It was once Netscape... until they screwed up in the market so bad that they gave up on it and released the source as:
Mozilla... until it became so bloated and overdesigned (and dangerously close to a movie company's trademark on a mutant lizard) that they had to start over as a project called:
That's a bit harsh - how about unfair competition? Anyway, "Mozilla" was the internal codename for Navigator at Netscape. It has always been it's name and it still is today (now for the whole suite).
To quote the "Freeing the Source:
The Story of Mozilla ":
Mozilla was a term initially created by Jamie Zawinsky and company during the development of Navigator. The team was working at a similarly frantic pace to create a beast vastly more powerful than Mosaic, and the word became the official code name for Navigator.
Firefox... which, (assuming they finally did their homework and checked on trademarks) is actually the best name since the original "Netscape".
They better! The name is catchy and the logo is quite beautiful. Try "Help" > "About Mozilla Firefox".
'using free software to achieve the WSIS goals might get in the way of an intellectual property owner's ability to make a profit'
That's odd, FOSS can't exactly prevent an intellectual property owner from making a profit on their intellectual property. It is theirs after all, and FOSS can't deliver solutions that make use of this specifically, because that would be in violation of said owner's intellectual property.
However, FOSS can - in some cases - deliver an alternative. Picking either solution depends on such things as quality and security, etc. Oh by the way, this is called competition by merit, which happens to be healthy competition.
Of course I might be wrong, perhaps I missed something?
It appears that Microsoft might get more than a slap on the wrist this time around.
Don't bet on it! With the upcoming enlargement of the EU on the agenda, the EU has already stated that they wish to speed things up and get this thing out of the way, in time for the acceptance of the new member states into the EU. The result could be an unfavorable settlement before May 1st - in other words another slap on the wrist.
During the time when my country had the EU presidency back in 2002, everybody was quite busy completing the negotiations with the new member states and as a result the EUCD didn't get enough careful attention. In the eleventh hour on december 22nd 2002 Denmark voted for the directive, turning 180 degrees from a solid majority against it? We were the first country to vote on this issue and I fear it did set a bad example for the other countries who voted next.
Sure, but now people have a chance to protect themselves by filtering BMP-files on http proxies, etc. Who uses them in browsers anyway?
Well, except that maybe this vulnerability could now be combined with the previously disclosed filetype spoofing vulnerability to do some nasty damage.
Stewie: Hello operator? Hello? Oh god, that's right you have to punch in the numbers nowadays. Aah, I should know this... oh yes, 867-5309, that's it. No wait that's not it, damn you Tommy Tutone! Only one thing to do! 111-1111. Lois? Damn. 111-1112. Lois? Damn. 111-1113. Damn!
The following is an edited listing of recent vulnerabilities discovered by the eEye Research Team. Full details of each vulnerability will be disclosed to the public at the time a patch is released from the vendor
The oldest known undisclosed vulnerability here is 93 days overdue. There are seven on this list.
Vulnerabilities that not only these security researchers and Microsoft may know of - vulnerabilities that may be exploited even as I write this. I must be completety stupid to think that this kind of security non-disclosure is complete and utter crap?!
I know the guys at eEye can't do much about this, as in disclosing the nature of the vulnerabilites, so that we might unplug servers, or close some tcp/udp ports or whatever. They'd surely we sued (DMCA, and all that).
Hey, I have a great idea. Why not use this open port on the infected MyDoom boxes to propogate a virus which is set to automatically remove MyDoom and then remove itself several days after infection? It would be a great way to "patch" all these compromised boxes.
Perhaps, but depending on how you execute this, you'd be walking a fine line between being a good samaritan and being the script kiddie who is causing even more network congestion as your "good" virus propagates.
Anyway, this would still be focusing on the symptoms of the virus instead of the cause.
How on earth could I forget our national lunch!:-)
These wonderful open dark bread sandwiches! I guess Ida Davidsen would be most famous in this particular area. I have yet to taste her smoerrebroed, however I know it's pretty expensive. Anyway, you can get quite decent smoerrebroed anywhere in Denmark, and it's a must if you're visiting.
The other AC mentioned the actress Connie Nielsen, which reminds me that LOTR star Viggo Mortensen is half Danish, and actually speaks our language fluently. He worked here as a waiter at some point.
First pastries and bacon, now this. Is there anything the Danish can't do?
Not much. Perhaps you recognize these guys?
