I wish it waas true, then when I get paid in US $, it comes out ot a hell of a lot more here.
Unfortunately, your pres. has run your economy so far into the ground that our dollar has gone way up in comparison (we're at what 86 cents to the US dollar now?). A few years ago the Canadian dollar was worth 75 odd cents to the US dollar.
The true measure is that the relative worth of the CAD to the EURO has stayed constant, but the USD has dropped in comparison to both.
It's a pity, it hurts a lot of export businesses in Canada.
I'm no big liberal supporter, but as far as I know, this is all still hearsay. I'm not sure that I'd base my voting decision based on the second-hand testimony of someone's blog.
That said, I'd probably not vote liberal for other reasons. I don't think they would win if they did call an election.
Furthermore, even if they did call en election, they would undoubtedly get pulled out of office if the charges are true. They aren't likely to form a massive majority government!
Besides that, Gomery is the one who placed the publication ban, and so far he hasn't been very pro-liberal. (I think he's been very impartial)
Then again, I'm a chemist, and I haven't been following the inquiry in great detail.
Canadians have a serious problem: corruption in government, with money being funneled in illegal ways.
This scandal implicates the previous prime-minister, the current prime-minister, and a slew of relatively wealthy people.
A huge inquiry ensues, and costs an amount similar to the amount of money that was originally stolen (perhaps, misused is a better word). In particular, around 250 million is supposedly improperly accounted for, and the commission investigating the problem is costing another 130 million.
Since the inquiry isn't a criminal case against the individuals involved, the commissioner in charge of the inquiry has asked that journalists not publicise the events, so that an unbiased jury can be found for the real criminal proceeedings.
Members of the public are still welcome to go see the events, just not to publicly report them. (keep in mind that until the publication ban was put in place, the TV channel with the live hearings was getting amazing ratings in Quebec- hence constituting a serious problem for finding an unbiased jury)
I think it is pretty sad that someone finds it necessary to publicise their own version of events on their blog, in defiance of the ban, because it presents all kinds of problems in actually prosecuting the people who have allegedly committed serious crimes.
As per the slashdotting, a pity even the slashdot effect hasn't torn the site down.
The whole freedom of speech issue is not really a big problem for most people I know in Montreal, as there is no permanent secrecy being imposed. The events being investigated happened several years ago, and it doesn't make a huge difference if the details are known today or in a few months- except for the prosecution aspect.
The really scary freedom restrictions here are the 'security certificates' which allow the government to throw people in jail, and not tell people what evidence they are being convicted with.
Then again, the same thing seems to happen in the US, only justified with terms like 'enemy combatant', instead of 'security certificate'.
That's not the bad part: The real bad bit is if someone did get a copy, and biometrics are being used, you would be fucked in a permanent kind of way.
Someone else can impersonate you, but you can never really change yourself. (futuristic viral/gene therapy aside)
I really don't want to see biometrics used as a validation method for anything.
In fact, the whole idea of putting a wireless chip into US passports just makes life easier for most other white/english people, because terrorists will be able to better home in on their targets. I'll have a lower chance of being collateral damage. (note the sarcasm: I don't think it would be a good thing for US citizens abroad)
You might try reading something like Eric S. Raymond's 'The art of Unix Programming' (http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/). It's pretty interesting in terms of the history of programming, but also in terms of how to do things in an interesting way.
I'd also suggest you learn something about programming embedded hardware, microcontrollers. Parralax sells lots of little systems that allow you to interface computers with real stuff. At the very least, it's neat to blink LED's, and at the best, you learn how to get motors going.
Apple posts really good information about how to build useable programs on their web site. Read their guidelines for building useable programs and you will probably find it helpful in the future (all free online through their developer site, http://developer.apple.com/).
Lastly, do some web programming. Install something like PHP-triad on your computer so you can learn to code HTML, and build some small PHP programs. Learning a thing or two about mySQL databases will probably also be intereting for you. There are lots of great tutorials on webmonkey (http://webmonkey.wired.com/webmonkey/).
