I'd just like to thank you, esteemed #1, for finally publicly addressing this issue. It's a step in the right direction because it increases transparency. Conspiracy theories whither only under the application of illumination. More of this sort of discussion can only help, aside from any other concrete modifications taken or eschewed. Come visit us more often, Taco.
Here's a New York Times article from yesterday. Fun quote:
In Mr. Stallman's view, proprietary software is an unwarranted restriction on the freedom of information. The revision of the G.P.L., he said, is "part of something bigger - part of the long-term effort to liberate cyberspace." Software patents, he said, are "utterly insane."
For Microsoft's part, Steven A. Ballmer, its chief executive, has called the G.P.L. a "cancer."
Yet in his way, Mr. Stallman is also quite pragmatic. Proprietary software applications can run on Linux without restrictions, which is important for the survival of Linux as a viable alternative to commercial operating systems.
I don't see how this woman can be spouting off about violations of building standards when she has a website that still uses tables for layout. EVERYBODY know that content should be separated from presentation; I mean come on, it's 2006 almost! I've got half a mind to put up a website reporting her to the W3c, I tell you.
And now you're an annonymous remailer. I'm a php coder, but you have ignored the necessary work of filtering your input, man. Which wouldn't be a big deal, since it's a simple example, but you're comparing the ammount of necessary code, and it seems you've left some out....
Mr Cornett added that in fact Red Hat did more Linux business in some individual European counties than Novell did worldwide.
Novell had SUSE Linux Enterprise Server revenue of $8m in its third quarter, ended July 31, 2005, with about 47% coming from North America, 37% from EMEA, and 16% the rest of the world. In comparison, Red Hat had subscription revenue of $54.3m in its second quarter, ended August 31, 2005.
I don't think that you got very far with Bertrand Russell. Why can't anyone here disagree with anyone else without insulting them? I think you too casually discount the magnitude of Russell's dilemma vis a vis set theory and the theory of types. He wanted the impossible, as we now know in a formal sense thanks to Gödel, namely a complete and consistent logical system, and his failure to resolve his paradox was devistating to him (and moreso, I think, to Whitehead, but I may be worng about that). How far is far enough into Russell to understand that his most formidable acheivement is tainted with a paradox at its heart? You say, "Russell showed that the domain of logic gets tangled if you use it to think about itself. Well (with hindsight) that is no surprise at all." I submit that it was quite a big surprise indeed. And further that its implications, while often overstated, aren't merely a "hiccup," but instead place it at the top of that rather rarified class of ontologically significant mathematical discoveries.
Ouch. Careful there. You should back up your profile before mucking around in that XML. Also, the entire proposed solution sounds a little drastic. If you can download the.xpi (I remember google having made this a little difficult) you only need edit that extension. Instructions here.
I think that Georgia is attempting to require an ID for voting and it is being fought tooth and nail by various public interest groups (or perhaps "public interest" groups).
Georgia is attemting to pass a law that requires voters to have an official state ID, namely a driver's license or, barring that, a surrogate state ID available for a fee. People are opposed to it because the effect (if not the intent, but really the intent too) is to disenfranchise the kinds of people who don't have driver's licenses and for whom buying a replacement ID is an onerous burden, namely the poor, which is to say to a great extent, the black residents of the state. In the 19th century this was called a Poll Tax and it served exactly the same purpose, namely to disenfranchise minorities. It was ruled unconstitutional then and hopefully will be again if Georgia insists upn promulgating this 21st century version.
Another place where "Default Permit" crops up is in how we typically approach code execution on our systems. The default is to permit anything on your machine to execute if you click on it, unless its execution is denied by something like an antivirus program or a spyware blocker. If you think about that for a few seconds, you'll realize what a dumb idea that is. On my computer here I run about 15 different applications on a regular basis. There are probably another 20 or 30 installed that I use every couple of months or so. I still don't understand why operating systems are so dumb that they let any old virus or piece of spyware execute without even asking me. That's "Default Permit."