Tycho Brahe (astronomy)
Niels Bohr (physics)
Bjarne Stroustrup (C++ creator)
Hans Christian Andersen, Soeren Kierkegaard, Karen Blixen (tales, essays, short stories)
Victor Borge (comedy)
Bille August (movie director)
Carl Nielsen (classical composer)
Arne Jacobsen (designer - the father of modern danish design)
They're all Danes. Perhaps some interesting companies too:
Novo (largest supplier of insulin, creator of the world smallest syringes - a perfect combo)
Lego (well)
Carlberg (mmmm... beer)
Maersk (shipping inddustry - look for the star logo)
We're also the worlds largest producer of windmills, I believe? We can do pretty much everything.
I don't know about the pastries. A "Danish" as you know it, is not called a Dasish in Denmark - it's not even believed to be Danish, if I'm not mistaken?:-)
I just like the config file method. Does this mean that I can keep my config file (for compiling the kernel) when I upgrade to the next stable? (keeping in mind that I have it customized)
Yes, that's what the "make oldconfig" is for. You need to overwrite the.config file first. This goes for the 2.4 series kernels - I don't know if it has changed in the 2.6 series?
Yeah yeah, evolving language. Some adaptations should be thrown in the chlorinated pool!
Indeed! "might of" and "would of" are simply incorrect!
As an example, take "would've" as the contraction in speaking "would have". The sound of the "'ve" bit is misheard as "of". Sure, sometimes it sounds like your saying "of", but it is NOT "of". It never has been. Some people are more familiar with the spoken form of English than the written - which is the reason for this error.
To be on topic, my computer was one of the 2070.:-)
It seems my ISP has added a DNS entry to their name servers for www.sco.com pointing to 127.0.0.1. It does have a low TTL (primary: 107?, secondary: 300), but I wonder how long they'll continue this?
Someone at some point might actually want to visit www.sco.com... nah, probably not.;-)
Do yourself a favour and go for the Strict versions of the (X)HTML markups directly. Don't waste time with Transitional markup, because you'll be creating the same old tag soup that all the browsers (old and new) will happily eat in quirks mode. When the day comes (after your transition?) and you finally set that DTD to Strict, all your pages will be blown to bollocks because the browsers will now render them in strict standards compliance mode.
Why bother? You can't really benefit from Style Sheets in quirks mode anyway? Remember, the rendering is completely different between quirks and strict standards compliance mode, and with good reason! The browser developers finally had a chance to do it right with strict standards compliance mode rendering because their implementations are made from scratch from the same thorough W3C spec. With quirks mode they just use their old layout engines from back during the browser wars.
You'll benefit greatly from the Strict versions of the (X)HTML markup. While taking full advantage of Style Sheets and ridding your old (X)HTML sources of the deprecated presentational tags, you'll end up with more easily maintainable (X)HTML sources. Think about it, most of your pages might already consist of 80% tags related to presentation. When you have removed these from one page and put the presentational information in an external style sheet, it won't be that much of an effort to apply these resulting style sheet rules to the rest of your pages. Why? Because most of the time you'll just be removing deprecated tags. Sure, there's still a bit of structure to deal with, but it's a worthwile task.
I've written "(X)HTML" in this comment a couple of times now. As I see it, the Transitional/Strict issue is infinately more important than the HTML/XHTML issue. When you have Strict HTML markup it's really a no-brainer to convert it to XHTML, because it's pretty much about syntax, well formedness. Try taking a look at W3C's HTML compatibility guidelines for XML. If you do yourself a favor and explicitly use closing tags, etc. you can convert your HTML to XHTML with a couple of regular expression substituions. That's pretty much it. Bottom line: the main difference between the Strict versions og HTML and XHTML is largely syntax. (There are some elements of your DOM that require special attention with respects to applying CSS, but this statement is essentially true.)
If you care about having the same result shown accross browsers (especially IE), then watch out for XHTML.
(Borrowing a bit from a previous comment I made here on/.) IE can be a stick in the wheel, because it
ignores the XML declaration in XHTML documents beginning like this:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='iso-8859-1'?>
IE expects to encounter the DOCTYPE first, which doesn't make sense - and would be non-valid XHTML markup. When IE encounters the above declaration it throws itself into quirks mode, unconditionally!
Sure, the XML declaration is not strictly required, however if you read the W3C XHTML spec it says:
An XML declaration is not required in all XML documents; however XHTML document authors are strongly encouraged to use XML declarations in all their documents. Such a declaration is required when the character encoding of the document is other than the default UTF-8 or UTF-16 and no encoding was determined by a higher-level protocol.