I met Branson 2 weeks ago. He happened to be carrying a model past me (after having just rappelled from the ceiling of a mall in Montreal while launching his new cell phone line here). He didn't seem that interesting, but who knows, right?
I'm taking Paul's challenge pretty seriously. I appreciated the 'how to start a startup' essay quite a bit, and since I read it last week, I also read the associated book.
I've put together a team of friends who are very capable, and organized them to start a business. It's amazing how good programmers often have egos the size of small planets: to have gotten past the ownership division stage of a project is a pretty good feeling.
I wonder how many other groups will take it as seriously? I know about half the questions on Q&A page are mine, so either there were a bunch of identical emails, or relatively few.
I was mildly dissapointed by the initial response I received to my questions, as it seemed they were simply assumed to be ignorant questions. I read and understood everything involved quite well, and it's fairly insulting to be dismissed loosely as: 'we answered that already, go read it again'. Having exchanged a few emails with Paul in the past (about lisp, and later about the bayesian filters), I didn't get the feeling he was involved in the responses.
I don't agree with all of Paul's views, but I think they're not that far off the right track in life. I'm surprised by the number of people who simply scoff. What part of working hard to generate wealth quickly do people here not like? Most people I know express the view that they are constrained by circumstance to limited productivity. This is an opportunity to test that. Then again, what would slashdot be without the trolling?
Seeing as they started their comapany in the Cambridge, Ma area, they live in the same area, and the foreward of Paul's books mention that area, I think it's a safe bet that they mean England.
Why exactly does putting viruses into.rar's count as a new virus attack technique?
This is the same thing that has been going of for a long time with viruses in compressed files.
What's next, complaining that there are viruses in tar files? Suggesting that propagation of viruses by usb-flash drives, DVD-RW's, SD camera memory and so on... are new vectors of propagation?
This seems like a really lousy way of trying to instill virus paranoia in people to sell more A/V software.
Then again, maybe my tinfoil hat is just a bit tight today. Does anyone think there is merit to this article?
Proceedural, object-oriented, and self-learning (AI style) code all tend to feed on bloat.
QUESTION: Is it really true that a reasonably useful piece of software must be so complex as to encapsulate functions in dozens of architectural layers, which the end-developer usually knows little of? Are the problems we face truly so complex that we can't contain them entirely in our minds? Must everything be broken down and solved as piecemeal problems?
I agree, but only 1 particular brand of capacitors had blown, and they had blown all over the board. All the remaining caps were another brand, and they all survived (even though they were similar were of similar magnitude, and in close proximity to the blown caps).
I'm pretty sure that that brand was just crap. I later saw another board in my lab with blown caps. Again, the same brand (the only caps on the other board to blow). The motherboards were different brands, but they had been purchased within 6 months of eachother. The only common component were those caps. Again, with the 2nd board, after replacing the caps, the board has worked fine since.
I have had more than a few HD's die (especially early 1-2 gig drives). Floppy drives are/were also fairly notorious.
A couple of motherboards have also gotten toasted along the way.
I've had false alarms with oxidation of SCSI and IDE cable connectors give indications that drives/motherboards don't work. By removing/replugging the cables a few times, things miraculously start to work again (oxidized layer rubs off).
CPU fans are the most annoying component to fail often, although the noise generally means that it gets attention quickly.
Surprisingly, I have only had 1 power supply fail outright. Maybe that's because I tended to get the dust out occasionally.
A few weeks back I replaced all the major caps on an old AOPEN motherboard that had unexpectedly died. Now it works again.
Interesting that AOPEN didn't provide any tech support response, or offer to recall/exchange the obviously defective boards. (6 caps were blown on the 1 motherboard, all with the same branding)
No more AOPEN for me. Now I've got a nice big G5.:)
There are excuses/explanations for blaming the user for failures. This makes sense. Until you consider the magnitude of the problem.
