From TFA: The malware looks like a ordinary Flash file, with its redirect function encrypted, so that when publishers upload it, the malware is not detectable.
All Doubleclick has to do is require the actionscript source code for all ads. There is *no good reason* for an advertiser to hide anything from doubleclick. Send doubleclick your sourcecode. They will compile it into a.swf file. If you don't like that policy, then you can find another distributer for your ads. If your actionscript is so convoluted or obfuscated that doubleclicks programmer can't figure it out, then you can wait in line until the programmer can figure it out, or you can simplify it.
My guess is, they told him, "we are suing you for a brazillion dollars. You can't sell this condo because we fully expect that the court is going to award it to us by this time next week."
Basically, just bullying him. I think the best way to get justice here would be for people to google-bomb the words, "ebay holding company" and also the name of this company so that searches point to this guy's blog.
When the paper was published in 1955, it wasn't controversial, and there weren't creationists around to parade it as proof of their ideas. This whole giant clusterfuck "debate" where so many people make fools of themselves with this ID/creationism idea, is actually fairly new - let me be clear, what I mean is, the fury of the controversy is new. In 1955, a scientist could publish a paper about evolution and then go to church on Sunday. Science and religion weren't seen as either/or propositions as they are today. The generation that advanced science (arguably) more than any other, the generation that gave us computers and space travel, didn't get its panties in a bunch over evolution or religion.
What seems to have happened is that some creationists decided to make evolution their litmus test. They decided to make it a big controvery. They decided to tell people that "omfg we have to oppose this with every fiber of our being" and I really haven't a clue why they did that (other than being stupid).
This has happened before. There used to be people who believed in geocentrism for the exact same reason taht people reject evolution - because they just honestly WANT to believe the bible. But here's the deal, even creationist don't believe in geocentrism, yet creationist still believe the bible. So what happened? They just changed their interpretation of it. I can't figure out why they don't just do that again.
That's clearly NOT the meaning that the authors intended, as evidenced by use of the word "perceived." This was a survey where they asked people, "do you perceive any bias here" and then they compared the salaries of people who perceived bias with those who did not. The only possible way to interpret the word bias in this context is unfair discrimination.
And the results are quite interesting. If a woman *thinks* there is discrimination, she tends to make more money than a woman who doesn't think there is any discrimination. The opposite is true of men. I don't even know how to begin to interpret that.
Each card has a public and private key. The cable company's signal is also encrypted, but there's a public band somewhere where the cable company can communicate will any cablecard that happens to be listening. So you plug the cable card into the TV (or tivo or whatever) and then go to the setup menu and read off a string of numbers. That string represents the card's public key.
The cable company takes its encryption key and encrypts it with the card's public key, then transmits that over the public band. Every cable card device sees this, but only the target card (your card) is able to read it, and use the card's private key to decrypt it.
So now the card has been given the cable company's encryption key, and can decrypt the signal and let you watch all the sweet sweet porn.^H^H^H^H^H discovery HD. The cable company periodically changes its key, and it keeps a list of all the cable cards that are authorized and sends the new key to all those cards.
IF you had all of this working in software, then you could copy the cable company's key into as many other devices as you want. That way, you could pay for one TV, but have other TVs authorized. But, you would have to keep copying the key to all the other devices. You absolutely could not get perpetual free cable. The best you can do is pay for one but actually have many. Hardly even seems worth it.
Just FYI, Libertarians do *not* believe that the free market is a panacea, only that it is usually better than a government solution in terms of efficiency and the resulting choice and freedom.
Yes, but the MRI was an actual invention. It was something new and took research and hard work to bring it to fruition. What bothers most people are cases like what happened to blackberry. Some company had patented, "email over wireless" which is an absolutely ridiculous thing to call an invention. More likely, the patent company had a grid with buzzwords on the X and Y axis and they just patented every point on the grid. Like this:
Email-X-X Web-X-X Usenet-X-X over-RSS-Wireless
So they've got six patents right there: Email over RSS. Web over RSS. Usenet over RSS. Email over wireless. Web over wireless. Usenet over wireless.
So while you're describing the MRI story, most people here on slashdot are thinking about Blackberry. Right now, we don't actually know if this hard drive patent is an MRI case or a blackberry case.
I know you're joking. Somebody made a fake video and claimed it was footage from an apollo 20 mission, so I know you must be joking, because nobody is dumb enough to fall for such an obvious fake.
