That is because the Acid tests DO NOT test standards. They test fringe cases and in some cases test parts that have since been removed from the spec or nobody uses. It wastes time to develop solely to pass the Acid tests. What is more helpful is to build your browser to standards, which IE8 and IE9 are (they don't support all standards... nobody does... but what they do support is supported well), and one you get the standards built in all of these fringe case test will naturally fall into line. You could build IE to pass Acid 3 and still have a crappy browser that the only thing it can do well is pass the Acid test.
Being in the medical IT field I can tell you that almost all medical software is written for Windows. And last I checked I don't think you can arrest anyone for developing for the windows platform. Just because the system is on Windows doesn't automatically make it insecure. There are a number of things that could have been done to mitigate this such as... super-gluing the USB ports, securing door access, group policy to lock down what can be run. If best practice security was followed this guy would have hard a hard time doing it. If you leave a system wide open for attack it will be... whether it be Unix, Mac, or Windows.
There is a service called Otherinbox that uses this approach. They give you a domain @yourname.otherinbox.com. Then you turn on the catch all feature and you can create any number of throw away email addresses. Combine that with filters if you get tired of receiving emails from microsoft@blah.otherinbox.com you just create a filter to delete them. I use this for everything that is not a business that I trust.
It doesn't really matter what Microsoft does. They could give food to starving children and people would say that they had an ulterior motive of keeping those children alive to get them hooked on Windows.
Oh... But killing PoWs is the whole other crime of war. Torture does not need to end in death to be torture.
The point was that we are not doing anything like what the Japanese did. What they did is undeniably torture. What our CIA did is not even close to what the Japanese did such that they really cannot, in my view, be called the same thing. So, to make a sweeping statement that our version of water boarding is torture based off of what the Japanese did is a logical fallacy. Scaring the living daylight out of someone is not torture.
Besides the media is making it sound like this is a regular thing that the CIA does. It has only been used on three prisoners, and that was back in 2002. Furthermore, the session revealed significant information that saved many lives.
The prisoners were not harmed in any way and were water boarded under medical supervision. Do you hear that? We gave terrorists medical supervision. Do you think the terrorists would have provided medical support after their planned attacks that were thwarted because we water boarded these three individuals?
How about we strap you to a board and try it for 10-20 minutes and see if you still don't consider it torture?
According to CIA memos they were only allowed to do two sessions per day lasting no more than two hours each. And in those sessions they were only allowed to water board up to 40 seconds (which they say rarely happened). This could only be done a maximum of six times per two hour session. Meaning that at most the person was water boarded for four minutes out of two hours. Finally, in any 30 day period a prisoner was only allowed to be water boarded on five of those days.
I can hold my breath for forty seconds, and I can certainly do this six times in two hours. Can you?
The Japanese used salt water in their water boarding which in and of itself can cause death.
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/60549.html
After that if the stomach of the individual became too full of water they would either beat water out of the stomach or jump on the victim.
From Wikipedia
In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach.
Making people stand, depriving them of sleep, and making them think they are drowning is not torture no matter how much the media wants you to believe it is. Now having your bones broken, having your fingernails ripped off, having people jump on your stomach, or being mutilated... that's torture.
Do we actually have proof that it was stolen? How bout that they approached the makers of the original game and said, "Hey we like this game can we use it with a few modifications?" I see no reason to assume right off that it is stolen.
Pro-life advocates prefer adult stem cells because it does not require the destruction of an embryo. Preferring life is not an emotional argument. It is in fact a reasonable argument. What is unreasonable is anti-life(to use your own line of reasoning) advocates who claim that a developing baby is not fully human, when at 6 weeks there is a heart beat including a developed nervous system and brain waves. These brain waves are not supplied by the mother. The pumping heart is not the mothers. It is the child's and thus is it's own life form. The mother does not grow the child, the child grows itself. The mother only serves as an incubation chamber.
There are reasonable arguments to be pro-life. Simply because you disagree with the position does not man that the arguments are based only on emotion. You sir or mam are simply trying to set up a straw man argument that you can easily push over to make your views look better and to ease your conscience.
It wasn't handled incompetently... she's still alive. If it was handled incompetently they would have shot her without first trying to disarm what they believed could be explosives. If it were real explosives handling it incompetently would have been letting her just walk around and eventually blow herself and others up. The police did the right thins and nobody was hurt. How is that incompetence?
