If you really want to open a pop up window, don't turn off the bloody URL bar and other assorted bits that help a user understand where they are.
It's incredibly sad that pretty much every bank I've ever used doesn't think I might like to know that I'm really talking to their server when I use their web interface.
Target names should only exist within the namespace of the site that created them.
Site A should be able to create and interact with a window named "popup".
Site B should be able to create and interact with a window named "popup".
This should happen without either site interfering, blocking or overwriting the other. They should simply be invisible to each other, existing in completely seperate little worlds.
How big are RSS files normally?
I'd be surprised if the bandwidth involved in tracking and coordinating a whole bunch of clients would be significantly less than the RSS itself.
By the time you've told a client to "go an ask these other clients" you may as well have just sent it the RSS file.
An additional problem is that there are too many loons on the internet screaming hysterically about Spyware at the slightest opportunity rather than helping people really understand the issues and make informed choices.
Now 15 years and much computer usage later, I make the mistake myself sometimes. And when I see myself do it, I think I must be an absolute idiot.
Joking aside I experience the same thing. It happens much more when I am firing off a "quick" email response or something similar. I wonder if it's part of the "multi-tasking" work pattern and a part of my brain has already moved onto whatever's next before it finishes with the email.
Whether you like ads or not you have no right to punish people who choose to support their sites via advertising.
They aren't forcing you to go to their site, you are requesting it. Blocking adverts is one thing, but intentionally trying to harm advertisers is ridiculous.
Unless it targets adverts that try and look like system dialogue boxes. Those fuckers deserve everything they get!
Vote with your feet. Don't like a site's advertising policy? Support a different site with a better one.
For the same reason it isn't convenient to have my DVD/CD player tucked away in a cupboard in another room. It's handy to be able to put things into it with minimal fuss.
Obviously the phone won't be as good as a dedicated camera with a proper lens.
At the end of the day though they may be "good enough" for most purposes that the extra expense and hassle of carrying around a seperate low(ish) end "happy snap" digital just doesn't seem worth it. I wonder how close we are to that now. I know the camera in my Nokia 7250i is pretty much useless but I'm sure there are better camera phones these days.
The wire on my mouse isn't annoying when you use it in it's normal position (ie where I've positioned my mouse mat).
It only gets annoying when I want to move it and use it in another position for some reason (such as needing that bit of deskspace for something) in which case the wired mousemat is going to be just as annoying, if not more so (I'd have to move both the mouse and the mousemat as they work in tandem, whereas now I can get away with just moving the mouse).
They aren't going to be taking Joe Numbnut and his personal pirated copy to court now or in the future. An individual person simply isn't worth going after.
Obviously OS piracy is easier to target. People generally expect computers to come with an OS so computer makers pirating in a nice physical location make a nice target.
With music/movies there's no need for such centralisation.
It'll just mean more people lining up with cap in hand hoping to get some free money from Google. Google, especially now it's a publicly traded company, probably needs to demonstrate it's on firm ground here and take it court.
It is very wrong to assume some Linux hobbyist will quickly put aside other things in life, to patch a bug like this, which will make companies like Redhat, novell richer.
True to a degree (though I don't know what "which will make companies like Redhat, novell richer" has got to do with it).
However it shouldn't take "some Linux hobbyist". Open Source allows many eyes and part of that goes towards removing the responsibility from one single person. Ultimatly it's difficult to see how with this being a security issue and so many people having access to the source (including the companies you mentioned with a commercial interest in getting it fixed) someone didn't produce a fix and get it to the people who can get it into the kernel for so long.
Perhaps there's more to the story here. Looking at the Securityfocus page it's not immediatly clear to me what the status is with the various recentish vendor kernels.
Hmm... sounds like an "effect on the economy" to me!
At the end of the day I guess the question is whether economies are better served resisting change in the world around them or working with and taking advantage of it.
If you think the Kyoto protocol is unfair on the US, Kyoto signatories will certainly consider it unfair if the US operates outside it and will undoubtably take action to counter that unfairness.
Slashdot Mirror
If some sites 'need' to span hosts then they should lobby/propose a sensible solution to their problem, not expect insecure behaviour by default.