Re:Not Any Time Soon
on
Cracking Go
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It will be interesting to see if any follow-up mission to Saturn will ever happen
I think it's unlikely to happen for 50 years or more, and that's kind of sad.
But who knows, maybe there'll be some major technological advance that'll make Cassini-like probes common place. Maybe we'll build a space elevator, or maybe we'll start using nerva rockets. Heck, if we (the US) can manage to get Ares built, think of the upper stage booster we could mount on that puppy! We could have landers the mass of Cassini - maybe.
In the mean time, we can get excited about New Horizons (what I've been trying to do is get my nephew to understand the concept that, no matter how hard he wishes for it, he can't possibly know what Pluto looks like, and no human has ever seen it - that way, when the pics come in, it will be something special for him). And if the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter mission happens, that'll be awesome too.
No references to the book 2001, A Space Odyssey yet? You guys are slipping. In the mid '60s, when A.C. Clarke wrote the book, he asked asked astronomers (mainstream scientists, not UFO nuts) "if you had to pick one object in the solar system that appeared artificial, what would it be?" They all picked Iapetus. At the time, the blurry photos we had from ground-based telescopes could tell us that it was 50% light and 50% dark, but nothing else. It was a big mystery, even after the Voyager flybys. For that reason, Clarke used Iapetus as the sight of the monolith stargate (the movie version used Jupiter).
We're really lucky to live in a time when all these mysteries are solved.
I agree with your point, and just want to say that Flex is an alternative to a client-server app written in Java or.Net or whatever. It isn't an alternative to a website.
If you want a website and some basic interaction with the user, then use HTML and a server-side language.
But if for some reason you need to let a user do a lot of very complex data manipulation, then doing it client-side makes more sense, and in that situation, HTML and javascript has *always* been the *wrong* answer. It has always been better to solve that problem with java, or something similar. Now you have one more tool to solve that problem.
But you're right, there will always be people who will see every problem as a nail (because all they have is a hammer). That doesn't mean that hammers aren't useful.
Their pricing model is sort of similar to what MS is doing with.NET. You can actually get a command-line compiler and build flex apps for free, just like you can compile to.net bytecode for free. What Adobe charges $500 for is the IDE (there is a standalone that's based on Eclipse and an Eclipse plugin). So what you're really paying for is code introspection, code behind, a debugger, and a design view (it seems that the design view doesn't work in the linux version).
There's also an educational version for around $40 and some kind of subscription service similar to microsoft select. You can also get a 30-day trial, which should be enough to get you up to speed on the language, then you could move to the free stuff if you wanted.
Like other client-side technologies, Flex makes liberal use of web services, and that's cool - Another thing you get if you actually buy Flex is something called ColdFusion remoting. This is a way of integrating with Adobe's coldfusion server. You build a SOAP web service in coldfusion, but if you have CF-Remoting then you can talk to that service with a different protocol that SOAP. Supposedly, it's faster because it's not using XML. But you're not locked into it because the service is still available as a standard web service, complete with WSDL and all that. Sounds intriguing. I haven't really checked it out.
Some of the kinetic energy from any impact is converted to heat. Even if the object is made of ice, it's still going to do that. In this case, it released enough KE to boil a bit of water and make the first few people who rushed to the site ill.
But you're right, the meteorite wasn't a glowing hot ball that took days to cool, and boiled water the whole time. This was a quick, flash effect that was over instantly.
persistent data in flash is only available to the domain that stored it. In other words, if a flash app that you downloaded from www.yousuck.com saves data, it cannot be read by a flash app you download from www.noseriouslyyousuck.com. So the truth is, flash is better for you in terms of privacy than are standard browser cookies.
But wait (you're probably thinking) if google is serving every ad, then the domain is always google and google can then track where you're going!!
That's true, and also irrelevant. If google is serving every ad then guess what, google can just look in their webserver logs for your IP address. So flash does nothing for them. The privacy issue with cookies was **interdomain** cookies. Flash has nothing like that. I wish it did actually. It's a pain in some cases. I do some coding in flex and, by default, flash wont even so much as hit a webservice from another domain. Adobe really locked it down.
