- Play games (Tux Racer doesn't count) - Use Photoshop (don't say Gimp) - Use 3D Studio Max (yes, there are some alternatives, but 3ds Max is an industry standard) - Etc
The biggest problem with Linux is that it severely lacks blanket support by large software and hardware developers (including solid driver support for many things). This is what happens when you have a desktop market share that many companies truly consider irrelevant. Yes, Linux has a lot to offer on the desktop, but as of yet it is not on equal footing to Windows (or even Apple in most cases [such as graphics design, drivers, etc]).
ActiveX is a Microsoft technology. Even Microsoft is trying to get away for the security holes they've created with that.
ActiveX is just an implementation of OLE and COM via the Internet Explorer browser. Anyone is able to write an interface that supports ActiveX controls. The idea that they are inherently insecure is an oft-proclaimed falsehood on Slashdot. IE's implementation has had problems, but that's not the same thing as the technology behind it.
ActiveX : Internet Explorer:: Extensions : Firefox
It all comes down to implementation of the interactive extension to the browser.
Sometimes, security means not implementing something if it cannot be implemented securely.
That is true enough, although the problem is usually between the chair and keyboard. The biggest problem with ActiveX, and the way it got it's bad reputation is users who click 'Yes' to everything. Give Firefox enough market share and it will become profitable for these malware authors to write extensions that screw a computer/browser the same way ActiveX can.
The story goes that scientist conected an EKG machine and watched for signs of brian patterns. When the plant apeared excited they interpreted it as emotion. I didn't think it was actualy true but i found a few posts about it.
Mythbusters actually took a shot at this one (episode 61). They tried hooking up both a polygraph (as the original guy did) as well as an EKG machine. What they found is that there initially appeared to be a response, but once they isolated themselves from the plant they were testing, the apparent response went away. Kinda dumb, but somewhat interesting.
If you're interested, you can get it here or wait for it to be on Discovery again.
Here's an honest question: Ignoring the cost, just what is it that you think is so much better about Windows 2000 compared to XP? I've used both and I'll tell you what: Nothing.
Both systems are designed around the same kernel. Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP is NT 5.1. In this regard both are very stable and nearly never have stability problems that aren't due to faulty hardware or drivers (and the same can be said for Linux systems).
XP is basically 2000 with added multimedia, games, and hardware support. In addition it has a revamped interface allowing for theming (which can of course be turned off for those that don't like change). Throw in some additional native drivers and you've basically got XP.
As far as I can tell, people who still use 2000 by choice are either ignorant or just dumb.
I suppose now is as good a time as any to ask a question.
I still use IE as my default browser, simply because it loads *fast*. I don't have a brand new system, but when I click the little blue E, I have a browser window inside 2-3 seconds. When I click the little orange fox it often takes up to 8-10 seconds before the window has opened and loaded. I use 'about:blank' for the homepage in both browsers.
Are there any ways to reduce the time to load firefox? I'd even be fine with starting Firefox when Windows loads, keeping the executable in memory. Is this possible? I like a lot about Firefox, but it's startup time and the GUI's "feel" have kept me using IE.
The problem I see with this is that (in my experience) there are several single points of failure in a hard drive, and if one of them goes the entire drive is toast. Specifically, the heads, the motor, and the controller board. I've had all three die on different occasions, and for all three the entire drive is dead. If the motor or controller board fails, then your data is fine, but you'll need to spend up to $1,000 (or more) to get the data off the drive. If the heads fail (mechanically or physically) there is a good chance that all the platters can be damaged so you're totally screwed.
In any case, aside from tons of bad sectors forming on the drive (in which case the entire drive is probably on it's way out) I don't see how an internal mirror can help much. You can't recover the data without going through an expensive data recovery service, so you may as well just buy a second physical drive, something that anyone can swap out and replace.
My guess was that Windows' System Idle Process was using CPU cycles even when nothing else was
Damned System Idle Process, regularly hogging 100% of my CPU! I bet it uses even more in Vista!
So I try to end the process and Task Manager gives me some BS about it not being valid. What if I want to use a different idle process? Hmm? Vendor lock-in! Monopoly!
