Whew, I really feared we might get a little heated and am glad you understood me on your own:-) I have absolutely no problem with being in the minority (and I sure as hell know I am on this issue), I prefer that in fact, since I believe everyone can only be responsible for his/her own actions and thus any kind of group is, in the end, purely virtual. I'm a zealot when it comes to freedom, privacy ad standards, I know that, but I feel better this way:-D
I understand perfectly well, thank you. But I do consider anti-virus definition updates a privacy issue as well, maybe that's what you don't expect? I'm fully aware that the current implementation only downloads a blacklist from a single server once every day (or whatever the interval is), while the have-Google-check-the-URL-"feature" has to be enabled seperately. Don't assume I'm dumb or uninformed, just because I condemn a system you like, maybe I know what I'm doing and simply have a very different set of values from yours.
I don't make stuff up, as you put it. But our definitions might diverge on one or two issues. For me an active-by-default system to download a blacklist counts as privacy violation, even if I could activate an even worse system that would send URLs to Google.
It is a connection, not authorized by the user, possibly giving the full HTTP-headers as well.
Additionally I won't trust that blacklist, as the authors are either with Google or the Mozilla corporation [sic]. But honestly there's enough discussion on that and similar issues already. Many devs siding with the "it's a feature"-aaproach either don't even remotely get it or seem to be malicious *shrugs* I don't expect the Mozilla team to recover from this anymore, I'll just wait till it gets so bad in a release that I'll change to a different browser (which is a shame, FF had the potential to behave like a "good" browser once upon a time)
While I LOL? I have a system with an uptime measured in weeks and then is shut down only because I don't want to leave it on when I leave the house for more than a couple of days. Essentially I keep browser, email, calendar and OGG-Player on at all times. While FF doesn't seem to have too many problems with that for me, it is easily the thing I expect! Now, one might argue that I'm not a typical user, but even the Win-drones in my circle of friends leave their systems running for days when they don't have to sleep next to the fans. Most keep a browser open as well, one simply needs it too often to wait for it to restart all the time... In fact I virtually know nobody who doesn't keep their browser open as long as the systems up. Maybe you're willing to provide us with some scientifc research regarding the usage patterns of "normal" FF-users (FF-users are certainly a group distinct from web-users, as they already have a minimum amount of technical knowledge)?
Sadly there's a grain of truth to the parent's post. The Mozilla devs have time and time again decided to include, auto-activate and not provide an UI to disable rather heavily discussed functions. Sometimes they really go the extra mile to make sure the user uses something they consider "necessary", while privacy advocates, standards zealots and other people who try to make the net a better place shake their heads in horror over the "feature".
It is a big deal for the mathematicians. That is all
I wouldn't go so far as to say it is only interesting for mathematicians. Fluid dynamics and Navier-Stokes especially, is what, for example, many 3D engines use to simulate water by now. Granted, they use simplified equations, usually only taking the surface into consideration, but any breakthrough in the theory their models are based on might have implications for those models as well. I'd say let's wait until a) those new findings have been properly peer-reviewed and b) more computer scientists, engineers, and other theory-appliers have had a few months of thinking about it.
It's not on the changes list and the source is a bit hefty to search for it when you don't know your way around it, but: Does anyone know whether Darin's "ping" attribute (of WhatWG origin) is included and active? Aside from the auto-active google spyware that would be another nail in FFs (and every Gecko-based browsers) coffin on my systems...
(On a related note: What other RMS-type "free" alternative do you work on, use or recommend? I'll probably switch to Konqueror as soon as FF2 goes through the update system), but I'd like to have a few options... And don't say Amaya, ok?:-P)
Where you wrote: "that role-reversal is widely believed to be a myth." If role-reversal is a myth, then that means it doesn't actually happen.
I read and meant that differently, with the emphasis on "that", but I see how that misunderstanding came about. I should be more careful choosing my words.
