The good news probably is that if a user has access to install this script and run it, they could install any nasty CGI exploit they wanted to already, so it probably won't make security worse on that end. The dangerous thing is that the user is basically opening another door to their user account, and a relatively insecure one at that (since the only protection is.htaccess, there's no encryption...and the script has no built-in protection at all, so if the user doesn't password protect it, it's basically a wide-open shell account).
DennyK
Re:Safety First.
on
Potato Bazookas
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I'll second the warning to be very careful with potato guns. A kid in my old neighborhood was badly injured when messing with a gun made from a chain-link fence post. Don't know exactly what he was doing with it, but he came very close to blowing half his arm off. I never heard what happened to him afterwards...hopefully the doctors were able to reattach it.
Moral: Be very careful when you're messing with stuff that explodes...
"Drugs Pay for Terrible Things" is rather ironic, actually, since none of those "terrible things" would happen if the posession and sale of drugs weren't criminalized.
The "pot causes teen pregnancy" commercial in the second half was amusing, however. Someone needs to study up on causal fallacies...;)
Sadly, that wouldn't work if you were providing the download. If you (the copyright holder) make your file publicly available via the Internet, that's an implicit invitation for people to download it. Now, if those people subsequently shared the file, that would be illegal, but unfortunatly, I doubt you would get very far trying to sue someone who downloaded the file with your knowledge from a server you control.
Using it as a projection screen is kind of dumb... (As many others have mentioned, why not just put a retractable screen in front of the window? A much cheaper alternative, even if you insist on recessing it into the ceiling or otherwise making it "match" your other stuff. ) However, this would be a nice alternative to blinds. Horizontal and vertical blinds are way too leaky for my taste, and where are you going to find an opaque shade to cover a glass door or six-foot window? I like the idea of flipping a switch and turning the entire window opaque.
They are also unveiling new cordless within-the-window shades. These are blinds and shades that fit between the glass that can be lowered and raised without cords hanging down the sides of the windows. The Iowa-based company is already selling within-the-window shades with pull cords.
Um...what exactly is the point of this? Besides making it a pain in the arse to fix or replace the blinds when they break or get stuck, that is? And how do they work without cords? Are they electric? One more thing to break that you have to take the entire window apart to fix, then...
Andersen is also unveiling an "invisible insect screen" at the show, a window screen the company says is visible only from up close.
Pella will show new retractable screens for patio doors, in which the screens roll into the frame of a sliding door when not in use. The company already sells retractable screens for windows.
Just don't use the invisible insect screen on a patio door...by the time you're close enough to see it, your tray of drinks has already encountered it and succumbed to the laws of physics by being knocked out of your hands...;)
As for a retractable screen...um...I have one of those already...it's called a sliding screen door. When I don't want it blocking the doorway, I slide it over so it's behind the solid part of the patio door. How is this retractable thing any different, I wonder?
One innovation that buyers would really go for, manufacturers say, is a true self-cleaning window -- covered with a protective surface similar to a car wax.
Wait...my windows aren't self-cleaning? Oops... Maybe I should open my blinds once in a while... On second thought, maybe not...ignorance is probably bliss in this case...;)
I believe it's an FCC requirement. Radio and television stations in the east have four-letter call signs beginning with "W", in the west, they begin with "K". See: http://www.oldradio.com/current/bc_k&w.htm for more details...
Beginning in 2004, the service will cost between 30 (US$32) and 35 per flight, it said. Passengers can use bonus miles as part of Lufthansa's Miles&More frequent flyer program to pay for the service, it said.
Users will be able to download from the Internet at speeds up to 3M bps (bits per second) and upload, initially, at speeds up to 128K bps, according to Lufthansa. The upload speeds will later increase to 750K bps, it said.
Yeah, I gues I could some items like cell phones/radios maybe eletric motors & other such devices that are very rf "leaky" but there's no way in hell I'm buying that story for, say, a cd player.
The flight attendants have better things to do than to examine every portable electronic device on the plane to figure out which ones might be "leaky" enough to potentially cause problems. So they make the rule simple; if it's electronic, turn it off.
...but that's not what they tell you - they say some babble (and it's never really the same on each flight) about "being found to interfere with electrical systems" or "navigation systions" or "the plane's systems"
Because if they told some other story, people would probably argue with them. And the truth is, any device *could* potentially interfere with the plane's systems. Unless you happen to carry around an RF meter of some sort with you (and good luck getting that past security;) ), you have no idea how much or what kind of RF energy your Walkman is putting out.
or give contact info for those with inquiries or complaints.
