Although, in The Matrix, they did not use still cameras for this effect, which is'nt anywhere near new. They added to it by using movie cameras so that they could pan around the characters as they move. So instead of panning around a frozen character for example, they could pan around a moving character. It looked much better.
All this hard work will simply be dismantled by governments that legislate against it's use, or otherwise used by those governments.
How can we trust their servers? What happens when the system or servers are cracked by the NSA, who will deny it and forever have full access to information that flows freely between people that beleive they are communicating securely.
Give me brute force big-bit crypto tunnels any day.
They can prove A is speaking to B all they like, is there a law against that! What they'll need to prove is the content, which is what is most important.
Fling could be a nice extra layer of privacy, but I would'nt put too much trust in it alone.
The URL I quoted actually stated "Microsoft Outlook", but I did assume they meant Express. However Outlook also has the preview function, opf course without ActiveX it would be useless. So I might be guilty of assumption and limited research for reading that one URL and beleiving my memory of the incident.
However, that virus could have had a pay load. It can write to any file with the help of ActiveX, so why not NTLDR, COMMAND.COM, etc.
It was a proof of concept virus that worked. Showing that it could pose a real threat.
I know MS does not totally lack security, they do make attempts at it. And I know the *nixes are not perfect. But MS is by far the worst, and the money hunger that drives them makes them easy targets along with their buggy and insecure products.
How can they advertise how great their stuff is when bugs and exploits are always cropping up, especially with OS like OpenBSD on the market that have far fewer problems and are far cheaper and faster in many cases.
I tell you what though, even though I use Netscape and Outlook, I will still keep auto preview switched off.
Oh sorry Thalaric, I'm not quite done being a "Micro-bigot".
Here is that example you were after...
"It uses a vulnerability discovered by Georgi Guninski in which many versions of Internet Explorer 5 allow any HTML file or e-mail to write files without ActiveX authorization."
"Historically we've always said, as long as you don't open attachments, you're safe," Network Associates spokesman Sal Viveros said. "That's not true anymore."
BubbleBoy is a "proof of concept" virus that has no dangerous payload, meaning it doesn't attempt to delete or alter files.
So, it can write ANY file without authorisation when it is opened or previewed. This is why I switched off auto preview at work.
Funny how you state your ignorance of such a beast and yet are oh so cocky to rub my bigot nose in what I have written about of which I am not ignorant.
The unmovable link between frame buffer bytes that correspond to pixels on an LCD is not the reason that an LCD cannot truely change resolution.
The reason an LCD cannot change resolution is because the usable pixels in an LCD are physically built into it at the factory (as are RGB groups on CRTs).
The key here is that the resolution of the LCD pixels is far far lower than RGB groups that are also physically built into a CRT.
Due to that, the LCD resolution is so close to the desired resolution that any change in resolution required via interpolation, shows plenty of quantization error.
But with a CRT, that might have many more physical RGB groups per frame buffer pixel, it does'nt matter because interpolation is not required and the effect of a pixel not starting and ending where the RGB groups start and end, only results in slight bluring between pixels of differing colour or shade. Having the physical RGB groups in a triange arrangement further reduces this bluring.
Basically, quantization error is most noticable when the shift in resolution is not a multiple of the original, especially when the viewing device physical resolution is close to the required resolution.
I specifically said "user" to imply someone of non God status and I even italicised the word.
Outlook comes set up by default to open each mail you get for you (previews), and can run scripts in this fashion without you even being in front of the computer, or you can disable this in Outlook which would limit these dangers to only occur as you click on them to read them, which of course is great security (cough).
This, is not, a good mail product. It is an extreme danger to the network performance and the integrity of user files and privacy.
Just receiving an infected email is enough with Outlook. Compare this to a Unix sys admin, is he likely to run a script he received through email, whilst being logged in as root? If so, he should not be an admin.
