AFAIK, the copyright of Steamboat Bill has expired which was only 14 years at that time and Disney had to wait a bit until it was expired before publishing Steamboat Willie.
What stops you from making your own interpretation of any Grimm, Andersen, Carrol or even Disney story?
In the case of Disney, copyright does.
Just try to publish a comic with a talking duck or mouse even remotely resembling Disney characters and count the days until Disney's lawers knock on your door.
Exactly that's the reason Disney wants perpetual protection of their early Micky Mouse stuff. Do you really think they are afraid of people warezing Steamboat-willie?
If you would do a "deep analysis" you would recognize that if you don't trust a website, turning off cookies won't make your credit-card number any safer.
And if you trust a website, turning ON cookies won't make your data any more unsafe.
The effect of cookies on security is zero.
Also, cookies store data FROM THE SERVER on the client, not vice-versa. There are no accumulated risks on the server in any way. Maybe you should do some research (or "deep analysis") before posting such nonsense.
(And don't even dare to weasel out of your incompetence by pretending you meant the accumulating risks on the client. If you don't trust your own computer (which is ridiculous), you shouldn't put any sensitive information on it, whatsoever - again cookies don't make a difference.)
I haven't heard a single case in which some valuable information was stolen or some computer was hacked because of cookies - and I also can't imagine a way how something like that should happen.
Can someone please tell me why cookies are considered "insecure"?
How else shall we implement sessions? Query-strings? Awww.
Linux has that, but it's not a phone line or a company (generally, this is getting better)
Nonsense. SuSE and RedHat support everything Microsoft does plus much more.
For example if you pay SuSE for a service level 3 (AFAIR) agreement, SuSE will do everything, inlcuding changing code to fullfill your needs. Yes, they also have phone lines.
Microsoft doesn't even offer something like this. Microsoft is a "take it or leave it" company that doesn't do any special orders.
I'm so sick of this FUD because in reality Linux companies provide much better support than Microsoft and most commercial companies.
You complain about Mozilla being too bloated (which seems strange because you later say you don't care about speed), then Phoenix which is *exactly* what you ask for (a Mozilla without the bloat) is released and you are still complaining?
The post contains several reasons why IE sucks "it doesn't really do CSS right, it is a security nightmare" but the conclusion is "Mozilla still doesn't come close to IE".
Goddamnit, use the "quickstart" option. Your only complaint is solved.
Mozilla has so many handy features like popup-blocking, tabs and so much more than IE that it beats IE hands down.
First she complains about the installer not making enough decisions, then she complains about SaX making decisions.
In reality, the installer DOES make all decisions. All it does (and that was obviously confusing Eugenia) is SHOW these decisions to you and allow you to change it. But it doesn't force you to do anything at all.
What's wrong with that? The below-average complete moron (which everybody seems to be targetting these days.) just presses "Install" and it installs without any need to configure anything. On a computer with one clean harddrive or partition, the install should work just fine with the default settings.
Hell, even Eugenia was able to install the damn thing, so it's dumbed down enough.
Also, unlike Eugenia sais, SuSE comes with CDs *AND* DVD, not "or".
Even the worst electric plants are more effecient than the ebst internal combustion engines at producing and transporting the resulting energy.
That's of course true, but for an electrical car you have to first convert chemical energy to electrical (in the plant), convert it back into chemical (in the car battery), convert that back into electrical and finally into kinetic energy.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, the Mac switcher ads are already pretty - well let's say "unlikely to have really happened that way".
For Bill Gates not unlikely enough, it seems. How high is the chance that a Mac to PC convert writes down her confessions and includes:
"See Which Edition is Right for You? for more information."
Complete with link to the right Microsoft page?
I find some UFO stories more believable.
What are the problems?
But, IIS has the far, far worse security track record.
Now I don't have counted the developers of KDE and Linux, but I'd guesstimate that there are more on KDE.
AFAIK, the copyright of Steamboat Bill has expired which was only 14 years at that time and Disney had to wait a bit until it was expired before publishing Steamboat Willie.
In the case of Disney, copyright does.
