Well, when I'm accessing my own sites, a self-signed certificate signed by *me* where the chain of trust stops *there* is preferable to a chain involving companies that operate under US jurisdiction...
Expanding further, using someone elses self-signed site is more secure if there is a way to verify the key,... Yeah, I know... the whole purpose of CA's in the first place, but fatally flawed and past it's sell by date - only kept going by the money-making vested interests
"Anonymous Coward" is a registered user who chooses not to announce his/her username to the world. Slashdot would still have it without needing to go "all detective" on log files
You sound a bit peeved that the EU actually had the balls to follow through with their fine, whilst the US case a few years back piddled down to nothing
Much of our area is limestone, with no clay or anything on top. And it RAINS a lot.
A few big sink holes have appeared on roads, and there are lots of cave systems.. My house doesn't even have foundations - it's built direct on the limestone.. I often wonder if the limestone is just a few feet thick, with a big cavern below.
Still - seems our weasly insurance companies aren't as weasly as yours!
and if you continue to read, it says the award was made because of the bongos.
Yeah, I agree that that is mental, but overall the song melody does sound far more that "99%" of the Andrew Oldham version.... It does raise a question though - how the hell is the Andrew Oldham version so tied in as a 'mix' of the original Stones version!
And for the record, I agree that the verve were right royally screwed over this.
Over here across the Atlantic, most of the big stores don't charge for using credit cards anyway. Smaller shops and pub normally have a minimum amount before paying by card, and only a few places charge a credit card fee.
Same situation on this side of the Atlantic. That's what this news story was about. A possible, albeit somewhat unlikely, change to the current situation.
It's not the same situation. Well, the parent poster was talking about our conclusion to that situation,
In the UK, some time ago, a law was passed to stop credit card companies demanding the retailer didn't pass on the credit card surcharge (as is soon to be done in the US too)
For a small while, some shops started charging the extra surcharge, but presumably through loss of business changed their minds.
In other words, the law you are talking about NOW allowing shops to charge a surcharge.. we went through ages ago, and If the same thing happens over there as over here, you'll see some stores charging a surcharge for a while, but after a year or so things will be back to as they are now
Really? Here in the UK you can use the ATM of any bank without a surcharge. (Some 'private' ATM's do charge though - the ones you find inside shops etc,)
Back to the subject, many years ago, it was made illegal for the card companies to charge a surcharge whilst not allowing the retailer to pass the cost directly to the customer. (they previously would say that if a retailer charged more for credit cards, their service would be revoked)
After that, for a while in some shops, you'd see "prices are 3% more if paying by credit card" etc. but that soon stopped. All shops that I know of just accept the surcharge, presumably because they were losing too many credit card customers.
Ooh, I'll have to write the Rolling Stones a thank-you letter for getting that terrible, maudlin piece of crap off the radio. And here I thought the Stones hadn't done anything worthwhile since the 70s.
It did the reverse for a while - Richard Ashcroft said he'd never sell out and allow any of his music to be used on TV advertisements.. After the decision, the new copyright holders thought different...
wtf.... BONGOS gave the copyrights to the song over the Jagger and Richards? that is fucked up....that song is 99% not written by those douche bags.
Then you obviously haven't heard the mix they are talking about:
"Song credits
Although the song's lyrics were written by Verve vocalist Richard Ashcroft, it has been credited to Keith Richards and Mick Jagger after charges by the original copyright owners that the song was plagiarized from the Andrew Oldham Orchestra recording of The Rolling Stones' 1965 song "The Last Time"."
I don't understand why this one is such a big deal and causing all the talk about restricting legal gun rights vs the other shootings.
Perhaps people realized that news of a crazy gunman going on a rampage and murdering lots of people have become so commonplace that they are not "such a big deal" anymore, and this implies that there is a serious problem?
Before, you'd see blogger.com or youtube.com or many of the others, and not necessarily know it was google.
Now, ALL google companies are using 1e100.net for the reverse, so you can tell straight away it's a google server without needing to know all the spinoffs and other companies they may have bought.
Slashdot Mirror
No! You seem to be asduming that all self-signed certificates are bogus.
And even if they were, how does downgrading the site to http help?
Well, when I'm accessing my own sites, a self-signed certificate signed by *me* where the chain of trust stops *there* is preferable to a chain involving companies that operate under US jurisdiction ...
Expanding further, using someone elses self-signed site is more secure if there is a way to verify the key,... Yeah, I know... the whole purpose of CA's in the first place, but fatally flawed and past it's sell by date - only kept going by the money-making vested interests
*woooosh*
Thanks for the irony overload!
Since when?
"Anonymous Coward" is a registered user who chooses not to announce his/her username to the world. Slashdot would still have it without needing to go "all detective" on log files
You sound a bit peeved that the EU actually had the balls to follow through with their fine, whilst the US case a few years back piddled down to nothing
Much of our area is limestone, with no clay or anything on top. And it RAINS a lot.