If I was the head of a company, #1. in the company policy would be that under no circumstances should a Microsoft product be allowed inside our local network. In fact, nothing that is not first run by Systems.
Hang on, someone sends you an email, you open it, it absoluetely fucking floors your email server and network bandwidth in the DoS process of mailing itself to 50 of your collegues and 50 of each of their collegues etc and you think that the user opening his fucking mail is the one at fault!?!?!?!?!?
If an email came to a Unix user with a nasty payload, the damage would most likely be limited to that users ~ files and email. In Windows that users whole HDD can be Mr.Sheen'ed faster than you can say "I'm clean!" and you network totally fucked over.
The poor bastards on the network with Unix and Mac boxes, etc are left with this slow arse connection because of some money hungry arsehole in Redmond.
What would you rather do, patch a known hole with something that purports to be a fix, or leave the whole thing open in a state that is known to be insecure?
Jeezuz fucking Christ!
Even if the patch does'nt fill the hole or creates another, there are thousands of programmer eyes out their looking at that hole and that patch, looking for problems. They find one, they fix it, they post it.
I support an edu environment that uses NT Workstation 4 in classrooms. (under duress)
The only way we can keep out the l33t hackers is to apply polices that make the PC's very annoying to try to use. Even then with such crap fundamental design, students get in and wreak havoc.
BeSysAdm is just one example. If you can log on at all, you are administrator of that machine!
There are other utils that claim to get domain admin, but I would'nt dare run it for fear of getting fired from the fraidy cat management.
That their World wide printing network is being infiltrated day in day out by a crack band of elite special forces ankle and ethernet biting Tele Tubbies fans! Fuck wit.
Are you running FTP in passive mode? Since it's return port is otherwise random, NAT does'nt know what to do with the remote response, so the connection is not made.
I tested QuakeII years ago with a Voodoo I, it ran consistently faster under Linux than it did under Windows 95, by only a few FPS.
I have seen benchmarks of Matrox G400's with the GLX driver running 30% faster than the Windows 9x drivers. That was when it was just a labour of love by users and John Carmack.
Some idiots will see these benchmarks and forever think Linux is slow because the drivers being compared are incomparable.
Look at it this way... If I add 2 zero's to a dollar bill, it's still a real dollar
That's a bit too simple.
A 650MHz Athlon, modified for 700... becomes a 700MHz Athlon. It MAY run less reliably, it WILL run warmer, but it isn't a 650 pretending to be a 700 but actually running at 650. It is a 650 boosted to 700 and pretending to be a 700. Hell in now IS a 700, reliability aside.
The only real wat to lock bus / clock speeds is to make microfuses in silicon, and blow the correct fuses in silicon during the test/burnin cycle of manufacturing. until this process becomes perfected (It's only a matter of time) fraud will be a fact of life in the computer industry.
I've been thinking for years that this is how they can defeat the crooks.
How cheap would it be to put an EPROM inside the CPU case, glued right down next to the CPU wafer (or as a part of it). Have this EPROM define the speed of the PLL clock (which is also inside the CPU casing), which feeds the CPU directly and also outputs that clock, buffered onto one of the pins for the motherboard, etc.
The PLL/EPROM setup, should be made so that any further burning (even any single bit) could only slow down the PLL.
As a further measure, a small fuse inside the CPU could supply the program pin, once it is all programmed, blow that fuse and that EPROM is write protected.
Anyone who defeats this, deserves the profits they get!
I guess morbidly fascinating would be my description of the way I feel about what these idiots are doing to/.
It's amazing how crap it is becoming since it quickly became the L33t site to be seen at. It seems all these guys want to be seen, but don't have much sufficiently geeky to say, so they ruin it for the people who do have geek interests by ripping the crap out of some really valid, logical and interesting posts.
To make it worse, some people who do have an interesting thing to say, get called Trolls by these fools.
But the scariest thing is, some of the complete crap that gets moderated UP!! Who the hell reads at/. now days? We now can't cruise/. at 2 let alone 1. Sad state of affairs.
