766 posts • joined 1 May 2008
Firebug is indeed magnificent, but here's the problem IMHO: why must the browser itself weigh itself down further and saddle all its users with such bloat, when such a capable addon exists already for those who'll actually use it?
Those dev hours would have been better spent on some of the many showstopper bugs that have persisted for years (everyone's got their own pet one by now).
Gs up, Bose down
I gotta docket full of lawyers and my homeyboys* do too.
[* Tim Cook and Jony Ive]
@Charlie Clark Re: Description...
Charlie, do you mean that to exclude those with "extensive script-blocking" will reduce the target size?
If so, I'm not convinced that will make it "much, much smaller", because:
1. Those who ad-block, script-block etc are still a very small minority, I suspect. Be careful you are not voicing the prejudice of our profession!
2. Such people (myself included) may have given up on JS-blocking due to the effort involved in unblocking the many sites that won't function without JS. That leaves us armed to the teeth with other addons that do everything short of blocking JS to protect privacy, which may just be enough of a climbdown to make us vulnerable.
Thanks for the clarification.
This is the bit that gets me. Sure, you have a laundry list of "high-entropy properties" (browser, list of plugins, OS, font settings, screen, GPU) but I find it hard to believe there isn't still a pretty high collision rate. I mean, any laptop of the same model in the hands of Average Joe who doesn't change defaults is likely to give the same hash, surely?
Plus, when the range of "entropy" (read:uniqueness) sources is that great, the odds of one of them being changed and thereby changing the hash must be pretty high too, right? (I guess these two points are slightly contradictory, but both still carry some weight I think.)
I'm just about certain I'm missing something, feel free to enlighten me ;)
Re: Or just plain offensive?
Mugging Babbage, Drew? Geek points ahoy :)
Re: Well, if things don't work out
>fried Mars Bar
Pah. Spoken like someone who's never tried a deep-fried Crunchie ;)
Still, I'm in. Will our passports be ready before the end of Scottish Summer (1 Aug)?
Icon: The only "VB" right-thinking regtards should be interested in...
Re: I wonder if the new Pi-B powers up via the USB ports?
The fact that you posted an hour before me and hadn't yet received an upvote for that joke fills me with despair for the wits of our fellow commentariat.
Pi "R" may sadly be a while coming though. So far we're only at "B" and we've had two models and a revision of the second, so I fully expect the "R" to come with integral hoverboard.
By comparison, the Pi "D" is just around the corner, and you'll only need one of those :)
Nonsense, you've been trying to sell me penis pills for the last month! Didn't you notice the backscatter from my Barracuda?
[Actually, most of your post reads very similarly to that other email you sent me proposing marriage if I paid for your passport and flight. I did reply to that one, but that was before you started sending me the penis-pill ones. What am I to infer from this? I should point out that the photo I sent back was taken on a rather chilly morning!]
Someone is producing, or possibly dancing to, inaccessible thumping mid-90s Dutch techno music behind me on the hiking trail?
>Lets not even start on what a hideously gauche thing to do this would be in the first place, and not dwell on what your mother might think about your father acting in such a way.
Tim, is that you? ;)
Well, probably not, given your apparent disdain for iThings, but seriously man, lighten up! Try not to be so British. One thing none of us can deny about our parents is that, at one time at least, they found each other attractive. And they did the nasty. Yes they did. Sleep well ;)
This all would be largely unnecessary if Joe Sixpack (and Joe PHB, I suppose) hadn't dismissed PGP as "too complicated". PGP which, as far as I'm aware, Snowden still considers "good enough".
It's easy enough to carry a PGP key on your keyfob, not to mention a portable MUA to use it with if you like. And if you don't trust the host computer enough for that, then you'd be no better off with webmail.
Is it too late for everybody to get behind that?
>Am I the only one thinking that perhaps the iPhone isn't exactly shaped in the correct way for this purpose?
You're holding it wrong.
Re: Where do we complain
I like big butts and I cannot lie. Frankly, I'm dreading my interview to be Beyoncé's PA tomorrow.
>Bad language is almost always abusive. I really don't get why you'd want kids to grow up thinking its normal to verbally abuse people.
Your premise is incorrect. Most usage of swearwords is not in the second person, but the third, and the majority within this is whereby it's used as a form of spice or raising agent; adding a bit more piquancy and emotional intensity to the content. "The fucking mower broke again" tells us more about the speaker's emotional investment in the subject than if the swearword was omitted.
