No it's not. That's why there's hardly any comments on this story. Even for a tech story, it's tedious.
Heh, well..mmm..maybe I will have to admit that I just tried to be polite:))
Our experiences from running the rc5-56 challenge
on
Cheating at Seti@home
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
run at cyberian.org some 4 years ago was that people will do anything to get their team/name listed in the first page of the statistics. Some of the people were even arrested by police for hacking into machines to make them crunch rc5 for their name. And it seems this trend is only getting worse. This is kind of sad, because it is not very good for the reputation of such efforts.
...remember that Wolfram.com the site on which the story resied == Mathematica. The company whose product Mathematica is. So, do not expect to see something unprejudiced. It's an interesting story anyway:)
...would make a great name for the Microsoft Insider, or what ever that publication is called.:) (required karma leecher)
This work is important because it will enable us to understand why there is any matter at all in the Universe. This is one of the great mysteries.
Yes indeed, the antimatter-matter is interesting also because - it makes use remember that a big part of our current understand of science is based on just assumptions. Rules, that exist because they have made sense (so far). One day, when we learn more, many of these rules might get obsolete.
a project publicly funded by the French Agency for New Technologies (RNTL).
I have lately started being more and more convinced that one of the key issues to success of open source - in a business sense, will be the fact that it is much easier for government organizations and other similar-type organizations to fund them without being guestioned and having put their moral in doubt. Why? Every single time that Microsoft, Adobe or some other closed source company is looking for government money, the politicians are facing a rather guestion: "In what light will this put us?"
Now, it would be interesting to see some years further and see how this all changes. I am convinced that there will much more public discussion on the subject whether this is discrimative against the non-open source companies. In my opinion it basicly is not, because being open source, it benefits everyone and not just a single company - but still, there's still someone who benefits most.
This analysis is based on the data gathered after the story 'Donating Time To Goodwill Projects?' was published at the Slashdot.org site on 24th October 2002 around 13:30 GMT -05:00 (US East coast time). What I wanted to find out is: what is the slashdot effect really like, what are visitors like.
What if you get the link for the yet unpublic page from the referrer logs of your own site, for example www.reuters.com -logs. Would using that information be criminal?
(Offtopic: Children playing naked on the beach is not pedophilia -- it's just pictures of children playing naked on the beach. It's not even illegal in the US. If you get turned on by it, see a psychiatrist.)
What would you do if you had to choose between marginally easier availability of nasty pornography and a democratic revolution in China, or perhaps a return to power of the legitimately elected government of Pakistan?
Do you mean this can be achieved by Freenet - or why did you use it as an example? I believe Freenet can only exist if it is wanted to exist (or if anyone does not want hard enough it to not exist). Let's say a country with heavy censorship says : "if we find freenet sw in your computer, you and your relatives will be put in the jail - or killed if the jail is already full.". Time will tell.
Today is a role-play day. In my normal role, I like the idea of free speech, but lets take a role of those on the other side. Quoatation from the front page:
"'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'"
"Daddy, where were you when they took pictures of me playing naked on the beach when I was five, and when they posted me to the pedophilia board."
The concept of free speech/press is not so simple.
One more comment to myself:) It seems the rfc2616 already covers this quite well. So the only problem is that the browser vendors have failed to follow the rfc:
15.1.3 Encoding Sensitive Information in URI's
Because the source of a link might be private information or might
reveal an otherwise private information source, it is strongly
recommended that the user be able to select whether or not the
Referer field is sent. For example, a browser client could have a
toggle switch for browsing openly/anonymously, which would
respectively enable/disable the sending of Referer and From
information.
Clients SHOULD NOT include a Referer header field in a (non-secure)
HTTP request if the referring page was transferred with a secure
protocol.
Authors of services which use the HTTP protocol SHOULD NOT use GET
based forms for the submission of sensitive data, because this will
cause this data to be encoded in the Request-URI. Many existing
servers, proxies, and user agents will log the request URI in some
place where it might be visible to third parties. Servers can use
POST-based form submission instead
Is W3 the organisation which could try to push it through?
Where it == a change to how referrer information is sent. As there clearly is some benefits for the website developer/author for having the referrer info the situation after change could be an analogy to what is used with cookies:: the referrer info would be only sent if 1) the user is following a link (or similar mechanism) and 2) the link being followed resides in the same space.
Examples:
link from www.xyzzy.com/index.html to www.xyzzy.com/about.html - sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/index.html to www.othersite.com/ - not sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/categories.html to www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/contents.html - sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/ to www.xyzzy.com/~abuser/ - not sent .
As you Zeinfeld, clearly are in the position to make a difference (being the "inventor" - or one of the inventors - of the mechanism) - what do you think about this? Do you know if w3.org for example is already considering this? If not, who should I, You, everyone else talk to?
My idea was to have a way to be able to construct backlinks from sites. At the time we had 100 users and the operating assumption was that all information put on the Web was public.
You are forgiven:) No, seriously the world is different now. Is W3 the organisation which could try to push it through? Or do we just have to believe that the browser vendors realize it in time before every site utilizes this in their inner logic and the change to better is thus impossible.
