I took a good long look at everything they make on their website and was pretty excited until the realization of the mips processor hit home. You see, I used to have an Amiga...
Can a computer REALLY be called "on the internet" if it can't look at youtube videos? You and I may know and understand and if it's exchanging packets it's on the net, but grandma or the kids run firefox and try to watch something on youtube and it doesn't and won't work then their reaction is gonna be "uh, do you have a computer that works with the internet?". No flash is, sad to say, a non-starter.
But damn they're close. Real close. They've done some great work with these machines.
What they need now is an OLED display at 1280 pixels across and a touch screen. Oh and a cam. And I hate to say it because I've been rabidly raging against these things for literally decades now, but, yeah, an x86 cpu.
To lose a domain you have to be using it in bad faith. You're not as far as is shown here.
So don't worry about it.
(Bad faith would be using it in a way detrimental to them, directly)
Keep in mind tradmark law is for a specifict class of goods or service in a specific geographic area. The world keeps on going even though "Delta" is a trademark of an airline and a company that makes faucets.
20 years ago I ported uh, "some accounting package" from unix to MSDOS. It had the weirdest way of doing stuff. When I asked about it I was told it's so they can take 50K or 100K out in the morning, buy drugs, but if they didn't use it all they had to account for it and be able to put it back in as something else.
Of course I'm convinced that restaurtants and the film industry are the only ones that do things like this. Cough choke.
"Obviously you don't need encryption very badly if you don't care about man-in-the-middle attacks."
Yeah I used to think that. Till I looked at certs long and hard. If you can't figure out how to let a client prove he's taking to you given the information he has available maybe you don't need to be thinking about commercial grade websites that much.
Having said that this "Warning" in FF is utterly ratarded and has to go. This is not negotialble.
If you think SSL as it's imnplemented is really that safe you should try simulating the ssl handshake with low level ssl tools so you too can see the multiple errors in almost nearly evry cert that the browesers just plain ignore so at least things like paypal actually work.
SSL may be silly but it's all we really have and whatever kiddie put this warning in spent too much time in Redmond. All I really want is a bar that gives me a security threshold - a red line or a yellow line or a green line for the three levels of security. That'll be fine thanks. And stop terrifying my customers. They're smart enough to know what's going on and I'm sick of their giggling about this FF feature.
Sorry to be in a bad mood but I have some (non ssl) web pages that work in Opera and IE and are correct but do not work in FF now. This does not help.
Also, I really still don't get why aybody would use firefox as long as Opera is as good as it is. All FF does is just plays catch-up. Incredible.
I read the article because somebody sent me a link to it. I clicked on the "discuss" link, something I very seldom do, only to see the author engaged in a flamefest with detractors, one of whomesaid "I gave you worse on slashdot" so hopped over here to look. Yeah, that's usenet, even if NNTP isn't shuffling the bits to "hundreds if not thousands of sites around the world"
The cabal still runs the net and there's still a talk.bizarre party at the end of the summer.
The people at Craigslist thought "What a bunch of fucking tools. I'm not interested in their 'authority', and I'm not going to take time out of my busy life to dignify them by coming and humbling myself before them."
I aint buyin' it.
More likely it went like this:
(Pffffffffffffffft... 'ere)"Dude, we gotta do something about this."
(thanks) "Yeah."
"We should like, get in a cab and go over to eff and get brad or mike to fix this."
(pffffffffffffffft) *cough* Yeah.
"Ok. cool. when's it due?"
"(pfffffffft)lemme check. hang on... Oh shit. Yesterday."
The ISP's dns server may not be the same as the dns server the transparent web proxy cache uses. Unless THAT buger points to a djbdns or patched dns server it doesn't matter what you or your isp does for dns service.
Sneaky huh? I have a sense some poeple are gonna be phuqued by this.
"The problem with doing that would be that it would then be impossible (at least using current DNS software, as far as I know) to allow clients on an internal network to have limited internet access without allowing them to perform DNS tunneling "
You've lost me toally. I'm not talking about expolicit web proxies, but the "transparent" ones that ISPs use.
I can connect with ssh and ftp to free.tibet, but not via port 80 ("web") service. It's all in the wrist action of (the screw you I'm doing my own dns lookup of) the "transparent" web proxy the upstream has.
This has nothing to do with "dns tunnelling" whatever that is on internal networks or what have you. I dunno about where you are but around here every provider of dialup, broadband, wireless and sat uses these dumb "transparent" web proxies. They're also a vixieism, iroically.
