I know that, but... When YOU or Nursie post the correct information between you? Then, I make appropriate statements
Either one of our filter rules would have worked just fine, thanks very much. Neither of us was "wrong", and we didn't disagree in anything except giving two different ways to do the same thing.
And you've got to be kidding if you think I want to read any of your irrelevant linked pages.
The ONLY time I have "issues" with facebook pages, is this (in my router rules for security)
Of course you will have issues with Facebook pages if you set your router to block cookies. Most of Facebook requires you to be logged in. Logging in requires enabling cookies.
Did you really fail to realize that most of Facebook won't work if you block cookies? You seemed like a halfway intelligent guy until that.
Yup, got ya... I was just trying to get folks to "watch out" for what YOU said (fbcdn.com) vs. what NURSIE said (a.fsdn.com)
Oh please. Do you really expect anyone to believe that?
Blocking the URL that Nursie said to block will prevent the annoying image from loading. Blocking the <a> tags by their href attribute (as I suggested doing here) will hide the entire <a> element (including the annoying image inside it).
There's more than one way to skin a cat when you're not just nuking entire subdomains via HOSTS.
Looks fine, & LOADS A HELL OF A LOT FASTER TOO & safe(r) also!
LOL, no, I just tried it out of curiosity and it does indeed look like utter crap if you HOSTS-block the a.fsdn.com domain.
If anyone is curious as to what it looks like, and doesn't want to muck with their HOSTS file, just go to View -> Page Style -> No Style. Then when you've had enough of the unstyled HTML vomit, go back and select Basic Page Style to fix it.
Firefox, AdBlock Plus filter rules (Ctrl-Shift-F). You should be able to copy them to the clipboard and add them to your filter rules just by hitting Ctrl-V.
Apparently, it's really -> fbcdn.com to 'block' (or not) from this poster _0xd0ad here
Blocking fbcdn.com will make Facebook not work. I did not say you should block it. Unless you can block it on everything except Facebook, so that Facebook will still work. But your HOSTS file can't do that.
Nursie said to block a very specific URL, not an entire subdomain. You and your hammer are unwelcome here. Not every problem is a nail. You can't just bash an entire subdomain into nonexistence because you don't like ONE PICTURE on it.
No, never mind, this was about Facebook and I (strangely) assumed you were talking about Facebook.
I'd like to know how Slashdot looks without the CSS from a.fsdn.com. My guess is, it looks like shit. But I don't suppose that bothers you. Personally, I like the AJAX-y goodness that is Slashdot 2.0. If you like bludgeoning the internet into barely-working crap before you read it, that's your business.
Um, I don't think that car is going anywhere. And if you want to break in, you'll probably have to go through the holes where the windows used to be - I doubt any of the doors will open, key or no key.
I'm really unimpressed with any lawyer who couldn't figure out how to change the filter to "All Files" so that they could find the PDF. Yes, it works fine. Yes, I whipped up an HTML test page and I tried it.
I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume that you, being a geek lawyer, either knew this or could have figured it out, and it's just the Righthaven tools who apparently don't know how computers work.
Of course, a FF extension to change the accept parameter of <input type="file"/> elements would be even slicker.
Last time I looked, an IR LED showed up nice and bright on every digital camera I ever tried it with, so either the IR filters aren't perfect (likely) or they use cheap IR filters on most cameras (also likely).
Here in the USA they have to have at least 2 things to get you for running a red light: a photo of the intersection, with your clearly-identifiable vehicle outside of the intersection and the light clearly RED, and second, a photo of the same intersection during the same red light cycle, with your clearly-identifiable vehicle now inside of the intersection. In other words, they must prove that you entered the intersection after the light had turned red.
However, to get you for making a rolling right-turn-on-red they must have a video showing your approach to the intersection, because they must prove that you failed to come to a complete stop before you entered the intersection on red. And in order to get the video of your approach to the intersection, the camera must already be on and recording.
And even in the case of running the red light, the system must photograph the vehicle once before it runs the red light. To do this, it has to detect who is probably going to run the light. So if you come up to such an intersection fast and then stop hard, it may take your picture even if you manage to stop without running the red light. They won't ticket you, since a human reviews the photos. They'll see that you didn't actually run the light, and they will move on to the next recorded incident.
Actually, the magic was simple. Stradivari had students who produced his rough violins. He himself spent all of his time finishing them, which basically involved a lot of planing, playing, and listening. As a result, he was able to finish over a thousand violins in his lifetime, while others made hundreds because they did all the work themselves. Bartolomeo Giuseppe Guarneri is estimated to have produced only about 250 violins, and Bergonzi didn't make very many because he didn't have time to; he primarily repaired violins.
