You know, I've thought about this before, and that's another way of doing it. I've wondered if anyone actually did it that way; it's interesting to know that the answer is yes. Seems like, since this gives you absolute positioning too, it would be even better than the rotary encoder approach.
Stereo systems are another great example (quickly turning volume up/down, not having it reset all the time)
Having it reset seems like a poor design decision, but it isn't an essential aspect of digital volume.
I will actually vote for digital volume controls because it means you can change the volume by remote, BUT only if they are the dial sort of volume control rather than vol up/down buttons. With a rotary encoder you get the benefits of digital (can control it in other ways besides moving the knob) with most of the benefit of analog (quick changes, better feel). About the only thing you don't get is absolute positioning, but the benefits compensate for that loss IMO.
Of course, this doesn't make much sense in a car where you're almost always next to the volume control anyway. (I say "almost" because I know when I was younger I would go on trips with my parents and I'd want to control the volume from the back seat. Instead, my parents acted as a remote control -- "turn it up" *turns it up* "thanks", "turn it down" *turns it down* "thanks" -- until they got fed up with that. Might also be able to come up with other situations auto volume control is useful.)
This isn't in the proposal, but you could require.bank domains to use https even if there isn't any sensitive data. (Or make it a standard for the browser to complain loudly if this convention isn't followed.)
For a CS person I'm relatively lax about security stuff (I find the division between security and convenience closer to the convenience of other people), but I do glance for the yellow bar when I go to banking sites (or other places where I a actually care about security).
Exactly how does this protect a user if a worm maps www.citi.bank to and IP address for www.citi.bank.p0wned.com in their host table?
There are two levels of answers:
1.) They're aiming at protecting phishing, not all malicious activity. I email you [not you specifically, generic you] something that says "ur account wi11 expir3 n 3 days" and you click on the link and enter your information into the page that loads. There isn't any room in there for me to remap your hosts file.
2.) If I do have the access to remap your hosts file, there are easier ways to figure out what your password is then having it sent through my website. Like, install a keylogger and wait 'till you just go to your bank outright.
3.) Combined with SSL certificates, the browser could positively identify that you are talking to the computer that is *actually* at citi.bank. This is already done somewhat with.com domains, but.bank you then get the added assurance (in theory) that citi.bank actually belongs to citibank.
Suppose there was a seal that you could only buy for $50,000 and a background check. But having that seal on your vehicle (no matter what size) meant that your shipment would NEVER be checked by law enforcement. No matter what borders you crossed. No matter what time.
It's more that the seal was put on by a theoretically trusted party and is virtually tamperproof. So it's not so much trusting that the person who put it on is lying, it's trusting that they were already checked out before and haven't changed the contents of their van.
And if the original party is *actually* trustworthy, then yes, I think it would be a decent idea.
I would like a good speech recognition program. I've been meaning to give Dragon a try at some point, but I'd need a mic too (unless it comes with one which it might...). I do enough writing and stuff that it could come in handy to reduce wrist strain.
A lot is coding, but I could still be speaking this/. post to the computer instead of typing it.
I don't claim that it's correct or best; it's simply the dominant practice.
So is releasing crap software turning your customers into beta testers. So is writing non time-critical software in unsafe languages. Most people use Internet Explorer on Windows.
Keeping the traditional use also creates an inconsistency with kilobit and megabit and gigiabit etc, where, if I'm correct, values ARE measured in powers of 10.
Mac OS X provides spellchecking services automatically
I do wish Windows would do this, especially if they would repurpose the Word spell check code. It gives pretty good suggestions almost all the time and very good suggestions not uncommonly; Firefox not only has a really shitty dictionary (missing, for instance, "repurpose" and even "okay"), but tends to be very unhelpful with suggestions.
I don't get it, because, for instance, ispell is an OSS spell checker that works really well. This post seems to indicate that they know about the problem but can't fix it because of licensing...
There are some core features here that, while they could be implemented in an extension, I think should be considered an integral part of the browser from a normal user's point of view. In other words, even if the user chooses a minimum install, I think they should be installed and switched on. If you want to disable them that's fine, but I don't think you should be able to from the installation program.
These features are: # Pop-up Blocker # Accessibility # Phishing Protection, perhaps (depends on how it's implemented) # Automated Update
If you don't, then many users are going to be browsing without a pop-up blocker, are going to say "this browser sucks," and are going to switch back to IE.
