Most of the time I browse in Fire fox and use 'HTTPS Anywhere', so I'm not usually seeing Google instant at all. And even when I do switch to other browsers for something, I usually type so fast anyway I don't have time to pay attention to the ads that flash by while I type a search term. So yeah, not really an issue one way or the other for me.
^ This.
Truthfully though, without any mention of how it could talk to a nervous system and back, I think the best it'll do is being a new form of input for robots, esp. ones that are working with delicate tasks.
The problem is, there's way too many drivers on the road who do need more training, who are going to see this and be going so fast they feel the need to swerve instead of stop.
It's not that I can't be bothered, it's that I already know what it is without opening it and opening it would only be an unnecessary risk. I also know that they expressly say on their website to forward suspected phishing messages to that address so that they can do something about it.
I agree, I only found it because it showed up on my/. gadget on my igoogle page, and went hunting for it so I could post a reply. I normally don't browse idle.
I think the wow ones that maybe work are the ones that say "Battle.Net account alert" or something to that effect, look kind of official and say things to the effect of 'Your account is under investigation for XYZ Reasons, if you want to contest these reasons, pleas visit your account page to contest this or else your account will be suspended," and then have 'links' to 'account management' login pages that catch your e-mail. 'course, my account had been turned off for years before I got the first one like this, and I keep getting more and more of them. I just forward them all unread to hacks@blizzard.com . Ironically enough, I keep tripping yahoo mail's spam filter when I forward more than two or three a day and then they lock down my ability to send mail
You're confusing hosting with providing access. Hosting means that they're providing space on their servers for your information to be on the internet. Providing access means that if it's out there, then we will allow you to get to it. Going back to the GC, LOTS of hosting companies won't host porn for you, but most ISPs don't care if you go out and view it on some random server. The two are very different services with very different expectations and usually very different usage agreements.
IF you're saying that Rackspace is not within their rights to refuse to host this hate message, then by the same token the New York Times would not be within their rights to refuse to print an advertisement that shows full frontal, or one with satanic messages of hate. Anybody could have anything published in the times as long as they were willing to pay the normal advertisement fees.
The Times should have the right to say 'no we won't print that' but they should NOT have the right to say 'You can't sell the Post in the same newsstand as our paper'. What's going on here is more the former, but you're making it out to be the latter.
It's not blocking a thing. it's not saying "We're not going to allow the people who use us as an ISP to not be able to see your website" It's saying, 'we won't be party to you putting this on the internet, you can go do it with some other HOSTING SERVICE.
To use an analogy, blocking them (and thus even coming close to the 'net neutrality' issues that people are touting) would be like putting up a wall around the protesters and saying that "we're not going to let anyone see your protest" while what they're actually doing is more like "We're not going to hold your sign for you"
While I realize that they're trying to make people slow down here, I'm afraid they're going to cause a lot of wrecks too when people swerve to avoid the little girl, or slam on the brakes and loose control, etc.
And worse, what happens when people get used to seeing it and start ignoring it? Then not only is it not making people slow down, it's a potential for making them disregard a real child in the road.
The Civil Rights acts says you can't look at someone and say, "I don't like your type, I'm not going to serve you." It does NOT prevent you from saying "You broke our rules about good behavior and now we won't serve you." or "You're an ass and you're giving us a bad name, so we don't want to be associated with you any more." Contracts can sometimes force you to continue your association till your contract is up, but that's why there's clauses for that.
Depends on the jurisdiction. IIRC, here, it's based on drivers license records. Don't want to ever be a juror? Resign yourself to using public transportation
Maybe it's me, but it seems like the teacher shouldn't have left the kids unattended long enough to set something like this up. Sure the teacher shouldn't be sued for not telling him not to do that, but maybe they should be in at least a little trouble for leaving the students alone and unsupervised.
Well it's obvious. When you hear alarms, you go see what all the commotion is about and see how in the way of emergency personnel you can get. Bonus points if they end up having to rescue you too.
Maybe they should go after yearbook.com too. Registered in '95 actually, way prior to facebook, and even uses facebook connect, or you can sign in with myspace or twitter too. And it's definately social networking, aimed at high school kids (remember facebook was originally aimed at college students).
