According to my high school, "hacking" includes opening Internet Explorer when the last guy to use the PC set the home page to an unprotected network share.
It needs WebSockets, make sure your browser supports them. I couldn't get it to work from my workplace, I assumed WebSockets don't support proxies or something.
This is why no-ip.org has a couple dozen alternative domains to choose from. Same idea with mailinator with sites that try to block you using mailinator e-mail addresses.
Sorry you don't like Chrome... I think you'll find the popup problem is probably isolated to a handful of shady sites (I have no such problems myself) and closing all windows effectively quits Chrome anyway. Not sure what Flash is about, it worked out of the box for me.
Chrome has a very good sandbox model though, and they do a ton of tricks to try and keep it running fast. There's also a built in JS-whitelist functionality I call "NoScript Lite" which works pretty well. Plus you have nice sandboxed extensions, unlike Firefox where extensions get free run of the browser or even the system. You might want to keep trying Chrome for a bit, it may still grow on you.:) I jumped to Chrome 0.1 from a very slow Firefox 3 and never looked back, even with the massive lack of features at the time.
I think a problem is games never really go on sale like other products do. And yet the benefits to putting games on sale have been clearly shown:
“The sale is a highly promoted event that has ancillary media like comic books and movies associated with it. We do a 75 percent price reduction, our Counter-Strike experience tells us that our gross revenue would remain constant. Instead what we saw was our gross revenue increased by a factor of 40. Not 40 percent, but a factor of 40. Which is completely not predicted by our previous experience with silent price variation.”
It would be phenomenally stupid for OnLive to go forward with Desktop when it would be obvious to MS that they were in breach of the license. So that leads me to believe at least OnLive thinks they are compliant and have a legitimate licenses. That said MS did make some sort of statement about working with OnLive to resolve "licensing issues". So SOMETHING is going on.
I only paid like $30 for the Orange Box when it came out. Valve has given me above and beyond my money's worth over the past 4+ years so I have no problem buying a key every so often to pay them back.
I'm finding it kind of funny he stuck with Firefox even through the horrible 3.0-3.5 phase that caused me to jump ship when Chrome 0.1 came out. Firefox took 30 seconds to start and 14 or so to shut down at one point. After some debugging I determined almost half of that was due to Adblock Plus ALONE. Removing its configuration files sped up startup by 11 seconds.
Chrome nicely takes care of that particular problem with ease. Slow extensions run in their own processes and are easily identified as problematic from a task manager.
Also I am finding the quicker release schedule of Firefox funny since my dad refused to try Chrome due to its release schedule which he thought was too fast, so he stuck with Firefox. And now Firefox is going to have quick releases too.
He also uses Bing since he thinks its more trustworthy than Google but that's another story.
It says you can load stuff like Origin and standard PC titles on there, I doubt it will block any other software... Steam is their platform, Valve won't care if you run other stuff too I think.
In other words, if your server delivers a garbage or blank P3P header, the browser assumes there are no privacy implications? Sounds like a hole in the standard to me, such headers should be ignored IMO. Though Google really should have tested this properly with all browsers before deploying it in production it sounds to me like an oopsie, not at all like the Safari thing.
perhaps by running against an instance in the cloud while the local instance finishes loading
Why don't we track the killer by his IP address using Visual Basic or whatever while we're at it?
But I agree with the main sentiment; as computers become faster devs use it as an excuse to make apps more bloated and slower thinking users won't notice. But the best apps will always run fast and light.
Interestingly, Google Chrome attempts to at least APPEAR to start fast by loading components in the background while shoving stuff to the screen as fast as it can. The main window pops up before your profile is loaded AFAIK.
This guy had no business doing what he did. AFAIK you need a signed agreement with the company in question to perform penetration testing, otherwise it's illegal, no matter what your motivations are.
It would seem to me digital items are provided as a SERVICE, not a PRODUCT. If I get a contract with a cell company, and then my contract runs out (or they go under or something), I am not entitled to get my money back because I was paying for a service and not a physical product (well I may have paid for my phone but I get to keep it if my contract included paying for it). Similarly when I buy a digital item, there is no physical product. I am buying the service of using this imaginary item. The only issue here is when I buy this service for unlimited usage, should I be compensated when the service is stopped? Even if the answer is yes I doubt the full amount will be refunded, because the users got usage out of the "service".