Just one more reason to drop M$ and Windoze if you ask me.
I can see this as ending poorly for site developers who use Flash.
Wow, a truly silver--dare I say mithril--lining to a very ugly cloud!
Ever since Flash became the abused stepchild of online marketing zombies, one of my pet peeves are people who design a website navigation menu in Flash, and do not provide a text-based alternative for browsers without Flash or with the extension disabled. Judge for the win!
On the other hand, this could suck for owners of large complex websites. Does anyone know the details behind the suit? Specifically, what was it exactly that made Target's website non-compliant? (Obviously image-based CAPTCHAs will do it I guess.) I read TFA and the link in TFA but found no worthwhile information.
Finally, did anyone else find that MindSpring site a joke? Since 1997, we have worked around the world with many...entities to accomplish complex objectives. Wow! I bet if I put that I 'accomplished complex objectives' on my resume I'd be hired on the spot. From what I could tell, the company's objectives included spraying buzzwords and management BS all over the place. And yes, success was theirs!
Here's hoping they don't follow Lucas' tracks and ruin the originals; however, this could be pretty nice if done right. A friend and I were talking and thought it would be very cool if for Trouble with Tribbles they insert the DS9 cast into the background so it matches up with the DS9 episode Trials and Tribble-ations (where DS9 cast were superimposed into TOS footage). Very cool, but probably too much to ask:)
I think bickering like that between the AC and it's parent is pointless, but this is dumb.
Create a new text file called test.txt, or whatever. Put it somewhere. Put some unique text in the file. Use the search feature to search inside of files for that bit of text. It finds it. Now, rename that file to test.java, or anything with a.java extension. Search again. Broken.
Not broken.
File searches in XP are done with file-type handlers. This is actually a pretty neat idea because it allows users to search for content in specially-formatted, or even binary files, because a DLL is handling the search. Programs register their handlers when the user installs them.
Windows ships with a generic plain-text handler, but it only knows about a limited number of file types (file extensions). By adding additional file extensions to a specific registry key you can tell this handler to work with any other kind of file (java, cs, css, whatever). The only negative is that there is no simple GUI to get it done, though there are some WSH scrips available to do it for you. Alternatively you can configure the indexing service to index all file types, not just ones it knows about and this does have a GUI.
If you qualify a bug like this as meaning the software is broken, then it's unlikely you'll find any software that isn't.
This article the usefulness does not inform no matter what at all concerning the platform center 2, perhaps it possesses that useful bit for those which is hungry special language that. Because us the report of the place of the sisters, is better than the first fragment other fragment. It probably will have glance with the list which compares the feature of fragment a and fragment 2.
First when the fragment - it does not wait to the spring, improve than the fragment which has other things
Chip II - chip C this compared to compared to recovers with all directions, being instead of second chip or chip 3 intelligence the map which will not be the specific chip which it does not know today and compared to the enemy consumes ten and it is quicker
It becomes design from the foreign nation and 3rd the chip - and second the chip than folds and it cuts smaller 2 to improve it sees but it is slower
The different chip - with chip 1 by hungry force compared to it recovers with realness and it talks and the chip which is for compared to improves but overwhelmingly positively
The different chip - this when it is not like that, all, the different chip with the fact that it is impressed quite together but chipdom mother burden ol block falling chips end all, and so
There is a trouble which follows me? Oh, Oh! Me quite sensibility be! The possibility you seeing the broad way which is, me the order broad way what kind of to be young bud which conveys meaning which is useful ties the personage and freezing to death together and. This article wedgie of the trash is terdhammer pukebucket where it is convex. This article is to chain every hour comfort which is not hope of popular saying, Iri it is torn like that and probably ars technica articles or in order to do darkly from 2 origin Google interpretations which the crank attach it leads and. It it does not waste you timely reading to dry.
I do not know and so brought about... as many as doh logs i hope and the fact that it reads the what kind of method article from under the precision which is not this realness is Yongwon and to my language processing ability and the thing effect do not go mad i want! where Effect it received.
The troublesome army song submits *screen*?
-
Mod the tubes it will kick and power Insightful is this post!
