
Metric shit ton
Is that larger or smaller than an imperial arse-load?
1257 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Oct 2007
Now I understand what's so important about space exploration. It's not the science or any of that technical stuff, it's something *we* can all get behind, humanity as a whole, united in common cause. It has to be worth it for that alone.
Amazing how one small word can change perceptions.
Ad bureaux are unscrupulous, news at 11.
The advice remains the same: Trust nobody, treat all cookies as session cookies, clear your cache, don't use Flash [1] and disable DOM storage. Anything less is just asking for BOHICA.
[1] or redirect Flash's local storage location to /dev/null.
Omniture? Blackholed on the firewall and has been for years. This is just a small portion of my blockthetossers script:
${addcmd} 205.216.15.64/27 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 205.216.7.128/28 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 207.108.181.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 216.143.122.0/23 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 216.194.125.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 216.52.17.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 65.119.25.152/29 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.150.208.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.150.217.0/27 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.151.137.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.151.146.192/27 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.151.152.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.151.244.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 66.235.128.0/19 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 67.133.240.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 70.42.134.0/24 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
${addcmd} 74.201.95.0/27 # Omniture confirmed ARIN
Anyone else you'd like to ask about? Audience Science? Experian? Because those and many, many others have been blocked for the same length of time. Hardly any performance hit because Radix trees are quite efficient at this sort of thing. I see it's now becoming trendy, which means most people will get it horribly wrong. Ho hum...
"In 2010, Google says, its services were up 99.984 per cent of the time. And through first several months of 2011, they're at 99.9949 per cent. That translates to about five minutes of downtime per month."
Yes, that's one end of the link. Now, what about your connection, the ISP, BT outages for DSL subscribers etc, not forgetting how easy DDoS attacks have proven to be just lately. It's alright for the server to be accepting connections when you yourself can't reach the bugger. That'll make you feel a whole lot better, won't it?
Stupid, stupid idea that is only gaining momentum because it's being pushed hard so that vendors can sell us storage solutions labelled "local cloud cache" or "high availability local storage" or some other whalesong-induced bollocks sometime down the line when they decide their revenue is down. Cyclic sales...
A long long time ago,
I can still remember,
When our water used to taste divine.
And I knew if we all ran out,
Of beer and whisky, rum and stout,
It would be as tasty as the wine.
But several awful Buds thereafter,
Found me facing a disaster,
Bladder overflowing,
I couldn't stop from going!
I really think I should have looked,
For the signs that said I would be booked,
The sheriff says I might be fucked,
The day the water died...
Sorry, couldn't resist ;o)
Point 1) The most telling part of this is LM "checking" to see if this has any legitimacy. That means it could have happened, even if it hasn't already, which means they need a rocket up their arses come what may of their investigation.
Point 2) All this crap is going to lead to is more draconian Internet law. That's a government's fix for everything: We can't be wrong using such an open platform for sensitive data so we'll just slap those with a clue of how to use it and level the playing field. Soon enough you won't be able to use anything but port 80 and approved DNS without some goon knocking your door off its hinges. Bye bye, open platform.
No, they haven't.
# host www.theregister.com
www.theregister.com has address 212.100.234.54
# dig www.theregister.com AAAA
; <<>> DiG 9.6.-ESV-R3 <<>> www.theregister.com AAAA
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 56258
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.theregister.com. IN AAAA
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
theregister.com. 494 IN SOA ns1.theregister.co.uk. hostmaster.theregister.co.uk. 2010031800 28800 7200 604800 3600
;; Query time: 4 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 12:35:10 2011
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 105
Zone hasn't changed since March 2010. Bloody disgraceful! :o)
You may want to investigate ifconfig <interface> link for rooted iOS devices. Android probably has ifconfig <interface> hw ether, too.
Trivially easy to get around and this isn't just wireless APs, either. It'll work on secured ports on managed switches for wired ethernet. Never trust a MAC address to identify a host.
3.6.16, Mahatma Coat? Whatever, I'd be willing to bet that most of those who complain about Fx loading times have umpteen add-ons, graphics-heavy personas, huge swathes of unsorted bookmarks, Java, Moonlight, Flash (a-ah!) and about three quarters of an inch of actual Gecko-rendered real-estate between the idiotic toolbars and the status bar. For all we know they could be using a poxy Willamette, too!
This is why this talk of speed is only ever going to be subjective. I have a fixed set of add-ons, customisations and a huge bookmark collection myself. There again, I'm not moaning about how long it takes to load my huge store of crap (two to four seconds from cold with an NFS mounted /home over Gig-E depending on my server's mood, literally picofortnights when it's all cached).
