Re:Is it ok to keep kids off the internet these da
on
Good Email For Kids?
·
· Score: 1
Well, FUD is pretty much current-day culture. Chris Hanson, anyone? I'm pretty convinced half of that is staged, if the police can't catch these guys but network TV can. Either that, or the system really doesn't give a crap about us (and having had 911 hang up on me in the middle of Chicago when I had a gang chasing me, that wouldn't surprise me either).
My parents never regulated me Internet access. They didn't need to. They told me what was acceptable, what wasn't, and gave me the morals to not sit around and be a jaagov (I limit me/. usage to lunch breaks, so there!). I'm 26 now and have run my own software consultancy for the past 5 years. No felonies, no arrests, only 4 speeding tickets and 2 parking tickets in the past 10 years. I'm not perfect, but unfettered Internet access didn't keep me from having my own car, my own home, and my own business.
I think most people are afraid of kids being exposed to information that gets filtered on TV for sexuality and gore/violence, more so than they are worried about the molestation (though it's still a big concern to them). There's plenty out there that could be "harmful", but that's more a moral standpoint than actually based on psychiatry. But, there's also a world of knowledge out there that could be extremely educational. You're better off (as you have demonstrated) taking an interest in your children and showing them the difference between what's acceptable and what isn't, and then trusting them to respect your choices.
You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, so they say. Show an actual interest and a bit of love for your kids, and they might respect your decisions. Gee, fancy that.
Re:Is it ok to keep kids off the internet these da
on
Good Email For Kids?
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Use more lotion.
At least your wrists weren't sprained enough to type that post, right?
No, it sounds like "Gmail: If you were running SpamAssassin, you'd have user-level filtering preferences. What kind of ghetto shit are you running that can't provide that customization?"
With the plethora of "lone-wolf programmer" articles on here, you'd think this would be more obvious.
The antisocial, overprotective nature of programmers or self-styled "hackers" isn't necessarily wrong. Patent lawyers essentially do the same thing these guys do, at a smaller scale: "I did it. Give me credit! Neener Neener!"
It's ultimately puerile, but for people who generate information, recognition is a very important aspect of whatever opus they're currently constructing. People who wish to advance through the ranks are certainly in the system, but people who are information architects have a certain need to be recognized for their achievements.
That's oft times why the more juvenile refuse to work in team projects; even if it's a pat on the back, they want to stand out and be recognized. By organizing into a collective, that sense of identity is usually lost, so that's why you get the reticence.
Most indie artists can get on boutique sites for their specific genre and get promoted just fine.
Hell, there were even artists that got discovered on Soulseek and they actually put a label together just for them.
MySpace + SNOCAP has always been a joke (I've personally dealt with SNOCAP in the past, and actually had to drop them because they were so unbelievably bass ackwards). MySpace + Amazon = a really bad joke.
Me? I'd rather put up my user profile and put the Beatport player on there instead of the SNOCAP player. Links right to the same store, and I get 60% of $2.49 per track on a new track, $1.99 on back catalog tracks. That's a dance-specific example, but there are boutique sites out there for any genre you're into.
From my experience, sites like Beatport do over $5 million gross, so there's certainly money to be made from DRM-free music. It's just a matter of doing your research or hooking up with an indie distributor who can get you into a few hundred of these stores. Big-banking on your MySpace profile or iTunes is truly detrimental for most people and is an all-out gambit.
Or, better put: Better to have 60% of something than 0% of a goose egg.
DRM can always be subverted. The moment you start to stream out, you can _always_ redirect the bitstream from the audio device to a local file.
In the worst case, you lo-jack it and just redirect your headphone jack to your mic jack. Simple enough if you're willing to take the hit on re-encoding. In the best case, you fake an audio device in software and deposit the unencoded pile wherever you want.
Even if you aren't a code wizard, DRM is not an obstacle to freedom. All it is, is a PITA and a disingenuous way to lock in people who don't have the code-fu to put the music they've purchased on their MP3 players. You need a different copy and a different license to do that, you know.
The earliest electronic ping-pong game was played on an analog computer using an oscilloscope as a display, and was developed by William A. Higinbotham at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1958. His game was called Tennis for Two.[8]
At least, I am assuming that's what you're referencing. The first known "game" was a missile simulator, developed in 1947 by Thomas Goldsmith, Jr. This was 4 years before the demo of the NIMROD (which was the first "console" gaming system). The NIMROD was British; Goldsmith was born in South Carolina and taught physics at Furman University, very much an American.
As far as GP goes, I'm assuming that "Free Software" is spoken of as an ideology. If you want to get technical, RMS was ranting and raving about free software as far back as the Copyright Act of 1976. The FSF and GNU project were created in 1985, a full 6 years before Linus even began his kernel development. Hell, GNU Hurd was announced in 1990.