You can probably contact the airline to inquire about any of their rules or procedures if you want. I'm sure they will be happy to explain them to you. There's probably an address or phone number on your ticket envelope.
As for complaints...why? Unless a device is regulating some biological function neccesary for your continued existance as a living being, surely you can live without it for the 15-20 minutes it takes to take off and land. Just sit back, relax, read a magazine, say hello/goodbye to your neighbor, or find something else to do that isn't battery powered.;)
1. Am I being sued? No, you are not being sued. Certain companies are being sued.
Are there really people out there who ended up at this site and somehow got the impression that *they* were being sued? The lack of common sense some people suffer from never ceases to amaze me...;)
If you don't want to pay the monthly fees, why not get an MP3 player? The CDR MP3 players aren't much more expensive than a good CD head unit, and you can fit 10 hours of 128K MP3s (which sound just as good as a CD in a moving car, and much better than FM) on a CD-R. A few CDs would tide you over for even the longest road trip. And whenever you get bored with your current selections, just hit KaZaa^W^W err...legally purchase more music and make some new ones. The only think you might not like is the lack of talk radio, but personally, I consider that a huge plus. (Have you ever tried to find a radio station that plays music 24/7 in Central FL? There must be some sort of state law that says radio stations can only play idiotic blathering "talk shows" between 8AM and noon, and those lame "My Sex Life Sucks So I'll Call The Radio Station And Whine About It" shows after midnight.;-D )
My JVC was the best $300 I ever spent. I haven't had to listen to an annoying radio ad or loudmouthed DJ for months.
The idea of the current system is not to replicate complex devices like hard drives, but rather cheap, low-performance items like TV remotes, radios, etc. With items like these, the performance and failue issues of the "flexonics" would be much less of a problem. (Circuit switching speed isn't exactly essential when flipping channels, and when was the last time you resoldered a busted capacitor on your $10 AM/FM?)
I'm sure the cost of a system like this would make it impractical for home use, but it could replace assembly lines for many cheap items. When the costs drop, you may even see them in stores...instead of (over)stocking a couple hundred cheap universal remotes, Wal-Mart will just "print" them, or any number of other gadgets, on demand. And in the future, who knows? Advances in technology may make it practical to use "flexonics" or some derivative for creating more complex circuits. Perhaps one day we *will* be printing our own computer hardware...
You think that's bad...FL is $10 for the first *year* and $5 for each year thereafter, per number. And it doesn't stop the Orlando Sentinel from harassing me because I read my news online instead of in their dead tree edition; newspapers are exempt from the list, along with the usual "preexisting relationship", political, and charitable exemptions. Bleah.
I went one better...I turned off all the ringers on my phones. Now when I get a call, I just hear the answering machine pick up, and listen to the message, if there is one. I also set the machine to answer after five rings; I've noticed that some telemarketers give up on a number if there's no answer after four rings, so I don't even know when they call...;)
Although I don't get the pleasure of ignoring a stridently ringing phone, I also don't get awakened at 9AM (which is the middle of the night for me) by one. I'd say it's a fair trade...;)
...the 'lending' of the digital book doesnt limit lending it to someone else, you don't have that restriction.
While that's true in a physical sense, it's not true in a legal sense. The library will likely purchase (or maybe be given, depending on the arrangement) a license to distribute X number of copies at once, not an unlimited number, as the article mentions:
"What's more, only a limited number of each eBook will be available, and after a preset number of days, the eBook will lock out the current reader so another patron can check it out."
The only really pertinent question is: "If we choose to control who gets it, how do we go about it?" Computer games aren't like bottles of whiskey in that they can be made available to anyone via a download. Just how does a society "control" this? By assuming that anyone with a credit card is an adult (like the on-line porn industry)?
There are far worse things on the 'Net that violent games. It's the responsibility of the parents to keep an eye on what their children are doing online. If a kid is downloading and installing games that he really shouldn't be playing and the parents know nothing about it, then they're not doing their job. There is very little chance of effectively controlling distribution of anything over the Internet; for every porn site that requires credit cards, there are a hundred that offer "free samples" or outright free content. For every "official" game demo that might be controlled (GameSpot, File Planet, etc.), there are a hundred mirrors without any controls (and likely a hundred warez sites with the full game, anyway).
