The problem with companies like AOL, EarthLink, etc, is that they give a false sense of security to their users, claiming that they will be protected from everything. Not a day goes by I don't see their stupid TV commercials and feel sick.
If people want to be really safe using the web, they need to be conscious about their computer and their security. This is a major drag for average users, but there's no other way. Even if the programs that access the web were 100% safe, there are ways of attacking users by exploiting their ignorance and gullibility. Teaching people to be more security-aware makes it a lesser problem to have insecure applications.
Views, maybe. Clicks, not so much. It would be interesting to see if there's any adverstising revenue coming from a Slashdotting. I would guess it's very little. The only indirect gain is the small boost in Page Rank, being linked from such a high traffic site.
I agree, on the Firefox Flicks globe, the videos I prefer are not the ones that talk about Firefox's features or "coolness", but the ones that are different and original. But there's plenty of other elements that are very appealing to people. For instance, I particularly liked a couple of videos from France, were some dude's little kids talk about Firefox. I don't even know what they're saying, but babies are cute, and the videos are cool to watch. Other stuff that sells: sexiness and puppies.
Hope somebody's taking note, I'm throwing gold at you, gold, I tell ya!
Yes, I don't intend to spend so much time downloading and reinstalling the whole thing just to get some minor (and a few major) updates. Call me when there's a real major change, maybe version 2.1. They should take a page from Firefox 1.5 and do automatic patching. All the cool applications are doing it:).
The problem remains. How are you going to store the first password the user entered? It is impossible to have an encryption system where the key (or the key to the key, or...) is not somehow accessible. The only way to avoid this is to have client/server interaction, where the server holds the keys, or store the key in an external location, such as an USB drive. None of these seem feasible for a simple standalone chat application.
But, anyway, even if the key is obtainable somehow, it doesn't justify the lack of encryption. At least it makes it a *little* more complicated to obtain passwords from the user. Having them in plain text is just plain stupid (no pun intended).
There will always be people who will want to purchase the original games, be it because they don't condone piracy, or they like the art on the booklet and DVD, they don't have the time/skill/balls to mod their system, or simply because they like having the original better. Mass distribution of games, even pirated ones, increase the popularity of both the games and console. Otherwise, more sophisticated and probably user unfriendly ways of protecting content would be implemented.
I just love it when people say something and then they don't. It's like their making a statement, and then they make the opposite, so they dind't say anything. I think it's an interesting way of showing both points of view without commiting to either one. Or not.
Agreed. Google is a HUGE company with a lot going on, but this can be very polarizing. You may be part of something really cool, or you may be part of something very infamous. Google is rapidly gaining on Microsoft, both in a good way and in a bad way. Would you say a Microsoft employee has the same amount amount of pride to show their kids/grandkids what he/she did?
Well, it can be called one of the first serious implementations of Web 2.0 frameworks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0, so we can hope times of "web as service" are soon
Ah, nothing like a good cup of buzz in the morning.
I would also like to add that it wouldn't be so hard to device a system that allows speeding for short intervals of time, since there might be some special circumstances that merit speeding. That makes the system open for bypass, but in general it would work just fine.
Mozilla could take a name change and become Netscape once again.
Even if Netscape is its predecessor, Mozilla has stood on its own and has gained worldwide respect without being associated to Netscape. As another reply stated, Netscape has a lot of baggage and people don't react to that old name anymore. Mozilla has existed for a long time, but Mozilla Firefox is a relatively new product, and that helps getting some new users. Mozilla shouldn't change to Netscape because it is not Netscape. It's a whole new thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with companies like AOL, EarthLink, etc, is that they give a false sense of security to their users, claiming that they will be protected from everything. Not a day goes by I don't see their stupid TV commercials and feel sick.
If people want to be really safe using the web, they need to be conscious about their computer and their security. This is a major drag for average users, but there's no other way. Even if the programs that access the web were 100% safe, there are ways of attacking users by exploiting their ignorance and gullibility. Teaching people to be more security-aware makes it a lesser problem to have insecure applications.
True
I'd rather go with workaround #2. It's easier to do and undo IMO. It's also cleaner in that you know exactly what will stop working.
Views, maybe. Clicks, not so much. It would be interesting to see if there's any adverstising revenue coming from a Slashdotting. I would guess it's very little. The only indirect gain is the small boost in Page Rank, being linked from such a high traffic site.
I agree, on the Firefox Flicks globe, the videos I prefer are not the ones that talk about Firefox's features or "coolness", but the ones that are different and original. But there's plenty of other elements that are very appealing to people. For instance, I particularly liked a couple of videos from France, were some dude's little kids talk about Firefox. I don't even know what they're saying, but babies are cute, and the videos are cool to watch. Other stuff that sells: sexiness and puppies.
Hope somebody's taking note, I'm throwing gold at you, gold, I tell ya!
Yes, I don't intend to spend so much time downloading and reinstalling the whole thing just to get some minor (and a few major) updates. Call me when there's a real major change, maybe version 2.1. They should take a page from Firefox 1.5 and do automatic patching. All the cool applications are doing it :).
The problem remains. How are you going to store the first password the user entered? It is impossible to have an encryption system where the key (or the key to the key, or...) is not somehow accessible. The only way to avoid this is to have client/server interaction, where the server holds the keys, or store the key in an external location, such as an USB drive. None of these seem feasible for a simple standalone chat application.
But, anyway, even if the key is obtainable somehow, it doesn't justify the lack of encryption. At least it makes it a *little* more complicated to obtain passwords from the user. Having them in plain text is just plain stupid (no pun intended).
You are so bringing down our synergy.
I don't understand why this post is modded interesting. It's damn informative it is!
Beats the hell out of Google's Eternal Beta(TM). I still don't like it, though.
There will always be people who will want to purchase the original games, be it because they don't condone piracy, or they like the art on the booklet and DVD, they don't have the time/skill/balls to mod their system, or simply because they like having the original better. Mass distribution of games, even pirated ones, increase the popularity of both the games and console. Otherwise, more sophisticated and probably user unfriendly ways of protecting content would be implemented.
I think that "IBM" company does something with computers... I could be wrong.
* Cue Google news of the hour *
I believe you mean rethorical.
I just love it when people say something and then they don't. It's like their making a statement, and then they make the opposite, so they dind't say anything. I think it's an interesting way of showing both points of view without commiting to either one. Or not.
I agree, Charlize Theron is like butter.
Agreed. Google is a HUGE company with a lot going on, but this can be very polarizing. You may be part of something really cool, or you may be part of something very infamous. Google is rapidly gaining on Microsoft, both in a good way and in a bad way. Would you say a Microsoft employee has the same amount amount of pride to show their kids/grandkids what he/she did?
It's not like your kids listen to you anyway.
Did he have bugs in his farm? I think you're on to something...
As if half a dozen of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.
Ah, nothing like a good cup of buzz in the morning.
Agreed.
I would also like to add that it wouldn't be so hard to device a system that allows speeding for short intervals of time, since there might be some special circumstances that merit speeding. That makes the system open for bypass, but in general it would work just fine.
Even if Netscape is its predecessor, Mozilla has stood on its own and has gained worldwide respect without being associated to Netscape. As another reply stated, Netscape has a lot of baggage and people don't react to that old name anymore. Mozilla has existed for a long time, but Mozilla Firefox is a relatively new product, and that helps getting some new users. Mozilla shouldn't change to Netscape because it is not Netscape. It's a whole new thing.
How about Ender? After the first book, he seemed to have all the money in the world.
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
Porn riot... I'm listening.
If you had gone to www.mozilla.org, you will see that they are promoting www.mozilla.com, which has the 1.5 download.