Um... even if you run your own caching server, if your ISP runs a "transparent" web proxy it will do its own dns. You may in fact run DJB which is immune from this bug, but if your ISP runs an unpatched dns server you'll still be scrod despite running your own caching server.
Slick huh?
They need to take the dns lookup out of the web proxies.
Screw that. EV's have a chance to disintermediate oil companies and gas stations - if we let it happen. What GM is doing is exactly the opposite of what we need.
You need to be able to charge your vehicle at home from renewable sources. That'll make a difference.
Paying the same as you do now for the same old same old (albeit electric) would be good but not as good as the above.
"we get used to leaving off the 'www' at the beginning of domains with Firefox "
Netscape 1.0 did this 15 years ago. Every credible browser since then has too. www.name.com became a fashion statement more than an address of where port 80 (http, or "web") service was on a specific network as was the original intent of that nomenclature.
Hughes does this too now with their sat service. Never mind I use my own dns servers, their "transparent" web proxy does it's own dns and ignores the ones you use. Just for web.
That is, I can FTP to say, "free.tibet" but if I try for that web page I get a hughes/yahoo thing that says "did you mean..." (no, I did't you asswipe) Grrrrrrrrrr.
Vixie of course, invented the "transparent web proxy" to "get around" the "problem" of people using non-iana roots to get at web pages in alternative dns spaces about a decade ago. He was right smug about it at the time.
In 1994 Ted Rogers spoke at a conference in Toronto. He said what sounded to me like really stupid things about the net.
When he was done, he just left and didnt hang around.
The next speaker was Nick Negroponte whose first line was "It's a pity Mr. Rogers left because I'd like to have a chance to tell him everything he said was wrong."
It hasn't got any better. Rogers will screw you every step of ther way with every service they have from my perspective. Bail, kids, bail.
I have Hughes sat. I'm 30km away from any halfway (and that's a stretch) interent. It's hilly aorund here and wifi is a bit of a crapshoot. I've used VOIP on the Hughes sat - it works, but there's one helluva lag. The worst bit though is that it (uh, skype software I haven't played with others) seems to just sit there in a tight loop digitizing sound and sending. Even when there's dead silence it's furiously digitizing sound into zeros and sending those buggers as fast as it can.
With the bandwidth cap on the Hughes service this would take you down in no time.
Is there any stuff that only sends when there's actually data to send?
I don't care about the other end that's in NYC and isn't an issue.
My first job was at the Hamilton Spectator. I was hired because they had an IBM 1130 and so did we at high school. That was the "new" system. The "old" system was a Univac that had patch panels for "programs" and used 90 column cards with round punched holes and mechanical data processing equipment that was at least 50 years old (sorters, duplicaters, etc). While I was there the Univac was phased out. Too bad nobody cancelled the standing order for one million black punch cards once a year. I think they're still using them as scratch paper to this day.
When I first got to play with PDP-8's and then PDP-11's it felt like I'd gone forward, not backward in time.
Toggling in the boot loader was the best part. It was, btw, that particular PDP-11 that Dave Conroy wrote a C compiler for RSX11M. Today that code is known as "gcc". It was written at Teklogix in Mississauga Ontario in the mid 1970s.
"According to their track record, Google scaled reasonably well."
You mean google search. Orkut, for example, ran on 5 NT servers when it first came out and didn't exactly have the same subsecond response time that search did.
"I mean, it is kind-of like chatroom v. 2.0 or something along those lines. But when it gets to be where you spend more time living in an imaginary dreamworld, then it's time to seek help."
Slashdot Mirror
" She stated that she wouldn't push creationism over evolution in schools.
She also said she wouldn't be vice president either because she could do more for people as governor of Alaska."
There is still a good chance both will turn out to be true.
I took a good long look at everything they make on their website and was pretty excited until the realization of the mips processor hit home. You see, I used to have an Amiga...
Can a computer REALLY be called "on the internet" if it can't look at youtube videos? You and I may know and understand and if it's exchanging packets it's on the net, but grandma or the kids run firefox and try to watch something on youtube and it doesn't and won't work then their reaction is gonna be "uh, do you have a computer that works with the internet?". No flash is, sad to say, a non-starter.
But damn they're close. Real close. They've done some great work with these machines.