Some predecessors to GNU: SPICE (UC Berkeley), TeX (Stanford), and the X Window System (MIT).
Looking even earlier, there was SHARE for the IBM 701, which was founded in 1955 in Los Angeles. DECUS didn't come along until 1961, so it's a bit hard to say Germans came first in that regard.
So, yes, actually, GP is correct in stating that America has had quite a big part in the founding and shaping of the Free Software movement. I can't necessarily state that it's a popular mindset these days, or adopted for the same reasons as then.
However, your own post is littered with inaccuracies and your own inability to see past "Lunix == teh open sorez." I'm willing to go so far as to say that the early viability of the Linux kernel itself is wholly dependent upon the GNU toolkit that Stallman near single-handedly wrote. At worst, it wouldn't have lasted past a student project. At best, it would have taken several years before a distribution came out, and there sure as shit wouldn't have been distros like Debian in '93.
If you're willing to give credit where it's due, so am I. Otherwise, nice flamebait.
Take the peer review of Digg, give it the interface of del.icio.us, and hack out some broken transitional XHTML... and you've got Stack Overflow.
Seriously, for a guy who runs a site called Coding Horror, the irony isn't lost on me that Atwood put together this abortion. Cute idea, but it misses the mark entirely.
Uh... You know that if you have half a brain, EE is free.
Either you pay with your wallet or you provide help. To get a premium account, you need to average 10,000 points a month; given that most people provide the maximum of 500 points a question, a thorough answer with an "A" grade will usually garner you 2,000 points ("A" gives a x4 multiplier, "B" gives a x3).
So, if you are active on the site anyway, you need to average answering 5 questions a month. In return, you can ask unlimited questions and access the entire kb.
If you need the information and aren't giving any back, I don't see what's wrong with requiring you to pay. In lieu of an ad-ridden site (which all slashbots will complain about indignantly), they came up with a model that actually pays for the bandwidth.
I'm all for "information wanting to be free", but when it comes to actually hosting it all, I'm reminded of the saying about ass, gas, or cash. I have a premium account on EE (and enough damn T-shirts). I found that a half hour every two weeks (when I'd be trolling/. anyway) gets me unlimited access to information I do need.
If Jeff Atwood's going to fund this entire thing out of pocket, more power to him, but I don't see it happening. If it's on an ad-based model, anyone who uses an ad-blocker is a hypocrite and a cheapskate.
Uh, you pretty much have to pay customs taxes on anything shipped over national lines. Anything commercial will get hit with an "import tax", even if it's simply customs brokerage.
That's not a vulnerability. The entire point of greylisting is to catch the fire-and-forget spammers. It's about detecting half-baked SMTP implementations that can't handle deferrals.
For the most part, greylisting + RBL + a heuristic scanner eats 98% of my spam. And for those bitching about time-sensitive data not getting across the wire in time:
Greylisting is a one-time ordeal. If you're receiving email from someone you've _never_ had email correspondance with, it's going to happen. Three times deferred, then added to internal whitelist. Takes no more than half an hour.
If you're running that far to the wire, I'd expect that you either: A. broke your fax machine, or B. can't get your act together to not run your business on the 11th hour.
In either case, it's a human problem, not a technological one. Build a contingency for oh-shit, last-minute emergencies, and don't wait for the other shoe to drop before trying to rush something out.
1. Server does magic check. Sees image/gif. 2. Server sends file as image/gif. 3. Browser deliberately misfires helper routine, get r00ted.
There's a reason why magic strings are used: they're part of the encoding process. Let's look at it from two angles:
1. Browser gets set JAR, reads it as GIF. What happens? Broken image, possible buffer overflow. In the former case: that's what is supposed to happen. In the latter case? Problem in GIF decoding algorithm, _not_ the browser's fault.
2. Browser gets the JAR, goes by file extension, gets access to DOM and cookies. Uh... wait, what? Yes, my friend, that is the sound of raep.
Are you honestly attempting to state that #2 is better than #1?
Really? I started college in the fall of '97 and picked up 3789729 then.
And a "me too" to keeping the account active for nostalgia's sake. I've pretty much lost everyone on my list and get the occasional spam, but you never know who'll pop up one day.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, FUD is pretty much current-day culture. Chris Hanson, anyone? I'm pretty convinced half of that is staged, if the police can't catch these guys but network TV can. Either that, or the system really doesn't give a crap about us (and having had 911 hang up on me in the middle of Chicago when I had a gang chasing me, that wouldn't surprise me either).
