Comment: Re:This company scares me more and more (Score 4, Insightful) 189
Point is, companies have had their own currencies for years. While some people might disagree with those practises - company-specific currency isn't intrinsically bad
Comment: Re:it's because IE implementation is buggy (Score 1) 197
Parent has hit the nail right on the head. I used to work on Facebook games for an indie games company and now I'm in charge of 'doing Facebook' for another company and so cross domain Iframe cookie problems are something I come across a lot. Maintaining user sessions inside iframes isn't straightforward.
Relatively recently, Facebook updated their apps platform so that app iframes to 3rd party sites are POSTed to via JavaScript to avoid safari's limitation on accepting 3rd party cookies. Previously the work around was to have some js in your page that would post to itself - both methods trick safari into thinking the user actively navigated to the Iframe and so should accept cookies.
Facebook have yet to implement a trick to make ie accept 3rd party cookies and so the widely used work around is use either a genuine or dud p3p header.
Yes, these hacks and workarounds are nasty and yes they're bad for standards - but if browser vendors insist on such privacy controls they need to make it much more user friendly for users to whitelist sites. Most of users we get through Facebook don't know what cookies are - they just want our apps to work. Blocking cookies without even prompting the user is not the way forward.
Comment: I for one prefer targeted advertising (Score 1) 170
Say what you want about Facebook - but I like how their adverts quite often for something I'm genuinely interested in. IMO, that's what ALL advertising should be like. No matter how many times I see the Always adverts on TV - I'm never going to buy sanitary pads.
Comment: Re:This is advertising (Score 1) 473
This isn't advertising, it's reporting the news.
Should
Comment: Maybe in the US (Score 1) 395
Facebook/Myspace/etc are used much more widely than AIM ever was.
Comment: Re:The idea is just fine (Score 1) 143
A much better way to implement this unnecessary cookie law would be to put the responsibility on browser vendors instead of website owners. Something along the lines of "This website wants to set cookies which may be necessary for it to work correctly, do you want to allow this? yay/nay". Someone/"they" could even make a standard that allows websites to explain to browsers the reasoning behind each cookie set. Of course, this has the problem that too many people don't update their browsers - but those people bring it on themselves and should therefore not be "protected" by this law.
Comment: Re:Traveled the world!! (Score 1) 118
From the summary; "months" (:
Comment: Re:Passing on Viruses (Score 2) 396
I don't know where you got the notion of me being on the "*nix is just as vulnerable as Windows" bandwagon, at no point did I say anything along those lines. Anybody who assumes that *nix platforms have no native viruses aside from rootkits is utterly naive. Yes, *nix viruses aren't as widespread as their Windows counterparts, but they do exist, they can cause significant damage and *nix platforms are not inherently immune.
It would be relatively simple to write a script that would send itself to everybody in a user's address book and then execute "rm -fr
An OS can be as secure as you want on paper, but no OS is 100% secure if it's got any human interaction.
Comment: Re:Passing on Viruses (Score 5, Informative) 396
I've set up ClamAV on my Linux mail server to catch most dodgy stuff before it reaches my Windows PC. I also recently installed it onto my Linux Netbook to scan a friend's external hard drive for a Windows virus. I haven't been following the latest security news, so didn't particularly want to risk plugging it into my friend's or my Windows machine to scan it.
So I agree, there definitely is a use for Linux-based anti virus software...even if my own uses are mainly concerned with protecting Windows machines.