msie8 is the first to implement this event. don't know what that is? ajax is the most important technological development in browsers in recent history (invented with microsoft's xmlhttprequest object, btw). however, ajax breaks history and bookmarking (can't go forward/ back, can't bookmark deep into an ajax session)
a way around this has been to hijack the hash part of anchor links, since they stay on the same page, but create a history. initially, this hack didn't work for msie, because msie didn't consider hash changes to be part of the browser's history, invoking valid msie hatred (msie7 fixed that oversight). but now, from the back of the class, msie jumps to the front of the class with onhashchange, becoming the programmer's best friend
currently, there is no way to tell when a browser's anchor hash link changes other than with extremly ugly, resource wasting kludges like putting a "heartbeat" on the web page (every 200 milliseconds, see if the url's hash link has changed... vomit). however, here's a recent history emulator without the odious heartbeat kludge (but no bookmarking functionality):
but now, msie, with onhashchange, makes ajax programming for history/ bookmarking elegant... for the very first time. there's plenty of reasons to hate microsoft folks, but hate them for actual real technical reasons
want one? ok: there's msie8's bullshit compatibility button. since msie8 tries so hard to be compliant for once, it is faced with backwards compatibility issues for rendering sites that only really work on msie now
so the lesson is: by all means, hate microsoft and msie. but make sure your hate is grounded in reality, not ignorant bias which i see in a lot of comments here
throughout the us and much fo the west, traditional newspaper and television news rooms are dying and laying off personnel left and right. the ad revenue just isn't there anymore
if, locked in a room and forced to listen to the contents of your dimwittedness for longer than 10 minutes, i might be persuaded to give up freedom of expression and freedom of the press in order to shut the likes of you up
9/11 truthers creationists fluoridated water/ chemtrail conspiracists fred phelps and westboro nutjobs etc
great flying spaghetti monster save me! chinese style censorial autocracy please!;-P
you can't slander the king in thailand, you can't talk about nazism in germany, you can't besmirch attaturk in turkey, you can't question islam most anywhere islamic, you dare not question the technocrats in china, you dare not be a journalist writing stories critical of the kremlin in russia, you dare not question the tinpot dictator in autocratic countries, etc., etc., etc.
but in much of the west: canada, australia, the usa, i can, for example, call gw bush a fucking moron, and i haven't the faintest doubt nothing bad will come of me for that
that reallty means something in this world
and you who question my pride in the west for this freedom: you have something you wish to criticize about the west and its behavior?
you don't need the hype. linking it to the downfall of vista makes us laugh at you
just describe what it does, dryly, concisely, technically. if it is worthy of the hype, we will supply the hype for you
but when you supply the hype, we are inclined to believe there's not much really going on with your project. which might not be true. so change your tone, for your own sake
and i've always been derided as a microsoft fanboy. when i think its just common sense:
the amount of hacks and viruses and malware on an os/ browser has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than marketshare
you can try to make something as secure as possible, but if the incentive is high, hackers can always pay attention to security way more than you do, and find holes you did not anticipate, no matte rhow subtle
if something is full of security holes, it won't be hacked, if its market share is tiny
meanwhile if something is ironclad, it will still be hacked, if its maker share is huge. the incentive to find holes is so high, the most esoteric avenues of investigation are explored
for saying open source is superior to closed corporate source?
it is: if you have completely control over the source code, there are no "secrets" about the code that a corporation retains control of
this makes it very different when the chinese use access: there is still an outside hand in what china does. with open source, an authoritarian regime doesn't have to listen to you or consult you at all
it completely inverts the supposed ideological superiority of open source
thank god the average chinese citizen has their freedoms fully protected. all they have to do is HACK THE OPERATING SYSTEM. they're protected, no problem
there are some seriously stupid people around here
"oh, we trust an authoritarian government to never FORK the source of an open source project! they might jail you for political dissent, but heavens forbid they fork an open soruce project!"
seriously, what the hell is wrong with you morons?
that which was started to cricumvent corporate control, is used as a tool for authoritarian control
this is not in any way good for linux
it cuts to the very core of the rationale we all use for saying linux and open source software is a superior approach
if the software is coopted and subverted by an authoritarain regime, where is the inherent freedom that makes open software ideologically superior?
