Count them. If you don't know how much you are eating, then you don't have any clue if you are eating too much or not. Figuring out how much you are eating is the first step.
Simply counting the calories you consume may be enough to make you realize an easy way to cut out a few hundred calories; remember, 115 extra calories a day is equivalent to about 1 pound gained a month.
It depends on what withstand means. I've watched lots of dragonflies (and other insects) fly around in stronger winds than that, gusts too. If they mean stay in the air and mostly on course, it should at least be possible, if they mean stay in one place, probably not.
The remote computer is probably compromised and running a bot (ESET is probably listing LSA Shell because it figures it would handle the connection if it were allowed; from what I can tell, there isn't a Windows exploit associated with port 500).
You could use Tcpview to see if anything is listening on port 500 (but there probably isn't).
It also might be an oddly configured VPN (oddly configured in that it is trying to connect to your ip address).
Most people have no idea what to do with that information and don't care about gathering it (I certainly don't care if an installer from a site that I have already decided to trust checks something on the internet, and for most stuff, if it doesn't have an option to turn off persistent checks, I don't install it.)
For Joe Everybody, "YOU NEED A FIREWALL" is bad advice, it is just going to frustrate him by popping up all the time, or by adding more bugs to the system. For technical users, if they want one, fine, but they don't particularly need one (in my first comment in this thread, I did preface 'turn it off' with 'if you aren't sure you need it' (well, roughly anyway, too lazy to copy and paste actual words)).
So maybe I would have better said "There is no reason to insist that everyone run a third party firewall on XP SP2 or later."
At present, the html5 working draft suggests showing a link to the video if playback is not supported. There is also an example of using javascript to fallback to a plug-in if the browser does not report that it can 'probably' play the video (apparently being sure is a bit tough).
I wouldn't be particularly amazed, I'm reasonably aware of what calls home (re your examples, I don't have a hardware printer installed and didn't bother installing the chince-ware that came with my camera).
On my mothers computer, which is probably a more reasonable example of a 'typical' user, I want the various apps 'calling home' and installing updates.
Beyond that, something like Tcpview is sufficient if something seems to be an issue:
As far as Microsoft and your paranoia, between a conspiracy to keep users in the dark and a conspiracy to avoid enormous support headaches, I find the latter quite a bit more likely.
Unless you are absolutely certain you need it, stop running Zone Alarm. The inbound software firewall in XP(SP2+)/Vista works fine, and you probably don't need an outbound firewall.
(If you are using some integrated security package called Zone Alarm, just turn off the firewall part)
A well patched XP system was probably never vulnerable to the network propagation of Conficker (tough to say exactly, but Conficker wasn't spotted until the patch had been out for a couple of weeks).
In Michigan (my state), if you order a $2,000 item and fail to report the purchase and pay 6% use tax on it, you are evading taxes, which may work out okay year to year but probably isn't the best idea in the world.
For items less than $1,000, there is an option to pay a fixed amount based on AGI, rather than 6% on each item.
So to some extent, by calling tax evasion 'the best deal' you are making GP posters point for him.
There is nothing that makes the license granted to MySpace exclusive. The "solely on and through MySpace Services" is a limitation that is placed on MySpace, not on the creators use of content that is posted to MySpace.
As is pointed out in another reply, the TOS were different in 2005 than they are now, but as I pointed out in my response to that reply, not in a way that effects who has rights to the content (except MySpace may have had rights to use the work in a derivative work if it was posted in the first half of 2005). So MySpace probably doesn't have any sort of claim here.
Google cares that you look at Google search results and the accompanying ads (Mozilla makes their money as a search affiliate). They don't care if you use Google's free browser to do it, or some other browser.
It actually makes lots of sense if you figure that most resources are extracted in the way that requires the least use of energy. At some point, garbage becomes the ore with the best yield.
Aluminum does a decent job of demonstrating this, recycling it requires much less energy than refining it from ore, and said recycling is also very popular (scrap aluminum nets enough cash that people will mess around with a few pounds of it when doing demolition, or whatever).
Well, we disagree on the second point. YouTube, Hulu, and every other video site I can think of are on my side (but I am biased to think I am right).
I don't think the tag is really intended for today, it is intended to make the experience smoother 10 years from now (at each stage, hosting, browsing, etc.).
Mozilla (and Netscape before it) have long implemented things that are not in standards. This isn't what causes problems. What causes problems is not supporting the standard after it is released.
Really, gathering real world information about how an idea works is a valuable input to the standards process.
Slashdot Mirror
Count them. If you don't know how much you are eating, then you don't have any clue if you are eating too much or not. Figuring out how much you are eating is the first step.
Simply counting the calories you consume may be enough to make you realize an easy way to cut out a few hundred calories; remember, 115 extra calories a day is equivalent to about 1 pound gained a month.
It depends on what withstand means. I've watched lots of dragonflies (and other insects) fly around in stronger winds than that, gusts too. If they mean stay in the air and mostly on course, it should at least be possible, if they mean stay in one place, probably not.
I have no idea.
