Somehow the thought of actively browsing the web looking for random folks sticking their fingers up their noses and generally acting strange reminds me of a couple of years ago.
At least if these folks have gone wireless and are in public, they may behave a little more civilised.
Whilst a blog may give one persons view point, I find the alluring aspect of blogging and online amateur sites (like slash even) is not the article or POV of the original poster, but of how its responded to.
It feels more like I'm taking part in events than sitting back watching somebody else's version.
I thought because the Earth-Moon system are coupled they would once again end up becoming one glorious whole. (No goatse jokes please...) Without a new source of energy, the moon cannot escape our gravitational well. If the moon was going to leave our orbit, it wouldv done so already.
(Picture the rubber sheet and marbles - the moon will orbit us until it collides, it will just take orders of magnitude longer than a blackhole)
The reason Windows XP does not do full text search correctly is because it uses a specific registry handler entry for each type of file (*.txt, *.rtf etc). It uses a different handler for different types of files.
However it only comes with a few configured filetypes settings, and no way to set a default "When no searchFilter available, treat as plain text" setting.
I stressed and strained about this when XP came out initially. The only way I found to do it so I got expected results was to build myself a scanner. It searched through a drive, and identifies EVERY file extension. It then looks through the registry to see which Extensions have linked Handlers. It generates a reg file containing stub links for every unmatched filetype.
Its a bit shotgun, but allowed me to continue using the Text search for XP.
Username "PHISHINGSCAM" Password "QUICKGETEM" Name "CALL SECURITY" DOB "01/01/1337"
This would be cool to try. But tbh, I recon they would just take the list and try those that look legit.
What we could do is simply forward any phishing scam mails to a central phishing clearing house. The banks could fund a small team to handle collective online fraud.
Re:ways to prevent online fraud?
on
Fishing for Phishers
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I posted a comment a few days ago regarding how my bank secures online access.
The gist of it is a longer code that I arrange with them in person, and when I go online with them, they ask for random portions of that code.
I would have to be scammed multiple times before anyone had access to my banking.
Its just aiming at the big players to maximise your audience. Currently, more people will fall for something like a Citibank scam than a LocalYokelTownBank scam. Yes, there will be gullible people in both groups, but a lot more with the larger bank.
Yes, the RIAA are going to sue IBM for billions of dollars.
They played one illicit mp3 at 70 teraflops.
An RIAA spokesperson said "Playing a song at those astronomical speeds is highly illegal, it almost burnt our accountants fingers just counting the zeros!"
Slashdot Mirror
Run Linux on him?
:)
Or the more serious answer..
I think Kim is already doing more than a lot of us combined manage to do.
He is showing people that its not wrong to be different
Hang on, you actually used the tech available to make effectively a news report and posted it in a reasonable format for the world to see?
:)
Eeeee Gads! I never thought there was a legit use for this stuff.
Theres no nose picking? No nakedness? no outragous crap happening?
I'm shocked
(I don't think the linux community will like the Windows media requirement though..)
Hey, look on the bright side, we could hunt down and chase all the video bloggers into a big forest and leave them there overnight.
Hang on, where have I seen that before?
Isn't this just buffered webcam viewing?
Somehow the thought of actively browsing the web looking for random folks sticking their fingers up their noses and generally acting strange reminds me of a couple of years ago.
At least if these folks have gone wireless and are in public, they may behave a little more civilised.
The code running on the webserver must be AMAZING.
Its so obfuscated that I cant even see it!
ahhhhhh its finally shown up.
Doesnt bode well though.
Would a general internet tax be more palettable?
Let the government get their dues from us, hell, it even takes care of the media downloads.
What if theres a power cut?
Whilst a blog may give one persons view point, I find the alluring aspect of blogging and online amateur sites (like slash even) is not the article or POV of the original poster, but of how its responded to.
It feels more like I'm taking part in events than sitting back watching somebody else's version.
No it wasnt lying to you.
:)
From IMDB:
Plot Outline: The crew of Moonbase Alpha must struggle to survive when a massive explosion throws the Moon from orbit into deep space.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072564/
Note the "massive explosion" part
thats where the additional energy to escape the gravity well comes from.
Not to be tinfoilified, but 400km is pretty much bang on the 250miles that the IIS orbits at.
Perhaps, this is the US government trying to get something practical out of the process.