Well, that's going to be pretty hard to obtain. My use of the word "often" does not imply a statistical percentage, just that I've observed that to be the case a fair number of times. I'd love to be able to give you figures, but I can't, sorry.
For me, "often" does imply a percentage, so that was a misunderstanding, too. "a fair number of times" is much closer to my impression of "about even":-)
I didn't say people didn't reverse roles, where did you get that from? I specifically disagreed with the notions "Often submissives are" and "Likewise, dominants are often", "often" implying a majority of cases. That is, with all the dominants and submissives I know personally, including, but certainly not limited to, me, what is considered myth, based on the fact that there are professional dominatrixes (and very few doms, one might add), but few professional slaves, combined with the fact that the former are rather expensive, which leads to the inevitable assumption that more submissive rich, and thus usually powerfull, men exist, because they get more media "limelight", being more easily available for contact, as the dominatrixes are usually listed somewhere, so they can be found by their prospective clients and so by the the media as well (Most BDSMers I know keep their sexuality in their own homes and look with as much disgust onto "professionals", as many other "normal" people I know don't exactly appreciate prostitutes). From observation of BDSMers known to me personally I arrive at an even distribution of "strong"/"weak" dominants and submissives. But I don't claim that my observations are fact, I don't have any scientifically collected data on the topic (the sample would probably be too small anyway), so I asked if you could provide some for your statements, because I'm genuinely interested in the topic.
As the abyssmal number X has proven, the even/odd theory was wrong, the next theory is for even/odd checksums, explaining X and there's hoping for a good XI...
I the BDSM-circles I frequent that role-reversal is widely believed to be a myth. Do you have any statistical data on it, or is that a preconception from the manager-meets-domina-genre of cliches?
Well, it does sound like you're fibbing to us, but in case you're not: Take his wife (a good sympathy fuck coupled with an hour or two of crying/telling-it-all might help her to straighten herself out and leave the looser), unless you're bound by being married to a monogamous person yourself or have moral issues with it (In those cases you might want to try the good-friend-approach, but it is way less effective). Tell him he's pathetic (that need not be in person, a note attached to his monitor while he's asleep should suffice, the wife is certainly willing to do that for you, but make sure it's obvious whom it's from). Change your phone-number, so he can't call you anymore. Decide: If you want to give him another chance, then leave your new number on a post-it attached to his fishing gear. Otherwise add a line about being ready to sue him for stalking if need be to the "pathetic" note and make sure you actually do.
...there's an awful lot of people paid by big companies, like google, now... Whenever they make a stupid change (like making user tracking easier with the "ping" non-standard attribute, for example), they swear it's got nothing to do with that... The team might originally have been about a sleek, standard-conformant browser, but, looking at their current behavior, I'd say they're all about market-share and being "accepted" (by incorporating their every wish) by the big companies (that happen to pay them heftily). "Corporate sellouts" by the book. You want a free browser following the UNIX philosophy? You'll probably have to write it yourself (Unless Konqueror or Links suit you)...
It can't be PCI-X, as I still have an AGP-only board, but the "DVD burner"-thing might fit, I also use a NEC (albeit no DVD-RAM)... A little extreme, prohibiting the system to boot when the DVD-burner-driver is damaged, isn't it? Self-inflicted, no less (not as if I ever tried the burner under Vista yet...). Yeesh:-)
Thanks for the help.
File: \Windows\System32\Drivers\PXHjpa64.sys
Status: 0x0000428
Info: The image hash cannot be found in the system catalogs. The image is likely corrupt or the victim of tampering.