I thought about saying just talk to her as an alternative but I figured it was fairly self-evident that if talking to them was an option you could choose to do so rather than trying to limit what she's able to see.
The settings are here. Under "Control your default privacy", select "Custom" and it will prompt you for custom settings. You can also change "How you connect" and "How tags work".
There's also a "View As" option which can let you see what your profile will look like to any particular one of your friends or lists. E.g. you can see your profile as it would appear to someone in your "Restricted" list.
It's not the same situation, because the only thing she could notice is that she no longer sees much activity on your profile. Even if she notices she may just think you've stopped using Facebook as much.
In fact, you could always set custom visibility for specific posts allowing her to see them so that your wall won't appear to be suspiciously empty if she checks it.
You do not have to block them. You can limit the visibility of almost anything and everything in your profile from anyone without de-friending or blocking them. Refer to my post from ~4 hours ago.
The only thing you can't limit them from seeing is your name and the fact that you have an account, which they know already (and possibly your display picture - I don't remember).
Slashdot Mirror
I know that, but... When YOU or Nursie post the correct information between you? Then, I make appropriate statements
Either one of our filter rules would have worked just fine, thanks very much. Neither of us was "wrong", and we didn't disagree in anything except giving two different ways to do the same thing.
And you've got to be kidding if you think I want to read any of your irrelevant linked pages.
The ONLY time I have "issues" with facebook pages, is this (in my router rules for security)
Of course you will have issues with Facebook pages if you set your router to block cookies. Most of Facebook requires you to be logged in. Logging in requires enabling cookies.
Did you really fail to realize that most of Facebook won't work if you block cookies? You seemed like a halfway intelligent guy until that.
Yup, got ya... I was just trying to get folks to "watch out" for what YOU said (fbcdn.com) vs. what NURSIE said (a.fsdn.com)
Oh please. Do you really expect anyone to believe that?
Blocking the URL that Nursie said to block will prevent the annoying image from loading. Blocking the <a> tags by their href attribute (as I suggested doing here) will hide the entire <a> element (including the annoying image inside it).
There's more than one way to skin a cat when you're not just nuking entire subdomains via HOSTS.
Looks fine, & LOADS A HELL OF A LOT FASTER TOO & safe(r) also!
LOL, no, I just tried it out of curiosity and it does indeed look like utter crap if you HOSTS-block the a.fsdn.com domain.
If anyone is curious as to what it looks like, and doesn't want to muck with their HOSTS file, just go to View -> Page Style -> No Style. Then when you've had enough of the unstyled HTML vomit, go back and select Basic Page Style to fix it.
Firefox, AdBlock Plus filter rules (Ctrl-Shift-F). You should be able to copy them to the clipboard and add them to your filter rules just by hitting Ctrl-V.
No, Nursie was correct: if you AdBlock that URL (not the entire a.fsdn.com subdomain), the annoying icons will be blocked on Slashdot.
See here for my AdBlock rules that block annoying Facebook/Google+/Twitter integration everywhere (not just on Slashdot).
You *MAY* wish 2 read _0xd0ad's post
Read it? I wrote it.
Apparently, it's really -> fbcdn.com to 'block' (or not) from this poster _0xd0ad here
Blocking fbcdn.com will make Facebook not work. I did not say you should block it. Unless you can block it on everything except Facebook, so that Facebook will still work. But your HOSTS file can't do that.
Nursie said to block a very specific URL, not an entire subdomain. You and your hammer are unwelcome here. Not every problem is a nail. You can't just bash an entire subdomain into nonexistence because you don't like ONE PICTURE on it.
No, never mind, this was about Facebook and I (strangely) assumed you were talking about Facebook.
I'd like to know how Slashdot looks without the CSS from a.fsdn.com. My guess is, it looks like shit. But I don't suppose that bothers you. Personally, I like the AJAX-y goodness that is Slashdot 2.0. If you like bludgeoning the internet into barely-working crap before you read it, that's your business.
Oh, and by the way, fsdn.com is Slashdot, not Facebook. You're thinking of fbcdn.com.
I actually use Facebook. Your custom HOSTS file would make Facebook simply not work.
Yes, they're AdBlock Plus blocking rules. Put them in the Element Hiding Rules section.
They block <a> tags based on the content of their href attribute. *= means "contains the following string".
Putting slashdot.org before the # will restrict to this domain (and subdomains of it).