What they need now is an OLED display at 1280 pixels across and a touch screen. Oh and a cam. And I hate to say it because I've been rabidly raging against these things for literally decades now, but, yeah, an x86 cpu.
To lose a domain you have to be using it in bad faith. You're not as far as is shown here.
So don't worry about it.
(Bad faith would be using it in a way detrimental to them, directly)
Keep in mind tradmark law is for a specifict class of goods or service in a specific geographic area. The world keeps on going even though "Delta" is a trademark of an airline and a company that makes faucets.
"Yes it is more stress but also more benefits"
I'm a big fan of authoritative observations. So it is huh?
Just out of idle curiosity, what contries is polygamy legal in?
Besides Swaziland that is:
http://in.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idINL148259220080901
(Ok so I'm a pedant that did a bit of PDP-8 programming, they use octal).
The number "8" doesn't show up in octal. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12....
20 years ago I ported uh, "some accounting package" from unix to MSDOS. It had the weirdest way of doing stuff. When I asked about it I was told it's so they can take 50K or 100K out in the morning, buy drugs, but if they didn't use it all they had to account for it and be able to put it back in as something else.
Of course I'm convinced that restaurtants and the film industry are the only ones that do things like this. Cough choke.
Buh-bye, windows!
That'll work in enoiugh applications for enough people a whole generation of hardware and software will need to be recycled.
I'm all of 1989. Should I be getting a check or something?
Or a lawn and some kids to yell at?
"Obviously you don't need encryption very badly if you don't care about man-in-the-middle attacks."
Yeah I used to think that. Till I looked at certs long and hard. If you can't figure out how to let a client prove he's taking to you given the information he has available maybe you don't need to be thinking about commercial grade websites that much.
Having said that this "Warning" in FF is utterly ratarded and has to go. This is not negotialble.
If you think SSL as it's imnplemented is really that safe you should try simulating the ssl handshake with low level ssl tools so you too can see the multiple errors in almost nearly evry cert that the browesers just plain ignore so at least things like paypal actually work.
SSL may be silly but it's all we really have and whatever kiddie put this warning in spent too much time in Redmond. All I really want is a bar that gives me a security threshold - a red line or a yellow line or a green line for the three levels of security. That'll be fine thanks. And stop terrifying my customers. They're smart enough to know what's going on and I'm sick of their giggling about this FF feature.
Sorry to be in a bad mood but I have some (non ssl) web pages that work in Opera and IE and are correct but do not work in FF now. This does not help.
Also, I really still don't get why aybody would use firefox as long as Opera is as good as it is. All FF does is just plays catch-up. Incredible.
I read the article because somebody sent me a link to it. I clicked on the "discuss" link, something I very seldom do, only to see the author engaged in a flamefest with detractors, one of whomesaid "I gave you worse on slashdot" so hopped over here to look. Yeah, that's usenet, even if NNTP isn't shuffling the bits to "hundreds if not thousands of sites around the world"
The cabal still runs the net and there's still a talk.bizarre party at the end of the summer.
The people at Craigslist thought "What a bunch of fucking tools. I'm not interested in their 'authority', and I'm not going to take time out of my busy life to dignify them by coming and humbling myself before them."
I aint buyin' it.
More likely it went like this:
(Pffffffffffffffft... 'ere)"Dude, we gotta do something about this."
(thanks) "Yeah."
"We should like, get in a cab and go over to eff and get brad or mike to fix this."
(pffffffffffffffft) *cough* Yeah.
"Ok. cool. when's it due?"
"(pfffffffft)lemme check. hang on... Oh shit. Yesterday."
"Oops. (pfffffffft) Oh wellllll..."
The ISP's dns server may not be the same as the dns server the transparent web proxy cache uses. Unless THAT buger points to a djbdns or patched dns server it doesn't matter what you or your isp does for dns service.
Sneaky huh? I have a sense some poeple are gonna be phuqued by this.
"The problem with doing that would be that it would then be impossible (at least using current DNS software, as far as I know) to allow clients on an internal network to have limited internet access without allowing them to perform DNS tunneling "
You've lost me toally. I'm not talking about expolicit web proxies, but the "transparent" ones that ISPs use.
I can connect with ssh and ftp to free.tibet, but not via port 80 ("web") service. It's all in the wrist action of (the screw you I'm doing my own dns lookup of) the "transparent" web proxy the upstream has.
This has nothing to do with "dns tunnelling" whatever that is on internal networks or what have you. I dunno about where you are but around here every provider of dialup, broadband, wireless and sat uses these dumb "transparent" web proxies. They're also a vixieism, iroically.