This error occured when booting (not to mention the usual destroyed MBR, etc.), in four fresh installs, after only a few minutes to hours of usage each. Probably a problem with the software I installed, and it's the 64Bit build of Beta 1. Still, Vista turned non-bootable faster than a botched 98 install:-/
Out of curiousity: Does anyone know anything about this? Google doesn't turn up anything for "PXHjpa64.sys"...:-D
I would favour an integration into HL2-Episodes (it's already set in the same universe, according to some articles), as the Portal-Gun would make a nifty addition to Gordon's arsenal, don't you think? Add destructible environments (like Red Faction had back in ye olde times) and it could well end up being my favourite Shooter-Universe:-)
If I remember correctly, the hollow earth one had a few "dead right away" beginnings. I'm not sure whether you could decline the good professors request to accompany him down a volcanic chasm outright, but during descend in an egg-shaped pod there was something going wrong and you had the option of continuing down (killing the professor by heart-attack on arrival/impact) or fire the ascend rockets (Maybe the professor gave a warning), propelling you from the chasm into space, leaving you to die (Wow, that must've been some rocket fuel and even then I was asking myself: "Why even install something like that? If I press 'emergency ascend rockets', I'd expect to survive that!"). On the other hand, none of the endings were really "good" as in "happy end"... The hot tub one is probably the best, but the two of you remained trapped inside earth, another allowed you (alone, I believe) to pass to the surface via a river, which stranded you on the ocean... All others were outright gruesome (Being sucked into a black hole (the "sun"), suffocating atop huge heaps of diamonds, being killed by inhabitants, the aforementioned volcano-dive, trying to restart the descend-pod (the chasm had collapsed)...)
I did:-) I owned two (German translations, so I'm not sure if they were part of the series discussed here, but they used the same concept), one about a "hollow earth", where you were the young assistant to a professor traveling there (He gets killed practically the second you arrive) and could end up in a hot tub with a female scientist (or being thrown into a volcano together, which pleased my morbid little self), and one about a ghost town where indian and cowboy ghosts still chase each other, trying to kill three tourist kids (one of which is you). That one had a crappy (Swing tha magical tomahawk) "good" ending, but several nice "bad" ones, including pictures (hmmm, branding iron, girl stabbed in the back, everybody turned into swiss cheese by cowboy bullets, delicious:-D ) A third (someting about pyramids and secrets) I had only as text-adventure, but knew it belonged to the series, because I had seen the book in the local library before...
Slashdot Mirror
Whew, I really feared we might get a little heated and am glad you understood me on your own :-) I have absolutely no problem with being in the minority (and I sure as hell know I am on this issue), I prefer that in fact, since I believe everyone can only be responsible for his/her own actions and thus any kind of group is, in the end, purely virtual. I'm a zealot when it comes to freedom, privacy ad standards, I know that, but I feel better this way :-D
I understand perfectly well, thank you. But I do consider anti-virus definition updates a privacy issue as well, maybe that's what you don't expect? I'm fully aware that the current implementation only downloads a blacklist from a single server once every day (or whatever the interval is), while the have-Google-check-the-URL-"feature" has to be enabled seperately. Don't assume I'm dumb or uninformed, just because I condemn a system you like, maybe I know what I'm doing and simply have a very different set of values from yours.
I don't make stuff up, as you put it. But our definitions might diverge on one or two issues. For me an active-by-default system to download a blacklist counts as privacy violation, even if I could activate an even worse system that would send URLs to Google.
It is a connection, not authorized by the user, possibly giving the full HTTP-headers as well.
Additionally I won't trust that blacklist, as the authors are either with Google or the Mozilla corporation [sic]. But honestly there's enough discussion on that and similar issues already. Many devs siding with the "it's a feature"-aaproach either don't even remotely get it or seem to be malicious *shrugs* I don't expect the Mozilla team to recover from this anymore, I'll just wait till it gets so bad in a release that I'll change to a different browser (which is a shame, FF had the potential to behave like a "good" browser once upon a time)
While I LOL? I have a system with an uptime measured in weeks and then is shut down only because I don't want to leave it on when I leave the house for more than a couple of days. Essentially I keep browser, email, calendar and OGG-Player on at all times. While FF doesn't seem to have too many problems with that for me, it is easily the thing I expect! Now, one might argue that I'm not a typical user, but even the Win-drones in my circle of friends leave their systems running for days when they don't have to sleep next to the fans. Most keep a browser open as well, one simply needs it too often to wait for it to restart all the time... In fact I virtually know nobody who doesn't keep their browser open as long as the systems up. Maybe you're willing to provide us with some scientifc research regarding the usage patterns of "normal" FF-users (FF-users are certainly a group distinct from web-users, as they already have a minimum amount of technical knowledge)?
it uses a downloaded blacklist.