Whois Record
Related Domains For Sale or At Auction
GolfYearbook.com ($1,688) MilitaryYearbook.com ($1,888) YearbookReview.com ($1,895) WebYearbook.com ($1,888) NationalYearbook.com ($688) IYearbooksInc.net (Bid)
YearbookForum.com ($1,688) StaffYearbook.com ($688) InternetYearbook.com ($1,588) YearbookSoftware.com ($300) YearbookManager.com ($1,200) YearbookCenter.com ($380)
YearbookSurvey.com ($480) GraduateYearbook.com ($300) BonnarooYearbook.com (Bid) YearbookCamp.com ($350) GreenYearbook.com ($1,650) YearbookWorkshop.com ($1,888)
MyCoolYearbook.com (Bid)
1 2 3 4 More >
Reverse Whois:
"Insider Guides, Inc." owns about54 other domains
Email Search:
is associated with about 52 domains
Registrar History:
4 registrars
NS History:
2 changes on 3 unique name servers over 3 years.
IP History:
8 changes on 8 unique name servers over 5 years.
Whois History:
211 records have been archived since 2004-03-08 .
Reverse IP:
2 other sites hosted on this server.
Log In or Create a FREE account to start monitoring this domain name
DomainTools for Windows®
Now you can access domain ownership records anytime, anywhere... right from your own desktop! Download Now>
Registrant:
Insider Guides, Inc.
280 Union Square Drive
New Hope, PA 18938
US
Domain Name: YEARBOOK.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Insider Guides, Inc.
Domain Administrator
280 Union Square Drive
New Hope, PA 18938
US
(215)862-1162
(215)862-1655 [fax]
Domain created on 03-Jan-1995
Domain expires on 02-Jan-2022
Last updated on 24-May-2010
Domain servers in listed order:
PDNS1.ULTRADNS.NET
PDNS2.ULTRADNS.NET
PDNS3.ULTRADNS.ORG
PDNS4.ULTRADNS.ORG
PDNS5.ULTRADNS.INFO
PDNS6.ULTRADNS.CO.UK
By the logic that's being thrown around here, though, Microsoft could sue Sunsoft and Terrasoft and all of the other *soft companies out there, because they obviously have prior-art for the *soft suffix...... It's even stupider than Bskyb suing Skype for the word Sky
Slashdot Mirror
Last flight I was on, spent 4 hours in a plane, and all they had to gave me were peanuts...
So you sanitize it to display characters only instead of a script.
Most of the time I browse in Fire fox and use 'HTTPS Anywhere', so I'm not usually seeing Google instant at all. And even when I do switch to other browsers for something, I usually type so fast anyway I don't have time to pay attention to the ads that flash by while I type a search term. So yeah, not really an issue one way or the other for me.
I think the GP was referring to 'Campaign contribution' checks...
^ This. Truthfully though, without any mention of how it could talk to a nervous system and back, I think the best it'll do is being a new form of input for robots, esp. ones that are working with delicate tasks.
The problem is, there's way too many drivers on the road who do need more training, who are going to see this and be going so fast they feel the need to swerve instead of stop.
Admittedly, it's a nice recursive loop we've got going here...
It's not that I can't be bothered, it's that I already know what it is without opening it and opening it would only be an unnecessary risk. I also know that they expressly say on their website to forward suspected phishing messages to that address so that they can do something about it.
I agree, I only found it because it showed up on my /. gadget on my igoogle page, and went hunting for it so I could post a reply. I normally don't browse idle.
I think the wow ones that maybe work are the ones that say "Battle.Net account alert" or something to that effect, look kind of official and say things to the effect of 'Your account is under investigation for XYZ Reasons, if you want to contest these reasons, pleas visit your account page to contest this or else your account will be suspended," and then have 'links' to 'account management' login pages that catch your e-mail. 'course, my account had been turned off for years before I got the first one like this, and I keep getting more and more of them. I just forward them all unread to hacks@blizzard.com . Ironically enough, I keep tripping yahoo mail's spam filter when I forward more than two or three a day and then they lock down my ability to send mail
You're confusing hosting with providing access. Hosting means that they're providing space on their servers for your information to be on the internet. Providing access means that if it's out there, then we will allow you to get to it. Going back to the GC, LOTS of hosting companies won't host porn for you, but most ISPs don't care if you go out and view it on some random server. The two are very different services with very different expectations and usually very different usage agreements. IF you're saying that Rackspace is not within their rights to refuse to host this hate message, then by the same token the New York Times would not be within their rights to refuse to print an advertisement that shows full frontal, or one with satanic messages of hate. Anybody could have anything published in the times as long as they were willing to pay the normal advertisement fees. The Times should have the right to say 'no we won't print that' but they should NOT have the right to say 'You can't sell the Post in the same newsstand as our paper'. What's going on here is more the former, but you're making it out to be the latter.
