Sure, information technology is becoming ever increasingly complex; but it is also a great opportunity for companies that have the management able to deal with that complexity to excel and outperform their competition.
"Issues such as network access control, intrusion detection, network operations and help desk functions can take up much of a security staff's working hours", said Popinski.
I think this guy's just pissed that he doesn't have enough time to surf Slashdot at work.
Tip for auto-validating PHP generated XHTML
on
Web Standards Solutions
·
· Score: 5, Informative
During development, you can easily setup PHP.XPath to automatically validate every page you create.
Simply turn on output buffering at the top of your script using ob_start(). It's best to do this in a common header script called by all your pages.
Then, in a common footer script, load the output buffer (retrieved as a string using ob_get_contents()) into an instance of PHP.XPath using the importFromString method.
If your page displays, it will at least be valid XML (most of the way towards being valid XHTML). If you break the well-formedness of your output your page will not display because PHP.XPath will raise an error.
Thank you for the explanation, but that still doesn't change the point I was making which is that it is highly likely that the USPTO has issued duplicate patents, simply because of:
a) the stupid incomprehensible language in which these things are written
and
b) the volume in which software patents are coming at them, with lip service given to actual prior art searching - even within their very own patent database.
One "cool" thing about the teletext system was the little known fact that the page numbers are actually in HEX.
The "public" pages only use hex numbers that consist only of numeric characters, but I once had a TV that allowed you to enter the hex numbers aswell, and you could find all sorts of cool stuff, including some kind of system to automatically set video-recorders etc.
Thank you for your letter of 28 September 2004, the contents of which I note.:D
In it, you are asserting that $FEATURE of my software product is infringing upon your $PATENT.
What is interesting, is that we recently received a similar letter from another company claiming that $FEATURE is infact an infringement of their $PATENT.
On further examination, it would appear that the USPTO has awarded you both a patent for the same thing ROAFLOL:D
If you chose to take this action no further we shall also consider this matter closed. If, however you wish to continue with a claim for breach of patent infringement our first line of defence shall be to have your patent annulled on the grounds of duplication. You may wish to consider this seriously if you are already receiving royalties from $PATENT from other parties.
...is that the large software companies have patented so much of the fundamental building blocks of software engineering that even if you do come up with something truly "new and innovative" they can still get you on the sub-component functionality.
This means they can effectively hold to ransome any new software venture that turns out to be succesful, regardless of what they do.
Whilst it's all very well for us "FireFox on Linux" users to gloat about our immunity from scumware; we must be aware that the developers of scumware only target IE _because_ it is the most prolific browser. The security weaknesses of IE are more likely the second reason.
Now if a critical mass of Internet users migrate to FF/Moz/Saf etc., scumware authors WILL target this shared extension architecture.
Now, it is all very well saying that the Mozilla platform may not allow drive-by installation (to the best of our knowledge); but remember that scumware is often installed through social engineering of the user. "This website requires Hyperviewing 3D Spatial Extension" (bundled with scumware for your convenience); and the user may click "Yes" to install without second thought.
How you go about allowing extension installation whilst maintaining a level of sanity needs carefull thought at this stage.
I don't understand why people have a problem with passwords. Are geeks brains really wired so differently to "non-geeks"?
I have a different password for everything; but it is derived from a core password modified in some way that is relevant to the whatever it is the password for; usually the name, such as "Slashdot" or "Fark".
My algo also means that you cannot tell which component of the password is core and which is derived.
I'm also concerned with this, although google seems to do the same thing from time to time (actually quite rarely)
Actually, Google track every click from their search results using an image load on the mousedown event of the hyperlink. View the source to a Google results page to see it.
Trouble is; you don't even need an account for them to profile _you_; just being an acquaintance of someone who does is enough.
Unless you will never send _to_ a gmail.com address; or educate everyone who is ever likely to email you not to send to you from the gmail web interface.
A Google web bug in sent HTML email is all that is needed to tie your email address to your Google GUID.
Slashdot Mirror
Why couldn't they use a scale of 1 to 10 like EVERYBODY ELSE?
Sure, information technology is becoming ever increasingly complex; but it is also a great opportunity for companies that have the management able to deal with that complexity to excel and outperform their competition.
"Issues such as network access control, intrusion detection, network operations and help desk functions can take up much of a security staff's working hours", said Popinski.
I think this guy's just pissed that he doesn't have enough time to surf Slashdot at work.
... but is it XML compatible?
