Google is ranking down competitors eh? Go ahead, google "search engine". Go ahead, I'll wait. What's the FIRST result? Bing.com. Case dismissed.

Uh...no. Scoville units are a measure of the amount of capsaicin. It is entirely objective

If you download the sdk they have an emulator.

You know very little about gay men, obviously. The vast majority do NOT engage in anal sex.

It is predominant among homosexuals but that is more likely cultural than biological. Many gay men participate in far more casual and unprotected anal sex or other high risk practices. It's not becase it's two men though, it's because those two men happen to be having high risk sex. If heteros were doing the exact same acts with the same frequency, you'd see a similar infection rate.

Most gay males do not both give and receive

Uh no, heterosexual anal sex carries the EXACT SAME RISK with a known infected partner. But hey, way to be a bigot. Anal sex in general is far more risky as the vagina is an acidic environment that is hostile to the virus, plus microtears can occur int he rectum walls during anal sex that creates a better blood pathway.

http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102240544.html there are several different figures given by different studies, but the highest Ive seen was .4 Most studies give a figure >.01

As a middle class white male non IV-drug user, statistically speaking, you are far more likely to hit a hole in one in golf than to catch HIV in the United States. Its something like .04% per incident with a known carrier if you're male and having vaginal sex.

I've tried repeatedly to warn my own credit union of a security breach in their "self-help" terminal. It's running windows and a modified version of IE (no close out x). The problem is that the "View cookies" menu item open an explorer window in focus and the whole directory can then be traversed and written to. It's also internet friendly and not firewalled for third party sites. Sounds like a perfect recipe for a keylogger to me.

Most coders don't sanitize code coming from a trusted source. They sanitize input from users, but something like a SQL injection is generally an effect of improper user-san anyway.

Imagine you have a script that just includes a user's profile data (user.php) from a flat file (stupid i know but its an example), by entering in a remote file to a field, it might be sanitized, however in a sql injection you could over right "user.php" with http://www.evilsite.com/evilscript.php

Myspace ran into this issue when they launched their mobile service. The mobile service wasn't properly stripping out javascript and the main site didn't sanitize already input data, under the assumption that sanitization had already happened. As a result, you could enter javascript into the mobile client and it would be executed on any web browser.

Yah from that comment it would seem correct however you have to TRY to open up mysql to outside connections. I just find it dumbfounding that anyone would.

Are you (or he, i haven't read his comment) trying to say that mysql was accessible from the outside to arbitrary connections directly? I find that pretty hard to believe.

Im just saying your description of the hack was entirely inaccurate.

Uh...no. The article states they just used SQL injection to insert an include to a remote php file (the idiots apparently hadnt disabled remote file includes). The included file was basically a dashboard that did directory listings and file transfers. I did a contract cleaning up a similar mess (URL-RFI Injection). The hardest part about the entire hack was probably finding the SQL injection point.