BTW, you people *do* realise that your add-ons, themes, bookmarks and general years of cruft survive across upgrades, right? And if you don't delete old, incompatible add-ons and general shite from before Phoenix Beta [1], Fx loads them on every single cold launch?
Clue: Badly needed.
[1] It's called hyperbole. Look it up.
"and also has the most vulnerabilites in each year for more than half a decade now"
ITYM "has the most vulnerabilities *found* and *fixed* in each year." Which would you rather have, a proactive team finding, fixing and releasing patches for bugs or a defensive team evading them? Believe me, the latter is more likely to bite you on the arse in the real world.
...on one of my networks. If I catch you using this I'll chop your sodding fingers off. I don't care if you're the senior VP of staff bogs. You may even recover to see that I've done it. Same goes for any other cloud service. Now get some sodding work done and stop buggering around on Amazon. The Araldite in the USB ports should be a clue to how much I don't want your Justin Beiber album on one of my machines.
The main reason, Mr. Bezos, that it's difficult for people to transfer music/pictures of their whelps/funny powerpoint files/little purple bastards to their work machines is that WE MAKE IT DIFFICULT. We do that for a reason. Get a clue, FFS, and stop encouraging lusers to misuse corporate resources.
http://bit.ly/P6ylT
Suing Usenet (the NNTP network) would be like trying to sue a virus for giving you a bout of pig plague. Usenet.com was a commercial entity with a sales pitch of "get your pirate on!" which has bugger all to do with the Usenet that those of us who know of its existence use.
Pineapple, for obvious reasons.
Advertising, yet again, is at the root of this problem. I've long thought that GSM should have had a means to disable the sending of SMS to the handset. To those of us who don't use SMS, this would be a killer feature. That it doesn't tells you all you really need to know.
The zirconium encapsulation of the fuel rods reacting with water when they reach a certain temperature. One of the reasons, apart from the yellow flame rather than blue, that I doubt reactor 3's explosion was hydrogen again is that reactor 3 is (or was) using mixed oxide fuel, loaded in 2010, unlike the other three which are using zirconium encapsulated uranium oxide. It's possible the MOX uses the same carriers, though.
That didn't look like a hydrogen explosion to me. You'll note the blue "halo" right at the start of reactor 1's blowout, entirely consistent with a hydrogen blast, which was replaced by a yellow/orange flame and grey smoke of reactor 3's. I'm reserving judgment on this one. I don't think we're getting the entire truth.
Mozilla, this DNT idea isn't going to work. You're relying on trackers being ethical which, given the amount of money Google has proved there is in that activity, isn't a realistic expectation.
What you really need to do is expose the mechanisms to the user in a meaningful way. For example, bring DOM storage out from under about:config so that it can be easily disabled and, more importantly, the user knows what it is for. A mechanism to restrict the session to the parent domain would also help keep web beacons and rogue scripts under control. Just a couple of examples of useful controls that could be applied instead of this false sense of security. Oh, and get rid of the "safe" browsing traitorware, please.
If you're really serious about this, you need to assist the user in safeguarding her privacy by bringing the mechanisms and methods of such tracking under her control. Since you are mostly funded by Google who have a vested interest in keeping the user tracked, I really doubt that this will happen. Toss as many bones as you like in this direction but until a substantial increase in user control over privacy matters happens, it'll mean nothing. In fact, you're making matters worse: It won't be so very long before I hear "I didn't bother with AdBlock and NoScript because this do not track thingy protects me."
...this is still relevant:
Your post advocates a
(x ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting trackers. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.):
(x ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x ) Dishonesty on the part of trackers themselves
(x ) Extreme profitability of tracking web users
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
<snip>
Anyone who hasn't seen this before will just have to wonder what other options there were (and what I put in the "Furthermore, this is what I think about you:" section). Those who have know what it contains, the reasons why it won't work and are probably having a damned good laugh.
I think you'll find he's well aware of the privacy issue with sending mail via Google. What he's doing is taking a stand against it and since, in the crazy world of the law (sarcasm) one actually has to have been wronged before one can file a complaint, has fired a sample message off to one of his mates with a Gmail account and looked at the results for evidence of Google's interception of privileged communications. It seems he found some.
"CEO Eric Schmidt said that a completed OS was still "a few months away,""
Still trying to hide the trackers (whoops, I meant safe-browsing link verification), WiFi geolocation and Big Brother back-end from prying eyes, Mr. Creepy? Amazing what you can do with "open source" these days, eh?
