Not always though. Windows 95 had a disk that was distributed with OEM restore disks that was called the "Windows 95 Companion CD" or something to that effect. It was a copy of the Win95 install disk without the setup program. (You couldn't boot from it either. Not that it would do you any good if you could.) Basically anytime you were prompted by Windows to insert your Windows Install disk you would use this one instead. A common trick at the time was to copy the setup program from a real Win95 install disk and use it with the files on this disk to reinstall Windows. This let you reinstall without all the crud the OEM setup forced on you. Though to be fair my computer's restore disk came with two options, bare windows install (wasn't a completely standard install, but didn't include any additional programs)or factory setup (i.e. loaded with the previously mentioned worthless crud).
The previous version check on the MS-DOS 6.22 upgrade disk set was pathetically broken. The setup program on the boot disk for it didn't really check versions. You could use the boot disk to partition the hard drive, format the hard drive, and transfer the system files from the boot disk to the hard drive. Once that was done you could reboot the machine using the boot disk and it would allow you to "upgrade" to MS-DOS 6.22. No previous version of DOS was actually necessary. (Of course this may be what you meant...)
Minor quibble, but the 16-bit version of IE sucked too. I've used both, and frankly they were both trash.
If Microsoft couldn't make a decent browser for Windows 3.1 (to which they had full access to the source code), how can you fault Netscape for being unable to do so either?
It might have something to do with the "world-wide" bit....
If someone knows what a web browser is, it is likely that they will also know what the "World Wide Web" is. (Emphasis on the "World Wide" part.) In fact I'd say it would be highly unlikely that anyone would get one of these without at least that being explained to them. Probably a "here's the basics, now have at it" sort of deal.
Besides can you think of a better one? Seriously, if you think a globe doesn't work as an appropriate icon then step up to the plate, what would you use? Why?
I was unaware about the rate quotes on property loans. That's rather interesting. I see your point with reguards to unfairness.
Still, I stand by my statement's accuracy. Credit report inquiries show that you've applied for credit, nothing more and nothing less. If you're comparison shopping by actually applying for loans, you can't really complain that the credit bureaus show you have.
For what it is worth, most credit card applications aren't automatically approved/rejected. Generally speaking for that to happen your credit rating has to really good or really bad. (Mind-boggling what people will do to their credit score by the way, I've actually seen a five.) A couple of inquiries aren't going to decrease your chance for approval all that much. Anyone who falls in the middle is probably going to be reviewed by a human and not a computer. They tend to be a bit more forgiving and unless there is a large number of inquiries, they probably ignore them for the most part. Payment history is the big decider. (House loans would tend to be a bit more strict than credit cards I'd imagine, being a few orders of magnitude larger.)
No, it isn't an example of comparison shopping. It's an example of someone applying for multiple accounts/loans. Comparison shopping would be getting credit applications from multiple creditors and reviewing them to pick the best offer. You don't get a credit report inquiry for looking at a credit application. The only time the credit bureaus are involved is when you actually apply and the creditor requests a credit report. At that point one would hope you had already picked one.
The inquiries are used to weigh the short-term risk that some accounts aren't on the report yet. Most creditors, in the US, report credit information to the bureaus once a month. Inquiries show up immediately. If someone has perfect credit going back a long way, then suddenly starts applying for multiple loans, the inquiries show that the current list of accounts might not contain all of the applicant's accounts, i.e. ones that may have been approved this month. Credit ratings are based, roughly, on the amount of credit you possess vs. the amount of that credit you have used. (This assumes of course that you are current in all your accounts.)
I used to work for a credit card company, many years ago, and I can confirm that this is (or at least was) true. The logic behind this is painfully simple; if you are requesting credit from multiple companies in a short time frame you are probably a credit risk. It's also a possible indicator of identity theft.
If memory serves me correctly, the christian church co-opted a pre-existing holiday for the day of Christ's rebirth. The original holy day was a pagan fertility celebration. (And one must imagine it was a great deal more fun to celebrate than anything the christian church had to offer.)
