And with the likes of PeerGuardian, et. al., it only gets harder for the corporations to put the virtual, and legal, smackdown on file sharing.
OK, can someone once and for all tell me how PG makes it more difficult for corporations to track down file sharers? All the have to do is use a public network, right? I just don't get it. Do some think they'll sit behind a special kind of RIAA network to scan people and have totally missed the news of PG mentioned everywhere?
Have we got any data on blocked RIAA connections?
People mentioning PG is always talking about the software like it efficiently blocks the organizations you've picked.:-S
Re:Obfuscated Javascript
on
Google Suggest
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I don't think they obfuscated it to obfuscate it, but to save bandwidth with a minimum of cost in CPU time. Take 1 byte and multiply that with however many visitors per second they're getting;-)
Nice work with a code beautifier, but you still need the variable and function names unless you want to spend a whole lot of time figuring out how everything is related.
I tried the Swedish -> English dictionary and used the "translate prepared words" feature. It suggests words to add missing translations for, however basically all it suggested were other forms of translated words. For example, it wished to have a translation for the swedish "typer" which in english is "types". However, "typ" which in english is "type" is already translated. That feature gets pretty useless since it gets filled with special *forms* of various words when the base form exists.
I still don't believe that, only that they're often more secure. But, sure, you may get that impression if OSS is several times immune to exploits that work on IE... But I have never, ever, read an article that even tries to say what you do.
How much profit do you think MS is losing by not translating to Swahili? I'm guessing you don't see a Swahili version because they wouldn't get enough profit to support it.
Yup, and this is a nice thing with open source software, as software or translations like these may be developed even if there's not much of a profit to be made, since it's not a sole company that have to do the job.
Magnet links is an open standard (specification draft) and an alternative to primarly eDonkey2000, eMule, and Overnet hashes that are based on a precursor to the MD5 algorithm, and I doubt very safe anymore?
I personally think any clients that don't support magnet links should really start consider adopting those -- DC++, most Gnutella clients, and Shareaza already do.
That said, I doubt people would click on more ads if Firefox wouldn't exist. I mean, you can choose to not click on ads in IE too.:-)
I can imagine Firefox popup blocker helping here, but I doubt it makes less people click on banner ads. Those people probably had made the decision not to before they even switched to Firefox. I can't really see how a software choice changes one's behavior like that.
... since you don't automatically become more aware of banner ads and stop clicking on them just because you switch browser. It's the same user behind the wheels. Maybe it has more to do with people getting more aware of them in general as they get more used to browsing the World Wide Ad Web.
It hurts popup ads of course, though, since Firefox blocks them, but so does IE too nowadays.
I think that was basically an invitation to get a horde of Slashdot stalkers looking you up by hacking the slashdot.org database and getting your IP address, etc.:-)
Software winner: Symantec Brightmail, for ease of installation, configuration and administration as well as an excellent user interface and detailed "live" graphical reporting it would be hard to surpass these features.
Managed Service winner: Network Box, if security is a concern then Network Box has the bases covered, if availability and redundancy are your preferred choice then a trial of either MailGuard or MessageLabs may be on the cards.
Appliance winner: IronPort, strong security, redundancy and recently developed ease of installation with the new GUI make this appliance the choice in this review. For those with a tighter budget then perhaps one of the McAfee WebShield appliances may be considered and are still very worthy contenders.
It heard about this kind of experiments being successfully done years ago. And then it was also about simple games, like moving a pad of some kind. Maybe this time, news agencies will remember they reported about it though, although I don't expect them to. In a few years, we'll probably see "significant advancements" when they play Tetris directly via a brain even if that's just three commands, rotate, left, right.:-P
Right there is the very easy way of saying that it might not be related to human activities. To give research like this more substance, scientists need to first say it's not nature's fault before saying it's the humans fault.
On the other hand, Ogg is more efficient than mp3 on lower bitrates (without joint tricks) so it should also be able to achieve reasonably small file sizes, especially if you compare the quality to a "joint 5.1" mp3.
It may be all free and good now, but how long before someone pays the right price to access/control what people see.
We'll see, no indications so far at least.
My experience is that Google search seems to be turning up more noise now than before. Two years ago I could with certainty do a search and get the page I wanted. Now it seems I must scroll through pages of commercial sites and the such to get to the meaty part of the Internet...those little novelty sites that people put up themselves.
