These spamming assholes are promoting a site operated by a company called CyberDefender. Everyone should contact them via phone and fax to let them know what massive piles of shit they are.
To save everyone some site, here's the contact information listed on the linked page:
CyberDefender Corp.
617 West 7th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (213) 689-8631
Fax: (213) 689-8639
I think you you missed the point in this case. I'm not suggesting routine automation of a 727. Far from it, the goal of this exercise was a single flight that was intended to end in a crash landing. In fact, a single pilot took this plane up and subsequently bailed out, allowing the plane to crash. This could have been accomplished from end to end without the pilot, and it would not have been prohibitively costly.
Netcraft confirms it: you're a pedantic asshole, and your subsequent attempts to defend your pedantry only serve to make you look more pathetic. Listen, I've been doing this computing/programming/networking thing since about 1989. My history includes stuff like Timex Sinclair boxes with tape decks (Hey, look! It's technically memory, but commonly referred to as persistent storage), 8086 boxes such as the venerable AT&T PC-6300 with a badass 360K floppy drive (holy crap, memory once again, but most commonly referred to as removable diskette storage) and a whopping 10 MB hard drive (chrissake, look at that shit, it's memory again but most commonly referred to as a goldanged hard drive), various CP/M boxes, a couple of SCO boxes, some early SGI hardware, a slew of 386/486/586 (I still hate Cyrix) boxes, RS/6000 boxes running AIX at first and Debian once I "fixed" them (fun with null modem cables), what you might call "modern" servers spanning multiple datacenters and numbering in the thousands, etc.
Over the years, when somebody who knows what the hell he's talking about says something like "gosh, I need more memory," nobody with half a clue assumed he was referring to hard drive space. Conversely, when somebody said something like "golly gee whiz, I sure am seeing high utilization on my filesystems," it was safe to assume he wasn't talking about fucking ramdisks. Attempting to cloud the issue in a pathetic attempt (via another reply of yours) to reference swap space (virtual memory, whatever makes you feel good) as memory in a vain attempt to prop up your prior pedantry honestly only serves one purpose: it further reinforces your status as pedantic asshole.
In short, you can quote all the technical references you want. Hell, it's not unlikely that I've personally written or substantially contributed to a lot of documentation that you've read. What really matters here is the simple fact that you're being called out for what you are. Stop screwing with people and go do something useful, Junior.
What you're referencing has always been used as, at best, an ugly hack to accommodate mistakes and bad decisions when representing complete documents transmitted over HTTP(S). At worst (and this is how I view it), it simply serves to perpetuate the abysmal practice of serving data via both encrypted and plaintext channels over the network. This is a terrible idea for many reasons, and should be soundly discouraged at every possible turn.
Go fuck yourself. I have two daughters. I'd do the same to anyone engaging in any sort of extensive contact with my children without my express permission and immediate supervision. Frankly, if you were present and had a problem with that, I'd be happy to deal with you as well. So again, go fuck yourself you sniveling little piece of shit.
Fixing Mixed content is not always so difficult, we replaced image links to use "//" instead of "http://", which allows it to use whatever protocol you are already using.
Please tell me you meant "/" instead of "//" there, and that you actually understand how URIs are constructed. Specifically, do you understand how protocol indicators work, and the difference between absolute and relative URIs?
On another note, why did you capitalize "content" in the subject line and "mixed" in the comment body?
Banks could also require people to show up in person at a designated branch, present five different forms of identification, sign fifteen release forms, and swear a blood oath to Odin before agreeing to any transaction whatsoever.
My point is very simple: it is not the bank's fault that the client acted in a manner contrary to his own financial interest. Society as a whole operates on the principle that services are generally tailored to the majority. The majority isn't suffering from these issues. If the minority affected by these issues so desires, they're more than welcome to resume good old fashioned "drive down to the bank" methods.
What you're advocating is just another step toward a total nanny state where everyone walks around in government-mandated plastic bubbles. Have fun with that; I won't be attending your party.
