Except that on a VM the need is not the same. And on a phone also different. Is it really useful to have an ANSI escape sequence interpreter in the kernel ? Much of the legacy could be removed/replaced on those kernels.
The only issue is that "basic regex power" is far behind. Every input is Unicode nowadays, and Perl still leads the way, in general unicode handling features, but also in handling unicode in regexes.
That's true: PHP's preg_replace just requires ugly escapes of the regexp metacharacters, and requires the human to do the hard parse. This also means that IDEs only see a bare string, so no coloring of the regexps. I don't see how this is an improvment.
It depends if he's himself a user of the Piriform software. If he isn't and has never been, there is no contract between him and Piriform, so the TOS do not apply.
Why bother responding? Why bother letting them know that you're listening to and giving consideration to their threats? Why bother making a paper trail of any kind?
Because that./ question, being publicly accessible, is already a trail.
They should get the points only if they mentions the origin of the code and the license under which it is distributed and that licence is effectively allows redistribution.
That's what you should expect from all hardware manufacturers... Nowadays only Apple seems to provide long term software upgrades for its hardware (at least iPhones)
Not a new issue. 10 years ago I bought a Philips HiFi system that could be used alone, but also connected to a PC for audio output and for input (a few keys of the remote control). This 100% proprietary system ever had only drivers and a player for Windows XP. Never worked on Linux, and installing the drivers on Vista required a big hack and often require to reboot the PC before usage...
And as style shows where you could use the preprocessor... #include <stdio.h> int main() { #define F "\nfizz\n" #define B "buzz" #define F_B F B "\n" #define B_F "\n" B F #define FB "\nfizz" B "\n" puts("1\n2" F "4" B_F "7\n8" F_B "11" F "13\n14" FB
"16\n17" F "19" B_F "22\n23" F_B "26" F "28\n29" FB
"31\n32" F "34" B_F "37\n38" F_B "41" F "43\n44" FB
"46\n47" F "49" B_F "52\n53" F_B "56" F "58\n59" FB
"61\n62" F "64" B_F "67\n68" F_B "71" F "73\n74" FB
"76\n77" F "79" B_F "82\n83" F_B "86" F "88\n89" FB
"91\n92" F "94" B_F "97\n98" F B); return 0; }
PS: the hardest part is to fight the Slashdot auto-formatter to respect my layout... but I failed!
Too bad you didn't write it more efficiently (a single string constant, a single call to puts) and with style! #include <stdio.h> int main() { puts("1\n2\nfizz\n4\nbuzz\nfizz\n7\n8\nfizz\nbuzz\n11\nfizz\n13\n14\nfizzbuzz\n" "16\n17\nfizz\n19\nbuzz\nfizz\n22\n23\nfizz\nbuzz\n26\nfizz\n28\n29\nfizzbuzz\n" "31\n32\nfizz\n34\nbuzz\nfizz\n37\n38\nfizz\nbuzz\n41\nfizz\n43\n44\nfizzbuzz\n" "46\n47\nfizz\n49\nbuzz\nfizz\n52\n53\nfizz\nbuzz\n56\nfizz\n58\n59\nfizzbuzz\n" "61\n62\nfizz\n64\nbuzz\nfizz\n67\n68\nfizz\nbuzz\n71\nfizz\n73\n74\nfizzbuzz\n" "76\n77\nfizz\n79\nbuzz\nfizz\n82\n83\nfizz\nbuzz\n86\nfizz\n88\n89\nfizzbuzz\n" "91\n92\nfizz\n94\nbuzz\nfizz\n97\n98\nfizz\nbuzz"); return 0; }
Don't mistake "The current research" with "One research paper posted on Slashdot a few months ago". You're over-generalizing. Or maybe you are an expert on the subject, but in that case I would be happy to see the other sources you know.
people should get a large popup for each site that requires them to allow tracking
You do not seem to understand what is "do-not-track". This is just a declaration of the user to "Do not track me". Nothing technically forces the site to not track you. In fact, most of the advertising agencies that say they implement it say that they will just not use the tracking data to show you personnalized ads. You will get only generic ads not based on your profile, but will still be profiled. Worse, if "Do-not-Tack" is enabled in Firefox, this adds an additional bit of valuable information to your tracking profile: the fact that you are privacy-aware.
So don't count on Do-not-Track only if you want that your privacy be respected. Use additional tools such as AdBlock Plus and Ghostery and allow cookies only siste by site with a whitelist.
Obviously you did not read their terms and conditions before relying on the service. DotTK are crooks by design. Their businness model is clear: get your money once you find the service useful.
The first one is kind of major, I would think: You can't even browse a network?!
Nowadays, as a user you're not supposed to connect directly to the desktop machine of another user. You exchange files through file servers, print servers or The Cloud. So how is browsing the network useful?
Slashdot Mirror
Except that on a VM the need is not the same.
And on a phone also different.
Is it really useful to have an ANSI escape sequence interpreter in the kernel ?
Much of the legacy could be removed/replaced on those kernels.
The only issue is that "basic regex power" is far behind. Every input is Unicode nowadays, and Perl still leads the way, in general unicode handling features, but also in handling unicode in regexes.
That's true: PHP's preg_replace just requires ugly escapes of the regexp metacharacters, and requires the human to do the hard parse. This also means that IDEs only see a bare string, so no coloring of the regexps. I don't see how this is an improvment.
A lawyer may tell him this:
It depends if he's himself a user of the Piriform software.
