what will happen in practise is that they will answer a lot more "wrong numbers" from regular people who have mis-dialed
This is only played for callers that block their number. So a few misdialed numbers might crop up too... but guess what, they're just as likely to misdial a number which gets answered by a human being and they'll get charged for that too.
Maybe what the browsers need is some sort of vetted App Store for extensions, where all submissions are reviewed by a central authority and approved or rejected?
What does the AC mean by that? What content was missing?
Guard: "I'm sorry, sir, but I'm unable to open this gate by order of his majesty because you have not purchased the downloadable content which was released on the same day as this copy of the game you acquired."
But that's still backwards - my forum persona should be associated with my in-game character, not my real ID. Imagine for a moment this was some sort of role-playing game... nah, too much of a stretch.
No wait, let's actually imagine that:
[SkullManger, the level 80 Paladin, just returned from his quest to deliver 20 hearts of the magical glorp beasts to the Wizard for his spell. He ventures into his hut where his wife, FlowerYoga, is crafting a fine meal.]
SkullManger: "What's for dinner honey?"
FlowerYoga: "Your favorite, dear... breaded and fried Murloc."
SkullManger: "Awesome, I can't wait. In the meantime, I've been meaning to look into what other people in the community are doing. Could you hand me my Dell Studio XPS 16 laptop and my Blizzard keyfob?"
FlowerYoga: "Sure, here you go!"
SkullManger: "Thanks, doll! Now what was my Battle.NET password again... ah, right."
[SkullManger uses Firefox 3.6 to deftly navigate the forum, HTTP packets flying into his computer while he types on the beautiful 16 inch glossy display.]
SkullManger: "I can't believe someone wrote this. I'm going to have to reply."
[SkullManger composes a beautiful reply using the forum software's fckedit editor, ensuring that he properly quotes the previous post. He often doesn't use the formatting buttons as Paladins are known for their HTML crafting skills. He stares in bewilderment at the fact that the Horde is somehow able to also participate in the forum and that he can read what they have typed. He begins to wonder whether the Horde auction house stocks Dell laptops or if they carry Lenovo, HP, or various other brands. His mind drifts and he starts wondering whether there are mounts that will take him to China or Taiwan.]
Yeah... or maybe the role-playing should stay within the game.
From the submitter's own link of the official announcement:
NEW ORLEANS - The Captains of the Port for Morgan City, La., New Orleans, La., and Mobile, Ala. , under the authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, has established a 20- meter safety zone surrounding all Deepwater Horizon booming operations and oil response efforts taking place in Southeast Louisiana.
Vessels must not come within 20 meters of booming operations, boom, or oil spill response operations under penalty of law.
The safety zone has been put in place to protect members of the response effort, the installation and maintenance of oil containment boom, the operation of response equipment and protection of the environment by limiting access to and through deployed protective boom.
In areas where vessels operators cannot avoid the 20-meter rule, they are required to be cautious of boom and boom operations by transiting at a safe speed and distance.
Violation of a safety zone can result in up to a $40,000 civil penalty. Willful violations may result in a class D felony.
Permission to enter any safety zone must be granted by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port of New Orleans by calling 504-846-5923.
For information about the response effort, visit www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.
There's no mention of photography, camera, or anything of that nature. If you get your vessel within 20m of a protective boom, you're a total moron regardless of whether or not you happen to have a camera.
Tell me, when you're doing your hobby, say, gardening, what would you do if some random schmuck came up to you and said "I really like peas, and you aren't planting any, so you suck. You should plant peas."?
Are these the same random schmucks who abbreviate Microsoft as M$ and say that it sucks and that people should instead use Linux? Yeah, I run into those people once in a while.
-change the transparency for that layer to 50% -you should be able to see the car behind your wheel now. -you can move the wheel around with the move tool and it will not turn opaque
Okay, this is how one sets the opacity to 50%.
-if you click on the scale tool, to resize, YOU WILL NOTICE IN THE TOOL OPTIONS ONE YOUR OPTIONS IS PREVIEW OPACITY
Why would one want to do that? "PREVIEW" means "show me how my unsaved changes will display", but the opacity has already been applied. This makes as much sense as "preview what's already in the file I loaded". Of course, GIMP is free to choose its own definition of what behavior a preview feature is supposed to do, but don't be surprised that people are confused when it goes against established standards.
this is exactly the kind of stupid bullshit that people spout, and can't be fucking bothered to learn the software.
