Yeah, in their RaQ1 product... but the same day it was discovered it was fixed and has long since disappeared as a problem. The reason was that on the original RaQ1 all user accounts were inside the site's "web" directory. RaQ2 and RaQ3 have users isolated above the site's "web" directory.
It made it on the frontcover with the main stories... it's still there in fact. It got submitted at a "slow" time of day so other stories covered it up real quick.
They still don't publicize that they use Linux, not because they are "ashamed" of it but because the simple fact is that they aren't a Linux-company.
Linux was not a -purpose- for them it was a tool (ie, a means to an end). If there was some other tool out there that was also "free" and Open Sourced, they very well might use it instead.
I know that they are very happy to get the Linux "buzz" in certain circles, but they have also made a point that they are a Server Appliance company, not a Linux company.
I'm biased, very much so, but in the case of Cobalt it's not quite the same as with a ".com" company.
Cobalt has physical real-world product. They aren't selling vaporware. They can show consistent growth both in revenue and in product line.
I'm not saying that they have a value of billions of dollars, but comparisons to some other IPOs over the last year or two where those companies with software or information-based (or worse, vapor-based) are really not fair.
Yep, looks like you were right. I was taking the wording of the helpfile too literally (heh, wording can be too literal... punny).
Anyway, I copied your experiment and it worked as you expected. Interestingly I got 3 cookies from CNET (I deleted my CNET cookies and restarted my browser before each attempt). 2 from CNET and 1 from hitbox.com
When I repeated I got -4- cookies... 2 from CNET, 1 from hitbox.com and 1 from avenuea.com...
I'm turning my Squid AdZapper back on and leaving "warn me" on for cookies... I had a 23K cookie file, which after removing those I didn't want was 3K. I've been too lazy with my cookies:)
To filter the GIF cookies you can just filter ads... there is also a program I have used called Intermute that is pretty good for custom cookie filters... here's 3 possibilities for you, go to FreshMeat and search for "banner" or "cookie" to find more.
Ummm, not quite... actually what my Netscape (4.7... WindowsNT version) is:
Accept only cookies that get sent back to the originating server
The Help file further explains:
Important: in most cases, "Accept all cookies" is the best choice. The second button means that your computer will not send a cookie to a server that did not originate it.
I've always read that to mean that the cookie will only be sent to the -same- server it originated from, rather than to another server within that domain (which is possible under the cookie spec) such that if the cookie came from "www1.domain.name" it would not be sent to "www2.domain.name" or "ftp.domain.name".
It doesn't mention anything about refusing cookies if the HTTP connection doesn't originate from the same server as the site of the page that called a GIF... as far as Netscape is concerned the GIF came from "doubleclick.net" so whenever you view a GIF from "doubleclick.net" it will send that cookie back to it because it's the same server.
So which interpretation of this well hidden Netscape option is correct?
Umm, Millennium was cancelled already... Actually, Space Above and Beyond was better than either, though I think that they all 3 could have converged quite nicely (now that could make a good movie).
Newbie questions will come out... might as well get them out of the way...
What about more modern cellphone technologies like the digital phones from PowerTel (SMS)?
There has always been controversy over RF from cellphones and powerlines... what about the possibility of RF from Satellite transmission (which you can't get away from without a lot of steel and concrete)?
Is the genetic damage that has been documented significantly more than the theoretical damage from "cosmic ray" radiation or solar radiation (which we are just beginning to document as well)?
First people complain that Red Hat is going to destroy the Linux movement because some companies have chosen to only support Red Hat, which may wipe out some other distributions.
Then people curse the fact that another company has chosen to support a new Linux distro.
Then people get mad because the new distro may be based on Red Hat.
You can't have your cake and eat it, too... Linux has to keep diversity or the whole point is moot. You have to start somewhere, so they chose Red Hat, so what? If you don't like it, don't use it, but at least it's keeping a resemblance of diversity.
Slashdot Mirror
Saturnalia? What about Yule? Not everyone here is Greco-Pagan ;)
Yeah, in their RaQ1 product ... but the same day it was discovered it was fixed and has long since disappeared as a problem. The reason was that on the original RaQ1 all user accounts were inside the site's "web" directory. RaQ2 and RaQ3 have users isolated above the site's "web" directory.
It made it on the frontcover with the main stories ... it's still there in fact. It got submitted at a "slow" time of day so other stories covered it up real quick.
Linux was not a -purpose- for them it was a tool (ie, a means to an end). If there was some other tool out there that was also "free" and Open Sourced, they very well might use it instead.
I know that they are very happy to get the Linux "buzz" in certain circles, but they have also made a point that they are a Server Appliance company, not a Linux company.
Cobalt has physical real-world product. They aren't selling vaporware. They can show consistent growth both in revenue and in product line.
I'm not saying that they have a value of billions of dollars, but comparisons to some other IPOs over the last year or two where those companies with software or information-based (or worse, vapor-based) are really not fair.
/Jahf
Anyway, I copied your experiment and it worked as you expected. Interestingly I got 3 cookies from CNET (I deleted my CNET cookies and restarted my browser before each attempt). 2 from CNET and 1 from hitbox.com
When I repeated I got -4- cookies ... 2 from CNET, 1 from hitbox.com and 1 from avenuea.com ...
I'm turning my Squid AdZapper back on and leaving "warn me" on for cookies ... I had a 23K cookie file, which after removing those I didn't want was 3K. I've been too lazy with my cookies :)
/Jahf
The Help file further explains:
I've always read that to mean that the cookie will only be sent to the -same- server it originated from, rather than to another server within that domain (which is possible under the cookie spec) such that if the cookie came from "www1.domain.name" it would not be sent to "www2.domain.name" or "ftp.domain.name".
It doesn't mention anything about refusing cookies if the HTTP connection doesn't originate from the same server as the site of the page that called a GIF ... as far as Netscape is concerned the GIF came from "doubleclick.net" so whenever you view a GIF from "doubleclick.net" it will send that cookie back to it because it's the same server.
So which interpretation of this well hidden Netscape option is correct?
/Jahf
Umm, Millennium was cancelled already ... Actually, Space Above and Beyond was better than either, though I think that they all 3 could have converged quite nicely (now that could make a good movie).
Newbie questions will come out ... might as well get them out of the way ...
That's not a measure of the brain's capacity so much as a measure of a lifetime's experiences.
Then people curse the fact that another company has chosen to support a new Linux distro.
Then people get mad because the new distro may be based on Red Hat.
You can't have your cake and eat it, too ... Linux has to keep diversity or the whole point is moot. You have to start somewhere, so they chose Red Hat, so what? If you don't like it, don't use it, but at least it's keeping a resemblance of diversity.
*SARCASM* maybe?
Really, 'top' only scrapes the surface of what NT's perfmon does ... 'top' is alot closer to NT's task manager.
I love linux ... but ... NT has some very useful tools.
*lol* How is he supposed to know he doesn't like it until he reads it?
Agreed. I was not a big fan of Mr. Kelley, but the department choice is tacky and a couple of the comments are equally sad.
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 5221,00.html
But it's still very sketchy. It's going to have to happen someday, just like IPv6, namespace is just pitiful right now.
I was hoping they would have new TLDs ... where is -definitive- information on what new TLDs are going to be proffered and when they will activate?