Certainly! I could accept a multi-dozen thousand UKP fine and possible imprisonment from HM Revenue & Customs for refusing to complete the interactive PDF Corporation Tex return form ( CT600 ).
What an alternative!
Note: paper submissions are no longer accepted.
i had no idea, sorry to hear that. that's pretty deep shit. have you considered migration as an alternative?
A big limitation of Sumatra is that it doesn't support filling out interactive forms, which makes it a no-go in my organization
an organization relying on filling out interactive pdf forms sounds quite like a no-go to me. can't you really come up with a better solution to get your shit together? besides, the topic is how to get rid of this pdf pest because of obvious security concerns. I don't see how insisting in bad practices could be of any help.
here are my 50c: forget proprietary formats, forget any interactive or multimedia content requiring anything but a vanilla browser to view (yes, this includes html crap in emails), embrace the simplicity of plain text and mash up a secure webapp for anything beyond the capabilities of plain text.
Does this sound like boasting to anyone else? It's like a more modern version of having the press watch an explosion of their latest bomb.
ditto. it immediately reminded me to that hacker the company I work for recently hired. the guy had all the references: an obscure background in some sort of underground scene, ex member of group with some defacements to brag about, profuse media coverage (even a full page article plus interview in national leading press), clear asperger profile... well, he didn't even pass the test period (which is pretty rare in that company).
those who have bothered to read the article after having seen the headline have no clue whatsoever. that's no disgrace, you can't possibly know about everything in this life, let alone about such specialized topics. however, those ho have read the article and still believe it makes any sense, they are just part of the problem. relax, and enjoy the show!
plus: don't have the ethically repugnant guts to call the public disclosure of illegal activities a "security breach". what a bunch of repugnant unethical morons was this propaganda intended for again? oh wait...
... an obscure poll from yougov is anywhere relevant now.
i would rather want to know the exact amount (in petabytes) yougov hands over to nsa daily. could explain this propaganda stunt. hey it's enemy of democracy day!
Or like a terrible pump design. Intelligent design my ass, more like idiotic design.
hey, this is still work in progress!
(if we don't fuck everything up first, a production release of human_specimen_worth_its_salt is expected soon, bear with us just some million years more!)
People don't tolerate neglect; they just go find alternatives.
some even might go find alternatives to java altogether... oh wait. not really, because most people tends not to look for alternatives at all, and actually tolerates shitloads of bullshit. that's why companies like oracle exist.
It not only includes a built-in ad blocker but also allows users to download videos and doesn't impose device-specific streaming restrictions outlined in the YouTube Terms Of Service.
not that i care and not that i ever want a wp or any of ms crap, but this is just awesome. precious. kudos for ms, for once! and btw, fuck you, google.
sorry. there's no contradiction, really, i meant that warning against trusting *any* site (an advice i endorse) would be incompatible with advocating for trusting *some* sites because they would fix the issue (the same sites that got pwned in the first place), but i see now that you weren't implying that at all. my bad.
It could lure you into a sense of false security, letting you think you are safe by avoiding them, when really you don't know that. Other sites are probably infected too.
methinks the whole interntets build upon a false sense of false security. the OP is right, there is no reason not to disclose the list.
Also, the sites they've found are probably not infected anymore, since presumably they've been notified and resolved the problem.
this is a bold assumption, and a clear indication of a false sense of security:-) (besides in contradiction with your previous statement)
i doubt any president has more real power than any mcdonalds employee, so it wouldn't make much difference if they actually were honest...
but the idea of an honest man makin it all the way up through it's political career, not to mention a presidential race, is a funny one! would be first time in history, i guess.
You are a moron who has lost the debate, because you picked the wrong horse. Just admit that your a moron and move on with your pathetic life.
ok, now i'm a moron, because you say so. i've lost a debate (?) because you say so. i picked a horse (?), and it was the wrong one, because you say so. further, my life is pathetic, because you say so.
now i should admit al this idiocy, and move on. because you say so. anything else, sir?
what a brilliant argument. i don't know what to say. you even spared me the effort to ridicule you!
Fuck you. Messes to clean up, you say? What mess have you ever cleaned up. You let the mess fester until the grown-ups have to come in and clean it up for you. Then you go right back to what you were doing before, and let it build up again.
What Europeans tend to do is ignore problems, study them, wring their hands, wait around for some savior. And never actually do anything or solve any problem. Right now you are cowering in fear while a bunch of jihadist parasites overrun your countries and allow globalists to destroy your economies. While panhandling around the world for money to stave off the inevitable. Wonder where that comes from...