Another point. XHTML pages should really only be created for the purpose of being served - by your web server - as application/xhtml+xml. See W3C's document on XHTML Media Types. IE doesn't support the application/xhtml+xml media type, and this together with the above mentioned deficiency makes for quite a showstopper with respects to the adoption of XHTML - it's sad, really.
Mozilla and Opera will handle XHTML documents served as application/xhtml+xm
Any compressed archive I want I use TAR and then either Gzip or Bzip. Are these better?
Depends on how you look at it?
Gzip is GNU's version of zip and was made - as in most cases - as a Free alternative to avoid problems with patents (LZW, I believe in this case). Gzip can only create archives with single files, which is okay, because this is where Tar comes in.
Tar (the Tape Archiver), as you know simply stores multiple files in a single file. You could create the file on a tape drive (hence the name), but these days you'd probably just pipe it into your archive program of choice.
Bzip is a more sophisticated archiver and uses a block-sorting algorithm, like RAR, which generally allows for better compression.
So basically, I'd say Bzip is most certainly better than your average zip programs. As for Gzip, I haven't compared it to PkWare's zip, but I would expect similar compression ratios.
When you need and archiver that works as a filter, both Gzip and Bzip - as opposed to most other archivers - will provide this. Say:
ls/home/some_user -la | gzip | uuencode file_list.gz | mail -s "Here's directory listing of your home dir" some_user@domain.com
I suggest modifying the forward http array to emit an inverse slashdotyon pulse into the heart of the anomaly.
Ah, I see where you're going! An inverse slashdotyon pulse requires a lot of power, though? Perhaps, if we use the main deflector dish instead? We could reroute emergency power to the dish and then set the polarity to the http frequency required. This should restore bandwidth to the remote server's tcp/ip plasma coils a bit faster.
There are other ways to get the same effect:
- playing music while working
- going for a brisk walk (not heavy sport, because that tires you out)
- smoking a joint (depends on the person but for many people this does the trick)
- playing a game (solitaire?)
[Sorry about the previous empty post - wrong button!]
What I meant to say was: I find if I go to the toilet, solutions to tricky problems almost always come to me instantly. No, really!:-)
It's really weird, though I've come to rely on this rather curious phenomenon.
There are other ways to get the same effect:
- playing music while working
- going for a brisk walk (not heavy sport, because that tires you out)
- smoking a joint (depends on the person but for many people this does the trick)
- playing a game (solitaire?)
Slashdot Mirror
What build are you using? Mine is "Gecko/20040207 Firefox/0.8" - it's a fox, alright. In more than one sense actually. :-)
zIt was once Netscape... until they screwed up in the market so bad that they gave up on it and released the source as:
Mozilla... until it became so bloated and overdesigned (and dangerously close to a movie company's trademark on a mutant lizard) that they had to start over as a project called:
That's a bit harsh - how about unfair competition? Anyway, "Mozilla" was the internal codename for Navigator at Netscape. It has always been it's name and it still is today (now for the whole suite).
To quote the "Freeing the Source: The Story of Mozilla " :
Mozilla was a term initially created by Jamie Zawinsky and company during the development of Navigator. The team was working at a similarly frantic pace to create a beast vastly more powerful than Mosaic, and the word became the official code name for Navigator.Firefox... which, (assuming they finally did their homework and checked on trademarks) is actually the best name since the original "Netscape".
They better! The name is catchy and the logo is quite beautiful. Try "Help" > "About Mozilla Firefox".
zThat's odd, FOSS can't exactly prevent an intellectual property owner from making a profit on their intellectual property. It is theirs after all, and FOSS can't deliver solutions that make use of this specifically, because that would be in violation of said owner's intellectual property.
However, FOSS can - in some cases - deliver an alternative. Picking either solution depends on such things as quality and security, etc. Oh by the way, this is called competition by merit, which happens to be healthy competition.
Of course I might be wrong, perhaps I missed something?
zThe submitter wrote:
It appears that Microsoft might get more than a slap on the wrist this time around.Don't bet on it! With the upcoming enlargement of the EU on the agenda, the EU has already stated that they wish to speed things up and get this thing out of the way, in time for the acceptance of the new member states into the EU. The result could be an unfavorable settlement before May 1st - in other words another slap on the wrist.
During the time when my country had the EU presidency back in 2002, everybody was quite busy completing the negotiations with the new member states and as a result the EUCD didn't get enough careful attention. In the eleventh hour on december 22nd 2002 Denmark voted for the directive, turning 180 degrees from a solid majority against it? We were the first country to vote on this issue and I fear it did set a bad example for the other countries who voted next.
zEmphasis mine.