a corporate controlled software can make deals with an authoritarian regime, and withhold support for certain functionality. not that they do, but that they can. but with open source, the devil doesn't need to make deals with you, he just ignores you completely, and uses the software for dominance and control as the authoritarian regime sees fit
you're not going to stop heroin junkies, you're not going to secure theft sites
scrap dealers need to be bound up in red tape, and then scrap dealers who skirt the ordinances must be dealt with harshly. you don't have to worry about international or interstate transport, as you are going to destroy your profit margin on what usually amounts to less than $100 for a lot of heavy metal, and you are not usually dealing with criminal masterminds here who would exert the effort. nor do they have the resources to melt it down themselves
the scrap dealer is the point at which illegal goods get turned into legal goods and profit. scrap dealers therefore are going to have to be tied up in laws and regulations in order to stop this trade, and watched like hawks. chain of custody regulations must be put in place: if you use a bunch of metal, you have to produce paperwork detaling where it came from
yes his attack only involves one dns server, but it is devastating and quick and effective. you can attach yourself vampirically to one dns server, sniff for bank info, redirect google, look at email, or whatever, and then quit shop before anyone raises alarm, and set up shop somewhere else, easily and quickly and invisibly
yes, you won't be able to take over ALL dns servers, but why is doing that the only thing that qualifies in your mind as truly threatening? kaminsky's attack, as described, is a hell of a scary hard core hack. its not hype, its the genuine frightening article. its the creme de la creme of hacks: simple, elegant, and as devastating as they come. any yahoo can move in, take over a dns server, victimize users downstream, and move on unnoticed and set up shop somewhere else. hardcore. devastating. frightening
is it some sort of ego thing? you have to belittle the validity of someone else's discovery? why do people consider this hype?
you frequently here discussions on slashdot about grey hat activities: going to computers hosting worms, and shutting down the worm remotely, for example. and you hear many people here supporting that
now in europe, this is exactly what they are going to do: shut down zombies, shut down spam relays, and everyone on slashdot babbles incoherently about teh ev1l gubmint invading our computers. when such european effort sprobably sprang directly from the kind of strategizing peopl ehere on slashdot frequnetly engage in enthusiastically
its like the propaganda and hysteria over the lori drew case, which carries no precedent because it is such an extreme outlier
so:
do you care about rights and freedoms?
you do?
then react to REAL and GENUINE threats to them
if you instead spastically flail out everytime someone words an article in a propagandistic manner, you are no defender of rights and freedoms, you are merely a manipulated hysterical fool. and, in fact, someone useful for the suppression of our rights, by proving to those who wish to restrict our rights that people don't even understand what their rights are
defend your rights and freedoms
against genuine threats
not smoke and mirrors... thereby demonstrating you are a spastic twit who doesn't even know what your rights and freedoms are
Slashdot Mirror
onhashchange
http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2008/03/ie8-html5-and-a/
msie8 is the first to implement this event. don't know what that is? ajax is the most important technological development in browsers in recent history (invented with microsoft's xmlhttprequest object, btw). however, ajax breaks history and bookmarking (can't go forward/ back, can't bookmark deep into an ajax session)
a way around this has been to hijack the hash part of anchor links, since they stay on the same page, but create a history. initially, this hack didn't work for msie, because msie didn't consider hash changes to be part of the browser's history, invoking valid msie hatred (msie7 fixed that oversight). but now, from the back of the class, msie jumps to the front of the class with onhashchange, becoming the programmer's best friend
currently, there is no way to tell when a browser's anchor hash link changes other than with extremly ugly, resource wasting kludges like putting a "heartbeat" on the web page (every 200 milliseconds, see if the url's hash link has changed... vomit). however, here's a recent history emulator without the odious heartbeat kludge (but no bookmarking functionality):
http://www.zachleat.com/web/2008/08/21/onhashchange-without-setinterval/
but now, msie, with onhashchange, makes ajax programming for history/ bookmarking elegant... for the very first time. there's plenty of reasons to hate microsoft folks, but hate them for actual real technical reasons
want one? ok: there's msie8's bullshit compatibility button. since msie8 tries so hard to be compliant for once, it is faced with backwards compatibility issues for rendering sites that only really work on msie now
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/08/27/introducing-compatibility-view.aspx
ugggh