If these are available in stores then how would we ensure that the store personnel keep them away from children? Lock the CDs up with the cigarettes?
Actually, I would guess that locking up cigarettes has more to do with preventing people (children and adults) from stealing them (an expensive product in a small package is an easy target for shoplifting), as opposed to preventing them from being *sold* to minors. (It's just as easy to ID little Johnny when he brings a carton to the cash register as it is when he walks up and asks for one...) That said, most stores I've seen do keep their games under lock and key, to prevent people from shoplifting them. The real key is not so much where the games are kept as it is to make sure the purchaser is "old enough" (by whatever standards the law or society decides on) to buy a particular game.
Heck, they were talking about this stuff after 9/11/2001. Using this technology so a ground pilot can fly a plane that has been comprimised. Quite an interesting idea.
Yes, very interesting. Now instead of trying to figure out how to use a box cutter to intimidate a planeful of people who are now ready and willing to kick their asses for trying that again, hijackers only need a radio transmitter and a 12-year-old hacker to break the encryption scheme in order to start flying planes into buildings...
I may not have an 8mm movie player, but I can at least view my dad's 1950's carnival movies frame by frame.
And if you ever did want to see those films as films, it's not hard to find a player. And even if one day there are none to be found, it would take nothing more than a little mechanical skill and some trial and error to build one yourself. Now, to find or build a device to read digital media that hasn't been used in twenty years is a far more complicated task...
That doesn't really indicate illiteracy. Americans are not used to royal titles. Almost all titles commonly used in this country are usually followed by the surname of the person they describe, so it becomes a habit of sorts to assume that, say, "Dr. Smith's" first name is NOT Smith. Granted, "Charles" is not a name most people would think of as a surname when seen by itself, but I can see how the question might stump some folks if they were asked on the spot and didn't really think about it. (I haven't seen the mentioned show, but I'm guessing it was some guy wandering around the street sticking a microphone in random people's faces and asking them questions...am I way off here?;) ) Doesn't mean they're stupid or illiterate, it just means that habit dictated their instinctive response ("Um...I don't know...") instead of logical reasoning, which is not unusual in that kind of situation.
Not everyone can afford a big-screen TV and surround sound system. Without those, the experience watching at home doesn't really compare to the theater. An afternoon ticket around here can be had for $6-7 at the best theaters, and if you skip the concession stands and bring your own munchies (not that I would ever do such an Evil Thing, of course...;-D ), when you consider there are only a handful of movies I consider worth watching coming out each year, a few trips to the theater is not a bad deal. Of course, I do have a DVD player (well, a PS2...), and I own many VHS and DVD copies of my favorite movies for repeated viewing at home on my cheap 19" TV, but sometimes there are still films I want to see in the theater.
The only downside to the theater is that I can't adjust the volume. Has anyone else noticed that most theaters these days turn the sound up to truly nasty levels? I have rather sensitive hearing, and the last several movies I went to, the sound was loud enough to really cause pain until I stuffed some napkins in my ears. These days, I just bring along earplugs to most movies. (While you might think that detracts from the whole immersive "surround sound" experience, the movies I've been at actually sound fine, and sometimes even a bit too loud, through a set of earplugs, which is really scary considering the plugs are lowering the volume by a few dozen decibles...;) )
Those old blurbs are pretty interesting, but it would have been nice to have a little more info, or even the original articles, rather than just a photo and a paragraph of text. Still, browsing their archive is a cool way to waste a half hour or so...;)
Between all of my email accounts, I get about 250-300 spam messages a day. My most active account at my own domain (which has a catchall) gets about 200-250 per day. I'd kill to only be getting ten spams a day.
I wonder how accurate that statistic is. Frankly, I'm amazed the "average" number of spams isn't already around ten a day or even higher. Almost everyone I know receives this much, and the ones who don't are pretty close. Maybe it's just because the folks I know use email more extensively than all the Grandpa Joes out there who only get a message or two from their grandkids in their mailbox every week? Such is the curse of email, I suppose...the more you spread your address around, the more spam you're likely to receive...
I tried playing The Sims a couple of times, but I just couldn't get into it. It's really just BORING, in all honesty. I don't really enjoy doing mundane tasks and chores in real life, where at least I get some real benefit from them (clean house, fewer "pet" flies, more money, etc.). The idea of spending hours on end ordering some game character to do the same things in some virtual world is mind-numbing.