Then run an apt-get dist-upgrade. Perhaps there are some packages that need removal because of changed dependencies, etc. :-)
zSure, but now people have a chance to protect themselves by filtering BMP-files on http proxies, etc. Who uses them in browsers anyway?
Well, except that maybe this vulnerability could now be combined with the previously disclosed filetype spoofing vulnerability to do some nasty damage.
zStewie: Hello operator? Hello? Oh god, that's right you have to punch in the numbers nowadays. Aah, I should know this ... oh yes, 867-5309, that's it. No wait that's not it, damn you Tommy Tutone! Only one thing to do! 111-1111. Lois? Damn. 111-1112. Lois? Damn. 111-1113. Damn!
zWouldn't it be much faster to use a subspace frequency?
zFrom the site:
The following is an edited listing of recent vulnerabilities discovered by the eEye Research Team. Full details of each vulnerability will be disclosed to the public at the time a patch is released from the vendorThe oldest known undisclosed vulnerability here is 93 days overdue. There are seven on this list.
Vulnerabilities that not only these security researchers and Microsoft may know of - vulnerabilities that may be exploited even as I write this. I must be completety stupid to think that this kind of security non-disclosure is complete and utter crap?!
I know the guys at eEye can't do much about this, as in disclosing the nature of the vulnerabilites, so that we might unplug servers, or close some tcp/udp ports or whatever. They'd surely we sued (DMCA, and all that).
I'll stop the ranting know.
zPerhaps, but depending on how you execute this, you'd be walking a fine line between being a good samaritan and being the script kiddie who is causing even more network congestion as your "good" virus propagates.
Anyway, this would still be focusing on the symptoms of the virus instead of the cause.
zHow on earth could I forget our national lunch! :-)
These wonderful open dark bread sandwiches! I guess Ida Davidsen would be most famous in this particular area. I have yet to taste her smoerrebroed, however I know it's pretty expensive. Anyway, you can get quite decent smoerrebroed anywhere in Denmark, and it's a must if you're visiting.
The other AC mentioned the actress Connie Nielsen, which reminds me that LOTR star Viggo Mortensen is half Danish, and actually speaks our language fluently. He worked here as a waiter at some point.
zNot much. Perhaps you recognize these guys?
They're all Danes. Perhaps some interesting companies too:
We're also the worlds largest producer of windmills, I believe? We can do pretty much everything.
I don't know about the pastries. A "Danish" as you know it, is not called a Dasish in Denmark - it's not even believed to be Danish, if I'm not mistaken? :-)
zYes, that's what the "make oldconfig" is for. You need to overwrite the .config file first. This goes for the 2.4 series kernels - I don't know if it has changed in the 2.6 series?
zIndeed! "might of" and "would of" are simply incorrect!
As an example, take "would've" as the contraction in speaking "would have". The sound of the "'ve" bit is misheard as "of". Sure, sometimes it sounds like your saying "of", but it is NOT "of". It never has been. Some people are more familiar with the spoken form of English than the written - which is the reason for this error.
To be on topic, my computer was one of the 2070. :-)
zIt seems my ISP has added a DNS entry to their name servers for www.sco.com pointing to 127.0.0.1. It does have a low TTL (primary: 107?, secondary: 300), but I wonder how long they'll continue this?
Someone at some point might actually want to visit www.sco.com ... nah, probably not. ;-)
zI believe this interview with Mr. Torvalds was made just prior to the discovery of the MyDoom worm.
I read it a couple of days ago when it was linked to from Groklaw.
zDo yourself a favour and go for the Strict versions of the (X)HTML markups directly. Don't waste time with Transitional markup, because you'll be creating the same old tag soup that all the browsers (old and new) will happily eat in quirks mode. When the day comes (after your transition?) and you finally set that DTD to Strict, all your pages will be blown to bollocks because the browsers will now render them in strict standards compliance mode.
Why bother? You can't really benefit from Style Sheets in quirks mode anyway? Remember, the rendering is completely different between quirks and strict standards compliance mode, and with good reason! The browser developers finally had a chance to do it right with strict standards compliance mode rendering because their implementations are made from scratch from the same thorough W3C spec. With quirks mode they just use their old layout engines from back during the browser wars.
