Are y9ou sure? I don't recall a time when I haven't seen answers at the bottom of the page, regardless of browser. They only thing that was different is that they didn't put the "registered user" filler in the middle, between the question and answers.
When I use Google or any other search engine, all of the links in the results go directly to the actual site. It is not redirected in any way. Therefore even Google does not know which link I clicked, or whether I clicked any at all. With the measures I mentioned above, the site I visit has no idea that I got there from Google. It looks to the site like I just opened a new browser window and directly typed its URL into the Address bar no matter how I actually got there.
I was wondering how you manage this? Google search results all output a google-based url that then redirects . The printed URL is often truncated, so you can't go to it automatically.
Seriously, this is slick. I don't mean the language (it appears I need to install a plugin to view samples, which is a bit silly - I just want to see the language). No, I mean the advertising. Post it to slashdot with a title the casts it in doubt; link to the web site that requires you to install the plugin... poof! instant installed client base.
And why? Because the grade-grubbing means that as of about 10-15 years ago, reviews are nothing more than adverts, and ratings are nothing more than auctions to the highest bidder.
Exactly true. Now, reviews are all about who can provide the most perks to the reviewers.
There's a bit of a hole in that logic. You're saying that because it shouldn't have been stored (I agree, it shouldn't), we can't prove nobody had it before, and because it might have leaked eventually, everybody should have it now?
If you make the assumption that this data would have gotten leaked eventually - then I can almost see your point. But there are terabytes of data that do not get leaked every day and in all probability never will.
The existence of the data could have been made public without the data itself. That aside -- from the wikileaks writeup, it appears that their only motive in publishing it is for analysis of crisis responses.
So you're saying that it's really OK, because most people won't have the same numbers - making it so that the privacy of their communications isn't a concern?
I've had the same cell and home phone numbers for 10 years now -but it really doesn't matter. It's trivial to track someone's old contact information to their new, in most cases
Text pagers are usualy carried by persons operating in an official capacity. Messages in the archive range from Pentagon and New York Police Department exchanges, to computers reporting faults to their operators as the World Trade Center collapsed.
The archive is a completely objective record of the defining moment of our time. We hope that its revelation will lead to a more nuanced understanding of the event and its tragic consequences.
Text pagers are also carried by support personnel, executives, grunts, everyday people. It's nice how they point out the "official" messages but leave out that these are outnumbered by "call me, are you ok?!" style messages, along with things like account numbers, private phone numbers, etc.
The text of the messages indicates that it's also not strictly sent by people who were directly involved - so is this just a dump of NYC area pages from nearby cell towers? What filtering do they have to prevent unrelated information from being shared?
Ah, right, this is wikileaks. We don't consider consequences for other people here. What a joke.
I'd question the ethics of it. The very existence of this database is of huge political and social importance, thus falling under Wikileaks' remit, but by putting it into the public domain they're infringing the privacy of the citizens involved even further. You can bet all the TLAs, not to mention police forces, lawyers, insurance companies, and so on are having fun with it now it's in public view.
Exactly- and especially true when you browse through and see messages like " " Andre-are you at work today? Gimme a call - 301-555-5555. Gerry". (number obviously changed in my repost) There's no doubt that these people will be targeted for 9/11-related scams and other obnoxious behavior in short order. You think Gerry's not already getting a call from someone looking to cash in, or who just thinks they're being funny?
If this list were filtered so that it was just automated systems, non-personal, etc , that's fine -- but doing it in this way is just opening the door for all the abuse and stupidity that we're capable of. As it is - it's a gross breach of privacy, published in a way that ensures that there will be no accountability for any abuse of personal information found in it.
On the other hand, if a person or group is making software for use by other people (as Inkscape seems like it's far from a "scratch a personal itch" project) then one does need to take into account the perceptions of those other people.
I'm sure that the three of us who remember usenet and would recognize "NT" to mean that we didn't have to bother reading any further than the subject appreciate the attempt. As for the rest of you youngins... get off my lawn.