Just try to publish a comic with a talking duck or mouse even remotely resembling Disney characters and count the days until Disney's lawers knock on your door.
Exactly that's the reason Disney wants perpetual protection of their early Micky Mouse stuff. Do you really think they are afraid of people warezing Steamboat-willie?
When the Grimm brothers take something from the public domain and remake it, "it's not theirs".
But when Disney does it, it is not only theirs it also should be protected for decades and decades?
If you would do a "deep analysis" you would recognize that if you don't trust a website, turning off cookies won't make your credit-card number any safer.
And if you trust a website, turning ON cookies won't make your data any more unsafe.
The effect of cookies on security is zero.
Also, cookies store data FROM THE SERVER on the client, not vice-versa. There are no accumulated risks on the server in any way. Maybe you should do some research (or "deep analysis") before posting such nonsense.
(And don't even dare to weasel out of your incompetence by pretending you meant the accumulating risks on the client. If you don't trust your own computer (which is ridiculous), you shouldn't put any sensitive information on it, whatsoever - again cookies don't make a difference.)
So what is your point?
That all life will end before 2026 and worrying about anything after that year is pointless?
The ridiculousness aside (486s are useless today for normal use), why is everybody so shortsighted?
I haven't heard a single case in which some valuable information was stolen or some computer was hacked because of cookies - and I also can't imagine a way how something like that should happen.
Can someone please tell me why cookies are considered "insecure"?
How else shall we implement sessions? Query-strings? Awww.
Maybe it's time for YOU to stop spreading the FUD that Linux supporters don't have phone lines.
Hundreds of Microsoft supporters will insult you and order you to immediately upgrade to [insert newest MS OS here].
Nonsense. SuSE and RedHat support everything Microsoft does plus much more.
For example if you pay SuSE for a service level 3 (AFAIR) agreement, SuSE will do everything, inlcuding changing code to fullfill your needs. Yes, they also have phone lines.
Microsoft doesn't even offer something like this. Microsoft is a "take it or leave it" company that doesn't do any special orders.
I'm so sick of this FUD because in reality Linux companies provide much better support than Microsoft and most commercial companies.
There you have your tens of thousands of dollars for licensing.
What, you didn't read the study?
The main site was on a fixed IP and showed the webcam on the dynamic IP.
Just a little ssh and sed magic.
Don't try this with Windows.
Tying yourself to a single vendor is stupid, so with all things equal from a technical standpoint, Linux still wins by a large margin.
Of course this study suggests that Linux beats Windows also on the technicat point of view.
Oh, I forgot, you want to play "The Sims" on your webserver. Well, in that case...
Oh jeeez, I think I just fed a troll.
The post contains several reasons why IE sucks "it doesn't really do CSS right, it is a security nightmare" but the conclusion is "Mozilla still doesn't come close to IE".
Goddamnit, use the "quickstart" option. Your only complaint is solved.
Mozilla has so many handy features like popup-blocking, tabs and so much more than IE that it beats IE hands down.
First she complains about the installer not making enough decisions, then she complains about SaX making decisions.
In reality, the installer DOES make all decisions. All it does (and that was obviously confusing Eugenia) is SHOW these decisions to you and allow you to change it. But it doesn't force you to do anything at all.
What's wrong with that? The below-average complete moron (which everybody seems to be targetting these days.) just presses "Install" and it installs without any need to configure anything. On a computer with one clean harddrive or partition, the install should work just fine with the default settings.
Hell, even Eugenia was able to install the damn thing, so it's dumbed down enough.
Also, unlike Eugenia sais, SuSE comes with CDs *AND* DVD, not "or".
Total domination by one organization is.
In the end, many, many Linux companies will dominate software just like many, many PC-makers currently dominate hardware.
Since Bitkeeper is a development package, "using" equals "contributing code" for all meaningful cases.
That's of course true, but for an electrical car you have to first convert chemical energy to electrical (in the plant), convert it back into chemical (in the car battery), convert that back into electrical and finally into kinetic energy.
Those losses add up.
Bart has to be Han Solo, Milhouse is good enough for Luke. Just my opinion ;-)