Does sticking with a series for a life time make much sense to you, with anything else being amusing, or what? I just find it to be a very logical thing to do. To try to get other jobs. You know... Variation. And regardless if he succeeded or not in that, he has now got a good break from the X-Files and might have the motivation to make a movie about it again.
Something I liked with A9 was an easily accessible site info page with a site review and even rating, along with other misc. info like page ranking (from Amazon.com? Alexa?) The link was right next to the search result, like "show cached" is in Google.
What would be nice is if Google had something like this that wasn't tied into Amazon.com like that, and gave graphs for PageRank history instead of whatever ranking technology they had used.
Is that, say, a message box at start up saying you may not share copyrighted data?
I mean, it's impossible for the software to "know" and stop you from sharing copyrighted stuff... And that's of course not restricted to P2P software.
Hmm, AT&T should publish an April Fool's RFC for "the copyright bit" like they did with "the evil bit". Then software could at least respect that one.:-)
It looks like Google is losing their focus and Google is thinking that the only way to compete with MS is to offer similar products as MS on MS-Only platforms.
Microsoft has no picture management tool like this.
Microsoft had no desktop search tool at the time Google released theirs.
What more Google software on Windows are you referring to?
Does Beagle support an open extension API for third-party developers to add extension support to it?
I've found this being something missing in Google, Copernic, X1, and Yahoo! Search which is a variant of X1. Basically all of them, except... (you'll never see this coming) Microsoft's new desktop search engine.:-S OK, not sure how open it is, haven't looked into it, however it's an extension API documented here.
Please let Beagle get something like that if it hasn't already, so we don't have to rely on their developers to add everything we want. If Beagle become well used due to being open source and all, that could become a huge advantage to it, with the most obscure formats indexed in an intelligent way with metadata extracted, etc.
Same is true for a firefox extension. By installing the extension, you're saying that you know and trust the originator of the extension.
There's actually a difference here... In Firefox you can let a site install extensions, in IE you can let a company install extensions. Usually, you know (and can judge) the site better than a cryptic company name, since you're already visiting the site.
The problem is, there aren't many OS's out there that arbitrarily run dangerous code from a web page with no interaction from the user other than visiting the page in question, low security settings or not.
I agree about this; when the Mozilla Foundation presented their solution implemented in Firefox XPI packages (I'd guess the most comparable technology here) with whitelists the user had to manually manage, it amazed me how simple the solution really was. Here, we didn't just have a click on "Yes" on a cryptic message about "ActiveX " (watch all casual users go "huuuh??") which only Windows programmers know what it is; here there was a clear message about "you must allow this site to install this component first". Hopefully that will trigger more of a "I might be doing something dangerous here" than telling IE "yeah yeah, go on" in a message box.
I think the problem with IE's solution isn't that it isn't secure -- with the proper settings it is secure enough against ActiveX controls. I mean, you can even disable the whole thing. No, the problem is that the user need to ensure they're set right, and need to be his very own security expert, aware of the implications of the ActiveX technology, scripting, and so on, to ensure they maintain a high security level. How many casual users, the very group Windows is aimed for, can be called that? The "internet zones" are the true abomination in my opinion. Microsoft makes it as easy as possible to make their OS able to play the latest games etc, but at the same time, they assume their users are security experts in IE.
My point being: how is it possible that Firefox is more secure than IE, while having basically no security settings visible to add complexity? Microsoft should give that a thought. Sounds like workarounds added by the IE team to attempt to remedy a design that always was beyond rescue in the first place to me (think OS integration).
It will be very interesting to see how Windows Longhorn works here. We should know already this year as the betas start rolling out from Redmond. Will they add further layers of security to confuse their casual users, or will their just fix their design and e.g. unbundle IE from the OS? Since IE 7 will be the first browser to not be released as a separate download, I'm fearing the worst...
Of course, these things are not restricted to a specific operating system and applies to an amazing amount of software as well. The technique goes under the name "social engineering".
I can understand the problem with virus writers that spread their creations, but this guys wasn't part of a group that did? Or am I missing something here...
However, from the Cnet guy's questions, it certainly seemed like he had written his questions in advance while thinking he was a dirty hacker trying supporting "cyberterrorism".
Yes, I agree, and what I find most frustrating is that the explorers are as willing and bold as ever to go on these missions, even given the dangers.
I think this problem will remain until private space travelling get cheap enough. That's why I saw the SpaceshipOne as a milestone in space travelling. Not because that much was accomplished exploration-wise, they barely exited the atmosphere, but because what they accomplished is a prerequisite to be able to explore even if suffering losses.