How else are they going to pay for the Greek bailout? Europe is essentially a socialist setup and, despite the recession, it seems we still have more than our fair share of wealth. They only want to redistribute it a bit... </cynic>
The chances of Ertugrul and his co-conspirators getting what they deserve because of this is vanishingly small. This is not a result, people.
Ah, someone who has actually tried MSE before slagging it off. One important point you did miss, though, was that it also doesn't crap out on you and stop updating itself after twelve months without warning [1] and leave you thinking you're protected when you're not.
[1] The warning needs to get in the user's way before your average user will take any notice of it whatsoever. The "little red shield thing that won't go away" is neither use or ornament. People (in this context, read that as a hominid barely capable of breathing in and out without detailed instructions and an educational DVD - the sort of person that thinks Big Brother ending was a bad thing) need smacking in the teeth with security issues before they'll care enough to actually do anything.
"We do warn the user!" is the usual reply from these cretins. Yes, but do you repeatedly hit it over the head with cucumbers and take away all of its toys, metaphorically speaking, until it does something constructive about the situation? No? Then you don't understand users.
Ah but, John, "monetization" of the Internet is a relatively new idea. We who remember the free, open, non-discriminatory interconnection of private networks and quid pro quo sharing of knowledge idea don't want it and we never have. If small publishers (or anyone else, for that matter) need to go into shady ethical areas to make money, perhaps their business models are flawed, in which case it's up to them, not us, to think about solutions that both work and do not infringe the rights of others or move aside for those that can.
However, if some people are willing to accept being tracked and profiled, why, let them opt in. What these small publishers are scared of is that nobody will, so perhaps this tells you just how popular this idea of throwing privacy to the wind really is. If that doesn't, the lengths some people go to to release themselves from all this snooping should be a massive clue.
I forget the last time, if ever, I looked at a newspaper or magazine, even a free one, and some prick popped up, took my photo, handed me a form to fill in and tattooed my arse with a unique ID while I wasn't looking. The result would probably be a very real-time smack in the mouth for whoever tried. I'm also struggling to remember a time I made a purchase on the strength of an advert that I didn't go looking for specifically based on other criteria. In fact, I usually have a harder time finding what I want to purchase *because* of the relentless advertising.
The whole thing is a sham. It's poorly thought out and people are trying to make it work against all odds using guilt trips. Sorry, but I don't feel the least bit guilty.
No. As Alex says, the default should be safety and privacy. There has been ample opportunity to do this in a self-regulatory manner and it has been repeatedly missed. Even things we should be able to trust such as Firefox has added things like SafeBrowsing and GeoLocation which leaks PII like a sieve. Enough is enough. Either respect users' privacy or laws like this will be needed. It's as simple as that.
I respectfully disagree, Sarah. A troll, if taken from the original etymology of trolling from angling before the AOLers got hold of it, is an action deliberately taken to get a bite or two. I think that describes quite nicely what this foolish "pastor" is doing. Both the media and Islam have bitten when ignoring the halfwit and his bait would have denied him his 15 minutes of fame.
I heard someone political (completely forgettable so I can't remember who) saying that although this is a minor disturbance in the grand scheme of things, this little troll of one particular set of god botherers will never go away due to the persistent nature of the web.
So they've just discovered this little foible of the web? Then WHY in the name of ANY deity do the politicians and big business alike advocate we forget all about privacy when it comes to the Internet? They obviously recognize the drawbacks.
Nah, patent. Even Apple wouldn't dare go up against the Mad Military in a court of lore[1]. They'll not hesitate to try to patent and/or claim other people's ideas, though.
"We invented the GUI! Windows copied us!"
So X/PARC and Digital Research were just sitting there playing with themselves, were they? Yeah right, Steve. NURSE!
[1] No, that wasn't a typo. Think about it.
"I support Web Foundation’s mission to promote the advancement of the web, as well as access to it, especially in Africa where the web can act as a catalyst for economic growth.”
He's had one of those "Dear freind, how are you?" type e-mails promising him zillions in unclaimed government funds. Can't you tell?
Dear Gordy,
until they bloody well pack it in, we want as few Africans, particularly Nigerians, on the 'net as possible, capice?
Sincerely,
World+Dog.
"maybe the daily mail needs to run a piece about this 'up to' garbage"
..which will then only be read by Daily Mail readers. You see the problem with your idea?
"'heres your new car sir, it does up to 120 mph and up to 50mpg'"
Good analogy! The national speed limit is 70MPH and your fuel economy depends on you not driving like a prat. These are givens, as are variable bit rates over distance to people who understand DSL technology.