Only server admins can access those logs. Since these admins are networking professionals, we can expect the same amount of discretion from them as from any other professional like your doctor or your lawyer.
Hah. Since this is highly competed marketed, the first argument used when selling a 8-year old his first "web space" is "YES! Ofcourse you have full access to log files, what did you expect?!" "Don't believe us?! Let's look at this company's report as a showcase, just for you..boy...ermm. Sir."
I have come across a few sites that use the refer info to let you access files and images, so other sites can't just link directly to the file.
Yes, referrer information makes an excellent authentication scheme for highly confidential system dealing with transfer of mission critical information.... Just also check for a magic string in the user agent and voila! trusted computing reinvented. To make it unhackable - just add a few more levels of obfuscation.;))) The sad part of this, is that I have actually seen authentication schemes like this. Don't know whether I should cry or laugh:)
referer log in my access log files contains someones email account pw for their web based email service... and being the ass that I am, i read their email. its quite fun.
And why wouldn't you? The user is basically direct marketing his/her user credentials especially for you. Also ever wonder how these highly confidential web pages entered google. Yes, ofcourse google indexed a cool "these guys referred us page". And ofcourse the poor author of the page "for your eyes" only, did not think he would need to password protect it - because it will only be accessed by the 100 company executives (...who happily browse to pr0n sites to leave referral marks after reading the study on intranet security...)... I think I will pop!
I don't know who started it - but I find it very odd that browsers send referer info by default. Why? It does not provide anything extra for the user but problems. It is not once or twice that you find URLs to "confidential" pages if you browse through your webserver logs. And... I bet 95% of web surfers do not even know that they are sending this information all the time. Is there really any reason why the default is to send the referer info? I have seen people riot on much less important privacy issues. Why not about this? The referer plague exists in almost all browsers - and only in few browsers you actually can easily turn it off. What's going on?
Mr. Decombe argues that Grokker is a more universal approach to the problem of visualizing textual information than what has been found in previous tools, which focus more on navigation than on categorization.
"The difference is that we have no single paradigm"
...which is exactly why things like this have failed before IMHO. Being to complicated too run, administrate, use and understand. Or... I hope this provocates some wiser to explain why it groks?
According the site Jay Inslee has got most from MSFT, total of $237,400 - nice money already. He is one of the persons behind the "Internet Radio Fairness Act"
- "designed to make the copyright royalty arbitration process more fair for smaller entities." What else has he been involved with?
Although the featureload of the Simputer is quite convinving, the main point is that this is now obviously the first truly open hardware project to have actually entered the martket. Let's see if it opens the floodgates....In the future, however, the featureload might be even more impressive as the open HW approach surely enables fast and cost-effective development.
I'm trying to find the best way to implement a large-scale Electronic Software Delivery (ESD) service for my software company.
What software, which audience, which principles? It makes a difference whether you are building ESD like tucows or for a special product for a special market - for example. It might be possible for you to get some real information out from here, but you will have to tell more. Don't be scared, if someone wants to look up your company, he is already well capable of doing it:)
...with stories from space like this, is that they could as well let you download a sample made of the scientist's toilet experience, and no-one would notice any difference. Anyway, listening to this is very fancy....because... you know... it's from space - it must be awesome!
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, well..mmm..maybe I will have to admit that I just tried to be polite :))
run at cyberian.org some 4 years ago was that people will do anything to get their team/name listed in the first page of the statistics. Some of the people were even arrested by police for hacking into machines to make them crunch rc5 for their name. And it seems this trend is only getting worse. This is kind of sad, because it is not very good for the reputation of such efforts.
...remember that Wolfram.com the site on which the story resied == Mathematica. The company whose product Mathematica is. So, do not expect to see something unprejudiced. It's an interesting story anyway :)
s/F/S/. How about meanwhile contributing to a media stunt and reading a Slashdot effect analysis.
This work is important because it will enable us to understand why there is any matter at all in the Universe. This is one of the great mysteries.
Yes indeed, the antimatter-matter is interesting also because - it makes use remember that a big part of our current understand of science is based on just assumptions. Rules, that exist because they have made sense (so far). One day, when we learn more, many of these rules might get obsolete.
I have lately started being more and more convinced that one of the key issues to success of open source - in a business sense, will be the fact that it is much easier for government organizations and other similar-type organizations to fund them without being guestioned and having put their moral in doubt. Why? Every single time that Microsoft, Adobe or some other closed source company is looking for government money, the politicians are facing a rather guestion: "In what light will this put us?"
Now, it would be interesting to see some years further and see how this all changes. I am convinced that there will much more public discussion on the subject whether this is discrimative against the non-open source companies. In my opinion it basicly is not, because being open source, it benefits everyone and not just a single company - but still, there's still someone who benefits most.
This analysis is based on the data gathered after the story 'Donating Time To Goodwill Projects?' was published at the Slashdot.org site on 24th October 2002 around 13:30 GMT -05:00 (US East coast time). What I wanted to find out is: what is the slashdot effect really like, what are visitors like.
