A better way to do it would be to just maintain a database of phishing sites that the browser downloads and checks *LOCALLY* to see if it is phishing.
Instead of every page hit being set to Google or $SERVER, it checks Google or $SERVER to see if the database has changed since last downloaded. If it has, it downloads a binary update and inserts it into the database. Then it checks the LOCAL database to see if this is a phishing site.
Such a mechanism is just as up-to-date as submitting the URL to the remote site, and much more secure. And the binary form of such database updates would be minuscule, on average each request would likely take *LESS* time this way since you are only checking last-modified headers on a file instead of initiating a full HTTP GET/POST.
It is not copyright infringement because the content has not been nodified.
The CONTENT is just HTML code. Just because your website looks a certain what in your IE browser doesn't mean it looks the same when I view it in Lynx.
Does that mean I am guilty of copyright infringement because the site does not look the same as when you created it? Is it copyright infringement when a deaf person watches a film because they are modifying it by removing the sound?!?!?
Like I said above - site owners need to get their heads out of their ass. HTML has no guarantee over layout, that is not what markup is for. It is to offer up *suggested* layouts. If you want layout guarantee, use PDF or something.
Don't see how this is news. Google Mobile has been doing this for at least a year. Any links to external sites that originate on my m.google.com homepage are automatically "mobile-i-fied" by Google. You can disable the service in your preferences I believe if you want the full size page.
Personally I love the service since it saves me valuable bandwidth and time.
I do not know if Google respects these special User-Agent strings for mobile-specific site versions - and frankly, as a user, as long as the site works, I don't really give a hoot who is parsing it. "Web Designers" need to get their heads out of their ass and realize that the web is a content delivery mechanism, not a publishing and layout mechanism. You have absolutely no guarantee whatsoever on what your content looks like to the end user. If you don't like that than get a real publishing job.
4000 / 365 = over 10 years. And that's assuming 24/7 production. Unless you are doing this in the north pole during the summer, that is impossible. It's more like 20 years for payback.
One exception - I get the impression European plans are a much closer match to U.S. prepaid/pay-as-you-go plans, except they are far more reasonably priced. U.S. PAYG plans are massive ripoffs
It depends totally on your useage model. If you are a light cell user you could almost certainly pay less with a PayGo plan than a contract plan. I ran the numbers and if I could get out of my contract for free I would save over $10 a month by using PayGo, because I typically use less than 100 minutes a month on my cell.
Japan has recently announced a policy change regarding entry at border crossings for Non-Japanese citizens which will go into effect November 23, 2007. This policy change will affect ALL non-Japanese citizens arriving in Japan regardless of travel purpose, duration of stay or previous entries (except for those traveling on diplomatic or special government related clearance).
All travelers will be fingerprinted and photographed upon entry through Japanese Immigration. Travelers who refuse to be subject to fingerprinting and photography will be refused entry and immediately deported or possibly detained.
Are you telling me that in the US campus "police" (aka security guards - they DO NOT have "police jurisdiction on campus", they are nothing above rent-a-cops) are allowed to carry tasers???
Thank god I never attended school there.
Why were the police involved in removing a student speaking at a private gathering on a university campus?
The only reason the police were even there would be because of Kerry. The only people who should have even been involved in the incident are campus security. Police have no business escorting a citizen from anywhere just for asking someone some questions, unless the owner of the property asked them to leave and they refuse. I saw no one at any point ask the student to leave, they just shut off his mike, then the cops grabbed him and placed him under arrest.
Robert Khoo: It was in early June that they announced their 2008 dates, so by that time we already realized PAX 2007 was going to be insane because of the prereg ticket sales. I actually gave (IDG World Expo CEO) Mary Dolaher a ring and told her that for the past four years PAX is on the last weekend of August. She actually had no idea who we were, but I told her that it would be in everyone's best interest if she reconsidered the date given our size. She said she would call me back "next week..." and that was 4 months ago, so I don't know- maybe she lost my phone number?
How can you be running a huge gaming expo, under the banner "E for All", and not even know what PAX or Penny Arcade are? They obviously know nothing about their target audience at all.
People are focusing and commenting on the wrong thing both here and in other forums discussing the topic.
The question is not weather or not it is justified to taser someone who is resisting arrest. It is not even is it justified to taser this guy who was obviously already subdued.
The question is **why the hell is this guy being considered resisting arrest inthe first place**. What justification was the original arrest under? The police are not supposed to be able to arrest you for speaking out of place in a public forum!
