AC has a point. Words CAN hurt you. Especially when they're words like "I hear so-and-so is a faggot, we should do something about it" posted on Facebook, that everyone from your school sees. Sure, words can't punch you... but they sure as hell can encourage people to punch you.
Or even worse "so and so said that Muhammad was a pedo and burned a qur'an". Instant death sentence
They cannot set it via http, so you will have to visit an https page for it to take effect:
Strict-Transport-Security headers must be sent via HTTPS responses only. Client implementations must not respect STS headers sent over non-HTTPS responses, or over HTTPS responses which are not using properly configured, trusted certificates.
Which could be grounds for a Man In The Middle Attack. It does not say anything about forcing people to use HTTPS, just that it will be done automatically instead of using a redirect. So it'll make sites which force HTTPS safer, but it won't force twitter to push https if you haven't asked for it.
There is a better explanation here. Basically after the header is received the browser will convert any http: requests to https:, therefore bypassing any redirect. Whether this will force you to use https depends on whether Twitter will set this header on their https sites only or on both http and https. Even if they do set it only on the https site it will force you to use https if you visit the https URL even once.
A big problem I see with this is 1) Twitter isn't carrying important personal data, 2) in fact, quite the opposite, except for login credentials to sign in, and that's always been HTTPS anyway, 3) HTTPS does not cache. We should be encouraging sites to be more cachable and more ISPs to adopt proxies like Squid, not cripple their ability to reduce traffic leaving/entering the network.
HTTPS does cache pages at the browser, it is only middle tier browsers like squid that cannot cache the pages. Of course if you have an interactive site then these will disable caching anyway, you don't want everyone to see your session.
Probably not, especially if users are aware of why the ban is in place. Generally military staff have the intelligence to not intentionally disobey instructions/request. The use of these sites could be decreased dramatically, just be telling them not to use them for a while, the block is simply a way of putting a low barrier in place to discourage the final 25% or so of use.
It's like trying to diet. Many people know they should snack less, but struggle to resist temptation. Not having snacks in the house doesn't stop you going out and buying them, however it provides a slight disincentive which helps some people stop snacking.
Plus lots of sites embed youtube videos. Someone could easily end up watching one without explicitly going to youtube without a block.
Once they discover a method to wire trap encrypted video calls, that would open a new era in porn scene.
...
I'm pretty sure that identifying a specific word with 50% accuracy is better than random chance. There are more than two words in the English language.
Maybe he's talking about the porn film.90% seem to be "oh" or "yes" (or so i am told)
They're not all BS lawsuits. For example they also sued many search engine spamming websites that were just scraping content from other sites and trying to make money with other peoples content. Righthaven should just concentrate on those ones.
A tenth of a watt-second is not exactly Hiroshima.
It is if you're in a colony of bacteria living quietly on a certain razor blade.
Somewhere a giant alien is holding a hand held laser near our galaxy saying "its only 100 mega kawabs, but it should punch a hole through this disk...."
And, to be in the same neighborhood as a conventional pistol (at least in terms of energy delivered) with a 100 ns pulse you'd need around a 40-50 TW laser.
Take 9mm Parabellum. 115 grains at about 1100 ft/s is around 420 J. Delivering that over 100 ns gives about 42 TW so this "pistol" is out by 10 orders of magnitude.
That corresponds pretty well with making hair-thin holes through a razor-blade. I can believe 1MW
Oh yeah, and Firefox is the only browser that doesn't support H.264 even if it's installed in the system. How am I supposed to watch those HTML5 H.264 videos?
Not for long though, google chrome is also dropping this patent trap.
It's a shame they don't use a sealed system and just pass the water through. It would require much more water of course, but you could co-locate the data center with the water treatment plant and then just pass all the city's water through the data center to cool it and on to the consumers to drink, so no water would be wasted (although in this case I am not sure who would trust water that had been passed though an NSA controlled facility - if it was Google that would be OK because we know they do no evil:)
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I for one am going to lay down my arms, convert to Christianity and uphold copyright law. Lets all do it together.
And bully for the good old US of A, the bastion of democracy and goodness, for coming up with it!
I, and all of my attractive, intelligent and clever friends agree with this! You should agree as well!
Absolutely. Let us all lay down our arms, convert to Christianity and promise to uphold copyright law.
AC has a point. Words CAN hurt you. Especially when they're words like "I hear so-and-so is a faggot, we should do something about it" posted on Facebook, that everyone from your school sees. Sure, words can't punch you... but they sure as hell can encourage people to punch you.
Or even worse "so and so said that Muhammad was a pedo and burned a qur'an". Instant death sentence
Strict-Transport-Security headers must be sent via HTTPS responses only. Client implementations must not respect STS headers sent over non-HTTPS responses, or over HTTPS responses which are not using properly configured, trusted certificates.
