when I told them I could block ads with Firefox their faces lit up
If you can tell me how websites are getting around the pop-up blocker code build into FF (standard install), or how to prevent them without some kind of intense javascripting whitelist, that'd be fantastic.
Consider browser tech...
on
DOM Scripting
·
· Score: 1
When a browser/OS combination determines how something renders, like an input type="file" element. Want to stylize it? The page at http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/inputfile.html provides some guidance, but holy crap, what a friggin pita!
[this I know, spending a few hours trying to maybe write my own version with no better luck]
Sure, the basic functionality can be duplicated with javascript. However, tying this behavior explicitly to a "ping" attribute makes it much easier to identify and block/disable the behavior. If someone doesn't want to mess around with a NoScript extension, script whitelists, etc... then this makes life easier.
Look at it this way: I'm lazy. I don't want to be a security/privacy Nazi about any/every script on webpages I view. However, if there's an "easy" way to block something I view as potentially abusive, this ping attribute could easily be disabled.
Which makes me think that if other users are lazy like me and just want to disable "ping", this feature would likely be dead-in-the-water, and designers who want to track users would continue to use Javascript.
Intriguing comment about potentially "explicit" Bible passages. I'm a Christian, though certainly not a Bible scholar. I'd be very curious to know what sorts of material could qualify for such an "explicit" label under the most liberal interpretation of that word. We know there's violence, of course, but what is there that could possibly qualify as sexually explicit, or even suggestive?
This phase is intentionally designed for developing unmanned transport vehicles for use in low/no traffic, rugged areas. Think resupply and medivac. That alone would vastly reduce support overhead and threat to support troops (who generally aren't wandering around in heavily armored vehicles like front line troops).
Well, that sounds good, in theory. Now I admittedly don't know what sort of AI or algorithms these autonomous vehicles are using to navigate and make "decisions", but if you've got an unmanned vehicle with supplies (read: easy target), it would still need to be protected from "abduction". I'd imagine a vehicle like this would probably stop cold if surrounded (360 degrees of obstacles) by other vehicles, at which point the abductees could take what's inside, and leave. Unless this vehicle is also accompanied by manned and armed escorts. And at that point, why not just give the escorts a remote control, rather than all that fancy AI/computer gear?
Then again, I'm not any sort of military strategist, nor do I really know anything about the battlefield. But it seems to me that military uses wouldn't be the best choice for this hypothetical tool. Or am I overlooking the solutions to these problems I've mentioned above?
What really gets me is that now we ALL have to take our shoes off, every goddamned time. And it's because the never-to-be-repeated crazy-as-a-loon Richard Reid tried to put a bomb in his shoes. Nobody's going to try that again. But because it was a possibility, we have to line up for this faux-security inspection of our shoes. Seriously, wtf? It's one more illusion of security that accomplishes nothing but pissing off those of us who know better.
20 gallons from a 250lb carcass/cadaver? That sounds like an incredibly high number. I think you'd be really lucky to get five.
Seriously, if you were to "liquefy" remains immediately upon death, pour them into jugs, I don't think you could get 20 gallons. Now if you're talking about cooking to render out the oils and fats, you'd better cut out at least 70% of the non-bio-diesel product.
(If the poster's goal was to be funny, it was lost on other moderators and myself. If it was to be "interesting", I think the poster hasn't thought this through very much. )
I didn't hear about this until I read this post. Do you have a link to a reputable journal (not some Schmoe's blog) that explains what happened? I just want to hear some real info on why we should be hating Paypal.com rather than believing the comments posted by an AC.
Depending upon what area of the country you're in, of course.
Here in the upper midwest (MN, WI, MI, even northern IL) the timber wolf (aka grey wolf, aka canis lupus) population has been recovering quite nicely after they were hunted to frightfully low numbers in the early part of the 20th century when states like MN and WI (MI too?) offered bounties on them.
Some say the wolves have actually reached their sustainable and manageable population now. There have been several car-kills of timber wolves in the aforementioned states in the last few years, and DNR numbers indicate pretty good stability.
I was curious to take a look at it, though I'm not in the market for a new case.
Obviously a big advertisement, I thought perhaps if we slashdot it into oblivion, it would cost the site-owner a bunch of bandwidth cash. However, I wonder if he makes it back in ad views. Anyone know if we'd pay him, or make him pay by slashdotting the server?;)
This past weekend I had a discussion with my aunt who works as a sales person for Oracle (and is also a qualified DBA). We were discussing my resume and she claimed that all the Open Source-related skills on it would scare potential employers.
She basically tells me that no business operator with brains would deploy OSS, because there's nobody to "stand behind it". I countered, I thought brilliantly, by offering the example of Apache, the most shining and long-running example of Open Source. She replies that Oracle and others take Apache and create their own customized versions, suggesting additional code audits, etc, so that versions that Oracle might run are NOT your average httpd.apache.org downloads.