I believe at least one publisher has stated used games are a BIGGER problem for them than piracy. They receive no money for either one, but used games are legal and you can just walk into a store and buy one so it's more accessible for more people. It would not surprise me if devs are trying to kill them, though obviously they have to be careful or else lawsuits will likely be thrown their way (perhaps legitimately so, I should be able to resell my own property that I don't use anymore).
Oh I read your post wrong; anyways I did answer your question in the first bit.
Code sample:
setTimeout("alert('This alert fires second.');", 0);
for (var i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {// Maybe do something in here that takes awhile. }
alert("This alert fires before the other one.");
Either your browser will display the alerts in the proper order despite the 0ms timeout (because timers are only handled when idle because they are NOT threaded) or your browser will get angry at the 10,000,000 iteration-long loop.
I am going to assume you are aware of how those functions work (specifically that they cannot interrupt the current thread if it is busy; they are only handled if the thread is idle) and that they themselves are not multi-threaded or have anything to do with multi-threading. It's not 100% clear from your post, though.
I think we're jumping the gun here if we assume Google is going to count all users as active users, especially since they haven't actually done this yet. If they do do this that's another story, but they could just as easily use a more fair criteria for counting users, such as perhaps only counting users who have visited Google+ specifically N times over the past month or have shared content over Google+, etc.
Other than that issue anyway there really is no big deal about forcing Gmail and Google+ account creations. If the new user never uses them they won't even know they exist (though the public profile bit does trouble me some), so it seems to me Google is just trying to streamline the account creation process.
Slashdot Mirror
According to my high school, "hacking" includes opening Internet Explorer when the last guy to use the PC set the home page to an unprotected network share.
Addendum: Though, probably just slashdotted.
It needs WebSockets, make sure your browser supports them. I couldn't get it to work from my workplace, I assumed WebSockets don't support proxies or something.
This is why no-ip.org has a couple dozen alternative domains to choose from. Same idea with mailinator with sites that try to block you using mailinator e-mail addresses.
Sorry you don't like Chrome... I think you'll find the popup problem is probably isolated to a handful of shady sites (I have no such problems myself) and closing all windows effectively quits Chrome anyway. Not sure what Flash is about, it worked out of the box for me.
Chrome has a very good sandbox model though, and they do a ton of tricks to try and keep it running fast. There's also a built in JS-whitelist functionality I call "NoScript Lite" which works pretty well. Plus you have nice sandboxed extensions, unlike Firefox where extensions get free run of the browser or even the system. You might want to keep trying Chrome for a bit, it may still grow on you. :) I jumped to Chrome 0.1 from a very slow Firefox 3 and never looked back, even with the massive lack of features at the time.
I think a problem is games never really go on sale like other products do. And yet the benefits to putting games on sale have been clearly shown:
“The sale is a highly promoted event that has ancillary media like comic books and movies associated with it. We do a 75 percent price reduction, our Counter-Strike experience tells us that our gross revenue would remain constant. Instead what we saw was our gross revenue increased by a factor of 40. Not 40 percent, but a factor of 40. Which is completely not predicted by our previous experience with silent price variation.”
(From http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10/24/less-is-more-gabe-newell-on-game-pricing/)
People clearly are liking lower price points for their games and everyone wins when games are priced at those levels (at least briefly).
Of course Steam games are regularly, even when not on sale, priced more reasonably than $60 for most titles.
It would be phenomenally stupid for OnLive to go forward with Desktop when it would be obvious to MS that they were in breach of the license. So that leads me to believe at least OnLive thinks they are compliant and have a legitimate licenses. That said MS did make some sort of statement about working with OnLive to resolve "licensing issues". So SOMETHING is going on.
I only paid like $30 for the Orange Box when it came out. Valve has given me above and beyond my money's worth over the past 4+ years so I have no problem buying a key every so often to pay them back.
Tried upping your DPI setting?
TFA claims without the magnetic connector the jack simply won't work. Perhaps the non-magnetic kind needs to be used differently in order to work.
