Most likely Redhat cut some Business Development deal with them to make such an announcement in exchange for help in porting or something. This is the kind of PR "spin" that comes out of businesses. It's not about what is the whole truth or waht makes sense, it's about business perception.
My solution is liberal use of the "middle button"
on
Web Site "Lock-In"
·
· Score: 2
I don't know about other Netscape for Unix users, but I constantly click on URLs with the middle button, which opens up a new browser window. Probably the majority of clicks I make, espcially from one website to another, are middle button clicks that open a new browser window. Of course this results in me having like 10 Netscape windows all the time, but I never have any of those windows "stuck" in a site because I just close the window when I am done looking at it.
This is kind of funny because I had a friend who had a great idea. He was a CS PHd and was thinking of developing an image compression technique that would be optimized for skin tone colors. So all porn images would be very small and load faster. He was going to use the.xxx extension for this wonderful image type.
I don't know exactly how Amazon's one-click works, but I'm pretty sure it can't have the problem you are describing. When you turn on Amazon's one-click, they give you a cookie to identify you. When you have this cookie, you get the one-click link on all of their product pages. When you click on the one-click link, the server processes the link and also can check to see that you have the cookie and that the identities match. So you could send the one-click link to someone else, but if they clicked on it, they wouldn't have the cookie identifying themselves as you.
And even if someone was trying to be malicious and somehow sniffed your traffic and got the cookie amazon gave you when you turned on one-click and somehow put it in their own browser, and then in their browser when to your URL to one-click buy something, they wouldn't get the product for themselves. They would just be buying the product for you with your credit card since the shipping address and billing info is associated with the one click. And it's possible Amazon has some other security measures that even make that scenario impossible.
Oh, and referres can be faked, so they are hardly security precautions. But it's possible they do something like send something in plaintext and encrypted and then decrypt the ciphertext and make sure it matches the plaintext.
The geniuses in Redmond decided to make IE 5.0 spawn Media Player and pass the URL off to it, and have Media Player grab the movie by itself. This way, no referrer gets passed to the web server. So if you are thinking of implementing a referrer check such as this, just be aware of potential pitfalls such as this.
According to this article, Josh Bernoff predicts the end of network television in the next 10 years because of these devices. I don't know about this guy's credentials, but he seems a little technically short-sighted.
Sure these devices might cause some change in viewing habits in the next few years, but that's it. If anything is going to significantly impact network television in the next 10 years, it is going to have something more to do with the constant blurring of TVs and computers, the ever increasing amount of bandwidth into the home (DSL, cable modems, etc.), and something closer to on-demand broadcast (and even interactive) television.
And I kind of doubt that NBC is investing significant amounts of money into something that will be its own downfall.
Slashdot Mirror
RMS was having problems getting his email due to a conflict between Outlook and his recent upgrade from Windows 98 to Windows 2000, I'm sure.
Most likely Redhat cut some Business Development deal with them to make such an announcement in exchange for help in porting or something. This is the kind of PR "spin" that comes out of businesses. It's not about what is the whole truth or waht makes sense, it's about business perception.
I don't know about other Netscape for Unix users, but I constantly click on URLs with the middle button, which opens up a new browser window. Probably the majority of clicks I make, espcially from one website to another, are middle button clicks that open a new browser window. Of course this results in me having like 10 Netscape windows all the time, but I never have any of those windows "stuck" in a site because I just close the window when I am done looking at it.
This is kind of funny because I had a friend who had a great idea. He was a CS PHd and was thinking of developing an image compression technique that would be optimized for skin tone colors. So all porn images would be very small and load faster. He was going to use the .xxx extension for this wonderful image type.
I don't know exactly how Amazon's one-click works, but I'm pretty sure it can't have the problem you are describing. When you turn on Amazon's one-click, they give you a cookie to identify you. When you have this cookie, you get the one-click link on all of their product pages. When you click on the one-click link, the server processes the link and also can check to see that you have the cookie and that the identities match. So you could send the one-click link to someone else, but if they clicked on it, they wouldn't have the cookie identifying themselves as you.
And even if someone was trying to be malicious and somehow sniffed your traffic and got the cookie amazon gave you when you turned on one-click and somehow put it in their own browser, and then in their browser when to your URL to one-click buy something, they wouldn't get the product for themselves. They would just be buying the product for you with your credit card since the shipping address and billing info is associated with the one click. And it's possible Amazon has some other security measures that even make that scenario impossible.
Oh, and referres can be faked, so they are hardly security precautions. But it's possible they do something like send something in plaintext and encrypted and then decrypt the ciphertext and make sure it matches the plaintext.
Where in that article does it say it's Flash 3 and not Flash 4?
The geniuses in Redmond decided to make IE 5.0 spawn Media Player and pass the URL off to it, and have Media Player grab the movie by itself. This way, no referrer gets passed to the web server. So if you are thinking of implementing a referrer check such as this, just be aware of potential pitfalls such as this.
According to this article, Josh Bernoff predicts the end of network television in the next 10 years because of these devices. I don't know about this guy's credentials, but he seems a little technically short-sighted.
Sure these devices might cause some change in viewing habits in the next few years, but that's it. If anything is going to significantly impact network television in the next 10 years, it is going to have something more to do with the constant blurring of TVs and computers, the ever increasing amount of bandwidth into the home (DSL, cable modems, etc.), and something closer to on-demand broadcast (and even interactive) television.
And I kind of doubt that NBC is investing significant amounts of money into something that will be its own downfall.