Bingo. That counts as a privacy problem in my book.
Sadly there's a grain of truth to the parent's post. The Mozilla devs have time and time again decided to include, auto-activate and not provide an UI to disable rather heavily discussed functions. Sometimes they really go the extra mile to make sure the user uses something they consider "necessary", while privacy advocates, standards zealots and other people who try to make the net a better place shake their heads in horror over the "feature".
Thanks, that's what I thought.
Maybe someone has thouroughly checked 2 already, and can guarantee it.
It's a shame how some parts of the Mozilla community behave when it comes to issues such as ping...
It is a big deal for the mathematicians. That is all
I wouldn't go so far as to say it is only interesting for mathematicians. Fluid dynamics and Navier-Stokes especially, is what, for example, many 3D engines use to simulate water by now. Granted, they use simplified equations, usually only taking the surface into consideration, but any breakthrough in the theory their models are based on might have implications for those models as well. I'd say let's wait until a) those new findings have been properly peer-reviewed and b) more computer scientists, engineers, and other theory-appliers have had a few months of thinking about it.
It's not on the changes list and the source is a bit hefty to search for it when you don't know your way around it, but: Does anyone know whether Darin's "ping" attribute (of WhatWG origin) is included and active? Aside from the auto-active google spyware that would be another nail in FFs (and every Gecko-based browsers) coffin on my systems...
:-P)
(On a related note: What other RMS-type "free" alternative do you work on, use or recommend? I'll probably switch to Konqueror as soon as FF2 goes through the update system), but I'd like to have a few options... And don't say Amaya, ok?
Where you wrote: "that role-reversal is widely believed to be a myth." If role-reversal is a myth, then that means it doesn't actually happen.
:-)
I read and meant that differently, with the emphasis on "that", but I see how that misunderstanding came about. I should be more careful choosing my words.
Well, that's going to be pretty hard to obtain. My use of the word "often" does not imply a statistical percentage, just that I've observed that to be the case a fair number of times. I'd love to be able to give you figures, but I can't, sorry.
For me, "often" does imply a percentage, so that was a misunderstanding, too. "a fair number of times" is much closer to my impression of "about even"
Thank you.
I didn't say people didn't reverse roles, where did you get that from? I specifically disagreed with the notions "Often submissives are" and "Likewise, dominants are often", "often" implying a majority of cases. That is, with all the dominants and submissives I know personally, including, but certainly not limited to, me, what is considered myth, based on the fact that there are professional dominatrixes (and very few doms, one might add), but few professional slaves, combined with the fact that the former are rather expensive, which leads to the inevitable assumption that more submissive rich, and thus usually powerfull, men exist, because they get more media "limelight", being more easily available for contact, as the dominatrixes are usually listed somewhere, so they can be found by their prospective clients and so by the the media as well (Most BDSMers I know keep their sexuality in their own homes and look with as much disgust onto "professionals", as many other "normal" people I know don't exactly appreciate prostitutes). From observation of BDSMers known to me personally I arrive at an even distribution of "strong"/"weak" dominants and submissives. But I don't claim that my observations are fact, I don't have any scientifically collected data on the topic (the sample would probably be too small anyway), so I asked if you could provide some for your statements, because I'm genuinely interested in the topic.
As the abyssmal number X has proven, the even/odd theory was wrong, the next theory is for even/odd checksums, explaining X and there's hoping for a good XI...
I the BDSM-circles I frequent that role-reversal is widely believed to be a myth. Do you have any statistical data on it, or is that a preconception from the manager-meets-domina-genre of cliches?
"IceWeasel", I love it!