User ignorance is sometimes the problem. I'm pretty familiar with computers, programming and things related. I should be able to maintain a system that I use exclusively from becoming infected, right?
Actually, I have a fully patched win98 system at home. 3 weeks ago, after browsing the web for about 2 hours, I went to bed. The next morning I booted the system to check my email. My dial-up connection reported that the modem was already in use as soon as I tried dialing into my ISP (I had booted the system and gone to brush my teeth).
So I unplugged my modem, and after a while of scratching around through the registry and various directories, I found a nasty dialer. My phone bill indicated that it had connected for 8 minutes. I'm pretty careful, and extremely observant. I didn't accept or install *anything* the night before. I was simply using a vanilla win98 and IE5.
Oh- and by calling my bell, I made sure that the charges for the 900 number were not accepted- the roaches who set it up won't get money from me.
That's the kind of stupidity that annoys me with windows.
I also use OsX, and linux, and I haven't had similar problems (in fact to get the spyware removers, I booted that system off a knoppix partition). If it is obscurity that protects them, then why not jump on the bandwagon while it's still advantageous?
Too bad I can't use all the apps I need on other os's.
My form of silent protest: I now do my best to not install windows or MS products unless absolutely necessary (on occasion I do in my lab, or for a family member). When friends and family ask for windows help: I say no. I offer to help if they want to switch.
The problem of bad software being sold is tremendous. No other industry consistently receives revenues for products which fail so consistently. The attitude is often that of an 'as is' contract. If you ever see the program load functionally, then forget about ever getting real help with a problem. Mind you, this is more true for large companies than small software developers.
I'm amazed that what I consier to be a HUGE security issue hasn't been addressed.
If you open 2 tabs, and the background one has an applet of any type, the applet can grab the actions from the visible tab, redraw the visible tab and so on.
I'm surprised that a 'slashdot rendering' bug makes it into the list when a REALLY, REALLY dangerous vulnerability is present. I have seen quite a few bug reports about it, and I tried posting my own, but alas, no response.
I feel a bit like the dude who posted his bug to bugzilla, only to get no response.
The bugzilla.mozilla.org bug report is 233780, although there are lots of others that are similar. They keep getting marked as unconfirmed, when they are quite easily reproducible.
There is one thing that FORTRAN does much more nicely than most of the other high-level languages that I use: array indexing is really straight forward. It's easy to index slices of an array.
I don't really like the overall look or feel, but it does the job really well.
I think that far too many people assume that it's obsolete and completely useless. I used to ignorantly assume that it was some kind of dead languages that was completely obsolete. I'm happy that I finally realized otherwise.
Since major companies like IBM have chosen to produce compilers that perform best with FORTRAN. (absoft markets the compilers with a front end)
I like C, and a slew of other languages much better...
But my G5 dual-processor desktop machine can be optimized to run at around 35 GFLOPS. Try that on an 8086 derivative What, maybe you can get 2-4 GFLOPS per machine (if a dual-processor system)? I have a low-end supercomputer on my desk! Unfortunately, without FORTRAN, it wouldn't be so super.
FORTRAN is the only language that will easily take advantage of the HW (Altivec 'velocity engine' and parallel processing).
Each language is good for some tasks. FORTRAN happens to be good for performance in science and engineering work.
I'm more thinking what pthisis said: I don't consider the services that they provide a 'right'. It's more the right to receive the service that you are already paying for.
After all, you are paying for service, and they then infringe on your privacy as a condition of providing you with the service.
I group it into the same category as shrink wrapped EULA's. Aren't they illegal now (in some places)?
I pretty much assumed that was the case, so I usually make a point of complaining verbally about the wait, the music and te service during the hold period.:)
I think that it should be illegal for the other party to record the call without your explicit consent... after all, even though they mention that the call may be monitored, often it's a few minutes of hold time before you can actually tell the human responder that you don't want to be eavesdropped on.
