Firefox is my primary browser, but I do have Opera installed and keep it updated. One annoying bug that's been around for a while is that middle-clicking on a link does not set the Referrer header. This causes a number of *ahem* "image-hosting" websites to throw their hotlink prevention message at you.
BoA is not a public utility. When I ran a business I declined to deal with certain people because they were a huge pain in the ass. Can't BoA do the same????
WikiLeaks is not a problem client for BoA, because BoA does not and likely has not ever dealt with WikiLeaks directly. They're denying transactions to third-party organizations that deal with WikiLeaks directly.
Just about the only way this could be a reasonable decision is if WikiLeaks were officially declared a terrorist organization. As it stands now, with Assange claiming that WikiLeaks has a BoA hard drive and has dirt on an major U.S. bank, this seems to be "personal".
Whether Anonymous is right or wrong is for you to decide. But under either case, you don't mess with them.
What a utterly stupid statement. That's justification for doing nothing about bad behavior by any individual or organization simply because they engage in bad behavior, and those who engage in bad behavior are not to be messed with.
Maybe they should sell pre-release 'beta' copies and let players test it.
Why would they do that when they can call it a final release, put it on store shelves, have even more people "testing" the game, and rake in even more money while doing so?
it just seems kind of insane to me that people want to share stuff in public on an open medium, and then act shocked and dismayed that someone MIGHT ACTUALLY SEE IT. its some sort of human pscyhological blind spot: for some unknown reason, people trust the web with really personal details, when the web is about the exact opposite of the kind of place you want to put those personal details.
It is a human nature thing, but it really isn't specific to the web. We're all aware of the woman who wears revealing clothes out in public and gets offended when they attract the attention of "less than desirable" men. It's the same thing on the Internet.
Ever since google started messing up their front page by, you know, adding stuff, I started using the firefox search box. This had the side effect of diversifying the search tools I use, and about:blank really is the best homepage.
Now call me a conservative whiny techie, but never having to see obnoxious random "experiments", and logo doodles ever again is a huge step forward.
Yikes. You know that the default Firefox homepage isn't www.google.com, right? It doesn't have those "obnoxious random 'experiments', and logo doodles".
So, yeah..."conservative whiny techie" might be the better label of multiple labels that pop into one's head after reading that comment of yours.
Where are the Assanges who would be willing to take on Saudi Arabia with their set-in-law prejudice of anyone who does follow the book?
You're aware that Assange doesn't go in and steal these secret documents himself, are you not? Wikileaks generally relies on people "on the inside" to pass along the documents they release. If there's no one in a particular organization with access to incriminating documents willing to release those documents, there's really nothing Assange or Wikileaks can do about it.
If Google is listing its own products above those of their competitors, they're doing a pretty shitty job. Doing a google search for "search engine" gets me a wiki, an aggregator site, Altavista, Bing and then Google;-)
Bing came up as a sponsored link on my results. Google itself didn't even appear until page 4.
Therefore, what I type into my computer that they are not allowed to read in your country is not for you to stop me from posting, nor for you to stop the server from serving. It is for you to tell your subjects not to read, if you choose to have laws that make certain forms of speech illegal in your country.
Umm... How can someone know they "shouldn't" read what you've written without reading it first?
If this was targeted character assassination that's mission accomplished.
I'm not so sure about this. Mere hours after being filed, the warrant was publicly dropped. That's not what you do if you're attempting a character assassination. You need to allow the story to be soaked up by the masses, and most of them probably wouldn't have heard about this until Monday.
Just about every major news outlet has updated their story, too, to announce the dropping of charges. Hell, CNN currently links to Is Assange the target of a U.S. smear campaign? right from their front page.
Fox News appears to be a little reluctant, however. They have a link on their front page titled "Swedish Authorities Drop Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks Founder On Rape Accusation", but it takes you to their original story which is still titled "Swedish Authorities Issue Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks Founder After Rape Accusation".
They're not suing "no one in particular". They are suing individuals who are not yet identified for an action that has not yet occurred, to enable law enforcement to prevent that action from occurring.
If I have temporary research that requires dozens of tabs, it seems a waste of time to manually arrange them into a tab group that you're going close anyway. A few clicks? You can already create a new "tab group" with a quick Ctrl+N. Drag-n-drop? You can already drag tabs between Firefox windows and even drag a tab off and create a new window.
Hell, you can even have Firefox open your previously open windows and tabs when you start it up.
The demo was flashy, but the justifications for Tab Candy aren't that compelling. We already have solutions for the problems that Tab Candy supposedly solves. Most of them are easier, too.
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it [...]
Wait, what? Bookmarks lack a certain amount of privacy which makes you uncomfortable using them, but you're OK with a feature that is nothing more than a bookmark-as-a-tab? I can't follow this logic...
