Yes, I am a graphics artist = I cater to end users (don't you care what their experience is? I do, it's my job to!). I'm sorry if that makes me seem like an idiot to you. It's very unfortunate
I don't see that Flash caters to end users at all, I'm afraid. Look at this very web site. What couldn't have been expressed with standard web technologies? Anything useful?
Since I am a user, I have to say Flash sites display nothing but contempt towards me. They force me to view information their way, ignoring preferences I might have, force me to look at lame animations to go between pages, don't let me extract text easily, often don't interact with the browser correctly, and so on ad infinitum.
CSS works fine and dandy and it STILL doesn't look the same on all platforms and browsers when implemented properly. Is this acceptable to those concerned that one web browser will choose to render tables one way while another will choose another method. One will render layers one way, another in a completely different way. I can write CSS until my hands bleed and I will still not get consistency
And here is your problem. You will *not* get absolutely perfect consistency. The web wasn't designed that way. Why do you want it, anyway? Think about what it would take to enforce it - at the very least you would have to control my browser size.
most people browsing the web (remember tons of people out there who barely know how to use their computer (they buy software that fuels the need for backend software that provides jobs to us all in one way or another) = the majority of the audience on the web
If you don't tell the public when they are wrong, how can you expect an informed public?
almost anything that can surf the web these days has a Flash Player written for it (if it doesn't yet, believe me it will, Macromedia wants 100% adoption of Flash if possible)
Does FreeBSD? I'm using it right now.
And 100% adoption is something of a nightmare scenario. Do you really want to just cede control of the content and design of the web to one corporation? Especially one that might resort to all sorts of chicanary once they start to topple. And looking at their stock price one can hope their days are numbered.
Flash IS a valid mechanism for web content
Sort of. HTML allows you to embed objects, but to *only* provide support for your information via proprietary viewers, and not the standard web technogies, is a little unprofessional and short sighted.
Look the "Spirited Away" site itself. Would it really have hurt to provide a single page of HTML telling me the stuff that was on the (slow, redundant) Flash site?
I repeat the Flash Player is executable you can easily apply any local system security you want to it
Yes, and it's receiving instructions from some foreign source, and the format, though published, is not exactly easy to check. And as recent events have proven, it's impossible to secure "plug ins" when they themselves are full of bugs.
You also have zero evidence that the plug-in itself is not secure!
So, I have to wait for the first "all you base are belong to us" bug to be exploited, do I?
Here's how it works - we allow incoming traffic through port 80 for a set of well-defined technologies. Adding *anything* else is a risk - including Javascript. You can make a case for the usefulness of Javascript, but Flash? I think I'd tell the employees to go look at movie sites at home.
Many web surfers, on comparable sites (in regard otherwise equal in quality of content and interest in the topics), will prefer to use the one that looks better or is more intuitive!
I've yet to see a Flash site that looks better or is more intuitive. They waste time with lame animations, and they invent a bunch of new, unfamiliar controls.
I also remember the time before Flash, it was mostly visually boring.
Why is that a problem, exactly? Perhaps, as another poster pointed out, you should invent some alternative to the web, get the IETF to allocate you a port for this new "multimedia" internet application, and leave the web alone.
The incompatible islands of content are not really a good argument in the case of Flash. Flash has been installed on over 490 million computers to date (that sounds more like several continents of compatible content)!
As long as they are all Windows machines! The plugin seems pretty flakey on Linux, and what about FreeBSD, Solaris and so on? What happens when macromedia start to collapse and start charging per page created, per view, or whatever? What happens when some other company invents some other multimedia viewing thing, and they start to try to break one another? No, I like things exactly as they are now. Open, and controlled by sensible people, in the main.
If that is not a standard by sheer numbers though not by W3C (which is lately pushing SVG that is really more oriented toward static graphics than animated or web based applications as Flash is?) I don't know what is!
The difference with SVG is that it will be published, and there will be many tools supporting it, not one company. I acknowledge that the Flash format itself was published (due to SVG panic and collapsing stock?), but it's not exactly XML, and therefore easily viewed and manipulated, and designed to work with other web technologies properly, is it? I haven't looked at SVG, but I truly hope that it's not just a knee-jerk reaction to Flash...
It all seems to be variations of the same to me.
So? I thought you wanted it to be intuitive. Certainly, new things don't have to be unintuitive, but the risk is quite high, and I find Flash sites quite an ordeal. Which things are buttons? Which are scrollbars? They're all hidden in "clever" ways.
By the way you say, Disney doesn't actually know what they are doing?!?!? This is news to me! How do you figure that? Do you have something personal against the Mouse? Do you really believe that! And you are mocking me?!? Disney has been called many things for their business practices, policies, and principles, but I don't think anyone has ever accused them of not knowing what they are doing (regardless of their morals or of the intent of what they are doing, they know VERY WELL, and they do it better than any other Entertainment Company in the World)!!!
They don't know what they're doing WRT the web, if they don't just provide the information in HTML or XML as well as Flash. I don't know about their movies, the only interesting ones seem to be done by other people and just released by Disney (Toy Story, Spirited Away), which are the only ones I've seen lately. I think they are basically bereft of creativity, mining the public domain for material while trying to destroy it for future generations.
No thanks, please use the proper term, ENVY!
Envy over what? Being creatively backrupt? Nope.
Please *think* about what YOU do by holding such sublime hatred (envy) of organizations with power like Disney. Remember they started humbly and their innovators / entrepreneurs / visionaries / artists worked their a@#es off to get where they are today!
Walt Disney and crew may have. Now? I don't think so. This is, of course, why it's important that copyrights and patents are allowed to expire.
That is the DREAM of this country for many people living here and ALL hoping to someday enter!