So anyway, the bottom line is that google isn't going to get any more information about you from flash than what they get anyway from their webserver logs. So chill out.
you really are some kind of moron if you think a bunch of cops are standing around listening to what questions people ask and when whey hear, "disenfranchisement" they swing into action and start tasering. I mean, seriously. If you honestly think that the cops just decided among themselves that the content of his question was inappropriate, then you are delusional. You just can't possibly be sane.
Those cops are making minimum wage. They don't give a flying fuck what questions people ask. Hell, one of the cops was black. If anything, he probably agreed with the question.
So no, there is no possible way that the cops "just didn't like the content of his question." That is a ridiculous statement.
Just to review, here's what happened in our conversation: 1. you made a statement that was patently false. You claimed that the police didn't like the content of the kid's questions. 2. I called you on that ridiculous statement. 3. unable to formulate a rational or logical response to me, you tell me to DIAF.
He was - from what I saw - moving along with the herd of cops, towards the door.
bullshit. Watch it again. The black cop has to just about pick him up. He fights that cop all the way to the back of the auditorium - and here's a key point: had he just let the black guy carry him outside, that would be the end of it. But no, watch carefully, he jumps away from the black guy and then turns and runs back toward the crowd. That's when they finally tackled him and the female cop pulls the taser. Even there, he could have just chilled the fuck out and they probably would have just cuffed him, taken him outside, maybe made him sit in a car for a while, then let him go.
At 44 seconds the one cop picks him up to carry him out.
At 50 seconds he breaks away from the cop and tries to run back toward the crowd.
You're just so wrong about this. Everything that *he* did earned him that tasering. He is 100% at fault.
Those aren't crimes in and of themselves.
correct. And he wasn't arrested for that. The punishment for being a rude asshole and taking up other people's Q and A time was that he his mic was cut. That's it. That's all that had to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
From TFA: The malware looks like a ordinary Flash file, with its redirect function encrypted, so that when publishers upload it, the malware is not detectable.
.swf file. If you don't like that policy, then you can find another distributer for your ads. If your actionscript is so convoluted or obfuscated that doubleclicks programmer can't figure it out, then you can wait in line until the programmer can figure it out, or you can simplify it.
All Doubleclick has to do is require the actionscript source code for all ads. There is *no good reason* for an advertiser to hide anything from doubleclick. Send doubleclick your sourcecode. They will compile it into a
Problem solved.
"[The Earth] doesn't love you any more than your pet rock does."
Remember, the Earth will not talk to you, and if fact, it cannot speak. If the Earth does talk to you, we encourage you to ignore its advice.
My guess is, they told him, "we are suing you for a brazillion dollars. You can't sell this condo because we fully expect that the court is going to award it to us by this time next week."
Basically, just bullying him. I think the best way to get justice here would be for people to google-bomb the words, "ebay holding company" and also the name of this company so that searches point to this guy's blog.
When the paper was published in 1955, it wasn't controversial, and there weren't creationists around to parade it as proof of their ideas. This whole giant clusterfuck "debate" where so many people make fools of themselves with this ID/creationism idea, is actually fairly new - let me be clear, what I mean is, the fury of the controversy is new. In 1955, a scientist could publish a paper about evolution and then go to church on Sunday. Science and religion weren't seen as either/or propositions as they are today. The generation that advanced science (arguably) more than any other, the generation that gave us computers and space travel, didn't get its panties in a bunch over evolution or religion.
What seems to have happened is that some creationists decided to make evolution their litmus test. They decided to make it a big controvery. They decided to tell people that "omfg we have to oppose this with every fiber of our being" and I really haven't a clue why they did that (other than being stupid).
This has happened before. There used to be people who believed in geocentrism for the exact same reason taht people reject evolution - because they just honestly WANT to believe the bible. But here's the deal, even creationist don't believe in geocentrism, yet creationist still believe the bible. So what happened? They just changed their interpretation of it. I can't figure out why they don't just do that again.
Excel is great, unless you want to multiply 77.1 * 850, in which case it gives you the wrong answer*
*Excel 2007 anyway.
You should not let your political views filter your hearing like that.
It's a bit like what many religious people do, isn't it. Sad.
That's clearly NOT the meaning that the authors intended, as evidenced by use of the word "perceived." This was a survey where they asked people, "do you perceive any bias here" and then they compared the salaries of people who perceived bias with those who did not. The only possible way to interpret the word bias in this context is unfair discrimination.