I don't care how annoying the guy was being, or what he was doing that was out of line (storming the mic, etc). Campus security could get involved and escort the guy off the premises, but he shouldn't be arrested for speaking his mind! The police who were there (likely for Kerry security) should not have even been involved in the entire incident.
The TV set is over 15 years old. It's a POS. It doesn't matter what you're feeding into it (DVD/Cable, SVideo/Composite), because the tube is old and worn and has lost much of it's clarity.
But guess what - it is still more than good enough for your average joe sixpack who doesn't know any better, or care even if he did.
You don't have to be a content creator to not be infringing. It could easily be justified as fair use. Especially if it is a 10 second clip on YouTube which you have editorialized elsewhere on the web.
As soon as a cheapo Chinese Set top box comes out that only costs the cable companies $50 a piece, we will have all digital cable. Why? Because they can afford to rent them for free to customers. It would be more than worth it for them sinc ethey will be abe to free up so much bandwidth by dropping the analog spectrum.
The reason people with old TVs don't want to pay an extra $5 a month for digital TV is they see no benefit, and I don't blame them. It would not look any better at all on their 27" TV from 1990 than a decent analog picture.
But to the basic point of yours: why the feck should I let you tell me what I can do with my property? If you don't like what I want to do with what I bought DON'T SELL IT TO ME. It's not like I've got a gun to your head and my wallet out in front of you.
Because it is not your property. It is MINE. I wrote it, you're just using it because I am letting you.
What you are advocating is nothign different than being able to take a book and photocopy it from page to page and distribute it freely.
Any user should not have the freedom to dictate to me, a developer, what I do or do not do with my code. If I want to release it under GPL, super. If I want to release it as a binary, that is my right too (so long as I am not using other GPL code).
I wrote it, it is my choice. Similarly, it is your choice if you want to use it or not.
This is why Linus does not back Stallman. Linus has publicly stated that his viewpoint is the same as the above - that the developer has the right to do whatever they want, it's their code. If Stallman had his way, all software would be legally copyright free and able to be copied around at whim, regardless of what the creator wants. He wants to "free software" from copyright.
As far as your "who will you be crying to when you'll want to retrieve your old data or experiment with older libraries or systems?" comment - the answer is NO ONE. No one forced you to use that proprietary program. It was your choice, it is your consequences. This is what freedom means. It is a two way street.
"Freedom" means you can do whatever you want. "Freedom" means that I, as a softwate developer, am free to share it with the world in any way which I choose.
Stallman's problem is he doesn't agree with that; it is fact that his true desire to end the ability of a software author with the ability to release it under their own terms.
Back up the HD, re-install the factory OS from the recovery CD. Return laptop for repair to clueless tech department, when it is fixed, put Linux back.
It is not worth the hassle trying to fight this. In the end you have no "rights", the company issuing the warranty can do anything they damn well please. You'd be better off just getting it fixed ASAP with as little hassle as possible.
Hynix, has announced they have stacked 24 flash chips in a 1.4mm thick multi-chip package
According to NASA, it may even be possible to stack 48 chips in a 2.8mm package. Scientists also speculate someday we may be able to achieve up to 240 chips in a 14mm thick package.
Further on this, according to NASA, 50 double-jawed Moray Eels can chew 100 objects simultaniously. Even further, 100 double-jawed Moray Eels can chew 200 objects.
That is all well and good, until you start with a string whose natural harmonic frequency is say, 445.6 Hz, 448 Hz, or any other random number.
It's not like in nature there is some "ideal guitar string tree" that grows strings of exactly 440 Hz. **We create strings** for our instruments that have harmonics that fit our **artificially created** scale.
Humans love to take natural elements and put them in pretend boxes.
I don't know how much money you make, but you seem to be mistaking fanboyism for something I like to call "a budget".
Not everyone can afford to spend $599 on a PS3, $499 on a 360, and $300 on a Wii. That's $1400 freaking dollars - I can feed and house my family for almost two months on that. Not to mention the cost getting games for each of those systems.
A few years ago when I was a student I would be lucky to even buy *ONE* of these systems, considering the $299 Wii price is my food for 3 months.
No, most people can only afford one game system. So, whichever one you chose (if you can get any at all), you're stuck with it, for at least 2-3 years.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not modifying the content it is just modifying the markup. You can't copyright markup. If you could I would have copyrighted long ago.
A better way to do it would be to just maintain a database of phishing sites that the browser downloads and checks *LOCALLY* to see if it is phishing.