These are the cards that need to be combined into one configurable card, so that people can have only three useful cards. One for shopping discounts, one driver's license and one debit card.
What about my credit card? Combine that with something else, or do we keep it separate? How 'bout the student ID and bus pass? I also carry an AAA card for some unknown reason (I don't yet own a car*...), a health insurance card, and a couple other pieces of worthless crap.
My current university doesn't seem to do this, but my undergrad institution allowed you to put your debit card on your student ID. If we do that, throw out the worthless stuff, and say that the student ID can double as a bus pass (it can't but theoretically it could; all students get one), I still have five cards instead of three. If we don't overload the student ID, that's seven.
* Given this information, it might seem weird that I have an AAA membership in the first place. This is a yearly gift from my grandmother. Myself and my parents have told her that she shouldn't do that because it's almost worthless (I did use it once while I was borrowing a car), but she doesn't listen.
Its probably more difficult to work it out for multiple banks and allowing fair and equal access to all banks.
Yeah, good thing that's not what they're doing.
Actually, the whole campus ID thing is very different from this driver's license thing. This is unsupported by the state DMV, doesn't modify the contents of your card, and "just" finds a new use for the information that's already there, specifically your license number.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, actually that makes a lot of sense.
You know, I've thought about this before, and that's another way of doing it. I've wondered if anyone actually did it that way; it's interesting to know that the answer is yes. Seems like, since this gives you absolute positioning too, it would be even better than the rotary encoder approach.
Every now and then, I hear the fake shutter sound that lets me know my cell phone just took a picture of the inside of my pocket.
Hey, with what's considered modern art these days, you could probably set up an exhibit of these.
It'd have a very strong theme.
Thanks for the hints. I'll give it a shot at some point.
Naw, he just wrote it literally to the CD. Like with a Sharpie.
I think he's suggesting that dir hide them by default, like Unix hides dot-files.
I'm not sure if this is a good idea or not for the DOS philosophy.
Stereo systems are another great example (quickly turning volume up/down, not having it reset all the time)
Having it reset seems like a poor design decision, but it isn't an essential aspect of digital volume.
I will actually vote for digital volume controls because it means you can change the volume by remote, BUT only if they are the dial sort of volume control rather than vol up/down buttons. With a rotary encoder you get the benefits of digital (can control it in other ways besides moving the knob) with most of the benefit of analog (quick changes, better feel). About the only thing you don't get is absolute positioning, but the benefits compensate for that loss IMO.
Of course, this doesn't make much sense in a car where you're almost always next to the volume control anyway. (I say "almost" because I know when I was younger I would go on trips with my parents and I'd want to control the volume from the back seat. Instead, my parents acted as a remote control -- "turn it up" *turns it up* "thanks", "turn it down" *turns it down* "thanks" -- until they got fed up with that. Might also be able to come up with other situations auto volume control is useful.)
Mine tends to say 13 PAPER JAM. (I've got an ooooold LaserJet 4+ that seems to jam once every few pages. I almost never use it.)
That depends how carefully you check. If you just look for a yellow bar, then no, it isn't pointless.
.bank solves the second.
If I'm a phisher, I can register phish.com, get an SSL cert for phish.com, and serve pages from phish.com and turn the address bar yellow.
There are two parts to this authorization:
1) Am I talking to www.whatever.bank
2) Is www.whatever.bank my bank?
SSL mostly solves the first problem,
This isn't in the proposal, but you could require .bank domains to use https even if there isn't any sensitive data. (Or make it a standard for the browser to complain loudly if this convention isn't followed.)
For a CS person I'm relatively lax about security stuff (I find the division between security and convenience closer to the convenience of other people), but I do glance for the yellow bar when I go to banking sites (or other places where I a actually care about security).
Um, I've had one now for ~2 years, and they were around long before that. I was fairly late to getting a cell phone...
You can poison DNS servers so that it will set the .bank addresses to other DNS servers.
And then you go to that site... and the browser says "your SSL certificate's no good".
You would also need to compromise one of the SSL certificate authorities.
course, the "safety toolbar" could then do a WHOIS check and such, but now we're just adding layers of complexity.
Or, you know, a check of the SSL certificate, which you'll need to do anyway.
Exactly how does this protect a user if a worm maps www.citi.bank to and IP address for www.citi.bank.p0wned.com in their host table?