Here's a related thread from yesterday.
Two words: context, audience.
...clean clothes. That's about the only standard. As you long as you don't stink you are fine here in Finland. :)
Do you mean this can be achieved by Freenet - or why did you use it as an example? I believe Freenet can only exist if it is wanted to exist (or if anyone does not want hard enough it to not exist). Let's say a country with heavy censorship says : "if we find freenet sw in your computer, you and your relatives will be put in the jail - or killed if the jail is already full.". Time will tell.
Pssst! it was a joke :)
"'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'"
"Daddy, where were you when they took pictures of me playing naked on the beach when I was five, and when they posted me to the pedophilia board."
The concept of free speech/press is not so simple.
15.1.3 Encoding Sensitive Information in URI's Because the source of a link might be private information or might reveal an otherwise private information source, it is strongly recommended that the user be able to select whether or not the Referer field is sent. For example, a browser client could have a toggle switch for browsing openly/anonymously, which would respectively enable/disable the sending of Referer and From information. Clients SHOULD NOT include a Referer header field in a (non-secure) HTTP request if the referring page was transferred with a secure protocol. Authors of services which use the HTTP protocol SHOULD NOT use GET based forms for the submission of sensitive data, because this will cause this data to be encoded in the Request-URI. Many existing servers, proxies, and user agents will log the request URI in some place where it might be visible to third parties. Servers can use POST-based form submission instead
Where it == a change to how referrer information is sent. As there clearly is some benefits for the website developer/author for having the referrer info the situation after change could be an analogy to what is used with cookies :: the referrer info would be only sent if 1) the user is following a link (or similar mechanism) and 2) the link being followed resides in the same space.
Examples:
link from www.xyzzy.com/index.html to www.xyzzy.com/about.html - sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/index.html to www.othersite.com/ - not sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/categories.html to www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/contents.html - sent
link from www.xyzzy.com/~jukal/ to www.xyzzy.com/~abuser/ - not sent
.
As you Zeinfeld, clearly are in the position to make a difference (being the "inventor" - or one of the inventors - of the mechanism) - what do you think about this? Do you know if w3.org for example is already considering this? If not, who should I, You, everyone else talk to?
You are forgiven :) No, seriously the world is different now. Is W3 the organisation which could try to push it through? Or do we just have to believe that the browser vendors realize it in time before every site utilizes this in their inner logic and the change to better is thus impossible.
Hah. Since this is highly competed marketed, the first argument used when selling a 8-year old his first "web space" is "YES! Ofcourse you have full access to log files, what did you expect?!" "Don't believe us?! Let's look at this company's report as a showcase, just for you..boy...ermm. Sir."
Yes, referrer information makes an excellent authentication scheme for highly confidential system dealing with transfer of mission critical information. ... Just also check for a magic string in the user agent and voila! trusted computing reinvented. To make it unhackable - just add a few more levels of obfuscation. ;))) The sad part of this, is that I have actually seen authentication schemes like this. Don't know whether I should cry or laugh :)
And why wouldn't you? The user is basically direct marketing his/her user credentials especially for you. Also ever wonder how these highly confidential web pages entered google. Yes, ofcourse google indexed a cool "these guys referred us page". And ofcourse the poor author of the page "for your eyes" only, did not think he would need to password protect it - because it will only be accessed by the 100 company executives (...who happily browse to pr0n sites to leave referral marks after reading the study on intranet security...)... I think I will pop!
I don't know who started it - but I find it very odd that browsers send referer info by default. Why? It does not provide anything extra for the user but problems. It is not once or twice that you find URLs to "confidential" pages if you browse through your webserver logs. And... I bet 95% of web surfers do not even know that they are sending this information all the time. Is there really any reason why the default is to send the referer info? I have seen people riot on much less important privacy issues. Why not about this? The referer plague exists in almost all browsers - and only in few browsers you actually can easily turn it off. What's going on?
Mr. Decombe argues that Grokker is a more universal approach to the problem of visualizing textual information than what has been found in previous tools, which focus more on navigation than on categorization.
"The difference is that we have no single paradigm"
According the site Jay Inslee has got most from MSFT, total of $237,400 - nice money already. He is one of the persons behind the "Internet Radio Fairness Act" - "designed to make the copyright royalty arbitration process more fair for smaller entities." What else has he been involved with?
Although the featureload of the Simputer is quite convinving, the main point is that this is now obviously the first truly open hardware project to have actually entered the martket. Let's see if it opens the floodgates....In the future, however, the featureload might be even more impressive as the open HW approach surely enables fast and cost-effective development.
What software, which audience, which principles? It makes a difference whether you are building ESD like tucows or for a special product for a special market - for example. It might be possible for you to get some real information out from here, but you will have to tell more. Don't be scared, if someone wants to look up your company, he is already well capable of doing it :)
...with stories from space like this, is that they could as well let you download a sample made of the scientist's toilet experience, and no-one would notice any difference. Anyway, listening to this is very fancy....because... you know... it's from space - it must be awesome!