If he isn't and has never been, there is no contract between him and Piriform, so the TOS do not apply.
Why bother responding? Why bother letting them know that you're listening to and giving consideration to their threats? Why bother making a paper trail of any kind?
Because that ./ question, being publicly accessible, is already a trail.
You're wondering why Lili Hop is not popular?
It's just a game. Why does that shit want to know my phone number or my IMEI ?
1 line of UTF-8 characters for...
UTF-8 is an encoding of Unicode codepoints. It has nothing to do with characters.
They should get the points only if they mentions the origin of the code and the license under which it is distributed and that licence is effectively allows redistribution.
The phone is not the only element that you can not trust.
The SIM card you put inside is even less trustable.
That's what you should expect from all hardware manufacturers...
Nowadays only Apple seems to provide long term software upgrades for its hardware (at least iPhones)
Not a new issue.
10 years ago I bought a Philips HiFi system that could be used alone, but also connected to a PC for audio output and for input (a few keys of the remote control). This 100% proprietary system ever had only drivers and a player for Windows XP.
Never worked on Linux, and installing the drivers on Vista required a big hack and often require to reboot the PC before usage...
And as style shows where you could use the preprocessor...
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
#define F "\nfizz\n"
#define B "buzz"
#define F_B F B "\n"
#define B_F "\n" B F
#define FB "\nfizz" B "\n"
puts("1\n2" F "4" B_F "7\n8" F_B "11" F "13\n14" FB
"16\n17" F "19" B_F "22\n23" F_B "26" F "28\n29" FB
"31\n32" F "34" B_F "37\n38" F_B "41" F "43\n44" FB
"46\n47" F "49" B_F "52\n53" F_B "56" F "58\n59" FB
"61\n62" F "64" B_F "67\n68" F_B "71" F "73\n74" FB
"76\n77" F "79" B_F "82\n83" F_B "86" F "88\n89" FB
"91\n92" F "94" B_F "97\n98" F B);
return 0;
}
PS: the hardest part is to fight the Slashdot auto-formatter to respect my layout... but I failed!
Too bad you didn't write it more efficiently (a single string constant, a single call to puts) and with style!
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
puts("1\n2\nfizz\n4\nbuzz\nfizz\n7\n8\nfizz\nbuzz\n11\nfizz\n13\n14\nfizzbuzz\n"
"16\n17\nfizz\n19\nbuzz\nfizz\n22\n23\nfizz\nbuzz\n26\nfizz\n28\n29\nfizzbuzz\n"
"31\n32\nfizz\n34\nbuzz\nfizz\n37\n38\nfizz\nbuzz\n41\nfizz\n43\n44\nfizzbuzz\n"
"46\n47\nfizz\n49\nbuzz\nfizz\n52\n53\nfizz\nbuzz\n56\nfizz\n58\n59\nfizzbuzz\n"
"61\n62\nfizz\n64\nbuzz\nfizz\n67\n68\nfizz\nbuzz\n71\nfizz\n73\n74\nfizzbuzz\n"
"76\n77\nfizz\n79\nbuzz\nfizz\n82\n83\nfizz\nbuzz\n86\nfizz\n88\n89\nfizzbuzz\n"
"91\n92\nfizz\n94\nbuzz\nfizz\n97\n98\nfizz\nbuzz");
return 0;
}
Clickable link
Don't mistake "The current research" with "One research paper posted on Slashdot a few months ago ". You're over-generalizing. Or maybe you are an expert on the subject, but in that case I would be happy to see the other sources you know.
2. The user-agent string is one factor of many which is (in fact) used to try to identify a browser as uniquely as possible.
Is it still the case now that browser versions change every month, and the User-Agent string with it?
Actually, as a web guy, I also care about logs that are free from false positives due to accidental clicks and redirects.
As a web guy that is security aware I would not want that a hacker uses this "feature" to hide his tracks after his forfeit.
people should get a large popup for each site that requires them to allow tracking
You do not seem to understand what is "do-not-track". This is just a declaration of the user to "Do not track me". Nothing technically forces the site to not track you. In fact, most of the advertising agencies that say they implement it say that they will just not use the tracking data to show you personnalized ads. You will get only generic ads not based on your profile, but will still be profiled.
Worse, if "Do-not-Tack" is enabled in Firefox, this adds an additional bit of valuable information to your tracking profile: the fact that you are privacy-aware.
So don't count on Do-not-Track only if you want that your privacy be respected. Use additional tools such as AdBlock Plus and Ghostery and allow cookies only siste by site with a whitelist.
ok, at least you're honest about it...
Honest, but Anonymous Coward... Does that really count?
Or better: anyone can push to the central repo, but only one can push to the master branch.
You can do this kind of setup with gitolite.
Obviously you did not read their terms and conditions before relying on the service. DotTK are crooks by design. Their businness model is clear: get your money once you find the service useful.
Please get it correct. It isn't very hard to do and it's rather annoying.
Please don't get it wrong. It isn't very hard to do and it's rather annoying.
Thanks Entrope.
Automating the package release seems like a no-brainer for either the SAMBA or Ubuntu team.
As you know this is a no-brainer for them, it is obviously a no-brainer for you too. So just fucking do it!
Are you paying Canonical for Ubunut support?
No? So stop complaining.
The first one is kind of major, I would think: You can't even browse a network?!
Nowadays, as a user you're not supposed to connect directly to the desktop machine of another user. You exchange files through file servers, print servers or The Cloud. So how is browsing the network useful?