It's important to remember that many people living that "dream" never got there via hard work, imagination, or drive. They'll be happy to package that dream for you, to keep you a nice docile cog in the machine, though.
Not to say it can't be achieved, but an awful lot of CEOs don't seem to have ever actually *done* anything, except switch from job to job through the old boy's network, raping and pillaging as they go.
Jealousy never gets you anywhere. Instead of hating all above you, work as hard as they did, move up the ladder by taking equal if not greater risks of falling, and get there yourself by having MUCH better ideas and drive! I'm sure the view is very different from the top. I hope you get there someday (and that others do not harbor hatred toward you just for being there)!
Yes, it would be better to get there via hard work. As far as I can see, Disney is just a pack of executives and their lawyers who screw over smaller artists and their companies who actually do the producing, and lobby to change laws to take away our "fair use" rights and completely kill of the public domain - ironically where Disney gets it's "ideas".
I never said any of the things which you claimed I said. Is it that you have to resort to telling lies to try and make a point
No, it's all there. Look at your first reply to my statement that you can see the data flowing across the network interface, and then when I tried to tell you that tcpdump can be used to demonstrate this. I just did, for a quiet chuckle. Having to walk you through it all step-by-painful-step is not something I'm going to forget in a hurry.
People like you must *hate* this permanent record thing. I'll bet the google usenet archive annoys the hell out of you. It would embarrass me, if I though employers were going to see all that mad rambling attached to me.
Prove you can do what you say you can
What am I supposed to prove again? Get ethereal, you can see all the HTML (or whatever) flowing across the network interface. Done.
Encapsulated in a fucking com object you stupid fucking retard. Do you need me to teach you hwo to tie your shoes
I already refuted this elsewhere. Security through obscurity is no good! Why don't you just admit you can only obfuscate it from people who don't really care?
Yes, I know you said a public key, but obviously you think a public key is a "master key" which can deencrypt any encryption
No, I didn't say that at all. Reread what I said - I said you must give me the public key *before* I can decrypt your page for viewing. And you admit that! Putting it in a component is not an effective technique for security. Please don't do that, and go around telling people their data is safe!
Would you like to continue your quest in proving that you are nothing more than a pathetic poser
Well, it hasn't happened yet, except in you mind, where you can decrypt cipher text without a key, or effectively "hide" the key in a component from everyone.
It's also important to remember that your original two "hiding" schemes are failures. Encryption is better though, at least you're starting to think about it!
And what besides pointing you to the tcp/ip RFC did I get wrong
Confusing HTTP with TCP. Not understanding that *all* packets can be captured. Not knowing that tcpdump can capture the entire contents of a packet. Not understanding that tcpdump is non-intrusive.
And there's more... the process of explaining all this to you was incredibly painful. Luckily it's all well documented in my journal.
When you finally understand there is no "master public key" for encryption
I did not say there was a "master public key" - but you must get a public key to the browser somehow - otherwise the browser would not be able to decrypt what you send it. Therefore I can get the key, too. Do you understand yet? Or tell me how you can magically get the public key to the browser without my seeing it as well...
actually get a clue about how IE renders HTML dynamically, then you will understand
Yes, but you have to send the JavaScript, or the HTML, or whatever, to *do* that dynamic rendering. That is the source. I can capture it. Therefore there is no way to hide the source.
Are you getting a clue yet. There are many different ways that the html source can made completely and totally hidden. Once you get past your skript kiddie mentality and learn how to program in windows and how to program within the iexplorer environment, you will get a clue
Whatever. You have to send me the source (of whatever form) that describes the page. I can read that, as it flows across the network interface.
But since it makes you happy to think such things and I love making you look like a retard flash file format [macromedia.com]
Actually, this is the first time you've been right! It had to happen eventually I guess.
They've released the format so I'm happy to be proven wrong, in this case. If non-macromedia tools and players are released, I'll be able to take it seriously.
Pratt's list of topic he has gotten wrong so far:
* TCP/IP * tcpdump * CSS !important priorities * hiding HTML * RSA encryption... there are probably others. See my journal for the laugh-a-minute voyage through ignorance.
But, I'm happy to say I was wrong about the Flash format. Unlike you, I'm man enough to admit it. If I was *you*, I'd currently be trying to weasel out of it by demanding an implementation of a Flash player.
I wonder how long ago this happened - I guess all that lobbying by sensible people has paid off! I can't image what Macromedia's business model will be, once free tools exist... time will tell.
Now, where's that "hidden" web site source? Do it or forever be branded a cowardly lamer...
No, I'm not interested in what is a standards organization or not. To be a standard of any kind, it must be published somewhere. The content of a flash "executable" that you download is not. Therefore it is not a standard.
It is just popular amongst dimwits, like you.
Now, where's that web site with "unreadable" source?
By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard
Really? And where is this "standard" published, chimp?
You haven't seen evidence that the flash plugin is secure because you haven't looked. http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/flash/whitepap ers/security.pdf
That's a statement of intent, yes. But hardly any kind of evidence. It will continue to be banned by organizations that care about, and understand security.
Time to get yourself some kind of education, I think.
Sigh. I'm breaking my promise to ignore this clown, but I can't let people be mislead.
With WSH you can use every and any com object ever created, plus have complete access to the win32 api's, plus you can write your own com objects. why don't you learn about a topic before you discuss it
Yes, of course. But that doesn't give me the functionality of what's available in CPAN.
Not to mention you can use VBScript, Javascript, Perl... gasp..... Python, TCL and many more programming languages with WSH
I'd like to see you use Perl with WSH without installing Perl first. Let's see you back up that little claim, dumbass. Here is your big chance to "code rings around me".
This is the important point - you have to install Perl (or whatever) anyway, so it's a complete non-sequitor. Please don't be mislead by this ignorant tool into thinking WSH can in any way execute Perl code.