But if the RIAA does not follow this then they cannot follow other cases. They must protect their copyright in every instance that they can or they forfeit the right to it (copyright law). So, hopefully they won't.
Looks as though the defamatory remarks are sort of back in the article. Except now they are there as a factual statement that he is suing for someone posting those remarks. I find that ironic and funny.
I'm kinda getting tired of the "Hey, we think we found water on Mars... oh never mind" announcements. How many times have they said this only have it be wrong?
Thing is this really isn't even an issue with Microsoft. Microsoft did not invent High Assurance Certificates. And since they are being issued Microsoft has the obligation to support them... same as Opera or Firefox. Really this isn't Microsoft's fault. The blame rests in user error and really clever phishers. Microsoft (and all the other browsers) job is to figure out a way to make sure that users aren't fooled... which when it really comes down to it is next to impossible.
If you knew anything about history you would know that the Crusades were not "convert or die" campaigns as some would lead you to believe. In fact the Crusades were an attempt to take back the Holy Land because Saladin and his army had come and slain the Jews and taken over. How do you think the Dome of the Rock came to be?
And thus starts the Creationist flame war. I'm utterly amazed at the complete intolerance towards Christians these days. We live in a worlds where the term "tolerance" is thrown left and right and people are supposed to respect each other... except if you're a Christian. Then you're some kind of moron... because obviously all Christians are complete imbeciles and can't think for themselves.. despite the fact that there are many extremely bright people who claim Christianity. I fear for the future, because this is exactly how the holocaust started. People ridiculed the Jews and looked down on them until one day a certain guy had the idea that he would just do away with them... and the world looked on. Makes me wonder what will happen to the Christians in the future.
Wow! I think that is the single worst case of an Ad Hominem attack that I have ever seen. Attacking someone because of their screen name... hmm who is the one with the faulty reasoning?
Acid 2 is a flawed test. Molly Holzschlag of the WASP has even stated so. Acid 2 was created to test bleeding edge technology even though some of that is still not cemented in the CSS 3 spec. Passing Acid 2 doesn't mean anything, because the spec could still change.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen. So many forget this.
That is because the Acid tests DO NOT test standards. They test fringe cases and in some cases test parts that have since been removed from the spec or nobody uses. It wastes time to develop solely to pass the Acid tests. What is more helpful is to build your browser to standards, which IE8 and IE9 are (they don't support all standards ... nobody does ... but what they do support is supported well), and one you get the standards built in all of these fringe case test will naturally fall into line. You could build IE to pass Acid 3 and still have a crappy browser that the only thing it can do well is pass the Acid test.
Being in the medical IT field I can tell you that almost all medical software is written for Windows. And last I checked I don't think you can arrest anyone for developing for the windows platform. Just because the system is on Windows doesn't automatically make it insecure. There are a number of things that could have been done to mitigate this such as ... super-gluing the USB ports, securing door access, group policy to lock down what can be run. If best practice security was followed this guy would have hard a hard time doing it. If you leave a system wide open for attack it will be ... whether it be Unix, Mac, or Windows.
There is a service called Otherinbox that uses this approach. They give you a domain @yourname.otherinbox.com. Then you turn on the catch all feature and you can create any number of throw away email addresses. Combine that with filters if you get tired of receiving emails from microsoft@blah.otherinbox.com you just create a filter to delete them. I use this for everything that is not a business that I trust.
Amen!! Finally some sense on this post regarding the Acid tests.
It doesn't really matter what Microsoft does. They could give food to starving children and people would say that they had an ulterior motive of keeping those children alive to get them hooked on Windows.
Oh... But killing PoWs is the whole other crime of war. Torture does not need to end in death to be torture.
The point was that we are not doing anything like what the Japanese did. What they did is undeniably torture. What our CIA did is not even close to what the Japanese did such that they really cannot, in my view, be called the same thing. So, to make a sweeping statement that our version of water boarding is torture based off of what the Japanese did is a logical fallacy. Scaring the living daylight out of someone is not torture.
Besides the media is making it sound like this is a regular thing that the CIA does. It has only been used on three prisoners, and that was back in 2002. Furthermore, the session revealed significant information that saved many lives.
The prisoners were not harmed in any way and were water boarded under medical supervision. Do you hear that? We gave terrorists medical supervision. Do you think the terrorists would have provided medical support after their planned attacks that were thwarted because we water boarded these three individuals?
How about we strap you to a board and try it for 10-20 minutes and see if you still don't consider it torture?
