As much as I'd love to say otherwise, the SSL business is actually quite competitive these days
The server certificate business has always been competitive, you'd have to go back to the days of Netscape 3.0 to find a browser that had less than 50 root certificates preinstalled.
Client certificates (for authentication and email) are slightly less competitive, but there are still reasonable deals around.
Code signing certificates on the other hand are hundreds upon hundreds of dollars, and last time I checked only two companies were offering them. Both companies required you to purchase separate certificates at full price (despite only having to do the identity check once) for MSJVM, Java 2 plugins and Netscape 4.7, and if you want one for signing ActiveX controls, thats an entirely different product again. Of course suckers that we aren't, we only bought the one certificate and used openssl to convert it.
So is your company planning to branch out beyond server certs at any stage?
The catch is that they aren't really trusted, or more importantly, trustable. What do you know about Verisign's internal security procedures?
CA's are supposed to make their issuing policies publically available. One day a few years ago when I had too much time on my hands I went through and checked them all. Of the 100 odd root certificates that were originally installed in my browser, I threw out about half for not having their policy publically available in human readable form. I threw out most of the rest (including Verisign and Thawte's low-end certs) because their policy was too lax, but maybe I just have high standards.
In my work on the Intelligent Book project (intro text, example screenshot), I've been doing just this sort of thing using a Java applet for the communication and then modifying the page for 18 months or so (including returning XML). Fundamentally the advantage to using JavaScript over Java if you can is that the calls into the browser DOM from Java go through JavaScript anyway (whether explicitly in your code, or internally in the Sun code) and that Java-to-JavaScript bridge has been the source of interesting bits of flakiness, and there is still a delay on the first JavaScript-to-Java call in Firefox and Mozilla.
You don't need to touch the DOM at all if you do the rendering in Java. The controls available to you that way are much richer than the standard HTML controls too.
Tell you what, I'll bow down to your every utterance for the rest of eternity if you can provide a working example of a mapping application that runs in most major browsers and is as fast, compact and responsive as maps.google.com is done using any technology currently available natively in a browser/webserver EXCEPT javascript, PHP and HTTP.
There's also single-operator prior art in the Scheme neq? operator.
Or != in Java, C/C++ (with pointers) and countless other languages. There's even prior art for a single-operator called "IsNot" in Visual Basic if 5 year old Usenet postings to Microsoft's public newsgroups requesting new features for the language count as "publication".
Jonathan Allen is the one that needs to sue them. There are posts all over Usenet showing that he thought this up back in 2000, and they have clearly stolen his idea. Just do a search on "isnot visual basic". I'm not sure if publication in Usenet counts as prior art, but I do hope the patent office finds something to reject this for.
This is a bit of a "security hole" that flash is able to give instructions to the browser, however. Perhaps Mozilla's plugin code should have some abilities to stop popups or other instructions from the loaded plugins.
The standard popup blocking should work for plugins too. It does for Java, my company produces a client/server development tool which pops up windows, and both the Firefox and IE popup blockers handle them just fine, allowing you to click the yellow area to let them through.
If people have to start blocking all popups from plugins just because the browser is not consistent in blocking them, its going to mess things up for the plugins that do it properly.
If you set the Content-type header of your page and accept-encoding attribute on the form to UTF-8, all modern browsers will send the data in UTF-8. This works whether you are doing a GET or a POST, but you might have to do the decoding yourself on the server side, because many libraries have broken URL-encoding and decoding routines that only deal with Latin-1 or the server locale's charset.
My service provider is Verizon. No GSM. Will ROAD eventually have CDMA, or will the US eventually have GSM?
The US has GSM already, you just need to switch networks and/or move to another state.
But for a phone with these specs looking to release in almost a year's time, I'm surprised they're going with GSM rather than WCDMA, or is Germany that far behind in 3G rollout?
The self-checkout stands are great except for that they're never any faster. Why? The people using them are morons.
When they were first introduced here, like self-checkin at the airport they were faster to use because everyone else was scared of using them so there were no queues. Now that everyone uses them, it is faster to pick the cutest checkout operator and join her queue.
Part of the problem is that the ones here use scales to check that what you scan is what you put in your shopping bag, and the system keeps getting people to rescan things because the weight doesn't quite match or they were too slow putting it in the bag, or they needed to start a new bag, and if they were scanning at half the speed that a checkout operator does, they've scanned three more things since what the system is complaining about, so they end up rescanning the wrong thing and needing assistance from the checkout supervisor to fix up the whole mess.
So I don't think the morons have much to do with it really. Its just quicker to have someone who's experienced with the scanner and knows its quirks, trusted to not need the backup scales (though they probably have a camera watching them, so they're not completely trusted), and authorized to cancel the odd item and rescan when needed (though often they've exceeded their limit and need the supervisor to come and authorize it anyway in my local).
It sounds to me like they're trying to set themselves up for the next DRM enabled, only runs Microsoft signed software from approved partners, version of Windows. Without some scare stories like this, the EU and other governments not already in Microsoft's pocket would be bound to make it difficult for them.
Any advances made by the developed world to allow them to produce less emissions while maintaining a healthy economy (unless it involves outsourcing the emissions to third worold countries) will have a flow through effect on the third world countries as they develop. So this is not a good excuse for the US to continue to use.
So let me get this straight, you want the United States to sign a treaty that would require them to buy "points" from other countries just so they can be in compliance with it?
The only country that looks like it will be required to buy points due to unmeetable targets is Japan, having already dealt with its pollution and emissions problems in the 1970s and '80s.
The US has by far the highest emissions output in absolute terms and per capita and it is growing at an alarming rate exceeded by only Canada and Australia, while the rest of the world is reducing theirs. There is plenty of room for reduction there, just no will to do anything about it.