Either that's a great troll, or it explains a lot.
Of course, if people give up their privacy rights by voluntarily disclosing their protected health information to some software app, no one will stop them.
So you advocate stopping people from doing what they want to do? How would that work exactly? Should the government deny its citizens free will? Do you suggest we should assemble a kind of police force that will stop people from doing something voluntarily?
It's so totally evil. From the patent application:
BACKGROUND
[0001]Recent trends in the healthcare industry have been directed to centralizing storage of healthcare data. This centralization has great benefit to both healthcare entities as well as patients. For instance, transfer of or access to records can be accomplished virtually instantaneously by way of a network connection. Most of these solutions leave the individual patient in control of access to and sharing of their information.
[0002]In accordance with centralized storage of healthcare records, individuals are able to make more informed health decisions for themselves and their family. By vesting control of the information in the owner of the information, decisions with regard to sharing or use can be based upon trust, relationship or other parameter. For example, an owner can choose to share their healthcare information with one entity while blocking access by another. Additionally, a user can choose to share healthcare information with an employer while shielding access from a particular service provider (e.g., insurance company).
[0003]Because the healthcare information and records are stored in a centralized, network-accessible locations (e.g., Internet), the patient should be able to use their health information wherever and whenever they want. As stated above, it can be possible to share the information, or portion of the information, as desired. In most approaches, access can be regulated by the owner of the information based upon entity, type of information, amount of information, or other desired parameter.
[0004]Most recently, centralized healthcare data services are working with doctors, hospitals, employers, pharmacies, insurance providers and manufacturers of health devices (e.g., blood pressure monitors, heart rate monitors) to make it easy to add information electronically to the centralized healthcare record.
[0005]With a more complete picture of a family's health, an individual can work with healthcare professionals and with authorized service providers (e.g., Web sites) that connect with healthcare data to make more informed health-related decisions. Unfortunately, traditional approaches have not been designed to integrate effectively with corporations, organization or other groups. Thus, these entities are not able to leverage the powerful benefits of the centralized storage of healthcare data.
In fact, it seems like a good way to make an exercise-type game both more immersive and better target both areas for improvement and avoid areas of difficulty
And safer too. In combination with a heart rate monitor, a Wii Fit type of game can adjust the difficulty of the exercises on the fly to keep you within your target heart rate.
I read the entire transcript and the sense that I got was that the justices were testing the soundness of the arguments by throwing out absurd scenarios that stretch credibility in order to see whether or not it is applicable.
OK, let's say you're the judge, and you don't think your scenario is absurd. But you have to render an opinion in a court on the surface of the moon with its attendant jurisdictional and respiratory issues in which the plaintiff may not have standing- she may be kneeling, and administering oral sex to justices under the bench. Meanwhile defendants are traveling by at almost the speed of light and experiencing time dilation that interferes with scheduled court appearances. Upon completion of a happy ending, shall defendants be cited for failing to appear with summary judgment granted to the plaintiff, or given the indeterminate simultaneity dependent upon which party's reference frame is considered, toss the case back to lower courts on Earth requiring clarification on whether the court's proper frame must be used? Would the same findings hold if the ending were say, not happy?
In your moon scenario, the goatse guy would show up and everyone would see the light at the end of the tunnel after firsthand experience of a significant amount of dilation thereby collapsing the quantum wave function and Schrodinger's cat would leap out. In the end, that's all that matters.
Thanks for supporting my point that they are self absorbed cry babies that will ignore a mathematical proof because you did not follow their procedures.
I suppose you think James Randi is a self-absorbed cry-baby because in order to participate in his $1 million challenge you need to follow his procedures?
Or maybe the owners of Slashdot are self-absorbed cry-babies because they expect you to follow a specific set of procedures in order to sign up for an account and post a reply to an article? Perhaps you're just a self-absorbed cry-baby because the world doesn't work the way you think it ought to?
Um...did you listen to/read the oral arguments from last November? They fucking CRUCIFIED method patents.
I read the entire transcript and the sense that I got was that the justices were testing the soundness of the arguments by throwing out absurd scenarios that stretch credibility in order to see whether or not it is applicable. This is a common method employed to gauge the applicability of a law to a specific situation. While I'm sure the justices have an opinion on what is and isn't patentable, their job is to explore the limits of the law and the mechanism they use is through questioning. Don't confuse asking a question with having a particular belief.
