That might work, except that the original 256 characters (all the roman characters, e.g. a-z) are duplicated all over the place in unicode, and so you can still wreak havok while staying within a single section of unicode.
But why do you want to restrict people to a single section? That's a hack, not a good thing to do. What if I want to have www.hello.co.jp? I'll give you a hint - Japanese companies think it's a great idea to throw random English words everywhere, even if many people have no idea what the hell it means (including english speakers), and you often see english mixed right in the middle of hiragana and kanji. This is the way things are done, and you shouldn't restrict it just on a whim.
What do you mean by "if the unicode of the URL does not match the default unicode of the browser"? The point of unicode is that it is uniform - there's only one. It is broken up into sections, and perhaps that's what you meant to say, but even that won't work.
Let's take Japanese as an example, and I will give you two reasons why it won't work.
Perhaps if you assume I am Japanese, you will assume that my "default unicode section" is the section containing the Japanese characters. So this works fine if I go to URLs that use hiragana / katakana / kanji, but what if I go to www.google.com? Or www.washingtonpost.com? Or www.citibank.com? (Yes, there are Citi offices in Japan). Are you going to throw up a phishing warning simply because I'm browsing an international site? Because if you do that, you're going to make people so used to seeing those warnings that they will just ignore them and/or turn them off.
Even if your method did work, however, this would still be easy to get around. The original 256 characters are repeated many times, and it just so happens that in the full-width forms (in the CJK sections) they are repeated again. I.e. I can use the letters a-z while still staying within the Japanese section of Unicode, and although these letters are the same visually, they are a different character in the Unicode charset, so you could easily have www.google.com and www.google.com registered entirely in the first 256 characters of Unicode or entirely in the full-width form section of Unicode, and there would be no discrepancy whatsoever.
The problem is a lot more complicated than you make it out to be.
But how do you want to compare everything to make sure it matches? Is www.metro..jp the same thing is www.metero.tokyo.jp? It's not quite as simple as you make it sound. Even for (Tokyo), there are characters in the chinese codepage that are almost identical, and really are identical at the font / resolution most people use...
For all you people saying "There's no problem, just do it" - I say watch out... there will be a rush of attacks and spoofs as soon as this is opened up. The letter "a" appears in the unicode character set multiple times, and some of the variants are almost indistinguishable. I'm not just talking about someone registering släshdot.org, I'm talking about someone reigstering slashdot.org (the a is FF41 instead of the normal a). Good luck telling the attacks appart from the real sites.
For those who are wondering when a Japanese person might try to say the letter "V" - they actually do try (in advertisements), for example, to say "DVD"... unfortunately it seems to come out as "Dee We Dee" (as in "we want to by a wii" pronunciation of we.)
What is it that makes people think rocket science is such a black art? It's really not that hard to understand, no moreso than most other engineering fields.
Personally, I think there are a lot harder things than rocket science. ChemE was always difficult in my mind, as was VLSI. I don't see what's so special about rocket science.
Actually, if you want to be correct, it was built for the Government. There's a difference - rather than building a piece of crap using underpaid (government) labor, we paid top dollar so that it could get subcontracted out multiple levels, while still winding up with the same crap.
That might actually be interesting:-) Feel free to drop me a line... I don't really want to post my email in plain text, so pardon the munge: icf AT cs.....edu fill in the blank and win a cookie. Hell, I don't have anything better to do tonight, so I might actually take you up on it if you're serious.
They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.
So clearly the FF team couldn't have just magically propagated the builds to all the mirrors, because the Internet isn't a big truck that you can just dump something on. Clearly, the tubes can get filled and delayed, so they wanted to get the files up early. Holy shit man, even Sen. Stevens understands this!
No, because when I buy my airline tickets on nwa.com with my Northwest Airlines WorldPerks Visa Signature card, I get:
a) Double miles (e.g. if the ticket from DTW to PEK $1700, I get 3,400 miles for the purchase + mileage for flying (about 30,000 w/ platinum elite). I wouldn't get those 3,400 miles if I paid cash b) Lost baggage insurance (an extra $3,000 beyond what is covered by common carrier agreement) c) Travel insurance (accidental death & dismemberment) d) Travel emergency assistance + a lot more - http://usa.visa.com/personal/cards/credit/visa_sig nature_benefits.html
Personally, I put everything on my credit card, and it's gotten me a number of free roundtrip (international) tickets so far. And I pay no finance charges, because I pay the balance off. (Yes, the WP card has a $90/yr fee, but since miles are worth roughly $.01-$.02/mile, that's about 4,500-9,000 mile-equivalent. Since the credit card gets me much more than 9,000 miles/year, it's worth the $90 fee.)