There are a myriad of great tools out there, but personally I have a copy of almost everything from Sysinternals on my thumbdrive. Top of the list are Process Explorer a (overclocked, suped-up, uber, and simply amazing) version of TaskManager. It shows everything you've ever wanted to know about a process but didn't know you could know. In addition, FileMon and RegMon are very helpful for troubleshooting permission problems, and the PSTools kit (psexec, pskill, etc) are also great. They also have a free read-only version of NTFSDOS (and even an NTFS filesystem driver for 95/98. The TCP/IP tools are also very good to have on hand. Best part is of course that they are free, and many have source available.
If you do any Windows troubleshooting, this website is a must-have. No joke.
Interesting that neither the summary nor the article links to the page at BYU's NewsNet page. It has a few more details, links to other sources, a video, and pictures related to the research.
features do sound solid, but honestly, it's the style that counts.
Ah, the mantra of an (self-admitted in this case) Apple fan. No offense, but it seems like since the iMac, that's been the general feel Apple gives off. "Well, it doesn't have the feature I want... Oh! Shiny! Must buy!".
Personally, and maybe this is the engineer part of me talking, if it doesn't have the feature set I want or implements them poorly, I won't waste my money on it no matter how pretty it looks. Style might be "hip" and "cool" but it should be second-seat to functionality (think of a $1,000 1991 Civic with flame stickers and an airfoil on the back).
How do you get a law overturned, without first breaking it and going to court?
Most likely by attempting to show that it violates some other law or previously established right. Economical methods such as boycotts are also available.
And what is unethical about breaking an unethical law?
I didn't suggest there was anything unethical about breaking the law, just that one stays within the accepted bounds of ethics while attempting to remove the offending law. Don't go around killing innocent people to make a point, as an extreme example.
I certainly don't mean to say that breaking the law is always "wrong", at any rate. I usually break the DMCA several times a week by different means because I believe in fair use. That said, one shouldn't think that they are absolved of the consequences of their actions just because the law seems/is unfair, unjust, or unethical. Until it's changed, the law is still the law.
"How we feel" is the central tenet of a democratic society. If a law is unjust, it is our duty to defy it.
As long as you are willing to face the consequences of such actions, yes. Defy away; however, a more reasonable and responsible citizen might suggest that if a law is believed to be unjust, they have a duty to try and get it overturned through legal and ethical means first. If that doesn't work, then I think you have a tea party:)
Make for good stories too... Wait, I saw this coming! There's also something about a black box, a blind guy, passports, and a guy who looks like he spent a little too much time in prison.
Find a way to make the average user patch software.
As wonderful as it would be if all software was completely bug free and contained no security holes, it's simply impossible. No product, be it OSS or commercial, is free of these banes. On the other hand, problems like this would nearly go away, if only users would patch the software. Whether it's a new exploit in Windows or Apache or phpBB, if you don't patch, you're going to get screwed. Yes, it seems like Microsoft products have more patches than average, but at least they have patches. Blaster and MyDoom? They'd have never hit the news if users were patched. Automatic Updates in XP is a great step forward, but it's still opt-in.
Some people seem amazed when I say I had no direct problems with Blaster or Welchia, and they don't seem to get it that these problems essentially always appear after a patch is release which means there is no valid reason for their survival. Patch, patch, patch, patch, patch. Yes, slightly monotonous, but if users would simple do it, we'd stop seeing these equally monotonous news stories about Exploits of Doom.
Not only that, but I find it just so picturesquely Slashdot that the summary says "tells you how to set up any decent web browser" and the actual article explicitly only works with Firefox. IE/Safari/Opera users just laugh at the submitter and "editors".
That, and who thinks they are fooling anyone by doing this? If you have a Google account for other services like Gmail, then you must allow Google to set a cookie, and you are still identifying yourself. You're also giving up the ability to customize your searches (safesearch, number of results, languages, etc).
Depending on how your cookie settings are set, the only thing Google will know is what you're searching for. If you're really that worried about it, just delete the Google cookie when you're finished for the day/week/month. If all you use is Search, then just blacklist google.com in your cookie settings. That, or you can send all your traffic through an anonymous third party who has no accountability. If you're concerned about absolute privacy with regards to Google, it seems unlikely you'd give the same information to some anonymous others.
