Except, Adblock assumes an opt-out principle. For flash, I would want opt-in: 99.9% of all Flash is trash.
Then try either FlashBlock (Firefox Extension) or these userContent.css rules. Both block all Flash, putting a placeholder where the Flash object would've been allowing you to click to load it.
Andy Hertzfeld strived to open Magic Cap at the time of the GMGC bankruptcy. If I remember Andy's explanation correctly, Nathan Myrvold, formerly of Microsoft, used the bankruptcy process to capture the IP after Andy Hertzfeld working with Andy Rubin had won two previous decisions to get the Magic Cap IP. Nathan mostly wanted the Telescript agent patents for his dead startup patent collection, though.
Afterwards, Andy H. continued to work with Nathan to pry the Magic Cap IP loose, since Nathan allegedly didn't care that much. But Nathan kept putting more and more restrictions on Magic Cap's use to the point that few would have been able to use the Magic Cap technology for anything practical or interesting even if it was open source. So Andy finally stopped trying.
The bottom line is that even though no one is using Magic Cap, we can't make it available as open source. And thus, and incredible amount of creativity, investment and hard work is effectively lost to the world (except for what people remember in their heads).
Nope, that's not it either. It was an action game, the little marshmallow guy walked around on the screen and did stuff.
The DOS&Mac links were obviously for the anonymous poster wanted Shufflepuck Cafe.
The link at Apple2.org.za is for an Apple][ game named "Floppy", which looks like:
http://img326.imageshack.us/img326/1176/picture16a j.png
If that's not a little "marshmallow guy", I'm not sure what is.
How is BeOS any more "modern" than NeXT (OSX). It also runs on a BSD (UNIX) kernel, and provides it's own media and widget layers. The number of similarities between the two OSes is striking.
Be never ran ontop of a BSD kernel. It was a custom microkernel written by Be engineers, called 'nukernel'. There is a partial POSIX implementation (aptly named 'nuposix'), that allowed some UNIX'y programs to be recompiled without changes to the source (unless of course, you used something that wasn't implemented in nuposix, such as mmap). Just because it has/bin/bash and other standard UNIX utilities doesn't make it UNIX, and certainly doesn't mean it used a BSD kernel.
Other than both companies/OS were the result of former Apple employees leaving to start new companies, there are only a few similarities between the two.
What big company is going to block China? That's where most of their workers are. Can't cut your communications lines to them.
Allow your office(s) in China to talk to your office(s) elsewhere in the world, and block all Chinese IP-blocks that don't belong to your company. Or, block all of China from everything except your VPN server, and let them VPN in. etc.
Totally off topic, but then again, this really isn't a topic. I'm not sure how this story was accepted, but... moot point now.
Excite failed so spectacularly. What was once a "$5 billion dollar" company, sold off the portal for $10 million in 2001. Some of the other assets Excite@Home bought during the heyday for billions, sold for roughly $10-$30 million. Gotta love those dot com days.
Having worked for a company that was a wholly owned subsidiary of Excite@Home, I personally (And believe others would agree with me) blame the failure on the @Home merge. That brought in a lot of telco-type executives that had no idea about the media/content side of the business, and then the media/content executives that had no idea about the telco side of the business. As things started to slide, they brought in some AT&T people, who it seems like they purposely sabotaged the company, to pick up the @Home assets cheap, for their broadband unit.
So really, just your generic case of management being clueless, reckless management of money (I mean, it *does* grow on trees afterall, right?), followed by what is percieved by many as sabotage from AT&T.
I used to work for MatchLogic, which was an non-evil DoubleClick. Regarding tracking of purchases, it's easily done. When you receive an ad, you get a bonus cookie with it. Then on the destination site (Dell, etc) there would be "web pings" (1x1 gifs) on various pages. This way we could track how far into the site you got, if you ended up making a purchase, etc. Not every advertiser did this with us, but those that did were always impressed.
But it doesn't really help in terms of weeding out spiders/automated clicks/etc. I was actually involved heavily in that, and while lots of code was written to automate it, and logs were sent to an outside auditing firm, I'd still often take an hours worth of logs once a week and look it over manually (Which was still an impressive amount of data, about 12,500,000 log entries in an hours worth of logs).
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, that's not it either. It was an action game, the little marshmallow guy walked around on the screen and did stuff.a j.png
The DOS&Mac links were obviously for the anonymous poster wanted Shufflepuck Cafe.
The link at Apple2.org.za is for an Apple][ game named "Floppy", which looks like:
http://img326.imageshack.us/img326/1176/picture16
If that's not a little "marshmallow guy", I'm not sure what is.
DOS Version: http://www.the-underdogs.info/game.php?id=2159
http://www.apple2.org.za/mirrors/ftp.apple.asimov. net/images/games/action/floppy.dsk.gz
Be never ran ontop of a BSD kernel. It was a custom microkernel written by Be engineers, called 'nukernel'. There is a partial POSIX implementation (aptly named 'nuposix'), that allowed some UNIX'y programs to be recompiled without changes to the source (unless of course, you used something that wasn't implemented in nuposix, such as mmap). Just because it has /bin/bash and other standard UNIX utilities doesn't make it UNIX, and certainly doesn't mean it used a BSD kernel.
Other than both companies/OS were the result of former Apple employees leaving to start new companies, there are only a few similarities between the two.
Allow your office(s) in China to talk to your office(s) elsewhere in the world, and block all Chinese IP-blocks that don't belong to your company. Or, block all of China from everything except your VPN server, and let them VPN in. etc.
Totally off topic, but then again, this really isn't a topic. I'm not sure how this story was accepted, but... moot point now. Excite failed so spectacularly. What was once a "$5 billion dollar" company, sold off the portal for $10 million in 2001. Some of the other assets Excite@Home bought during the heyday for billions, sold for roughly $10-$30 million. Gotta love those dot com days. Having worked for a company that was a wholly owned subsidiary of Excite@Home, I personally (And believe others would agree with me) blame the failure on the @Home merge. That brought in a lot of telco-type executives that had no idea about the media/content side of the business, and then the media/content executives that had no idea about the telco side of the business. As things started to slide, they brought in some AT&T people, who it seems like they purposely sabotaged the company, to pick up the @Home assets cheap, for their broadband unit. So really, just your generic case of management being clueless, reckless management of money (I mean, it *does* grow on trees afterall, right?), followed by what is percieved by many as sabotage from AT&T.
I used to work for MatchLogic, which was an non-evil DoubleClick. Regarding tracking of purchases, it's easily done. When you receive an ad, you get a bonus cookie with it. Then on the destination site (Dell, etc) there would be "web pings" (1x1 gifs) on various pages. This way we could track how far into the site you got, if you ended up making a purchase, etc. Not every advertiser did this with us, but those that did were always impressed. But it doesn't really help in terms of weeding out spiders/automated clicks/etc. I was actually involved heavily in that, and while lots of code was written to automate it, and logs were sent to an outside auditing firm, I'd still often take an hours worth of logs once a week and look it over manually (Which was still an impressive amount of data, about 12,500,000 log entries in an hours worth of logs).