so the lesson is: by all means, hate microsoft and msie. but make sure your hate is grounded in reality, not ignorant bias which i see in a lot of comments here
throughout the us and much fo the west, traditional newspaper and television news rooms are dying and laying off personnel left and right. the ad revenue just isn't there anymore
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/nbc/nbcu_to_cut_500_jobs_layoffs_begin_at_nbc_news_bureaus_102371.asp
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_11142071
pretty soon, all we will be left with are 10 reporters, the drudgereport and 10,000 bloviating bloggers
(shudder)
you must suffer the bloviating of morons
if, locked in a room and forced to listen to the contents of your dimwittedness for longer than 10 minutes, i might be persuaded to give up freedom of expression and freedom of the press in order to shut the likes of you up
9/11 truthers
creationists
fluoridated water/ chemtrail conspiracists
fred phelps and westboro nutjobs
etc
great flying spaghetti monster save me! chinese style censorial autocracy please! ;-P
1. start with 1 throwaway silly joke
1
2. multiply that by the Humorlessness constant
1 * H
3. add 300% overhead cost of a mediocre informative rating
1 * H * 300%
4. factor by the coefficient of who gives a shit
F(1 * H * 300%)W
and you are left with 3 users of IPv6
so there
you mean it went from 1 person to 3 people?
you can't slander the king in thailand, you can't talk about nazism in germany, you can't besmirch attaturk in turkey, you can't question islam most anywhere islamic, you dare not question the technocrats in china, you dare not be a journalist writing stories critical of the kremlin in russia, you dare not question the tinpot dictator in autocratic countries, etc., etc., etc.
but in much of the west: canada, australia, the usa, i can, for example, call gw bush a fucking moron, and i haven't the faintest doubt nothing bad will come of me for that
that reallty means something in this world
and you who question my pride in the west for this freedom: you have something you wish to criticize about the west and its behavior?
ok. go ahead
thereby further proving my point ;-)
1. it just sounds cool
2. sometimes in scrabble, you need to get rid of a lot of Is
language isn't a top down authoritarian function, its trickle up from the bottom
therefore, here in this thread, based on my authority of having none at all, i hereby announce "virii" to be a valid word in the english language
use it profusely, use it constantly, use it anywhere
and in such a way, make it a valid word
motion has passed
"whilst many people would be capable of making the same deductions, many people are not"
the people who are not making the deductions you are making are the ones who seem to be in better contact with reality
regardless, no one likes someone else making deductions for them, no matter how truthful
its patronizing, it drives people away. it demonstrates a colossal arrogance
i've been using antivir for the past 2 years on vista and xp. solid, good antivirus
you don't need the hype. linking it to the downfall of vista makes us laugh at you
just describe what it does, dryly, concisely, technically. if it is worthy of the hype, we will supply the hype for you
but when you supply the hype, we are inclined to believe there's not much really going on with your project. which might not be true. so change your tone, for your own sake
"the majority of bugs and spyware and crap out there now is obviously written by people without much talent"
i'm not saying the guys doing this are good, or deserve anything but jailtime/ fine/ etc
but they certainly are not stupid
meanwhile, by thinking they are stupid, you are displaying an unhealthy amount of arrogance and hubris
do you know what it takes to find a hole in a system and exploit it?
yu have to surpass the minds of those who have already given the area a lot of thought
and i've always been derided as a microsoft fanboy. when i think its just common sense:
the amount of hacks and viruses and malware on an os/ browser has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than marketshare
you can try to make something as secure as possible, but if the incentive is high, hackers can always pay attention to security way more than you do, and find holes you did not anticipate, no matte rhow subtle
if something is full of security holes, it won't be hacked, if its market share is tiny
meanwhile if something is ironclad, it will still be hacked, if its maker share is huge. the incentive to find holes is so high, the most esoteric avenues of investigation are explored
for saying open source is superior to closed corporate source?
it is: if you have completely control over the source code, there are no "secrets" about the code that a corporation retains control of
this makes it very different when the chinese use access: there is still an outside hand in what china does. with open source, an authoritarian regime doesn't have to listen to you or consult you at all
it completely inverts the supposed ideological superiority of open source
thank god the average chinese citizen has their freedoms fully protected. all they have to do is HACK THE OPERATING SYSTEM. they're protected, no problem
there are some seriously stupid people around here
but since we're talking about CHINA, what's the fucking point exactly?
it's an AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENT
do any of you understand the fucking concept?
