That this bug was hidden away in the Bugzilla annals for over 4 years as Confidential is really intolerable. It reeks of trying to sweep an embarassing problem under the rug, which is the complete antithesis of Open Source development.
...
If a person, or group, can't be mature enough to admit a big, "oops, I/we made a really big design mistake. We'll fix it because many people are depending on us," then that person or group has no business working on such a fundamentally important piece of software as a web browser.
A workable solution to this kind of problem has been around for many years. Java applets, when run from appletviewer, display a very prominent notice telling the user that very thing.
The sad this about all this is that it's not even a fundamental design problem. Firefox has configuration options to eliminate this problem:
All you need to do is put something like this in your user.js file:
// disable target="_blank" (open in same window): user_pref("browser.block.target_new_wind ow", true);
// prevent Javascript from trapping the context menu user_pref("dom.event.contextmenu.enabled", false);
// ---- Stuff from http://flii.us/myworks/phoenix/pages/user.html ----
// don't allow popups to disable features
// if you know what the blank commented parts do, plz let me know // so i can update my file here.:) THANKS! // + special thanks to devin pohly for looking some of these up
// Prevent Javascript from changing window focus user_pref("dom.disable_window_flip", true);
// Prevent JavaScript from resizing your browser + user_pref("dom.disable_window_move_resize", true);
// Prevent the Close button from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.close", true);
// same as dom.disable_window_open_feature.locationbar ?? or nothing + user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.dire ctories", true);
// Prevent the URL bar from being disabled? user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feat ure.location", true);
// Prevent the Menu bar from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.menubar", true);
// Prevent the Minimize button from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.minimizable", true);
// Prevent the Bookmarks Toolbar from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.personalbar", true);
// Prevent window resizing from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.resizable", true);
// Prevent scrollbars from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.scrollbars", true);
// Prevent the Status bar from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.status", true);
// Prevent the Title bar from being disabled user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_featu re.titlebar", true);
// Prevent Javascript from hiding toolbar in new windows? + user_pref("dom.disable_window_open_feature.tool bar", true);
// Prevent Javascript from changing status bar text + //user_pref("dom.disable_window_status_change", true);
But since we're on the topic, it is interesting that despite MS being a monopoly, they're still doing major work on their upcoming OS. But... no, we'd rather talk about their OS taking a big step towards (possibly even past) what Apple has done.
Microsoft is making Windows better than it was before. Excellent!
Let me know when Microsoft makes Windows good. Or, if not good, at least on-par with modern operating systems.
The last thing I want is another big Microsoft API. Let me know when the Windows API gets smaller, or when Windows implements the Single Unix Specification in any meaningful manner. I have better things to do than to waste my time trying to write programs against a cumbersome toy OS API.
Anyway, quantum cryptography IS one time pads with a transmission method that ensures the key is delivered without being intercepted
It wouldn't have to be. If you wanted to, you could exchange 3DES keys over a quantum cryptographic channel. (And if you're paying $0.10/bit to use the QC channel, you might just consider it.;-) )
Which is something that could be solved trivially with a suid program that allows users to create and own groups. This would be *far* less bug-prone than ACLs.
Why are market reasons invalid when determining the quality of technology?
Perhaps because market reasons rarely take long-term consequences into account, or because those in charge of better technologies mismanaged them, or because of patents?
Managers, upon getting input from engineers regarding the network's capicity and estimating the number of users, decide on the available speed. Marketers merely sell you on why that's enough.
I thought that's what advertisers and salespeople do.
Right, but the Amiga was also about 10 years ahead of PCs. So when the Amiga was out, the "16-bit generation" was just starting. 10 years later, the 32-bit generation started.
I want to maintain control of the copyrights to my code for exactly the same reason that the FSF wants me to give them the copyright -- to make sure that my code never, ever becomes proprietary."
Have a look at this. Basically, the FSF's copyright assignment contract prevents the code from being made proprietary.
First of all, not every piece of software I'm using has its roots in proprietary software (see below). Second of all, even if your statement were true (which it's not) the proprietary software you're referring to was generally crap compared to the free software that replaced it. (That's the bulk of the reason why the GNU tools became so popular, AFAIK.)
Examples of software I'm using that, as far as I can tell, doesn't have its roots in proprietary software:
Python
Perl
Apache
gcc
Lots of little tools: fspanel, keylaunch, WindowMaker dockapps, XFree86
Tons of Debian-specific software: dpkg, update-*, apt, defoma, debconf
(Although I might be wrong about the origins of some of the above software, if I am right about one or more of them, then your statement ("Every single piece of software you're using now has its roots in proprietary software") is disproven.
Slashdot Mirror
...
If a person, or group, can't be mature enough to admit a big, "oops, I/we made a really big design mistake. We'll fix it because many people are depending on us," then that person or group has no business working on such a fundamentally important piece of software as a web browser.
A workable solution to this kind of problem has been around for many years. Java applets, when run from appletviewer, display a very prominent notice telling the user that very thing.
The sad this about all this is that it's not even a fundamental design problem. Firefox has configuration options to eliminate this problem:
All you need to do is put something like this in your user.js file:
That didn't prevent the statusbar hack, but it made everything else *really* obvious.
Have a look at about:config. There's a lot of useful stuff in there.
Fair enough, but there are other reasons to muck with the BIOS (and other uses for fast boot times).
Anything that uses the Win32 API as its standard interface is *not* on-par with modern operating systems.
Microsoft is making Windows better than it was before. Excellent!
Let me know when Microsoft makes Windows good. Or, if not good, at least on-par with modern operating systems.
The last thing I want is another big Microsoft API. Let me know when the Windows API gets smaller, or when Windows implements the Single Unix Specification in any meaningful manner. I have better things to do than to waste my time trying to write programs against a cumbersome toy OS API.
Please give me more free space.
There's always parallel processing. (Yes, this has limits too, but they're much higher than a lot of people would like to think.)
It wouldn't have to be. If you wanted to, you could exchange 3DES keys over a quantum cryptographic channel. (And if you're paying $0.10/bit to use the QC channel, you might just consider it. ;-) )
There's also the man-in-the-middle attack, as another poster pointed out.
Sure, no problem, as long as you don't try to get it patented. That would make me ve-ry an-gry.
Which is something that could be solved trivially with a suid program that allows users to create and own groups. This would be *far* less bug-prone than ACLs.
Why are market reasons invalid when determining the quality of technology? Perhaps because market reasons rarely take long-term consequences into account, or because those in charge of better technologies mismanaged them, or because of patents?
s/write me/maintain/
You can write large programs in assembly, too, but most people would agree that assembly language is not the best tool for the job.
...if the OS was properly designed in the first place.
You're confusing bandwidth and power output. Bandwidth merely refers to the portion of the frequency spectrum being used.
I thought that's what advertisers and salespeople do.
Oh, and if you want to fork Linux and maintain your own tree in order to have binary compatibility, feel free to do so.
5-second boot times would be quite useful for a MythTV box. Try implementing that without messing with the BIOS.
Right, but the Amiga was also about 10 years ahead of PCs. So when the Amiga was out, the "16-bit generation" was just starting. 10 years later, the 32-bit generation started.
XFree86 is dying. ;-)
Have a look at this. Basically, the FSF's copyright assignment contract prevents the code from being made proprietary.
Welcome to good science.
Examples of software I'm using that, as far as I can tell, doesn't have its roots in proprietary software:
(Although I might be wrong about the origins of some of the above software, if I am right about one or more of them, then your statement ("Every single piece of software you're using now has its roots in proprietary software") is disproven.