Hmm, there should be a way to check if a client is bogus, and there is: They could just throw one block in where something should be found! (maybe even a few) If there are still "nothing found" replies they know what's happening. To avoid media hysteria they can even announce that they will do so in some cases. R.
While some postings called Harvard spineless, i think what they did was just necessary: To act before the news hits the papers, put out some "clarifying comments" as fast as possible and get anything that even remotely looks as if it might be suspicious of their doorstep. The reason is, that they have to fear legal action from "jp" and, what's worse, a newscampaign which might damage their image in the worst way (hey just think of the feast some kind of reporters would have accusing harvard of publicizing pornography over the internet).
I think some "sysadmin" type should (and would) ALWAYS look on the URL when checking on a site for some very simple reasons: he will want to know on which box (and where) the files are located, it's an easy thing to do (hey in all browsers i know the location is in very prominent view), and normally you don't stumble out of a site without noticing it, especially if the site is on the lokal net you might at least start to wonder about a sudden change in response times. Even in the case of inlines the inconsistencies between text and images should make anyone curious.
It looks like marketing department won "Linux" in the Big Buzzword Bingo, maybe after some developer mentioned GNU to them.
But hey, maybe someone could spark some more public discussion from that, thereby generating some positive publicity for GNU, Linux, BeOS, and even the iToaster.
Just an idea on how to hit the marketing dep. with their own weapons... if they figure they can make it into the news with it, maybe they'll even try to sue themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, there should be a way to check if a client
is bogus, and there is:
They could just throw one block in where something should be found! (maybe even a few)
If there are still "nothing found" replies they know what's happening.
To avoid media hysteria they can even announce that they will do so in some cases.
R.
While some postings called Harvard spineless, i think what they did was just necessary:
To act before the news hits the papers, put out some "clarifying comments" as fast as possible and get anything that even remotely looks as if it might be suspicious of their doorstep.
The reason is, that they have to fear legal action from "jp" and, what's worse, a newscampaign which might damage their image in the worst way (hey just think of the feast some kind of reporters would have accusing harvard of publicizing pornography over the internet).
I think some "sysadmin" type should (and would) ALWAYS look on the URL when checking on a site for some very simple reasons: he will want to know on which box (and where) the files are located, it's an easy thing to do (hey in all browsers i know the location is in very prominent view), and normally you don't stumble out of a site without noticing it, especially if the site is on the lokal net you might at least start to wonder about a sudden change in response times.
Even in the case of inlines the inconsistencies between text and images should make anyone curious.
It looks like marketing department won "Linux" in the Big Buzzword Bingo, maybe after some developer mentioned GNU to them.
... if they figure they can make it into the news with it, maybe they'll even try to sue themselves.
But hey, maybe someone could spark some more public discussion from that, thereby generating some positive publicity for GNU, Linux, BeOS, and even the iToaster.
Just an idea on how to hit the marketing dep. with their own weapons