I think you'd find that if the US did that, all of the attacks would stop.
You can't honestly believe that. People bred to hate other people will continue to try and harm those people. The war in the Middle East is just an excuse to them, if even that.
Read up on your history if you think that terrorist attacks are a new invention, or exist just because of current US actions.
I set cookies to delete automatically when closing FF and have used some combination of tools or manually doing it at least weekly for years.
I think this is kinda funny.
The whole original point of cookies was to make a user's life easier. You don't need to log into Slashdot every time you visit the page. You only need to authenticate with GMail or Yahoo once a day to read email. Your shopping cart is remembered. Etc, etc, and yet people are so paranoid that they still clear them out on a regular basis.
It's true that there's some data mining involved, but I think it's trivial enough that it's not worth the extra effort (IMO anyway). So what if Doubleclick (may they burn in Hell forever) knows that some guy visits Slashdot, ThinkGeek, and PennyArcade? I figure my privacy is fine as long as they cannot link the activity back to me personally. If that bothers you, whitelisting sites makes it pretty easy to weed out data miners, though it can become a pain when sites use cookies for navigation, shopping, etc.
One tip I do have for IE users, is to try out the Restricted Sites zone. I've added a few sites to it and it drastically speeds up page loads. For example, Dilbert.com used to be slow and ad-ridden with popups, but after adding it to Restricted Sites, it has no cookies and no JavaScript which means no ads, no popups, no nothing. Page loads are 500% faster.
I use my Windows credentials to secure my computer and enjoy the typing saved by not clearing my cookies every ten minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
Your not sacrificing anything with linux I don't
Maybe you don't, but what if I want/need to:
- Play games (Tux Racer doesn't count)
- Use Photoshop (don't say Gimp)
- Use 3D Studio Max (yes, there are some alternatives, but 3ds Max is an industry standard)
- Etc
The biggest problem with Linux is that it severely lacks blanket support by large software and hardware developers (including solid driver support for many things). This is what happens when you have a desktop market share that many companies truly consider irrelevant. Yes, Linux has a lot to offer on the desktop, but as of yet it is not on equal footing to Windows (or even Apple in most cases [such as graphics design, drivers, etc]).
ActiveX is a Microsoft technology. Even Microsoft is trying to get away for the security holes they've created with that.
:: Extensions : Firefox
ActiveX is just an implementation of OLE and COM via the Internet Explorer browser. Anyone is able to write an interface that supports ActiveX controls. The idea that they are inherently insecure is an oft-proclaimed falsehood on Slashdot. IE's implementation has had problems, but that's not the same thing as the technology behind it.
ActiveX : Internet Explorer
It all comes down to implementation of the interactive extension to the browser.
Sometimes, security means not implementing something if it cannot be implemented securely.
That is true enough, although the problem is usually between the chair and keyboard. The biggest problem with ActiveX, and the way it got it's bad reputation is users who click 'Yes' to everything. Give Firefox enough market share and it will become profitable for these malware authors to write extensions that screw a computer/browser the same way ActiveX can.
You know, it really makes you wonder what sort of discoveries we miss out on because we take so much care to preserve the past.
I know, I know, and I feel the same way. But no matter what we do, Slashdot editors just keep posting dupes!
What kinds of discoveries are we missing out on because we're re-hashing stories over a year old? We may never know.
The story goes that scientist conected an EKG machine and watched for signs of brian patterns. When the plant apeared excited they interpreted it as emotion. I didn't think it was actualy true but i found a few posts about it.
Mythbusters actually took a shot at this one (episode 61). They tried hooking up both a polygraph (as the original guy did) as well as an EKG machine. What they found is that there initially appeared to be a response, but once they isolated themselves from the plant they were testing, the apparent response went away. Kinda dumb, but somewhat interesting.
If you're interested, you can get it here or wait for it to be on Discovery again.
Or cheap, or just don't see a need to install a more demanding OS for no discernible benefit.
From my original post:
Here's an honest question: Ignoring the cost, just what is it that you think is so much better about Windows 2000 compared to XP?