I am glad you mentioned WWII. I won't bother to note the obvious fact of your continued existence, at the expense of several hundred thousand American lives. After the war, and to this day, you have had to do virtually nothing to defend yourselves from the Soviets or any other threat, by attaching yourselves to the belly of the United States like sucker-fish on a shark, or leeches. The only reason you were not overrun by the Soviets from 1945 to 1990, and the Russians from 2000 till now is because of the US nuclear umbrella. The only reason your wimpy and worthless cultures have managed to stave off economic disaster this long is because you have negligible defense requirements because you know we will take care if it for you.
This entire time you have, as a group, acted like a bunch of whiny effete children and your current attitude to the US is a deeply-held resentment because YOU KNOW all this, even though you won't admit it to yourselves. Just like all coddled children. You create "International" and "World" organizations to make it seem like you are players on the world stage, and to insulate yourselves from actually backing a wheelbarrow up to the US Treasury and taking the money directly. But make no mistake, all the IMF, the UN, the World Bank does is provide cover for you sucking the US Taxpayer, and the US economy, dry. You're still at it, the EU was begging from IMF money just last week.
You will read this, mod it to hell, point out all the "obvious" errors like any pseudo-intellectual poser, and move on. I have no illusions that you are capable of realizing how incredibly pathetic your entire misbegotten continent has gotten since cowardice has become so fashionable.
So again, fuck you.
patriots: can be so correct about foreign countries and so naive about their own at the same time!
"Not a nice guy" is what you say about your sister's boyfriend who yells at her and treats her badly. Saddam was a sadistic tyranical purveyor of genocide.
you mean like the entire saud family who's been tyranizing and brutalizing the population for decades, or like israel's military with an ongoing genocide operation. you are correct: there's no nice guy in this fucking game.
it illustrated that you "can get a cupholder for free" if you ask for it nicely to the very same dealer who just sold you the overpriced car, if he has some cupoholders left and happens to be in good mood and doesn't dislike your face too much. you can also get one for free if you manage to sneak into the shop at night and steal it. that still doesn't make the cupholders free.
second, cupholders are material property and thus not comparable to any software ownership. you consistently overlook this. if cupholders are free, can i visit your dealer with a truck and get two tons of them? of course not, because they are limited in existence, their total cost is fixed and part of your dealer's costs of operations. you "can get some for free" as long as that cost is not exceeded, as long as there are stil cupholders paid for by the vehicle buying customers around.
and cupholders don't need a license, whereas software does. the limited set of cupholders are just commercial gifts to make customers (or even possible customers) happy, and you might do whatever you want with them. you can use them to grow flowers in or give them as a christmas gift to your aunt in texas. you could even build a car around them! you could say the same about mse but then mse specifically requires ownership of a paid, untransferrable license to be used, unless you want it to hold cups on your desk, which you can't since it's software, immaterial property, i hope you finally got that by now.
you wanted to demonstrate with cupholders that mse is free, but just discovered that neither mse nor cupholders are, strictly speaking. good for your analogy! spot on!
of course i was just trying to be funny/picky (whatever) with my first comment, i perfectly understood what the op meant, but i'm afraid you're taking this whole thing too seriously, and no imaginable car analogy will assist you in demonstrating that elephants fly, or that commercial software is free for that matter.
OK. I stand corrected about not needing a license, but now we need nearly substitute any vendor specific part for cupholder in the car analogy. Ford can give you a free part for their car. It only works on their car. It is useless on other cars. It is useless if you don't own their car. Never the less, the part was free if you didn't pay for it.
didn't we already sort out the part where your car analogy isn't valid? oh, and i see you're still having a hard time grasping the concept of "license required" as opposed to "free". but keep up the good work, you will get it. hey, after all you finished highschool, didn't you?
Go back to high school and finish your education. Seriously.
it's ad hominem time already? ok. well i didn't finish high school, and i'm afraid i won't finish my education either. not in my life. at least i hope so, but sorry about you:'(
not the bits that get copied, so your entire post is ridiculous.
exactly, since cupholders aren't comparable to bits being copied, your analogy makes no sense. but you might want to re-read your own words very carefully:
you pay for a license to use Windows
you must have paid a license to run mse. you cannot, barring blatant violation of sacrosanct property law (and consequently burning in hell), enjoy any part of mse without having paid a windows license. as such mse is an extension of exactly that same license. wherever you see "free" for any software running only on windows, "license required" holds. if it's ms software then it is already well paid for. by you, of course. if it's someone else's software who generously gives up any compensation, well, he does so in favor of ms, because it still contributes it's value to their paid license model that *you* paid for. it's not free, not even as in beer.
op might have said "requires no additional payment" or "at no extra cost" and that would have been correct.
maybe because it's not free. it's "free for customers" since it only has meaning to them. that means that it's in the price of whatever makes you be a customer. that's not (call me silly) free.