.com domains, but .bank you then get the added assurance (in theory) that citi.bank actually belongs to citibank.
There are two levels of answers:
1.) They're aiming at protecting phishing, not all malicious activity. I email you [not you specifically, generic you] something that says "ur account wi11 expir3 n 3 days" and you click on the link and enter your information into the page that loads. There isn't any room in there for me to remap your hosts file.
2.) If I do have the access to remap your hosts file, there are easier ways to figure out what your password is then having it sent through my website. Like, install a keylogger and wait 'till you just go to your bank outright.
3.) Combined with SSL certificates, the browser could positively identify that you are talking to the computer that is *actually* at citi.bank. This is already done somewhat with
Suppose there was a seal that you could only buy for $50,000 and a background check. But having that seal on your vehicle (no matter what size) meant that your shipment would NEVER be checked by law enforcement. No matter what borders you crossed. No matter what time.
It's more that the seal was put on by a theoretically trusted party and is virtually tamperproof. So it's not so much trusting that the person who put it on is lying, it's trusting that they were already checked out before and haven't changed the contents of their van.
And if the original party is *actually* trustworthy, then yes, I think it would be a decent idea.
I would like a good speech recognition program. I've been meaning to give Dragon a try at some point, but I'd need a mic too (unless it comes with one which it might...). I do enough writing and stuff that it could come in handy to reduce wrist strain.
/. post to the computer instead of typing it.
A lot is coding, but I could still be speaking this
You can't realistically store a file using a fraction of a disk block
Hans Reiser disagrees with you. (As long as you don't use notail.)
I don't claim that it's correct or best; it's simply the dominant practice.
So is releasing crap software turning your customers into beta testers. So is writing non time-critical software in unsafe languages. Most people use Internet Explorer on Windows.
Shouldn't we try to fix things that are wrong?
Where do you think the term "percent" came from?
Keeping the traditional use also creates an inconsistency with kilobit and megabit and gigiabit etc, where, if I'm correct, values ARE measured in powers of 10.
Mac OS X provides spellchecking services automatically
I do wish Windows would do this, especially if they would repurpose the Word spell check code. It gives pretty good suggestions almost all the time and very good suggestions not uncommonly; Firefox not only has a really shitty dictionary (missing, for instance, "repurpose" and even "okay"), but tends to be very unhelpful with suggestions.
I don't get it, because, for instance, ispell is an OSS spell checker that works really well. This post seems to indicate that they know about the problem but can't fix it because of licensing...
There are some core features here that, while they could be implemented in an extension, I think should be considered an integral part of the browser from a normal user's point of view. In other words, even if the user chooses a minimum install, I think they should be installed and switched on. If you want to disable them that's fine, but I don't think you should be able to from the installation program.
These features are:
# Pop-up Blocker
# Accessibility
# Phishing Protection, perhaps (depends on how it's implemented)
# Automated Update
If you don't, then many users are going to be browsing without a pop-up blocker, are going to say "this browser sucks," and are going to switch back to IE.
Sure, you could put a wrapper around the whole system, but that wouldn't be trivial.
And yet... this is exactly what they did! Wow!
(This story is the worst case of people needing to RTFA I've seen for a while...)
These are the cards that need to be combined into one configurable card, so that people can have only three useful cards. One for shopping discounts, one driver's license and one debit card.
What about my credit card? Combine that with something else, or do we keep it separate? How 'bout the student ID and bus pass? I also carry an AAA card for some unknown reason (I don't yet own a car*...), a health insurance card, and a couple other pieces of worthless crap.
My current university doesn't seem to do this, but my undergrad institution allowed you to put your debit card on your student ID. If we do that, throw out the worthless stuff, and say that the student ID can double as a bus pass (it can't but theoretically it could; all students get one), I still have five cards instead of three. If we don't overload the student ID, that's seven.
* Given this information, it might seem weird that I have an AAA membership in the first place. This is a yearly gift from my grandmother. Myself and my parents have told her that she shouldn't do that because it's almost worthless (I did use it once while I was borrowing a car), but she doesn't listen.
Its probably more difficult to work it out for multiple banks and allowing fair and equal access to all banks.
Yeah, good thing that's not what they're doing.
Actually, the whole campus ID thing is very different from this driver's license thing. This is unsupported by the state DMV, doesn't modify the contents of your card, and "just" finds a new use for the information that's already there, specifically your license number.