A few big sink holes have appeared on roads, and there are lots of cave systems.. My house doesn't even have foundations - it's built direct on the limestone.. I often wonder if the limestone is just a few feet thick, with a big cavern below.
Still - seems our weasly insurance companies aren't as weasly as yours!
and if you continue to read, it says the award was made because of the bongos.
Yeah, I agree that that is mental, but overall the song melody does sound far more that "99%" of the Andrew Oldham version.... It does raise a question though - how the hell is the Andrew Oldham version so tied in as a 'mix' of the original Stones version!
And for the record, I agree that the verve were right royally screwed over this.
Over here across the Atlantic, most of the big stores don't charge for using credit cards anyway. Smaller shops and pub normally have a minimum amount before paying by card, and only a few places charge a credit card fee.
Same situation on this side of the Atlantic. That's what this news story was about. A possible, albeit somewhat unlikely, change to the current situation.
It's not the same situation. Well, the parent poster was talking about our conclusion to that situation,
In the UK, some time ago, a law was passed to stop credit card companies demanding the retailer didn't pass on the credit card surcharge (as is soon to be done in the US too)
For a small while, some shops started charging the extra surcharge, but presumably through loss of business changed their minds.
In other words, the law you are talking about NOW allowing shops to charge a surcharge.. we went through ages ago, and If the same thing happens over there as over here, you'll see some stores charging a surcharge for a while, but after a year or so things will be back to as they are now
Signatures? How quaint. I remember that from the last century,
Really? Here in the UK you can use the ATM of any bank without a surcharge. (Some 'private' ATM's do charge though - the ones you find inside shops etc,)
Back to the subject, many years ago, it was made illegal for the card companies to charge a surcharge whilst not allowing the retailer to pass the cost directly to the customer. (they previously would say that if a retailer charged more for credit cards, their service would be revoked)
After that, for a while in some shops, you'd see "prices are 3% more if paying by credit card" etc. but that soon stopped. All shops that I know of just accept the surcharge, presumably because they were losing too many credit card customers.
Sorry 'bout that!
Ooh, I'll have to write the Rolling Stones a thank-you letter for getting that terrible, maudlin piece of crap off the radio. And here I thought the Stones hadn't done anything worthwhile since the 70s.
It did the reverse for a while - Richard Ashcroft said he'd never sell out and allow any of his music to be used on TV advertisements.. After the decision, the new copyright holders thought different...
wtf.... BONGOS gave the copyrights to the song over the Jagger and Richards? that is fucked up....that song is 99% not written by those douche bags.
Then you obviously haven't heard the mix they are talking about:
"Song credits
Although the song's lyrics were written by Verve vocalist Richard Ashcroft, it has been credited to Keith Richards and Mick Jagger after charges by the original copyright owners that the song was plagiarized from the Andrew Oldham Orchestra recording of The Rolling Stones' 1965 song "The Last Time"."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKC5cdGBY04
Perhaps people realized that news of a crazy gunman going on a rampage and murdering lots of people have become so commonplace that they are not "such a big deal" anymore, and this implies that there is a serious problem?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Mod this up to infinity
talktalks position on this: http://www.talktalkblog.co.uk/2010/09/28/talktalk-confirms-that-customers-not-affected-by-acslaw-data-protection-breach/
http://www.hexten.net/wiki/index.php/Pam_abl
What gets me is that they called the kid in, presented the photo as evidence of his wrongdoing, and didn't expect any negative comeback?
That's frightening - they sooo thought what they were doing was ok, they didn't think people would go mad over this...
That mindset in a school teacher is scary
Its LESS DECEPTIVE that the old way.
Before, you'd see blogger.com or youtube.com or many of the others, and not necessarily know it was google.
Now, ALL google companies are using 1e100.net for the reverse, so you can tell straight away it's a google server without needing to know all the spinoffs and other companies they may have bought.
Both you and the parent are wrong.
They are using 1e100.net for the REVERSE LOOKUP. And to keep things right, they also have the corresponding domain name with the relevant A record.
However, they don't actively use these domain names in the web requests, and squid logs the web address request, NOT the reverse PTR.
All your accesses to google, youtube and others are 1e100.net if you look up the PTR
Ahhh, Gcc doesn't like the smiley face at the end of line 20
You are wrong.
I have released bug free software.
Here it is, under creative commons license:
10 PRINT "Hello World" :-)
20 GOTO 10
oops, I mean:
echo "noembed=1" >> ~/.mplayer/mplayerplug-in.conf
Your first post said "there is nothing wrong with domain squatting"
Now you appear to say that it's necessary evil because we can't 'fix' it without causing problems elsewhere.
The latter I'm more intended to agree with.
Well, the message you were replying to said:
"Based on the video id, the actual file location of the video itself can be found."
implying playing the video directly, or downloading it first, either of which
mplayer can do with mp4's or with flash files.
That doesn't matter - mplayer and just about everything else can play .flv