I think The Sims would be far more interesting if there was an option to let the Sims operate independently, while you just arrange their lives as you see fit. (Yes, I know you can give them "free will", but in my version of the game, at least, this means they invite their friends over and then get so interested in the picture hanging on the wall that they don't answer the door, never bother to go to work or pay the bills, and sometimes piss their pants because they forget to go to the bathroom... Then they start a fire in the kitchen while trying to cook and stand there screaming about it until the flames engulf them and burn them to a crisp... ) Creating situations to watch how your Sims react would be far more entertaining that ordering them to go pee, then shower, then go to sleep, then wake up, then go here, then do this, and on and on and on...
On a somewhat off-topic note, a game that is much more entertaining and realistic than The Sims is Alter Ego. It lets you create and develop a person from birth to old age, and is quite addictive. Plus, it runs on a 286 and fits on a floppy disk!;D There's also an online version for you non-DOS folks, though I don't know how complete it is myself. Definatly an entertaining game!:)
Get an MP3/CD player, if you can afford one. My JVC was well worth the $300. I can fit over a hundred 128Kbps (which is no worse than FM radio, really) tracks on a single CD. Set it on random/shuffle mode and let it run. No DJs, of course, but I personally consider that a plus. The nice thing is I can have a mix of music on the CD...everything from New Age to German industrial metal. Very nice if you have less-than-mainstream tastes in music like mine;) My JVC lets you play random songs from one directory on the CD, or from all directories, so you can divide your music up as you like and still have a random selection. And when you get tired of one mix, just burn a new CD-R with different tunes. I haven't listened to the radio since I bought the thing six months ago.;)
And, of course (to get back on topic), no nosy billboard will be able to tell what track is currently pumping away in your car...;)
The "Hide your HTML" stuff has me baffled. I can't get their demos to work in IE or Moz. It shows me a page and tells me the HTML is "encrypted"...but there's nothing on the page except that message. Everything I see in the browser, I can see in the source.
I'm dying of curiosity...I'd love to know how they're tricking potential customers into thinking their HTML is "secret", short of writing their own web browser to decode their "encrypted" content...;)
Their other "protection" schemes are silly. Let's see what we got here:
The "hidden" URL of their test download file:
http://www.anti-leech.com/ddd/test.zip
The "hidden" URL of their protected image:
http://www.anti-leech.com/pics/logo.gif
Got both of these in about twenty seconds. Turns out their right-click menu doesn't work in Moz; it displays the JS message, but then the right-click menu opens anyway. Heh... Even if it doesn't, all you have to do is copy the URL of the image from the source and paste it into the browser. It will not only display just the image, but it will also redirect you to the real URL that is supposedly hidden. As for the file download, Mozilla helpfully tells you the URL you are downloading the file from, and the filename. Stick the two together, and there's the real URL. Duh...;)
Their "anti-spam" service involves using a Javascript to print your address instead of plain HTML (wow, that's innovative...;) ), and adding a link to one of those spambot trap pages (which generates endless random email addresses for the poor bot). Whoop-tee-do. I could do the same thing on any web site in about five minutes.
Can't see the "Source Code" protection, but I'd bet it's about as effective as the image and file "protection" schemes.
About the only thing on here that really functions is the popup detector, and that obviously doesn't work right most of the time itself, judging by the posts here...;)
Anti-Leech.com says: "We estimate that our system can protect you in 98% of all cases and in the other 2% make it a lot harder for anyone to copy your content." Apparently, they figure 98% of the people on the web are too clueless to know what an image tag is, to know what "View Source" does, or to be able to concatenate strings in their head... Maybe they're trying to push their system on site owners whose target audience is limited to AOL users?;-D
Haven't had much experience with XP myself (still using Win98 at home, Win2K at work), but this is typical of what I dislike about newer versions of Windows; more annoying "features" with no built-in way to turn them off. I don't need my OS to tell me what files I can and cannot mess with. From that link, I gather in XP you not only need to edit the registry manually to fix it (which is pretty typical of Windows anyway, but is still annoying for an option that could easily have been included in the GUI), but you need to hex-edit a DLL just to *enable* the registry key? That's absurd!
Yet another reason to stick with Windows 98 for now, I guess...;)
Slashdot Mirror
The good news probably is that if a user has access to install this script and run it, they could install any nasty CGI exploit they wanted to already, so it probably won't make security worse on that end. The dangerous thing is that the user is basically opening another door to their user account, and a relatively insecure one at that (since the only protection is .htaccess, there's no encryption...and the script has no built-in protection at all, so if the user doesn't password protect it, it's basically a wide-open shell account).