I'd be interested in actually hearing the audio of the arguments so that I could know the tone in which those questions were raised. Anyone have a link handy?
I wish. I joked with my wife about the tax benefits of our two kids. Being a math geek, she started to do the math taking into account the new birthdays, additional holiday gifts..on and on. Let's just say it didn't end up much of a benefit in the fiscal sense.
Not to mention that people failed to tell me I'd need to feed them too! Man, what a money pit that has turned out to be.
"Ryan explained that Windows treats Pixel Qi’s 3qi display as a 1024 x 600 pixel screen, it’s actually a 3072 x 600 pixel screen. Those extra pixels help make the text easier to read if you’re using Roman, Cyrillic, Hebrew, Arabic, or a number of other languages. For Chinese, Pixel Qi is working on higher vertical and horizontal resolutions."
1024 x 600 is practically useless these days. How do they get the 3072 number though? Is that because each pixel technically contains an individual red, green, and blue sub-pixel?
Exactly. 99 regular sites infected to 1 porn site infected is rather telling if there are 1000 times more regular sites, which would mean that you have a ten-fold increase in risk on porn sites.
Way to miss the point, which is that avoiding porn sites doesn't mean you won't get infected. This proves that there are many regular sites out there that are infected, ratio of anything be damned.
They're making a claim involving a ratio. I'm pointing out a flaw in their claim. If the ratio is unimportant, they shouldn't have mentioned it. And they've "proven" something that was already widely known in the security community and re-packaged it as news.
As usual, this is a non-story that boils down to nothing more than a press release for Avast: "You're at risk! Buy our crap which will slow down your computer and probably won't detect much anyways!"
Avast is free. It even says so in the summary.
And we all know the summary is heavily fact checked by the Slashdot editors, right? From http://www.avast.com/free-antivirus-download : "Enjoy worry-free web surfing - Innovative Sandbox technology protects you from dangerous websites" -- not available in the free edition. And their free edition is only available for personal and non-commercial use only. Their business offerings start at $39.95 for a 1 computer, 1 year subscription.
My point still stands that this is a press release designed to drum up more sales by spinning a problem as news while painting Avast as having the solution to this problem. Classic PR material.
How many times have you gone looking through apps, found something that looked pretty good, installed it, and it was crap?
None. Not once in fact. You see, those reviews and stars are there for a reason. If something gets crap reviews, don't buy it. In exchange for requiring that tiny bit of due diligence, I have several apps that would never make it though Apple's approval process. Apps that would require voiding my warranty to get on the i-Devices.
Who contributes the reviews if nobody tries it until it's reviewed?
So, let me get this right...you want to use an ultra-portable computer, but there are some places you won't take it, and that is a problem with the device?
There are many reasons why one would want to print from any given device, ultra-portable or not. Your fixation on "some places you won't take it" is a red herring. The issue is its (in)ability to print, which is certainly desirable functionality for some.
I don't have an iPad, but if I did I would be more than happy to take it when I visit my sister's family, for example. And wouldn't it be nice if there were an app that had hundreds of readily available "color by numbers" drawings that I could easily print out and give to the kids and they could go to town on the printout with their crayons? Sure, I could use their PC and find PDFs or web pages, but it's not asking much that something essentially running OS X under the hood be able to do what just about any general purpose computer has been able to do for the last 30 years.
Further actual numbers mean little - what percentage of porn sites are infected (or deliberately take malware related action) as opposed to legitimate sites?
Exactly. 99 regular sites infected to 1 porn site infected is rather telling if there are 1000 times more regular sites, which would mean that you have a ten-fold increase in risk on porn sites. As usual, this is a non-story that boils down to nothing more than a press release for Avast: "You're at risk! Buy our crap which will slow down your computer and probably won't detect much anyways!"
Slashdot Mirror
what will happen in practise is that they will answer a lot more "wrong numbers" from regular people who have mis-dialed
This is only played for callers that block their number. So a few misdialed numbers might crop up too... but guess what, they're just as likely to misdial a number which gets answered by a human being and they'll get charged for that too.
Maybe what the browsers need is some sort of vetted App Store for extensions, where all submissions are reviewed by a central authority and approved or rejected?
So your complaining about DLC then?
No. I'm explaining what the AC meant by that, as you asked.