Instead of every page hit being set to Google or $SERVER, it checks Google or $SERVER to see if the database has changed since last downloaded. If it has, it downloads a binary update and inserts it into the database. Then it checks the LOCAL database to see if this is a phishing site.
Such a mechanism is just as up-to-date as submitting the URL to the remote site, and much more secure. And the binary form of such database updates would be minuscule, on average each request would likely take *LESS* time this way since you are only checking last-modified headers on a file instead of initiating a full HTTP GET/POST.
It is not copyright infringement because the content has not been nodified.
The CONTENT is just HTML code. Just because your website looks a certain what in your IE browser doesn't mean it looks the same when I view it in Lynx.
Does that mean I am guilty of copyright infringement because the site does not look the same as when you created it? Is it copyright infringement when a deaf person watches a film because they are modifying it by removing the sound?!?!?
Like I said above - site owners need to get their heads out of their ass. HTML has no guarantee over layout, that is not what markup is for. It is to offer up *suggested* layouts. If you want layout guarantee, use PDF or something.
Don't see how this is news. Google Mobile has been doing this for at least a year. Any links to external sites that originate on my m.google.com homepage are automatically "mobile-i-fied" by Google. You can disable the service in your preferences I believe if you want the full size page.
Personally I love the service since it saves me valuable bandwidth and time.
I do not know if Google respects these special User-Agent strings for mobile-specific site versions - and frankly, as a user, as long as the site works, I don't really give a hoot who is parsing it. "Web Designers" need to get their heads out of their ass and realize that the web is a content delivery mechanism, not a publishing and layout mechanism. You have absolutely no guarantee whatsoever on what your content looks like to the end user. If you don't like that than get a real publishing job.
4000 / 365 = over 10 years. And that's assuming 24/7 production. Unless you are doing this in the north pole during the summer, that is impossible. It's more like 20 years for payback.
One exception - I get the impression European plans are a much closer match to U.S. prepaid/pay-as-you-go plans, except they are far more reasonably priced. U.S. PAYG plans are massive ripoffs
It depends totally on your useage model. If you are a light cell user you could almost certainly pay less with a PayGo plan than a contract plan. I ran the numbers and if I could get out of my contract for free I would save over $10 a month by using PayGo, because I typically use less than 100 minutes a month on my cell.
Japan has recently announced a policy change regarding entry at border crossings for Non-Japanese citizens which will go into effect November 23, 2007. This policy change will affect ALL non-Japanese citizens arriving in Japan regardless of travel purpose, duration of stay or previous entries (except for those traveling on diplomatic or special government related clearance).
All travelers will be fingerprinted and photographed upon entry through Japanese Immigration. Travelers who refuse to be subject to fingerprinting and photography will be refused entry and immediately deported or possibly detained.
Are you telling me that in the US campus "police" (aka security guards - they DO NOT have "police jurisdiction on campus", they are nothing above rent-a-cops) are allowed to carry tasers??? Thank god I never attended school there.
You're still ignoring the original question.
Why were the police involved in removing a student speaking at a private gathering on a university campus?
The only reason the police were even there would be because of Kerry. The only people who should have even been involved in the incident are campus security. Police have no business escorting a citizen from anywhere just for asking someone some questions, unless the owner of the property asked them to leave and they refuse. I saw no one at any point ask the student to leave, they just shut off his mike, then the cops grabbed him and placed him under arrest.
Robert Khoo: It was in early June that they announced their 2008 dates, so by that time we already realized PAX 2007 was going to be insane because of the prereg ticket sales. I actually gave (IDG World Expo CEO) Mary Dolaher a ring and told her that for the past four years PAX is on the last weekend of August. She actually had no idea who we were, but I told her that it would be in everyone's best interest if she reconsidered the date given our size. She said she would call me back "next week..." and that was 4 months ago, so I don't know- maybe she lost my phone number?
How can you be running a huge gaming expo, under the banner "E for All", and not even know what PAX or Penny Arcade are? They obviously know nothing about their target audience at all.
People are focusing and commenting on the wrong thing both here and in other forums discussing the topic.
The question is not weather or not it is justified to taser someone who is resisting arrest. It is not even is it justified to taser this guy who was obviously already subdued.
The question is **why the hell is this guy being considered resisting arrest inthe first place**. What justification was the original arrest under? The police are not supposed to be able to arrest you for speaking out of place in a public forum!
I don't care how annoying the guy was being, or what he was doing that was out of line (storming the mic, etc). Campus security could get involved and escort the guy off the premises, but he shouldn't be arrested for speaking his mind! The police who were there (likely for Kerry security) should not have even been involved in the entire incident.
