You can right click on most text input elements, and select "Add a Keyword for this Search..." and the URL (with equivlent %s) is filled in for you. It even works on POSTed forms such as those used by Allmusic guide!
The citizens are, and the parliament (barely) is. Unfortunatly, the Council of Ministers wear the pants in this relationship. Software patents are on the way!
This is true, but if you allow voruses in to your machine, and especially allow them to run as System/Administrator/whatever, then you have bigger problems.:)
2. Chill! You'll burst a blood vessel with that attitude!
Re:But for the Grace of Gabe... there go ye?
on
Given Up to Spyware?
·
· Score: 1
Slashbot # comment (#11015475) deviates more than 20% from accepted discussion content parameters pursuant to topic 33652 "Steam". Slashbot # is hereby demoted to Conditioned rank.
Civil protection units from city 41 block 65-f are hereby ordered by high command to capture and detain slashbot # for transfer to municipal re-education facility.
An app that didn't make any calls to the kernel wouldn't be able to do much...
To see what system calls Konqueror makes, run 'strace -f konqueror'. This won't catch them all, of course, becuase KDE relies on other processes to do a lot of its work. You can start an X server with xterm as the only client, and do 'strace -f startkde' to see the lot.
Of course, one can always apt-get remove konqueror if one doesn't want it installed, the rest of KDE will not stop working. Try that with Internet Explorer.:)
WRT to MSIE using 'kernel internals': is there actually any documented evidence of when/where/why it does this? Internet Explorer probably uses the "Native API" *less* than a typical Unix process would use system calls; where Mozilla would open(2) a file, IE would call the OpenFile Win32 API, which would be handled by the Win32 server (csrss.exe, IIRC).
The classic Mac OS did this for years. If you had Balloon Help turned on, then mousing over a disabled menu item would bring up a help balloon explaining exactly why the item was disabled.
Since no one else seems to have mentioned this, I assume OS X doesn't have balloon help any more.:(
You assume that the speed of light has remained constant since then.;)
There was a Slashdot article quite recently about a new super-accurate atomic clock that will help scientists determine more readily whether our universal constants are really constant. We'll know in a few hundred years, I guess.
Of course, it will probably mean that the light from Andromeda has been travelling for 2.5001 million years instead of just 2.5 million years.:)
re infants and the brain dead: yup. Sounds like an excuse for some speculative fiction to raise awareness of these issues and get people debating them.
Actually filling this one in was harder than I thought it would be. I guess because I'm too lazy to think up new catagories that consicely summarise the objections we've seen. Nevertheless...
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses (x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (x) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it (x) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists (x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it [well, we'll find out if this is illegal once Ralsky et al. sue] ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (x) Extreme profitability of spam [providing Ralsky et al. with enough funds to make the court case long and bloody] ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering (x) Inethicality of slowing the entire Internet down, when a handful of spammers are responsible for 99% of our spam ( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation (x) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud (x) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free (x) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email (x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
The Citibank case is entirely their fault. Whatever the web site was, it should have been somewhere in the citibank.com domain. As long as the web server also used SSL, you could have been assured that the site was legit.
Well, as long as the domain given wasn't the unicode equivalent of (I+16@|\||.com anyway.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Nice try, but Google's Zeitgeist pages haven't showed browswer stats since the autumn.
You can right click on most text input elements, and select "Add a Keyword for this Search..." and the URL (with equivlent %s) is filled in for you. It even works on POSTed forms such as those used by Allmusic guide!
Mozilla on Linux uses GTK+... I guess IHBT.
> Admin/user in windows exists almost purely for sys administration tasks
And to run most third party software.
Bullshit. They'd net $5000 and eternal fame. And admins who prefer postfix and exim would finally be able to shut those damn smug Qmail admins up. :)
The citizens are, and the parliament (barely) is. Unfortunatly, the Council of Ministers wear the pants in this relationship. Software patents are on the way!
I *thought* that "running" software is making an ephermal copy, which is covered under fair use. I may be wrong, however.
This is true, but if you allow voruses in to your machine, and especially allow them to run as System/Administrator/whatever, then you have bigger problems. :)
And if you run the search indexer as root, then it's your own dumb fault if you get taken advantage of. :)
I'm confident that Sony, the same company that gave us consoles whose optical drives break after 13 months use, would not make such a stupid mistake.
How about you give us a few links to relevant material, instead of bitching?
Sounds like another good reason to disable Javascript to me...
1. So does Windows, these days.
2. Chill! You'll burst a blood vessel with that attitude!
Slashbot # comment (#11015475) deviates more than 20% from accepted discussion content parameters pursuant to topic 33652 "Steam". Slashbot # is hereby demoted to Conditioned rank.
r rtaninilwd
Civil protection units from city 41 block 65-f are hereby ordered by high command to capture and detain slashbot # for transfer to municipal re-education facility.
^91011errtaninilwd
^91011levtencentxq
^91011e
^91011levtencentxq
Fatal error in task: symbol slashbot_id undefined!
^^^alks897
^^^^rwx777
^^rw-664
Right, the vfat module doesn't do anythign when you use sync. Or so I heard, might just be old information.
sync doesn't work on VFAT filesystems, from what I've heard.
Incorrect! Try again! :)
An app that didn't make any calls to the kernel wouldn't be able to do much...
:)
To see what system calls Konqueror makes, run 'strace -f konqueror'. This won't catch them all, of course, becuase KDE relies on other processes to do a lot of its work. You can start an X server with xterm as the only client, and do 'strace -f startkde' to see the lot.
Of course, one can always apt-get remove konqueror if one doesn't want it installed, the rest of KDE will not stop working. Try that with Internet Explorer.
WRT to MSIE using 'kernel internals': is there actually any documented evidence of when/where/why it does this? Internet Explorer probably uses the "Native API" *less* than a typical Unix process would use system calls; where Mozilla would open(2) a file, IE would call the OpenFile Win32 API, which would be handled by the Win32 server (csrss.exe, IIRC).
You forgot Heart!
The classic Mac OS did this for years. If you had Balloon Help turned on, then mousing over a disabled menu item would bring up a help balloon explaining exactly why the item was disabled.
:(
Since no one else seems to have mentioned this, I assume OS X doesn't have balloon help any more.
You assume that the speed of light has remained constant since then. ;)
:)
There was a Slashdot article quite recently about a new super-accurate atomic clock that will help scientists determine more readily whether our universal constants are really constant. We'll know in a few hundred years, I guess.
Of course, it will probably mean that the light from Andromeda has been travelling for 2.5001 million years instead of just 2.5 million years.
re infants and the brain dead: yup. Sounds like an excuse for some speculative fiction to raise awareness of these issues and get people debating them.
Hardlink! :)
Actually filling this one in was harder than I thought it would be. I guess because I'm too lazy to think up new catagories that consicely summarise the objections we've seen. Nevertheless...
Your post advocates a
( ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based (x) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
(x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
(x) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it [well, we'll find out if this is illegal once Ralsky et al. sue]
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam [providing Ralsky et al. with enough funds to make the court case long and bloody]
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
(x) Inethicality of slowing the entire Internet down, when a handful of spammers are responsible for 99% of our spam
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
(x) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
(x) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
(x) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
The Citibank case is entirely their fault. Whatever the web site was, it should have been somewhere in the citibank.com domain. As long as the web server also used SSL, you could have been assured that the site was legit.
:)
Well, as long as the domain given wasn't the unicode equivalent of (I+16@|\||.com anyway.