My parents never regulated me Internet access. They didn't need to. They told me what was acceptable, what wasn't, and gave me the morals to not sit around and be a jaagov (I limit me /. usage to lunch breaks, so there!). I'm 26 now and have run my own software consultancy for the past 5 years. No felonies, no arrests, only 4 speeding tickets and 2 parking tickets in the past 10 years. I'm not perfect, but unfettered Internet access didn't keep me from having my own car, my own home, and my own business.
I think most people are afraid of kids being exposed to information that gets filtered on TV for sexuality and gore/violence, more so than they are worried about the molestation (though it's still a big concern to them). There's plenty out there that could be "harmful", but that's more a moral standpoint than actually based on psychiatry. But, there's also a world of knowledge out there that could be extremely educational. You're better off (as you have demonstrated) taking an interest in your children and showing them the difference between what's acceptable and what isn't, and then trusting them to respect your choices.
You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, so they say. Show an actual interest and a bit of love for your kids, and they might respect your decisions. Gee, fancy that.
Use more lotion.
At least your wrists weren't sprained enough to type that post, right?
No, it sounds like "Gmail: If you were running SpamAssassin, you'd have user-level filtering preferences. What kind of ghetto shit are you running that can't provide that customization?"
With the plethora of "lone-wolf programmer" articles on here, you'd think this would be more obvious.
The antisocial, overprotective nature of programmers or self-styled "hackers" isn't necessarily wrong. Patent lawyers essentially do the same thing these guys do, at a smaller scale: "I did it. Give me credit! Neener Neener!"
It's ultimately puerile, but for people who generate information, recognition is a very important aspect of whatever opus they're currently constructing. People who wish to advance through the ranks are certainly in the system, but people who are information architects have a certain need to be recognized for their achievements.
That's oft times why the more juvenile refuse to work in team projects; even if it's a pat on the back, they want to stand out and be recognized. By organizing into a collective, that sense of identity is usually lost, so that's why you get the reticence.
Most indie artists can get on boutique sites for their specific genre and get promoted just fine.
Hell, there were even artists that got discovered on Soulseek and they actually put a label together just for them.
MySpace + SNOCAP has always been a joke (I've personally dealt with SNOCAP in the past, and actually had to drop them because they were so unbelievably bass ackwards). MySpace + Amazon = a really bad joke.
Me? I'd rather put up my user profile and put the Beatport player on there instead of the SNOCAP player. Links right to the same store, and I get 60% of $2.49 per track on a new track, $1.99 on back catalog tracks. That's a dance-specific example, but there are boutique sites out there for any genre you're into.
From my experience, sites like Beatport do over $5 million gross, so there's certainly money to be made from DRM-free music. It's just a matter of doing your research or hooking up with an indie distributor who can get you into a few hundred of these stores. Big-banking on your MySpace profile or iTunes is truly detrimental for most people and is an all-out gambit.
Or, better put: Better to have 60% of something than 0% of a goose egg.
Welcome to reality.
DRM can always be subverted. The moment you start to stream out, you can _always_ redirect the bitstream from the audio device to a local file.
In the worst case, you lo-jack it and just redirect your headphone jack to your mic jack. Simple enough if you're willing to take the hit on re-encoding. In the best case, you fake an audio device in software and deposit the unencoded pile wherever you want.
Even if you aren't a code wizard, DRM is not an obstacle to freedom. All it is, is a PITA and a disingenuous way to lock in people who don't have the code-fu to put the music they've purchased on their MP3 players. You need a different copy and a different license to do that, you know.
Crabtree's Bludgeon, anyone? Seriously.
Okay... you caught me. McGrath's C library and work on make were pretty fundamental to the project. Mea culpa.
>Computer gaming was invented by a British professor with an overgrown oscilloscope and time to kill.
Wrong. From Wikipedia:
The earliest electronic ping-pong game was played on an analog computer using an oscilloscope as a display, and was developed by William A. Higinbotham at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1958. His game was called Tennis for Two.[8]
At least, I am assuming that's what you're referencing. The first known "game" was a missile simulator, developed in 1947 by Thomas Goldsmith, Jr. This was 4 years before the demo of the NIMROD (which was the first "console" gaming system). The NIMROD was British; Goldsmith was born in South Carolina and taught physics at Furman University, very much an American.
As far as GP goes, I'm assuming that "Free Software" is spoken of as an ideology. If you want to get technical, RMS was ranting and raving about free software as far back as the Copyright Act of 1976. The FSF and GNU project were created in 1985, a full 6 years before Linus even began his kernel development. Hell, GNU Hurd was announced in 1990.
Some predecessors to GNU: SPICE (UC Berkeley), TeX (Stanford), and the X Window System (MIT).
Looking even earlier, there was SHARE for the IBM 701, which was founded in 1955 in Los Angeles. DECUS didn't come along until 1961, so it's a bit hard to say Germans came first in that regard.