DennyK
I'll second the warning to be very careful with potato guns. A kid in my old neighborhood was badly injured when messing with a gun made from a chain-link fence post. Don't know exactly what he was doing with it, but he came very close to blowing half his arm off. I never heard what happened to him afterwards...hopefully the doctors were able to reattach it.
Moral: Be very careful when you're messing with stuff that explodes...
DennyK
"Drugs Pay for Terrible Things" is rather ironic, actually, since none of those "terrible things" would happen if the posession and sale of drugs weren't criminalized.
;)
The "pot causes teen pregnancy" commercial in the second half was amusing, however. Someone needs to study up on causal fallacies...
DennyK
Sadly, that wouldn't work if you were providing the download. If you (the copyright holder) make your file publicly available via the Internet, that's an implicit invitation for people to download it. Now, if those people subsequently shared the file, that would be illegal, but unfortunatly, I doubt you would get very far trying to sue someone who downloaded the file with your knowledge from a server you control.
DennyK
Using it as a projection screen is kind of dumb... (As many others have mentioned, why not just put a retractable screen in front of the window? A much cheaper alternative, even if you insist on recessing it into the ceiling or otherwise making it "match" your other stuff. ) However, this would be a nice alternative to blinds. Horizontal and vertical blinds are way too leaky for my taste, and where are you going to find an opaque shade to cover a glass door or six-foot window? I like the idea of flipping a switch and turning the entire window opaque.
;)
;)
They are also unveiling new cordless within-the-window shades. These are blinds and shades that fit between the glass that can be lowered and raised without cords hanging down the sides of the windows. The Iowa-based company is already selling within-the-window shades with pull cords.
Um...what exactly is the point of this? Besides making it a pain in the arse to fix or replace the blinds when they break or get stuck, that is? And how do they work without cords? Are they electric? One more thing to break that you have to take the entire window apart to fix, then...
Andersen is also unveiling an "invisible insect screen" at the show, a window screen the company says is visible only from up close.
Pella will show new retractable screens for patio doors, in which the screens roll into the frame of a sliding door when not in use. The company already sells retractable screens for windows.
Just don't use the invisible insect screen on a patio door...by the time you're close enough to see it, your tray of drinks has already encountered it and succumbed to the laws of physics by being knocked out of your hands...
As for a retractable screen...um...I have one of those already...it's called a sliding screen door. When I don't want it blocking the doorway, I slide it over so it's behind the solid part of the patio door. How is this retractable thing any different, I wonder?
One innovation that buyers would really go for, manufacturers say, is a true self-cleaning window -- covered with a protective surface similar to a car wax.
Wait...my windows aren't self-cleaning? Oops... Maybe I should open my blinds once in a while...
On second thought, maybe not...ignorance is probably bliss in this case...
DennyK
I believe it's an FCC requirement. Radio and television stations in the east have four-letter call signs beginning with "W", in the west, they begin with "K". See: http://www.oldradio.com/current/bc_k&w.htm for more details...
DennyK
Beginning in 2004, the service will cost between 30 (US$32) and 35 per flight, it said. Passengers can use bonus miles as part of Lufthansa's Miles&More frequent flyer program to pay for the service, it said.
;)
Users will be able to download from the Internet at speeds up to 3M bps (bits per second) and upload, initially, at speeds up to 128K bps, according to Lufthansa. The upload speeds will later increase to 750K bps, it said.
So sayeth the article, anyhow...
DennyK
Yeah, I gues I could some items like cell phones/radios maybe eletric motors & other such devices that are very rf "leaky" but there's no way in hell I'm buying that story for, say, a cd player.
...but that's not what they tell you - they say some babble (and it's never really the same on each flight) about "being found to interfere with electrical systems" or "navigation systions" or "the plane's systems"
;) ), you have no idea how much or what kind of RF energy your Walkman is putting out.
;)
The flight attendants have better things to do than to examine every portable electronic device on the plane to figure out which ones might be "leaky" enough to potentially cause problems. So they make the rule simple; if it's electronic, turn it off.
Because if they told some other story, people would probably argue with them. And the truth is, any device *could* potentially interfere with the plane's systems. Unless you happen to carry around an RF meter of some sort with you (and good luck getting that past security
or give contact info for those with inquiries or complaints.
