I do use the TITLE attributes already. But, as you say, not all browsers are created equal. I'm using MSIE 5.5, 6.0, sometimes NS 4.7, and Moz (recent) on Windows, Linux and Solaris. So a little extra magic helps for consistency.
I had forgotten about ACCESSKEY. I am pleseantly suprised that all the Windows and *nix based browsers respond equally well to ALT+key... I was worried about accelerator confusion. Of course, a normal user wouldn't know about that feature (or what keys to press for different form parts). Maybe I'll add it next to the text description.
The last part, about the magic GET request, is necessary in that there is only one form, and therefore, one action. Moreover, the required search strings are often abuses of various Perl scripts which expects a POST request from a complex form, but also happen to accept a GET request. These GET requests require a multitude of search-specific fields to be passed in the query. Because they are search specific, I'd need multiple forms, with many hidden form elements. But even then, in many places I am forced to duplicate the input text fields' content... for example: One field searches a property database. It amounts roughly to an LDAP search... (|(hostname=*$foo*)(propertynumber=*$fo o*)(descrip tion=*$foo*))...
and the query string looks almost exactly like that, except URL escaped. Note $foo repeated thrice? The javascript calls a function that takes a query string prototype and searches/replaces with the entered text. Any number of repeated references in a complex search expression can therefore be created. One would otherwise have to fill three text boxes with the same text. This is most easily accomplished with javascript, and cannot be done otherwise with a simple form. Remember, I don't control the scripts. I just want to tie those resources together for myself and my coworkers. Since all our browsers support javascript, and in IE it is enabled for at least our internal network, I feel I am using the right tool for the job.
Are you saying that because you had access to the Half-Life 2 Beta, you have authoritative knowledge through some developer-fed channel from Valve that gives you verifiable information concerning the theft?
Because not everyone here is as "tight" as you are with Valve, so you have to explain what you mean, instead of throwing out a non-explanatory (even elitist) comment.
Sure, I got a copy of the.NET Server (aka Server 2003) beta. That doesn't mean that I should know the details of the Windows 2000 source code leak, does it?
I designed myself my own "portal" if you will, for my desktop. A few other people use it too. It presents a matrix of various input forms, each labeled with an icon that represents what it will be used for. From there, I can launch LDAP lookups in our directory, check property, search a dicitionary, search google, use our intranet search, etc. etc. All from a very spartan, quick loading interface.
The form is automated with javascript. It's sensitive to mouse-over... it displays the type of search in the status bar to remind you if the icon is not informative. And if you roll over the form, the "Google" search area steals the input focus so you can just start typing (used most frequently). But if you click in a specific search box, Google won't steal the focus anymore. Hitting enter launches a input-box specific function that crafts an appropriate GET request using the text in the box, and "submits" it using the enclosing form.
If you can think of a better way to present such a page with straight XHTML and CSS... I'd like to hear it. And it is indispensible... I spend a lot of time opening up new windows to that screen.
all the cards can listen to the same IP address. You can have all the network cards active at the same time. IP Multipathing isn't really an issue, because you don't need it. You can push any path preference issues down a layer into your router's configuration.
You are our new Slashdot champion. Lets' break down your +5 score:
+1 for mentioning Linux. +1 for introducing it in a clever, offhand way (a link to kernel.org which will associate the linking phrase in google, YOU SLY DOG YOU!) +1 for advocating a return to client/server computing in some form +1 for using "open" and "hardware" in the same sentence.
Good job! I'd shake your hand if I could reach it. Now for the bad news:
You don't know what the FUCK are you talking about. The Sempron is going to be 100% like the Duron. Is the Duron in ANY way more suited then any other processor for thin client computing? AMD's new server line of Opterons with lower voltage cores might be a starting point. The Pentium-M might be a starting point. The Sempron is NOT a starting point.
Oh wait, AMD already sells an embedded x86-compatible processor Am5x86! And, WHAT'S THIS?!?! It even sells a miniature integrated platform, called Elan.
Well tie me up and violate me with a spoon. Do you enjoy being such a karma whore or are you just that ignorant?
are provided by a straight raytracer (soft shadows, color bleeding, etc.)