Yes. What is so hard for you to understand. Perhaps a car analogy will help. If I buy a low quality over-priced vehicle without a cupholder that is the cost of the vehicle. Later, when I go to the dealer and say "Hey! I'd like a cup holder in my car!, and then he just hands me one and sends me on my way without charging me, I got the cup holder for free! See how easy that is to understand once it is put in terms you can understand?
try asking the dealer for the thingy *without* buying that low quality over-priced vehicle first.
of course the real reason that your car analogy inevitably fails is that property transfer and property duplication (ie sharing) are simply not comparable. but hey, it's way cool that you equate mse to a cupholder!
Then how does it make you feel that your beloved language was then written by a code monkey by your own definition?
in absolutely no way. i know the benefits of static typing pretty well. what i assume is that someone who says "is broken because it's not statically typed" must be a code monkey. at best.
You only manage to appear to posses small intelligence when you throw derogatory terms so casually. I doubt that knowing this will make you any wiser, but all your assumptions are wrong.
my small intelligence suggests you got lost on the very first post of this thread already. reread slowly if you care.
i doubt there are many languages out there whose implementation isn't written in C, or on a language whose implementation isn't written in C in turn, or in another language with static typing. this doesn't alter the fact that you completely fail to see the benefits of having dynamic untyped languages around, to the extent to say "they are broken". my first guess then is that you must be a code monkey. my second guess is that you are some sort of director/manager of a team of code monkeys. if i'm still wrong, my third guess would be that you have no clue about programming whatsoever. but if you don't like the banana, that's just fine. move along:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Certainly! I could accept a multi-dozen thousand UKP fine and possible imprisonment from HM Revenue & Customs for refusing to complete the interactive PDF Corporation Tex return form ( CT600 ).
What an alternative!
Note: paper submissions are no longer accepted.
i had no idea, sorry to hear that. that's pretty deep shit. have you considered migration as an alternative?
(with an appropriate time delay)
--
isawwhatudidthere
It may conflict with some law, but that's generally an issue for the enforcement folks to decide.
sorry, who? you didn't actually mean voldemort, did you?
A big limitation of Sumatra is that it doesn't support filling out interactive forms, which makes it a no-go in my organization
an organization relying on filling out interactive pdf forms sounds quite like a no-go to me. can't you really come up with a better solution to get your shit together? besides, the topic is how to get rid of this pdf pest because of obvious security concerns. I don't see how insisting in bad practices could be of any help.
here are my 50c: forget proprietary formats, forget any interactive or multimedia content requiring anything but a vanilla browser to view (yes, this includes html crap in emails), embrace the simplicity of plain text and mash up a secure webapp for anything beyond the capabilities of plain text.
Does this sound like boasting to anyone else? It's like a more modern version of having the press watch an explosion of their latest bomb.
ditto. it immediately reminded me to that hacker the company I work for recently hired. the guy had all the references: an obscure background in some sort of underground scene, ex member of group with some defacements to brag about, profuse media coverage (even a full page article plus interview in national leading press), clear asperger profile ... well, he didn't even pass the test period (which is pretty rare in that company).
those who have bothered to read the article after having seen the headline have no clue whatsoever. that's no disgrace, you can't possibly know about everything in this life, let alone about such specialized topics. however, those ho have read the article and still believe it makes any sense, they are just part of the problem. relax, and enjoy the show!
Don't have morally repugnant and illegal secrets.
plus: don't have the ethically repugnant guts to call the public disclosure of illegal activities a "security breach". what a bunch of repugnant unethical morons was this propaganda intended for again? oh wait ...
... an obscure poll from yougov is anywhere relevant now.
i would rather want to know the exact amount (in petabytes) yougov hands over to nsa daily. could explain this propaganda stunt. hey it's enemy of democracy day!
all this makes one want to puke, doesn't it?
Or like a terrible pump design. Intelligent design my ass, more like idiotic design.
hey, this is still work in progress!
(if we don't fuck everything up first, a production release of human_specimen_worth_its_salt is expected soon, bear with us just some million years more!)
People don't tolerate neglect; they just go find alternatives.
some even might go find alternatives to java altogether ... oh wait. not really, because most people tends not to look for alternatives at all, and actually tolerates shitloads of bullshit. that's why companies like oracle exist.
