noteworthy wrote:
] Advertisements on websites are annoying, often breaking up
] text and flashing to get your attention. To stop about 99% of
] the ads on the internet from even showing, add the following
] code to your userContent.css file:
]
]
] I was finally sufficiently annoyed by obtrusive Flash
] advertisements at the Washington Post that I tracked down this
] information on hiding them from view.

If you use Mozilla/Firebird, the adblock plugin (http://adblock.mozdev.org/) is awesome. Unlike the standard "Don't show images from this server" you enter in URL's with wildcards, and Adblock can either render white space in place on any match, or remove it from being rendered (and thus not taking up any space).

This blocks ALL offending content, images/Flash/Java, everything

Ie:
*.doubleclick.*
*.fastclick.*
*/ads/*
*/ads.*

Blocking all types on Ads with Mozilla/Firefox

Stripe Snoop 1.1 has been released! A 16 bit DOS binary build is now supported (for small homebrew applications). All the fancy SF stuff is working, but I still need to move/update/create the new homepage.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/stripesnoop/

http://www.columbia.edu/~mjr2101/hope.xls

Sorted by time

] TELUS blocks long distance direct-dialed calls to four
] countries to help reduce "modem hijacking"

This is a growing trend I've noticed recently, where hardware solutions are needed to fix simply software security issues, because the software people can't get their head out of their asses.

See a great article in ACM about this here: http://acmqueue.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=160

Hardware again fixing Software security

] Phasmatis is a open source
] program that can read and write SPT files. SPT files
] contain screenshots, keylogs, visited URL, application
] names, and other data recorded by the Spector(tm)
] monitoring program. Spector is closed source and only
] runs on Windows Platforms. Phasmatis is OS independent,
] and currently runs on Linux and Windows platforms.
]
] Phasmatis is designed to solve several problems:
]
] * Phasmatis can be run on (theorically) any OS that
] zlib has been ported to, and SPT viewing is no longer
] locked only to Windows Platforms. As Linux moves more and
] more into the corporate setting, this is very important.
]
] * Certain people, such as System Administrators, only
] need to view SPT file, and purchasing another license for
] Spector(tm) that includes features that are not needed
] (ie recording), isn't econmical.
]
] * Phasmatis allows people who are being monitored at
] work or at home to know it, and allows them to see what
] activities are being captured. It allows the user to
] detect restrictied activity that was captured that maybe
] they did not do, and allows them to pro-actively approach
] who is in charge to discuss the matter.

Phasmatis Released

angus wrote:
] I love the Beastie Boys but I hope this is not true and/or
] they didn't know about it. Basically the story relates that
] the new BB's CD and some rumored copy protection that is
] really is more like malware. "Check, check, check it out!"

What I'm eagerly watching is all the malware/spyware laws about to be passed, which prohibits any piece of software from being installed without my expressed permission. Seeing as how most CD copy protection software works is by installing some DLLs when you insert it in a machine, the RIAA could be getting cornered.

I wonder if the Velvet Revolver CD has some licensing agreement on the wrapper to the effect of "By opening this package you agree to have XYZ software installed on your machine." It begs to question, what can't you put in a licensing agreement?

Malware laws -vs- RIAA

I'm planning on taking a few projects I've been working on and registering them as FOSS projects on Sourceforge. I've been reading a lot about the different licenses of late. Does anyone have any advice or tips about bring an FOSS project up. User -vs- delevoper Documentation, writing for multiple platforms, defining milestones/stable releases, etc?

] To use the "Wiki It!" bookmarklet, simply highlight the
] word or words you wish to look up, and click the
] bookmarklet. A separate, minimalist window will open with
] the Wikipedia entry for it.
]
] Just drag the Wiki It! link onto your personal toolbar.
] It has been tested on Mozilla 1.5 on Linux and Windows
] systems, as well as Firefox 0.7, and Internet Explorer 6.

Most Significant Bit :: Wikipedia Bookmarklet

] So when your French DVD won't play in America, that's not
] because it'd be illegal to do so: it's because the
] studios have invented a business-model and then invented
] a copyright law to prop it up.

This statement is exactly what we have been talking about. Companies using laws to enforce a business model which no longer works.

Re :Why Microsoft should get out of DRM

] Why is Google immune from liability?
]
] The most direct reason is that a federal law that those
] who host, rather than author, speech on the Internet
] cannot be treated, for legal purposes, as having
] published it. As a result, they cannot be sued for
] defamation -- or for any other tort that has publication
] as one of its essential elements.
]
] The law protects message board owners, chat room hosts,
] bloggers who give others access to their blogs, and
] indeed, virtually anyone who allows material on their
] site, or provides access to material, that they do not
] themselves author. That includes Google and other search
] sites.
]
] By contrast, the defamation liability risk of selection
] sites such as The Drudge Report -- that is, sites that
] offer collections of specially culled links to other
] sites -- remains uncertain. Someone who chooses a link
] may count as having published the material to which the
] link leads -- and may be held to have the state of mind
] to be held liable for the choice. This argument has been
] used in the context of the Digital Millennium Copyright
] Act, and could be used in the defamation context, as
] well.

I checked and couldn't find any court presidence on what constitutes "publishing" content on the Internet and "linking" content on the Internet. Anyone know of any?

What are the legal ramifications of meme-ing a site that contents something defamatory? This has interesting consequences for the blogging community: seeing how stories and commentaries are spread by the Internet equivilent of word of mouth, linking, a single defamatory story would act as a virus, exposes all who link it to possible legal action.

Why you can't sue Google