If you are commuting 3-4 hours everyday (hey, maybe 5!), you practically deserve it.
If you are a salesman, sucks to have your route.
So a medium size SUV does essentially no damage, compared to the essentially zero damage done by a Prius?
Sounds about right to me (But I live in a state where road damage is mostly caused by winter and trucking).
Put GPS on snowmobiles and send me a check when they trespass.
The remote computer is probably compromised and running a bot (ESET is probably listing LSA Shell because it figures it would handle the connection if it were allowed; from what I can tell, there isn't a Windows exploit associated with port 500).
You could use Tcpview to see if anything is listening on port 500 (but there probably isn't).
It also might be an oddly configured VPN (oddly configured in that it is trying to connect to your ip address).
Most people have no idea what to do with that information and don't care about gathering it (I certainly don't care if an installer from a site that I have already decided to trust checks something on the internet, and for most stuff, if it doesn't have an option to turn off persistent checks, I don't install it.)
For Joe Everybody, "YOU NEED A FIREWALL" is bad advice, it is just going to frustrate him by popping up all the time, or by adding more bugs to the system. For technical users, if they want one, fine, but they don't particularly need one (in my first comment in this thread, I did preface 'turn it off' with 'if you aren't sure you need it' (well, roughly anyway, too lazy to copy and paste actual words)).
So maybe I would have better said "There is no reason to insist that everyone run a third party firewall on XP SP2 or later."
Apple says they support the tag in 3.1:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA25197
At present, the html5 working draft suggests showing a link to the video if playback is not supported. There is also an example of using javascript to fallback to a plug-in if the browser does not report that it can 'probably' play the video (apparently being sure is a bit tough).
I wouldn't be particularly amazed, I'm reasonably aware of what calls home (re your examples, I don't have a hardware printer installed and didn't bother installing the chince-ware that came with my camera).
On my mothers computer, which is probably a more reasonable example of a 'typical' user, I want the various apps 'calling home' and installing updates.
Beyond that, something like Tcpview is sufficient if something seems to be an issue:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897437.aspx
(Maybe combined with Process Explorer: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx )
As far as Microsoft and your paranoia, between a conspiracy to keep users in the dark and a conspiracy to avoid enormous support headaches, I find the latter quite a bit more likely.
It is in Google's interest to fix it. If the perception that adsense isn't fair becomes widespread, it hurts their pricing power.
There really isn't any reason at all to use a third party software firewall on Windows (post XP SP2).
Where is it legal in the U.S. to feed animal products to herbivores (that are intended for human consumption...)?
Unless you are absolutely certain you need it, stop running Zone Alarm. The inbound software firewall in XP(SP2+)/Vista works fine, and you probably don't need an outbound firewall.
(If you are using some integrated security package called Zone Alarm, just turn off the firewall part)
Yah, but you start with the exploits that will give you access to the largest number of systems and work your way down.
Exploits of web/cgi programs seem pretty frequent (and I have seen those systems used to then attack desktops).
A well patched XP system was probably never vulnerable to the network propagation of Conficker (tough to say exactly, but Conficker wasn't spotted until the patch had been out for a couple of weeks).
You are confused. At this point, the typical 'hacker' works on whatever systems he thinks he can make the most botnet money from.
In Michigan (my state), if you order a $2,000 item and fail to report the purchase and pay 6% use tax on it, you are evading taxes, which may work out okay year to year but probably isn't the best idea in the world.
For items less than $1,000, there is an option to pay a fixed amount based on AGI, rather than 6% on each item.
So to some extent, by calling tax evasion 'the best deal' you are making GP posters point for him.
There is nothing that makes the license granted to MySpace exclusive. The "solely on and through MySpace Services" is a limitation that is placed on MySpace, not on the creators use of content that is posted to MySpace.
As is pointed out in another reply, the TOS were different in 2005 than they are now, but as I pointed out in my response to that reply, not in a way that effects who has rights to the content (except MySpace may have had rights to use the work in a derivative work if it was posted in the first half of 2005). So MySpace probably doesn't have any sort of claim here.
I pay my use tax. Without fail.
Google cares that you look at Google search results and the accompanying ads (Mozilla makes their money as a search affiliate). They don't care if you use Google's free browser to do it, or some other browser.
It actually makes lots of sense if you figure that most resources are extracted in the way that requires the least use of energy. At some point, garbage becomes the ore with the best yield.
Aluminum does a decent job of demonstrating this, recycling it requires much less energy than refining it from ore, and said recycling is also very popular (scrap aluminum nets enough cash that people will mess around with a few pounds of it when doing demolition, or whatever).
I resent your implication that I fail to pay the use tax that I owe.
Well, we disagree on the second point. YouTube, Hulu, and every other video site I can think of are on my side (but I am biased to think I am right).
I don't think the tag is really intended for today, it is intended to make the experience smoother 10 years from now (at each stage, hosting, browsing, etc.).
Mozilla (and Netscape before it) have long implemented things that are not in standards. This isn't what causes problems. What causes problems is not supporting the standard after it is released.
Really, gathering real world information about how an idea works is a valuable input to the standards process.