Mod parent down, and read grandparent quote context:
>> These types of vulnerabilities affect all browsers. ActiveX in Internet Explorer in this case is really no different than NSAPI in Firefox or Opera. It is simply an object model for loading native plug-ins into the process.
Therefore the parent's argument becomes:
>> Except those which do not run on operating systems that do not have Active X OR A NSAPI STYLE PLUG-IN LOADER?
Or more simply:
This type of exploit could only affect browsers other than lynx.
One solution to the AdSense cat-and-mouse game is conversion-based ad fees.
This is how the "complete 10 offers and get a free iPod" sites work. Clicking on the link doesn't work, you need to sign up for the offer and/or spend money.
If you are using AdWords fully, Google knows your conversions and knows what value those conversions provide to you. Your payment for ads could be changed so that you don't pay for CPM, you don't pay for clicks, you pay for conversions, which are money in your bank.
There is a possibility for you to game Google -- don't report all your conversions, effectively getting some of them for free. However, Google is already in the business of optimize ad serving to increase their revenue. This would be changed to optimize ad serving to increase BOTH of your revenues.
-----------
In an effort to produce a full post I will also address some implementation issues.
Another way to game Google here could allow free ads by creating many accounts or many campaigns. One solution is to have a hybrid payment method (You pay X cents per click plus Y% of your conversion value). Another solution is to only offer this new payment method to long-standing customers or those who have already paid $X in fees for AdWords.
A transparent and easy solution would be difficult, but this would remove many of the excuses people currently have for NOT using AdWords, especially on the expanded content network.
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 ( ) mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (X) no one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (X) it is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) it will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it ( ) users of email will not put up with it ( ) microsoft will not put up with it ( ) the police will not put up with it (X) requires too much cooperation from spammers ( ) requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once (X) many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) laws expressly prohibiting it (X) lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) open relays in foreign countries ( ) ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses ( ) asshats (X) jurisdictional problems (X) 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 ( ) extreme profitability of spam ( ) joe jobs and/or identity theft (X) technically illiterate politicians ( ) extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering ( ) 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 ( ) 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 ( ) countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks ( ) countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) sending email should be free ( ) 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 (X) i don't want the government reading my email ( ) 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 FTC should oversee this sort of behavior everywhere, as it is dishonest and misleading to have supposedly trustworthy news sources engage in this kind of behavior.
Yes, the FTC should regulate blogs and all media outlets in order to increase public trust in them~
If by redundant, you mean hosted in a few google farms and susceptible to EMP, which is the most likely weapon of the next world war, then yes I agree it is redundant.
I hear lots of people talking about how an open source voting solution would exceed the quality of commercially available solutions in use today. Also, I hear that such a solution would also be easy to implement.
Could someone please send me a link to the SVN where I can find this alleged OSS voting software?
"...dogs can be trained to tell the difference between a legit copy of a DVD and one from those pesky pirates. From the article, 'A DVD-sniffing anti-piracy dog named Paddy has uncovered a huge cache of 35,000 discs in Malaysian warehouses"
Q: How do you teach a dog to detect pirated DVD's in Malaysia? A: Teach dog to bark continuously. Take dog to Malaysia.
Slashdot Mirror
The function of a web "OS" (including WM, kernel, system processes) for a browser-centric appliance are as follows:
Network connectivity and configuration (plus rendezvous support?)
CUPS support?
Window management
2d/3d hardware acceleration (don't forget Google's http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/)
Filesystem, sound, video codec support
User device support:
- HIDs (multitouch?)
- printers?
- webcams?
- cameras?
http://www.kde.org/getinvolved/
Mod parent down, and read grandparent quote context:
>> These types of vulnerabilities affect all browsers. ActiveX in Internet Explorer in this case is really no different than NSAPI in Firefox or Opera. It is simply an object model for loading native plug-ins into the process.
Therefore the parent's argument becomes:
>> Except those which do not run on operating systems that do not have Active X OR A NSAPI STYLE PLUG-IN LOADER?
Or more simply:
This type of exploit could only affect browsers other than lynx.
Awesome... do you guys have instant runoff voting so that the voters can vote freely?
>> Flapping NAV Performs Controlled Hovering Flight
da Vinci... is that you?
One solution to the AdSense cat-and-mouse game is conversion-based ad fees.