Hmm. On my computers, I have hundreds of programs that I run every day; sometimes a small one pipes to a more complex one sometimes several call each other in a chain. If any program asked me if I really want it to run as a default first step, I'd immediately delete it. Fortunately this was in his point number one, saving me from having to read any of the rest. This author is a ass.
It's refreshing to see a reasoned explanation of the motivations and intentions of an editor. So thanks for that post, number fifty-five.
Unfortunately when this has occurred in the past, it was often in the context of a response to a maniacal diatribe by a poster with a personal grudge or overarching pet peeve, the sort of itch which can never be scratched. Those conversations can tend to devolve into uninteresting attack and defense.
I believe I saw this code being demonstrated at a recent New York PHP meeting; the IBM guy was tabbing through a tree menu and the voice would say, for example, at what level down the tree the current focus was, the tag in question, whether or not the field was editable and the like. Far and beyond the functionality of, say, JAWS.
The demo was mainly focused on the "ajax" lirary which was a rapid-deployment web-app framework and the accessibility features were an aside, but it was pretty impressive. See here for the code and here for an example app.
Local admin rights are not necessary to install firefox, which can function dandily in its own directory (and the user's Docs and Settings\Application Data\ dir). I speak from experience having installed firefox on plenty of locked down workstations for plenty of grateful peons.
During a recent talk in Redmond, security researcher Dan Kaminsky wasn't sure how geeky to get. After all, he was talking to a bunch of executives on the first day of Blue Hat, not Microsoft's rank-and-file engineers.
So he kept his comments brief when it came to a flaw in something called MD5--a "hashing" algorithm, or a kind of fingerprint used to authenticate documents. He figured it was probably too esoteric for his audience. The rest of his presentation was focused on a different security topic.
But when it came time for questions, "this one guy with a shock of white hair looks straight at me and just says, 'MD5.'" Kaminsky, who said the comment seemed more like an order than a request for information, complied by demonstrating how two Web pages could have the same "hash," as the man listened and nodded knowingly.
So he tossed out some buzzword he had heard without any context to indicate that he had any idea what he was talking about (maybe he knew MD5 was a hash -- at best) and we're supposed to think the presenter was blown away at the knowledge of MS execs? It's about the same as if he had yelled out, "C!" Oh my god! That's a programming language that can have overflows! Those can be a serious security concern. Wow, he knows his shit! Silly, silly, silly.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's been three or four years since I actualy - actually - laughed audibly with slashdot open before me.
Hrm... suggests I've been wasting a lot of time over the last half decade.
C:\Documents and Settings\Username\My Documents
Gee, thanks! If only I'd known this ten years ago.
I'd just like to thank you, esteemed #1, for finally publicly addressing this issue. It's a step in the right direction because it increases transparency. Conspiracy theories whither only under the application of illumination. More of this sort of discussion can only help, aside from any other concrete modifications taken or eschewed. Come visit us more often, Taco.
Looks like CyricZ's going to be wearing out another keyboard spewing anti-php FUD.
How can anyone get so exercised about a programming language?
Anyone who read more than a few words into it would've realized they're talking about a person
Wow. Slashdot article as Turing Test.
I don't see how this woman can be spouting off about violations of building standards when she has a website that still uses tables for layout. EVERYBODY know that content should be separated from presentation; I mean come on, it's 2006 almost! I've got half a mind to put up a website reporting her to the W3c, I tell you.
If you give any header a value with a newline, you're creating 2 headers, according to RFC 822:
3.2. HEADER FIELD DEFINITIONS
[...]
field = field-name ":" [ field-body ] CRLF
So after CRLF you are set to define a new fieldname : field-body. And no, php doesn't do any filtering for you in the mail() function.
And then for the sender header I give you this:And now you're an annonymous remailer. I'm a php coder, but you have ignored the necessary work of filtering your input, man. Which wouldn't be a big deal, since it's a simple example, but you're comparing the ammount of necessary code, and it seems you've left some out....
Check this out.
I don't think that you got very far with Bertrand Russell.