>Yes they may do so at school
Well that is down to the school that tolerates it in any monitorable context.
>but that is not the same as including it in officially sanctioned entertainment.
WTF is "officially sanctioned entertainment"? Victory TV? The Running Man?
>I simply don't understand the f-bomb. Why would you take something that's supposed to be really good and use it to describe something bad?
I ain't no etymologist, but I'm fairly confident that the "good" and "bad" usages are fairly easy to discern from one another... In fact I'm not sure there even are any constructions with the word "fuck" that could realistically be misconstrued. Let's see:
fuck (v): "I'm going to fuck you." Good (unless you dislike sex)
fuck (vt) "I'm going to fuck you up/over/off." Generally Bad (counter-examples welcome).
fuck (n): "You miserable fuck!" Bad (unless during sex and with partner used to salty language)
fucking (adj): "You're a fucking fuck!" Bad / "Wotsits are fucking awesome!" Good. Aggregate: Neutral.
>Perhaps something a little less offensive, such as wishing someone would burn in torment, it isn't so bad is it?
That sounds like a biblical reference, but since you don't come out and say it, I'll assume it just means wishing someone would be burned alive. And that's better than using a word that connotes with sex or elevated emotion (mostly negative)? NGL bro, I think I'll stick with "fuck".
Re: What I'd like to see...
Ford: drunk whores
Reagan: reverse cowgirl
Clinton: Need I bother?
Bush The Revenge: shoe fetish
Obama: Jury's still out, but my money's on some unspeakable act involving a Nobel prize
If you're going to come on like his BFF, you might try and get his name right.
Re: Maybe it's "time" for a tardis regen....
>What that would be, I don't know, maybe a checkered cab [...]
Not... sure... if... trolling... but...
DIAF. I know the show's doing its best to pander to the US audience, but there are limits!
The most important question:
Will seeing this fella cause an elephant-sized mouse to shriek and jump onto a chair?
Re: Oh dear
Are you posting to the right article?
If so, you do realise they said sengis, not Sengas, right?
Re: How bizarre
Nice going Tim, now I can't wait to see the PR campaign for Worstal Bank ;)
@TheOtherHobbes Re: That problem has been solved
>Will there be a penguin version?
Protip: your SO isn't as "into" Linux as she tells you she is.
Fast work there, Ken!
Isn't that obvious?
Fridge: @Washers, is that you? The whole kitchen's shaking!!
Washing Machine: @Fridgy yeah that's me, spin cycle lol
Fridge: FFS, holding onto yoghurts & jar of pickles 4 dear life here :/
Re: Yup, got this particular T-shirt
No, fair play, on second reading the intent is perfectly clear. I think I took a break before that sub-head and got the sense of that snippet arseways. I was reading it as "cheating at navigating to the locus", which wasn't what you were saying at all. Apologies for the unwarranted rabies (rabidity?).
Out of interest (and as I'm more likely to have it at hand than VS), does Chrome actually direct you to the location of the broken tag as well?
Yup, got this particular T-shirt
In my case it was ODF (well, ODG if we must be precise) that an internal invoicing app was spitting out in a template stylee by copying some field values into the base XML and zipping it all up. Only problem, the values often contained illegal characters that made LO puke. Recognising the problem didn't take nearly as long as beating all the data into shape :(
I did howl a bit at this though, Trevor:
>There are two ways to cheat. The first is use Visual Studio or Visual Studio Express. [...]
Just two ways, really? VS, really? This seems a bit of a case of "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" to me. You had the line+col locus, you had a distinctive string you could search for; either of these would have gotten you there in Notepad, for heavens' sake. OK, you don't get the code-beautification that might help fix it, but you didn't actually mention whether VS does that bit either, with an invalid file; and in any case, anyone who's gotten this far might reasonably be expected to have the chops to spot what's wrong quite easily.
Other than that, good article - always good to raise awareness that self-help is sometimes an option with these formats (and a salutary warning to restart your wordprocessor once in a while!)
Re: Power storage?
I can't fathom why this is still an issue. Whenever I go to the Pound shop there's always thousands of AAs there that nobody's even using, and they're full already!
Don't the government know about this?
Pretty sure he stole that schtick from Tim Allen.
"Zoom in just there..."