Well, it does sound like you're fibbing to us, but in case you're not: Take his wife (a good sympathy fuck coupled with an hour or two of crying/telling-it-all might help her to straighten herself out and leave the looser), unless you're bound by being married to a monogamous person yourself or have moral issues with it (In those cases you might want to try the good-friend-approach, but it is way less effective). Tell him he's pathetic (that need not be in person, a note attached to his monitor while he's asleep should suffice, the wife is certainly willing to do that for you, but make sure it's obvious whom it's from). Change your phone-number, so he can't call you anymore. Decide: If you want to give him another chance, then leave your new number on a post-it attached to his fishing gear. Otherwise add a line about being ready to sue him for stalking if need be to the "pathetic" note and make sure you actually do.
...there's an awful lot of people paid by big companies, like google, now... Whenever they make a stupid change (like making user tracking easier with the "ping" non-standard attribute, for example), they swear it's got nothing to do with that... The team might originally have been about a sleek, standard-conformant browser, but, looking at their current behavior, I'd say they're all about market-share and being "accepted" (by incorporating their every wish) by the big companies (that happen to pay them heftily). "Corporate sellouts" by the book. You want a free browser following the UNIX philosophy? You'll probably have to write it yourself (Unless Konqueror or Links suit you)...
It can't be PCI-X, as I still have an AGP-only board, but the "DVD burner"-thing might fit, I also use a NEC (albeit no DVD-RAM)... A little extreme, prohibiting the system to boot when the DVD-burner-driver is damaged, isn't it? Self-inflicted, no less (not as if I ever tried the burner under Vista yet...). Yeesh :-)
Thanks for the help.
Out of curiousity: Does anyone know anything about this? Google doesn't turn up anything for "PXHjpa64.sys"...
I would favour an integration into HL2-Episodes (it's already set in the same universe, according to some articles), as the Portal-Gun would make a nifty addition to Gordon's arsenal, don't you think? Add destructible environments (like Red Faction had back in ye olde times) and it could well end up being my favourite Shooter-Universe :-)
If I remember correctly, the hollow earth one had a few "dead right away" beginnings. I'm not sure whether you could decline the good professors request to accompany him down a volcanic chasm outright, but during descend in an egg-shaped pod there was something going wrong and you had the option of continuing down (killing the professor by heart-attack on arrival/impact) or fire the ascend rockets (Maybe the professor gave a warning), propelling you from the chasm into space, leaving you to die (Wow, that must've been some rocket fuel and even then I was asking myself: "Why even install something like that? If I press 'emergency ascend rockets', I'd expect to survive that!"). On the other hand, none of the endings were really "good" as in "happy end"... The hot tub one is probably the best, but the two of you remained trapped inside earth, another allowed you (alone, I believe) to pass to the surface via a river, which stranded you on the ocean... All others were outright gruesome (Being sucked into a black hole (the "sun"), suffocating atop huge heaps of diamonds, being killed by inhabitants, the aforementioned volcano-dive, trying to restart the descend-pod (the chasm had collapsed)...)
I did :-) I owned two (German translations, so I'm not sure if they were part of the series discussed here, but they used the same concept), one about a "hollow earth", where you were the young assistant to a professor traveling there (He gets killed practically the second you arrive) and could end up in a hot tub with a female scientist (or being thrown into a volcano together, which pleased my morbid little self), and one about a ghost town where indian and cowboy ghosts still chase each other, trying to kill three tourist kids (one of which is you). That one had a crappy (Swing tha magical tomahawk) "good" ending, but several nice "bad" ones, including pictures (hmmm, branding iron, girl stabbed in the back, everybody turned into swiss cheese by cowboy bullets, delicious :-D ) A third (someting about pyramids and secrets) I had only as text-adventure, but knew it belonged to the series, because I had seen the book in the local library before...
I thought you might want to correct that Sig, it's "Stasi" (abr. "Staats-Sicherheit", roughly "State-Security") :-)
Take a friendly suggestion: work on your social skills, you don't come across too civilized either... :-D