> so here we are: it is contributing to such infringement to run a Napster-like network.
Perhaps, but none of the programs the sued operators were running could be described as "Napster-like" (except by the RIAA, but we all know the quality of their logic).
We have: an SMB spider, which reports everything people are sharing on their computers via Windows' file sharing, a frontend to that spider, and Direct Connect, which provides a chatroom with a list of people in the chat, and an interface to download those people's filelists (which are not, it should be noted, stored on the server).
From the RIAA press release: "All of them work much like Napster, centrally indexing and processing search requests for copyrighted works. And they permit users to download any of those works with the single click of a mouse."
Both Windows' file sharing and direct connect allows anyone to share anything, legal or not, copyrighted or not. Napster, on the other hand, was exclusively used to trade MP3s, the majority of which were copyrighted. There are a few non-infringing uses to Napster, independant artists and whatnot. There are substantial non-infringing uses to flatlan & phynd, notably security, in addition to SMB itself, such as sharing drivers, patches, and user's home folders (what's on your network? if you're at a business, I would guess that the majority is not music). Direct Connect also has a significant number of non-infringing uses, as it allows anything to be shared, not just MP3s.
The Gestapo were the Nazi secret police who particpated in the death of nearly 6 million people. To trivialize this by equating it to rounding up of thiefs shows a real warped sense of perspective on your part.
As opposed, of course, to the idea of trivializing the countless murders, rapes, and thefts commited by pirates on the high seas by using the term "piracy" to describe someone breaking copyright law.
You read some of the arguments against XML, and you realize that people just don't "get it".
I'm sorry to "me too", but I've come to the same conclusion. In fact, I'll take it another step: they don't know what they're talking about. The very first page of the XML recommendation spells out why they created XML:
The design goals for XML are:
XML shall be straightforwardly usable over the Internet.
XML shall support a wide variety of applications.
XML shall be compatible with SGML.
It shall be easy to write programs which process XML documents.
The number of optional features in XML is to be kept to the absolute minimum, ideally zero.
XML documents should be human-legible and reasonably clear.
The XML design should be prepared quickly.
The design of XML shall be formal and concise.
XML documents shall be easy to create.
Terseness in XML markup is of minimal importance.
In other words, it's portable, widely useful (pretty much any data storage app can use it), easy for both humans and machines to read and write, and in order to achive all this they're sacrifing size. It says it in the first page!
I guess it's the "when the only tool you have..." problem, but this tool comes with a list of its goals. If a hammer said "The hammer was designed with concentrating lateral kinetic energy into a small area in mind. Exerting or harnessing rotional energy is of no importance.", would people say "hammers suck! they don't work with screws!"?
I was actually thinking about this topic the other day, so here's what I decided.
I would start out by having him (male for the sake of simplicity) play old games... games like Jetpack, Al Lowe's games, text-based games like Tradewars, Zork, Adventure. There are three reasons for this: One, these are games I remembered playing as a kid, and loved. It'd be great to rediscover them through your kid's eyes. Two, they're cheap. Every single console cost $100-$200 when it came out, with its games costing ~$50. These games are all free (and if they're all your kid plays, then he won't even know what he's missing until he gets to school). The third reason, which is the most relevent to this discussion, is that all these games would be very simple to code. If he plays and enjoys text-based adventures, it'd be much easier to code Tommy's Adventure than it would be to code Super Mario World 1024.
So, once he's been enjoying these games for a while, I'd ask if he wanted to make his own. For starters I'd just ask for a description of the game, which I would then code. Three reasons: one, it'll be easier for me to make the game than to teach him to program (when he's still very young); two, he'll learn the value of writing design documents; and three, when he's ready to start programming, he'll have ready access to the source code to games that he's designed.
Of course alongside all of this I'd be giving him constructive toys like Legos and encouraging him to create. Personally, problem solving is easy for me to do, but completely original design is quite a bit more difficult. Learning that would be much better than simply learning to program: it'd give him motivation to program.
It is not likely to be related to the current DDOS [http://average.matrix.net/], which seems to be this MS vuln [http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/370308].
I don't believe that that vulnerability is what's being exploited at the moment. From the CERT article:
Overview
Microsoft SQL Server 2000 contains a vulnerability that allows remote attackers to create a denial-of-service condition between two Microsoft SQL servers.