You can probably contact the airline to inquire about any of their rules or procedures if you want. I'm sure they will be happy to explain them to you. There's probably an address or phone number on your ticket envelope.
As for complaints...why? Unless a device is regulating some biological function neccesary for your continued existance as a living being, surely you can live without it for the 15-20 minutes it takes to take off and land. Just sit back, relax, read a magazine, say hello/goodbye to your neighbor, or find something else to do that isn't battery powered.
DennyK
The first question on their Questions and Answers page is hilarious:
;)
1. Am I being sued?
No, you are not being sued. Certain companies are being sued.
Are there really people out there who ended up at this site and somehow got the impression that *they* were being sued? The lack of common sense some people suffer from never ceases to amaze me...
DennyK
If you don't want to pay the monthly fees, why not get an MP3 player? The CDR MP3 players aren't much more expensive than a good CD head unit, and you can fit 10 hours of 128K MP3s (which sound just as good as a CD in a moving car, and much better than FM) on a CD-R. A few CDs would tide you over for even the longest road trip. And whenever you get bored with your current selections, just hit KaZaa^W^W err...legally purchase more music and make some new ones. The only think you might not like is the lack of talk radio, but personally, I consider that a huge plus. (Have you ever tried to find a radio station that plays music 24/7 in Central FL? There must be some sort of state law that says radio stations can only play idiotic blathering "talk shows" between 8AM and noon, and those lame "My Sex Life Sucks So I'll Call The Radio Station And Whine About It" shows after midnight. ;-D )
My JVC was the best $300 I ever spent. I haven't had to listen to an annoying radio ad or loudmouthed DJ for months.
DennyK
The idea of the current system is not to replicate complex devices like hard drives, but rather cheap, low-performance items like TV remotes, radios, etc. With items like these, the performance and failue issues of the "flexonics" would be much less of a problem. (Circuit switching speed isn't exactly essential when flipping channels, and when was the last time you resoldered a busted capacitor on your $10 AM/FM?)
I'm sure the cost of a system like this would make it impractical for home use, but it could replace assembly lines for many cheap items. When the costs drop, you may even see them in stores...instead of (over)stocking a couple hundred cheap universal remotes, Wal-Mart will just "print" them, or any number of other gadgets, on demand. And in the future, who knows? Advances in technology may make it practical to use "flexonics" or some derivative for creating more complex circuits. Perhaps one day we *will* be printing our own computer hardware...
DennyK
You think that's bad...FL is $10 for the first *year* and $5 for each year thereafter, per number. And it doesn't stop the Orlando Sentinel from harassing me because I read my news online instead of in their dead tree edition; newspapers are exempt from the list, along with the usual "preexisting relationship", political, and charitable exemptions. Bleah.
DennyK
I went one better...I turned off all the ringers on my phones. Now when I get a call, I just hear the answering machine pick up, and listen to the message, if there is one. I also set the machine to answer after five rings; I've noticed that some telemarketers give up on a number if there's no answer after four rings, so I don't even know when they call... ;)
;)
Although I don't get the pleasure of ignoring a stridently ringing phone, I also don't get awakened at 9AM (which is the middle of the night for me) by one. I'd say it's a fair trade...
DennyK
...the 'lending' of the digital book doesnt limit lending it to someone else, you don't have that restriction.
While that's true in a physical sense, it's not true in a legal sense. The library will likely purchase (or maybe be given, depending on the arrangement) a license to distribute X number of copies at once, not an unlimited number, as the article mentions:
"What's more, only a limited number of each eBook will be available, and after a preset number of days, the eBook will lock out the current reader so another patron can check it out."
DennyK
The only really pertinent question is: "If we choose to control who gets it, how do we go about it?" Computer games aren't like bottles of whiskey in that they can be made available to anyone via a download. Just how does a society "control" this? By assuming that anyone with a credit card is an adult (like the on-line porn industry)?
There are far worse things on the 'Net that violent games. It's the responsibility of the parents to keep an eye on what their children are doing online. If a kid is downloading and installing games that he really shouldn't be playing and the parents know nothing about it, then they're not doing their job. There is very little chance of effectively controlling distribution of anything over the Internet; for every porn site that requires credit cards, there are a hundred that offer "free samples" or outright free content. For every "official" game demo that might be controlled (GameSpot, File Planet, etc.), there are a hundred mirrors without any controls (and likely a hundred warez sites with the full game, anyway).
