No, no, no. It will look completely different. It'll have rounded corners. Or something. I know! It'll have animated 3D shadows! How can anyone get any work done using a program that lacks animated 3D shadows?
With the engine past the redline there is very little vacuum to operate the power brakes. Without power assist the brakes may not be able to overcome the engine (this is, IMHO, a fundamental design defect).
>...shift into neutral...
The computer may not let you do that with the car moving and the engine at high rpm. After all, the engine and/or transmission might be damaged (another design defect).
>...and/or turn off the key...
Some of these vehicles don't have keys: just a radio remote. The emergency shutdown procedure is to hold a button down for three seconds (another design defect).
The risk is not total loss of the entire database but occasional corruption here and there. However, for Facebook that's tolerable as long as it doesn't rise to a level such that it irritates the users. Given that the average Facebook user can't remember her best friend's phone number, that's a pretty high level.
Except that when somebody asks for my birthdate "for authentication" what they get is wildly different from the real date and also different from the one given to anyone else for the same purpose (on the rare occasions that I give out a birthdate at all).
I don't, but they get rather tedious about it. Particularly silly is the notion that FaceSpacers are "technology experts" while those of us who find "social networking" a bore are "luddites".
In contrast to the government I have no personal reason to distrust Comcast, never having had any dealings with them (and not crediting Slashdot rants about how evil they are). However, trust is not necessary. Both are often quite predictable and in this case the chance that the FCC is hiding something nefarious in this test is so small as to provoke laughter at those who are worried about it.
Besides, any trojan would be aimed at Windows anyway.
> So do people constantly attack Bill Gates accounts?
They probably try, but there is also the matter of attack surface. Gates has no reason to have much of any. There is also the fact that, while far from my favorite person, he is not an idiot. The same cannot be said for the C-level execs of many large businesses with very large attack surfaces.
Slashdot Mirror
> Do they claim so?
The browsers they list as having 90% of the Net have 90% of the Web. As there is more to the Net than the Web they are necessarily wrong.
> Browser usage is definitely what most people do on the Internet...
You forget spammers and botnet operators, both large and growing markets.
> How do you find non-Web resources on the Internet other than through search
> engines on the Web?
I use Gopher.
JavaScript downloaded from a Web site _is_ "untrusted applications". Soon HTML itself will be a full-blown progamming language.
> ...look just like a local app did ten years ago.
No, no, no. It will look completely different. It'll have rounded corners. Or something. I know! It'll have animated 3D shadows! How can anyone get any work done using a program that lacks animated 3D shadows?
> Personally, I reckon they are trying to work out who to sue.
Just be careful never to call it iNdexedDB (or bdDEXEDnI).
> ...it looks like the Golden Age of the web will continue...
Provided that your definition of a Golden Age includes many new and exciting exploits.
> ...Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome account for more than 90 percent
> of the usage on the Net...
The Web is not the Net.
> And I know how to hit the brakes...
With the engine past the redline there is very little vacuum to operate the power brakes. Without power assist the brakes may not be able to overcome the engine (this is, IMHO, a fundamental design defect).
> ...shift into neutral...
The computer may not let you do that with the car moving and the engine at high rpm. After all, the engine and/or transmission might be damaged (another design defect).
> ...and/or turn off the key...
Some of these vehicles don't have keys: just a radio remote. The emergency shutdown procedure is to hold a button down for three seconds (another design defect).
> The two white dwarfs in HM Cancri are so close together that mass is flowing
> from one star to the other.
Not a unique feature of this pair. This is common in pairs that are much farther apart.
> Even if they lose the case, they have to bring the case in the first place.
No they don't. There is clearly no infringement.
> If it were, could Volkswagen sue Apple for the use of the "i" letter since
> the company first used the designation on the Golf GTi in 1975?
Not in the USA. There would be no infringement.
> ...if people will be fooled is irrelevant.
Perhaps in Australia, but in the USA it is the essence of trademark.
> They know that no one is going to confuse this with an actual Apple product,
> but they have to protect the trademark.
If no one is going to confuse this with an actual Apple product the trademark is not threatened.
The risk is not total loss of the entire database but occasional corruption here and there. However, for Facebook that's tolerable as long as it doesn't rise to a level such that it irritates the users. Given that the average Facebook user can't remember her best friend's phone number, that's a pretty high level.
> But if you're at the stage where MySQL isn't able to handle all the data ...it's time to move up to PostgreSQL.
> you're throwing at it...
Except that when somebody asks for my birthdate "for authentication" what they get is wildly different from the real date and also different from the one given to anyone else for the same purpose (on the rare occasions that I give out a birthdate at all).
Lots of John Haslers, but none of them are me.
> So what are the odds of this thing being captured into a long orbit?
Zero.
> ...go to Spokeo and type in your name.
Result:
"A team of untrained hedgehogs searched high and low for the page you were looking for, but alas, they could not find it."
> why do I care what they do?
I don't, but they get rather tedious about it. Particularly silly is the notion that FaceSpacers are "technology experts" while those of us who find "social networking" a bore are "luddites".
> Apparently you can set what your friends can share about you...
That will only work if your friends are too stupid to copy and paste.
Oh. Wait. We're talking about Facebook.
In contrast to the government I have no personal reason to distrust Comcast, never having had any dealings with them (and not crediting Slashdot rants about how evil they are). However, trust is not necessary. Both are often quite predictable and in this case the chance that the FCC is hiding something nefarious in this test is so small as to provoke laughter at those who are worried about it.
Besides, any trojan would be aimed at Windows anyway.
> At best, those who are less stupid than others need to work (and sometimes
> fight) to protect the stupid people from themselves.
Who decides who is stupid?
> So do people constantly attack Bill Gates accounts?
They probably try, but there is also the matter of attack surface. Gates has no reason to have much of any. There is also the fact that, while far from my favorite person, he is not an idiot. The same cannot be said for the C-level execs of many large businesses with very large attack surfaces.
Lie. They are not checking the addresses for validity.
However, their contractor seems to be Slashdotted.
It isn't "vigilantism" to choose to cease doing business with someone. If these ISPs feel that there was a breach of contract they can sue.