My entire supposition was based on the fact that cost was irrelevant. Perhaps I wasn't real clear on this, as everyone seems to have missed it.
W2K FTW
LOL so tru!!!!~ m$ is teh sux
</sarcasm>
Here's an honest question: Ignoring the cost, just what is it that you think is so much better about Windows 2000 compared to XP? I've used both and I'll tell you what: Nothing.
Both systems are designed around the same kernel. Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP is NT 5.1. In this regard both are very stable and nearly never have stability problems that aren't due to faulty hardware or drivers (and the same can be said for Linux systems).
XP is basically 2000 with added multimedia, games, and hardware support. In addition it has a revamped interface allowing for theming (which can of course be turned off for those that don't like change). Throw in some additional native drivers and you've basically got XP.
As far as I can tell, people who still use 2000 by choice are either ignorant or just dumb.
Blah blah Firefox
I suppose now is as good a time as any to ask a question.
I still use IE as my default browser, simply because it loads *fast*. I don't have a brand new system, but when I click the little blue E, I have a browser window inside 2-3 seconds. When I click the little orange fox it often takes up to 8-10 seconds before the window has opened and loaded. I use 'about:blank' for the homepage in both browsers.
Are there any ways to reduce the time to load firefox? I'd even be fine with starting Firefox when Windows loads, keeping the executable in memory. Is this possible? I like a lot about Firefox, but it's startup time and the GUI's "feel" have kept me using IE.
Thanks for any suggestions.
The only choice for Master Chief is Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. Anyone else cool enough is too old for the role.
Why not see if Steve Downes will do it? As the man who voices Master Chief in the games, I think it would be great to hear him in the movie.
[automatic internal redundancy]
The problem I see with this is that (in my experience) there are several single points of failure in a hard drive, and if one of them goes the entire drive is toast. Specifically, the heads, the motor, and the controller board. I've had all three die on different occasions, and for all three the entire drive is dead. If the motor or controller board fails, then your data is fine, but you'll need to spend up to $1,000 (or more) to get the data off the drive. If the heads fail (mechanically or physically) there is a good chance that all the platters can be damaged so you're totally screwed.
In any case, aside from tons of bad sectors forming on the drive (in which case the entire drive is probably on it's way out) I don't see how an internal mirror can help much. You can't recover the data without going through an expensive data recovery service, so you may as well just buy a second physical drive, something that anyone can swap out and replace.
My guess was that Windows' System Idle Process was using CPU cycles even when nothing else was
Damned System Idle Process, regularly hogging 100% of my CPU! I bet it uses even more in Vista!
So I try to end the process and Task Manager gives me some BS about it not being valid. What if I want to use a different idle process? Hmm? Vendor lock-in! Monopoly!
Just one more reason to drop M$ and Windoze if you ask me.
I can see this as ending poorly for site developers who use Flash.
Wow, a truly silver--dare I say mithril--lining to a very ugly cloud!
Ever since Flash became the abused stepchild of online marketing zombies, one of my pet peeves are people who design a website navigation menu in Flash, and do not provide a text-based alternative for browsers without Flash or with the extension disabled. Judge for the win!
On the other hand, this could suck for owners of large complex websites. Does anyone know the details behind the suit? Specifically, what was it exactly that made Target's website non-compliant? (Obviously image-based CAPTCHAs will do it I guess.) I read TFA and the link in TFA but found no worthwhile information.
Finally, did anyone else find that MindSpring site a joke? Since 1997, we have worked around the world with many...entities to accomplish complex objectives. Wow! I bet if I put that I 'accomplished complex objectives' on my resume I'd be hired on the spot. From what I could tell, the company's objectives included spraying buzzwords and management BS all over the place. And yes, success was theirs!
It has lived long...and it has prospered.
:)
And even after death, it's katra lives on!
Here's hoping they don't follow Lucas' tracks and ruin the originals; however, this could be pretty nice if done right. A friend and I were talking and thought it would be very cool if for Trouble with Tribbles they insert the DS9 cast into the background so it matches up with the DS9 episode Trials and Tribble-ations (where DS9 cast were superimposed into TOS footage). Very cool, but probably too much to ask
I think bickering like that between the AC and it's parent is pointless, but this is dumb.