And the results are quite interesting. If a woman *thinks* there is discrimination, she tends to make more money than a woman who doesn't think there is any discrimination. The opposite is true of men. I don't even know how to begin to interpret that.
Each card has a public and private key. The cable company's signal is also encrypted, but there's a public band somewhere where the cable company can communicate will any cablecard that happens to be listening. So you plug the cable card into the TV (or tivo or whatever) and then go to the setup menu and read off a string of numbers. That string represents the card's public key.
The cable company takes its encryption key and encrypts it with the card's public key, then transmits that over the public band. Every cable card device sees this, but only the target card (your card) is able to read it, and use the card's private key to decrypt it.
So now the card has been given the cable company's encryption key, and can decrypt the signal and let you watch all the sweet sweet porn.^H^H^H^H^H discovery HD. The cable company periodically changes its key, and it keeps a list of all the cable cards that are authorized and sends the new key to all those cards.
IF you had all of this working in software, then you could copy the cable company's key into as many other devices as you want. That way, you could pay for one TV, but have other TVs authorized. But, you would have to keep copying the key to all the other devices. You absolutely could not get perpetual free cable. The best you can do is pay for one but actually have many. Hardly even seems worth it.
Just FYI, Libertarians do *not* believe that the free market is a panacea, only that it is usually better than a government solution in terms of efficiency and the resulting choice and freedom.
Yes, but the MRI was an actual invention. It was something new and took research and hard work to bring it to fruition. What bothers most people are cases like what happened to blackberry. Some company had patented, "email over wireless" which is an absolutely ridiculous thing to call an invention. More likely, the patent company had a grid with buzzwords on the X and Y axis and they just patented every point on the grid. Like this:
Email-X-X
Web-X-X
Usenet-X-X
over-RSS-Wireless
So they've got six patents right there: Email over RSS. Web over RSS. Usenet over RSS. Email over wireless. Web over wireless. Usenet over wireless.
So while you're describing the MRI story, most people here on slashdot are thinking about Blackberry. Right now, we don't actually know if this hard drive patent is an MRI case or a blackberry case.
The resolution will be 10 meters per pixel. That's not good enough to see the lander bases from apollo, let alone any footprints.
wiki article (look for the data on the Terrain Camera)
I know you're joking. Somebody made a fake video and claimed it was footage from an apollo 20 mission, so I know you must be joking, because nobody is dumb enough to fall for such an obvious fake.
A much better comparison: A typical star contains *only* about 10^57 atoms
I've been adding it to my pages as I work on them, but I haven't worked on that page for a while.
You should use something like PHP. Then you could have an includable header... oh wait, nevermind.
It will be interesting to see if any follow-up mission to Saturn will ever happen
I think it's unlikely to happen for 50 years or more, and that's kind of sad.
But who knows, maybe there'll be some major technological advance that'll make Cassini-like probes common place. Maybe we'll build a space elevator, or maybe we'll start using nerva rockets. Heck, if we (the US) can manage to get Ares built, think of the upper stage booster we could mount on that puppy! We could have landers the mass of Cassini - maybe.
In the mean time, we can get excited about New Horizons (what I've been trying to do is get my nephew to understand the concept that, no matter how hard he wishes for it, he can't possibly know what Pluto looks like, and no human has ever seen it - that way, when the pics come in, it will be something special for him). And if the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter mission happens, that'll be awesome too.
No references to the book 2001, A Space Odyssey yet? You guys are slipping. In the mid '60s, when A.C. Clarke wrote the book, he asked asked astronomers (mainstream scientists, not UFO nuts) "if you had to pick one object in the solar system that appeared artificial, what would it be?" They all picked Iapetus. At the time, the blurry photos we had from ground-based telescopes could tell us that it was 50% light and 50% dark, but nothing else. It was a big mystery, even after the Voyager flybys. For that reason, Clarke used Iapetus as the sight of the monolith stargate (the movie version used Jupiter).
We're really lucky to live in a time when all these mysteries are solved.
Minus the hallucinations.
Where's the fun in that??
I agree with your point, and just want to say that Flex is an alternative to a client-server app written in Java or .Net or whatever. It isn't an alternative to a website.
If you want a website and some basic interaction with the user, then use HTML and a server-side language.
But if for some reason you need to let a user do a lot of very complex data manipulation, then doing it client-side makes more sense, and in that situation, HTML and javascript has *always* been the *wrong* answer. It has always been better to solve that problem with java, or something similar. Now you have one more tool to solve that problem.
