is targeted for Firefox/IE).
Incidentally - has anyone got information about that program?
TFA only tells me the numbers and the guy's plans, nothing about the actual bug. What was it? It seems awfully hard to screw up adding two numbers together to get a third number, which is basically what that software was doing. Has it occurred to anyone that it might have been tampering? It seems to me that, with the fairly large (tens of thousands) number of votes, adding or removing just enough to make it a runoff would be the perfect vote tampering scheme - too little to draw much attention, but enough to actually make a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to me - it's proof that they can actually do what they say. Although, depending on how you look at it, every article is a fundraising article.
Now, IE has been around so long that its every exploit is well-known and a lot of software (both malicious and innocent) is made specifically for it. I'll draw a lot of flak for it but Firefox now is approaching IE - it was once the amazingly fast super-browser that was bound to replace its predecessor, but now has been replaced in the hearts of many by the likes of Chrome, the even newer and faster browser. It's simple enough - the older a piece of software gets, the more bloated it gets and the more exploits are discovered for it.
It's all about finding the right balance. I prefer Firefox because it has what I consider the best balance - supports newest standards, has lots of addons that are mostly unavailable for other browsers, and is still fairly fast. This rant was mostly unrelated to the topic, but I had to correct some people in the thread.
It's the Skynet? In all seriousness, it sounds awesome and it's good to know that they're using the right tools for the job (perl to organize, postgreSQL to manage large amounts of data).
Many of the people who view this site are involved in web design and own websites. I think that we should just stop with all these ads. They pay the website owner virtually nothing if pay-per-click, and even pay-per-view gives pittance. All the profits are funneled to people like Google. Ultimately, websites should do as slashdot does - have no ads for members. Even if your website has high bandwidth costs, ads just look unprofessional. I know this has been examined before, but I think those people who conclude that people will choose ads above cost are wrong - they ignore another crucial thing: speed. A website that loads quickly will be loved by users, it's one of the reasons why Google's web search succeeded. If there were no ads, everyone's web browsing would be noticeably faster and more enjoyable.
ABP isn't just blocking ads - it's a boycott. No ads viewed, no revenue gained.
Amount of service calls resolved: h
Server/network downtime (in hours): d
Use formula '(s / h) + 2d"
Use resulting number to chart IT support performance, assuming that the network + server uptime and stability is more important than user inconvenience. You could decide that anything above a certain threshold is too much, or use it to compare personnel with each other.
Now that glass cell from X-Men 3 that they used to contain Magneto will have a use again!
You don't trust the big AV companies, yet you trust Microsoft? I admit, shipping Windows with an antivirus is a good idea, but it has been for years - most pre-installed copies have a trial version of Norton or McAfee on them.
The fact that it was McAfee saying that makes me laugh... but even so, it's likely their product will be better than any Microsoft AV will be. Why? Not that Microsoft will make the worst AV, but it's about dedication. "Internet Security" companies like Norton and McAfee only control a niche market (firewall/AV software), so they will prop up their flagship products as much as they can, because without them, they're sunk. A company like Microsoft won't have to maintain it out of necessity, and this could easily go the way of FrontPage, OneCare, Money (as mentioned in TFS), Picture It!, and other products that it shed like excess skin as the years went on.
a new distributed networking filesystem (POHMELFS)
I always knew it would be "palm[-sized?] elves" that would bring us into the future!
In all seriousness, they need to find a way to make their acronyms shorter, or make acronyms inside acronyms, HURD-style.
How many of these articles are going to keep making it on /.?
Last time the iPhone was used to make the cover art of some magazine, which was of course comparable to the moon landing.
I know that this sounds like trolling, and by some definitions it may be, but I think that even an objective reader (someone who *isn't* sick of hearing how the iPhone cured cancer) would find this particular "article" incredibly pandering.
If I were *looking* for hype and gimmicks, there's always digg.
I agree. They seem to be posted here all the time, and show the iPhone as having these amazing new features, features that have often already been done. I don't have a problem with it - I just think that it isn't balanced (i.e.: seeing who has already done/is working on that feature).
How much are you willing to bet that he just said that for the reporters (or was told to say that BY the reporters)? If I were 11, I would be bragging away. Also, 1st comment is right - he rushed through on an easy degree. He should come back when he gets his doctorate - that's the real test. Just as an anecdote - I could have been taking university courses at 15 or 16 (virtually anyone with a grade 9-level education can, since the rest is basically rehashing and enhancing on whatever is already learned), but many universities simply do not allow minors to enroll, whether they have a high school diploma or not. It's likely there was an exception made for him, and he was also likely homeschooled (unless he got his HS diploma by age 9). This is similar to the 9-year-old judge and all 'prodigies'. Many of them, especially ones in objective fields deserve their degrees, but you wonder sometimes about whether connections made more of a difference in trailblazing a path for his future.
Just tell them you use Linux, even if you don't. They'll probably be able to add you to a white list.
That's assuming that they allow Linux. I've been to places where the netadmins do not allow non-Windows computers on the network. Not actually blocked, but against the rules - mainly out of laziness. It could be a similar situation here. Solution A: run Linux. Solution B: run Windows, but encrypt all your important data. It'll be able to monitor your browsing, but if it's spying on your browser there's not much else you can do besides try using an obscure browser (if the program is targeted for Firefox/IE). Incidentally - has anyone got information about that program?
TFA only tells me the numbers and the guy's plans, nothing about the actual bug. What was it? It seems awfully hard to screw up adding two numbers together to get a third number, which is basically what that software was doing. Has it occurred to anyone that it might have been tampering? It seems to me that, with the fairly large (tens of thousands) number of votes, adding or removing just enough to make it a runoff would be the perfect vote tampering scheme - too little to draw much attention, but enough to actually make a difference.