I'm getting hammered, and I am not a Microsoft SQL server. It's probably not too unreasonable to assume that SQL Server is what's been exploited, but I don't think it's the exploit you mentioned.
> The only games I can think of that don't create > servers are those based on Battle.net (Diablo, > Starcraft, etc.) because those are done through > intermediary servers.
Starcraft and Diablo both create servers. If you're hosting the game, you're running a server. Fire up netstat some time... I know for sure that Diablo II creates a server, I believe on port 4000, and connects to itself the same way other players' clients connect to you. Battle.net is a matchmaking service, no more (with the exception of the Diablo II realms).
Re:Why not? Lots of people google for employees
on
Googling For Dates?
·
· Score: 1
> Of course there is good and bad mixed together > in such search results (possibly embarassing > things I've posted in mailing lists) but I've > found that mixed results is better than no results. > Coed Naked Netting: Pushing all the right buttons.
> Convert all web pages to accessible formats, > convert all books (ever) to audio books, > redesign pedestrian access for the sightless... > > or put money into researching artificial eyes.
One of the common misconceptions is that only the disabled benefit from accessible web pages and audio books and so on. Everybody benefits from these things.
For example, people on a long road trip listen to audio books, all the time. There's a market for audio books, and it consists of more than just the blind.
Standards-compliant web pages benefit not only the blind, but also those using Lynx, and those using their PDAs, and those using their cell phones. Besides that, are you going to argue that malformed HTML is a good thing? If you're going to do something, do it right. The defination for HTML 4.0 (at least, maybe earlier versions as well, I don't know) requires that you have an alt="" tag on all images; that right there improves accessibility a great deal.
Closed captioned TV shows and movies are a blessing for those who can hear perfectly as well as for those who can't hear at all. Personally, I keep closed captioning on all the time. I have excellent hearing, but sometimes I don't hear what the actors say because they're unclear, or someone is talking to me, or there's some other noise, and I'm able to look at the TV and read what was said. I intend to keep closed captioning on if & when I have kids, because I believe it will help them learn to read sooner/faster/better.
I don't know much about designing accessible buildings, but I'm willing to bet that there are similiar general-purpose benefits there, as well. For example, elevators and motorized doors, which are designed or included for wheelchair access, are also good for (say) making it easier to move carts around. It's much easier to wheel the cart containing a few thousand dollar's worth of equipment onto an elevator than it is to get the manpower required to carry it all up and down stairs.
> There is a real problem with spending all of > your time accomodating a problem rather than > fixing it.
That's true, but there's a problem with that statement: it's not the same money. You can't just reallocate all or even most of the money from improving accessibility to researching artificial eyes. They're two different industries, with their own markets (like with the audio books). Different people are going to put their money into each.
on-line music shouldn't be more than $0.10 / music.
By USA law, the songwriter gets eight cents per track for any copy of a sound recording. In your pricing scheme, this means the songwriter would get eighty percent, leaving little to nothing for the performers and those who provide the service.
Great, that means that only original music will get out, music written by the band or singer themselves, and puppets like certain boy bands/female singers we've all heard of won't be profitable anymore. There'll be fewer covers, to be sure, but overall I think that's a fair tradeoff for new music. So what's the problem again?
> There's still DSL, there's still satellite, there's still (ick) dialup...
I have to point out just how lame the 5GB/month cap is. I'm on dial-up. Going at exactly 4 kilobytes per second, ignoring time taken to reconnect, I can get nearly twice the cap per month. And it's a slow connection if I'm getting only 4K/s, I usually get closer to 4.5K/s, which adds another gig per month:
Start with 4.5(K/s), and that adds up to 11.12 GB/month. On dial-up. How does someone using 2K/s (about what is needed to meet the cap) for a month qualify as a bandwidth hog when people on dial-up, who by defination can't be bandwidth hogs (right? they're on dial-up!), can double how much they download?
> And the Descent series is one of the best of all time.
Yes it is, and that's why the wonderful people at the d1x and d2x projects have worked so hard to make it portable. It's now running on the Win32, Linux, and Mac (and maybe Linux-PPC, dunno) platforms. Check it out... d1x: http://d1x.warpcore.org/ d2x: http://www.icculus.org/d2x/
You'll want to get the CVS versions of both, as there hasn't been a release in some time now. You can read the mailing list at http://ml.warpcore.org/descent-source/
> Yes, these problems do exist when you're forced to trust local users.