I thought because the Earth-Moon system are coupled they would once again end up becoming one glorious whole. (No goatse jokes please...)
Without a new source of energy, the moon cannot escape our gravitational well.
If the moon was going to leave our orbit, it wouldv done so already.
(Picture the rubber sheet and marbles - the moon will orbit us until it collides, it will just take orders of magnitude longer than a blackhole)
Be gentle with this drive, its nervous.
It sits cowering and shivering in the corner until all the mean slashdot ruffians have gone away.
I think another poster further up said it best, just add extra RW heads onto standard drives.
Who did I put down?
:)
You clearly stated in your post that you had come across the problem we were discussing.
I'll try not to help out folks in future
I think they were trying to prevent freezing whilst searching through a massive data files or archives and the other such dark web type things.
Their mistake wasn't creating different filters for the searches, but that there was no way to set a default.
Monkey! Go read the comment I made a few items below yours.
7 53280
It shows clearly how to rectify the EXACT problem you are having.
this is a huge mistake from microsoft.
heres a quick link:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=128854&cid=10
The reason Windows XP does not do full text search correctly is because it uses a specific registry handler entry for each type of file (*.txt, *.rtf etc). It uses a different handler for different types of files.
; EN-US;Q309173
.TXT flat text handler is identified by using a registry key:
{ 5e941d80-bf96-11cd-b579-08002b30bfeb}"
.ASP place
{ 5e941d80-bf96-11cd-b579-08002b30bfeb}"
However it only comes with a few configured filetypes settings, and no way to set a default "When no searchFilter available, treat as plain text" setting.
I stressed and strained about this when XP came out initially. The only way I found to do it so I got expected results was to build myself a scanner.
It searched through a drive, and identifies EVERY file extension.
It then looks through the registry to see which Extensions have linked Handlers.
It generates a reg file containing stub links for every unmatched filetype.
Its a bit shotgun, but allowed me to continue using the Text search for XP.
Microsoft have released their own shotgun registry pack, for more info see here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb
(I have since moved myself into using my own full search tool, but at least the XP search doesn't miss files which are clearly within visible range).
[Now for the science part..]
Take a file, something like "PunchTheMonkey.asp".
Make sure you have it open in notepad, and make sure there is a certain text string - for instance "spyware".
Open the windows XP search in that folder, tell it to search *.ASP, and give it the phrase "spyware".
Windows XP will NOT find this file.
-----
The Windows
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.txt\PersistentHandler]
@="
Adding an entry like the one above for each required filetype will restore the full text search functionality.
So, I add the following entry into the correct
[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\.ASP\PersistentHandler]
@="
After I have logged off/rebooted, I try the same again, and XP will now identify the file.
Yes I know, this is a very old game of google whacking.
It proves without a shadow of a doubt that Google uses the Link phrase in building its results.
I'd say that will be going up towards 90% ;)
Search for "litigious bastards".
The top result is SCO. Do you REALLY think they would have that in text anywhere on their site?
Just below this comment a poster has given a link to a phishing central source :)
:)
Looks like its already in action
http://www.antiphishing.org/
Username "PHISHINGSCAM"
Password "QUICKGETEM"
Name "CALL SECURITY"
DOB "01/01/1337"
This would be cool to try.
But tbh, I recon they would just take the list and try those that look legit.
What we could do is simply forward any phishing scam mails to a central phishing clearing house.
The banks could fund a small team to handle collective online fraud.
I posted a comment a few days ago regarding how my bank secures online access.
7 16472
The gist of it is a longer code that I arrange with them in person, and when I go online with them, they ask for random portions of that code.
I would have to be scammed multiple times before anyone had access to my banking.
The comment is here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=128336&cid=10
I agree with you here.
Its just aiming at the big players to maximise your audience.
Currently, more people will fall for something like a Citibank scam than a LocalYokelTownBank scam.
Yes, there will be gullible people in both groups, but a lot more with the larger bank.
Hook, line, sinker.
Full article mirror here: .org article
mirror.slashdot
Theres currently a problem with our server, you will have to login again to see the details.
(yes this is only a joke)
Yes, the RIAA are going to sue IBM for billions of dollars.
They played one illicit mp3 at 70 teraflops.
An RIAA spokesperson said "Playing a song at those astronomical speeds is highly illegal, it almost burnt our accountants fingers just counting the zeros!"