If these are available in stores then how would we ensure that the store personnel keep them away from children? Lock the CDs up with the cigarettes?
Actually, I would guess that locking up cigarettes has more to do with preventing people (children and adults) from stealing them (an expensive product in a small package is an easy target for shoplifting), as opposed to preventing them from being *sold* to minors. (It's just as easy to ID little Johnny when he brings a carton to the cash register as it is when he walks up and asks for one...) That said, most stores I've seen do keep their games under lock and key, to prevent people from shoplifting them. The real key is not so much where the games are kept as it is to make sure the purchaser is "old enough" (by whatever standards the law or society decides on) to buy a particular game.
DennyK
Heck, they were talking about this stuff after 9/11/2001. Using this technology so a ground pilot can fly a plane that has been comprimised. Quite an interesting idea.
Yes, very interesting. Now instead of trying to figure out how to use a box cutter to intimidate a planeful of people who are now ready and willing to kick their asses for trying that again, hijackers only need a radio transmitter and a 12-year-old hacker to break the encryption scheme in order to start flying planes into buildings...
DennyK
I may not have an 8mm movie player, but I can at least view my dad's 1950's carnival movies frame by frame.
And if you ever did want to see those films as films, it's not hard to find a player. And even if one day there are none to be found, it would take nothing more than a little mechanical skill and some trial and error to build one yourself. Now, to find or build a device to read digital media that hasn't been used in twenty years is a far more complicated task...
DennyK
That doesn't really indicate illiteracy. Americans are not used to royal titles. Almost all titles commonly used in this country are usually followed by the surname of the person they describe, so it becomes a habit of sorts to assume that, say, "Dr. Smith's" first name is NOT Smith. Granted, "Charles" is not a name most people would think of as a surname when seen by itself, but I can see how the question might stump some folks if they were asked on the spot and didn't really think about it. (I haven't seen the mentioned show, but I'm guessing it was some guy wandering around the street sticking a microphone in random people's faces and asking them questions...am I way off here? ;) ) Doesn't mean they're stupid or illiterate, it just means that habit dictated their instinctive response ("Um...I don't know...") instead of logical reasoning, which is not unusual in that kind of situation.
DennyK
Not everyone can afford a big-screen TV and surround sound system. Without those, the experience watching at home doesn't really compare to the theater. An afternoon ticket around here can be had for $6-7 at the best theaters, and if you skip the concession stands and bring your own munchies (not that I would ever do such an Evil Thing, of course... ;-D ), when you consider there are only a handful of movies I consider worth watching coming out each year, a few trips to the theater is not a bad deal. Of course, I do have a DVD player (well, a PS2...), and I own many VHS and DVD copies of my favorite movies for repeated viewing at home on my cheap 19" TV, but sometimes there are still films I want to see in the theater.
;) )
The only downside to the theater is that I can't adjust the volume. Has anyone else noticed that most theaters these days turn the sound up to truly nasty levels? I have rather sensitive hearing, and the last several movies I went to, the sound was loud enough to really cause pain until I stuffed some napkins in my ears. These days, I just bring along earplugs to most movies. (While you might think that detracts from the whole immersive "surround sound" experience, the movies I've been at actually sound fine, and sometimes even a bit too loud, through a set of earplugs, which is really scary considering the plugs are lowering the volume by a few dozen decibles...
DennyK
Those old blurbs are pretty interesting, but it would have been nice to have a little more info, or even the original articles, rather than just a photo and a paragraph of text. Still, browsing their archive is a cool way to waste a half hour or so... ;)
DennyK
Between all of my email accounts, I get about 250-300 spam messages a day. My most active account at my own domain (which has a catchall) gets about 200-250 per day. I'd kill to only be getting ten spams a day.
I wonder how accurate that statistic is. Frankly, I'm amazed the "average" number of spams isn't already around ten a day or even higher. Almost everyone I know receives this much, and the ones who don't are pretty close. Maybe it's just because the folks I know use email more extensively than all the Grandpa Joes out there who only get a message or two from their grandkids in their mailbox every week? Such is the curse of email, I suppose...the more you spread your address around, the more spam you're likely to receive...
DennyK
I tried playing The Sims a couple of times, but I just couldn't get into it. It's really just BORING, in all honesty. I don't really enjoy doing mundane tasks and chores in real life, where at least I get some real benefit from them (clean house, fewer "pet" flies, more money, etc.). The idea of spending hours on end ordering some game character to do the same things in some virtual world is mind-numbing.