It not only includes a built-in ad blocker but also allows users to download videos and doesn't impose device-specific streaming restrictions outlined in the YouTube Terms Of Service.
not that i care and not that i ever want a wp or any of ms crap, but this is just awesome. precious. kudos for ms, for once! and btw, fuck you, google.
sorry. there's no contradiction, really, i meant that warning against trusting *any* site (an advice i endorse) would be incompatible with advocating for trusting *some* sites because they would fix the issue (the same sites that got pwned in the first place), but i see now that you weren't implying that at all. my bad.
It could lure you into a sense of false security, letting you think you are safe by avoiding them, when really you don't know that. Other sites are probably infected too.
methinks the whole interntets build upon a false sense of false security. the OP is right, there is no reason not to disclose the list.
Also, the sites they've found are probably not infected anymore, since presumably they've been notified and resolved the problem.
this is a bold assumption, and a clear indication of a false sense of security :-)
(besides in contradiction with your previous statement)
i doubt any president has more real power than any mcdonalds employee, so it wouldn't make much difference if they actually were honest ...
but the idea of an honest man makin it all the way up through it's political career, not to mention a presidential race, is a funny one! would be first time in history, i guess.
You are a moron who has lost the debate, because you picked the wrong horse. Just admit that your a moron and move on with your pathetic life.
ok, now i'm a moron, because you say so.
i've lost a debate (?) because you say so.
i picked a horse (?), and it was the wrong one, because you say so.
further, my life is pathetic, because you say so.
now i should admit al this idiocy, and move on. because you say so.
anything else, sir?
what a brilliant argument. i don't know what to say. you even spared me the effort to ridicule you!
Fuck you. Messes to clean up, you say? What mess have you ever cleaned up. You let the mess fester until the grown-ups have to come in and clean it up for you. Then you go right back to what you were doing before, and let it build up again.
What Europeans tend to do is ignore problems, study them, wring their hands, wait around for some savior. And never actually do anything or solve any problem. Right now you are cowering in fear while a bunch of jihadist parasites overrun your countries and allow globalists to destroy your economies. While panhandling around the world for money to stave off the inevitable. Wonder where that comes from...
I am glad you mentioned WWII. I won't bother to note the obvious fact of your continued existence, at the expense of several hundred thousand American lives. After the war, and to this day, you have had to do virtually nothing to defend yourselves from the Soviets or any other threat, by attaching yourselves to the belly of the United States like sucker-fish on a shark, or leeches. The only reason you were not overrun by the Soviets from 1945 to 1990, and the Russians from 2000 till now is because of the US nuclear umbrella. The only reason your wimpy and worthless cultures have managed to stave off economic disaster this long is because you have negligible defense requirements because you know we will take care if it for you.
This entire time you have, as a group, acted like a bunch of whiny effete children and your current attitude to the US is a deeply-held resentment because YOU KNOW all this, even though you won't admit it to yourselves. Just like all coddled children. You create "International" and "World" organizations to make it seem like you are players on the world stage, and to insulate yourselves from actually backing a wheelbarrow up to the US Treasury and taking the money directly. But make no mistake, all the IMF, the UN, the World Bank does is provide cover for you sucking the US Taxpayer, and the US economy, dry. You're still at it, the EU was begging from IMF money just last week.
You will read this, mod it to hell, point out all the "obvious" errors like any pseudo-intellectual poser, and move on. I have no illusions that you are capable of realizing how incredibly pathetic your entire misbegotten continent has gotten since cowardice has become so fashionable.
So again, fuck you.
patriots: can be so correct about foreign countries and so naive about their own at the same time!
"Not a nice guy" is what you say about your sister's boyfriend who yells at her and treats her badly. Saddam was a sadistic tyranical purveyor of genocide.
you mean like the entire saud family who's been tyranizing and brutalizing the population for decades, or like israel's military with an ongoing genocide operation. you are correct: there's no nice guy in this fucking game.
it was spot on, actually.
it illustrated that you "can get a cupholder for free" if you ask for it nicely to the very same dealer who just sold you the overpriced car, if he has some cupoholders left and happens to be in good mood and doesn't dislike your face too much. you can also get one for free if you manage to sneak into the shop at night and steal it. that still doesn't make the cupholders free.
second, cupholders are material property and thus not comparable to any software ownership. you consistently overlook this. if cupholders are free, can i visit your dealer with a truck and get two tons of them? of course not, because they are limited in existence, their total cost is fixed and part of your dealer's costs of operations. you "can get some for free" as long as that cost is not exceeded, as long as there are stil cupholders paid for by the vehicle buying customers around.