The Easter bunny and Easter eggs have nothing to do with Christianity. It makes little sense in the context of rebirth. It makes a great deal of sense when you consider that both are symbols of fertility.
Not quite correct. The screening is done prior to arrival. The article doesn't say when, just that nothing happens because of it until the "suspect" deplanes (is on US soil) and, one must assume, subject to arrest.
Regardless, here is another quote from the article: The system appears to fly in the face of legal requirements Congress has placed in the Homeland Security appropriations bills for the last three years, which states, "None of the funds provided in this or previous appropriations Acts may be utilized to develop or test algorithms assigning risk to passengers whose names are not on government watch lists."
I don't see anything specifically about prescreening there.
I think we are definitely in agreement on the potential problems. This means a lot of defensive programming on the server side of things because the client must be considered to be compromised. You can't institute any sort of client-side solution (PunkBuster) because the client source must be made available. My example of a radar display shows that you can't send anything secret to the client. So if the player isn't supposed to know something the server can not send the information to the client software at all. The client is basically forced into the role of a graphical dumb terminal.
To be honest I'd have to say that I'm not convinced the FOSS is the best model here either. It's not a project that I'd want for my own. But if you were determined it might be doable. You'd probably need some fairly hefty servers though.
Be serious, if you have a legitimate bugfix you would submit it to the maintainer of the particular game for inclusion in the offical client software. It's not like every game using this server would be using the same version of the client installed from a single source. Each would most likely customize it to their particular taste.
That said, there's a difference between fixing a memory leak, and telling the server that you're now two zones away from your previous location. It would be your client software's interactions with the server that would get you banned, not what you did locally. In other words, your version of the client might display a radar-style map of hostiles where the "official" client doesn't and this would be fine. No one but you would know, however attacking a hostile mob on the other side of a wall at twice maximum range would probably get you banned. See the difference?
Easiest way would be to operate with the assumption that the client software is untrustworthy and verify anything that it sends to the server. This would of course require additional code on the server. But this is well know in game design (at least in the few books I've read on the subject).
As long as you don't distribute the modified server binaries you wouldn't be required by the GPL to distribute the servers' new source code. The cheaters wouldn't be able to know what you were checking until you started banning them.
On the off chance that your question is a serious one, I'll try to explain. The primary difference between American cartoons and Japanese cartoons is, in my opinion at least, the target audience. American society views cartoons as intended for children. Most of the cartoons produced here in the states are simple and devoid of anything that might offend parents. You will never see Disney (or any other domestic cartoon studio) release anything like "Ninja Scroll", "Slayer", or "Demon City Shinjuku". They're not child-safe. (Remember cartoons are for children.)
This isn't the case with the Japanese cartoons, which is why most fans of anime that I've personally met refer to it as anime instead of Japanese cartoons. The material will range from silly (Photon, Dragon Half) to serious (Jin-Roh, Ghost in the Shell, Last Exile). There are also scores of romantic comedies usually these involve a love triangle of some sort, i.e. Lum, Ranma 1/2, Vandread, Love Hina. There is something for just about any interest imaginable. (La Blue Girl comes to mind. Ick.) This isn't to say that there isn't anime intended for children because there is. It just isn't the focus of the genre.
I know of two. Sygate's Personal Firewall and Kerio. I think the Sygate firewall is defunct now, and the Kerio firewall was purchased by another company but the name of said company eludes me. I fairly sure you can still find the older free version on the web if you search for it.
Your analogy is incorrect. While reselling books hasn't harmed the publishing industry, it is fallacious to compare lending a book to file-sharing. A book is a physical object and unless you can make an exact copy and give it to your friend it isn't the same as "sharing" a music/movie/program file. In the case of an actual book there exists only one copy that is passed from one person to another when shared. No copying of any sort occurs and thus copyright law is not an issue. In the case of file-sharing, the original copy never leaves the sharer's possession. The end result is that the sharer hands out copies to anyone who requests the file. This is a clear (and obvious) violation of copyright.