If you really want to open a pop up window, don't turn off the bloody URL bar and other assorted bits that help a user understand where they are.
It's incredibly sad that pretty much every bank I've ever used doesn't think I might like to know that I'm really talking to their server when I use their web interface.
As far as I can see the W3C doesn't go anywhere near touching this stuff, it's outside the scope of what they do.
You do get wierd behaviour if you don't follow them. It's a fairly 'fragile' example.
Target names should only exist within the namespace of the site that created them.
Site A should be able to create and interact with a window named "popup".
Site B should be able to create and interact with a window named "popup".
This should happen without either site interfering, blocking or overwriting the other. They should simply be invisible to each other, existing in completely seperate little worlds.
The first since 1.0 maybe, but certainly not the first outright.
As far as I can tell the problem is fixed in the latest Opera beta so they might be able to get it into a proper release pretty soon too.
How big are RSS files normally? I'd be surprised if the bandwidth involved in tracking and coordinating a whole bunch of clients would be significantly less than the RSS itself.
By the time you've told a client to "go an ask these other clients" you may as well have just sent it the RSS file.
There was "e" and "i" everything. Frankly I'd find it amazing if someone somewhere wasn't using iTunes before Apple finally got round to it.
Getting into a long drawn out opinion fest with Theo De Raadt seems like great fun.
An additional problem is that there are too many loons on the internet screaming hysterically about Spyware at the slightest opportunity rather than helping people really understand the issues and make informed choices.
Are there damages? Can suing spammers actually be a revenue stream for MS?
Whether you like ads or not you have no right to punish people who choose to support their sites via advertising.
They aren't forcing you to go to their site, you are requesting it. Blocking adverts is one thing, but intentionally trying to harm advertisers is ridiculous.
Unless it targets adverts that try and look like system dialogue boxes. Those fuckers deserve everything they get!
Vote with your feet. Don't like a site's advertising policy? Support a different site with a better one.
Most Slashdot folks posting are slacking off at work and don't have a choice of OS.
Criticise China but be capable of listening to and considering criticism of your own country too.
They aren't converting to Linux. They are just adding a compatability layer so software for Linux can run on their proprietary OS.
For the same reason it isn't convenient to have my DVD/CD player tucked away in a cupboard in another room. It's handy to be able to put things into it with minimal fuss.
Obviously the phone won't be as good as a dedicated camera with a proper lens.
At the end of the day though they may be "good enough" for most purposes that the extra expense and hassle of carrying around a seperate low(ish) end "happy snap" digital just doesn't seem worth it. I wonder how close we are to that now. I know the camera in my Nokia 7250i is pretty much useless but I'm sure there are better camera phones these days.
The wire on my mouse isn't annoying when you use it in it's normal position (ie where I've positioned my mouse mat).
It only gets annoying when I want to move it and use it in another position for some reason (such as needing that bit of deskspace for something) in which case the wired mousemat is going to be just as annoying, if not more so (I'd have to move both the mouse and the mousemat as they work in tandem, whereas now I can get away with just moving the mouse).
They've been dealing with piracy for ages.
They aren't going to be taking Joe Numbnut and his personal pirated copy to court now or in the future. An individual person simply isn't worth going after.
Obviously OS piracy is easier to target. People generally expect computers to come with an OS so computer makers pirating in a nice physical location make a nice target.
With music/movies there's no need for such centralisation.
It'll just mean more people lining up with cap in hand hoping to get some free money from Google. Google, especially now it's a publicly traded company, probably needs to demonstrate it's on firm ground here and take it court.
However it shouldn't take "some Linux hobbyist". Open Source allows many eyes and part of that goes towards removing the responsibility from one single person. Ultimatly it's difficult to see how with this being a security issue and so many people having access to the source (including the companies you mentioned with a commercial interest in getting it fixed) someone didn't produce a fix and get it to the people who can get it into the kernel for so long.
Perhaps there's more to the story here. Looking at the Securityfocus page it's not immediatly clear to me what the status is with the various recentish vendor kernels.
If you think the Kyoto protocol is unfair on the US, Kyoto signatories will certainly consider it unfair if the US operates outside it and will undoubtably take action to counter that unfairness.