I was just flabbergasted, speechless, and clearly unprepared for an attack on OSS which I feel most certainly have proven themselves in numerous software packages.
Was I simply battling the "sales-droid" mentality? Is this a battle worth engaging in, or should I nod, smile, and slowly back away?;)
Bad quote in that CNN article.
All the real trekkies (trekkers? whatever.) know that the exact phrase "Beam me up, Scotty" never happened in any TOS script.
Please do demonstrate. Sure, I can tweak the styles, but how do you get the LI element to not cause a line-break? If you give them "display: inline", then any use of "width" is ignored (In FF, anyhow, but not in IE).
I've been coding HTML by hand for a long time now, using CSS for far less time, but I'd love to see a demo or sample code. Here's mine, what am I missing? http://kozz.dyndns.org:81/~kris/list.htm l
Regarding the HTML underneath, I agree. However, I'm curious if you know of a good way to display his "Rating" boxes (1 - 10, poor, avg, good) without using tables.
I try to eschew tables whereever possible, but I don't think you can do this w/o tables unless you're using divs with absolute positioning -- am I right, or wrong?
Reading this thread, I was pretty comfortable on the side of the "Liberals" (a word some use as an epithet), but your comments are quite good. Now, I won't say that I'm embracing everything the FBI does, but your comments are a refreshing, well-reasoned, insightful and far from knee-jerk monologue so often found on Slashdot.
Not trying to completely berate you here, but I'm genuinely curious as to the level of protection you were using on your PC. Were you surfing with IE at the time? Did you have all the latest windows patches? Also, were you using Spybot S&D's "immunize" function?
I use FF exclusively, unless there's a good reason to view a page in IE. And I always have the latest S&D immunizations for IE. But I'm curious if I'd be just as vulnerable despite these protections.
Owner of a dot-com, seven servers, and you're the only person with the technical skills? I'd say your options are:
Never leave town.
Delegate some responsibilities to someone else.
Entrepreneurs also need to be able to "let go" just a little bit by hiring responsible folks to share the burden of situations like this. If you continue to try doing things all on your own like this, I'm inclined to think you'd have nothing but headaches, followed by burn-out.
Slashdot Mirror
when I told them I could block ads with Firefox their faces lit up
If you can tell me how websites are getting around the pop-up blocker code build into FF (standard install), or how to prevent them without some kind of intense javascripting whitelist, that'd be fantastic.
When a browser/OS combination determines how something renders, like an input type="file" element. Want to stylize it? The page at http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/inputfile.html provides some guidance, but holy crap, what a friggin pita!
[this I know, spending a few hours trying to maybe write my own version with no better luck]
2. MP3 Toilet ... Technically, it's not a stand alone MP3 player, but rather one that works with your toilet.
I guess that'd make it a sit-alone player, hmm?
Ah, yes... the Richard Gere editions.
(someone had to say it)
Sure, the basic functionality can be duplicated with javascript. However, tying this behavior explicitly to a "ping" attribute makes it much easier to identify and block/disable the behavior. If someone doesn't want to mess around with a NoScript extension, script whitelists, etc... then this makes life easier.
Look at it this way: I'm lazy. I don't want to be a security/privacy Nazi about any/every script on webpages I view. However, if there's an "easy" way to block something I view as potentially abusive, this ping attribute could easily be disabled.
Which makes me think that if other users are lazy like me and just want to disable "ping", this feature would likely be dead-in-the-water, and designers who want to track users would continue to use Javascript.
I may be replying to a troll, but ...
Intriguing comment about potentially "explicit" Bible passages. I'm a Christian, though certainly not a Bible scholar. I'd be very curious to know what sorts of material could qualify for such an "explicit" label under the most liberal interpretation of that word. We know there's violence, of course, but what is there that could possibly qualify as sexually explicit, or even suggestive?
Truly curious to know. Anyone?
Chances are the porn producer would rather send men & women for the opportunity to be the first in the industry to film the zero-G money shot.
[shudder]
Well, that sounds good, in theory. Now I admittedly don't know what sort of AI or algorithms these autonomous vehicles are using to navigate and make "decisions", but if you've got an unmanned vehicle with supplies (read: easy target), it would still need to be protected from "abduction". I'd imagine a vehicle like this would probably stop cold if surrounded (360 degrees of obstacles) by other vehicles, at which point the abductees could take what's inside, and leave. Unless this vehicle is also accompanied by manned and armed escorts. And at that point, why not just give the escorts a remote control, rather than all that fancy AI/computer gear?
Then again, I'm not any sort of military strategist, nor do I really know anything about the battlefield. But it seems to me that military uses wouldn't be the best choice for this hypothetical tool. Or am I overlooking the solutions to these problems I've mentioned above?