Only way I can see to fix it, is a membership system where your IP is logged and you get barred if you are obviously just wasting bandwidth. But that would totally go against privacy, etc.
You can always tell the kiddies by the fact that they insult you right off the bat, rather than constructively criticise.
It is totally logical. Why keep people in the dark about overclocking what they have already legitimately paid for? Why keep them in the dark so that they can be oblivious to being victim of criminals that are making A LOT more money out of the knowledge.
The public does not need to be educated about what overclocking is.
How the hell did this get moderated up?
The majority of the public does not need to know that overclocking takes place
Huh!?!?!
or how to do it.
How many end users are going to risk soldering their nice expensive new Athlon for an extra ~8% performance? Most have never picked up a soldering iron and most of those that have, probably have'nt worked on or be willing to work on SMD's!!
Now think about how much more a 700 goes for over a 650! The people that will do this shit, are those that know how, have done it many times, and have much more to gain. There's a WHOLE LOT MORE THAN 8% to be made in $$$ "converting" a 650 to 700!
They just need to know that there are fake Athlon chips out there, and honestly, the 'public' doesn't need to know that either,
Make up your mind. I mean really, who the hell is moderating stupid comments like this up to 2?!?!?!?!
it's the resellers who need to know.
HUH! I know resellers that stoop to this kinda shit! Why the HELL should the public not be armed with the knowledge to protect itself?!?!
I doubt the shop that sold this chip to this guy realized they were selling a fake chip.
I doubt they cared!
The retailers need to run their chips through a test of some sort, some test that doesn't require that they actually boot up a computer with the chip, but maybe a simple electrical or physical test.
/DoctorEvilVoiceON/ Right.../DEVOFF/
Education may be the only defense against exploitation, but you have to be careful who you educate.
The type of people who are into SOLDERING THEIR PC'S already know how to overclock an Athlon.
Educating the public in this case would be futile because half of them wouldn't understand what you were talking about
Yep, no harm done.
and the other half wouldn't care
I'd like to say no harm done, but I can't because 1. I don't agree and 2. the harm HAS been done already to the consumers.
(not to mention the incredible resources necessary for 'educating the public').
Yeah, 5k of HTML on each vendors server might just topple their margins.
It's better to educate the knowledgable public (ie. the ones selling the stuff) so they can provide good service and abide by the law (which is plenty sufficient, BTW).
You're a funny guy.
If everyone knew everything, that'd be great, but there's no chance that that will ever happen, so make sure you get the right people to know the right things.
I like your messages about the injustices that are found in religion and society. But how can you kick some kids arses using the legal system you hate so much? Especially when all they are doing is trading your music in a lesser quality medium, as fans. I purchased Black, Justice, Kill 'em All, Puppets, Lightning and Garage Inc. Your message now means little to me.
I don't see how it could. Every logic gate the 1's and 0's pass through would surely upset what would most likely be an incredibly fine hair trigger for a intrusion detection. Even doing it on the simplest of analog comms would be pie in the sky, but how about doing it from my keyboard, through my motherboard (with spread spectrum enabled), pulverized through my MODEM, further mixed 'n' matched via my Telco, warped up to a satelite from my sniffing ISP, listened in to by some lonely HAM waiting for some distant moonbounce CW from the love he's yet to meet (actually a big smelly fat hairy guy who's forgotten about him and is currently reading at/.), bounced off a couple of other satelites, captured as it flies over Washington, cached on the downlink by the NSA because I had the text "kevin.mitnick" in one of the packets, routed, filtered and compressed/decompressed and scanned a guzillion times, before it hits ALL YOUR SCREENS... Somehow I just don't see it working in the digital world.:)
Lamboghini used to make a single man chopper. Looked kinda neat too. Almost as expensive as their loud, heavy, unreliable cars also. Although I guess not as heavy and hopefully I bit more reliable.:)
Without the capitalization, it does not necessarily refer to the trademark, neither does it refer to their trademark if coke is the first word in a correctly presented sentence.