People do not get much dumber than you
Design of HTML - I win. HTML hiding - I win. CSS "!important" - I win.
Anyway, I'll reply if you can use Perl in WSH without first installing Perl, as you claimed.
But I'll ignore any other weasel words and backpedalling, and just accept it as final proof that you do not know what you are talking about, and fully deserve not having any kind of credible computing position. Which is your situation right now, apparently. You're just the lone sysadmin monkey at the local hairdressers, or real estate office, or something...
Ohhh, you sure did slap me. Not. Try using CSS and see how far your generic elements get you when an author uses !important on a class or id. Duh. I just love it when rookies like youself read something and think you have a clue
Yes, the !important rule is also in the CSS2 spec, you really taught me soemthing there. NOT!!!!
You *idiot*. If you had read the quote I provided, you would see that the user's "!important" setting overrides the author's. This has *changed* from CSS1. You stupid monkey. Read things before posting moronic replies.
Anyway, looks like I win. You lose. Again.
Perhaps you should take web authoring 101 and you will find out that the author can choose to not deliver the content to whomever they wish and can create conditions which force you to use their style sheet
Only by being annoying pratts. Why would any *competant* person want to do this, anyway? Been using transparent gifs for layout again, chimp-boy?
yeah, right, I am just going to tell everyone where I work
Typical. You keep jumping up and down and whining, insisting that *I* do. Coward.
You are beyond fucking retarded
Again with the insults. Yet you are wrong *again*.
My personal work is on the web and never hidden
Except it's just not particularly good. There must be *something* to warrant all this bragging, surely?
iSpelunker is being rewritten
Good idea. What you had looked like it was done by a retarded chimp. Sorry, it actually was, wasn't it?
e-tards which highlights stupid peopel like you is also being worked on. Unlike you, I have a job and I do freelance work which means time is limited
I'm so scared. Except to put my posts on e-tards, you'll have to put your own, and if you don't know that lamers who claim it is possible to "hide" HTML source is one of the biggest running jokes of the internet, there's just no helping you.
Tell me, do you have a compression algorithm that can compress random data as well?
No it is not wrong. The salary surveys are extremely accurate
Then why are those figures so small? Let me guess, this is what you consider to be "well compensated"?
You should also start being nice to your admins, you wouldn't want your files to suddenly become corrupted would you
Admins do as they are damn well told. They exist to support me, and that is all. And as for file corruption, well, it's obvious that you are no professional now, isn't it?
If you understand webdevelopment, then you should easily understand why it can be done
You stupid monkey. I've explained plenty of times that it *cannot*. Get it into your simian fucking skull.
IE does not show the source code, you can only access it via script and with a broken DOM, you cannot access it
For the last time, it doesn't matter what IE does or does not show. Jesus! You've got to send it over the network. Therefore it is not "hidden", as anyone can see it. It doesn't matter that you send it as XML+XSLT to be transformed to HTML, as anyone can simply perform that same transformation using the XML+XSLT you sent. Can you really be this stupid? Please go and learn something about TCP/IP, networks, computing, and simple logic.
So, you are proven to be a *fucking* stupid monkey yet *again*. It's now clear that you like referring to specs you don't read.
I'm also quite free *not* to use *any* author stylesheet when rendering the page.
Jesus Christ, how much of a public slapping can you take, woogieoogiegolliwog? Where's that web site that you work on, boy? Is it too embarrassing to show anyone? I thought so.
Why is it then, woogieoogieboogie, that you are considered a kook in every newsgroup you frequent?
Type "william platt" into Google groups, and all you see are people wishing the kook would just go away. Don't like being on the other end, do you? But your insecurities are fairly easy to pick up on from your mad rantings, and it's certainly fun to throw rocks at you, and watch you screech.
You said it has the same functionality as Perl. *That* is ignorant. Look at the huge amount of modules on CPAN? Has it got every one of them? Thought not.
anythign you can do with perl on a *nix box, you can do with WSH and CoM on a win box
Yes, in theory anything can be done in any Turing complete language. It's just that it's easier in some than others.
Like perl is any more complex than javascript. You cannot be that retarded can you
Actually, it is. Look at the regular expression support alone. Or, get a degree of some kind.
If you plan on writing code to use on many platforms, try learning a real programming language and not some scripting language
Perl is a real programming language. It's used for a lot of things that C would formerly have been needed for. And it's portable.
I wonder what you mean by "real programming" language anyway? Can't be Javascript, that would be too funny.
Perhaps you migth try and act a little more intelligent instead of arguing about things you have no clue about
I wasn't arguing, the original post was intended to be humorous, but I should have known some insecure people would be "offended". Ah, well.
I have seen whining little code-monkeys like yourself. Losers who think the editor will help them write better code. if you had any real skill or talent, the editor would not matter
Sigh. No the editor can't help you, but it can be integrated with the language in useful ways for large projects, obviously.
Do some backup tapes need changing? I'm sure if you do that, they'll make you CEO any day now...
I'll bet that the graphic artist makes more money than a worn out COBOL code monkey like yourself
I've never written COBOL in my life. However, I'd have more respect for a COBOL program than someone who is so l33t they write "full blown text editors in Javascript!!"
And most graphic editors who migrated to the web were the second rate ones ie those who couldn't cut it elsewhere, so i doubt he's being paid much at all, looking at the average rates.
It is NOT the nature of the web nor was it designed that way
You have already proven that you do not know the first thing about the design of the web. Go to http://w3.org. Start reading. When you get some sort of clue, stop.
The WWW was intended to be a way to transfer information while maintaining the integrity of that information
Your assertion, which is wrong.
Information is not plain ascii text, but also color, fonts, shapes, images and sound
Right.