Because when a ray hits a surface, it only spawns a reflection ray and rays to any (point) light sources. Therefore shadows will have sharp edges, either a particular light at a particular point is visible or it is not. Moreover, the contribution of non-light sources to a surfaces' illumination is not modeled (light from OTHER surfaces). To accomplish this, once must create a large number of trial rays in a pattern around the reflection normal that roughly model the diffuse-ness of the surface in question. These can then "view" other nearby surfaces and pass on their illumination. Soft shadows can be achieved in this manner, by having rays intersect light sources which have volume, like real lights would. But this sort of technique is much, much slower.
to compute global illumination levels ahead of time (as opposed to using ambience). Then you can use raytracing in realtime to capture dynamic effects.
to embed the algorithm for generating email addresses into the virus. Use an internal PRNG seeded by the netblock to generate an email address based on a short set of words followed by a 2 digit number (to come up with things like billyballer99), at hotmail or wherever. Increment the seed for the PRNG a few times, generate more addresses. Email results to ALL addresses generated, perhaps at random intervals.
The pattern of addresses is random, but re-creatable per initial netblock. The virus writer could pick a target netblock, then register any of the possible email addresses. Then wait for the results to come in, then abandon the account.
The people analyzing the virus would have to disassemble the code to recreate the algorithm for picking addresses, which would slow the ability to identify a purpetrator: plus anyone who happens to lurk at the other end of one of the drops could be an "innocent bystander".
It's good if the virus accidentally emails real people with the stolen information because of the randomized algorithm. Creates plausible deniability.
(perhaps the word list and scheme is based on real email addresses scraped from the web)
(that is, XP Professional Corporate, otherwise known as "Volume Licensed" and XP Professional Dumbass edition) is the product ID string in the i386/setupp.ini file on the CD.
That's the only file that's at all different between both editions. So just copy the CD to the HD, change the line in that file that reads Pid=XXXXXYYY (where XXXXX is the first five digits, and YYY is the last three) to PID=XXXXX270 (so we are keeping the first five digits, and changing the last 3 to "270")
Also, make sure to call the Volume Label "WXPVOL_EN".
Burn, insert, reboot. When you are asked to enter a product key, use any old XP volume license key you can find: from your employer (good idea) or that keygen util that's floating around (not a good idea unless you've paid for a copy of XP) or whatever.
Finish the install, and presto! No product activation. Ever.
You can, but it's not as simple unless you already have the partitions as part of a LVM group. You'd have the same issue in Win98: there's no "room" to add a RAID identifier on the disk what with the small partition table and filesystems right after it. You need to scoot the filesystems down to make room for a RAID identifier area. Windows handles that tricky step in 2000 and above if you are booting NTFS (NOT FAT32) off a basic disc, converting it to dynamic on the fly.
Linux can't do that with the standard tools, you need to apply them intelligently.
First, you need to boot off a floppy (or go into single user mode and remount everything R/O). Essentially you have to make a copy of your current disk to the other one (how doesn't matter, although partitioning and recursive copy is usually faster than block by block, but either is fine). You need to mark it as a RAID member first, though. Then you edit your raid config file like you would normally. BUT! Mark the first disk as dirty in the config file. Now, unmount all the filesystems from the old disk, and turn on the array. The second, "clean" HD which is slightly modified for mirroring, gets mirrored back automagically to the first disk. When it's done, you can reboot, and you're running full mirrored mode.
The tools don't actually destroy the data. What they _don't_ do is attempt to move and resize your mounted filesystems from underneath you (!!!).
OSX may have provisions in the filesystem and/or partition table areas to mark a partition as being part of a RAID mirror without needing to do more complex stuff, so a online RAID-1 mirror is possible.
You can do this now in Linux if you start off with LVM, but taking older, simpler partitioned disks and filesystems is harder to bootstrap.
The way that worked was that you made real-mode BIOS calls to a ROM on the VGA card that implemented the function you want.