So, yes, actually, GP is correct in stating that America has had quite a big part in the founding and shaping of the Free Software movement. I can't necessarily state that it's a popular mindset these days, or adopted for the same reasons as then.
However, your own post is littered with inaccuracies and your own inability to see past "Lunix == teh open sorez." I'm willing to go so far as to say that the early viability of the Linux kernel itself is wholly dependent upon the GNU toolkit that Stallman near single-handedly wrote. At worst, it wouldn't have lasted past a student project. At best, it would have taken several years before a distribution came out, and there sure as shit wouldn't have been distros like Debian in '93.
If you're willing to give credit where it's due, so am I. Otherwise, nice flamebait.
It already has.
Take the peer review of Digg, give it the interface of del.icio.us, and hack out some broken transitional XHTML... and you've got Stack Overflow.
Seriously, for a guy who runs a site called Coding Horror, the irony isn't lost on me that Atwood put together this abortion. Cute idea, but it misses the mark entirely.
Uh... You know that if you have half a brain, EE is free.
Either you pay with your wallet or you provide help. To get a premium account, you need to average 10,000 points a month; given that most people provide the maximum of 500 points a question, a thorough answer with an "A" grade will usually garner you 2,000 points ("A" gives a x4 multiplier, "B" gives a x3).
So, if you are active on the site anyway, you need to average answering 5 questions a month. In return, you can ask unlimited questions and access the entire kb.
If you need the information and aren't giving any back, I don't see what's wrong with requiring you to pay. In lieu of an ad-ridden site (which all slashbots will complain about indignantly), they came up with a model that actually pays for the bandwidth.
I'm all for "information wanting to be free", but when it comes to actually hosting it all, I'm reminded of the saying about ass, gas, or cash. I have a premium account on EE (and enough damn T-shirts). I found that a half hour every two weeks (when I'd be trolling /. anyway) gets me unlimited access to information I do need.
If Jeff Atwood's going to fund this entire thing out of pocket, more power to him, but I don't see it happening. If it's on an ad-based model, anyone who uses an ad-blocker is a hypocrite and a cheapskate.
Uh, you pretty much have to pay customs taxes on anything shipped over national lines. Anything commercial will get hit with an "import tax", even if it's simply customs brokerage.
Nice troll, though.
Yeah, but this is as bad as striking out at a tee-ball game.
Wow, I missed that one by a mile. I thought we were getting feedback from Mel Gibson at one point.
You know it's a bad day when you not only RTFA, you fail to RTFS.
I before E, except in Budweiser.
That's not a vulnerability. The entire point of greylisting is to catch the fire-and-forget spammers. It's about detecting half-baked SMTP implementations that can't handle deferrals.
For the most part, greylisting + RBL + a heuristic scanner eats 98% of my spam. And for those bitching about time-sensitive data not getting across the wire in time:
Greylisting is a one-time ordeal. If you're receiving email from someone you've _never_ had email correspondance with, it's going to happen. Three times deferred, then added to internal whitelist. Takes no more than half an hour.
If you're running that far to the wire, I'd expect that you either: A. broke your fax machine, or B. can't get your act together to not run your business on the 11th hour.
In either case, it's a human problem, not a technological one. Build a contingency for oh-shit, last-minute emergencies, and don't wait for the other shoe to drop before trying to rush something out.
Well, why else do you think they bought em out? Google's advertising game isn't just limited to AdSense and AdWords, you know.
So, you realize the error in your logic then?
1. Server does magic check. Sees image/gif.
2. Server sends file as image/gif.
3. Browser deliberately misfires helper routine, get r00ted.
There's a reason why magic strings are used: they're part of the encoding process. Let's look at it from two angles:
1. Browser gets set JAR, reads it as GIF. What happens? Broken image, possible buffer overflow. In the former case: that's what is supposed to happen. In the latter case? Problem in GIF decoding algorithm, _not_ the browser's fault.
2. Browser gets the JAR, goes by file extension, gets access to DOM and cookies. Uh... wait, what? Yes, my friend, that is the sound of raep.
Are you honestly attempting to state that #2 is better than #1?
I didn't know that Daily Kos was the home of hackers on steroids.
I wouldn't think Nicolae Ceausescu would approve of any Romanians smoking Poles.
You seem to have misspelled Kleenex.
Long live the new flesh!
Nah, it just sounds like really glitchcore.
Who would have thought Mother Nature actually was a fan of musique concrete?
Really? I started college in the fall of '97 and picked up 3789729 then.
And a "me too" to keeping the account active for nostalgia's sake. I've pretty much lost everyone on my list and get the occasional spam, but you never know who'll pop up one day.