Any multimedia information must retain it's integrity otherwise information is lost
Yes, but you started with a spurious association, so you lose. The web was designed for document transfer, hyperlinking and universal display. Anything else must be added very slowly and very carefully. But, of course, dimwits who like Flash can't participate in that kind of process.
By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard
Really, and where is that standard, exactly? Is it documented anywhere?
It's a hell of a lot more secure than most of the other software on your system, and that includes the Linux kernel..
You have demonstrated a completed lack of clue in security related matters already, in my journal. Or do you *still* think you can "hide the HTML source" from the person who downloaded it? Explain exactly how you can "encrypt" it.
Flash exists because the W3C failed to deliver on SVG, HTML+Time and other important technologies which are needed to advance the web to take full advantage of it's potential
Generally, I agree, but even SVG wouldn't be necessary if people didn't prefer bright, shiny, dumb things to sensible, interoperable, and intelligent things.
So you know more about entertainment than a multibillion dollar world leader in entertainment
I didn't say, that woogieoogiegolliwog. I said they don't understand the web, like you.
Indeed. It's cool to be a corporate shill, apparently. And ignorance also seems to factor highly on the trendiness scale, too.
Most web developers sound like Lionel Hutz:
"I'm not really a lawyer, but I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound was turned down, but I think I got the gist of it."
And then they think they can just "decide", out of the blue, what is good and bad, correct and incorrect, and say patently crazy things like "I can hide HTML source" [see my journal for a laugh-a-minute exchange]
I don't want to deal with the inconsistencies between the rendering of web pages done on all browsers
It is the nature of the web that it *will* look different. It was designed that way, and that's the way it is. Deal with it.
How are you going to handle CSS, where I can override your settings any way that I like? I'll bet you use little transparent images to try to "force" pages to look the same. Sigh.
If you don't have the Flash Player Version 6 you will not see my web site. Sorry, not possible.
It's a safe bet that I'm not missing anything! What about those people behind firewalls that don't allow executable content through? I guess they can't see it either.
By the way, if it's done entirely in in Flash it is *not* a web site, by definition.
The Flash Plug-in lets my web site look the same to the entire world! Not because it's an open standard, but rather because it's a closed standard that behaves the same on all platforms! Quality control I will not sacrifice
Quality control == style sheets are too hard for me, and I can't get my head around the idea that the web was designed to allow different presentations of the same information for different situations.
If you refuse to run Flash for philosophical or ideological reasons
No, Flash is not a valid mechanism for web content. It is also a security hazard. I don't run any downloaded executable content. And yes, I'm aware that Flash *should* pose no threat, but I see zero evidence that the plug-in itself is secure.
you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience, you shouldn't go to their sites
I didn't say Flash itself was lame, just that web sites done *only* in Flash are, as this sort of thing will inevitably fragment the web into little incompatible islands of content. The web was invented to fix *exactly* this (if you were even *aware* of a time before the web) - and we'll end up back there again if we are not careful and don't *think* about what we do.
you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience
Because, like you, they don't actually know what they are doing.
Perl is pretty much useless on a winbox, learn WSH + COM, it gives you the same functionality and is native to the platform
Same functionality as Perl? You *fucking* ignorant fool. That's the stupidest thing I've heard since "HTML source can be hidden".
Besides that, how then will I port my code to other OSes? Ah, I forgot, since you don't *really* work in computing, you don't have that kind of problem.
Emacs. Of course because having a bloated editor on a bloated OS makes so much sense
I need the functionality, but my requirements are slightly above that of a Javascript coding "web developer".
Err, IE let's you switch of javascript, active x, and java. Geesh, it isn't like stting the security level to high is so difficult
My mistake, since I don't use IE.
Only a total loser "needs" to use a specific compiler or editor. What a loser you are
No, just a professional who needs optimal tools. Which you are not, as you only work at some real estate office being the onsite computing monkey. Are there some backup tapes that need changing? Some viruses that need erasing. Hop to it, boy!
So, you do not know much about windows, but claimed you could make the perfect windows box. methinks you are just one of those poverty stricken losers stuck with a 386 and Linux is the ONLY thing which will run on it
No, I don't run Linux, monkey-boy. But, being a professional who has strict requirements for technology and actually understands the issues, I don't develop on Windows either. Go back to Visual Basic, or show us all how to "hide HTML source". Go on, you uneducated Pratt.
[See my journal for this clown's idiotic BS, it's worse than I though even the *lamest* Javascript weenie could be]
Are you implying that IE doesn't let you turn off javascript?
Since I don't have to run Windows, and never will, I actually don't know. This had been commented on enough times that I assumed it to be true. So sue me.
Please pull your zealot head out of your ass
When you talk tough on/. this is what I picture: someone living in his parent's basement, who got the shit kicked out of him every day at school, and is now a social pariah.
So, mind your damned manners, geek-boy hiding behind his keyboard. It was only meant to be lighthearted.
Your ignorance of the situation in Palestine is quite sad
Like your ignorance of technology is quite sad? Please refer to my journal to see this joke's attempts at "hiding the HTML source", which anyone with half a brain will be able to deduce is quite impossible. His replies are a good laugh that anyone can enjoy.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I am a graphics artist = I cater to end users (don't you care what their experience is? I do, it's my job to!). I'm sorry if that makes me seem like an idiot to you. It's very unfortunate
...
I don't see that Flash caters to end users at all, I'm afraid. Look at this very web site. What couldn't have been expressed with standard web technologies? Anything useful?
Since I am a user, I have to say Flash sites display nothing but contempt towards me. They force me to view information their way, ignoring preferences I might have, force me to look at lame animations to go between pages, don't let me extract text easily, often don't interact with the browser correctly, and so on ad infinitum.