It may seem dumb to have it named linksys, but at the same time, it's only possible to use some of them when the SSID is still linksys. I can't remember the details, but I think that with WEP on in some models, you aren't able to connect to the AP unless it is still named linksys.
Retarded? Yes.
That's what we live with when friends and family think Futureshop really does stock good products at decent prices (no matter how hard one tries to dissuade with explainations).
Dude, it's not about convenience of having screen painting defects, it a security concern. One could easily re-create login boxes for major sites, and take password info from another tab.
If you don't understand the implications of security concerns, don't bash those who have some clue (not that I'm a guru).
I'm definitely not thrilled at the idea of losing tabbed browsing, but until this is fixed, it's a *major* concern to me.
Something like that, although I think that more functionality would be lost in eliminating applets than in getting rid of tabbed browsing (mind you, I use tabs more often than applets, but that's just me).
Interesting that such a major security hole can last for so long... it's a lot like the scary mozilla security story that was posted here about a month (or two?) ago. I consider Mozilla to be far more safe than IE, but some things seem to slide by.
I think the real fix would be to have bugzilla fixed, because in it's current state, it's very, very hard to search through bug reports to look for duplication. It's also very hard to determine whether or not the bug is filed into the correct category to get real attention from the developers.
A few days ago I realized that the whole Mozilla family has some serious issues with applets and tabbed browsing.
An applet in a non-active tab can take control of a forground window, actually absorbing mouseactions, and also repainting the foreground.
After looking at a bunch of other older bug reports, I submitted my own (which was java applet related), and have had no response. The entire set of problems appears to date back more than a year.
It's dissapointing to see serious issues like that not being actively worked on.
I'm even thinking I might get involved to fix exactly that bug (feature?). I'd even think that eliminating tabbed browsing is a good idea until a fix is released.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish it waas true, then when I get paid in US $, it comes out ot a hell of a lot more here.
Unfortunately, your pres. has run your economy so far into the ground that our dollar has gone way up in comparison (we're at what 86 cents to the US dollar now?). A few years ago the Canadian dollar was worth 75 odd cents to the US dollar.
The true measure is that the relative worth of the CAD to the EURO has stayed constant, but the USD has dropped in comparison to both.
It's a pity, it hurts a lot of export businesses in Canada.
I'm no big liberal supporter, but as far as I know, this is all still hearsay. I'm not sure that I'd base my voting decision based on the second-hand testimony of someone's blog.
That said, I'd probably not vote liberal for other reasons. I don't think they would win if they did call an election.
Furthermore, even if they did call en election, they would undoubtedly get pulled out of office if the charges are true. They aren't likely to form a massive majority government!
Besides that, Gomery is the one who placed the publication ban, and so far he hasn't been very pro-liberal. (I think he's been very impartial)
Then again, I'm a chemist, and I haven't been following the inquiry in great detail.
I'm just saying I think it's a pity the ban is being ignored.
The ban isn't a terrible thing, IMHO.
Canadians have a serious problem: corruption in government, with money being funneled in illegal ways.
This scandal implicates the previous prime-minister, the current prime-minister, and a slew of relatively wealthy people.
A huge inquiry ensues, and costs an amount similar to the amount of money that was originally stolen (perhaps, misused is a better word). In particular, around 250 million is supposedly improperly accounted for, and the commission investigating the problem is costing another 130 million.
Since the inquiry isn't a criminal case against the individuals involved, the commissioner in charge of the inquiry has asked that journalists not publicise the events, so that an unbiased jury can be found for the real criminal proceeedings.
Members of the public are still welcome to go see the events, just not to publicly report them. (keep in mind that until the publication ban was put in place, the TV channel with the live hearings was getting amazing ratings in Quebec- hence constituting a serious problem for finding an unbiased jury)
I think it is pretty sad that someone finds it necessary to publicise their own version of events on their blog, in defiance of the ban, because it presents all kinds of problems in actually prosecuting the people who have allegedly committed serious crimes.
As per the slashdotting, a pity even the slashdot effect hasn't torn the site down.