Wow, did you even read my post? I'm backing up onto a RAID-0 array because I'm fairly confident that the source of the data (my RAID-5 hardware array) is not going anywhere. Yes, a huge RAID-0 array is highly fault-prone, but if my backup server dies, so what, I've still got the original (except in the rare case of both computers being killed simultaneously, which is an acceptable risk to me. I can't afford 2.5TB of offsite storage.) The RAID-0 allows me to throw together my miscellaneous drives and create a volume large enough to hold my backups.
If the raid-0 array fails, I haven't really lost anything, because I still have all the data on my RAID-5 array (the original data source).
I have a 2.04TB RAID-5 array (4x750GB drives) attached to a 3ware 9590SE controller. I back this up to a RAID-0 array every so often on my other computer (a bunch of random disks using LVM... I'm not so worried about using raid 0, because it's a backup, and I doubt both boxen will die simultaneously.) I have a crossover cable running between the built-in gigabit ethernet ports on each (Intel Pro/1000), and the backup speed is actually acceptable. (I find that unless you are really willing to lay out for a very good gigabit switch (as opposed to hub), the crossover cable adds a lot for not very much money. I use the second built-in gigabit port on one box, and an add-in 3com card on the other, for normal network activity.)
My backup strategy is basically to NFS mount the other volume and create a giant tar file. Simple, and it works. YMMV
I have 4GB of physical ram (ddr2-6400) and 4gb of swap. There are actually a few reasons for this, YMMV (obviously I think the answer to this question depends on what you do).
I have a lot of things running which, usually, are doing nothing. For instance, apache2, mysql, postfix, and courier-imapd-ssl are always running, but they're rarely actually *doing* anything. (If I get a hit or an email, it's relatively rare as I hardly have very little hosted off of my home box - nevertheless, I do want these running). So I'm happy to let these get swapped out. When I start up matlab, and start dealing with huge datasets, I know it's going to swap most of these out. That's good. It will also swap out some of my matlab data that's loaded but not currently being used (and yes, it's quite possible to have >4gb in your workspace). For me, I have the swap because I need it. Figure out what you need, and you will have the answer to your question.
Also, you should note that in 64-bit mode, there are more registers available. If you're running a native 64-bit environment, there's a good chance the same app recompiled as a 64-bit app will run marginally faster.
At least, that's been my experience. (Running core 2 extreme on gentoo)
I've never understood why people carry on all-caps requirements that probably originated in the days of teletypes. I admit that at one point in time, it might have been useful to restrict people to a small number of characters to save a few bits, but nowadays it's not worth it. I have no idea of what company you work for and I'm not going to ask, but I will say that I have worked in places with old systems that still require all caps for text, even though the original systems have since been discarded and re-written any number of times. ("But we want to maintain the look and feel of the old system so that people are comfortable using the new system" - forgetting that anybody new they hire looks at it and says "WTF is this POS?"... but I digress)
Anyhow, I always felt sorry for anyone who actually had to read the all-caps mess. I occasionally read some stuff, and after a sentence or two the all caps text gave me the worst headache ever. Proper grammar and capitalization is meant to make language easier to parse. Purposefully leaving out capitalization just makes things hard to read.
Actually, there's very little precedent set here, and it's not as warm and fuzzy as you might think. If you actually read the findings of the court, you get the other side of the story.
It's not like the RIAA was worried that this woman was going to get fees awarded and then decided to withdraw - they basically got a judgement against the woman's daughter (daughter failed to enter a response, and a default judgement was awarded). Having already 'won' their case against the daughter, they withdrew the case against the mother. There was some squabble as to exactly how that should be done, and the court found that because the action was brought under copyright acts, and the mother was the prevailing party, the mother is *eligible* for an award of fees. The court also notes, however, that "under the statute, attorney fees are not to be awarded routinely or as a matter of course." I would be very suprised if she actually gets fees paid...
I should note that I misread the parent post. You would not say "It belongs to the Jobs'", but rather "It belongs to the Jobses." You could still say "The Jobs' house" if you are refering to the Jobs family, or you could also say "The Jobses' dog". (In neither of these cases is there an extra 's' added, since we're not using a singular proper noun, but rather a plural proper noun.)
Slashdot Mirror
That might work, except that the original 256 characters (all the roman characters, e.g. a-z) are duplicated all over the place in unicode, and so you can still wreak havok while staying within a single section of unicode.
But why do you want to restrict people to a single section? That's a hack, not a good thing to do. What if I want to have www.hello.co.jp? I'll give you a hint - Japanese companies think it's a great idea to throw random English words everywhere, even if many people have no idea what the hell it means (including english speakers), and you often see english mixed right in the middle of hiragana and kanji. This is the way things are done, and you shouldn't restrict it just on a whim.
