Message boards :
Number crunching :
Home Page
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3
Author | Message |
---|---|
Josef W. Segur Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0 ![]() |
I'm pretty sure our not so mysterious programmer "Dave" has his picture on this page and is above Matt in the pecking order. But the guy causing the difficulties is named Murphy, I think. Joe |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31117 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 ![]() ![]() |
I'm pretty sure our not so mysterious programmer "Dave" has his picture on this page and is above Matt in the pecking order. I am quite sure about that. ![]() |
1mp0£173 Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0 ![]() |
On the rare occasions that I have to code webpages (a chore to be avoided if at all possible, imho), I test the be-heck out of them on my computer before I let the rest of the planet look at them. I do the same, but every once in a while something surprising happens, and as soon as I'm comfortable, and turn my back on things, they'll come badly unglued. Someone else mentioned Murphy, but I believe it is O'Toole's Commentary that would apply: Murphy was an optimist. |
kittyman ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 51502 Credit: 1,018,363,574 RAC: 1,004 ![]() ![]() |
I'm pretty sure our not so mysterious programmer "Dave" has his picture on this page and is above Matt in the pecking order. Naw..... I think Murphy just messes with the Seti servers......he doesn't know coding....LOL. "Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once." ![]() |
![]() Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 7105 Credit: 147,663,825 RAC: 5 ![]() |
Hey guys, you didn't noticed it? I'm a 'safe surfer' and if a homepage have ActiveX my browser (InternetExplorer) ask, if it can be execute or not.. 'Allow running software such as ActiveX controls and plug-ins?' And since yesterday, now nearly every side at Berkeley have an ActiveX.. So for what? What would I see if I would accept it? If you have your browser at 'default level' you will not notice it.. ![]() |
1mp0£173 Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0 ![]() |
... or if you run a browser that does not support ActiveX at all, you're even safer. I don't know about the very latest versions, but for a long time ActiveX controls were actually "installed" on your machine, permanently, with no uninstall links. ActiveX controls are native Windows executables, and have too much access to the underlying OS. SETI@Home doesn't scare me, but there are too many of us running on other platforms and other browsers do something highly windows-centric. |
1mp0£173 Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8423 Credit: 356,897 RAC: 0 ![]() |
Actually, I suspect this is a browser error. I don't see anything on the home page that looks like ActiveX, but I do see this: <scheduler>http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi</scheduler> <link rel="boinc_scheduler" href="http://setiboinc.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah_cgi/cgi"> ... and this doesn't look like proper HTML -- at least the scheduler "tag" looks odd. Firefox appears to ignore it. Complete guess, but I'm thinking that they're trying to introduce a way for the BOINC client to find the scheduler even if the user types the wrong URL into the page. ... and I don't know if it's new or not. I would have put it in HTML comments so that the typical browser would not parse it. |
OzzFan ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 ![]() ![]() |
ActiveX controls are still downloaded to the individual machine and ran from there, posing seriously security threats, as well as limiting your website to Internet Explorer or compatible browsers supporting ActiveX. Newer versions of IE now allow you to manually disable individual ActiveX plugins, or disable them altogether. IE7 actually allows you to run them in "protected mode" which prevents them from gaining Administrative access to your machine when executed, which helps limit the usefulness of trojans or keyloggers. Still, using an ActiveX deficient browser is the safest of all. That's why I use Firefox. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 66511 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49 ![]() ![]() |
Same Here OzzFan, I use FF3 amap. :) CA HSR built a foundation, is laying Track! PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550 Loco, US's 1st HST ![]() |
![]() Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21533 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 ![]() ![]() |
... Still, using an ActiveX deficient browser is the safest of all. That's why I use Firefox. But... but... but... I thought you believed in all things Microsoft!?... And I thought ActiveX and a web browser integrated into their OS to give complete control for the user experience is central to their existence! How come you use something other than IE? Keep searchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
OzzFan ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 ![]() ![]() |
... Still, using an ActiveX deficient browser is the safest of all. That's why I use Firefox. Please tell me you don't seriously think that of me. Just because I stick up for Microsoft, all of a sudden I "believe in all things Microsoft"? I do believe I've mentioned before that I don't use IE. I also use Thunderbird Email too since Outlook has too many security flaws. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 21 Nov 03 Posts: 4793 Credit: 26,029 RAC: 0 |
And since yesterday, now nearly every side at Berkeley have an ActiveX. Arising out of the chaos and confusion, a new evil is born, and its name shall be called, ActiveX... ;) ![]() |
![]() Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21533 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 ![]() ![]() |
Please tell me you don't seriously think that of me. Just because I stick up for Microsoft, all of a sudden I "believe in all things Microsoft"? I do believe I've mentioned before that I don't use IE. ... I'm sorry but I take the view that if you generally 'stick up' for Microsoft, then you also condone and encourage a very unhealthy market place aggressiveness. Further, you also condone the continued 'support' of viruses, trojans and other such malware. Note that ActiveX is used in Windows by a lot of other things other than just IE. You get to use parts of IE from other applications whether you want to or not. Add in also that the GUI (desktop) runs as part of the kernel (!!!) and, phew... To my mind, it's all amazing it works as well as it does! My view is that Microsoft has its place, but at the moment the costs and collateral damage are far too high. OK, on that subject I can see you as a chaplain defending the rights and virtues of one of the poor unfortunates on Death Row... Regards, Martin (All just my own opinion as always.) See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 31 Jul 01 Posts: 2467 Credit: 86,146,931 RAC: 0 ![]() |
I'm sorry but I take the view that if you generally 'stick up' for Microsoft, then you also condone and encourage a very unhealthy market place aggressiveness. Further, you also condone the continued 'support' of viruses, trojans and other such malware. Wow, that's quite a statement. To go from supporting Microsoft to condoning viruses and trojans in two sentences. Just because I use Microsoft products I support the creation of viruses and trojans and I am a BAD person? Not a well thought out assumption on your part. Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc.... |
![]() Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21533 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 ![]() ![]() |
I'm sorry but I take the view that if you generally 'stick up' for Microsoft, then you also condone and encourage a very unhealthy market place aggressiveness. Further, you also condone the continued 'support' of viruses, trojans and other such malware. That is more a leap into something that I do not say in that statement. Many people use Microsoft. I'd guess that most people are completely unknowing of what Micorsoft is or how or what it is that they are using. That's fine in that they just merely (innocently?) pay for and use a 'product'. When you claim to know and to defend what is actually there... That's a different aspect. Happy crunchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
©2025 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.