Even 1% is a very large number. As for seeking help, it's a bit more complicated than you might imagine, and assistance of any kind is not guaranteed to product a desirable outcome.
I had a Sinclair ZX80 as a kid. My father fixed the keyboard issue for me with a real keyboard connected to it. The way it was set up, I could type BASIC commands normally, which was much nicer than the typical method. The standard peripherals were still a black and white TV and cassette deck; I'll always remember the lovely sound of a program loading from tape.
If you're pj, please update the recent Groklaw story with a little note to the effect that comment 39738733 was authored by you. That should just take a few seconds. Thanks.
I don't care about biases at all. I do care about making informed decisions based on all the information provided by interested parties. Attempting to use bias as any kind of meaningful metric for evaluating the truthfulness of information is foolish at best, and the correct approach is to seek out as many information sources as possible when making a decision.
People may try to argue that ignoring bias yields a higher probability of operating on incomplete information, but that's also a fallacy. Everyone has biases, no matter how independent they may claim to be. The only sane solution is to start by understanding that, and work carefully toward evaluating as many data points as possible. Unfortunately, people seem to play the "bias card" at every possible turn in an attempt to invalidate an opponent's position, instead of actually addressing and refuting or reinforcing the available information.
Sadly, it's a tactic that tends to work well, as external observers frequently seem all too content to take the easy way out and simply nod their heads on logical fallacies based on observations of bias. It's much easier than taking the time to analyze things on their own, and thus the talking heads keep raking in the big bucks while their loyal followers feel content in their ignorance.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing the fact that women donate eggs.
These spamming assholes are promoting a site operated by a company called CyberDefender. Everyone should contact them via phone and fax to let them know what massive piles of shit they are.
To save everyone some site, here's the contact information listed on the linked page:
CyberDefender Corp.
617 West 7th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (213) 689-8631
Fax: (213) 689-8639
Sure you could.
The alternative explanation is that he's getting his needs met on a regular basis by an attractive woman. How's your sex life these days?
I prefer to use hunter2 for all my critical accounts.
Porno on Rails
Is that the one where Dick Mighty does massive rails of coke off Lotta Pleasure's ass while Peaches McFre ... never mind.
Nope, stuff that splatters.
I think you you missed the point in this case. I'm not suggesting routine automation of a 727. Far from it, the goal of this exercise was a single flight that was intended to end in a crash landing. In fact, a single pilot took this plane up and subsequently bailed out, allowing the plane to crash. This could have been accomplished from end to end without the pilot, and it would not have been prohibitively costly.
Virtually anything can be flown remotely. It takes little additional gear to get the job done.
It can't possibly be that bad. If it is, kill it with fire. On second though, nuke all remaining media from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Netcraft confirms it: you're a pedantic asshole, and your subsequent attempts to defend your pedantry only serve to make you look more pathetic. Listen, I've been doing this computing/programming/networking thing since about 1989. My history includes stuff like Timex Sinclair boxes with tape decks (Hey, look! It's technically memory, but commonly referred to as persistent storage), 8086 boxes such as the venerable AT&T PC-6300 with a badass 360K floppy drive (holy crap, memory once again, but most commonly referred to as removable diskette storage) and a whopping 10 MB hard drive (chrissake, look at that shit, it's memory again but most commonly referred to as a goldanged hard drive), various CP/M boxes, a couple of SCO boxes, some early SGI hardware, a slew of 386/486/586 (I still hate Cyrix) boxes, RS/6000 boxes running AIX at first and Debian once I "fixed" them (fun with null modem cables), what you might call "modern" servers spanning multiple datacenters and numbering in the thousands, etc.
Over the years, when somebody who knows what the hell he's talking about says something like "gosh, I need more memory," nobody with half a clue assumed he was referring to hard drive space. Conversely, when somebody said something like "golly gee whiz, I sure am seeing high utilization on my filesystems," it was safe to assume he wasn't talking about fucking ramdisks. Attempting to cloud the issue in a pathetic attempt (via another reply of yours) to reference swap space (virtual memory, whatever makes you feel good) as memory in a vain attempt to prop up your prior pedantry honestly only serves one purpose: it further reinforces your status as pedantic asshole.