What does the AC mean by that? What content was missing?
Guard: "I'm sorry, sir, but I'm unable to open this gate by order of his majesty because you have not purchased the downloadable content which was released on the same day as this copy of the game you acquired."
Ah, the clichèd put-down. Someone too stupid and incompetent...
Speaking of which, if you want to use accents to make yourself appear more intelligent than you are... it's cliché, not clichè.
But that's still backwards - my forum persona should be associated with my in-game character, not my real ID. Imagine for a moment this was some sort of role-playing game ... nah, too much of a stretch.
No wait, let's actually imagine that:
[SkullManger, the level 80 Paladin, just returned from his quest to deliver 20 hearts of the magical glorp beasts to the Wizard for his spell. He ventures into his hut where his wife, FlowerYoga, is crafting a fine meal.]
SkullManger: "What's for dinner honey?"
FlowerYoga: "Your favorite, dear... breaded and fried Murloc."
SkullManger: "Awesome, I can't wait. In the meantime, I've been meaning to look into what other people in the community are doing. Could you hand me my Dell Studio XPS 16 laptop and my Blizzard keyfob?"
FlowerYoga: "Sure, here you go!"
SkullManger: "Thanks, doll! Now what was my Battle.NET password again... ah, right."
[SkullManger uses Firefox 3.6 to deftly navigate the forum, HTTP packets flying into his computer while he types on the beautiful 16 inch glossy display.]
SkullManger: "I can't believe someone wrote this. I'm going to have to reply."
[SkullManger composes a beautiful reply using the forum software's fckedit editor, ensuring that he properly quotes the previous post. He often doesn't use the formatting buttons as Paladins are known for their HTML crafting skills. He stares in bewilderment at the fact that the Horde is somehow able to also participate in the forum and that he can read what they have typed. He begins to wonder whether the Horde auction house stocks Dell laptops or if they carry Lenovo, HP, or various other brands. His mind drifts and he starts wondering whether there are mounts that will take him to China or Taiwan.]
Yeah... or maybe the role-playing should stay within the game.
From the submitter's own link of the official announcement:
NEW ORLEANS - The Captains of the Port for Morgan City, La., New Orleans, La., and Mobile, Ala. , under the authority of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, has established a 20- meter safety zone surrounding all Deepwater Horizon booming operations and oil response efforts taking place in Southeast Louisiana.
Vessels must not come within 20 meters of booming operations, boom, or oil spill response operations under penalty of law.
The safety zone has been put in place to protect members of the response effort, the installation and maintenance of oil containment boom, the operation of response equipment and protection of the environment by limiting access to and through deployed protective boom.
In areas where vessels operators cannot avoid the 20-meter rule, they are required to be cautious of boom and boom operations by transiting at a safe speed and distance.
Violation of a safety zone can result in up to a $40,000 civil penalty. Willful violations may result in a class D felony.
Permission to enter any safety zone must be granted by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port of New Orleans by calling 504-846-5923.
For information about the response effort, visit www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com.
There's no mention of photography, camera, or anything of that nature. If you get your vessel within 20m of a protective boom, you're a total moron regardless of whether or not you happen to have a camera.
Tell me, when you're doing your hobby, say, gardening, what would you do if some random schmuck came up to you and said "I really like peas, and you aren't planting any, so you suck. You should plant peas."?
Are these the same random schmucks who abbreviate Microsoft as M$ and say that it sucks and that people should instead use Linux? Yeah, I run into those people once in a while.
-change the transparency for that layer to 50%
-you should be able to see the car behind your wheel now.
-you can move the wheel around with the move tool and it will not turn opaque
Okay, this is how one sets the opacity to 50%.
-if you click on the scale tool, to resize, YOU WILL NOTICE IN THE TOOL OPTIONS ONE YOUR OPTIONS IS PREVIEW OPACITY
Why would one want to do that? "PREVIEW" means "show me how my unsaved changes will display", but the opacity has already been applied. This makes as much sense as "preview what's already in the file I loaded". Of course, GIMP is free to choose its own definition of what behavior a preview feature is supposed to do, but don't be surprised that people are confused when it goes against established standards.
this is exactly the kind of stupid bullshit that people spout, and can't be fucking bothered to learn the software.
Either that's a great troll, or it explains a lot.