The whole idea with explorers not funding the research just don't work in the long term, it seems. At least as long as they don't realise it's hard to accomplish something in a field you have little, if any, experience in. Once you gain it though, you can start accomplishing the real amazing feats.
Grr, then point us to that article where Gates said that security holes should be revealed immediately as they're discovered, and that you should rely on other mechanisms for a safe OS, and not secretly kept bugs. Or are you just making things up?
Yes, think of the Pentium II 233 MHz users who wish to run KDE 3.4!;-)
I think the question is: Should they slow down development for e.g. better text readability and visual functionality to accomodate the needs of a user base probably in minority? Or should those stick to either more bare bones, or older windows managers that were made at the time their computers were? What role is KDE supposed to have? Personally, I'd really like to have a window manager trying to compete with Mac OS X and the upcoming Longhorn.:-) I think the Linux community needs an option for those wanting a cool GUI, stuff like this tend to make people more eager to switch to it, believe it or not.:-)
At its simplest level, Longhorn will have the ability to display a Windows XP-like interface known as Windows Classic.
The next two levels are known Aero and Aero Glass. Aero Glass will be the most immersive level of Longhorn featuring three-dimensional shading and transparency. Aero Glass will likely require at least a 128MB video card. Aero will be a scaled down version of Aero Glass and will likely only require a 32MB video card.
Hmm, that quote is btw a bit misleading. "Windows Classic" is NOT the XP theme, but the Windows 2000 theme.
They actually hired some company to do the GUI, it wasn't Microsoft. However, of course that doesn't excuse them since they still approved it.:-) It's a mystery how the much slicker "Watercolor" theme (even better than the Windows 2000 one IMHO, since it was even very clear what window had focus) from the beta was scrapped. It could've at least been optional.
Slashdot Mirror
You find it amusing?
Why?
Does sticking with a series for a life time make much sense to you, with anything else being amusing, or what? I just find it to be a very logical thing to do. To try to get other jobs. You know... Variation. And regardless if he succeeded or not in that, he has now got a good break from the X-Files and might have the motivation to make a movie about it again.
Something I liked with A9 was an easily accessible site info page with a site review and even rating, along with other misc. info like page ranking (from Amazon.com? Alexa?) The link was right next to the search result, like "show cached" is in Google.
What would be nice is if Google had something like this that wasn't tied into Amazon.com like that, and gave graphs for PageRank history instead of whatever ranking technology they had used.
I agree, I think this is among the most amazing Terragen images I've seen :-o
Yes, considering what Terragen can do with shorelines, it's not exactly a high quality render, really.
Is that, say, a message box at start up saying you may not share copyrighted data?
:-)
I mean, it's impossible for the software to "know" and stop you from sharing copyrighted stuff...
And that's of course not restricted to P2P software.
Hmm, AT&T should publish an April Fool's RFC for "the copyright bit" like they did with "the evil bit".
Then software could at least respect that one.
It looks like Google is losing their focus and Google is thinking that the only way to compete with MS is to offer similar products as MS on MS-Only platforms.
Microsoft has no picture management tool like this.
Microsoft had no desktop search tool at the time Google released theirs.
What more Google software on Windows are you referring to?
... the long forgotten images to succeed the goatse guy were unveiled.
Meanwhile, at the Linux headquarters, Linus made the connection between beer and freedom...
Hmm, even more here btw...
I still believe Daniel Crotty's work on puzzling together those from their raw data was better. :-)
His mosaics
An open source groupware application, for example competiting with Microsoft Outlook.
Does Beagle support an open extension API for third-party developers to add extension support to it?
:-S OK, not sure how open it is, haven't looked into it, however it's an extension API documented here.
I've found this being something missing in Google, Copernic, X1, and Yahoo! Search which is a variant of X1. Basically all of them, except... (you'll never see this coming) Microsoft's new desktop search engine.
Please let Beagle get something like that if it hasn't already, so we don't have to rely on their developers to add everything we want. If Beagle become well used due to being open source and all, that could become a huge advantage to it, with the most obscure formats indexed in an intelligent way with metadata extracted, etc.
Same is true for a firefox extension. By installing the extension, you're saying that you know and trust the originator of the extension.
There's actually a difference here... In Firefox you can let a site install extensions, in IE you can let a company install extensions. Usually, you know (and can judge) the site better than a cryptic company name, since you're already visiting the site.
The problem is, there aren't many OS's out there that arbitrarily run dangerous code from a web page with no interaction from the user other than visiting the page in question, low security settings or not.