What do you mean by "if the unicode of the URL does not match the default unicode of the browser"? The point of unicode is that it is uniform - there's only one. It is broken up into sections, and perhaps that's what you meant to say, but even that won't work.
Let's take Japanese as an example, and I will give you two reasons why it won't work.
Perhaps if you assume I am Japanese, you will assume that my "default unicode section" is the section containing the Japanese characters. So this works fine if I go to URLs that use hiragana / katakana / kanji, but what if I go to www.google.com? Or www.washingtonpost.com? Or www.citibank.com? (Yes, there are Citi offices in Japan). Are you going to throw up a phishing warning simply because I'm browsing an international site? Because if you do that, you're going to make people so used to seeing those warnings that they will just ignore them and/or turn them off.
Even if your method did work, however, this would still be easy to get around. The original 256 characters are repeated many times, and it just so happens that in the full-width forms (in the CJK sections) they are repeated again. I.e. I can use the letters a-z while still staying within the Japanese section of Unicode, and although these letters are the same visually, they are a different character in the Unicode charset, so you could easily have www.google.com and www.google.com registered entirely in the first 256 characters of Unicode or entirely in the full-width form section of Unicode, and there would be no discrepancy whatsoever.
The problem is a lot more complicated than you make it out to be.
But how do you want to compare everything to make sure it matches? Is www.metro..jp the same thing is www.metero.tokyo.jp? It's not quite as simple as you make it sound. Even for (Tokyo), there are characters in the chinese codepage that are almost identical, and really are identical at the font / resolution most people use...
For all you people saying "There's no problem, just do it" - I say watch out... there will be a rush of attacks and spoofs as soon as this is opened up. The letter "a" appears in the unicode character set multiple times, and some of the variants are almost indistinguishable. I'm not just talking about someone registering släshdot.org, I'm talking about someone reigstering slashdot.org (the a is FF41 instead of the normal a). Good luck telling the attacks appart from the real sites.
For those who are wondering when a Japanese person might try to say the letter "V" - they actually do try (in advertisements), for example, to say "DVD"... unfortunately it seems to come out as "Dee We Dee" (as in "we want to by a wii" pronunciation of we.)
"Video" on the other hand is simply said "bideo".
What is it that makes people think rocket science is such a black art? It's really not that hard to understand, no moreso than most other engineering fields.
How to become a rocket scientist:
Personally, I think there are a lot harder things than rocket science. ChemE was always difficult in my mind, as was VLSI. I don't see what's so special about rocket science.
Actually, if you want to be correct, it was built for the Government. There's a difference - rather than building a piece of crap using underpaid (government) labor, we paid top dollar so that it could get subcontracted out multiple levels, while still winding up with the same crap.
That might actually be interesting :-) Feel free to drop me a line... I don't really want to post my email in plain text, so pardon the munge: ... .edu
icf AT cs.
fill in the blank and win a cookie. Hell, I don't have anything better to do tonight, so I might actually take you up on it if you're serious.
Phil -
Will you be at the APWG meeting on 14-15 Nov? If so, I'll buy you a beer - I liked your response.
(This is Ian from CMU, we met at the APWG meeting Nov 05 and also at the W3C meeting in NYC back in March.)
So clearly the FF team couldn't have just magically propagated the builds to all the mirrors, because the Internet isn't a big truck that you can just dump something on. Clearly, the tubes can get filled and delayed, so they wanted to get the files up early. Holy shit man, even Sen. Stevens understands this!
I have rarely seen a site that won't work with JavaScript enabled. I'm assuming you meant without JavaScript enabled...
No, because when I buy my airline tickets on nwa.com with my Northwest Airlines WorldPerks Visa Signature card, I get:
g nature_benefits.html
a) Double miles (e.g. if the ticket from DTW to PEK $1700, I get 3,400 miles for the purchase + mileage for flying (about 30,000 w/ platinum elite). I wouldn't get those 3,400 miles if I paid cash
b) Lost baggage insurance (an extra $3,000 beyond what is covered by common carrier agreement)
c) Travel insurance (accidental death & dismemberment)
d) Travel emergency assistance
+ a lot more - http://usa.visa.com/personal/cards/credit/visa_si
Personally, I put everything on my credit card, and it's gotten me a number of free roundtrip (international) tickets so far. And I pay no finance charges, because I pay the balance off. (Yes, the WP card has a $90/yr fee, but since miles are worth roughly $.01-$.02/mile, that's about 4,500-9,000 mile-equivalent. Since the credit card gets me much more than 9,000 miles/year, it's worth the $90 fee.)