For eg.
Coke sucks!
:)
I mean come on, who really digs this bubbly carbon stuff anyway?!?!
Ok, this is what I found in the Microsoft Reference that comes with Office97 Pro (OK, guys, I'm sorry! I'm at work and not allowed to put Linux on the network. Lord knows I've tried politically).
coke (kok) noun The solid residue of impure carbon obtained from bituminous coal and other carbonaceous materials after removal of volatile material by destructive distillation. It is used as a fuel and in making steel.
verb, transitive & intransitive coked, coking, cokes To convert or be converted into coke.
coke (kok) noun Slang. Cocaine.
Coke (kok) A trademark used for a soft drink. See Regional Note at tonic.
Don't ya just hate big fat greedy American Companies?
Is'nt coke an English word for a mineral or something? Used or a by product of smeltering? I'm not sure, but if it is, I can't see how they can just take what they want. Hell even if it was'nt an English word, it's not like the site is cokecola.* or something.
However, I would also like to say that a friend of mine has been addicted for years, not to cocaine, to ~Coke~Cola~. He drinks about 2-3 litres per day and has done so for years. Now doctors believe that his heart condition has developed from the high cafeine intake he gets from this black shit that rots your teeth.
Also, in Australia, the contents of all food products must clearly be stated on the packaging. So is ~Coke~Cola~ violating this law?
Slashdot Mirror
Although, in The Matrix, they did not use still cameras for this effect, which is'nt anywhere near new. They added to it by using movie cameras so that they could pan around the characters as they move. So instead of panning around a frozen character for example, they could pan around a moving character. It looked much better.
All this hard work will simply be dismantled by governments that legislate against it's use, or otherwise used by those governments.
How can we trust their servers? What happens when the system or servers are cracked by the NSA, who will deny it and forever have full access to information that flows freely between people that beleive they are communicating securely.
Give me brute force big-bit crypto tunnels any day.
They can prove A is speaking to B all they like, is there a law against that! What they'll need to prove is the content, which is what is most important.
Fling could be a nice extra layer of privacy, but I would'nt put too much trust in it alone.
Hi Thalaric,
The URL I quoted actually stated "Microsoft Outlook", but I did assume they meant Express. However Outlook also has the preview function, opf course without ActiveX it would be useless. So I might be guilty of assumption and limited research for reading that one URL and beleiving my memory of the incident.
However, that virus could have had a pay load. It can write to any file with the help of ActiveX, so why not NTLDR, COMMAND.COM, etc.
It was a proof of concept virus that worked. Showing that it could pose a real threat.
I know MS does not totally lack security, they do make attempts at it. And I know the *nixes are not perfect. But MS is by far the worst, and the money hunger that drives them makes them easy targets along with their buggy and insecure products.
How can they advertise how great their stuff is when bugs and exploits are always cropping up, especially with OS like OpenBSD on the market that have far fewer problems and are far cheaper and faster in many cases.
I tell you what though, even though I use Netscape and Outlook, I will still keep auto preview switched off.
Cya later.
Oh sorry Thalaric, I'm not quite done being a "Micro-bigot".
Here is that example you were after...
"It uses a vulnerability discovered by Georgi Guninski in which many versions of Internet Explorer 5 allow any HTML file or e-mail to write files without ActiveX authorization."
"Historically we've always said, as long as you don't open attachments, you're safe," Network Associates spokesman Sal Viveros said. "That's not true anymore."
BubbleBoy is a "proof of concept" virus that has no dangerous payload, meaning it doesn't attempt to delete or alter files.
http://www.zdnet.com/ zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2392757,00.html
So, it can write ANY file without authorisation when it is opened or previewed. This is why I switched off auto preview at work.
Funny how you state your ignorance of such a beast and yet are oh so cocky to rub my bigot nose in what I have written about of which I am not ignorant.
