The Japanese have an extreme fascination with all matters related to the toilet. Here is an example of that fascination. Don't click that link if you are squeamish about such matters
That was a fascinating article, thanks for the link. Now if I could mod my mouse to look like that.. mmm.. yuk..
What is with all these 'modding' nonsense. Do you see builders modding their trowels to look like glass spaceships? Or plumbers modding their wrenchs to look like Xmas tree decorations?
No? Then why waste time with all this ridiculous timewasting with computer cases. I mean come on, it's just a glorified adding machine!
A little steep for you maybe, but for many people, the automation of ripping, the niceness of having it in your car radio slow, the convenience of having car radio style controls and the built in amplifier is worth the extra few hundred dollars.
Not really. Bookmarks don't have a Referer header, so in the absence of a Referer header, or if it is a referral from somewhere allowed, then display the page. Otherwise, don't.
This sounds a bit like the X-Archive: no heading in Usenet. The difference there is that there was a popular and widespread concern about one's posts being archived. In this case such headers would be unpopular with most people who have an opinion on it.
That's a very good point you bring up about bookmarking a link. To be able to do that is a very desirable behaviour of one's web browser.
A technological solution to preventing deep linking but allowing bookmarks might involve the use of encryption keys, and cookies.
Basically, when you visit the site you would have a key generated for you and downloaded onto your computer in the form of a cookie.
Then when you visit pages on the site, the URLs generated for you have some extra data in them (perhaps after a '?') that when combined on the server side with the cookie that is also sent in the HTTP request, form a validation code that is checked against the page being requested.
If it calculates and matches okay, the page is served. Otherwise, the request is denied.
This would avoid deep linking because if the URL is given to someone who hasn't visited the relevant other parts of the site, they wouldn't have the cookie to match.
Just because one instance of deep linking has been ruled illegal, doesn't mean all instances are illegal. There will have been specifics to the case that causing the ruling to made. Unfortunately, as the article is in Danish, I don't know what they are.
There are technological ways around deep linking, of course. Checking the Referer header in an HTTP request is one option, and dynamically creating unique URIs on the pages you allow people to visit from is another.
It would be nice if technology was used to prevent this rather than court rulings, but hey, what can you do?
Anyway it's only been ruled in Denmark, so the effect on the Internet as a whole is negligible.
I understand that, but I find the methods he has used to come to that figure. His very simplistic formula is listed in section 3.7. Compared to the analysis listed in the rest of the document, which is very interesting, this cost estimation seems relatively niave.
I didn't think this story was particularly cool, or interesting, or relevant to most of the Slashdot audience. Using the number of comments as a guideline, it is quite easy to see that science stories such as these just aren't very popular.
Slashdot Mirror
- Congrats! You may enjoy this movie. Check it out!
Thanks, that's quite an interesting film. Like the nasty car crash at the side of the road, I just can't stop looking at it.They are just as complicated when you get down into the details of their inner workings though. Probably more so.
The objective is to get a learning curve that isn't too steep, while still allowing complicated tasks to be done.
This usually takes the form of a division into 'simple' and 'advanced' modes of operation. This is probably too niave an approach though.
As the site seems to be slashdotted right now, here is a mirror.
Here is a mirror of the site.
- The Japanese have an extreme fascination with all matters related to the toilet.
That was a fascinating article, thanks for the link. Now if I could mod my mouse to look like thatHere is an example of that fascination. Don't click that link if you
are squeamish about such matters
Yes, that's fine. Everything is fine.
I just felt like bitching about it, that's all.
What is with all these 'modding' nonsense. Do you see builders modding their trowels to look like glass spaceships? Or plumbers modding their wrenchs to look like Xmas tree decorations?
No? Then why waste time with all this ridiculous timewasting with computer cases. I mean come on, it's just a glorified adding machine!
Yes. The answer is yes. It is completely useless.
This would be an excellent application of voice recognition technologies.
A little steep for you maybe, but for many people, the automation of ripping, the niceness of having it in your car radio slow, the convenience of having car radio style controls and the built in amplifier is worth the extra few hundred dollars.
The difference is this: If they let you trade music with other cars nearby, then they would probably get in trouble.
Which is a shame 'cos that would be really neat too.
That's pretty neat. Sounds like a bit of a fragile thing to be putting in a car though ..
You could write/use some proxy software that deletes headers you don't want to use, like Referrer. Anyone know of any examples?
Not really. Bookmarks don't have a Referer header, so in the absence of a Referer header, or if it is a referral from somewhere allowed, then display the page. Otherwise, don't.
This sounds a bit like the X-Archive: no heading in Usenet. The difference there is that there was a popular and widespread concern about one's posts being archived. In this case such headers would be unpopular with most people who have an opinion on it.
That is really interesting, I wasn't aware that such types of rulings existed - what other sorts of rulings does Danish law provide?
That's a very good point you bring up about bookmarking a link. To be able to do that is a very desirable behaviour of one's web browser.
:-)
A technological solution to preventing deep linking but allowing bookmarks might involve the use of encryption keys, and cookies.
Basically, when you visit the site you would have a key generated for you and downloaded onto your computer in the form of a cookie.
Then when you visit pages on the site, the URLs generated for you have some extra data in them (perhaps after a '?') that when combined on the server side with the cookie that is also sent in the HTTP request, form a validation code that is checked against the page being requested.
If it calculates and matches okay, the page is served. Otherwise, the request is denied.
This would avoid deep linking because if the URL is given to someone who hasn't visited the relevant other parts of the site, they wouldn't have the cookie to match.
Shit, I should've patented that idea
Just because one instance of deep linking has been ruled illegal, doesn't mean all instances are illegal. There will have been specifics to the case that causing the ruling to made. Unfortunately, as the article is in Danish, I don't know what they are.
There are technological ways around deep linking, of course. Checking the Referer header in an HTTP request is one option, and dynamically creating unique URIs on the pages you allow people to visit from is another.
It would be nice if technology was used to prevent this rather than court rulings, but hey, what can you do?
Anyway it's only been ruled in Denmark, so the effect on the Internet as a whole is negligible.
Here, you might find yourself getting annoyed with this. Enjoy!
The main difference is that Serial ATA will be more readily available first, and will therefore become more popular.
If you look at the Serial SCSI page in the FAQ, note that it is still under development, where motherboards supporting Serial ATA are out now.
I understand that, but I find the methods he has used to come to that figure. His very simplistic formula is listed in section 3.7. Compared to the analysis listed in the rest of the document, which is very interesting, this cost estimation seems relatively niave.
Where did he get the billion dollar estimate from? I see no direct correspondance between lines of code and monetary value.
But if they still have to comply with it, then what's the difference? This could actually be a bad move for them.
I didn't think this story was particularly cool, or interesting, or relevant to most of the Slashdot audience. Using the number of comments as a guideline, it is quite easy to see that science stories such as these just aren't very popular.