This is how the "complete 10 offers and get a free iPod" sites work. Clicking on the link doesn't work, you need to sign up for the offer and/or spend money.
If you are using AdWords fully, Google knows your conversions and knows what value those conversions provide to you. Your payment for ads could be changed so that you don't pay for CPM, you don't pay for clicks, you pay for conversions, which are money in your bank.
There is a possibility for you to game Google -- don't report all your conversions, effectively getting some of them for free. However, Google is already in the business of optimize ad serving to increase their revenue. This would be changed to optimize ad serving to increase BOTH of your revenues.
-----------
In an effort to produce a full post I will also address some implementation issues.
Another way to game Google here could allow free ads by creating many accounts or many campaigns. One solution is to have a hybrid payment method (You pay X cents per click plus Y% of your conversion value). Another solution is to only offer this new payment method to long-standing customers or those who have already paid $X in fees for AdWords.
A transparent and easy solution would be difficult, but this would remove many of the excuses people currently have for NOT using AdWords, especially on the expanded content network.
Controlled by your thoughts...
Wow, I what would happen if I drove off this bridge... WHUPPS!
>> Madoff's victims gasped and cheered when he was sentenced to 150 years in prison
That's just leaves the SEC and the Fed.
This is great -- getting people to use the bugzilla and see quick results.
The best to get useful feedback is to hand a CD to a noob, and watch what they encounter.
>> 5-15% [marshall.org], or an average of $700-1400 per family per year.
Families spend $10,000 per year on electricity?
>> How about "pay to email"?
s/this comment/standard response to spam fighting suggestions that recommend a pay-to-email approach/
(can I really do that? I just did!)
>> Some wind turbine designs are far more bird friendly than others.
Why bother? Just kill two birds with one stone... and you don't even need the stone!
But what does our population think about referral links?
Shameless example: fulldecent.blogspot.com
I sometimes post reviews of thing I buy and recommend there. There are undisclosed (readable in the URL) referral links there.
Depending which side of the fence you are on, this could be a widespread abuse.
========= please use s/email/blog/s below =============
your post advocates a
( ) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) 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
( ) mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
(X) no one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
(X) it is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) it will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) users of email will not put up with it
( ) microsoft will not put up with it
( ) the police will not put up with it
(X) requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(X) many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) laws expressly prohibiting it
(X) lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) open relays in foreign countries
( ) ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) asshats
(X) jurisdictional problems
(X) 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
( ) extreme profitability of spam
( ) joe jobs and/or identity theft
(X) technically illiterate politicians
( ) extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(X) dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) 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
( ) 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
( ) countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) sending email should be free
( ) 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
(X) i don't want the government reading my email
( ) 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 FTC should oversee this sort of behavior everywhere, as it is dishonest and misleading to have supposedly trustworthy news sources engage in this kind of behavior.
Yes, the FTC should regulate blogs and all media outlets in order to increase public trust in them~
See this comparison and this comparison to see how Theora compares to the most popular real-world implementations of H264 on the Web.
WP:NPOV violation
From http://xiph.org/:
Our purpose is to support and develop free, open protocols and software to serve the public, developer and business markets.
Wait until gold is over $10,000 an ounce...
A VOIP app to bypass the phone number altogether... that would change the world.
But the question remains: where's the revenue?
I run the VNC server on my phone (veency) and I constantly get requests to connect while I am on the AT&T network.
Just to illustrate your point
If by redundant, you mean hosted in a few google farms and susceptible to EMP, which is the most likely weapon of the next world war, then yes I agree it is redundant.
Go ahead and mod me troll, but... oh wow a Slashdot news story on the same day as the news?!
... and his cohorts will still get a job before him.
I hear lots of people talking about how an open source voting solution would exceed the quality of commercially available solutions in use today. Also, I hear that such a solution would also be easy to implement.
Could someone please send me a link to the SVN where I can find this alleged OSS voting software?
Chicken fingers. That's my grand unified theory.
It taking another step towards that theory good?
"...dogs can be trained to tell the difference between a legit copy of a DVD and one from those pesky pirates. From the article, 'A DVD-sniffing anti-piracy dog named Paddy has uncovered a huge cache of 35,000 discs in Malaysian warehouses"
Q: How do you teach a dog to detect pirated DVD's in Malaysia?
A: Teach dog to bark continuously. Take dog to Malaysia.