I'm finding it kind of funny he stuck with Firefox even through the horrible 3.0-3.5 phase that caused me to jump ship when Chrome 0.1 came out. Firefox took 30 seconds to start and 14 or so to shut down at one point. After some debugging I determined almost half of that was due to Adblock Plus ALONE. Removing its configuration files sped up startup by 11 seconds.
Chrome nicely takes care of that particular problem with ease. Slow extensions run in their own processes and are easily identified as problematic from a task manager.
Also I am finding the quicker release schedule of Firefox funny since my dad refused to try Chrome due to its release schedule which he thought was too fast, so he stuck with Firefox. And now Firefox is going to have quick releases too.
He also uses Bing since he thinks its more trustworthy than Google but that's another story.
Yup, my best pings were 300ms back when I used to play Jedi Knight online.
It says you can load stuff like Origin and standard PC titles on there, I doubt it will block any other software... Steam is their platform, Valve won't care if you run other stuff too I think.
I assume they are talking about all major outstanding bugs in their HUD feature.
In other words, if your server delivers a garbage or blank P3P header, the browser assumes there are no privacy implications? Sounds like a hole in the standard to me, such headers should be ignored IMO. Though Google really should have tested this properly with all browsers before deploying it in production it sounds to me like an oopsie, not at all like the Safari thing.
Why don't we track the killer by his IP address using Visual Basic or whatever while we're at it?
But I agree with the main sentiment; as computers become faster devs use it as an excuse to make apps more bloated and slower thinking users won't notice. But the best apps will always run fast and light.
Interestingly, Google Chrome attempts to at least APPEAR to start fast by loading components in the background while shoving stuff to the screen as fast as it can. The main window pops up before your profile is loaded AFAIK.
This guy had no business doing what he did. AFAIK you need a signed agreement with the company in question to perform penetration testing, otherwise it's illegal, no matter what your motivations are.
It would seem to me digital items are provided as a SERVICE, not a PRODUCT. If I get a contract with a cell company, and then my contract runs out (or they go under or something), I am not entitled to get my money back because I was paying for a service and not a physical product (well I may have paid for my phone but I get to keep it if my contract included paying for it). Similarly when I buy a digital item, there is no physical product. I am buying the service of using this imaginary item. The only issue here is when I buy this service for unlimited usage, should I be compensated when the service is stopped? Even if the answer is yes I doubt the full amount will be refunded, because the users got usage out of the "service".
Let me guess... you set up customer complaints to get filed in /dev/null too?
I believe at least one publisher has stated used games are a BIGGER problem for them than piracy. They receive no money for either one, but used games are legal and you can just walk into a store and buy one so it's more accessible for more people. It would not surprise me if devs are trying to kill them, though obviously they have to be careful or else lawsuits will likely be thrown their way (perhaps legitimately so, I should be able to resell my own property that I don't use anymore).
Oh I read your post wrong; anyways I did answer your question in the first bit.
Code sample:
setTimeout("alert('This alert fires second.');", 0); // Maybe do something in here that takes awhile. }
for (var i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
alert("This alert fires before the other one.");
Either your browser will display the alerts in the proper order despite the 0ms timeout (because timers are only handled when idle because they are NOT threaded) or your browser will get angry at the 10,000,000 iteration-long loop.
I am going to assume you are aware of how those functions work (specifically that they cannot interrupt the current thread if it is busy; they are only handled if the thread is idle) and that they themselves are not multi-threaded or have anything to do with multi-threading. It's not 100% clear from your post, though.
Multi-threading in JS is handled by web workers.
I think we're jumping the gun here if we assume Google is going to count all users as active users, especially since they haven't actually done this yet. If they do do this that's another story, but they could just as easily use a more fair criteria for counting users, such as perhaps only counting users who have visited Google+ specifically N times over the past month or have shared content over Google+, etc.
Other than that issue anyway there really is no big deal about forcing Gmail and Google+ account creations. If the new user never uses them they won't even know they exist (though the public profile bit does trouble me some), so it seems to me Google is just trying to streamline the account creation process.
Yes, yes I would.
That type of vulnerability is called "It rather involved being on the other side of this airtight hatchway".