.java extension. Search again. Broken.
Create a new text file called test.txt, or whatever. Put it somewhere. Put some unique text in the file. Use the search feature to search inside of files for that bit of text. It finds it. Now, rename that file to test.java, or anything with a
Not broken.
File searches in XP are done with file-type handlers. This is actually a pretty neat idea because it allows users to search for content in specially-formatted, or even binary files, because a DLL is handling the search. Programs register their handlers when the user installs them.
Windows ships with a generic plain-text handler, but it only knows about a limited number of file types (file extensions). By adding additional file extensions to a specific registry key you can tell this handler to work with any other kind of file (java, cs, css, whatever). The only negative is that there is no simple GUI to get it done, though there are some WSH scrips available to do it for you. Alternatively you can configure the indexing service to index all file types, not just ones it knows about and this does have a GUI.
If you qualify a bug like this as meaning the software is broken, then it's unlikely you'll find any software that isn't.
-
This article the usefulness does not inform no matter what at all concerning the platform center 2, perhaps it possesses that useful bit for those which is hungry special language that. Because us the report of the place of the sisters, is better than the first fragment other fragment. It probably will have glance with the list which compares the feature of fragment a and fragment 2.
There is a trouble which follows me? Oh, Oh! Me quite sensibility be! The possibility you seeing the broad way which is, me the order broad way what kind of to be young bud which conveys meaning which is useful ties the personage and freezing to death together and. This article wedgie of the trash is terdhammer pukebucket where it is convex. This article is to chain every hour comfort which is not hope of popular saying, Iri it is torn like that and probably ars technica articles or in order to do darkly from 2 origin Google interpretations which the crank attach it leads and. It it does not waste you timely reading to dry.
I do not know and so brought about... as many as doh logs i hope and the fact that it reads the what kind of method article from under the precision which is not this realness is Yongwon and to my language processing ability and the thing effect do not go mad i want! where Effect it received.
The troublesome army song submits *screen*?
-
Mod the tubes it will kick and power Insightful is this post!
There are a myriad of great tools out there, but personally I have a copy of almost everything from Sysinternals on my thumbdrive. Top of the list are Process Explorer a (overclocked, suped-up, uber, and simply amazing) version of TaskManager. It shows everything you've ever wanted to know about a process but didn't know you could know. In addition, FileMon and RegMon are very helpful for troubleshooting permission problems, and the PSTools kit (psexec, pskill, etc) are also great. They also have a free read-only version of NTFSDOS (and even an NTFS filesystem driver for 95/98. The TCP/IP tools are also very good to have on hand. Best part is of course that they are free, and many have source available.
If you do any Windows troubleshooting, this website is a must-have. No joke.
Think like a programmer! You can always improve the interface to be more user friendly.
Holy crap! (Pardon the pun). A few modifications and this thing could be your workstation chair. Really kick those coding marathons into high-gear!
"Buy 50 cases of Bawls and get a GreatJohn office chair for half off!" Coming soon to ThinkGeek.
Interesting that neither the summary nor the article links to the page at BYU's NewsNet page. It has a few more details, links to other sources, a video, and pictures related to the research.
features do sound solid, but honestly, it's the style that counts.
Ah, the mantra of an (self-admitted in this case) Apple fan. No offense, but it seems like since the iMac, that's been the general feel Apple gives off. "Well, it doesn't have the feature I want... Oh! Shiny! Must buy!".
Personally, and maybe this is the engineer part of me talking, if it doesn't have the feature set I want or implements them poorly, I won't waste my money on it no matter how pretty it looks. Style might be "hip" and "cool" but it should be second-seat to functionality (think of a $1,000 1991 Civic with flame stickers and an airfoil on the back).
How do you get a law overturned, without first breaking it and going to court?
Most likely by attempting to show that it violates some other law or previously established right. Economical methods such as boycotts are also available.
And what is unethical about breaking an unethical law?
I didn't suggest there was anything unethical about breaking the law, just that one stays within the accepted bounds of ethics while attempting to remove the offending law. Don't go around killing innocent people to make a point, as an extreme example.
