Just tested on Windows Server 2003....shs,.pif,.url, and.shb files exhibit this behavior. I do not have microsoft access installed, so the.mam and.mad files show up as normal.
I looked a little more into it, and there is a NeverShowExt REG_SZ entry in the registry for each file type that does this. Here it is described in detail.
I would suggest searching through the registry for NeverShowExt and deleting the occurrences you find under HKCR. Be careful editing your registry, do it only if you know what you're doing, etc.
Opera's still quicker, & seems better accessing things like GMail (well, before they added ActiveX use to gmail, demanding it now, where it wasn't there a few days ago) even!:)
Try "Identify as Opera" instead of IE, and it won't complain about ActiveX.
I have seen many proprietary tools that require IE because they use weird javascript or have other non-standardnesses. The ActiveX XPI wouldn't help for these. I would also think that using that XPI would open you up to some of the browser security holes that people go to Firefox to avoid.
I like the idea of a link-handler XPI though. A seamless solution would also require this be implemented in IE to send you back to firefox to browse non-IE requiring sites.
If my ISP nullrouted a site containing this kind of material? No, I would not consider that to be censorship, since their nullrouting it does not inhibit the publishing of the site's information.
So then, is China's filtering of internet content not censorship?
This would go to civil court, so no one would have to "prove" anything. The jury is supposed to make their decision based on the "preponderance of the evidence"
um... when did they start capping our bandwidth? Last year, the outbound internet1 was constantly saturated (by about 10 students running FTP servers or whatever), so it may have seemed capped, but it wasn't technically. I could also download from RIT at 300K/sec from my cable modem in buffalo last year (probably more a limitation of the cable than RIT). If that's capped, then I'll take capped any day.
On the other hand, we have Kazaa trying to enforce an EULA. Which do you want to win?
Be careful there. The GPL is based on the same principle as EULAs are: You have no right to copy this unless you meet <conditions>. With the GPL, the conditions just give more options to the user than a typical EULA does.
If you declare EULAs unenforceable, you declare the GPL unenforceable.
What's the point of a convenient medium through which information may be exchanged if everybody starts patenting their DTD's?
The funny thing is that that patent only covers the use of schema's, not DTD's. If the schema is simple enough to be represented as a DTD, then you could get completely around it and not have to use their schema.
I made no comment as to the humor of the site, I was simply referring to how the site is technicaly done. It has the advantage of flash that it looks very clean, and the advantage of HTML that you can still link to the cartoons and such.
There's not a bit of flash in tht site. The hover-arrows are all javascript.
Don't be so quick to comdemn flash, if someone wants to create a horrible website, they can do it using anything, even just lots of frames. Flash just gives them more options.
As an example of a "good" flash site, see www.homestarrunner.com. They make creative use of flash, but the pages are still linkable.
Slashdot Mirror
Just tested on Windows Server 2003... .shs, .pif, .url, and .shb files exhibit this behavior. I do not have microsoft access installed, so the .mam and .mad files show up as normal.
I looked a little more into it, and there is a NeverShowExt REG_SZ entry in the registry for each file type that does this. Here it is described in detail.
I would suggest searching through the registry for NeverShowExt and deleting the occurrences you find under HKCR. Be careful editing your registry, do it only if you know what you're doing, etc.
Opera's still quicker, & seems better accessing things like GMail (well, before they added ActiveX use to gmail, demanding it now, where it wasn't there a few days ago) even! :)
Try "Identify as Opera" instead of IE, and it won't complain about ActiveX.
You mean these?
*runs faster*
Screenshot for those who don't believe him.
I have seen many proprietary tools that require IE because they use weird javascript or have other non-standardnesses. The ActiveX XPI wouldn't help for these. I would also think that using that XPI would open you up to some of the browser security holes that people go to Firefox to avoid.
I like the idea of a link-handler XPI though. A seamless solution would also require this be implemented in IE to send you back to firefox to browse non-IE requiring sites.
Interesting. If you view the source, the FAQ is still there, they just commented it out.
Wow, that's gutsy, anonymously advertising a movie in this thread. Were you meaning to be ironic?
And no one will hear it scream...
If my ISP nullrouted a site containing this kind of material? No, I would not consider that to be censorship, since their nullrouting it does not inhibit the publishing of the site's information.
So then, is China's filtering of internet content not censorship?
For example, if you smoke you get an additional 1000 mR/year (1 R/year) in addition to all the other things in the tobaco.
I call shenanigans.
From Princeton:
The Roentgen (R) is the special unit of exposure, which is the measure of the ionization produced in air by x or gamma radiation.
So, are you saying that a cigarette produces more x-rays or gamma rays than other things that would normally be put into our mouths?
Smoking is bad and causes cancer, but not because it's radioactive.
This would go to civil court, so no one would have to "prove" anything. The jury is supposed to make their decision based on the "preponderance of the evidence"
um... when did they start capping our bandwidth? Last year, the outbound internet1 was constantly saturated (by about 10 students running FTP servers or whatever), so it may have seemed capped, but it wasn't technically. I could also download from RIT at 300K/sec from my cable modem in buffalo last year (probably more a limitation of the cable than RIT). If that's capped, then I'll take capped any day.
(and technically, UofR is to the northeast)
Someone post a mirror!
Here's a mirror of the entire site.
Thanks for the clarification.
*cowers into the corner*
On the other hand, we have Kazaa trying to enforce an EULA. Which do you want to win?
Be careful there. The GPL is based on the same principle as EULAs are: You have no right to copy this unless you meet <conditions>. With the GPL, the conditions just give more options to the user than a typical EULA does.
If you declare EULAs unenforceable, you declare the GPL unenforceable.
I think I'd root for the EULAs in that case.
What's the point of a convenient medium through which information may be exchanged if everybody starts patenting their DTD's?
The funny thing is that that patent only covers the use of schema's, not DTD's. If the schema is simple enough to be represented as a DTD, then you could get completely around it and not have to use their schema.
I made no comment as to the humor of the site, I was simply referring to how the site is technicaly done. It has the advantage of flash that it looks very clean, and the advantage of HTML that you can still link to the cartoons and such.
There's not a bit of flash in tht site. The hover-arrows are all javascript.
Don't be so quick to comdemn flash, if someone wants to create a horrible website, they can do it using anything, even just lots of frames. Flash just gives them more options.
As an example of a "good" flash site, see www.homestarrunner.com. They make creative use of flash, but the pages are still linkable.
The only thing Kodak and Xerox have in common is their destruction of the Rochester economy
/bitter
Lets see how this does...
shortcuts.mov
omniwebtabs.mp4
workspaces.mov
If we outlaw pliers on planes, only the outlaws will have pliers on planes.