If you want to support verisign forever, go with dnssec.
Um... even if you run your own caching server, if your ISP runs a "transparent" web proxy it will do its own dns. You may in fact run DJB which is immune from this bug, but if your ISP runs an unpatched dns server you'll still be scrod despite running your own caching server.
Slick huh?
They need to take the dns lookup out of the web proxies.
Screw that. EV's have a chance to disintermediate oil companies and gas stations - if we let it happen. What GM is doing is exactly the opposite of what we need.
You need to be able to charge your vehicle at home from renewable sources. That'll make a difference.
Paying the same as you do now for the same old same old (albeit electric) would be good but not as good as the above.
Oh sure, NOW people understand we need vector graphics.
I saw NeWS demo'd by sun in 84. I used native postscript extensively in 88+.
Then I watched html make a mess out of nearly everything to do with the network (html email? huh?).
Bout friggin time poeple woke up.
" we get used to leaving off the 'www' at the beginning of domains with Firefox "
Netscape 1.0 did this 15 years ago. Every credible browser since then has too. www.name.com became a fashion statement more than an address of where port 80 (http, or "web") service was on a specific network as was the original intent of that nomenclature.
Yeah, Paul's big on DNS "Alternatives". Not.
Hughes does this too now with their sat service. Never mind I use my own dns servers, their "transparent" web proxy does it's own dns and ignores the ones you use. Just for web.
That is, I can FTP to say, "free.tibet" but if I try for that web page I get a hughes/yahoo thing that says "did you mean..." (no, I did't you asswipe) Grrrrrrrrrr.
Vixie of course, invented the "transparent web proxy" to "get around" the "problem" of people using non-iana roots to get at web pages in alternative dns spaces about a decade ago. He was right smug about it at the time.
In 1994 Ted Rogers spoke at a conference in Toronto. He said what sounded to me like really stupid things about the net.
When he was done, he just left and didnt hang around.
The next speaker was Nick Negroponte whose first line was "It's a pity Mr. Rogers left because I'd like to have a chance to tell him everything he said was wrong."
It hasn't got any better. Rogers will screw you every step of ther way with every service they have from my perspective. Bail, kids, bail.
I have Hughes sat. I'm 30km away from any halfway (and that's a stretch) interent. It's hilly aorund here and wifi is a bit of a crapshoot. I've used VOIP on the Hughes sat - it works, but there's one helluva lag. The worst bit though is that it (uh, skype software I haven't played with others) seems to just sit there in a tight loop digitizing sound and sending. Even when there's dead silence it's furiously digitizing sound into zeros and sending those buggers as fast as it can.
With the bandwidth cap on the Hughes service this would take you down in no time.
Is there any stuff that only sends when there's actually data to send?
I don't care about the other end that's in NYC and isn't an issue.
" What? comment your code?
Ludicrous!!"
Exactly. "Comments lie. Code never lies." - Keith D. Doyle
(You rang?)
My first job was at the Hamilton Spectator. I was hired because they had an IBM 1130 and so did we at high school. That was the "new" system. The "old" system was a Univac that had patch panels for "programs" and used 90 column cards with round punched holes and mechanical data processing equipment that was at least 50 years old (sorters, duplicaters, etc). While I was there the Univac was phased out. Too bad nobody cancelled the standing order for one million black punch cards once a year. I think they're still using them as scratch paper to this day.
When I first got to play with PDP-8's and then PDP-11's it felt like I'd gone forward, not backward in time.
Toggling in the boot loader was the best part. It was, btw, that particular PDP-11 that Dave Conroy wrote a C compiler for RSX11M. Today that code is known as "gcc". It was written at Teklogix in Mississauga Ontario in the mid 1970s.
(kids, lawn, etc...)
"According to their track record, Google scaled reasonably well."
You mean google search. Orkut, for example, ran on 5 NT servers when it first came out and didn't exactly have the same subsecond response time that search did.
"I mean, it is kind-of like chatroom v. 2.0 or something along those lines. But when it gets to be where you spend more time living in an imaginary dreamworld, then it's time to seek help."
Yeah, I hear there's a chatroom just for that.
" Everybody else is being patched to the level of security that we djbdns users have always had. Not to be *too* smug, of course."
Bingo.
If we were being smug we'd say something like "what do you expect when cert advisories are published as doc files?".