The whole freedom of speech issue is not really a big problem for most people I know in Montreal, as there is no permanent secrecy being imposed. The events being investigated happened several years ago, and it doesn't make a huge difference if the details are known today or in a few months- except for the prosecution aspect.
The really scary freedom restrictions here are the 'security certificates' which allow the government to throw people in jail, and not tell people what evidence they are being convicted with.
Then again, the same thing seems to happen in the US, only justified with terms like 'enemy combatant', instead of 'security certificate'.
It's most definitely possible to copy DNA.
That's not the bad part: The real bad bit is if someone did get a copy, and biometrics are being used, you would be fucked in a permanent kind of way.
Someone else can impersonate you, but you can never really change yourself. (futuristic viral/gene therapy aside)
I really don't want to see biometrics used as a validation method for anything.
In fact, the whole idea of putting a wireless chip into US passports just makes life easier for most other white/english people, because terrorists will be able to better home in on their targets. I'll have a lower chance of being collateral damage. (note the sarcasm: I don't think it would be a good thing for US citizens abroad)
You might try reading something like Eric S. Raymond's 'The art of Unix Programming' (http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/). It's pretty interesting in terms of the history of programming, but also in terms of how to do things in an interesting way.
I'd also suggest you learn something about programming embedded hardware, microcontrollers. Parralax sells lots of little systems that allow you to interface computers with real stuff. At the very least, it's neat to blink LED's, and at the best, you learn how to get motors going.
Apple posts really good information about how to build useable programs on their web site. Read their guidelines for building useable programs and you will probably find it helpful in the future (all free online through their developer site, http://developer.apple.com/).
Lastly, do some web programming. Install something like PHP-triad on your computer so you can learn to code HTML, and build some small PHP programs. Learning a thing or two about mySQL databases will probably also be intereting for you. There are lots of great tutorials on webmonkey (http://webmonkey.wired.com/webmonkey/).
I'd have to agree.
I met Branson 2 weeks ago. He happened to be carrying a model past me (after having just rappelled from the ceiling of a mall in Montreal while launching his new cell phone line here). He didn't seem that interesting, but who knows, right?
I'm taking Paul's challenge pretty seriously. I appreciated the 'how to start a startup' essay quite a bit, and since I read it last week, I also read the associated book.
I've put together a team of friends who are very capable, and organized them to start a business. It's amazing how good programmers often have egos the size of small planets: to have gotten past the ownership division stage of a project is a pretty good feeling.
I wonder how many other groups will take it as seriously? I know about half the questions on Q&A page are mine, so either there were a bunch of identical emails, or relatively few.
I was mildly dissapointed by the initial response I received to my questions, as it seemed they were simply assumed to be ignorant questions. I read and understood everything involved quite well, and it's fairly insulting to be dismissed loosely as: 'we answered that already, go read it again'. Having exchanged a few emails with Paul in the past (about lisp, and later about the bayesian filters), I didn't get the feeling he was involved in the responses.
I don't agree with all of Paul's views, but I think they're not that far off the right track in life. I'm surprised by the number of people who simply scoff. What part of working hard to generate wealth quickly do people here not like? Most people I know express the view that they are constrained by circumstance to limited productivity. This is an opportunity to test that. Then again, what would slashdot be without the trolling?
Seeing as they started their comapany in the Cambridge, Ma area, they live in the same area, and the foreward of Paul's books mention that area, I think it's a safe bet that they mean England.
Why exactly does putting viruses into .rar's count as a new virus attack technique?
This is the same thing that has been going of for a long time with viruses in compressed files.
What's next, complaining that there are viruses in tar files? Suggesting that propagation of viruses by usb-flash drives, DVD-RW's, SD camera memory and so on... are new vectors of propagation?
This seems like a really lousy way of trying to instill virus paranoia in people to sell more A/V software.
Then again, maybe my tinfoil hat is just a bit tight today. Does anyone think there is merit to this article?
you forgot an important portion of that quote:
It's a write-once only language.