I'm sure there's some bloggers out there got themselves stuck in an infinite spiral of syndication.
Better be careful with those little orange XML lozenges; just one in the wrong place could kill.
..about common sense.
During development, you can easily setup PHP.XPath to automatically validate every page you create.
Simply turn on output buffering at the top of your script using ob_start(). It's best to do this in a common header script called by all your pages.
Then, in a common footer script, load the output buffer (retrieved as a string using ob_get_contents()) into an instance of PHP.XPath using the importFromString method.
If your page displays, it will at least be valid XML (most of the way towards being valid XHTML). If you break the well-formedness of your output your page will not display because PHP.XPath will raise an error.
Thank you for the explanation, but that still doesn't change the point I was making which is that it is highly likely that the USPTO has issued duplicate patents, simply because of:
a) the stupid incomprehensible language in which these things are written
and
b) the volume in which software patents are coming at them, with lip service given to actual prior art searching - even within their very own patent database.
"Issue 'em all and let the courts sort 'em out."
One "cool" thing about the teletext system was the little known fact that the page numbers are actually in HEX.
The "public" pages only use hex numbers that consist only of numeric characters, but I once had a TV that allowed you to enter the hex numbers aswell, and you could find all sorts of cool stuff, including some kind of system to automatically set video-recorders etc.
Thank you for your letter of 28 September 2004, the contents of which I note. :D
:D
In it, you are asserting that $FEATURE of my software product is infringing upon your $PATENT.
What is interesting, is that we recently received a similar letter from another company claiming that $FEATURE is infact an infringement of their $PATENT.
On further examination, it would appear that the USPTO has awarded you both a patent for the same thing ROAFLOL
If you chose to take this action no further we shall also consider this matter closed. If, however you wish to continue with a claim for breach of patent infringement our first line of defence shall be to have your patent annulled on the grounds of duplication. You may wish to consider this seriously if you are already receiving royalties from $PATENT from other parties.
Yours,
PHB.
...is that the large software companies have patented so much of the fundamental building blocks of software engineering that even if you do come up with something truly "new and innovative" they can still get you on the sub-component functionality.
This means they can effectively hold to ransome any new software venture that turns out to be succesful, regardless of what they do.
...because I have not seen this mentioned at all.
Is the JPEG rendering in Firefox running on Windows independent of any underlying MS library and is therefore not affected?
Whilst it's all very well for us "FireFox on Linux" users to gloat about our immunity from scumware; we must be aware that the developers of scumware only target IE _because_ it is the most prolific browser. The security weaknesses of IE are more likely the second reason.
Now if a critical mass of Internet users migrate to FF/Moz/Saf etc., scumware authors WILL target this shared extension architecture.
Now, it is all very well saying that the Mozilla platform may not allow drive-by installation (to the best of our knowledge); but remember that scumware is often installed through social engineering of the user. "This website requires Hyperviewing 3D Spatial Extension" (bundled with scumware for your convenience); and the user may click "Yes" to install without second thought.
How you go about allowing extension installation whilst maintaining a level of sanity needs carefull thought at this stage.
Unless he talks out of his arse.
I don't understand why people have a problem with passwords. Are geeks brains really wired so differently to "non-geeks"?
I have a different password for everything; but it is derived from a core password modified in some way that is relevant to the whatever it is the password for; usually the name, such as "Slashdot" or "Fark".
My algo also means that you cannot tell which component of the password is core and which is derived.
I'm also concerned with this, although google seems to do the same thing from time to time (actually quite rarely)
Actually, Google track every click from their search results using an image load on the mousedown event of the hyperlink. View the source to a Google results page to see it.
Yeah I realised that in hindsight.
...if you have 20:20 hindsight.
Trouble is; you don't even need an account for them to profile _you_; just being an acquaintance of someone who does is enough.
Unless you will never send _to_ a gmail.com address; or educate everyone who is ever likely to email you not to send to you from the gmail web interface.
A Google web bug in sent HTML email is all that is needed to tie your email address to your Google GUID.
...doesn't "get it" when it comes to Linux, then he isn't going ot get "IT" full stop. And most PHB's don't.
So instead of peer review, we have peer-to-peer review! :)
...small project teams in big companies end up developing sophisticated Excel Spreadsheets.
is 3402 meters per second
or 12247 kilometers per hour
or 7610 miles per hour
I went to Times Square purposely to buy a fake Rolex. F'in thing turned out to be genuine.
We know women don't make good drivers.