No man, you're not the only one. When I first downloaded 5.0 and installed it I thought "what the fuck is this looking like Win95 shite?"
I want seperate apps that open from my Window manager menus, or from console, etc.
But.... Oh well... It is pretty good besides.
The unmovable link between frame buffer bytes that correspond to pixels on an LCD is not the reason that an LCD cannot truely change resolution.
The reason an LCD cannot change resolution is because the usable pixels in an LCD are physically built into it at the factory (as are RGB groups on CRTs).
The key here is that the resolution of the LCD pixels is far far lower than RGB groups that are also physically built into a CRT.
Due to that, the LCD resolution is so close to the desired resolution that any change in resolution required via interpolation, shows plenty of quantization error.
But with a CRT, that might have many more physical RGB groups per frame buffer pixel, it does'nt matter because interpolation is not required and the effect of a pixel not starting and ending where the RGB groups start and end, only results in slight bluring between pixels of differing colour or shade. Having the physical RGB groups in a triange arrangement further reduces this bluring.
Basically, quantization error is most noticable when the shift in resolution is not a multiple of the original, especially when the viewing device physical resolution is close to the required resolution.
I specifically said "user" to imply someone of non God status and I even italicised the word.
Outlook comes set up by default to open each mail you get for you (previews), and can run scripts in this fashion without you even being in front of the computer, or you can disable this in Outlook which would limit these dangers to only occur as you click on them to read them, which of course is great security (cough).
This, is not, a good mail product. It is an extreme danger to the network performance and the integrity of user files and privacy.
Just receiving an infected email is enough with Outlook. Compare this to a Unix sys admin, is he likely to run a script he received through email, whilst being logged in as root? If so, he should not be an admin.
If I was the head of a company, #1. in the company policy would be that under no circumstances should a Microsoft product be allowed inside our local network. In fact, nothing that is not first run by Systems.
Microsoft, sucks.
Huh!?!?!?
Users mistakes!?!?!?
Hang on, someone sends you an email, you open it, it absoluetely fucking floors your email server and network bandwidth in the DoS process of mailing itself to 50 of your collegues and 50 of each of their collegues etc and you think that the user opening his fucking mail is the one at fault!?!?!?!?!?
If an email came to a Unix user with a nasty payload, the damage would most likely be limited to that users ~ files and email. In Windows that users whole HDD can be Mr.Sheen'ed faster than you can say "I'm clean!" and you network totally fucked over.
The poor bastards on the network with Unix and Mac boxes, etc are left with this slow arse connection because of some money hungry arsehole in Redmond.
Wake the hell up.
What would you rather do, patch a known hole with something that purports to be a fix, or leave the whole thing open in a state that is known to be insecure?
Jeezuz fucking Christ!
Even if the patch does'nt fill the hole or creates another, there are thousands of programmer eyes out their looking at that hole and that patch, looking for problems. They find one, they fix it, they post it.
MS can't compare with that.
I support an edu environment that uses NT Workstation 4 in classrooms. (under duress)
The only way we can keep out the l33t hackers is to apply polices that make the PC's very annoying to try to use. Even then with such crap fundamental design, students get in and wreak havoc.
BeSysAdm is just one example. If you can log on at all, you are administrator of that machine!
There are other utils that claim to get domain admin, but I would'nt dare run it for fear of getting fired from the fraidy cat management.
And L0phtcrack is just downright amazing!
Back Orifice anyone?
NT is shite.
That their World wide printing network is being infiltrated day in day out by a crack band of elite special forces ankle and ethernet biting Tele Tubbies fans! Fuck wit.
Re: goofy problem with FTP through NAT.
Are you running FTP in passive mode? Since it's return port is otherwise random, NAT does'nt know what to do with the remote response, so the connection is not made.
I tested QuakeII years ago with a Voodoo I, it ran consistently faster under Linux than it did under Windows 95, by only a few FPS.