Why can't anyone here disagree with anyone else without insulting them? I think you too casually discount the magnitude of Russell's dilemma vis a vis set theory and the theory of types. He wanted the impossible, as we now know in a formal sense thanks to Gödel, namely a complete and consistent logical system, and his failure to resolve his paradox was devistating to him (and moreso, I think, to Whitehead, but I may be worng about that). How far is far enough into Russell to understand that his most formidable acheivement is tainted with a paradox at its heart? You say, "Russell showed that the domain of logic gets tangled if you use it to think about itself. Well (with hindsight) that is no surprise at all." I submit that it was quite a big surprise indeed. And further that its implications, while often overstated, aren't merely a "hiccup," but instead place it at the top of that rather rarified class of ontologically significant mathematical discoveries.
3. Delete extensions.rdf
.xpi (I remember google having made this a little difficult) you only need edit that extension. Instructions here.
Ouch. Careful there. You should back up your profile before mucking around in that XML. Also, the entire proposed solution sounds a little drastic. If you can download the
Well, now we've got slashdot on board. Whose going to tell Don Knuth?
I think that Georgia is attempting to require an ID for voting and it is being fought tooth and nail by various public interest groups (or perhaps "public interest" groups).
Georgia is attemting to pass a law that requires voters to have an official state ID, namely a driver's license or, barring that, a surrogate state ID available for a fee. People are opposed to it because the effect (if not the intent, but really the intent too) is to disenfranchise the kinds of people who don't have driver's licenses and for whom buying a replacement ID is an onerous burden, namely the poor, which is to say to a great extent, the black residents of the state. In the 19th century this was called a Poll Tax and it served exactly the same purpose, namely to disenfranchise minorities. It was ruled unconstitutional then and hopefully will be again if Georgia insists upn promulgating this 21st century version.
Why are the handful of people who identify problems and try to get them solved "shrill"?
Because they have animated of gifs of rotating police lights on their websites? I dunno.
Man, those tooltip ads on the anchors are very annoying. But fiendishly ingenius.
Hmm. On my computers, I have hundreds of programs that I run every day; sometimes a small one pipes to a more complex one sometimes several call each other in a chain. If any program asked me if I really want it to run as a default first step, I'd immediately delete it. Fortunately this was in his point number one, saving me from having to read any of the rest. This author is a ass.
It's refreshing to see a reasoned explanation of the motivations and intentions of an editor. So thanks for that post, number fifty-five.
Unfortunately when this has occurred in the past, it was often in the context of a response to a maniacal diatribe by a poster with a personal grudge or overarching pet peeve, the sort of itch which can never be scratched. Those conversations can tend to devolve into uninteresting attack and defense.
What, so they aren't two-dimensional any more? I just can't keep up with this "new math."
I believe I saw this code being demonstrated at a recent New York PHP meeting; the IBM guy was tabbing through a tree menu and the voice would say, for example, at what level down the tree the current focus was, the tag in question, whether or not the field was editable and the like. Far and beyond the functionality of, say, JAWS.
The demo was mainly focused on the "ajax" lirary which was a rapid-deployment web-app framework and the accessibility features were an aside, but it was pretty impressive. See here for the code and here for an example app.
Local admin rights are not necessary to install firefox, which can function dandily in its own directory (and the user's Docs and Settings\Application Data\ dir). I speak from experience having installed firefox on plenty of locked down workstations for plenty of grateful peons.
This post is talking about firefox, right?
Tools -> Extensions
Locate Greasemonkey in the list, highlight it, and click the Uninstall button at the bottom. Accept the alert dialog and restart Firefox.
Really:
Advanced PHP Programming by George Schlosshnagle
Google for it.
So he tossed out some buzzword he had heard without any context to indicate that he had any idea what he was talking about (maybe he knew MD5 was a hash -- at best) and we're supposed to think the presenter was blown away at the knowledge of MS execs? It's about the same as if he had yelled out, "C!" Oh my god! That's a programming language that can have overflows! Those can be a serious security concern. Wow, he knows his shit!
Silly, silly, silly.
I find Linus's interviews to be very interesting.
If you like his interviews, you'll love his book. Jeez, only $0.75 on half.com. It's full of tons of those tasty little Linus-nuggets.