Re: License smicense
IMHO the licence isn't problematic so much for the part highlighted in the article at all: it's far more because it doesn't (implicitly or explcitly) offer copyright immunity to users or distributors. People seem to have forgotten about this but it's the reason it's still on a number of distros' shit-lists and why the OSI wouldn't validate it as an open-source license (meeting the OSD).
A (rather dry legalese) analysis was given here. TL;DR Conclusion:
In effect TrueCrypt ought to be waiving certain of its rights for this to be operative as a license. Free software licenses do involve waivers of rights.
Our counsel advised us that this license has the appearance of being full of clever traps, which make the license appear to be a sham (and non-free).
The precise implications for forkers of all this are beyond me, but the devs clearly don't want a direct fork of their codebase, and they or a representative might even be prepared to break cover to sue. And the above demonstrates that they have a basis on which to do so, and even to start suing users if they want.
Re: objects and stuff
"Jackie Treehorn ... treats objects ... like women, man."
Re: Open source - crap code
>That should keep me busy for the next thousand years :-@
Well, that's up to you, isn't it? I dare say, given that it's apparently almost all awful, you might want to prioritise in favour of that which offends you most. It might be a more productive use of your free time than whinging on internet forums, anyway.
>(a) the code is incomprehensible in the first place
And calling the author out on that is something you're obviously too much of a shrinking violet to contemplate...
>(b) the "patch" would consist of "delete all lines from 1 onwards and replace with this".
Suffix with "...and here's why:" and the only potential hurdle is dev ego. (OK I'll give you that one)
>And just because it's free is no justification for it being crap.
It's only you who are asking for justification. It is out there in the public domain precisely so people like you, who can see that it's crap, and see why it's crap, can help make it less crap. Anything beyond that is your own inference. Personally I think you royally suck as an armchair critic, but you haven't mentioned whether you're accepting revisions to your posts. What's your licence for that?
Re: What's that title about then?
Haha, thank you kindly AC, that was really bugging me. Now I have a nice facepalm to show for it :)
I guess I can add "fails to read headlines musically" to my list of weaknesses :/
What's that title about then?
I admit to being largely a philistine with a limited eye for wordplay, but that just reads like gibberish to me. Anyone care to enlighten me?
Re: Precise language and vague language
I think I'm right in saying (not knowing the ins and outs of Exchange) that "strictly matches" wouldn't do it, because that added guff about the various tests is present whether it's a YES or a NO.
I have spamassassin-checked mail being filtered by pigeonhole (aka dovecot sieve) so the sieve rule condition I use for this is "begins with". Sieve is also very nifty for some of the more esoteric recipient-routing rules we need, on which I could write a rather long (but very niche) essay.
@Trevor, does Exchange provide such a condition, or did you reimplement a different way? I'd love to have been able to see all the conditions offered by Exchange, wonder if there's a full list online somewhere for my edification.
Re: 2008: undersea cables cut
Typical, bloody OpenReach.
Re: 3 sizes
No, you're misunderstanding, it's not the device that c... never mind.
Besides I don't see what's wrong with the range defined in Good Morning Vietnam: "Large, Medium and Caucasian".
(Yeah that's it, the one with just one pocket, undulating slightly. Ta)
Re: So fork it
That may not be as easy as you imagine. The source license contains language that many distro folks considered pretty noxious to the end-user; it's quite possible that the same terms might prove unworkable for the distributor of a fork. (Note: it's been a while since that issue arose, so I forget what the problem was exactly. )
Re: I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.
>So, this all comes about when XP is dead and now no user has a legitimate need for other than BitLocker?
Except for users of any edition of Windows Vista and 7 below Enterprise, and 8.* below Pro, IOW virtually every high-street-bought home computer in use today.
Re: Encryption software alternatives
There's more difference between your counter-examples than between some of them and TrueCrypt. The key is openness of the spec (file format).
TrueCrypt's file/volume format is open, as is ZIP, as is OpenDocument as used by OOo/LO. That means that as long as there's a demand and somebody, anybody, can be arsed doing the work, then that software will exist.
MS Office formats, on the other hand, are either proprietary (in the case of the old binary formats) or specced so vaguely that they're virtually impossible to implement properly (OOXML). Never mind the future, you can't use these formats with perfect fidelity now unless you have the right version of MSOffice. The third-party solutions that you do have are either reverse-engineered or have done their best (which is never going to be enough) to adhere to a 6,000-page spec full of undocumented gubbins whose meaning is buried in the (still proprietary) workings of those old binary formats.