I love the job that commericals are doing, scaring parents into being hyper-sensitive. Nasty, green-faced animated germs that are just SWARMING over our Precious Children -- unless we use Clorox Wipes (which also kills H1N1!!!!11!*), which takes care of 99.9% of those animated nasties. Fear tactics so obvious, it's hard to see how anyone falls for it. But... then we turn on the news and hear how the Swine Flu is Killing Us All, so... perhaps not so hard to understand.
* They started ading that tag to their commercials lately - presumably in response to the swine flu - but the best part is that "H1N1" is just the regular flu virus... Then again, I can't expect them to get facts right when my dr office has a sigh that says "HINI vaccines at Walgreens Now"
Likewise exposing your kid to lots of allergens (like pollen, grass, et cetera) can prevent allergies as the body learns to ignore these things. Even in adulthood the body can be "trained" to allergens through frequent exposure.
It's good that you've been saying this for years, but until you conduct some studies to prove it, most folks will probably still not listen to you on the subject...
Reminds me of a co-worker, back when I was cutting grass and digging ditches for a living. He'd always wash his hands before going to the bathroom, never after. I asked him about it once, he said, "I know where my dick's been all day, I can't say the same about my hands."
The same thing happened to me last week. I was looking to get a netbook, and was pricing dell minis. Baseline price was $299. I logged in with my corporate discount info, and found that my "discount price" was $339.
And how do you suppose they generate the text then? They have a system they train with text pulled from various sources, then they use it to generate an innocent looking text that can be executed with a predicted result, no? In other words, an assembler/compiler....See, I did read the pdf....
You really see nothng noteworthy about this? (Or are you just trying to cover up from getting called out in not reading TFA with a hasty skim and blasé attitude - I've done that myself a time or two...)
It looks like there is a root flaw in your logic implementation there jbacon. You are right about the special casing needs, but a simple redirection to a page explaining that they are using a non-standards compliant virus sink with links to getfirefox.com and articles backing up the claim would be much more effective in the long run
Because turning away potential customers who don't have a choice inthe browser they use (a huge corporate population is stuck on IE6) is always a sound strategy....
Slashdot Mirror
I've had GA cause slashdot itself to report site unavailable... rarely, but it happens.
Are y9ou sure? I don't recall a time when I haven't seen answers at the bottom of the page, regardless of browser. They only thing that was different is that they didn't put the "registered user" filler in the middle, between the question and answers.
When I use Google or any other search engine, all of the links in the results go directly to the actual site. It is not redirected in any way. Therefore even Google does not know which link I clicked, or whether I clicked any at all. With the measures I mentioned above, the site I visit has no idea that I got there from Google. It looks to the site like I just opened a new browser window and directly typed its URL into the Address bar no matter how I actually got there.
I was wondering how you manage this? Google search results all output a google-based url that then redirects . The printed URL is often truncated, so you can't go to it automatically.
Seriously, this is slick. I don't mean the language (it appears I need to install a plugin to view samples, which is a bit silly - I just want to see the language). No, I mean the advertising. Post it to slashdot with a title the casts it in doubt; link to the web site that requires you to install the plugin... poof! instant installed client base.
And why? Because the grade-grubbing means that as of about 10-15 years ago, reviews are nothing more than adverts, and ratings are nothing more than auctions to the highest bidder.
Exactly true. Now, reviews are all about who can provide the most perks to the reviewers.
If you make the assumption that this data would have gotten leaked eventually - then I can almost see your point. But there are terabytes of data that do not get leaked every day and in all probability never will.
The existence of the data could have been made public without the data itself. That aside -- from the wikileaks writeup, it appears that their only motive in publishing it is for analysis of crisis responses.
Laziness, of course... that's two whole extra keystrokes...
Valid point. Unless they're living in positive-pressure houses and never leaving, they really can't be avoided.
I've had the same cell and home phone numbers for 10 years now -but it really doesn't matter. It's trivial to track someone's old contact information to their new, in most cases
Text pagers are usualy carried by persons operating in an official capacity. Messages in the archive range from Pentagon and New York Police Department exchanges, to computers reporting faults to their operators as the World Trade Center collapsed. The archive is a completely objective record of the defining moment of our time. We hope that its revelation will lead to a more nuanced understanding of the event and its tragic consequences.