Of course, if people give up their privacy rights by voluntarily disclosing their protected health information to some software app, no one will stop them.
So you advocate stopping people from doing what they want to do? How would that work exactly? Should the government deny its citizens free will? Do you suggest we should assemble a kind of police force that will stop people from doing something voluntarily?
It's so totally evil. From the patent application:
BACKGROUND
[0001]Recent trends in the healthcare industry have been directed to centralizing storage of healthcare data. This centralization has great benefit to both healthcare entities as well as patients. For instance, transfer of or access to records can be accomplished virtually instantaneously by way of a network connection. Most of these solutions leave the individual patient in control of access to and sharing of their information.
[0002]In accordance with centralized storage of healthcare records, individuals are able to make more informed health decisions for themselves and their family. By vesting control of the information in the owner of the information, decisions with regard to sharing or use can be based upon trust, relationship or other parameter. For example, an owner can choose to share their healthcare information with one entity while blocking access by another. Additionally, a user can choose to share healthcare information with an employer while shielding access from a particular service provider (e.g., insurance company).
[0003]Because the healthcare information and records are stored in a centralized, network-accessible locations (e.g., Internet), the patient should be able to use their health information wherever and whenever they want. As stated above, it can be possible to share the information, or portion of the information, as desired. In most approaches, access can be regulated by the owner of the information based upon entity, type of information, amount of information, or other desired parameter.
[0004]Most recently, centralized healthcare data services are working with doctors, hospitals, employers, pharmacies, insurance providers and manufacturers of health devices (e.g., blood pressure monitors, heart rate monitors) to make it easy to add information electronically to the centralized healthcare record.
[0005]With a more complete picture of a family's health, an individual can work with healthcare professionals and with authorized service providers (e.g., Web sites) that connect with healthcare data to make more informed health-related decisions. Unfortunately, traditional approaches have not been designed to integrate effectively with corporations, organization or other groups. Thus, these entities are not able to leverage the powerful benefits of the centralized storage of healthcare data.
In fact, it seems like a good way to make an exercise-type game both more immersive and better target both areas for improvement and avoid areas of difficulty
And safer too. In combination with a heart rate monitor, a Wii Fit type of game can adjust the difficulty of the exercises on the fly to keep you within your target heart rate.
I read the entire transcript and the sense that I got was that the justices were testing the soundness of the arguments by throwing out absurd scenarios that stretch credibility in order to see whether or not it is applicable.
OK, let's say you're the judge, and you don't think your scenario is absurd. But you have to render an opinion in a court on the surface of the moon with its attendant jurisdictional and respiratory issues in which the plaintiff may not have standing- she may be kneeling, and administering oral sex to justices under the bench. Meanwhile defendants are traveling by at almost the speed of light and experiencing time dilation that interferes with scheduled court appearances. Upon completion of a happy ending, shall defendants be cited for failing to appear with summary judgment granted to the plaintiff, or given the indeterminate simultaneity dependent upon which party's reference frame is considered, toss the case back to lower courts on Earth requiring clarification on whether the court's proper frame must be used? Would the same findings hold if the ending were say, not happy?
In your moon scenario, the goatse guy would show up and everyone would see the light at the end of the tunnel after firsthand experience of a significant amount of dilation thereby collapsing the quantum wave function and Schrodinger's cat would leap out. In the end, that's all that matters.
Thanks for supporting my point that they are self absorbed cry babies that will ignore a mathematical proof because you did not follow their procedures.
I suppose you think James Randi is a self-absorbed cry-baby because in order to participate in his $1 million challenge you need to follow his procedures?
Or maybe the owners of Slashdot are self-absorbed cry-babies because they expect you to follow a specific set of procedures in order to sign up for an account and post a reply to an article? Perhaps you're just a self-absorbed cry-baby because the world doesn't work the way you think it ought to?
Um...did you listen to/read the oral arguments from last November? They fucking CRUCIFIED method patents.
I read the entire transcript and the sense that I got was that the justices were testing the soundness of the arguments by throwing out absurd scenarios that stretch credibility in order to see whether or not it is applicable. This is a common method employed to gauge the applicability of a law to a specific situation. While I'm sure the justices have an opinion on what is and isn't patentable, their job is to explore the limits of the law and the mechanism they use is through questioning. Don't confuse asking a question with having a particular belief.
I'd be interested in actually hearing the audio of the arguments so that I could know the tone in which those questions were raised. Anyone have a link handy?