That being said, I don't like DRM either. It has the potential to violate the legal rights of the users (and almost certainly will given enough time).
Help files. Users access Help topics directly from your program.
I do not want to run a program just to have it start yet another program (winhelp.exe or hh.exe) which opens the help file I wanted to read. That's retarded. It's like using a car to jumpstart a lawnmower. </bad car analogy>
The problem is the browser is supposed to catch this "exception" that DNS threw. You requested a domain name lookup from DNS. DNS checked and replied that the request was invalid. On its way back to you the response was altered by Earthlink to send you somewhere you didn't request. How is this not a hijacking?
Certainly, it allows you to turn off your PC and still have it be available for the next internet worm to infect.
Other than that, I can't think of anything except maybe LAN file/printer sharing or administration purposes. You certainly wouldn't want a real server to be napping and have to wake up to reply to a request.
A few of the Windows services monitor some of the other services. (I don't remember which ones off the top of my head.) If you kill one that Microsoft doesn't want you to stop another service will initiate a shutdown. IIRC, winlogon does this as well as a few others.
Not sure if it is still true, but credit cards used to be considered an unsecured loan. In short, a loan with no collateral. If you didn't pay the worst they could do was report you as a bad credit risk on your credit report and try to collect from you (or maybe hire a collection agency to do it for them). If you died they are without much recourse. After all they can't call a dead person, and a bad credit rating isn't going to hurt them either. Assuming you don't live in a Community Property state, you do not necessary inherit your spouse's debts. The accounts in that situation would be written off as a loss, if I remember correctly.
Hellsing. It has a rather good English dub. I actually like it better than the Japanese voice track. (Except for the neko-chan bit in episode 1. That wasn't translated well. It sounded a bit forced, perhaps a shade too literal...) But that is probably due to the fact it takes place in England.
Slashdot Mirror
He's referring to a computer game. I think one of the Ultima series. (But it's been a while since I played those so I might be mistaken.)
Not always though. Windows 95 had a disk that was distributed with OEM restore disks that was called the "Windows 95 Companion CD" or something to that effect. It was a copy of the Win95 install disk without the setup program. (You couldn't boot from it either. Not that it would do you any good if you could.) Basically anytime you were prompted by Windows to insert your Windows Install disk you would use this one instead. A common trick at the time was to copy the setup program from a real Win95 install disk and use it with the files on this disk to reinstall Windows. This let you reinstall without all the crud the OEM setup forced on you. Though to be fair my computer's restore disk came with two options, bare windows install (wasn't a completely standard install, but didn't include any additional programs)or factory setup (i.e. loaded with the previously mentioned worthless crud).
The previous version check on the MS-DOS 6.22 upgrade disk set was pathetically broken. The setup program on the boot disk for it didn't really check versions. You could use the boot disk to partition the hard drive, format the hard drive, and transfer the system files from the boot disk to the hard drive. Once that was done you could reboot the machine using the boot disk and it would allow you to "upgrade" to MS-DOS 6.22. No previous version of DOS was actually necessary. (Of course this may be what you meant...)
It might have something to do with the "world-wide" bit. ...
If someone knows what a web browser is, it is likely that they will also know what the "World Wide Web" is. (Emphasis on the "World Wide" part.) In fact I'd say it would be highly unlikely that anyone would get one of these without at least that being explained to them. Probably a "here's the basics, now have at it" sort of deal.
Besides can you think of a better one? Seriously, if you think a globe doesn't work as an appropriate icon then step up to the plate, what would you use? Why?
I was unaware about the rate quotes on property loans. That's rather interesting. I see your point with reguards to unfairness.
Still, I stand by my statement's accuracy. Credit report inquiries show that you've applied for credit, nothing more and nothing less. If you're comparison shopping by actually applying for loans, you can't really complain that the credit bureaus show you have.