and cupholders don't need a license, whereas software does. the limited set of cupholders are just commercial gifts to make customers (or even possible customers) happy, and you might do whatever you want with them. you can use them to grow flowers in or give them as a christmas gift to your aunt in texas. you could even build a car around them! you could say the same about mse but then mse specifically requires ownership of a paid, untransferrable license to be used, unless you want it to hold cups on your desk, which you can't since it's software, immaterial property, i hope you finally got that by now.
you wanted to demonstrate with cupholders that mse is free, but just discovered that neither mse nor cupholders are, strictly speaking. good for your analogy! spot on!
of course i was just trying to be funny/picky (whatever) with my first comment, i perfectly understood what the op meant, but i'm afraid you're taking this whole thing too seriously, and no imaginable car analogy will assist you in demonstrating that elephants fly, or that commercial software is free for that matter.
OK. I stand corrected about not needing a license, but now we need nearly substitute any vendor specific part for cupholder in the car analogy. Ford can give you a free part for their car. It only works on their car. It is useless on other cars. It is useless if you don't own their car. Never the less, the part was free if you didn't pay for it.
didn't we already sort out the part where your car analogy isn't valid? oh, and i see you're still having a hard time grasping the concept of "license required" as opposed to "free". but keep up the good work, you will get it. hey, after all you finished highschool, didn't you?
uh, ... er ... you did?
All I have to do is get it to run with WINE.
you wish. you still need a license: http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=25645 :-P
doing otherwise is a criminal offense. wtf are you talking about!
Go back to high school and finish your education. Seriously.
it's ad hominem time already? ok. well i didn't finish high school, and i'm afraid i won't finish my education either. not in my life. at least i hope so, but sorry about you :'(
you pay for a license to use Windows
ditto.
not the bits that get copied, so your entire post is ridiculous.
exactly, since cupholders aren't comparable to bits being copied, your analogy makes no sense. but you might want to re-read your own words very carefully:
you pay for a license to use Windows
you must have paid a license to run mse. you cannot, barring blatant violation of sacrosanct property law (and consequently burning in hell), enjoy any part of mse without having paid a windows license. as such mse is an extension of exactly that same license. wherever you see "free" for any software running only on windows, "license required" holds. if it's ms software then it is already well paid for. by you, of course. if it's someone else's software who generously gives up any compensation, well, he does so in favor of ms, because it still contributes it's value to their paid license model that *you* paid for. it's not free, not even as in beer.
op might have said "requires no additional payment" or "at no extra cost" and that would have been correct.
why are you pointing that out?
just so. :-)
maybe because it's not free. it's "free for customers" since it only has meaning to them. that means that it's in the price of whatever makes you be a customer. that's not (call me silly) free.
Yes. What is so hard for you to understand. Perhaps a car analogy will help. If I buy a low quality over-priced vehicle without a cupholder that is the cost of the vehicle. Later, when I go to the dealer and say "Hey! I'd like a cup holder in my car!, and then he just hands me one and sends me on my way without charging me, I got the cup holder for free! See how easy that is to understand once it is put in terms you can understand?
try asking the dealer for the thingy *without* buying that low quality over-priced vehicle first.
of course the real reason that your car analogy inevitably fails is that property transfer and property duplication (ie sharing) are simply not comparable. but hey, it's way cool that you equate mse to a cupholder!
Microsoft's "Security Essentials" is ... free.
free as in "included in the ridiculously high price for their crappy os"?
Then how does it make you feel that your beloved language was then written by a code monkey by your own definition?
in absolutely no way. i know the benefits of static typing pretty well. what i assume is that someone who says "is broken because it's not statically typed" must be a code monkey. at best.
You only manage to appear to posses small intelligence when you throw derogatory terms so casually. I doubt that knowing this will make you any wiser, but all your assumptions are wrong.
my small intelligence suggests you got lost on the very first post of this thread already. reread slowly if you care.
i doubt there are many languages out there whose implementation isn't written in C, or on a language whose implementation isn't written in C in turn, or in another language with static typing. this doesn't alter the fact that you completely fail to see the benefits of having dynamic untyped languages around, to the extent to say "they are broken". my first guess then is that you must be a code monkey. my second guess is that you are some sort of director/manager of a team of code monkeys. if i'm still wrong, my third guess would be that you have no clue about programming whatsoever. but if you don't like the banana, that's just fine. move along :-)
--
i like bananas!