[...] Sealing it off until they could bring out the production crews who would place pipelines to the feeder system (they have to collect it somehow and just spilling it into the ocean appears to have a bunch of problems associated with it) and the various bits and pieces that make up a production well.
I don't know if it's necessary, but to clarify: Deepwater Horizon is a drilling rig, not a production rig. Once the well was plugged, the rig would have moved on to another drilling location. A separate, production rig would have then been brought out to that location to reopen the well and begin collection.
And I work in residential construction. I have apprenticed and studied for years to gain the skills I employ but I don't get to collect a royalty check every time someone uses a door I installed...
But how many doors do you install per day, on average?
I support the artists I listen to by buying branded merchandise and by paying to see them perform. I don't pay them for the recordings I keep on my mp3 player.
Somehow I don't think you'd be OK with books and CDs costing a few hundred to a few thousands dollars to compensate for the time spent on creating them...
Blizzard should simply tie forum names to accounts in an opaque manner. You can only create a forum name if you have an account, and you can only create one per account and only if you have a game key activated on that account. The forum name can't be the same as the account username (to prevent disclosure) [...]
Uhh... This is almost exactly how it works right now. You log in with your Battle.Net account and select one of your WoW characters as your forum persona. My WoW account is currently inactive, so, while I can technically log in to the WoW forums with my Battle.Net account, I can't actually post.
True enough, but this exposes a rather significant (in my opinion) disconnect between the community and whoever came up with and approved this idea. The decision-makers don't understand their community.
If they don't correct that problem of theirs, they will have many more public relations snafus like this.
Slashdot Mirror
Firefox is my primary browser, but I do have Opera installed and keep it updated. One annoying bug that's been around for a while is that middle-clicking on a link does not set the Referrer header. This causes a number of *ahem* "image-hosting" websites to throw their hotlink prevention message at you.
BoA is not a public utility. When I ran a business I declined to deal with certain people because they were a huge pain in the ass. Can't BoA do the same????
WikiLeaks is not a problem client for BoA, because BoA does not and likely has not ever dealt with WikiLeaks directly. They're denying transactions to third-party organizations that deal with WikiLeaks directly.
Just about the only way this could be a reasonable decision is if WikiLeaks were officially declared a terrorist organization. As it stands now, with Assange claiming that WikiLeaks has a BoA hard drive and has dirt on an major U.S. bank, this seems to be "personal".
This is the same guy who has insinuated that George W. Bush is pals with Osama Bin Laden
[...] The notion that Bush knows nothing about him is just plain fishy.
Wait, what? So simply knowing about a person makes them your "pal"?
I support WIkileaks for the most part, but...
The DDoS attacks are giving them a business reason NOT to drop Wikileaks.
Yeah... just like some thugs smashing up your store is a business reason NOT to refuse paying protection money.
Whether Anonymous is right or wrong is for you to decide. But under either case, you don't mess with them.
What a utterly stupid statement. That's justification for doing nothing about bad behavior by any individual or organization simply because they engage in bad behavior, and those who engage in bad behavior are not to be messed with.
I wonder if that UN Ambassador feels silly about his comment that it was probably a display of power aimed at asian nations...
To be fair, he made it very clear that he was only speculating. He came off as saying "could be", not "probably".
Why would the military perform a missile launch to beat their chest then deny that they did it? XD
What's worse, I think, is the implication that we would even need to demonstrate a capability that we've had for 50 or so years.
Maybe they should sell pre-release 'beta' copies and let players test it.
Why would they do that when they can call it a final release, put it on store shelves, have even more people "testing" the game, and rake in even more money while doing so?
it just seems kind of insane to me that people want to share stuff in public on an open medium, and then act shocked and dismayed that someone MIGHT ACTUALLY SEE IT. its some sort of human pscyhological blind spot: for some unknown reason, people trust the web with really personal details, when the web is about the exact opposite of the kind of place you want to put those personal details.
It is a human nature thing, but it really isn't specific to the web. We're all aware of the woman who wears revealing clothes out in public and gets offended when they attract the attention of "less than desirable" men. It's the same thing on the Internet.
You can't expect all of the newest technologies like CSS3 and canvas to work in IE6, it's just not going to happen, ever.
Or, as the grandparent seems to subtly imply, simply halt innovation for the sake of catering to outdated technology.
Ever since google started messing up their front page by, you know, adding stuff, I started using the firefox search box. This had the side effect of diversifying the search tools I use, and about:blank really is the best homepage.
Now call me a conservative whiny techie, but never having to see obnoxious random "experiments", and logo doodles ever again is a huge step forward.
Yikes. You know that the default Firefox homepage isn't www.google.com, right? It doesn't have those "obnoxious random 'experiments', and logo doodles".