In short, you can quote all the technical references you want. Hell, it's not unlikely that I've personally written or substantially contributed to a lot of documentation that you've read. What really matters here is the simple fact that you're being called out for what you are. Stop screwing with people and go do something useful, Junior.
As a postscript to my last reply, I must admit that I love your sig.
What you're referencing has always been used as, at best, an ugly hack to accommodate mistakes and bad decisions when representing complete documents transmitted over HTTP(S). At worst (and this is how I view it), it simply serves to perpetuate the abysmal practice of serving data via both encrypted and plaintext channels over the network. This is a terrible idea for many reasons, and should be soundly discouraged at every possible turn.
Go fuck yourself. I have two daughters. I'd do the same to anyone engaging in any sort of extensive contact with my children without my express permission and immediate supervision. Frankly, if you were present and had a problem with that, I'd be happy to deal with you as well. So again, go fuck yourself you sniveling little piece of shit.
Fixing Mixed content is not always so difficult, we replaced image links to use "//" instead of "http://", which allows it to use whatever protocol you are already using.
Please tell me you meant "/" instead of "//" there, and that you actually understand how URIs are constructed. Specifically, do you understand how protocol indicators work, and the difference between absolute and relative URIs?
On another note, why did you capitalize "content" in the subject line and "mixed" in the comment body?
0101010101110010011011010110111101101101
Banks could also require people to show up in person at a designated branch, present five different forms of identification, sign fifteen release forms, and swear a blood oath to Odin before agreeing to any transaction whatsoever.
My point is very simple: it is not the bank's fault that the client acted in a manner contrary to his own financial interest. Society as a whole operates on the principle that services are generally tailored to the majority. The majority isn't suffering from these issues. If the minority affected by these issues so desires, they're more than welcome to resume good old fashioned "drive down to the bank" methods.
What you're advocating is just another step toward a total nanny state where everyone walks around in government-mandated plastic bubbles. Have fun with that; I won't be attending your party.
Even 1% is a very large number. As for seeking help, it's a bit more complicated than you might imagine, and assistance of any kind is not guaranteed to product a desirable outcome.
Before or after the guacamole is consumed?
Some people like pain.
I had a Sinclair ZX80 as a kid. My father fixed the keyboard issue for me with a real keyboard connected to it. The way it was set up, I could type BASIC commands normally, which was much nicer than the typical method. The standard peripherals were still a black and white TV and cassette deck; I'll always remember the lovely sound of a program loading from tape.
The universe compresses so much better if you just pipe it to /dev/null, and if you want to get it back you just do the reverse.
If you're pj, please update the recent Groklaw story with a little note to the effect that comment 39738733 was authored by you. That should just take a few seconds. Thanks.
I don't care about biases at all. I do care about making informed decisions based on all the information provided by interested parties. Attempting to use bias as any kind of meaningful metric for evaluating the truthfulness of information is foolish at best, and the correct approach is to seek out as many information sources as possible when making a decision.
People may try to argue that ignoring bias yields a higher probability of operating on incomplete information, but that's also a fallacy. Everyone has biases, no matter how independent they may claim to be. The only sane solution is to start by understanding that, and work carefully toward evaluating as many data points as possible. Unfortunately, people seem to play the "bias card" at every possible turn in an attempt to invalidate an opponent's position, instead of actually addressing and refuting or reinforcing the available information.
Sadly, it's a tactic that tends to work well, as external observers frequently seem all too content to take the easy way out and simply nod their heads on logical fallacies based on observations of bias. It's much easier than taking the time to analyze things on their own, and thus the talking heads keep raking in the big bucks while their loyal followers feel content in their ignorance.
Especially if the RAM is cooled sufficiently, cold boot attacks can be effective for information retrieval from "volatile" memory.