From what I am understanding of the article its there to stop:
http://www.example..../ [redirect to] https://..../
Which could be grounds for a Man In The Middle Attack. It does not say anything about forcing people to use HTTPS, just that it will be done automatically instead of using a redirect. So it'll make sites which force HTTPS safer, but it won't force twitter to push https if you haven't asked for it.
There is a better explanation here. Basically after the header is received the browser will convert any http: requests to https:, therefore bypassing any redirect. Whether this will force you to use https depends on whether Twitter will set this header on their https sites only or on both http and https. Even if they do set it only on the https site it will force you to use https if you visit the https URL even once.
A big problem I see with this is 1) Twitter isn't carrying important personal data, 2) in fact, quite the opposite, except for login credentials to sign in, and that's always been HTTPS anyway, 3) HTTPS does not cache. We should be encouraging sites to be more cachable and more ISPs to adopt proxies like Squid, not cripple their ability to reduce traffic leaving/entering the network.
HTTPS does cache pages at the browser, it is only middle tier browsers like squid that cannot cache the pages. Of course if you have an interactive site then these will disable caching anyway, you don't want everyone to see your session.
It is built in to Firefox 4 so soon you won't need an extension.
from the but-why-is-virgin-mobile-doing-it-to-me? dept.
I'm pretty sure Virgin mobile isn't doing it with anybody.
Of course. That's why its Virgin.
Probably not, especially if users are aware of why the ban is in place. Generally military staff have the intelligence to not intentionally disobey instructions/request. The use of these sites could be decreased dramatically, just be telling them not to use them for a while, the block is simply a way of putting a low barrier in place to discourage the final 25% or so of use. It's like trying to diet. Many people know they should snack less, but struggle to resist temptation. Not having snacks in the house doesn't stop you going out and buying them, however it provides a slight disincentive which helps some people stop snacking.
Plus lots of sites embed youtube videos. Someone could easily end up watching one without explicitly going to youtube without a block.
Once they discover a method to wire trap encrypted video calls, that would open a new era in porn scene.
...
I'm pretty sure that identifying a specific word with 50% accuracy is better than random chance. There are more than two words in the English language.
Maybe he's talking about the porn film.90% seem to be "oh" or "yes" (or so i am told)
In what way do secret spy satellites contribute to national security?
If I told you that I'd have to shoot you.
Its like they say ... shag one sheep....
3/14 is the third day in the fourteenth month.
Oh, I see, they are using middle-endian notation.
In hex its E/3 or E-3 which has a nice symmetry
And in binary its 1110-11 which is also quite nice
3/14 is the third day in the fourteenth month.
Oh, I see, they are using middle-endian notation.
In hex its E/3 or E-3 which has a nice symmetry
Its still 14/3 here
I hope you have some savings after making a post like that
They're not all BS lawsuits. For example they also sued many search engine spamming websites that were just scraping content from other sites and trying to make money with other peoples content. Righthaven should just concentrate on those ones.
And the Nazis executed some nasty murderers
Yes they've only just surpassed a Muslim's brain. Shouts "death to the infidel" And "how dare you insult the prophet" at random
Don't forget the random suicide bombing function
Pray to the god who arbitrarily decided to cause this catastrophe? That makes a load of sense.
It probably does if you are saying "don't do it to me too"! Or in the case of Westboro baptists "please do it to these heathens as well".
Because people like you who turn JavaScript off are tiny minority of users. Almost everyone else actually uses and enjoys it.
Your not kidding. Our site has 0.05% of users with JavaScript disabled (or otherwise unavailable)
A tenth of a watt-second is not exactly Hiroshima. It is if you're in a colony of bacteria living quietly on a certain razor blade.
Somewhere a giant alien is holding a hand held laser near our galaxy saying "its only 100 mega kawabs, but it should punch a hole through this disk...."
And, to be in the same neighborhood as a conventional pistol (at least in terms of energy delivered) with a 100 ns pulse you'd need around a 40-50 TW laser.
Take 9mm Parabellum. 115 grains at about 1100 ft/s is around 420 J. Delivering that over 100 ns gives about 42 TW so this "pistol" is out by 10 orders of magnitude.
That corresponds pretty well with making hair-thin holes through a razor-blade. I can believe 1MW
Oh yeah, and Firefox is the only browser that doesn't support H.264 even if it's installed in the system. How am I supposed to watch those HTML5 H.264 videos?
Not for long though, google chrome is also dropping this patent trap.
It's a shame they don't use a sealed system and just pass the water through. It would require much more water of course, but you could co-locate the data center with the water treatment plant and then just pass all the city's water through the data center to cool it and on to the consumers to drink, so no water would be wasted (although in this case I am not sure who would trust water that had been passed though an NSA controlled facility - if it was Google that would be OK because we know they do no evil :)
Or why not move to Alaska and just air cool?
penis.
I don't think this applies to French Letters