For what it is worth, most credit card applications aren't automatically approved/rejected. Generally speaking for that to happen your credit rating has to really good or really bad. (Mind-boggling what people will do to their credit score by the way, I've actually seen a five.) A couple of inquiries aren't going to decrease your chance for approval all that much. Anyone who falls in the middle is probably going to be reviewed by a human and not a computer. They tend to be a bit more forgiving and unless there is a large number of inquiries, they probably ignore them for the most part. Payment history is the big decider. (House loans would tend to be a bit more strict than credit cards I'd imagine, being a few orders of magnitude larger.)
No, it isn't an example of comparison shopping. It's an example of someone applying for multiple accounts/loans. Comparison shopping would be getting credit applications from multiple creditors and reviewing them to pick the best offer. You don't get a credit report inquiry for looking at a credit application. The only time the credit bureaus are involved is when you actually apply and the creditor requests a credit report. At that point one would hope you had already picked one.
The inquiries are used to weigh the short-term risk that some accounts aren't on the report yet. Most creditors, in the US, report credit information to the bureaus once a month. Inquiries show up immediately. If someone has perfect credit going back a long way, then suddenly starts applying for multiple loans, the inquiries show that the current list of accounts might not contain all of the applicant's accounts, i.e. ones that may have been approved this month. Credit ratings are based, roughly, on the amount of credit you possess vs. the amount of that credit you have used. (This assumes of course that you are current in all your accounts.)
I used to work for a credit card company, many years ago, and I can confirm that this is (or at least was) true. The logic behind this is painfully simple; if you are requesting credit from multiple companies in a short time frame you are probably a credit risk. It's also a possible indicator of identity theft.
If memory serves me correctly, the christian church co-opted a pre-existing holiday for the day of Christ's rebirth. The original holy day was a pagan fertility celebration. (And one must imagine it was a great deal more fun to celebrate than anything the christian church had to offer.)
The Easter bunny and Easter eggs have nothing to do with Christianity. It makes little sense in the context of rebirth. It makes a great deal of sense when you consider that both are symbols of fertility.
</offtopic>
Not quite correct. The screening is done prior to arrival. The article doesn't say when, just that nothing happens because of it until the "suspect" deplanes (is on US soil) and, one must assume, subject to arrest.
Regardless, here is another quote from the article:
The system appears to fly in the face of legal requirements Congress has placed in the Homeland Security appropriations bills for the last three years, which states, "None of the funds provided in this or previous appropriations Acts may be utilized to develop or test algorithms assigning risk to passengers whose names are not on government watch lists."
I don't see anything specifically about prescreening there.
I think we are definitely in agreement on the potential problems. This means a lot of defensive programming on the server side of things because the client must be considered to be compromised. You can't institute any sort of client-side solution (PunkBuster) because the client source must be made available. My example of a radar display shows that you can't send anything secret to the client. So if the player isn't supposed to know something the server can not send the information to the client software at all. The client is basically forced into the role of a graphical dumb terminal.
To be honest I'd have to say that I'm not convinced the FOSS is the best model here either. It's not a project that I'd want for my own. But if you were determined it might be doable. You'd probably need some fairly hefty servers though.
Be serious, if you have a legitimate bugfix you would submit it to the maintainer of the particular game for inclusion in the offical client software. It's not like every game using this server would be using the same version of the client installed from a single source. Each would most likely customize it to their particular taste.
That said, there's a difference between fixing a memory leak, and telling the server that you're now two zones away from your previous location. It would be your client software's interactions with the server that would get you banned, not what you did locally. In other words, your version of the client might display a radar-style map of hostiles where the "official" client doesn't and this would be fine. No one but you would know, however attacking a hostile mob on the other side of a wall at twice maximum range would probably get you banned. See the difference?
Easiest way would be to operate with the assumption that the client software is untrustworthy and verify anything that it sends to the server. This would of course require additional code on the server. But this is well know in game design (at least in the few books I've read on the subject).