Did you read the article? It's not only local users, it's all users. If you can get to the GUI, see a window that was RUNAS LocalSystem, and run a program, boom, you're more super than the superuser himself (the administrator). This applies to Terminal Services, Citrix, Remote Desktop, all of it. NOT just those who are actually at the computer.
> Simple fix: require each user to wear a straightjacket... Yeah, because that makes sense in an environment where the users need to be able to use the workstations...
But, as others have pointed out (Otis_INF and cperciva, that I've seen so far), you shouldn't be able to see windows that were RUNAS LocalSystem... that's the fault of the application developers (Network Associates in this case), and not so much Microsoft's fault.
> The arcade machines are vastly superior to the home consoles, in basically all ways.
If you have a (US) PlayStation, you can play both US mixes and the Disney mix. If you have a modded or Japanese PlayStation, you can play all 7 or so (+ Disney? not sure how many there are altogether) different mixes.
We did this at my high school... maybe 10 of us formed the "computer club", and in exchange for setting up the network (it was a brand new school, and the setup was slightly behind schedule, so we moved the computers around, hooked 'em up, Ghosted 'em, and so on) we got to use one of the labs after school to play games. Only rule was "no FPS".
We worked hard to make a convincing presentation to show the principal...
We came up with more (and different ideas, which unfortantely I don't remember), but you get the idea. ...and besides all that, we were helping to test the network... very important job, that.
Re:Slashdot: News for thieves. Like ethics matter.
on
What Free Cable?
·
· Score: 2
The double standards on Slashdot are amazing.... To people in the software industry who are stealing cable: don't get mad if you find out that the cable guy is pirating the software that your company sells.
Don't be ridiculous. This is like producing one CD for all of your products, shipping it off whenever one of your customers buys an application you made, and not even saying "You're not supposed to use any of the others, just the one you bought". Anyone who did that would (rightly, IMO) be "stolen" or "pirated" from, 'cause the customers would be just say "ooh, freebies" and use it all. Heck, if you read the article, you'd see that even the techs installing the hookup said "yeah, you'll get the premium channels for a while".
Whatever else this is, it has nothing to do with the morality of the people who asked and paid for only their broadband connection.
>...I really hope we don't start seeing a bunch of Warcraft/C&C/Starcraft clones...
The purpose of making Freecraft (note the name? it wants to be one of the *crafts) was to clone Warcraft 2, then later C&C and Starcraft and AOE and so on. The people behind it are good programmers, and so are lazy (?). Instead of writing a seperate engine for each game, they wrote one engine that could power all the games. It can be used for other games, ones people make up on their own, but its primary purpose is to clone the major RTS games.
Personally, I'd much rather play a free version of C&C, and be able to play with anyone, on any platform, regardless of whether they own the original game, in high-res goodness, instead of fighting Windows or WINE to show the modem I have on IRQ 6, COM 7 to an old DOS game who has (well, had) to support it directly.
(sorry 'bout the rant... I'm really looking forward to the C&C clone, as you may've picked up)
One of Hercules' tasks was to kill the 7-headed Hydra. For each head that was cut off, two more would grow in its place.
Hercules' solution was to use a torch to cauterize the wound. I don't see the RIAA finding anything like that...
An alternate solution that was proposed (I think in the comic strip Sluggy Freelance... I'm not sure) was to keep cutting the heads off until you were left with hundreds or even thousands of heads attached to one body, which then would be unable to move for having so many heads... this may be what the RIAA is going for: splinter the p2p community so many times, and into so many different factions, that nobody can share anything, because everybody is using a different program to share their stuff.
What is the function of the Gem in the Diablo II Battle.net Chat room?
When it has been clicked once, it activates -- causing a blue glow to appear through the Gem. When it is clicked again, it deactivates and the glow disappears. Rarely a perfect gem activation will occur instead of the usual Gem activation.
Basically, it does exactally what it does: you click it, it turns on, you click it again, it turns off. It has no effect on anything else, anywhere, in the game... it's just for fun. For a long while, no Blizzard employee was allowed to say anything about the gem, under pain of loss of their job. They said what it did around the time the expansion pack, Lord of Destruction, came out, IIRC. Just some fun trivia for you....