Wow, did you even read my post? I'm backing up onto a RAID-0 array because I'm fairly confident that the source of the data (my RAID-5 hardware array) is not going anywhere. Yes, a huge RAID-0 array is highly fault-prone, but if my backup server dies, so what, I've still got the original (except in the rare case of both computers being killed simultaneously, which is an acceptable risk to me. I can't afford 2.5TB of offsite storage.) The RAID-0 allows me to throw together my miscellaneous drives and create a volume large enough to hold my backups.
If the raid-0 array fails, I haven't really lost anything, because I still have all the data on my RAID-5 array (the original data source).
I have a 2.04TB RAID-5 array (4x750GB drives) attached to a 3ware 9590SE controller. I back this up to a RAID-0 array every so often on my other computer (a bunch of random disks using LVM... I'm not so worried about using raid 0, because it's a backup, and I doubt both boxen will die simultaneously.) I have a crossover cable running between the built-in gigabit ethernet ports on each (Intel Pro/1000), and the backup speed is actually acceptable. (I find that unless you are really willing to lay out for a very good gigabit switch (as opposed to hub), the crossover cable adds a lot for not very much money. I use the second built-in gigabit port on one box, and an add-in 3com card on the other, for normal network activity.)
My backup strategy is basically to NFS mount the other volume and create a giant tar file. Simple, and it works. YMMV
I have 4GB of physical ram (ddr2-6400) and 4gb of swap. There are actually a few reasons for this, YMMV (obviously I think the answer to this question depends on what you do).
I have a lot of things running which, usually, are doing nothing. For instance, apache2, mysql, postfix, and courier-imapd-ssl are always running, but they're rarely actually *doing* anything. (If I get a hit or an email, it's relatively rare as I hardly have very little hosted off of my home box - nevertheless, I do want these running). So I'm happy to let these get swapped out. When I start up matlab, and start dealing with huge datasets, I know it's going to swap most of these out. That's good. It will also swap out some of my matlab data that's loaded but not currently being used (and yes, it's quite possible to have >4gb in your workspace). For me, I have the swap because I need it. Figure out what you need, and you will have the answer to your question.
I downloaded the 32-bit precompiled version of firefox, and was able to install the flash plugin into that.
;-) Haven't tried VMWare though
Actually, for me, 64-bit is entirely convenient. I just type "emerge mozilla" and it works
Also, you should note that in 64-bit mode, there are more registers available. If you're running a native 64-bit environment, there's a good chance the same app recompiled as a 64-bit app will run marginally faster.
At least, that's been my experience. (Running core 2 extreme on gentoo)
No, the way to do it is -march=nocona
Then, if you want to do 32-bit, just do -m32, and -m64 for 64-bit
If I had any mod points left, parent would definitely be +1 Funny...
That would be exactly what the grandparent post was saying - not even the Gecko family of browsers is passing the test.
I've never understood why people carry on all-caps requirements that probably originated in the days of teletypes. I admit that at one point in time, it might have been useful to restrict people to a small number of characters to save a few bits, but nowadays it's not worth it. I have no idea of what company you work for and I'm not going to ask, but I will say that I have worked in places with old systems that still require all caps for text, even though the original systems have since been discarded and re-written any number of times. ("But we want to maintain the look and feel of the old system so that people are comfortable using the new system" - forgetting that anybody new they hire looks at it and says "WTF is this POS?"... but I digress)
Anyhow, I always felt sorry for anyone who actually had to read the all-caps mess. I occasionally read some stuff, and after a sentence or two the all caps text gave me the worst headache ever. Proper grammar and capitalization is meant to make language easier to parse. Purposefully leaving out capitalization just makes things hard to read.
I assume you're talking about Dominick's? They still seem to be doing just fine :-)
Just to be totally clear to those reading - it means that they can't refile against *her* - they can still file similar cases against other people.
Actually, there's very little precedent set here, and it's not as warm and fuzzy as you might think. If you actually read the findings of the court, you get the other side of the story.
It's not like the RIAA was worried that this woman was going to get fees awarded and then decided to withdraw - they basically got a judgement against the woman's daughter (daughter failed to enter a response, and a default judgement was awarded). Having already 'won' their case against the daughter, they withdrew the case against the mother. There was some squabble as to exactly how that should be done, and the court found that because the action was brought under copyright acts, and the mother was the prevailing party, the mother is *eligible* for an award of fees. The court also notes, however, that "under the statute, attorney fees are not to be awarded routinely or as a matter of course." I would be very suprised if she actually gets fees paid...
I should note that I misread the parent post. You would not say "It belongs to the Jobs'", but rather "It belongs to the Jobses." You could still say "The Jobs' house" if you are refering to the Jobs family, or you could also say "The Jobses' dog". (In neither of these cases is there an extra 's' added, since we're not using a singular proper noun, but rather a plural proper noun.)