|
79
|
Other Software / Developer's Corner / Re: Essays on Proper Storage of Site Passwords
|
on: June 13, 2012, 11:16:01 AM
|
... part of the problem is how the media treats them. Calling them brilliant, etc... No, it takes brilliance to keep a sever secure.
Part of the problem is the the Media knows scary stories keep people interested (however bogus they tend to be). No one wants to hear about the good news - unless it's on the level of a puppy being rescued from a mine shaft.
|
|
|
|
|
81
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Prometheus
|
on: May 15, 2012, 06:02:08 AM
|
|
Most notable is that this will NOT be another "Alien" movie. (You could say it will be a "Giger" movie.) The plot is based in the same "Alien" universe as the first film but will divert into its own story - diverting further away from Alien in the Prometheus sequel that Scott has mentioned. He has also said Prometheus is not a true "prequel" because of this.
I'm glad there aren't going to be any Xenomorphs (though, I'm sure there'll be something similar).
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: reserved characters in NTFS
|
on: April 06, 2012, 05:08:20 AM
|
Here's a list of characters (probably not the best resource) http://www.theworldofstuff.com/characters/The problem seems to be the convenience of being able to use alternate characters; it's not too practical to start using a system that you can't type with standard keyboard shortcuts. With my UK keyboard, these are legal characters readily available to use: ¦ (this is the one I mentioned above, named "Broken vertical bar", this isn't the "pipe" character.) ¬ = + ~ @ , & ^ ' # ] [ } { ) ( & % $ £ ! ` I've seen ~ used instead of \ to indicate directory structures (maybe that's common?). I guess you could use: ¦ for | ¬ for \ ~ for / ~ for \ Or double up common elements (just using similar "slants" within the characters) like: %% or ,, or ## for / `` or && for \ It would be nice if there is a standard that people have already embraced, I agree. edit: I've just realised it would be quite difficult coming up with similar looking characters for things like * and ? (well, all of them really). The large problem is not being able to use characters that are going to cause confusion because they are used reguarly, e.g. would it be bad to use ; in place of : etc., etc.
|
|
|
|
|
89
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Welcome to Big Brother UK
|
on: April 01, 2012, 05:17:03 PM
|
|
Okay, I think i've had enough now. I've just been reading the "rules" for the new UK and EU Cookie Law. Not only is our world turning into a Techno 1984, it's also going to parody Kafka at his best...
We are going to have perplexing laws that protect our privacy online by pretending to control cookies (and thereby grinding the web to a halt), whilst having other pointless laws to make a mockery of such "privacy".
Like, er, wow, just wow. I'm kind of in a state of shock.
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Suggestions for guides on all this DNS, CName, A Records stuff
|
on: April 01, 2012, 08:54:09 AM
|
|
I consider myself a "designer" (with the prefix of "web" I suppose), but the person that pays my wages likes to think I'm something more; which means he's always asking me to set up someone's domain on a host somewhere with the assumption I know what I'm doing. I do remind him that I don't know what I'm doing but he doesn't care - he can always set things up himself if he really has to; he'd just rather not have the bother.
I'd like to fully understand all this nameserver stuff, then I can at least understand what this bloke is saying when he starts going on about the A Records need changing to work with Google Mail (or whatever).
The problem is, I've tried reading a few guides but they aren't brain-dead enough for me to get a full mental picture of how everyting works. I need something that is patronisingly obvious (if possible) so I can see how all the dots connect.
It's like, I know enough to fill the the boxes to set something up, but I've no real idea of what's going on behind the scenes. If there's a problem with configurations, I'd like to be able to spot them or understand why they are so.
Are there any suitable guides or is it the kind of thing that will just make sense one day (maybe I've not made enough mistakes yet to form a picture of what's right or wrong).
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Show us your (physical) desktop
|
on: March 22, 2012, 10:39:57 AM
|
I mean what's making the lists
I cheated. The colour blocks are just part of the background, i.e. the wallpaper image. The colours are the (x11) CSS3 colour names - something I just thought might be handy to use so I don't have to remember things like #DCDCDC when editing CSS; instead I'll just look at the colour names and type gainsboro (which is #DCDCDC). Source here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_colors (did a screengrab and arranged things in Photoshop to create the wallpaper).
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Show us your (physical) desktop
|
on: March 22, 2012, 09:03:12 AM
|
|
Interesting looking back through this thread - as it goes back six years - I wonder how different our desktops are now compared to back then.
Here's my 2012 setup (there's a large Wacom Cintiq screen and machine/s somewhere else in the room under a load of crap). No doubt, this will seem quite inappropriate in another six years time; I suspect we'll all have giant fold out tablet displays running Micrsoft Metro XL.
[attachthumb=1]
|
|
|
|
|