The source code for Descent 1 and for Descent 2 has also been released, and you can find them at http://www.freespace-2.com/ddn/sources/freespace2/ , along with information about the engine and a mailing list.
I'm not entirely sure, but since Parallax developed Descent 1 & 2 for Interplay, and Volition developed the Freespace games for Interplay, I think that Interplay would be the one to get credit, at the very least for convincing the other two to release the source. Interplay is earning major karma points...
Slashdot Mirror
> so here we are: it is contributing to such infringement to run a Napster-like network.
Perhaps, but none of the programs the sued operators were running could be described as "Napster-like" (except by the RIAA, but we all know the quality of their logic).
We have: an SMB spider, which reports everything people are sharing on their computers via Windows' file sharing, a frontend to that spider, and Direct Connect, which provides a chatroom with a list of people in the chat, and an interface to download those people's filelists (which are not, it should be noted, stored on the server).
From the RIAA press release: "All of them work much like Napster, centrally indexing and processing search requests for copyrighted works. And they permit users to download any of those works with the single click of a mouse."
Both Windows' file sharing and direct connect allows anyone to share anything, legal or not, copyrighted or not. Napster, on the other hand, was exclusively used to trade MP3s, the majority of which were copyrighted. There are a few non-infringing uses to Napster, independant artists and whatnot. There are substantial non-infringing uses to flatlan & phynd, notably security, in addition to SMB itself, such as sharing drivers, patches, and user's home folders (what's on your network? if you're at a business, I would guess that the majority is not music). Direct Connect also has a significant number of non-infringing uses, as it allows anything to be shared, not just MP3s.
As opposed, of course, to the idea of trivializing the countless murders, rapes, and thefts commited by pirates on the high seas by using the term "piracy" to describe someone breaking copyright law.
I'm sorry to "me too", but I've come to the same conclusion. In fact, I'll take it another step: they don't know what they're talking about. The very first page of the XML recommendation spells out why they created XML:
In other words, it's portable, widely useful (pretty much any data storage app can use it), easy for both humans and machines to read and write, and in order to achive all this they're sacrifing size. It says it in the first page!
I guess it's the "when the only tool you have..." problem, but this tool comes with a list of its goals. If a hammer said "The hammer was designed with concentrating lateral kinetic energy into a small area in mind. Exerting or harnessing rotional energy is of no importance.", would people say "hammers suck! they don't work with screws!"?
sigh...
I was actually thinking about this topic the other day, so here's what I decided.
I would start out by having him (male for the sake of simplicity) play old games... games like Jetpack, Al Lowe's games, text-based games like Tradewars, Zork, Adventure. There are three reasons for this: One, these are games I remembered playing as a kid, and loved. It'd be great to rediscover them through your kid's eyes. Two, they're cheap. Every single console cost $100-$200 when it came out, with its games costing ~$50. These games are all free (and if they're all your kid plays, then he won't even know what he's missing until he gets to school). The third reason, which is the most relevent to this discussion, is that all these games would be very simple to code. If he plays and enjoys text-based adventures, it'd be much easier to code Tommy's Adventure than it would be to code Super Mario World 1024.
So, once he's been enjoying these games for a while, I'd ask if he wanted to make his own. For starters I'd just ask for a description of the game, which I would then code. Three reasons: one, it'll be easier for me to make the game than to teach him to program (when he's still very young); two, he'll learn the value of writing design documents; and three, when he's ready to start programming, he'll have ready access to the source code to games that he's designed.
Of course alongside all of this I'd be giving him constructive toys like Legos and encouraging him to create. Personally, problem solving is easy for me to do, but completely original design is quite a bit more difficult. Learning that would be much better than simply learning to program: it'd give him motivation to program.
I don't believe that that vulnerability is what's being exploited at the moment. From the CERT article:
I'm getting hammered, and I am not a Microsoft SQL server. It's probably not too unreasonable to assume that SQL Server is what's been exploited, but I don't think it's the exploit you mentioned.
> I found the strongest magnet I could (from an old speaker, I believe) ...
> absolutely zero corruption of the data.
Don't speakers use electromagnets?
> The only games I can think of that don't create
> servers are those based on Battle.net (Diablo,
> Starcraft, etc.) because those are done through
> intermediary servers.