No modern operating system worth it's salt would stoop to mapping the VGA ROM and emulating real-mode function calls to twiddle a few registers. It works in Linux (sort of) because all the heavy lifting is done in real mode before protected mode starts, which means you can't change any settings after initial boot. Useless.
I don't really know what the issue is. There really are few programs out there that on Linux _don't_ use GTK or QT and use their cut/paste semantics, which I am quite familiar with. It works just like Windows...
The problem I have is switching from *nix to Windows and losing the concept of the "primary" selection. You don't have to use middle-click = insert primary if you don't want to... it's not necessary anymore.
sites like slashdot, sa and 2/4chan people will purposefully not create clickable links, but type the URL-as-text. Just select, CTRL+N, middle click, no problem.
The only thing that gets you is slashdot's page-widening-defeating mechanism. But you still have a chance to correct the typos in the URL bar if it 404s on you.
However, the issue is that GameSTOP/EBGames, etc. charges $30 to mitigate the transaction between the first and second user. The second user is only saving $5, the first user is only getting $10 towards his next game. The retailer gets the plum. The game does not factor in a $30 second-hand markup. The original retail markup is at least $20. For a $50 game, that's all calculated markup, and no profit (!) Not good. In that situation, nobody wins, when compared to online auctions or smaller boutiques that have smaller margins. I'm not saying it should be illegal, it's just that potential buyers need to be better informed and know that GameSTOP is not the best venue for secondhand sales.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a _common_ repost that always seems to get modded up.
I do use the TITLE attributes already. But, as you say, not all browsers are created equal. I'm using MSIE 5.5, 6.0, sometimes NS 4.7, and Moz (recent) on Windows, Linux and Solaris. So a little extra magic helps for consistency.
o o*)(descrip tion=*$foo*)) ...
I had forgotten about ACCESSKEY. I am pleseantly suprised that all the Windows and *nix based browsers respond equally well to ALT+key... I was worried about accelerator confusion.
Of course, a normal user wouldn't know about that feature (or what keys to press for different form parts). Maybe I'll add it next to the text description.
The last part, about the magic GET request, is necessary in that there is only one form, and therefore, one action. Moreover, the required search strings are often abuses of various Perl scripts which expects a POST request from a complex form, but also happen to accept a GET request. These GET requests require a multitude of search-specific fields to be passed in the query. Because they are search specific, I'd need multiple forms, with many hidden form elements. But even then, in many places I am forced to duplicate the input text fields' content... for example:
One field searches a property database. It amounts roughly to an LDAP search...
(|(hostname=*$foo*)(propertynumber=*$f
and the query string looks almost exactly like that, except URL escaped.
Note $foo repeated thrice? The javascript calls a function that takes a query string prototype and searches/replaces with the entered text. Any number of repeated references in a complex search expression can therefore be created. One would otherwise have to fill three text boxes with the same text. This is most easily accomplished with javascript, and cannot be done otherwise with a simple form.
Remember, I don't control the scripts. I just want to tie those resources together for myself and my coworkers.
Since all our browsers support javascript, and in IE it is enabled for at least our internal network, I feel I am using the right tool for the job.
Are you saying that because you had access to the Half-Life 2 Beta, you have authoritative knowledge through some developer-fed channel from Valve that gives you verifiable information concerning the theft?
.NET Server (aka Server 2003) beta. That doesn't mean that I should know the details of the Windows 2000 source code leak, does it?
Because not everyone here is as "tight" as you are with Valve, so you have to explain what you mean, instead of throwing out a non-explanatory (even elitist) comment.
Sure, I got a copy of the
Why won't it just stay dead? OH NOES ITS NAWING ON MY BRIAN!!1
But let me supply a counter-example.
I designed myself my own "portal" if you will, for my desktop. A few other people use it too. It presents a matrix of various input forms, each labeled with an icon that represents what it will be used for. From there, I can launch LDAP lookups in our directory, check property, search a dicitionary, search google, use our intranet search, etc. etc. All from a very spartan, quick loading interface.