I agree about this; when the Mozilla Foundation presented their solution implemented in Firefox XPI packages (I'd guess the most comparable technology here) with whitelists the user had to manually manage, it amazed me how simple the solution really was. Here, we didn't just have a click on "Yes" on a cryptic message about "ActiveX " (watch all casual users go "huuuh??") which only Windows programmers know what it is; here there was a clear message about "you must allow this site to install this component first". Hopefully that will trigger more of a "I might be doing something dangerous here" than telling IE "yeah yeah, go on" in a message box.
I think the problem with IE's solution isn't that it isn't secure -- with the proper settings it is secure enough against ActiveX controls. I mean, you can even disable the whole thing. No, the problem is that the user need to ensure they're set right, and need to be his very own security expert, aware of the implications of the ActiveX technology, scripting, and so on, to ensure they maintain a high security level. How many casual users, the very group Windows is aimed for, can be called that? The "internet zones" are the true abomination in my opinion. Microsoft makes it as easy as possible to make their OS able to play the latest games etc, but at the same time, they assume their users are security experts in IE.
My point being: how is it possible that Firefox is more secure than IE, while having basically no security settings visible to add complexity? Microsoft should give that a thought. Sounds like workarounds added by the IE team to attempt to remedy a design that always was beyond rescue in the first place to me (think OS integration).
It will be very interesting to see how Windows Longhorn works here. We should know already this year as the betas start rolling out from Redmond. Will they add further layers of security to confuse their casual users, or will their just fix their design and e.g. unbundle IE from the OS? Since IE 7 will be the first browser to not be released as a separate download, I'm fearing the worst...
Of course, these things are not restricted to a specific operating system and applies to an amazing amount of software as well. The technique goes under the name "social engineering".
When things like these are modded +4 insightful, you know /. is going downhill.
Sounds like the submitter basically just submitted a link, so he felt the need to write a short story around it?
Anyway, yes, since it's not in italics, it's from the editor.
Some have speculated that this was done to prevent HTML standards from being followed by most developers
;-) (which they have)
In that case, MS wouldn't have spent too much effort getting employees into contributing to W3C standards.
I'm not familiar enough with windows to tell you how to preload FF at startup but there is a way.
No, that was removed.
Perhaps these websites should move from building apps with ActiveX? just a thought :p
I doubt Microsoft want to.
And their Windows Update website just happens to be quite useful for Windows users.
The WU Client only grabs critical security updates, not other stuff.
I can understand the problem with virus writers that spread their creations, but this guys wasn't part of a group that did?
Or am I missing something here...
However, from the Cnet guy's questions, it certainly seemed like he had written his questions in advance while thinking he was a dirty hacker trying supporting "cyberterrorism".
Yes, I agree, and what I find most frustrating is that the explorers are as willing and bold as ever to go on these missions, even given the dangers.
I think this problem will remain until private space travelling get cheap enough. That's why I saw the SpaceshipOne as a milestone in space travelling. Not because that much was accomplished exploration-wise, they barely exited the atmosphere, but because what they accomplished is a prerequisite to be able to explore even if suffering losses.
The whole idea with explorers not funding the research just don't work in the long term, it seems. At least as long as they don't realise it's hard to accomplish something in a field you have little, if any, experience in. Once you gain it though, you can start accomplishing the real amazing feats.
Grr, then point us to that article where Gates said that security holes should be revealed immediately as they're discovered, and that you should rely on other mechanisms for a safe OS, and not secretly kept bugs. Or are you just making things up?
Yes, think of the Pentium II 233 MHz users who wish to run KDE 3.4! ;-)
:-) I think the Linux community needs an option for those wanting a cool GUI, stuff like this tend to make people more eager to switch to it, believe it or not. :-)
I think the question is: Should they slow down development for e.g. better text readability and visual functionality to accomodate the needs of a user base probably in minority? Or should those stick to either more bare bones, or older windows managers that were made at the time their computers were? What role is KDE supposed to have? Personally, I'd really like to have a window manager trying to compete with Mac OS X and the upcoming Longhorn.
Then don't play 3D games.
As for Longhorn, it will scale back graphics if your card sucks:
At its simplest level, Longhorn will have the ability to display a Windows XP-like interface known as Windows Classic.
The next two levels are known Aero and Aero Glass. Aero Glass will be the most immersive level of Longhorn featuring three-dimensional shading and transparency. Aero Glass will likely require at least a 128MB video card. Aero will be a scaled down version of Aero Glass and will likely only require a 32MB video card.
Hmm, that quote is btw a bit misleading. "Windows Classic" is NOT the XP theme, but the Windows 2000 theme.
They actually hired some company to do the GUI, it wasn't Microsoft. However, of course that doesn't excuse them since they still approved it. :-) It's a mystery how the much slicker "Watercolor" theme (even better than the Windows 2000 one IMHO, since it was even very clear what window had focus) from the beta was scrapped. It could've at least been optional.