I have seen benchmarks of Matrox G400's with the GLX driver running 30% faster than the Windows 9x drivers. That was when it was just a labour of love by users and John Carmack.
Some idiots will see these benchmarks and forever think Linux is slow because the drivers being compared are incomparable.
They should be arresting the company that sells this Virus Enabled! (tm) software. Microsoft.
Look at it this way... If I add 2 zero's to a dollar bill, it's still a real dollar
That's a bit too simple.
A 650MHz Athlon, modified for 700... becomes a 700MHz Athlon. It MAY run less reliably, it WILL run warmer, but it isn't a 650 pretending to be a 700 but actually running at 650. It is a 650 boosted to 700 and pretending to be a 700. Hell in now IS a 700, reliability aside.
The only real wat to lock bus / clock speeds is to make microfuses in silicon, and blow the correct fuses in silicon during the test/burnin cycle of manufacturing. until this process becomes perfected (It's only a matter of time) fraud will be a fact of life in the computer industry.
I've been thinking for years that this is how they can defeat the crooks.
How cheap would it be to put an EPROM inside the CPU case, glued right down next to the CPU wafer (or as a part of it). Have this EPROM define the speed of the PLL clock (which is also inside the CPU casing), which feeds the CPU directly and also outputs that clock, buffered onto one of the pins for the motherboard, etc.
The PLL/EPROM setup, should be made so that any further burning (even any single bit) could only slow down the PLL.
As a further measure, a small fuse inside the CPU could supply the program pin, once it is all programmed, blow that fuse and that EPROM is write protected.
Anyone who defeats this, deserves the profits they get!
Hrunting
/.
/. now days? We now can't cruise /. at 2 let alone 1. Sad state of affairs.
Hi Sig11,
I guess morbidly fascinating would be my description of the way I feel about what these idiots are doing to
It's amazing how crap it is becoming since it quickly became the L33t site to be seen at. It seems all these guys want to be seen, but don't have much sufficiently geeky to say, so they ruin it for the people who do have geek interests by ripping the crap out of some really valid, logical and interesting posts.
To make it worse, some people who do have an interesting thing to say, get called Trolls by these fools.
But the scariest thing is, some of the complete crap that gets moderated UP!! Who the hell reads at
Only way I can see to fix it, is a membership system where your IP is logged and you get barred if you are obviously just wasting bandwidth. But that would totally go against privacy, etc.
You can always tell the kiddies by the fact that they insult you right off the bat, rather than constructively criticise.
Cya.
really, Sig, that's an incredibly dumb idea.
/DEVOFF/
It is totally logical. Why keep people in the dark about overclocking what they have already legitimately paid for? Why keep them in the dark so that they can be oblivious to being victim of criminals that are making A LOT more money out of the knowledge.
The public does not need to be educated about what overclocking is.
How the hell did this get moderated up?
The majority of the public does not need to know that overclocking takes place
Huh!?!?!
or how to do it.
How many end users are going to risk soldering their nice expensive new Athlon for an extra ~8% performance? Most have never picked up a soldering iron and most of those that have, probably have'nt worked on or be willing to work on SMD's!!
Now think about how much more a 700 goes for over a 650! The people that will do this shit, are those that know how, have done it many times, and have much more to gain. There's a WHOLE LOT MORE THAN 8% to be made in $$$ "converting" a 650 to 700!
They just need to know that there are fake Athlon chips out there, and honestly, the 'public' doesn't need to know that either,
Make up your mind. I mean really, who the hell is moderating stupid comments like this up to 2?!?!?!?!
it's the resellers who need to know.
HUH! I know resellers that stoop to this kinda shit! Why the HELL should the public not be armed with the knowledge to protect itself?!?!
I doubt the shop that sold this chip to this guy realized they were selling a fake chip.
I doubt they cared!
The retailers need to run their chips through a test of some sort, some test that doesn't require that they actually boot up a computer with the chip, but maybe a simple electrical or physical test.