It's not blocking a thing. it's not saying "We're not going to allow the people who use us as an ISP to not be able to see your website" It's saying, 'we won't be party to you putting this on the internet, you can go do it with some other HOSTING SERVICE. To use an analogy, blocking them (and thus even coming close to the 'net neutrality' issues that people are touting) would be like putting up a wall around the protesters and saying that "we're not going to let anyone see your protest" while what they're actually doing is more like "We're not going to hold your sign for you"
While I realize that they're trying to make people slow down here, I'm afraid they're going to cause a lot of wrecks too when people swerve to avoid the little girl, or slam on the brakes and loose control, etc. And worse, what happens when people get used to seeing it and start ignoring it? Then not only is it not making people slow down, it's a potential for making them disregard a real child in the road.
Got that right, I feel like not watching is the way to save your soul.
The Civil Rights acts says you can't look at someone and say, "I don't like your type, I'm not going to serve you." It does NOT prevent you from saying "You broke our rules about good behavior and now we won't serve you." or "You're an ass and you're giving us a bad name, so we don't want to be associated with you any more." Contracts can sometimes force you to continue your association till your contract is up, but that's why there's clauses for that.
That's not reassuring, the safety interlocks are off.
FTFY
Depends on the jurisdiction. IIRC, here, it's based on drivers license records. Don't want to ever be a juror? Resign yourself to using public transportation
Where do you see in TFA that he's 18? It just says he's a high school student.
Maybe it's me, but it seems like the teacher shouldn't have left the kids unattended long enough to set something like this up. Sure the teacher shouldn't be sued for not telling him not to do that, but maybe they should be in at least a little trouble for leaving the students alone and unsupervised.
Again one of those instances where it'd be nice to be able to mod articles. This is the kind of stuff that needs to be on slashdot.
Firefox has an option to keep cookies 'until I close Firefox', which would neatly allow for session cookies but put a nice crimp on tracking cookies.
Well it's obvious. When you hear alarms, you go see what all the commotion is about and see how in the way of emergency personnel you can get. Bonus points if they end up having to rescue you too.
Maybe they should go after yearbook.com too. Registered in '95 actually, way prior to facebook, and even uses facebook connect, or you can sign in with myspace or twitter too. And it's definately social networking, aimed at high school kids (remember facebook was originally aimed at college students). Whois Record Related Domains For Sale or At Auction GolfYearbook.com ($1,688) MilitaryYearbook.com ($1,888) YearbookReview.com ($1,895) WebYearbook.com ($1,888) NationalYearbook.com ($688) IYearbooksInc.net (Bid) YearbookForum.com ($1,688) StaffYearbook.com ($688) InternetYearbook.com ($1,588) YearbookSoftware.com ($300) YearbookManager.com ($1,200) YearbookCenter.com ($380) YearbookSurvey.com ($480) GraduateYearbook.com ($300) BonnarooYearbook.com (Bid) YearbookCamp.com ($350) GreenYearbook.com ($1,650) YearbookWorkshop.com ($1,888) MyCoolYearbook.com (Bid) 1 2 3 4 More > Reverse Whois: "Insider Guides, Inc." owns about54 other domains Email Search: is associated with about 52 domains Registrar History: 4 registrars NS History: 2 changes on 3 unique name servers over 3 years. IP History: 8 changes on 8 unique name servers over 5 years. Whois History: 211 records have been archived since 2004-03-08 . Reverse IP: 2 other sites hosted on this server. Log In or Create a FREE account to start monitoring this domain name DomainTools for Windows® Now you can access domain ownership records anytime, anywhere... right from your own desktop! Download Now> Registrant: Insider Guides, Inc. 280 Union Square Drive New Hope, PA 18938 US Domain Name: YEARBOOK.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Insider Guides, Inc. Domain Administrator 280 Union Square Drive New Hope, PA 18938 US (215)862-1162 (215)862-1655 [fax] Domain created on 03-Jan-1995 Domain expires on 02-Jan-2022 Last updated on 24-May-2010 Domain servers in listed order: PDNS1.ULTRADNS.NET PDNS2.ULTRADNS.NET PDNS3.ULTRADNS.ORG PDNS4.ULTRADNS.ORG PDNS5.ULTRADNS.INFO PDNS6.ULTRADNS.CO.UK
By the logic that's being thrown around here, though, Microsoft could sue Sunsoft and Terrasoft and all of the other *soft companies out there, because they obviously have prior-art for the *soft suffix...... It's even stupider than Bskyb suing Skype for the word Sky