Google PageRank has always put the most popular sites first (which are often, but not always, commercial) and the "little novelty sites" after. It depends a lot on how many who links to the page, and this is how it has always worked. However, I have noticed that more sites today try to fool the PageRank algorithm.
Hmm, bad news title?
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
This is more like an AIDS vaccine.
It doesn't stop HIV infections, but it prevents them into evolving into full-blown AIDS and reduces the risk of infection. Which sounds pretty good too, of course.:-) However, I'm not sure it removes the symptoms from HIV.
I see your gripe and raise you a "continously adding content, bugfixing, gm staff and providing 80+ servers isn't free you know"
However, it doesn't cost $15 / month from hundreds of thousands of gamers. Keep in mind that Diablo II and Starcraft and Warcraft III combined run on free servers along with free patches over the time of several years. And if I'm not totally wrong, these games have each had their major content patches and expansions.
Most of it is of course because they want to make a greater profit than from, say, Warcraft III or earlier games. It's understandable but I don't like that they keep trying to hide that fact.
I don't live in the USA, and from your question I got a bad feeling, thinking -- what, don't say it usually works like that over there?? Thankfully it doesn't seem so from all the replies.:-)
I also have a CS degree and it didn't matter for me where I got it. It seems to me they were being more interested in how I'd like the job and so on, and trying to see that if I would suit the company well. I think there are much more severe problems if the chemistry don't work between you and your job, being hard to work with, not prepared for the job and what it will take from you, being overy lazy, and so on, since this can be much harder to fix. A company might also be more willing to train a person in something if the guy is full of energy and really interested in the job than a more laid back guy, in case there would be differences in educations.
Slashdot Mirror
And with the likes of PeerGuardian, et. al., it only gets harder for the corporations to put the virtual, and legal, smackdown on file sharing.
:-S
OK, can someone once and for all tell me how PG makes it more difficult for corporations to track down file sharers? All the have to do is use a public network, right? I just don't get it. Do some think they'll sit behind a special kind of RIAA network to scan people and have totally missed the news of PG mentioned everywhere?
Have we got any data on blocked RIAA connections?
People mentioning PG is always talking about the software like it efficiently blocks the organizations you've picked.
I don't think they obfuscated it to obfuscate it, but to save bandwidth with a minimum of cost in CPU time. Take 1 byte and multiply that with however many visitors per second they're getting ;-)
Nice work with a code beautifier, but you still need the variable and function names unless you want to spend a whole lot of time figuring out how everything is related.
Where's the anti-window lobby when you need it?
:-P
As opposed to ways to make energy, there isn't really a many alternatives to windows, are there?
Maybe that's why there's no anti-window lobby.
You seem to be burned out from too much Slashdot browsing. :-)
I suggest you take a break and come back later.
I tried the Swedish -> English dictionary and used the "translate prepared words" feature. It suggests words to add missing translations for, however basically all it suggested were other forms of translated words. For example, it wished to have a translation for the swedish "typer" which in english is "types". However, "typ" which in english is "type" is already translated. That feature gets pretty useless since it gets filled with special *forms* of various words when the base form exists.
I still don't believe that, only that they're often more secure. But, sure, you may get that impression if OSS is several times immune to exploits that work on IE... But I have never, ever, read an article that even tries to say what you do.
How much profit do you think MS is losing by not translating to Swahili? I'm guessing you don't see a Swahili version because they wouldn't get enough profit to support it.
Yup, and this is a nice thing with open source software, as software or translations like these may be developed even if there's not much of a profit to be made, since it's not a sole company that have to do the job.
I personally think any clients that don't support magnet links should really start consider adopting those -- DC++, most Gnutella clients, and Shareaza already do.
A magnet link can look like something like this:
magnet:?xt=urn:sha1:YNCKHTQCWBTRNJIV4WNAE52SJUQCZ
Hmm, what specific features are you looking for in your mail client, exactly?
That said, I doubt people would click on more ads if Firefox wouldn't exist. :-)
I mean, you can choose to not click on ads in IE too.
I can imagine Firefox popup blocker helping here, but I doubt it makes less people click on banner ads. Those people probably had made the decision not to before they even switched to Firefox. I can't really see how a software choice changes one's behavior like that.