You'll benefit greatly from the Strict versions of the (X)HTML markup. While taking full advantage of Style Sheets and ridding your old (X)HTML sources of the deprecated presentational tags, you'll end up with more easily maintainable (X)HTML sources. Think about it, most of your pages might already consist of 80% tags related to presentation. When you have removed these from one page and put the presentational information in an external style sheet, it won't be that much of an effort to apply these resulting style sheet rules to the rest of your pages. Why? Because most of the time you'll just be removing deprecated tags. Sure, there's still a bit of structure to deal with, but it's a worthwile task.
I've written "(X)HTML" in this comment a couple of times now. As I see it, the Transitional/Strict issue is infinately more important than the HTML/XHTML issue. When you have Strict HTML markup it's really a no-brainer to convert it to XHTML, because it's pretty much about syntax, well formedness. Try taking a look at W3C's HTML compatibility guidelines for XML. If you do yourself a favor and explicitly use closing tags, etc. you can convert your HTML to XHTML with a couple of regular expression substituions. That's pretty much it. Bottom line: the main difference between the Strict versions og HTML and XHTML is largely syntax. (There are some elements of your DOM that require special attention with respects to applying CSS, but this statement is essentially true.)
If you care about having the same result shown accross browsers (especially IE), then watch out for XHTML.
(Borrowing a bit from a previous comment I made here on /.) IE can be a stick in the wheel, because it
ignores the XML declaration in XHTML documents beginning like this:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='iso-8859-1'?>
IE expects to encounter the DOCTYPE first, which doesn't make sense - and would be non-valid XHTML markup. When IE encounters the above declaration it throws itself into quirks mode, unconditionally!
Sure, the XML declaration is not strictly required, however if you read the W3C XHTML spec it says:
An XML declaration is not required in all XML documents; however XHTML document authors are strongly encouraged to use XML declarations in all their documents. Such a declaration is required when the character encoding of the document is other than the default UTF-8 or UTF-16 and no encoding was determined by a higher-level protocol.
Another point. XHTML pages should really only be created for the purpose of being served - by your web server - as application/xhtml+xml. See W3C's document on XHTML Media Types. IE doesn't support the application/xhtml+xml media type, and this together with the above mentioned deficiency makes for quite a showstopper with respects to the adoption of XHTML - it's sad, really.
Mozilla and Opera will handle XHTML documents served as application/xhtml+xm
Of course, that should have been: 'gzip -c'. As in compress to stdout. Sorry. :-)
Depends on how you look at it?
Gzip is GNU's version of zip and was made - as in most cases - as a Free alternative to avoid problems with patents (LZW, I believe in this case). Gzip can only create archives with single files, which is okay, because this is where Tar comes in.
Tar (the Tape Archiver), as you know simply stores multiple files in a single file. You could create the file on a tape drive (hence the name), but these days you'd probably just pipe it into your archive program of choice.
Bzip is a more sophisticated archiver and uses a block-sorting algorithm, like RAR, which generally allows for better compression.
So basically, I'd say Bzip is most certainly better than your average zip programs. As for Gzip, I haven't compared it to PkWare's zip, but I would expect similar compression ratios.
When you need and archiver that works as a filter, both Gzip and Bzip - as opposed to most other archivers - will provide this. Say:
ls /home/some_user -la | gzip | uuencode file_list.gz | mail -s "Here's directory listing of your home dir" some_user@domain.com
You can probably think of a better example. :-)
zAh, I see where you're going! An inverse slashdotyon pulse requires a lot of power, though? Perhaps, if we use the main deflector dish instead? We could reroute emergency power to the dish and then set the polarity to the http frequency required. This should restore bandwidth to the remote server's tcp/ip plasma coils a bit faster.
zThe article also describes Bruce Perens as a "cheerleader" and Linux Torvals as "quirky".
zSo, slax.org seems to have been slashdotted before the actual story was posted? Hmmm, I'd say that's a rather curious temporal anomaly? :-)
zAm I the only one who read that as corpses at first? :-)
z- playing music while working
- going for a brisk walk (not heavy sport, because that tires you out)
- smoking a joint (depends on the person but for many people this does the trick)
- playing a game (solitaire?)
[Sorry about the previous empty post - wrong button!]
What I meant to say was: I find if I go to the toilet, solutions to tricky problems almost always come to me instantly. No, really! :-)
It's really weird, though I've come to rely on this rather curious phenomenon.
z- playing music while working
- going for a brisk walk (not heavy sport, because that tires you out)
- smoking a joint (depends on the person but for many people this does the trick)
- playing a game (solitaire?)
k
z