"oh, we trust an authoritarian government to never FORK the source of an open source project! they might jail you for political dissent, but heavens forbid they fork an open soruce project!"
seriously, what the hell is wrong with you morons?
no wai reely? kid is 8-X X-P brb
k thx lol
that which was started to cricumvent corporate control, is used as a tool for authoritarian control
this is not in any way good for linux
it cuts to the very core of the rationale we all use for saying linux and open source software is a superior approach
if the software is coopted and subverted by an authoritarain regime, where is the inherent freedom that makes open software ideologically superior?
a corporate controlled software can make deals with an authoritarian regime, and withhold support for certain functionality. not that they do, but that they can. but with open source, the devil doesn't need to make deals with you, he just ignores you completely, and uses the software for dominance and control as the authoritarian regime sees fit
you support an authoritarian government imposing its prescription for surveillance on ITS PEOPLE
why? because the us govt might spy on that authoritarian government
i am sorry, but i am not diplomatic person: you are a fucking retard
that's the choke point
you're not going to stop heroin junkies, you're not going to secure theft sites
scrap dealers need to be bound up in red tape, and then scrap dealers who skirt the ordinances must be dealt with harshly. you don't have to worry about international or interstate transport, as you are going to destroy your profit margin on what usually amounts to less than $100 for a lot of heavy metal, and you are not usually dealing with criminal masterminds here who would exert the effort. nor do they have the resources to melt it down themselves
the scrap dealer is the point at which illegal goods get turned into legal goods and profit. scrap dealers therefore are going to have to be tied up in laws and regulations in order to stop this trade, and watched like hawks. chain of custody regulations must be put in place: if you use a bunch of metal, you have to produce paperwork detaling where it came from
yes his attack only involves one dns server, but it is devastating and quick and effective. you can attach yourself vampirically to one dns server, sniff for bank info, redirect google, look at email, or whatever, and then quit shop before anyone raises alarm, and set up shop somewhere else, easily and quickly and invisibly
yes, you won't be able to take over ALL dns servers, but why is doing that the only thing that qualifies in your mind as truly threatening? kaminsky's attack, as described, is a hell of a scary hard core hack. its not hype, its the genuine frightening article. its the creme de la creme of hacks: simple, elegant, and as devastating as they come. any yahoo can move in, take over a dns server, victimize users downstream, and move on unnoticed and set up shop somewhere else. hardcore. devastating. frightening
is it some sort of ego thing? you have to belittle the validity of someone else's discovery? why do people consider this hype?
aren't you constitutionally required to use the nord browser (opera)?
and yet the government still has more integrity than some yahoo in his parent's basement, which was my whole point
because with the government there is accountablity, responsilibty, a paper trail, transparency
and a grey hat is some yahoo in his parent's basement
your wisdom on who to trust is awesome
you frequently here discussions on slashdot about grey hat activities: going to computers hosting worms, and shutting down the worm remotely, for example. and you hear many people here supporting that
now in europe, this is exactly what they are going to do: shut down zombies, shut down spam relays, and everyone on slashdot babbles incoherently about teh ev1l gubmint invading our computers. when such european effort sprobably sprang directly from the kind of strategizing peopl ehere on slashdot frequnetly engage in enthusiastically
its like the propaganda and hysteria over the lori drew case, which carries no precedent because it is such an extreme outlier
so:
do you care about rights and freedoms?
you do?
then react to REAL and GENUINE threats to them
if you instead spastically flail out everytime someone words an article in a propagandistic manner, you are no defender of rights and freedoms, you are merely a manipulated hysterical fool. and, in fact, someone useful for the suppression of our rights, by proving to those who wish to restrict our rights that people don't even understand what their rights are
defend your rights and freedoms
against genuine threats
not smoke and mirrors... thereby demonstrating you are a spastic twit who doesn't even know what your rights and freedoms are