You have The Terminator governing over there, too!?
I think Locutus of Bork is gorverning.
That would make it Sturgeon's Paradox: non-crap is impossible. Was he a friend of Zeno?
If we ended the singleton tax, the gay marriage "problem" would vanish.
You could support both a singleton and multiton tax via an abstract tax factory.
I wish. I joked with my wife about the tax benefits of our two kids. Being a math geek, she started to do the math taking into account the new birthdays, additional holiday gifts..on and on. Let's just say it didn't end up much of a benefit in the fiscal sense.
Not to mention that people failed to tell me I'd need to feed them too! Man, what a money pit that has turned out to be.
What's the resolution on this thing?
Took me a bit of googling, but I found this:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2010/1/10/pixel-qi-is-alive-at-ces.aspx
"Ryan explained that Windows treats Pixel Qi’s 3qi display as a 1024 x 600 pixel screen, it’s actually a 3072 x 600 pixel screen. Those extra pixels help make the text easier to read if you’re using Roman, Cyrillic, Hebrew, Arabic, or a number of other languages. For Chinese, Pixel Qi is working on higher vertical and horizontal resolutions."
1024 x 600 is practically useless these days. How do they get the 3072 number though? Is that because each pixel technically contains an individual red, green, and blue sub-pixel?
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=w5ogAAAAEBAJ&dq="It+should+be+understood+by+those+skilled+in+the+art+that+a+Web+browser"
Exactly. 99 regular sites infected to 1 porn site infected is rather telling if there are 1000 times more regular sites, which would mean that you have a ten-fold increase in risk on porn sites.
Way to miss the point, which is that avoiding porn sites doesn't mean you won't get infected. This proves that there are many regular sites out there that are infected, ratio of anything be damned.
They're making a claim involving a ratio. I'm pointing out a flaw in their claim. If the ratio is unimportant, they shouldn't have mentioned it. And they've "proven" something that was already widely known in the security community and re-packaged it as news.
As usual, this is a non-story that boils down to nothing more than a press release for Avast: "You're at risk! Buy our crap which will slow down your computer and probably won't detect much anyways!"
Avast is free. It even says so in the summary.
And we all know the summary is heavily fact checked by the Slashdot editors, right? From http://www.avast.com/free-antivirus-download : "Enjoy worry-free web surfing - Innovative Sandbox technology protects you from dangerous websites" -- not available in the free edition. And their free edition is only available for personal and non-commercial use only. Their business offerings start at $39.95 for a 1 computer, 1 year subscription.
My point still stands that this is a press release designed to drum up more sales by spinning a problem as news while painting Avast as having the solution to this problem. Classic PR material.
How many times have you gone looking through apps, found something that looked pretty good, installed it, and it was crap?
None. Not once in fact. You see, those reviews and stars are there for a reason. If something gets crap reviews, don't buy it. In exchange for requiring that tiny bit of due diligence, I have several apps that would never make it though Apple's approval process. Apps that would require voiding my warranty to get on the i-Devices.
Who contributes the reviews if nobody tries it until it's reviewed?
So, let me get this right...you want to use an ultra-portable computer, but there are some places you won't take it, and that is a problem with the device?
There are many reasons why one would want to print from any given device, ultra-portable or not. Your fixation on "some places you won't take it" is a red herring. The issue is its (in)ability to print, which is certainly desirable functionality for some.
I don't have an iPad, but if I did I would be more than happy to take it when I visit my sister's family, for example. And wouldn't it be nice if there were an app that had hundreds of readily available "color by numbers" drawings that I could easily print out and give to the kids and they could go to town on the printout with their crayons? Sure, I could use their PC and find PDFs or web pages, but it's not asking much that something essentially running OS X under the hood be able to do what just about any general purpose computer has been able to do for the last 30 years.
Further actual numbers mean little - what percentage of porn sites are infected (or deliberately take malware related action) as opposed to legitimate sites?
Exactly. 99 regular sites infected to 1 porn site infected is rather telling if there are 1000 times more regular sites, which would mean that you have a ten-fold increase in risk on porn sites. As usual, this is a non-story that boils down to nothing more than a press release for Avast: "You're at risk! Buy our crap which will slow down your computer and probably won't detect much anyways!"
I'm waiting for programmable okonomiyaki.
You wish to program yourself?