The form is automated with javascript. It's sensitive to mouse-over... it displays the type of search in the status bar to remind you if the icon is not informative. And if you roll over the form, the "Google" search area steals the input focus so you can just start typing (used most frequently). But if you click in a specific search box, Google won't steal the focus anymore. Hitting enter launches a input-box specific function that crafts an appropriate GET request using the text in the box, and "submits" it using the enclosing form.
If you can think of a better way to present such a page with straight XHTML and CSS... I'd like to hear it. And it is indispensible... I spend a lot of time opening up new windows to that screen.
all the cards can listen to the same IP address.
You can have all the network cards active at the same time. IP Multipathing isn't really an issue, because you don't need it. You can push any path preference issues down a layer into your router's configuration.
You are our new Slashdot champion. Lets' break down your +5 score:
+1 for mentioning Linux.
+1 for introducing it in a clever, offhand way (a link to kernel.org which will associate the linking phrase in google, YOU SLY DOG YOU!)
+1 for advocating a return to client/server computing in some form
+1 for using "open" and "hardware" in the same sentence.
Good job! I'd shake your hand if I could reach it.
Now for the bad news:
You don't know what the FUCK are you talking about.
The Sempron is going to be 100% like the Duron. Is the Duron in ANY way more suited then any other processor for thin client computing? AMD's new server line of Opterons with lower voltage cores might be a starting point. The Pentium-M might be a starting point. The Sempron is NOT a starting point.
Oh wait, AMD already sells an embedded x86-compatible processor Am5x86! And, WHAT'S THIS?!?! It even sells a miniature integrated platform, called Elan.
Well tie me up and violate me with a spoon. Do you enjoy being such a karma whore or are you just that ignorant?
I paid more than $69 to get my OEM XP2500 8 months ago. Try the motherboard, if it suits, fine, if not, toss it, get a better one.
on a 533 MHz celeron and 128MB of RAM, and a laptop hard drive.
The scary thing is, it's the one of the most responsive windows machine I have.
Just goes to show you: Server 2003, it's XP, except it doesn't suck!
are provided by a straight raytracer (soft shadows, color bleeding, etc.)
Because when a ray hits a surface, it only spawns a reflection ray and rays to any (point) light sources. Therefore shadows will have sharp edges, either a particular light at a particular point is visible or it is not.
Moreover, the contribution of non-light sources to a surfaces' illumination is not modeled (light from OTHER surfaces).
To accomplish this, once must create a large number of trial rays in a pattern around the reflection normal that roughly model the diffuse-ness of the surface in question. These can then "view" other nearby surfaces and pass on their illumination. Soft shadows can be achieved in this manner, by having rays intersect light sources which have volume, like real lights would.
But this sort of technique is much, much slower.
to compute global illumination levels ahead of time (as opposed to using ambience). Then you can use raytracing in realtime to capture dynamic effects.
many games already do this for realistic lighting on the static scene.
For example:
Quake (1, 2 and 3)
Really. Just read the post history. It makes my head hurt.
(time to go home...)
to embed the algorithm for generating email addresses into the virus. Use an internal PRNG seeded by the netblock to generate an email address based on a short set of words followed by a 2 digit number (to come up with things like billyballer99), at hotmail or wherever. Increment the seed for the PRNG a few times, generate more addresses. Email results to ALL addresses generated, perhaps at random intervals.
The pattern of addresses is random, but re-creatable per initial netblock. The virus writer could pick a target netblock, then register any of the possible email addresses. Then wait for the results to come in, then abandon the account.
The people analyzing the virus would have to disassemble the code to recreate the algorithm for picking addresses, which would slow the ability to identify a purpetrator: plus anyone who happens to lurk at the other end of one of the drops could be an "innocent bystander".
It's good if the virus accidentally emails real people with the stolen information because of the randomized algorithm. Creates plausible deniability.
(perhaps the word list and scheme is based on real email addresses scraped from the web)
(that is, XP Professional Corporate, otherwise known as "Volume Licensed" and XP Professional Dumbass edition) is the product ID string in the i386/setupp.ini file on the CD.