... since you don't automatically become more aware of banner ads and stop clicking on them just because you switch browser. It's the same user behind the wheels. Maybe it has more to do with people getting more aware of them in general as they get more used to browsing the World Wide Ad Web.
It hurts popup ads of course, though, since Firefox blocks them, but so does IE too nowadays.
I think that was basically an invitation to get a horde of Slashdot stalkers looking you up by hacking the slashdot.org database and getting your IP address, etc. :-)
Some people just go to the last page anyway :-)
Software winner: Symantec Brightmail, for ease of installation, configuration and administration as well as an excellent user interface and detailed "live" graphical reporting it would be hard to surpass these features.
Managed Service winner: Network Box, if security is a concern then Network Box has the bases covered, if availability and redundancy are your preferred choice then a trial of either MailGuard or MessageLabs may be on the cards.
Appliance winner: IronPort, strong security, redundancy and recently developed ease of installation with the new GUI make this appliance the choice in this review. For those with a tighter budget then perhaps one of the McAfee WebShield appliances may be considered and are still very worthy contenders.
Every single post ever made to usenet has already been harvested by spammers, so what's the issue with making them public?
New posts in their new proprietary Google Groups will also get harvested.
It heard about this kind of experiments being successfully done years ago. And then it was also about simple games, like moving a pad of some kind. Maybe this time, news agencies will remember they reported about it though, although I don't expect them to. In a few years, we'll probably see "significant advancements" when they play Tetris directly via a brain even if that's just three commands, rotate, left, right. :-P
Nowhere does it link to info about the research doing this.
Nowhere do can you read why they think a breakthrough might be so close...
Not funny IMHO, more like insightful.
Right there is the very easy way of saying that it might not be related to human activities. To give research like this more substance, scientists need to first say it's not nature's fault before saying it's the humans fault.
No.
:-)
Since dark basements give no tan that can complain.
Hey, I'm a geek, what did you think I'd write.
On the other hand, Ogg is more efficient than mp3 on lower bitrates (without joint tricks) so it should also be able to achieve reasonably small file sizes, especially if you compare the quality to a "joint 5.1" mp3.
from "Don't be evil"?
IMHO, only if they don't listen to their users.
I assume all people complaining have been in contact with them already, right?
It may be all free and good now, but how long before someone pays the right price to access/control what people see.
We'll see, no indications so far at least.
My experience is that Google search seems to be turning up more noise now than before. Two years ago I could with certainty do a search and get the page I wanted. Now it seems I must scroll through pages of commercial sites and the such to get to the meaty part of the Internet...those little novelty sites that people put up themselves.
Google PageRank has always put the most popular sites first (which are often, but not always, commercial) and the "little novelty sites" after. It depends a lot on how many who links to the page, and this is how it has always worked. However, I have noticed that more sites today try to fool the PageRank algorithm.
This is more like an AIDS vaccine.
:-) However, I'm not sure it removes the symptoms from HIV.
It doesn't stop HIV infections, but it prevents them into evolving into full-blown AIDS and reduces the risk of infection. Which sounds pretty good too, of course.
I see your gripe and raise you a "continously adding content, bugfixing, gm staff and providing 80+ servers isn't free you know"
However, it doesn't cost $15 / month from hundreds of thousands of gamers. Keep in mind that Diablo II and Starcraft and Warcraft III combined run on free servers along with free patches over the time of several years. And if I'm not totally wrong, these games have each had their major content patches and expansions.
Most of it is of course because they want to make a greater profit than from, say, Warcraft III or earlier games. It's understandable but I don't like that they keep trying to hide that fact.
I don't live in the USA, and from your question I got a bad feeling, thinking -- what, don't say it usually works like that over there?? :-)
Thankfully it doesn't seem so from all the replies.
I also have a CS degree and it didn't matter for me where I got it. It seems to me they were being more interested in how I'd like the job and so on, and trying to see that if I would suit the company well. I think there are much more severe problems if the chemistry don't work between you and your job, being hard to work with, not prepared for the job and what it will take from you, being overy lazy, and so on, since this can be much harder to fix. A company might also be more willing to train a person in something if the guy is full of energy and really interested in the job than a more laid back guy, in case there would be differences in educations.