As long as you don't distribute the modified server binaries you wouldn't be required by the GPL to distribute the servers' new source code. The cheaters wouldn't be able to know what you were checking until you started banning them.
On the off chance that your question is a serious one, I'll try to explain. The primary difference between American cartoons and Japanese cartoons is, in my opinion at least, the target audience. American society views cartoons as intended for children. Most of the cartoons produced here in the states are simple and devoid of anything that might offend parents. You will never see Disney (or any other domestic cartoon studio) release anything like "Ninja Scroll", "Slayer", or "Demon City Shinjuku". They're not child-safe. (Remember cartoons are for children.)
This isn't the case with the Japanese cartoons, which is why most fans of anime that I've personally met refer to it as anime instead of Japanese cartoons. The material will range from silly (Photon, Dragon Half) to serious (Jin-Roh, Ghost in the Shell, Last Exile). There are also scores of romantic comedies usually these involve a love triangle of some sort, i.e. Lum, Ranma 1/2, Vandread, Love Hina. There is something for just about any interest imaginable. (La Blue Girl comes to mind. Ick.) This isn't to say that there isn't anime intended for children because there is. It just isn't the focus of the genre.
In short, anime doesn't walk on eggshells.
I know of two. Sygate's Personal Firewall and Kerio. I think the Sygate firewall is defunct now, and the Kerio firewall was purchased by another company but the name of said company eludes me. I fairly sure you can still find the older free version on the web if you search for it.
One might argue that is what they have now.
Your analogy is incorrect. While reselling books hasn't harmed the publishing industry, it is fallacious to compare lending a book to file-sharing. A book is a physical object and unless you can make an exact copy and give it to your friend it isn't the same as "sharing" a music/movie/program file. In the case of an actual book there exists only one copy that is passed from one person to another when shared. No copying of any sort occurs and thus copyright law is not an issue. In the case of file-sharing, the original copy never leaves the sharer's possession. The end result is that the sharer hands out copies to anyone who requests the file. This is a clear (and obvious) violation of copyright.
That being said, I don't like DRM either. It has the potential to violate the legal rights of the users (and almost certainly will given enough time).
I'd wager that Earthlink's mail servers have been given their own "special" DNS servers for precisely this reason. ("Special" meaning functional)
The problem is the browser is supposed to catch this "exception" that DNS threw. You requested a domain name lookup from DNS. DNS checked and replied that the request was invalid. On its way back to you the response was altered by Earthlink to send you somewhere you didn't request. How is this not a hijacking?
Certainly, it allows you to turn off your PC and still have it be available for the next internet worm to infect.
Other than that, I can't think of anything except maybe LAN file/printer sharing or administration purposes. You certainly wouldn't want a real server to be napping and have to wake up to reply to a request.
A few of the Windows services monitor some of the other services. (I don't remember which ones off the top of my head.) If you kill one that Microsoft doesn't want you to stop another service will initiate a shutdown. IIRC, winlogon does this as well as a few others.
Not sure if it is still true, but credit cards used to be considered an unsecured loan. In short, a loan with no collateral. If you didn't pay the worst they could do was report you as a bad credit risk on your credit report and try to collect from you (or maybe hire a collection agency to do it for them). If you died they are without much recourse. After all they can't call a dead person, and a bad credit rating isn't going to hurt them either. Assuming you don't live in a Community Property state, you do not necessary inherit your spouse's debts. The accounts in that situation would be written off as a loss, if I remember correctly.
Hellsing. It has a rather good English dub. I actually like it better than the Japanese voice track. (Except for the neko-chan bit in episode 1. That wasn't translated well. It sounded a bit forced, perhaps a shade too literal...) But that is probably due to the fact it takes place in England.
It allows you to customize a install cdrom for XP, i.e. no Media Player or Movie Maker. (Can also remove a whole lot more.)