I went above and beyond and just blocked them everywhere.
#a(href*=facebook.com/sharer)
#a(href*=plusone.google.com/_/+1)
#a(href*=twitter.com/intent)
If that causes problems I might restrict them to slashdot.org. But it probably won't.
Can, and already did. You can too.
Block them everywhere:
#a(href*=facebook.com/sharer)
#a(href*=plusone.google.com/_/+1)
#a(href*=twitter.com/intent)
or just on Slashdot:
slashdot.org#a(href*=facebook.com/sharer)
slashdot.org#a(href*=plusone.google.com/_/+1)
slashdot.org#a(href*=twitter.com/intent)
Bonus filters, no additional charge:
#a(href*=goat.)
#a(href*=goatse.)
slashdot.org#a(href*=/boredgeek)
slashdot.org#a(href*=/geekatwork)
slashdot.org#a(href*=/goo.gl/)
slashdot.org#a(href*=/is.gd/)
That's what you get for reading TFS.
I think I read the first sentence and the last sentence and completely ignored what came in between them.
Um, I don't think that car is going anywhere. And if you want to break in, you'll probably have to go through the holes where the windows used to be - I doubt any of the doors will open, key or no key.
We're talking about alternating current, so the electrons don't really move very far. They mostly just vibrate in one place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drift_velocity#Numerical_example
I'm really unimpressed with any lawyer who couldn't figure out how to change the filter to "All Files" so that they could find the PDF. Yes, it works fine. Yes, I whipped up an HTML test page and I tried it.
I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume that you, being a geek lawyer, either knew this or could have figured it out, and it's just the Righthaven tools who apparently don't know how computers work.
Of course, a FF extension to change the accept parameter of <input type="file"/> elements would be even slicker.
Last time I looked, an IR LED showed up nice and bright on every digital camera I ever tried it with, so either the IR filters aren't perfect (likely) or they use cheap IR filters on most cameras (also likely).
Here in the USA they have to have at least 2 things to get you for running a red light: a photo of the intersection, with your clearly-identifiable vehicle outside of the intersection and the light clearly RED, and second, a photo of the same intersection during the same red light cycle, with your clearly-identifiable vehicle now inside of the intersection. In other words, they must prove that you entered the intersection after the light had turned red.
However, to get you for making a rolling right-turn-on-red they must have a video showing your approach to the intersection, because they must prove that you failed to come to a complete stop before you entered the intersection on red. And in order to get the video of your approach to the intersection, the camera must already be on and recording.
And even in the case of running the red light, the system must photograph the vehicle once before it runs the red light. To do this, it has to detect who is probably going to run the light. So if you come up to such an intersection fast and then stop hard, it may take your picture even if you manage to stop without running the red light. They won't ticket you, since a human reviews the photos. They'll see that you didn't actually run the light, and they will move on to the next recorded incident.
Actually, the magic was simple. Stradivari had students who produced his rough violins. He himself spent all of his time finishing them, which basically involved a lot of planing, playing, and listening. As a result, he was able to finish over a thousand violins in his lifetime, while others made hundreds because they did all the work themselves. Bartolomeo Giuseppe Guarneri is estimated to have produced only about 250 violins, and Bergonzi didn't make very many because he didn't have time to; he primarily repaired violins.
References:
http://www.stradivarius.org/
http://www.stradivarius.org/violin/famous-violin-makers
http://si.edu/encyclopedia_si/nmah/guarneri.htm
Remotely Pat Your Pet With Kinect, Two Wiimotes, Treadmill, HUD, Computer, and $15,000 Robot
I thought about saying just talk to her as an alternative but I figured it was fairly self-evident that if talking to them was an option you could choose to do so rather than trying to limit what she's able to see.
The settings are here. Under "Control your default privacy", select "Custom" and it will prompt you for custom settings. You can also change "How you connect" and "How tags work".
There's also a "View As" option which can let you see what your profile will look like to any particular one of your friends or lists. E.g. you can see your profile as it would appear to someone in your "Restricted" list.
It's not the same situation, because the only thing she could notice is that she no longer sees much activity on your profile. Even if she notices she may just think you've stopped using Facebook as much.
In fact, you could always set custom visibility for specific posts allowing her to see them so that your wall won't appear to be suspiciously empty if she checks it.
You do not have to block them. You can limit the visibility of almost anything and everything in your profile from anyone without de-friending or blocking them. Refer to my post from ~4 hours ago.
The only thing you can't limit them from seeing is your name and the fact that you have an account, which they know already (and possibly your display picture - I don't remember).