According to CIA memos they were only allowed to do two sessions per day lasting no more than two hours each. And in those sessions they were only allowed to water board up to 40 seconds (which they say rarely happened). This could only be done a maximum of six times per two hour session. Meaning that at most the person was water boarded for four minutes out of two hours. Finally, in any 30 day period a prisoner was only allowed to be water boarded on five of those days.
I can hold my breath for forty seconds, and I can certainly do this six times in two hours. Can you?
The Japanese used salt water in their water boarding which in and of itself can cause death. http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/60549.html After that if the stomach of the individual became too full of water they would either beat water out of the stomach or jump on the victim. From Wikipedia In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach.
The Japanese version of waterboarding killed people, or injured them for life. Ours does neither.
Making people stand, depriving them of sleep, and making them think they are drowning is not torture no matter how much the media wants you to believe it is. Now having your bones broken, having your fingernails ripped off, having people jump on your stomach, or being mutilated ... that's torture.
Do we actually have proof that it was stolen? How bout that they approached the makers of the original game and said, "Hey we like this game can we use it with a few modifications?" I see no reason to assume right off that it is stolen.
Pro-life advocates prefer adult stem cells because it does not require the destruction of an embryo. Preferring life is not an emotional argument. It is in fact a reasonable argument. What is unreasonable is anti-life(to use your own line of reasoning) advocates who claim that a developing baby is not fully human, when at 6 weeks there is a heart beat including a developed nervous system and brain waves. These brain waves are not supplied by the mother. The pumping heart is not the mothers. It is the child's and thus is it's own life form. The mother does not grow the child, the child grows itself. The mother only serves as an incubation chamber. There are reasonable arguments to be pro-life. Simply because you disagree with the position does not man that the arguments are based only on emotion. You sir or mam are simply trying to set up a straw man argument that you can easily push over to make your views look better and to ease your conscience.
It wasn't handled incompetently ... she's still alive. If it was handled incompetently they would have shot her without first trying to disarm what they believed could be explosives. If it were real explosives handling it incompetently would have been letting her just walk around and eventually blow herself and others up. The police did the right thins and nobody was hurt. How is that incompetence?
You better not be, cause you're not even supposed to use the internet if you're in Scientology.
But if the RIAA does not follow this then they cannot follow other cases. They must protect their copyright in every instance that they can or they forfeit the right to it (copyright law). So, hopefully they won't.
Looks as though the defamatory remarks are sort of back in the article. Except now they are there as a factual statement that he is suing for someone posting those remarks. I find that ironic and funny.
I'm kinda getting tired of the "Hey, we think we found water on Mars ... oh never mind" announcements. How many times have they said this only have it be wrong?
Thing is this really isn't even an issue with Microsoft. Microsoft did not invent High Assurance Certificates. And since they are being issued Microsoft has the obligation to support them ... same as Opera or Firefox. Really this isn't Microsoft's fault. The blame rests in user error and really clever phishers. Microsoft (and all the other browsers) job is to figure out a way to make sure that users aren't fooled ... which when it really comes down to it is next to impossible.
If you knew anything about history you would know that the Crusades were not "convert or die" campaigns as some would lead you to believe. In fact the Crusades were an attempt to take back the Holy Land because Saladin and his army had come and slain the Jews and taken over. How do you think the Dome of the Rock came to be?
And thus starts the Creationist flame war. I'm utterly amazed at the complete intolerance towards Christians these days. We live in a worlds where the term "tolerance" is thrown left and right and people are supposed to respect each other ... except if you're a Christian. Then you're some kind of moron ... because obviously all Christians are complete imbeciles and can't think for themselves .. despite the fact that there are many extremely bright people who claim Christianity. I fear for the future, because this is exactly how the holocaust started. People ridiculed the Jews and looked down on them until one day a certain guy had the idea that he would just do away with them ... and the world looked on. Makes me wonder what will happen to the Christians in the future.
No it is chi (pronounced key). I'm a Greek minor.
It wouldn't surprise me if the just Photoshop his frames to make him look younger. There are ways of doing it.
Wow! I think that is the single worst case of an Ad Hominem attack that I have ever seen. Attacking someone because of their screen name ... hmm who is the one with the faulty reasoning?
Acid 2 is a flawed test. Molly Holzschlag of the WASP has even stated so. Acid 2 was created to test bleeding edge technology even though some of that is still not cemented in the CSS 3 spec. Passing Acid 2 doesn't mean anything, because the spec could still change.