Starcraft and Diablo both create servers. If you're hosting the game, you're running a server. Fire up netstat some time... I know for sure that Diablo II creates a server, I believe on port 4000, and connects to itself the same way other players' clients connect to you. Battle.net is a matchmaking service, no more (with the exception of the Diablo II realms).
> Of course there is good and bad mixed together
> in such search results (possibly embarassing
> things I've posted in mailing lists) but I've
> found that mixed results is better than no results.
> Coed Naked Netting: Pushing all the right buttons.
How's the sig working out for you?
> Convert all web pages to accessible formats,
> convert all books (ever) to audio books,
> redesign pedestrian access for the sightless...
>
> or put money into researching artificial eyes.
One of the common misconceptions is that only the disabled benefit from accessible web pages and audio books and so on. Everybody benefits from these things.
For example, people on a long road trip listen to audio books, all the time. There's a market for audio books, and it consists of more than just the blind.
Standards-compliant web pages benefit not only the blind, but also those using Lynx, and those using their PDAs, and those using their cell phones. Besides that, are you going to argue that malformed HTML is a good thing? If you're going to do something, do it right. The defination for HTML 4.0 (at least, maybe earlier versions as well, I don't know) requires that you have an alt="" tag on all images; that right there improves accessibility a great deal.
Closed captioned TV shows and movies are a blessing for those who can hear perfectly as well as for those who can't hear at all. Personally, I keep closed captioning on all the time. I have excellent hearing, but sometimes I don't hear what the actors say because they're unclear, or someone is talking to me, or there's some other noise, and I'm able to look at the TV and read what was said. I intend to keep closed captioning on if & when I have kids, because I believe it will help them learn to read sooner/faster/better.
I don't know much about designing accessible buildings, but I'm willing to bet that there are similiar general-purpose benefits there, as well. For example, elevators and motorized doors, which are designed or included for wheelchair access, are also good for (say) making it easier to move carts around. It's much easier to wheel the cart containing a few thousand dollar's worth of equipment onto an elevator than it is to get the manpower required to carry it all up and down stairs.
> There is a real problem with spending all of
> your time accomodating a problem rather than
> fixing it.
That's true, but there's a problem with that statement: it's not the same money. You can't just reallocate all or even most of the money from improving accessibility to researching artificial eyes. They're two different industries, with their own markets (like with the audio books). Different people are going to put their money into each.
Great, that means that only original music will get out, music written by the band or singer themselves, and puppets like certain boy bands/female singers we've all heard of won't be profitable anymore. There'll be fewer covers, to be sure, but overall I think that's a fair tradeoff for new music. So what's the problem again?
> There's still DSL, there's still satellite, there's still (ick) dialup...
I have to point out just how lame the 5GB/month cap is. I'm on dial-up. Going at exactly 4 kilobytes per second, ignoring time taken to reconnect, I can get nearly twice the cap per month. And it's a slow connection if I'm getting only 4K/s, I usually get closer to 4.5K/s, which adds another gig per month:
4(K/s) * 60(seconds/minute) / 1024(kilobytes/megabytes) * 60(minutes/hour) * 24(hours/day) * 30(days/month) = 10125 MB/month = 9.89 GB/month
Start with 4.5(K/s), and that adds up to 11.12 GB/month. On dial-up. How does someone using 2K/s (about what is needed to meet the cap) for a month qualify as a bandwidth hog when people on dial-up, who by defination can't be bandwidth hogs (right? they're on dial-up!), can double how much they download?
> And the Descent series is one of the best of all time.
Yes it is, and that's why the wonderful people at the d1x and d2x projects have worked so hard to make it portable. It's now running on the Win32, Linux, and Mac (and maybe Linux-PPC, dunno) platforms. Check it out...
d1x: http://d1x.warpcore.org/
d2x: http://www.icculus.org/d2x/
You'll want to get the CVS versions of both, as there hasn't been a release in some time now. You can read the mailing list at
http://ml.warpcore.org/descent-source/
Enjoy the goodness that is native Descent...
> Yes, these problems do exist when you're forced to trust local users.
Did you read the article? It's not only local users, it's all users. If you can get to the GUI, see a window that was RUNAS LocalSystem, and run a program, boom, you're more super than the superuser himself (the administrator). This applies to Terminal Services, Citrix, Remote Desktop, all of it. NOT just those who are actually at the computer.
> Simple fix: require each user to wear a straightjacket...
Yeah, because that makes sense in an environment where the users need to be able to use the workstations...