Whew! Rant over, but I hope you get my point. As long as there's the demand and someone willing to meet it, there will always be software capable of doing exactly what TrueCrypt does. Office 97? Not so much.
Re: The synchronicity is the most intriguing part
I did acknowledge that there are valid motives for anonymity, and like you I'd be lairy of it if the devs were a "sprightly startup LLC based in the US" (especially the US part!). But that's just an exploration of alternative realities; if we're going there, I'd much rather the devs were a traditional OSS collective of known, established experts in the field, based in all corners of the globe so it'd be hard to impossible for them all to be under the thumb of a single espionage agency or criminal network.
When software is born as a decentralised global operation, it's damn hard if not impossible for it to be subverted to the whims of any one country. When audits are carried out, ideally that process ought to happen in the same context.
That's not a word. You almost got a downvote for that.
The synchronicity is the most intriguing part
This all happening just as the audit project breaks its silence and promises upcoming "exciting news": giving me a pretty high pucker factor on the whole business. Rather glad I migrated my encrypted drives to LUKS a while back, anyhow.
The main reason at the time for doing that was that Gentoo and a few other packagers were going berserk about its license terms (I forget the details but it related to end-user indemnity IIRC). It wasn't until the Reg reported on the audit that I took note that the developers were actually anons (not Anons, as far as we know haha), which troubled me a lot more to be honest. I mean, in this world there are certainly valid reasons for that choice (e.g. the NSA can't lean on you if they don't know who you are), that inscrutability cuts both ways and just makes it a little hard to trust the project. Mind you, I guess that's what the audit was for (assuming one trusts the auditors).
And of course, making us all uber-paranoid makes the spooks' job even easier in some ways...
There's a limit to how well that's going to work out. Most cooked food and brewed (in the heat sense) beverages don't want to keep being cooked forever. If you've had either coffee or chip-shop chips that have been sitting on the hotplate for a while, you'll know what I mean.
Besides, the most creative and enjoyable bits of cuisine are constructed of various items usually at the end of the process, and these won't be happy if you tide them over all at the same temperature (consider the humble hamburger, with the usual accoutrements).
I think what I'm trying to say is JUST EAT IT! (While I tend to the wounds I sustained throwing it all together)
Re: Uplink module.
I think this concept was in the Bluetooth standard from early on (Personal Area Network + Dial-Up Profile IIRC), but it's never been implemented worth a damn, let alone to the extent that you (and I) dream of. Shame, because if it hadn't been so fragmented and inconsistent it was a strong enough brand that it could have gotten us there. But the interests sponsoring and implementing it were just too abstruse.
Current wifi kit in today's smartphones has probably got us closer to the sweet spot TBH, since most smartphones can share their data connection via tethering, as long as the mfr. or carrier hasn't nobbled the capability. I'd have killed for a phone that did that ten years ago.
What would be really spesh would be if the phone could tether wifi-to-wifi, so I didn't need to duplicate the wifi credentials across all the secondary devices (nor indeed put possibly redundant extra load on the AP, nor increase the attack surface on what might be an untrusted network beyond a single device). I know the hardware can do it (it's pretty ubiquitous on white-label Atheros kit anyway) but it's not a feature I've seen in phone software. If anyone has, I'm interested.
I would say, though, that it's arguably a bit of a "niche" use-case at the present time. Currently most people have, at most, one specialised net-ready device besides their phone/data-enabled-tablet that they'd actually carry around with them. For me it's my laptop, because I'm far too verbose/sausage-fingered to type all this drivel on my phone ;) For others, it might be a DSLR camera that's better than you can find in a phone (though I suspect that example's days are numbered). When you're at home, none of this matters as much - although if a single device could really smartly wrangle being my router for all the possible connections I might use both at home and everywhere else, in a sane manner or at least following policies I defined, I'd be into that.
Be a bit of a bugger if I lost it down the pub though.
Re: Website policy stupidity
My bank's clientèle must have moaned a lot about the extra hassle of VbV, at least that's the best theory I can come up with, because a month or two after rollout, the password prompt was binned. Now there's just a few seconds' wait and a throbber while the vendor/PSP site contacts the bank, then it's job done.