CSS works fine and dandy and it STILL doesn't look the same on all platforms and browsers when implemented properly. Is this acceptable to those concerned that one web browser will choose to render tables one way while another will choose another method. One will render layers one way, another in a completely different way. I can write CSS until my hands bleed and I will still not get consistency
And here is your problem. You will *not* get absolutely perfect consistency. The web wasn't designed that way. Why do you want it, anyway? Think about what it would take to enforce it - at the very least you would have to control my browser size.
most people browsing the web (remember tons of people out there who barely know how to use their computer (they buy software that fuels the need for backend software that provides jobs to us all in one way or another) = the majority of the audience on the web
If you don't tell the public when they are wrong, how can you expect an informed public?
almost anything that can surf the web these days has a Flash Player written for it (if it doesn't yet, believe me it will, Macromedia wants 100% adoption of Flash if possible)
Does FreeBSD? I'm using it right now.
And 100% adoption is something of a nightmare scenario. Do you really want to just cede control of the content and design of the web to one corporation? Especially one that might resort to all sorts of chicanary once they start to topple. And looking at their stock price one can hope their days are numbered.
Flash IS a valid mechanism for web content
Sort of. HTML allows you to embed objects, but to *only* provide support for your information via proprietary viewers, and not the standard web technogies, is a little unprofessional and short sighted.
Look the "Spirited Away" site itself. Would it really have hurt to provide a single page of HTML telling me the stuff that was on the (slow, redundant) Flash site?
I repeat the Flash Player is executable you can easily apply any local system security you want to it
Yes, and it's receiving instructions from some foreign source, and the format, though published, is not exactly easy to check. And as recent events have proven, it's impossible to secure "plug ins" when they themselves are full of bugs.
You also have zero evidence that the plug-in itself is not secure!
So, I have to wait for the first "all you base are belong to us" bug to be exploited, do I?
Here's how it works - we allow incoming traffic through port 80 for a set of well-defined technologies. Adding *anything* else is a risk - including Javascript. You can make a case for the usefulness of Javascript, but Flash? I think I'd tell the employees to go look at movie sites at home.
Many web surfers, on comparable sites (in regard otherwise equal in quality of content and interest in the topics), will prefer to use the one that looks better or is more intuitive!
I've yet to see a Flash site that looks better or is more intuitive. They waste time with lame animations, and they invent a bunch of new, unfamiliar controls.
I also remember the time before Flash, it was mostly visually boring.
Why is that a problem, exactly? Perhaps, as another poster pointed out, you should invent some alternative to the web, get the IETF to allocate you a port for this new "multimedia" internet application, and leave the web alone.
The incompatible islands of content are not really a good argument in the case of Flash. Flash has been installed on over 490 million computers to date (that sounds more like several continents of compatible content)!
As long as they are all Windows machines! The plugin seems pretty flakey on Linux, and what about FreeBSD, Solaris and so on? What happens when macromedia start to collapse and start charging per page created, per view, or whatever? What happens when some other company invents some other multimedia viewing thing, and they start to try to break one another? No, I like things exactly as they are now. Open, and controlled by sensible people, in the main.
If that is not a standard by sheer numbers though not by W3C (which is lately pushing SVG that is really more oriented toward static graphics than animated or web based applications as Flash is?) I don't know what is!
The difference with SVG is that it will be published, and there will be many tools supporting it, not one company. I acknowledge that the Flash format itself was published (due to SVG panic and collapsing stock?), but it's not exactly XML, and therefore easily viewed and manipulated, and designed to work with other web technologies properly, is it? I haven't looked at SVG, but I truly hope that it's not just a knee-jerk reaction to Flash
It all seems to be variations of the same to me.
So? I thought you wanted it to be intuitive. Certainly, new things don't have to be unintuitive, but the risk is quite high, and I find Flash sites quite an ordeal. Which things are buttons? Which are scrollbars? They're all hidden in "clever" ways.
By the way you say, Disney doesn't actually know what they are doing?!?!? This is news to me! How do you figure that? Do you have something personal against the Mouse? Do you really believe that! And you are mocking me?!? Disney has been called many things for their business practices, policies, and principles, but I don't think anyone has ever accused them of not knowing what they are doing (regardless of their morals or of the intent of what they are doing, they know VERY WELL, and they do it better than any other Entertainment Company in the World)!!!
They don't know what they're doing WRT the web, if they don't just provide the information in HTML or XML as well as Flash. I don't know about their movies, the only interesting ones seem to be done by other people and just released by Disney (Toy Story, Spirited Away), which are the only ones I've seen lately. I think they are basically bereft of creativity, mining the public domain for material while trying to destroy it for future generations.
No thanks, please use the proper term, ENVY!
Envy over what? Being creatively backrupt? Nope.
Please *think* about what YOU do by holding such sublime hatred (envy) of organizations with power like Disney. Remember they started humbly and their innovators / entrepreneurs / visionaries / artists worked their a@#es off to get where they are today!
Walt Disney and crew may have. Now? I don't think so. This is, of course, why it's important that copyrights and patents are allowed to expire.
That is the DREAM of this country for many people living here and ALL hoping to someday enter!
It's important to remember that many people living that "dream" never got there via hard work, imagination, or drive. They'll be happy to package that dream for you, to keep you a nice docile cog in the machine, though.
Not to say it can't be achieved, but an awful lot of CEOs don't seem to have ever actually *done* anything, except switch from job to job through the old boy's network, raping and pillaging as they go.
Jealousy never gets you anywhere. Instead of hating all above you, work as hard as they did, move up the ladder by taking equal if not greater risks of falling, and get there yourself by having MUCH better ideas and drive! I'm sure the view is very different from the top. I hope you get there someday (and that others do not harbor hatred toward you just for being there)!
Yes, it would be better to get there via hard work. As far as I can see, Disney is just a pack of executives and their lawyers who screw over smaller artists and their companies who actually do the producing, and lobby to change laws to take away our "fair use" rights and completely kill of the public domain - ironically where Disney gets it's "ideas".