I think you're missing my point.
The TV set is over 15 years old. It's a POS. It doesn't matter what you're feeding into it (DVD/Cable, SVideo/Composite), because the tube is old and worn and has lost much of it's clarity.
But guess what - it is still more than good enough for your average joe sixpack who doesn't know any better, or care even if he did.
Some OEM partner. Google just makes the software that runs on it.
You don't have to be a content creator to not be infringing. It could easily be justified as fair use. Especially if it is a 10 second clip on YouTube which you have editorialized elsewhere on the web.
As soon as a cheapo Chinese Set top box comes out that only costs the cable companies $50 a piece, we will have all digital cable. Why? Because they can afford to rent them for free to customers. It would be more than worth it for them sinc ethey will be abe to free up so much bandwidth by dropping the analog spectrum.
The reason people with old TVs don't want to pay an extra $5 a month for digital TV is they see no benefit, and I don't blame them. It would not look any better at all on their 27" TV from 1990 than a decent analog picture.
But to the basic point of yours: why the feck should I let you tell me what I can do with my property? If you don't like what I want to do with what I bought DON'T SELL IT TO ME. It's not like I've got a gun to your head and my wallet out in front of you.
Because it is not your property. It is MINE. I wrote it, you're just using it because I am letting you.
What you are advocating is nothign different than being able to take a book and photocopy it from page to page and distribute it freely.
And here's why.
Freedom is not a one way street.
Any user should not have the freedom to dictate to me, a developer, what I do or do not do with my code. If I want to release it under GPL, super. If I want to release it as a binary, that is my right too (so long as I am not using other GPL code).
I wrote it, it is my choice. Similarly, it is your choice if you want to use it or not.
This is why Linus does not back Stallman. Linus has publicly stated that his viewpoint is the same as the above - that the developer has the right to do whatever they want, it's their code. If Stallman had his way, all software would be legally copyright free and able to be copied around at whim, regardless of what the creator wants. He wants to "free software" from copyright.
As far as your "who will you be crying to when you'll want to retrieve your old data or experiment with older libraries or systems?" comment - the answer is NO ONE. No one forced you to use that proprietary program. It was your choice, it is your consequences. This is what freedom means. It is a two way street.
"Freedom" means you can do whatever you want. "Freedom" means that I, as a softwate developer, am free to share it with the world in any way which I choose.
Stallman's problem is he doesn't agree with that; it is fact that his true desire to end the ability of a software author with the ability to release it under their own terms.
Back up the HD, re-install the factory OS from the recovery CD. Return laptop for repair to clueless tech department, when it is fixed, put Linux back.
It is not worth the hassle trying to fight this. In the end you have no "rights", the company issuing the warranty can do anything they damn well please. You'd be better off just getting it fixed ASAP with as little hassle as possible.
But Google refunded 200% of the wasted money, not just 50%.
This just goes to prove what we already know, Steve Jobs is cheap.
Hynix, has announced they have stacked 24 flash chips in a 1.4mm thick multi-chip package
According to NASA, it may even be possible to stack 48 chips in a 2.8mm package. Scientists also speculate someday we may be able to achieve up to 240 chips in a 14mm thick package.
Further on this, according to NASA, 50 double-jawed Moray Eels can chew 100 objects simultaniously. Even further, 100 double-jawed Moray Eels can chew 200 objects.
Why are they using such an arcane method of filtering?
It's a cable network. Comcast owns all the endpoints. Why don't they just use QoS and traffic shaping?
Using TCP RST packets seems like such an error-prone and arcane method of doing this.
That is all well and good, until you start with a string whose natural harmonic frequency is say, 445.6 Hz, 448 Hz, or any other random number.
It's not like in nature there is some "ideal guitar string tree" that grows strings of exactly 440 Hz. **We create strings** for our instruments that have harmonics that fit our **artificially created** scale.
Humans love to take natural elements and put them in pretend boxes.
I don't know how much money you make, but you seem to be mistaking fanboyism for something I like to call "a budget". Not everyone can afford to spend $599 on a PS3, $499 on a 360, and $300 on a Wii. That's $1400 freaking dollars - I can feed and house my family for almost two months on that. Not to mention the cost getting games for each of those systems. A few years ago when I was a student I would be lucky to even buy *ONE* of these systems, considering the $299 Wii price is my food for 3 months. No, most people can only afford one game system. So, whichever one you chose (if you can get any at all), you're stuck with it, for at least 2-3 years.