Or it could be the vendors themselves, having gotten their ears bent with all too much "What the hell's this, I already put my card number in!" etc. Either way, if true it amounts to a damning indictment of my fellow patrons (not to mention majority shareholders, hint hint) of the bank in question.
Other, more charitable theories welcome.
Re: Smart' Traction
Curious as to why dan1980's and Omniaural's posts were downvoted. What they wrote is quite accurate: there is an unholy amount of money pumped into making advertising as psychologically effective as possible. Derren Brown has demonstrated some of the tricks of this trade, and their effectiveness (as I don't often watch his shows I can't comment on how selectively he may be choosing his marks, but however you slice it it goes to show there's no shortage of susceptible people).
Are the downvoters the same smug types above going "They won't get me, I'm too smart for them"? Perhaps you are -- how would I know? -- but on balance of the evidence at hand I'd tend to suspect you're the exception rather than the rule.
I myself like to believe I'm not affected by advertising either, but I recognise that I live in a world where all sorts of people are queuing up to mislead and hoodwink me in one way or another, and I'm pretty confident I'm not smarter than all of them.
There's a lot of confusion on this subject. In fact the reverse of what you say is nearer to the truth: Flash was (somewhat) rolled into Shockwave.
Bit of history: Shockwave was Macromedia's own baby, and debuted while Flash was quietly kicking around as another company's plugin, then known as "FutureSplash". About a year later, Macromedia bought that and rebranded it as "Shockwave Flash" to put it under the same brand as their existing product (perhaps a full merge of the products was planned back then, but it never happened for whatever reason; probably too much work). That's why Flash files have the .SWF extension.
Back then, the two products' use-cases hardly overlapped at all. Flash was simply an efficient (yes really!) way of bringing fancy animations and swanky UI "hotness" to the web. It wasn't much used as a platform for video because, well, nobody had the bandwidth to do much video-watching online.
Shockwave, by comparison, was a veritable Swiss Army knife of multimedia tools for both the web and other (often embedded/kiosk) platforms (it could create standalone executables, which came a bit later for Flash). Its big strengths were hardware-accelerated 3D animation (Flash still doesn't have this, and it was the massive new hotness at the time: lots of browser-based games and wanky corporate "walkthrough" features), embeddability of lots of contemporary media formats either in the box or via third-party plugins to the authoring app (Director), a well-thought-out GUI builder and powerful but accessible scripting language making it quite easy to pick up and use.
Back then you'd also see a lot of software installer CDs or multimedia CD-ROMs that used it: the Director icon on the "autorun.exe" file was a pretty common sight.
I doubt Director/Shockwave have had much love from Adobe over recent years, but I bet that they remain the go-to for a lot of embedded/kiosk GUI devs. It's been a long time since I saw anyone using it on the web though.
I can see Paul Bettany being busy with the voiceover work for a while...
Re: Touchscreen on a Desktop?
>Microsoft needs to get a clue and understand the difference between one- and two- handed computing.
Well, there are those of us who believe them to be quite well versed in one-handed computing ...
Re: colours look sort of iPhone 5C
>Actually it's Adobe who have the exclusive rights to every colour in the visible spectrum. Their lawyers will be in touch soon.
Nonsense; Adobe, like everyone else who knows what's good for them, license their colours from Pantone®. Not even Apple would go to the mat with their lawyers.
Re: Might consider this
Can't comment on CardDAV but Exchange (mail/calendar/contacts) sync hasn't missed a beat in almost 2 years for me, and that's with a server that's only pretending to be Exchange (but maybe that's the charm: both ends are only speaking the comprehensible parts of the protocol).
As for Firefox, I don't remember a single crash in the same period, and I've used it at least an hour per day throughout, with an average of 4-5 tabs open at all times (more than that and pages don't seem to want to remain in memory and have to reload when you refocus the tab - a bit bothersome but I can accept that there are constraints).
So it turns out your experience isn't normative. Who'd a' thunk it?
- NASA boffin: RIDDLE of odd BULGE FOUND on MOON is SOLVED
- Pic 7 AMAZING experiments set for Mars Rover 2020 – including oxygen generation
- Microsoft's Euro cloud darkens: US FEDS can dig into foreign servers
- Plug and PREY: Hackers reprogram USB drives to silently infect PCs
- Boffins spot weirder quantum capers as neutrons take the high road, spin takes the low