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1180.html
You've posted this before. Have you read it?
I never said any of the things which you claimed I said. Is it that you have to resort to telling lies to try and make a point
No, it's all there. Look at your first reply to my statement that you can see the data flowing across the network interface, and then when I tried to tell you that tcpdump can be used to demonstrate this. I just did, for a quiet chuckle. Having to walk you through it all step-by-painful-step is not something I'm going to forget in a hurry.
People like you must *hate* this permanent record thing. I'll bet the google usenet archive annoys the hell out of you. It would embarrass me, if I though employers were going to see all that mad rambling attached to me.
Prove you can do what you say you can
What am I supposed to prove again? Get ethereal, you can see all the HTML (or whatever) flowing across the network interface. Done.
Encapsulated in a fucking com object you stupid fucking retard. Do you need me to teach you hwo to tie your shoes
I already refuted this elsewhere. Security through obscurity is no good! Why don't you just admit you can only obfuscate it from people who don't really care?
Yes, I know you said a public key, but obviously you think a public key is a "master key" which can deencrypt any encryption
No, I didn't say that at all. Reread what I said - I said you must give me the public key *before* I can decrypt your page for viewing. And you admit that! Putting it in a component is not an effective technique for security. Please don't do that, and go around telling people their data is safe!
Would you like to continue your quest in proving that you are nothing more than a pathetic poser
Well, it hasn't happened yet, except in you mind, where you can decrypt cipher text without a key, or effectively "hide" the key in a component from everyone.
It's also important to remember that your original two "hiding" schemes are failures. Encryption is better though, at least you're starting to think about it!
And what besides pointing you to the tcp/ip RFC did I get wrong
... the process of explaining all this to you was incredibly painful. Luckily it's all well documented in my journal.
...
Confusing HTTP with TCP.
Not understanding that *all* packets can be captured.
Not knowing that tcpdump can capture the entire contents of a packet.
Not understanding that tcpdump is non-intrusive.
And there's more
When you finally understand there is no "master public key" for encryption
I did not say there was a "master public key" - but you must get a public key to the browser somehow - otherwise the browser would not be able to decrypt what you send it. Therefore I can get the key, too. Do you understand yet? Or tell me how you can magically get the public key to the browser without my seeing it as well
actually get a clue about how IE renders HTML dynamically, then you will understand
Yes, but you have to send the JavaScript, or the HTML, or whatever, to *do* that dynamic rendering. That is the source. I can capture it. Therefore there is no way to hide the source.
Are you getting a clue yet. There are many different ways that the html source can made completely and totally hidden. Once you get past your skript kiddie mentality and learn how to program in windows and how to program within the iexplorer environment, you will get a clue
Whatever. You have to send me the source (of whatever form) that describes the page. I can read that, as it flows across the network interface.
But since it makes you happy to think such things and I love making you look like a retard flash file format [macromedia.com]
... there are probably others. See my journal for the laugh-a-minute voyage through ignorance.
... time will tell.
...
Actually, this is the first time you've been right! It had to happen eventually I guess.
They've released the format so I'm happy to be proven wrong, in this case. If non-macromedia tools and players are released, I'll be able to take it seriously.
Pratt's list of topic he has gotten wrong so far:
* TCP/IP
* tcpdump
* CSS !important priorities
* hiding HTML
* RSA encryption
But, I'm happy to say I was wrong about the Flash format. Unlike you, I'm man enough to admit it. If I was *you*, I'd currently be trying to weasel out of it by demanding an implementation of a Flash player.
I wonder how long ago this happened - I guess all that lobbying by sensible people has paid off! I can't image what Macromedia's business model will be, once free tools exist
Now, where's that "hidden" web site source? Do it or forever be branded a cowardly lamer
[snip mad ranting]
No, I'm not interested in what is a standards organization or not. To be a standard of any kind, it must be published somewhere. The content of a flash "executable" that you download is not. Therefore it is not a standard.
It is just popular amongst dimwits, like you.
Now, where's that web site with "unreadable" source?
By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard
p ers/security.pdf
Really? And where is this "standard" published, chimp?
You haven't seen evidence that the flash plugin is secure because you haven't looked. http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/flash/whitepa
That's a statement of intent, yes. But hardly any kind of evidence. It will continue to be banned by organizations that care about, and understand security.
Time to get yourself some kind of education, I think.
Sigh. I'm breaking my promise to ignore this clown, but I can't let people be mislead.
...
With WSH you can use every and any com object ever created, plus have complete access to the win32 api's, plus you can write your own com objects. why don't you learn about a topic before you discuss it
Yes, of course. But that doesn't give me the functionality of what's available in CPAN.
Not to mention you can use VBScript, Javascript, Perl... gasp..... Python, TCL and many more programming languages with WSH
I'd like to see you use Perl with WSH without installing Perl first. Let's see you back up that little claim, dumbass. Here is your big chance to "code rings around me".
This is the important point - you have to install Perl (or whatever) anyway, so it's a complete non-sequitor. Please don't be mislead by this ignorant tool into thinking WSH can in any way execute Perl code.
People do not get much dumber than you
Design of HTML - I win.
HTML hiding - I win.
CSS "!important" - I win.
Anyway, I'll reply if you can use Perl in WSH without first installing Perl, as you claimed.
But I'll ignore any other weasel words and backpedalling, and just accept it as final proof that you do not know what you are talking about, and fully deserve not having any kind of credible computing position. Which is your situation right now, apparently. You're just the lone sysadmin monkey at the local hairdressers, or real estate office, or something
Let's see this genius at work!