The basic American claim that the treaty is unjust towards wealthier nations, while benefits countries like China and India, is true.
It is only true if your definition of "just" includes the right of Americans to pollute ten times as much as Chinese and Indians so that they may maintain their already significantly higher standard of living.
Slashdot Mirror
That's probably about all they'll be allowed to release. The copyright over the code inside start_sqlserver is probably still owned by Sybase.
The server certificate business has always been competitive, you'd have to go back to the days of Netscape 3.0 to find a browser that had less than 50 root certificates preinstalled.
Client certificates (for authentication and email) are slightly less competitive, but there are still reasonable deals around.
Code signing certificates on the other hand are hundreds upon hundreds of dollars, and last time I checked only two companies were offering them. Both companies required you to purchase separate certificates at full price (despite only having to do the identity check once) for MSJVM, Java 2 plugins and Netscape 4.7, and if you want one for signing ActiveX controls, thats an entirely different product again. Of course suckers that we aren't, we only bought the one certificate and used openssl to convert it.
So is your company planning to branch out beyond server certs at any stage?
CA's are supposed to make their issuing policies publically available. One day a few years ago when I had too much time on my hands I went through and checked them all. Of the 100 odd root certificates that were originally installed in my browser, I threw out about half for not having their policy publically available in human readable form. I threw out most of the rest (including Verisign and Thawte's low-end certs) because their policy was too lax, but maybe I just have high standards.
You don't need to touch the DOM at all if you do the rendering in Java. The controls available to you that way are much richer than the standard HTML controls too.
Where do those figures come from? Someone from the marketing department at Macromedia's arse?
Ctrl-U, or if you're using a heathen's browser, Alt-V C.
Javascript is orthoganal to XUL.
map24.com
Or != in Java, C/C++ (with pointers) and countless other languages. There's even prior art for a single-operator called "IsNot" in Visual Basic if 5 year old Usenet postings to Microsoft's public newsgroups requesting new features for the language count as "publication".
Jonathan Allen is the one that needs to sue them. There are posts all over Usenet showing that he thought this up back in 2000, and they have clearly stolen his idea. Just do a search on "isnot visual basic". I'm not sure if publication in Usenet counts as prior art, but I do hope the patent office finds something to reject this for.
I think you'd need a bit more than that. A VERY powerful hunting rifle, for instance.
It's called "Nine Men's Morris". I thought everyone knew that. Or are you talking about that other game with the horses and castles and stuff?
The standard popup blocking should work for plugins too. It does for Java, my company produces a client/server development tool which pops up windows, and both the Firefox and IE popup blockers handle them just fine, allowing you to click the yellow area to let them through.
If people have to start blocking all popups from plugins just because the browser is not consistent in blocking them, its going to mess things up for the plugins that do it properly.
If you set the Content-type header of your page and accept-encoding attribute on the form to UTF-8, all modern browsers will send the data in UTF-8. This works whether you are doing a GET or a POST, but you might have to do the decoding yourself on the server side, because many libraries have broken URL-encoding and decoding routines that only deal with Latin-1 or the server locale's charset.
As the anonymous idiot rather rudely pointed out, UMTS is a layer on top of WCDMA, the same way that GPRS and EDGE are layers on top of GSM.
The US has GSM already, you just need to switch networks and/or move to another state.
But for a phone with these specs looking to release in almost a year's time, I'm surprised they're going with GSM rather than WCDMA, or is Germany that far behind in 3G rollout?
You forgot "moderating obvious jokes on slashdot as 'Interesting'" in your list of sports.
When they were first introduced here, like self-checkin at the airport they were faster to use because everyone else was scared of using them so there were no queues. Now that everyone uses them, it is faster to pick the cutest checkout operator and join her queue.
Part of the problem is that the ones here use scales to check that what you scan is what you put in your shopping bag, and the system keeps getting people to rescan things because the weight doesn't quite match or they were too slow putting it in the bag, or they needed to start a new bag, and if they were scanning at half the speed that a checkout operator does, they've scanned three more things since what the system is complaining about, so they end up rescanning the wrong thing and needing assistance from the checkout supervisor to fix up the whole mess.
So I don't think the morons have much to do with it really. Its just quicker to have someone who's experienced with the scanner and knows its quirks, trusted to not need the backup scales (though they probably have a camera watching them, so they're not completely trusted), and authorized to cancel the odd item and rescan when needed (though often they've exceeded their limit and need the supervisor to come and authorize it anyway in my local).
If you're going to nick a cart, it doesn't matter what you use, a hammer will get it back out once you've cleared the carpark.
It sounds to me like they're trying to set themselves up for the next DRM enabled, only runs Microsoft signed software from approved partners, version of Windows. Without some scare stories like this, the EU and other governments not already in Microsoft's pocket would be bound to make it difficult for them.
Any advances made by the developed world to allow them to produce less emissions while maintaining a healthy economy (unless it involves outsourcing the emissions to third worold countries) will have a flow through effect on the third world countries as they develop. So this is not a good excuse for the US to continue to use.
The only country that looks like it will be required to buy points due to unmeetable targets is Japan, having already dealt with its pollution and emissions problems in the 1970s and '80s.
The US has by far the highest emissions output in absolute terms and per capita and it is growing at an alarming rate exceeded by only Canada and Australia, while the rest of the world is reducing theirs. There is plenty of room for reduction there, just no will to do anything about it.
It is only true if your definition of "just" includes the right of Americans to pollute ten times as much as Chinese and Indians so that they may maintain their already significantly higher standard of living.
Why do you need MSDEV if you're compiling with nmake? MSDEV is only needed for compiling from the IDE project files.
Don't worry, there will be by next week.