But, as others have pointed out (Otis_INF and cperciva, that I've seen so far), you shouldn't be able to see windows that were RUNAS LocalSystem... that's the fault of the application developers (Network Associates in this case), and not so much Microsoft's fault.
-Jason-
> "I've been trying so hard not to treat women like objects that I've ended up treating objects like women."
Like the tambourine?
> Besides, some of us geeks actually *gasp* like girls?
Pretty sure gasping like a girl isn't going to get you many (girls, that is).
Great, now where's the toaster?
>> Do you really want to copy all 8 GB of full-motion-video cut scenes of a DVD-ROM game to your hard disk?
> Well sure. What else am I going to do with a quarter-terabyte of hard drive space? I don't have that much porn.
Wait, so what's the DVD-ROM game you're copying?
> The arcade machines are vastly superior to the home consoles, in basically all ways.
If you have a (US) PlayStation, you can play both US mixes and the Disney mix. If you have a modded or Japanese PlayStation, you can play all 7 or so (+ Disney? not sure how many there are altogether) different mixes.
We worked hard to make a convincing presentation to show the principal...
RTS games teach economics:
We came up with more (and different ideas, which unfortantely I don't remember), but you get the idea.
...and besides all that, we were helping to test the network... very important job, that.
Don't be ridiculous. This is like producing one CD for all of your products, shipping it off whenever one of your customers buys an application you made, and not even saying "You're not supposed to use any of the others, just the one you bought". Anyone who did that would (rightly, IMO) be "stolen" or "pirated" from, 'cause the customers would be just say "ooh, freebies" and use it all. Heck, if you read the article, you'd see that even the techs installing the hookup said "yeah, you'll get the premium channels for a while".
Whatever else this is, it has nothing to do with the morality of the people who asked and paid for only their broadband connection.
> ...I really hope we don't start seeing a bunch of Warcraft/C&C/Starcraft clones...
The purpose of making Freecraft (note the name? it wants to be one of the *crafts) was to clone Warcraft 2, then later C&C and Starcraft and AOE and so on. The people behind it are good programmers, and so are lazy (?). Instead of writing a seperate engine for each game, they wrote one engine that could power all the games. It can be used for other games, ones people make up on their own, but its primary purpose is to clone the major RTS games.
Personally, I'd much rather play a free version of C&C, and be able to play with anyone, on any platform, regardless of whether they own the original game, in high-res goodness, instead of fighting Windows or WINE to show the modem I have on IRQ 6, COM 7 to an old DOS game who has (well, had) to support it directly.
(sorry 'bout the rant... I'm really looking forward to the C&C clone, as you may've picked up)
One of Hercules' tasks was to kill the 7-headed Hydra. For each head that was cut off, two more would grow in its place.
Hercules' solution was to use a torch to cauterize the wound. I don't see the RIAA finding anything like that...
An alternate solution that was proposed (I think in the comic strip Sluggy Freelance... I'm not sure) was to keep cutting the heads off until you were left with hundreds or even thousands of heads attached to one body, which then would be unable to move for having so many heads... this may be what the RIAA is going for: splinter the p2p community so many times, and into so many different factions, that nobody can share anything, because everybody is using a different program to share their stuff.
Basically, it does exactally what it does: you click it, it turns on, you click it again, it turns off. It has no effect on anything else, anywhere, in the game... it's just for fun. For a long while, no Blizzard employee was allowed to say anything about the gem, under pain of loss of their job. They said what it did around the time the expansion pack, Lord of Destruction, came out, IIRC. Just some fun trivia for you....
Well, first off, there's more information at http://www.freespace-2.com/ddn/sources/freespace2/ , along with a rar version that's about 2.7 meg.
/ , along with information about the engine and a mailing list.
The source code for Descent 1 and for Descent 2 has also been released, and you can find them at http://www.freespace-2.com/ddn/sources/freespace2
I'm not entirely sure, but since Parallax developed Descent 1 & 2 for Interplay, and Volition developed the Freespace games for Interplay, I think that Interplay would be the one to get credit, at the very least for convincing the other two to release the source. Interplay is earning major karma points...
-Jason-
> No, cause it just sits there logging the URL's you go to, and serving ads in games like Drug Wars etc...
Well, that's easy to fix. Play Drug Wars on your graphing calculator... no more ads.