Ohhh, you sure did slap me. Not. Try using CSS and see how far your generic elements get you when an author uses !important on a class or id. Duh. I just love it when rookies like youself read something and think you have a clue
Yes, the !important rule is also in the CSS2 spec, you really taught me soemthing there. NOT!!!!
You *idiot*. If you had read the quote I provided, you would see that the user's "!important" setting overrides the author's. This has *changed* from CSS1. You stupid monkey. Read things before posting moronic replies.
Anyway, looks like I win. You lose. Again.
Perhaps you should take web authoring 101 and you will find out that the author can choose to not deliver the content to whomever they wish and can create conditions which force you to use their style sheet
Only by being annoying pratts. Why would any *competant* person want to do this, anyway? Been using transparent gifs for layout again, chimp-boy?
yeah, right, I am just going to tell everyone where I work
Typical. You keep jumping up and down and whining, insisting that *I* do. Coward.
You are beyond fucking retarded
Again with the insults. Yet you are wrong *again*.
My personal work is on the web and never hidden
Except it's just not particularly good. There must be *something* to warrant all this bragging, surely?
iSpelunker is being rewritten
Good idea. What you had looked like it was done by a retarded chimp. Sorry, it actually was, wasn't it?
e-tards which highlights stupid peopel like you is also being worked on. Unlike you, I have a job and I do freelance work which means time is limited
I'm so scared. Except to put my posts on e-tards, you'll have to put your own, and if you don't know that lamers who claim it is possible to "hide" HTML source is one of the biggest running jokes of the internet, there's just no helping you.
Tell me, do you have a compression algorithm that can compress random data as well?
No it is not wrong. The salary surveys are extremely accurate
Then why are those figures so small? Let me guess, this is what you consider to be "well compensated"?
You should also start being nice to your admins, you wouldn't want your files to suddenly become corrupted would you
Admins do as they are damn well told. They exist to support me, and that is all. And as for file corruption, well, it's obvious that you are no professional now, isn't it?
If you understand webdevelopment, then you should easily understand why it can be done
You stupid monkey. I've explained plenty of times that it *cannot*. Get it into your simian fucking skull.
IE does not show the source code, you can only access it via script and with a broken DOM, you cannot access it
For the last time, it doesn't matter what IE does or does not show. Jesus! You've got to send it over the network. Therefore it is not "hidden", as anyone can see it. It doesn't matter that you send it as XML+XSLT to be transformed to HTML, as anyone can simply perform that same transformation using the XML+XSLT you sent. Can you really be this stupid? Please go and learn something about TCP/IP, networks, computing, and simple logic.
Ever hear of the CSS1 !important rule. Geesh you are an idiot
So, as well as looking like a chimp, it appears you think like one. From the CSS2 spec, sec 6.2:
'user "!important" rules override author "!important" rules'
So, you are proven to be a *fucking* stupid monkey yet *again*. It's now clear that you like referring to specs you don't read.
I'm also quite free *not* to use *any* author stylesheet when rendering the page.
Jesus Christ, how much of a public slapping can you take, woogieoogiegolliwog? Where's that web site that you work on, boy? Is it too embarrassing to show anyone? I thought so.
You must hate being a programmer and being on the bottom of the pay scale
... were you dropped on your head at birth, or did Pappy just beat you too hard?
That's actually wrong. But since you've never *had* a real professional computing job, what the fuck would you know, anyway?
"According to Yahoo"
or worse, like the dpt kook
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Why is it then, woogieoogieboogie, that you are considered a kook in every newsgroup you frequent?
Type "william platt" into Google groups, and all you see are people wishing the kook would just go away. Don't like being on the other end, do you? But your insecurities are fairly easy to pick up on from your mad rantings, and it's certainly fun to throw rocks at you, and watch you screech.
You stupid ignorant jackass
...
You said it has the same functionality as Perl. *That* is ignorant. Look at the huge amount of modules on CPAN? Has it got every one of them? Thought not.
anythign you can do with perl on a *nix box, you can do with WSH and CoM on a win box
Yes, in theory anything can be done in any Turing complete language. It's just that it's easier in some than others.
Like perl is any more complex than javascript. You cannot be that retarded can you
Actually, it is. Look at the regular expression support alone. Or, get a degree of some kind.
If you plan on writing code to use on many platforms, try learning a real programming language and not some scripting language
Perl is a real programming language. It's used for a lot of things that C would formerly have been needed for. And it's portable.
I wonder what you mean by "real programming" language anyway? Can't be Javascript, that would be too funny.
Perhaps you migth try and act a little more intelligent instead of arguing about things you have no clue about
I wasn't arguing, the original post was intended to be humorous, but I should have known some insecure people would be "offended". Ah, well.
I have seen whining little code-monkeys like yourself. Losers who think the editor will help them write better code. if you had any real skill or talent, the editor would not matter
Sigh. No the editor can't help you, but it can be integrated with the language in useful ways for large projects, obviously.
Do some backup tapes need changing? I'm sure if you do that, they'll make you CEO any day now
I'll bet that the graphic artist makes more money than a worn out COBOL code monkey like yourself
I've never written COBOL in my life. However, I'd have more respect for a COBOL program than someone who is so l33t they write "full blown text editors in Javascript!!"
And most graphic editors who migrated to the web were the second rate ones ie those who couldn't cut it elsewhere, so i doubt he's being paid much at all, looking at the average rates.
It is NOT the nature of the web nor was it designed that way
You have already proven that you do not know the first thing about the design of the web. Go to http://w3.org. Start reading. When you get some sort of clue, stop.
The WWW was intended to be a way to transfer information while maintaining the integrity of that information
Your assertion, which is wrong.
Information is not plain ascii text, but also color, fonts, shapes, images and sound
Right.