/DoctorEvilVoiceON/ Right...
Education may be the only defense against exploitation, but you have to be careful who you educate.
The type of people who are into SOLDERING THEIR PC'S already know how to overclock an Athlon.
Educating the public in this case would be futile because half of them wouldn't understand what you were talking about
Yep, no harm done.
and the other half wouldn't care
I'd like to say no harm done, but I can't because 1. I don't agree and 2. the harm HAS been done already to the consumers.
(not to mention the incredible resources necessary for 'educating the public').
Yeah, 5k of HTML on each vendors server might just topple their margins.
It's better to educate the knowledgable public (ie. the ones selling the stuff) so they can provide good service and abide by the law (which is plenty sufficient, BTW).
You're a funny guy.
If everyone knew everything, that'd be great, but there's no chance that that will ever happen, so make sure you get the right people to know the right things.
You work for Microsoft don't you?
sig11 is absolutely correct.
And if it was your decision...
I like your messages about the injustices that are found in religion and society. But how can you kick some kids arses using the legal system you hate so much? Especially when all they are doing is trading your music in a lesser quality medium, as fans. I purchased Black, Justice, Kill 'em All, Puppets, Lightning and Garage Inc. Your message now means little to me.
I don't see how it could. Every logic gate the 1's and 0's pass through would surely upset what would most likely be an incredibly fine hair trigger for a intrusion detection. Even doing it on the simplest of analog comms would be pie in the sky, but how about doing it from my keyboard, through my motherboard (with spread spectrum enabled), pulverized through my MODEM, further mixed 'n' matched via my Telco, warped up to a satelite from my sniffing ISP, listened in to by some lonely HAM waiting for some distant moonbounce CW from the love he's yet to meet (actually a big smelly fat hairy guy who's forgotten about him and is currently reading at /.), bounced off a couple of other satelites, captured as it flies over Washington, cached on the downlink by the NSA because I had the text "kevin.mitnick" in one of the packets, routed, filtered and compressed/decompressed and scanned a guzillion times, before it hits ALL YOUR SCREENS... Somehow I just don't see it working in the digital world. :)
Lamboghini used to make a single man chopper. Looked kinda neat too. Almost as expensive as their loud, heavy, unreliable cars also. Although I guess not as heavy and hopefully I bit more reliable. :)
BTW, their trademark is Coke and not coke.
Without the capitalization, it does not necessarily refer to the trademark, neither does it refer to their trademark if coke is the first word in a correctly presented sentence.
For eg.
Coke sucks!
:)
I mean come on, who really digs this bubbly carbon stuff anyway?!?!
Ok, this is what I found in the Microsoft Reference that comes with Office97 Pro (OK, guys, I'm sorry! I'm at work and not allowed to put Linux on the network. Lord knows I've tried politically).
coke (kok) noun
The solid residue of impure carbon obtained from bituminous coal and other carbonaceous materials after removal of volatile material by destructive distillation. It is used as a fuel and in making steel.
verb, transitive & intransitive
coked, coking, cokes
To convert or be converted into coke.
coke (kok) noun
Slang.
Cocaine.
Coke (kok)
A trademark used for a soft drink. See Regional Note at tonic.
Don't ya just hate big fat greedy American Companies?
Is'nt coke an English word for a mineral or something? Used or a by product of smeltering? I'm not sure, but if it is, I can't see how they can just take what they want. Hell even if it was'nt an English word, it's not like the site is cokecola.* or something.
However, I would also like to say that a friend of mine has been addicted for years, not to cocaine, to ~Coke~Cola~. He drinks about 2-3 litres per day and has done so for years. Now doctors believe that his heart condition has developed from the high cafeine intake he gets from this black shit that rots your teeth.
Also, in Australia, the contents of all food products must clearly be stated on the packaging. So is ~Coke~Cola~ violating this law?
The G400 is by no means new, how does a late review warrant news?