But you're right, there will always be people who will see every problem as a nail (because all they have is a hammer). That doesn't mean that hammers aren't useful.
Their pricing model is sort of similar to what MS is doing with .NET. You can actually get a command-line compiler and build flex apps for free, just like you can compile to .net bytecode for free. What Adobe charges $500 for is the IDE (there is a standalone that's based on Eclipse and an Eclipse plugin). So what you're really paying for is code introspection, code behind, a debugger, and a design view (it seems that the design view doesn't work in the linux version).
There's also an educational version for around $40 and some kind of subscription service similar to microsoft select. You can also get a 30-day trial, which should be enough to get you up to speed on the language, then you could move to the free stuff if you wanted.
Like other client-side technologies, Flex makes liberal use of web services, and that's cool - Another thing you get if you actually buy Flex is something called ColdFusion remoting. This is a way of integrating with Adobe's coldfusion server. You build a SOAP web service in coldfusion, but if you have CF-Remoting then you can talk to that service with a different protocol that SOAP. Supposedly, it's faster because it's not using XML. But you're not locked into it because the service is still available as a standard web service, complete with WSDL and all that. Sounds intriguing. I haven't really checked it out.
It's also quite possible at this point that I've spent more time browsing this website than the total amount of time I've spent having sex.
I guess I should kill myself or something.
Some of the kinetic energy from any impact is converted to heat. Even if the object is made of ice, it's still going to do that. In this case, it released enough KE to boil a bit of water and make the first few people who rushed to the site ill.
But you're right, the meteorite wasn't a glowing hot ball that took days to cool, and boiled water the whole time. This was a quick, flash effect that was over instantly.
persistent data in flash is only available to the domain that stored it. In other words, if a flash app that you downloaded from www.yousuck.com saves data, it cannot be read by a flash app you download from www.noseriouslyyousuck.com. So the truth is, flash is better for you in terms of privacy than are standard browser cookies.
But wait (you're probably thinking) if google is serving every ad, then the domain is always google and google can then track where you're going!!
That's true, and also irrelevant. If google is serving every ad then guess what, google can just look in their webserver logs for your IP address. So flash does nothing for them. The privacy issue with cookies was **interdomain** cookies. Flash has nothing like that. I wish it did actually. It's a pain in some cases. I do some coding in flex and, by default, flash wont even so much as hit a webservice from another domain. Adobe really locked it down.
So anyway, the bottom line is that google isn't going to get any more information about you from flash than what they get anyway from their webserver logs. So chill out.
you really are some kind of moron if you think a bunch of cops are standing around listening to what questions people ask and when whey hear, "disenfranchisement" they swing into action and start tasering. I mean, seriously. If you honestly think that the cops just decided among themselves that the content of his question was inappropriate, then you are delusional. You just can't possibly be sane.
Those cops are making minimum wage. They don't give a flying fuck what questions people ask. Hell, one of the cops was black. If anything, he probably agreed with the question.
So no, there is no possible way that the cops "just didn't like the content of his question." That is a ridiculous statement.
hmm, that's not a very effective response.
Just to review, here's what happened in our conversation:
1. you made a statement that was patently false. You claimed that the police didn't like the content of the kid's questions.
2. I called you on that ridiculous statement.
3. unable to formulate a rational or logical response to me, you tell me to DIAF.
nice.
He was - from what I saw - moving along with the herd of cops, towards the door.
bullshit. Watch it again. The black cop has to just about pick him up. He fights that cop all the way to the back of the auditorium - and here's a key point: had he just let the black guy carry him outside, that would be the end of it. But no, watch carefully, he jumps away from the black guy and then turns and runs back toward the crowd. That's when they finally tackled him and the female cop pulls the taser. Even there, he could have just chilled the fuck out and they probably would have just cuffed him, taken him outside, maybe made him sit in a car for a while, then let him go.
You really need to watch the video more closely.
At 44 seconds the one cop picks him up to carry him out.
At 50 seconds he breaks away from the cop and tries to run back toward the crowd.
You're just so wrong about this. Everything that *he* did earned him that tasering. He is 100% at fault.
Those aren't crimes in and of themselves.
correct. And he wasn't arrested for that. The punishment for being a rude asshole and taking up other people's Q and A time was that he his mic was cut. That's it. That's all that had to happen.