;D There's also an online version for you non-DOS folks, though I don't know how complete it is myself. Definatly an entertaining game! :)
I think The Sims would be far more interesting if there was an option to let the Sims operate independently, while you just arrange their lives as you see fit. (Yes, I know you can give them "free will", but in my version of the game, at least, this means they invite their friends over and then get so interested in the picture hanging on the wall that they don't answer the door, never bother to go to work or pay the bills, and sometimes piss their pants because they forget to go to the bathroom... Then they start a fire in the kitchen while trying to cook and stand there screaming about it until the flames engulf them and burn them to a crisp... ) Creating situations to watch how your Sims react would be far more entertaining that ordering them to go pee, then shower, then go to sleep, then wake up, then go here, then do this, and on and on and on...
On a somewhat off-topic note, a game that is much more entertaining and realistic than The Sims is Alter Ego. It lets you create and develop a person from birth to old age, and is quite addictive. Plus, it runs on a 286 and fits on a floppy disk!
DennyK
Get an MP3/CD player, if you can afford one. My JVC was well worth the $300. I can fit over a hundred 128Kbps (which is no worse than FM radio, really) tracks on a single CD. Set it on random/shuffle mode and let it run. No DJs, of course, but I personally consider that a plus. The nice thing is I can have a mix of music on the CD...everything from New Age to German industrial metal. Very nice if you have less-than-mainstream tastes in music like mine ;) My JVC lets you play random songs from one directory on the CD, or from all directories, so you can divide your music up as you like and still have a random selection. And when you get tired of one mix, just burn a new CD-R with different tunes. I haven't listened to the radio since I bought the thing six months ago. ;)
;)
And, of course (to get back on topic), no nosy billboard will be able to tell what track is currently pumping away in your car...
DennyK
The "Hide your HTML" stuff has me baffled. I can't get their demos to work in IE or Moz. It shows me a page and tells me the HTML is "encrypted"...but there's nothing on the page except that message. Everything I see in the browser, I can see in the source.
;)
;)
;) ), and adding a link to one of those spambot trap pages (which generates endless random email addresses for the poor bot). Whoop-tee-do. I could do the same thing on any web site in about five minutes.
;)
;-D
I'm dying of curiosity...I'd love to know how they're tricking potential customers into thinking their HTML is "secret", short of writing their own web browser to decode their "encrypted" content...
Their other "protection" schemes are silly. Let's see what we got here:
The "hidden" URL of their test download file:
http://www.anti-leech.com/ddd/test.zip
The "hidden" URL of their protected image:
http://www.anti-leech.com/pics/logo.gif
Got both of these in about twenty seconds. Turns out their right-click menu doesn't work in Moz; it displays the JS message, but then the right-click menu opens anyway. Heh... Even if it doesn't, all you have to do is copy the URL of the image from the source and paste it into the browser. It will not only display just the image, but it will also redirect you to the real URL that is supposedly hidden. As for the file download, Mozilla helpfully tells you the URL you are downloading the file from, and the filename. Stick the two together, and there's the real URL. Duh...
Their "anti-spam" service involves using a Javascript to print your address instead of plain HTML (wow, that's innovative...
Can't see the "Source Code" protection, but I'd bet it's about as effective as the image and file "protection" schemes.
About the only thing on here that really functions is the popup detector, and that obviously doesn't work right most of the time itself, judging by the posts here...
Anti-Leech.com says: "We estimate that our system can protect you in 98% of all cases and in the other 2% make it a lot harder for anyone to copy your content." Apparently, they figure 98% of the people on the web are too clueless to know what an image tag is, to know what "View Source" does, or to be able to concatenate strings in their head... Maybe they're trying to push their system on site owners whose target audience is limited to AOL users?
DennyK
Haven't had much experience with XP myself (still using Win98 at home, Win2K at work), but this is typical of what I dislike about newer versions of Windows; more annoying "features" with no built-in way to turn them off. I don't need my OS to tell me what files I can and cannot mess with. From that link, I gather in XP you not only need to edit the registry manually to fix it (which is pretty typical of Windows anyway, but is still annoying for an option that could easily have been included in the GUI), but you need to hex-edit a DLL just to *enable* the registry key? That's absurd!
;)
Yet another reason to stick with Windows 98 for now, I guess...
DennyK