Any multimedia information must retain it's integrity otherwise information is lost
Yes, but you started with a spurious association, so you lose. The web was designed for document transfer, hyperlinking and universal display. Anything else must be added very slowly and very carefully. But, of course, dimwits who like Flash can't participate in that kind of process.
By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard
Really, and where is that standard, exactly? Is it documented anywhere?
It's a hell of a lot more secure than most of the other software on your system, and that includes the Linux kernel..
You have demonstrated a completed lack of clue in security related matters already, in my journal. Or do you *still* think you can "hide the HTML source" from the person who downloaded it? Explain exactly how you can "encrypt" it.
Flash exists because the W3C failed to deliver on SVG, HTML+Time and other important technologies which are needed to advance the web to take full advantage of it's potential
Generally, I agree, but even SVG wouldn't be necessary if people didn't prefer bright, shiny, dumb things to sensible, interoperable, and intelligent things.
So you know more about entertainment than a multibillion dollar world leader in entertainment
I didn't say, that woogieoogiegolliwog. I said they don't understand the web, like you.
Indeed. It's cool to be a corporate shill, apparently. And ignorance also seems to factor highly on the trendiness scale, too.
Most web developers sound like Lionel Hutz:
"I'm not really a lawyer, but I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound was turned down, but I think I got the gist of it."
And then they think they can just "decide", out of the blue, what is good and bad, correct and incorrect, and say patently crazy things like "I can hide HTML source" [see my journal for a laugh-a-minute exchange]
I am a graphics artist,
Figures.
I don't want to deal with the inconsistencies between the rendering of web pages done on all browsers
It is the nature of the web that it *will* look different. It was designed that way, and that's the way it is. Deal with it.
How are you going to handle CSS, where I can override your settings any way that I like? I'll bet you use little transparent images to try to "force" pages to look the same. Sigh.
If you don't have the Flash Player Version 6 you will not see my web site. Sorry, not possible.
It's a safe bet that I'm not missing anything! What about those people behind firewalls that don't allow executable content through? I guess they can't see it either.
By the way, if it's done entirely in in Flash it is *not* a web site, by definition.
The Flash Plug-in lets my web site look the same to the entire world! Not because it's an open standard, but rather because it's a closed standard that behaves the same on all platforms! Quality control I will not sacrifice
Quality control == style sheets are too hard for me, and I can't get my head around the idea that the web was designed to allow different presentations of the same information for different situations.
If you refuse to run Flash for philosophical or ideological reasons
No, Flash is not a valid mechanism for web content. It is also a security hazard. I don't run any downloaded executable content. And yes, I'm aware that Flash *should* pose no threat, but I see zero evidence that the plug-in itself is secure.
you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience, you shouldn't go to their sites
I didn't say Flash itself was lame, just that web sites done *only* in Flash are, as this sort of thing will inevitably fragment the web into little incompatible islands of content. The web was invented to fix *exactly* this (if you were even *aware* of a time before the web) - and we'll end up back there again if we are not careful and don't *think* about what we do.
you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience
Because, like you, they don't actually know what they are doing.
Ah, I see. Good point. Plastering "Disney" all over everything related to it colored my perception.
Perl is pretty much useless on a winbox, learn WSH + COM, it gives you the same functionality and is native to the platform
Same functionality as Perl? You *fucking* ignorant fool. That's the stupidest thing I've heard since "HTML source can be hidden".
Besides that, how then will I port my code to other OSes? Ah, I forgot, since you don't *really* work in computing, you don't have that kind of problem.
Emacs. Of course because having a bloated editor on a bloated OS makes so much sense
I need the functionality, but my requirements are slightly above that of a Javascript coding "web developer".
Err, IE let's you switch of javascript, active x, and java. Geesh, it isn't like stting the security level to high is so difficult
My mistake, since I don't use IE.
Only a total loser "needs" to use a specific compiler or editor. What a loser you are
No, just a professional who needs optimal tools. Which you are not, as you only work at some real estate office being the onsite computing monkey. Are there some backup tapes that need changing? Some viruses that need erasing. Hop to it, boy!
So, you do not know much about windows, but claimed you could make the perfect windows box. methinks you are just one of those poverty stricken losers stuck with a 386 and Linux is the ONLY thing which will run on it
No, I don't run Linux, monkey-boy. But, being a professional who has strict requirements for technology and actually understands the issues, I don't develop on Windows either. Go back to Visual Basic, or show us all how to "hide HTML source". Go on, you uneducated Pratt.
[See my journal for this clown's idiotic BS, it's worse than I though even the *lamest* Javascript weenie could be]
... and don't we hate them, or something?
On top of that the movie's site is Flash only, which is retarded and lame by definition.
Are you implying that IE doesn't let you turn off javascript?
/. this is what I picture: someone living in his parent's basement, who got the shit kicked out of him every day at school, and is now a social pariah.
Since I don't have to run Windows, and never will, I actually don't know. This had been commented on enough times that I assumed it to be true. So sue me.
Please pull your zealot head out of your ass
When you talk tough on
So, mind your damned manners, geek-boy hiding behind his keyboard. It was only meant to be lighthearted.
To turn a Windows box into an actual useful device, you will need to install:
;)
* Perl
* Emacs
* All the cygwin tools
* A web browser that lets you switch off Javascript and other nonsense
* gcc
Then, you've got something resembling a real computer, not a media consumption box
Your ignorance of the situation in Palestine is quite sad
Like your ignorance of technology is quite sad? Please refer to my journal to see this joke's attempts at "hiding the HTML source", which anyone with half a brain will be able to deduce is quite impossible. His replies are a good laugh that anyone can enjoy.
WhooHoo a reply from an e-tard
Any luck becoming "CEO of a Fortune 500 company yet", asspelunker?
Or maybe you've been "hiding the HTML"?
"I never fail" - William Pratt.
Eat it, fag.