What really gets me is that now we ALL have to take our shoes off, every goddamned time. And it's because the never-to-be-repeated crazy-as-a-loon Richard Reid tried to put a bomb in his shoes. Nobody's going to try that again. But because it was a possibility, we have to line up for this faux-security inspection of our shoes. Seriously, wtf? It's one more illusion of security that accomplishes nothing but pissing off those of us who know better.
It's been done here. Now, featuring random typos for added realism (TM)!
IANAScientist, but ...
20 gallons from a 250lb carcass/cadaver? That sounds like an incredibly high number. I think you'd be really lucky to get five.
Seriously, if you were to "liquefy" remains immediately upon death, pour them into jugs, I don't think you could get 20 gallons. Now if you're talking about cooking to render out the oils and fats, you'd better cut out at least 70% of the non-bio-diesel product.
(If the poster's goal was to be funny, it was lost on other moderators and myself. If it was to be "interesting", I think the poster hasn't thought this through very much. )
I didn't hear about this until I read this post. Do you have a link to a reputable journal (not some Schmoe's blog) that explains what happened? I just want to hear some real info on why we should be hating Paypal.com rather than believing the comments posted by an AC.
... you know that any official/legal notice will be sent by US mail, certified mail, or delivered by hand.
I can't recall the first or last time any government agency gave me an official document ONLY in an electronic format.
Depending upon what area of the country you're in, of course.
Here in the upper midwest (MN, WI, MI, even northern IL) the timber wolf (aka grey wolf, aka canis lupus) population has been recovering quite nicely after they were hunted to frightfully low numbers in the early part of the 20th century when states like MN and WI (MI too?) offered bounties on them.
Some say the wolves have actually reached their sustainable and manageable population now. There have been several car-kills of timber wolves in the aforementioned states in the last few years, and DNR numbers indicate pretty good stability.
it's "a penny for your thoughts". See, better profit margin.
I was curious to take a look at it, though I'm not in the market for a new case.
Obviously a big advertisement, I thought perhaps if we slashdot it into oblivion, it would cost the site-owner a bunch of bandwidth cash. However, I wonder if he makes it back in ad views. Anyone know if we'd pay him, or make him pay by slashdotting the server? ;)
This past weekend I had a discussion with my aunt who works as a sales person for Oracle (and is also a qualified DBA). We were discussing my resume and she claimed that all the Open Source-related skills on it would scare potential employers.
;)
She basically tells me that no business operator with brains would deploy OSS, because there's nobody to "stand behind it". I countered, I thought brilliantly, by offering the example of Apache, the most shining and long-running example of Open Source. She replies that Oracle and others take Apache and create their own customized versions, suggesting additional code audits, etc, so that versions that Oracle might run are NOT your average httpd.apache.org downloads.
I was just flabbergasted, speechless, and clearly unprepared for an attack on OSS which I feel most certainly have proven themselves in numerous software packages.
Was I simply battling the "sales-droid" mentality? Is this a battle worth engaging in, or should I nod, smile, and slowly back away?
Bad quote in that CNN article. All the real trekkies (trekkers? whatever.) know that the exact phrase "Beam me up, Scotty" never happened in any TOS script.
May you rest in peace, Mr. Doohan.
Too bad the submitter didn't Link the Article itself.
side-by-side, equal-width boxes, using
m l
<ul>
<li> item </li>
<li> item </li>
</ul>
?
Please do demonstrate. Sure, I can tweak the styles, but how do you get the LI element to not cause a line-break? If you give them "display: inline", then any use of "width" is ignored (In FF, anyhow, but not in IE).
I've been coding HTML by hand for a long time now, using CSS for far less time, but I'd love to see a demo or sample code. Here's mine, what am I missing?
http://kozz.dyndns.org:81/~kris/list.ht
Regarding the HTML underneath, I agree. However, I'm curious if you know of a good way to display his "Rating" boxes (1 - 10, poor, avg, good) without using tables.
I try to eschew tables whereever possible, but I don't think you can do this w/o tables unless you're using divs with absolute positioning -- am I right, or wrong?
Reading this thread, I was pretty comfortable on the side of the "Liberals" (a word some use as an epithet), but your comments are quite good. Now, I won't say that I'm embracing everything the FBI does, but your comments are a refreshing, well-reasoned, insightful and far from knee-jerk monologue so often found on Slashdot.
So, thank you.
Not trying to completely berate you here, but I'm genuinely curious as to the level of protection you were using on your PC. Were you surfing with IE at the time? Did you have all the latest windows patches? Also, were you using Spybot S&D's "immunize" function?
I use FF exclusively, unless there's a good reason to view a page in IE. And I always have the latest S&D immunizations for IE. But I'm curious if I'd be just as vulnerable despite these protections.
- Never leave town.
- Delegate some responsibilities to someone else.
Entrepreneurs also need to be able to "let go" just a little bit by hiring responsible folks to share the burden of situations like this. If you continue to try doing things all on your own like this, I'm inclined to think you'd have nothing but headaches, followed by burn-out.