That's the only file that's at all different between both editions. So just copy the CD to the HD, change the line in that file that reads
Pid=XXXXXYYY (where XXXXX is the first five digits, and YYY is the last three) to
PID=XXXXX270 (so we are keeping the first five digits, and changing the last 3 to "270")
Also, make sure to call the Volume Label "WXPVOL_EN".
Burn, insert, reboot. When you are asked to enter a product key, use any old XP volume license key you can find: from your employer (good idea) or that keygen util that's floating around (not a good idea unless you've paid for a copy of XP) or whatever.
Finish the install, and presto! No product activation.
Ever.
You can, but it's not as simple unless you already have the partitions as part of a LVM group. You'd have the same issue in Win98: there's no "room" to add a RAID identifier on the disk what with the small partition table and filesystems right after it. You need to scoot the filesystems down to make room for a RAID identifier area. Windows handles that tricky step in 2000 and above if you are booting NTFS (NOT FAT32) off a basic disc, converting it to dynamic on the fly.
Linux can't do that with the standard tools, you need to apply them intelligently.
First, you need to boot off a floppy (or go into single user mode and remount everything R/O). Essentially you have to make a copy of your current disk to the other one (how doesn't matter, although partitioning and recursive copy is usually faster than block by block, but either is fine). You need to mark it as a RAID member first, though. Then you edit your raid config file like you would normally. BUT! Mark the first disk as dirty in the config file. Now, unmount all the filesystems from the old disk, and turn on the array. The second, "clean" HD which is slightly modified for mirroring, gets mirrored back automagically to the first disk. When it's done, you can reboot, and you're running full mirrored mode.
The tools don't actually destroy the data. What they _don't_ do is attempt to move and resize your mounted filesystems from underneath you (!!!).
OSX may have provisions in the filesystem and/or partition table areas to mark a partition as being part of a RAID mirror without needing to do more complex stuff, so a online RAID-1 mirror is possible.
You can do this now in Linux if you start off with LVM, but taking older, simpler partitioned disks and filesystems is harder to bootstrap.
vi /etc/raidtab /dev/md0 /dev/md0
(add a few lines to define disks and policy... maybe copy and paste)
mkraid
raidstart
I'd say 3 minutes if you already knew what you wanted to do. (!)
Or use YaST or something. And Solaris is no easier. I don't really understand the point...
The way that worked was that you made real-mode BIOS calls to a ROM on the VGA card that implemented the function you want.
No modern operating system worth it's salt would stoop to mapping the VGA ROM and emulating real-mode function calls to twiddle a few registers.
It works in Linux (sort of) because all the heavy lifting is done in real mode before protected mode starts, which means you can't change any settings after initial boot. Useless.
That was relevant for DOS, and that's about it.
I don't really know what the issue is. There really are few programs out there that on Linux _don't_ use GTK or QT and use their cut/paste semantics, which I am quite familiar with. It works just like Windows...
The problem I have is switching from *nix to Windows and losing the concept of the "primary" selection. You don't have to use middle-click = insert primary if you don't want to... it's not necessary anymore.
sites like slashdot, sa and 2/4chan people will purposefully not create clickable links, but type the URL-as-text. Just select, CTRL+N, middle click, no problem.
The only thing that gets you is slashdot's page-widening-defeating mechanism. But you still have a chance to correct the typos in the URL bar if it 404s on you.
--driver generic-mmc-raw --read-raw --source ATAPI:0,0,0 (etc....)
but maybe you should focus on reading comprehension.
There's nothing wrong with the secondhand sales market.
What's wrong is choosing EBGames as your marketplace.
However, the issue is that GameSTOP/EBGames, etc. charges $30 to mitigate the transaction between the first and second user. The second user is only saving $5, the first user is only getting $10 towards his next game. The retailer gets the plum.
The game does not factor in a $30 second-hand markup. The original retail markup is at least $20. For a $50 game, that's all calculated markup, and no profit (!) Not good.
In that situation, nobody wins, when compared to online auctions or smaller boutiques that have smaller margins.
I'm not saying it should be illegal, it's just that potential buyers need to be better informed and know that GameSTOP is not the best venue for secondhand sales.