I certainly don't mean to say that breaking the law is always "wrong", at any rate. I usually break the DMCA several times a week by different means because I believe in fair use. That said, one shouldn't think that they are absolved of the consequences of their actions just because the law seems/is unfair, unjust, or unethical. Until it's changed, the law is still the law.
"How we feel" is the central tenet of a democratic society. If a law is unjust, it is our duty to defy it.
:)
As long as you are willing to face the consequences of such actions, yes. Defy away; however, a more reasonable and responsible citizen might suggest that if a law is believed to be unjust, they have a duty to try and get it overturned through legal and ethical means first. If that doesn't work, then I think you have a tea party
freaky misfit mathematical geniuses
Make for good stories too... Wait, I saw this coming! There's also something about a black box, a blind guy, passports, and a guy who looks like he spent a little too much time in prison.
Hmm, lost it now.
Find a way to make the average user patch software.
As wonderful as it would be if all software was completely bug free and contained no security holes, it's simply impossible. No product, be it OSS or commercial, is free of these banes. On the other hand, problems like this would nearly go away, if only users would patch the software. Whether it's a new exploit in Windows or Apache or phpBB, if you don't patch, you're going to get screwed. Yes, it seems like Microsoft products have more patches than average, but at least they have patches. Blaster and MyDoom? They'd have never hit the news if users were patched. Automatic Updates in XP is a great step forward, but it's still opt-in.
Some people seem amazed when I say I had no direct problems with Blaster or Welchia, and they don't seem to get it that these problems essentially always appear after a patch is release which means there is no valid reason for their survival. Patch, patch, patch, patch, patch. Yes, slightly monotonous, but if users would simple do it, we'd stop seeing these equally monotonous news stories about Exploits of Doom.
Not only that, but I find it just so picturesquely Slashdot that the summary says "tells you how to set up any decent web browser" and the actual article explicitly only works with Firefox. IE/Safari/Opera users just laugh at the submitter and "editors".
That, and who thinks they are fooling anyone by doing this? If you have a Google account for other services like Gmail, then you must allow Google to set a cookie, and you are still identifying yourself. You're also giving up the ability to customize your searches (safesearch, number of results, languages, etc).
Depending on how your cookie settings are set, the only thing Google will know is what you're searching for. If you're really that worried about it, just delete the Google cookie when you're finished for the day/week/month. If all you use is Search, then just blacklist google.com in your cookie settings. That, or you can send all your traffic through an anonymous third party who has no accountability. If you're concerned about absolute privacy with regards to Google, it seems unlikely you'd give the same information to some anonymous others.
I think you'd find that if the US did that, all of the attacks would stop.
You can't honestly believe that. People bred to hate other people will continue to try and harm those people. The war in the Middle East is just an excuse to them, if even that.
Read up on your history if you think that terrorist attacks are a new invention, or exist just because of current US actions.
I set cookies to delete automatically when closing FF and have used some combination of tools or manually doing it at least weekly for years.
I think this is kinda funny.
The whole original point of cookies was to make a user's life easier. You don't need to log into Slashdot every time you visit the page. You only need to authenticate with GMail or Yahoo once a day to read email. Your shopping cart is remembered. Etc, etc, and yet people are so paranoid that they still clear them out on a regular basis.
It's true that there's some data mining involved, but I think it's trivial enough that it's not worth the extra effort (IMO anyway). So what if Doubleclick (may they burn in Hell forever) knows that some guy visits Slashdot, ThinkGeek, and PennyArcade? I figure my privacy is fine as long as they cannot link the activity back to me personally. If that bothers you, whitelisting sites makes it pretty easy to weed out data miners, though it can become a pain when sites use cookies for navigation, shopping, etc.
One tip I do have for IE users, is to try out the Restricted Sites zone. I've added a few sites to it and it drastically speeds up page loads. For example, Dilbert.com used to be slow and ad-ridden with popups, but after adding it to Restricted Sites, it has no cookies and no JavaScript which means no ads, no popups, no nothing. Page loads are 500% faster.
I use my Windows credentials to secure my computer and enjoy the typing saved by not clearing my cookies every ten minutes.