Authors of Perl script often have trouble modifying their own code.
That's a cute one.
I wish I didn't think it true.
Proceedural, object-oriented, and self-learning (AI style) code all tend to feed on bloat.
QUESTION: Is it really true that a reasonably useful piece of software must be so complex as to encapsulate functions in dozens of architectural layers, which the end-developer usually knows little of? Are the problems we face truly so complex that we can't contain them entirely in our minds? Must everything be broken down and solved as piecemeal problems?
I agree, but only 1 particular brand of capacitors had blown, and they had blown all over the board. All the remaining caps were another brand, and they all survived (even though they were similar were of similar magnitude, and in close proximity to the blown caps).
I'm pretty sure that that brand was just crap. I later saw another board in my lab with blown caps. Again, the same brand (the only caps on the other board to blow). The motherboards were different brands, but they had been purchased within 6 months of eachother. The only common component were those caps. Again, with the 2nd board, after replacing the caps, the board has worked fine since.
I have had more than a few HD's die (especially early 1-2 gig drives). Floppy drives are/were also fairly notorious.
A couple of motherboards have also gotten toasted along the way.
I've had false alarms with oxidation of SCSI and IDE cable connectors give indications that drives/motherboards don't work. By removing/replugging the cables a few times, things miraculously start to work again (oxidized layer rubs off).
CPU fans are the most annoying component to fail often, although the noise generally means that it gets attention quickly.
Surprisingly, I have only had 1 power supply fail outright. Maybe that's because I tended to get the dust out occasionally.
A few weeks back I replaced all the major caps on an old AOPEN motherboard that had unexpectedly died. Now it works again.
Interesting that AOPEN didn't provide any tech support response, or offer to recall/exchange the obviously defective boards. (6 caps were blown on the 1 motherboard, all with the same branding)
No more AOPEN for me. Now I've got a nice big G5. :)
There are excuses/explanations for blaming the user for failures. This makes sense. Until you consider the magnitude of the problem.
User ignorance is sometimes the problem. I'm pretty familiar with computers, programming and things related. I should be able to maintain a system that I use exclusively from becoming infected, right?
Actually, I have a fully patched win98 system at home. 3 weeks ago, after browsing the web for about 2 hours, I went to bed. The next morning I booted the system to check my email. My dial-up connection reported that the modem was already in use as soon as I tried dialing into my ISP (I had booted the system and gone to brush my teeth).
So I unplugged my modem, and after a while of scratching around through the registry and various directories, I found a nasty dialer. My phone bill indicated that it had connected for 8 minutes. I'm pretty careful, and extremely observant. I didn't accept or install *anything* the night before. I was simply using a vanilla win98 and IE5.
Oh- and by calling my bell, I made sure that the charges for the 900 number were not accepted- the roaches who set it up won't get money from me.
That's the kind of stupidity that annoys me with windows.
I also use OsX, and linux, and I haven't had similar problems (in fact to get the spyware removers, I booted that system off a knoppix partition). If it is obscurity that protects them, then why not jump on the bandwagon while it's still advantageous?
Too bad I can't use all the apps I need on other os's.
My form of silent protest: I now do my best to not install windows or MS products unless absolutely necessary (on occasion I do in my lab, or for a family member). When friends and family ask for windows help: I say no. I offer to help if they want to switch.
The problem of bad software being sold is tremendous. No other industry consistently receives revenues for products which fail so consistently. The attitude is often that of an 'as is' contract. If you ever see the program load functionally, then forget about ever getting real help with a problem. Mind you, this is more true for large companies than small software developers.
Well, maybe that's just my rant.
I'm amazed that what I consier to be a HUGE security issue hasn't been addressed.
If you open 2 tabs, and the background one has an applet of any type, the applet can grab the actions from the visible tab, redraw the visible tab and so on.