Text pagers are also carried by support personnel, executives, grunts, everyday people. It's nice how they point out the "official" messages but leave out that these are outnumbered by "call me, are you ok?!" style messages, along with things like account numbers, private phone numbers, etc.
The text of the messages indicates that it's also not strictly sent by people who were directly involved - so is this just a dump of NYC area pages from nearby cell towers? What filtering do they have to prevent unrelated information from being shared?
Ah, right, this is wikileaks. We don't consider consequences for other people here. What a joke.
I'd question the ethics of it. The very existence of this database is of huge political and social importance, thus falling under Wikileaks' remit, but by putting it into the public domain they're infringing the privacy of the citizens involved even further. You can bet all the TLAs, not to mention police forces, lawyers, insurance companies, and so on are having fun with it now it's in public view.
Exactly- and especially true when you browse through and see messages like " " Andre-are you at work today? Gimme a call - 301-555-5555. Gerry". (number obviously changed in my repost) There's no doubt that these people will be targeted for 9/11-related scams and other obnoxious behavior in short order. You think Gerry's not already getting a call from someone looking to cash in, or who just thinks they're being funny?
If this list were filtered so that it was just automated systems, non-personal, etc , that's fine -- but doing it in this way is just opening the door for all the abuse and stupidity that we're capable of. As it is - it's a gross breach of privacy, published in a way that ensures that there will be no accountability for any abuse of personal information found in it.
On the other hand, if a person or group is making software for use by other people (as Inkscape seems like it's far from a "scratch a personal itch" project) then one does need to take into account the perceptions of those other people.
It can made FLA or SWF?
No, and unfortunately it cannot made you learn the difference in tense between "make" and "made"
Alas, it has begun. The lolcatters have arrived.
He can has cheeseburger.
I can made for the hills.
I'm sure that the three of us who remember usenet and would recognize "NT" to mean that we didn't have to bother reading any further than the subject appreciate the attempt. As for the rest of you youngins... get off my lawn.
* They started ading that tag to their commercials lately - presumably in response to the swine flu - but the best part is that "H1N1" is just the regular flu virus... Then again, I can't expect them to get facts right when my dr office has a sigh that says "HINI vaccines at Walgreens Now"
*cough* swine flu *cough*
With all that coughing, I hope you're using your purell!
Likewise exposing your kid to lots of allergens (like pollen, grass, et cetera) can prevent allergies as the body learns to ignore these things. Even in adulthood the body can be "trained" to allergens through frequent exposure.
It's good that you've been saying this for years, but until you conduct some studies to prove it, most folks will probably still not listen to you on the subject...
Reminds me of a co-worker, back when I was cutting grass and digging ditches for a living. He'd always wash his hands before going to the bathroom, never after. I asked him about it once, he said, "I know where my dick's been all day, I can't say the same about my hands."
Unless you were making an allusion to Windows 2000, Built on NT* Technology.
*NT = New Technology
Especially when you consider that the star of the day declined to show up for autographs - because the crowd was too unruly...
The same thing happened to me last week. I was looking to get a netbook, and was pricing dell minis. Baseline price was $299. I logged in with my corporate discount info, and found that my "discount price" was $339.
I'm curious if the EU will have anything to say about this.
Yeah, they will. Probably something along the lines of "Give us 20 million euros for this or you're doomed."
And how do you suppose they generate the text then? They have a system they train with text pulled from various sources, then they use it to generate an innocent looking text that can be executed with a predicted result, no? In other words, an assembler/compiler....See, I did read the pdf....
You really see nothng noteworthy about this? (Or are you just trying to cover up from getting called out in not reading TFA with a hasty skim and blasé attitude - I've done that myself a time or two...)
Boy, you sure lepton that joke in a hurry.
You're a quarky one, aren't you...
It looks like there is a root flaw in your logic implementation there jbacon. You are right about the special casing needs, but a simple redirection to a page explaining that they are using a non-standards compliant virus sink with links to getfirefox.com and articles backing up the claim would be much more effective in the long run
Because turning away potential customers who don't have a choice inthe browser they use (a huge corporate population is stuck on IE6) is always a sound strategy....