Are these the same robots that seem to be spamming my inbox with UberEATS and other crap? I've already dumped Uber for Lyft because they've decided they have the right to spam everyone in my contact list in my name, but that hasn't slowed them down any.

This behavior should get SourceForge blacklisted as both cyber-squatters and adware, possibly malware vendor.

I agree 100%. 10 years ago sourceforge was a great site. Now it's basically a malware haven. Unfortunately, plugins like Web of Trust (WoT) seem to have been slow to catch up ... WoT is still marking sourceforge as green ("trusted"). Perhaps blackholing the site in DNS really is the best answer...

What if it's a smear job on Take Two? At taxpayer expense?

1. This isn't at taxpayer expense. It is at television owners' expense. Only people with televisions have to pay the television license that funds the BBC, not all taxpayers. To conflate the two is disingenuous.

2. So what if it is inaccurate or a smear job. That is part of having a free press: the right to get it wrong (and if you do, be eviscerated and/or humiliated by everyone else). The BBC has a very good record and deservedly good reputation, because despite the occasional imperfection, by and large their reporting and documentaries are first rate.

This lawsuit is an attempt to undermine the free press and apply inappropriate pressure to the editorial process, and frankly, Rockstar and Take Two deserve a severe smackdown for trying to do so, irrespective of the program's content.

In a nutshell, what they're saying is:

"If we can't control your editorial content in reporting about or dramatizing our behavior, we're going to sue you in an attempt to make it not worth your while to report on or dramatize our behavior"

Fuck them. I hope the BBC has the backbone to stick up to this sort of corporate bullying. If the show isn't flattering to Take Two, they can suck it up like anyone else.

I agree. It may only take a few seconds to google, but that's a few seconds unnecessarily wasted because the summary poster was too lazy to provide a definition (though to be fair, with as inaccurate as some summaries have been lately, this isn't the worst offense by far).

And in exchange for higher taxes on driving, they get the privilege of providing Oregon information on how much they travel and WHERE THEY TRAVEL.

It doesn't have to be that way. There could simply be an annual check of your odometer when you get your annual emissions check, with a bill due for the miles driven in the last year * rate per mile, payable in 60 days, with a slightly higher rate if you'd like to pay in installments. No need for GPS tracking at all.

Of course, they'll no doubt push in the direction of GPS tracking because big brother likes his data, but really, we could have per mile taxation without big brother intrusions if we as a society would stand up and demand it.

If they start doing this they better beware, there's never been a better reason for Google/Apple etc to get into the carrier business themselves.

This reminds me of a question I had about securing a linux server.

We all know it's quite good practice to move the SSH connection from port 22 to some arbitrary high port. But of course if attacker finds nothing on port 22 he's just going to start port scanning until he gets it.

Way better would be for port 22 to respond as a valid SSH server but to reject ALL username and password combinations EVEN THE CORRECT ONES.

Only drawback I can see is when I forget I moved the SSH port and get confused when my password doesn't work. But apart from that...

This seems so obvious that I am sure something already exists to do this. Sadly my primitive google-fu didn't find it.

Jolyon

You just ruined the chance for people to say global warming is going to result in the moon crashing into the Earth, silly poster.

Nonsense. As every Solarian knows global warming is due to the sun bestowing it's benevolent, fiery appendage upon us.

Actually, Firefox's market share has been dropping ever since the Christchurch, New Zealand Earthquake.

I'm not saying you're wrong about being able to select, say, 7.1 - but that's not how the Mohs system works, even if some people occasionally think that it is.

You're wrong in two different ways, which I kind of admire :)

Firstly, you have something that is between 7 and 8, so for arguments sake you call that '7 and a half' (this is regularly done).

Then you take another sample, and that scratches the '7 and a half' pieces, and not the 8, so it's between 7 and a half and 8. But that's a completely different scenario to arbitrarily assigning a '7.7'

There is another method of measuring hardness, the vicker's system which does indeed follow a linear scale, so you could potentially use the vicker's hardness of the specimens to determine an approximate decimal value for the hardness of your chosen sample. But that's completely stupid because the whole POINT of this is to show a relative hardness between two samples, ie to be able to measure it by scratching one piece against another. So my comment stands, the '7.7' value is pulled out of someone's ass and has no scientific merit.

The second problem is you then compare with software revision numbers... which are of course numbers pulled entirely out of someone's ass. And of course, version 5.9 is usually less than version 5.10 etc. so again you have no way of saying 'version 5.5 is about half way between version 5.0 and version 6.0 in features.'

Bring back Pope Benedict. At least he was rational. And while we're at it, arm him, and give him troops so he can do something about persecutions of Christians in the Middle East.

You want the pedophile shuffler back? Really?

His resignation was timed to deflect attention from that issue, coming as it was the very week HBO's documentary linking him (and his soon-to-be-sainted predecessor) directly to the pedophile scandals in the US, Ireland, and elsewhere came out.

And it worked. Instead of public outcry at the documented link between the then-reigning popes and the pedophile coverup, everyone was wetting their pants over a shiny new pope who wasn't to the right of Genghis Khan.

That said, it takes a really hardcore right-wingnut to want Ratzinger back.

The Mohs scale of hardness is a relative unitless scale comparing things to ten common minerals. There is no '7.7' on this scale. 7 is Quartz and 8 is Topaz. So all you can say with any accuracy is that it is between 7 and 8. Maybe it is closer to Topaz in hardness than Quartz, but even so, there's no way of calculating a '7.7' so they just pulled that number out of their ass...

Which makes me wonder how accurate the rest of what they say is.