So, yeah..."conservative whiny techie" might be the better label of multiple labels that pop into one's head after reading that comment of yours.
Where are the Assanges who would be willing to take on Saudi Arabia with their set-in-law prejudice of anyone who does follow the book?
You're aware that Assange doesn't go in and steal these secret documents himself, are you not? Wikileaks generally relies on people "on the inside" to pass along the documents they release. If there's no one in a particular organization with access to incriminating documents willing to release those documents, there's really nothing Assange or Wikileaks can do about it.
If Google is listing its own products above those of their competitors, they're doing a pretty shitty job. Doing a google search for "search engine" gets me a wiki, an aggregator site, Altavista, Bing and then Google ;-)
Bing came up as a sponsored link on my results. Google itself didn't even appear until page 4.
Therefore, what I type into my computer that they are not allowed to read in your country is not for you to stop me from posting, nor for you to stop the server from serving. It is for you to tell your subjects not to read, if you choose to have laws that make certain forms of speech illegal in your country.
Umm... How can someone know they "shouldn't" read what you've written without reading it first?
If this was targeted character assassination that's mission accomplished.
I'm not so sure about this. Mere hours after being filed, the warrant was publicly dropped. That's not what you do if you're attempting a character assassination. You need to allow the story to be soaked up by the masses, and most of them probably wouldn't have heard about this until Monday.
Just about every major news outlet has updated their story, too, to announce the dropping of charges. Hell, CNN currently links to Is Assange the target of a U.S. smear campaign? right from their front page.
Fox News appears to be a little reluctant, however. They have a link on their front page titled "Swedish Authorities Drop Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks Founder On Rape Accusation", but it takes you to their original story which is still titled "Swedish Authorities Issue Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks Founder After Rape Accusation".
They're not suing "no one in particular". They are suing individuals who are not yet identified for an action that has not yet occurred, to enable law enforcement to prevent that action from occurring.
Isn't this what traditional security is for...?
I don't see the point of this, either.
If I have temporary research that requires dozens of tabs, it seems a waste of time to manually arrange them into a tab group that you're going close anyway. A few clicks? You can already create a new "tab group" with a quick Ctrl+N. Drag-n-drop? You can already drag tabs between Firefox windows and even drag a tab off and create a new window.
Hell, you can even have Firefox open your previously open windows and tabs when you start it up.
The demo was flashy, but the justifications for Tab Candy aren't that compelling. We already have solutions for the problems that Tab Candy supposedly solves. Most of them are easier, too.
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it [...]
Wait, what? Bookmarks lack a certain amount of privacy which makes you uncomfortable using them, but you're OK with a feature that is nothing more than a bookmark-as-a-tab? I can't follow this logic...
Deepwater Horizon is a drilling rig [...]
Err... was. :o/
[...] Sealing it off until they could bring out the production crews who would place pipelines to the feeder system (they have to collect it somehow and just spilling it into the ocean appears to have a bunch of problems associated with it) and the various bits and pieces that make up a production well.
I don't know if it's necessary, but to clarify: Deepwater Horizon is a drilling rig, not a production rig. Once the well was plugged, the rig would have moved on to another drilling location. A separate, production rig would have then been brought out to that location to reopen the well and begin collection.
Could you really tell the difference between the real thing and a static looped scene of similar hardware?
If that were the case, they would have "capped" the gusher within a week and gotten everyone off their back.
It starts all feeds on load [...]
It also "thoughtfully" resizes your browser window to a size that doesn't even fit all of the feeds. Brilliant.
And I work in residential construction. I have apprenticed and studied for years to gain the skills I employ but I don't get to collect a royalty check every time someone uses a door I installed...
But how many doors do you install per day, on average?
I support the artists I listen to by buying branded merchandise and by paying to see them perform. I don't pay them for the recordings I keep on my mp3 player.
Somehow I don't think you'd be OK with books and CDs costing a few hundred to a few thousands dollars to compensate for the time spent on creating them...
Blizzard should simply tie forum names to accounts in an opaque manner. You can only create a forum name if you have an account, and you can only create one per account and only if you have a game key activated on that account. The forum name can't be the same as the account username (to prevent disclosure) [...]
Uhh... This is almost exactly how it works right now. You log in with your Battle.Net account and select one of your WoW characters as your forum persona. My WoW account is currently inactive, so, while I can technically log in to the WoW forums with my Battle.Net account, I can't actually post.
it's easy to call things obvious in hindsight
True enough, but this exposes a rather significant (in my opinion) disconnect between the community and whoever came up with and approved this idea. The decision-makers don't understand their community.
If they don't correct that problem of theirs, they will have many more public relations snafus like this.
Dear RIAA,
Shut the fuck up.
Sincerely,
Everyone