I'm surprised that a 'slashdot rendering' bug makes it into the list when a REALLY, REALLY dangerous vulnerability is present. I have seen quite a few bug reports about it, and I tried posting my own, but alas, no response.
I feel a bit like the dude who posted his bug to bugzilla, only to get no response.
The bugzilla.mozilla.org bug report is 233780, although there are lots of others that are similar. They keep getting marked as unconfirmed, when they are quite easily reproducible.
Argh
There is one thing that FORTRAN does much more nicely than most of the other high-level languages that I use: array indexing is really straight forward. It's easy to index slices of an array.
I don't really like the overall look or feel, but it does the job really well.
I think that far too many people assume that it's obsolete and completely useless. I used to ignorantly assume that it was some kind of dead languages that was completely obsolete. I'm happy that I finally realized otherwise.
Since major companies like IBM have chosen to produce compilers that perform best with FORTRAN. (absoft markets the compilers with a front end)
I like C, and a slew of other languages much better...
But my G5 dual-processor desktop machine can be optimized to run at around 35 GFLOPS. Try that on an 8086 derivative What, maybe you can get 2-4 GFLOPS per machine (if a dual-processor system)? I have a low-end supercomputer on my desk! Unfortunately, without FORTRAN, it wouldn't be so super.
FORTRAN is the only language that will easily take advantage of the HW (Altivec 'velocity engine' and parallel processing).
Each language is good for some tasks. FORTRAN happens to be good for performance in science and engineering work.
I'm more thinking what pthisis said: I don't consider the services that they provide a 'right'. It's more the right to receive the service that you are already paying for.
After all, you are paying for service, and they then infringe on your privacy as a condition of providing you with the service.
I group it into the same category as shrink wrapped EULA's. Aren't they illegal now (in some places)?
I pretty much assumed that was the case, so I usually make a point of complaining verbally about the wait, the music and te service during the hold period. :)
I think that it should be illegal for the other party to record the call without your explicit consent... after all, even though they mention that the call may be monitored, often it's a few minutes of hold time before you can actually tell the human responder that you don't want to be eavesdropped on.
Tricky dilemna:
Forego the service, or lose your rights?
It may seem dumb to have it named linksys, but at the same time, it's only possible to use some of them when the SSID is still linksys. I can't remember the details, but I think that with WEP on in some models, you aren't able to connect to the AP unless it is still named linksys.
Retarded? Yes.
That's what we live with when friends and family think Futureshop really does stock good products at decent prices (no matter how hard one tries to dissuade with explainations).
Dude, it's not about convenience of having screen painting defects, it a security concern. One could easily re-create login boxes for major sites, and take password info from another tab.
If you don't understand the implications of security concerns, don't bash those who have some clue (not that I'm a guru).
I'm definitely not thrilled at the idea of losing tabbed browsing, but until this is fixed, it's a *major* concern to me.
Something like that, although I think that more functionality would be lost in eliminating applets than in getting rid of tabbed browsing (mind you, I use tabs more often than applets, but that's just me).
Interesting that such a major security hole can last for so long... it's a lot like the scary mozilla security story that was posted here about a month (or two?) ago. I consider Mozilla to be far more safe than IE, but some things seem to slide by.
I think the real fix would be to have bugzilla fixed, because in it's current state, it's very, very hard to search through bug reports to look for duplication. It's also very hard to determine whether or not the bug is filed into the correct category to get real attention from the developers.
A few days ago I realized that the whole Mozilla family has some serious issues with applets and tabbed browsing.
An applet in a non-active tab can take control of a forground window, actually absorbing mouseactions, and also repainting the foreground.
After looking at a bunch of other older bug reports, I submitted my own (which was java applet related), and have had no response. The entire set of problems appears to date back more than a year.
It's dissapointing to see serious issues like that not being actively worked on.
I'm even thinking I might get involved to fix exactly that bug (feature?). I'd even think that eliminating tabbed browsing is a good idea until a fix is released.
They also say top-ten gadgets, when the slide show has far fewer.
Who knew they could't count?