|
title: Put the knife down and take a green herb, dude. |
descrip: One feller's views on the state of everyday computer science & its application (and now, OTHER STUFF) who isn't rich enough to shell out for www.myfreakinfirst-andlast-name.com Using 89% of the same design the blog had in 2001. |
|
FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY!!!
Back-up your data and, when you bike, always wear white. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Affiliate links in green. |
|
|
x
MarkUpDown is the best Markdown editor for professionals on Windows 10. It includes two-pane live preview, in-app uploads to imgur for image hosting, and MultiMarkdown table support. Features you won't find anywhere else include...
You've wasted more than $15 of your time looking for a great Markdown editor. Stop looking. MarkUpDown is the app you're looking for. Learn more or head over to the 'Store now! |
|
| Monday, March 04, 2019 | |
|
I’d been meaning to talk about the stenographic macOS exploit for a while. It’s interesting, but doesn’t really seem to warrant the amount of press it got. The TL;DR for it seems to be, “This is a clever hack to recreate the sorts of exploit you saw all over the place five years ago pop back up briefly.” That is, all it does is hide some code that can would’ve been fingerprinted as an attack. You still have to download something stupid (afaict) to be compromised. Let’s hit the high points from the security blog post: Here’s how the exploit operates:
And here’s the secret code in action that reads from the image and pushes it into an eval:
That should do it for you. It treats the image as a data stream, decodes some characters, and Question: Why do browsers still allow (Okay, there’s probably something where on-demand loading with As the blog author says…
That’s really all we’re doing… we’re using an image for encoding a payload, and security folks hadn’t thought to sniff those yet. The rest still has to trick you into opening something you didn’t ask for before you’re compromised. That is, there are other checks to prevent immediate failure. Btw: This is why you have to turn off “Open ‘safe’ files after downloading” in Safari. You can be made to download files, and you don’t want to hand them automatically to another security issue. This is a natural progression. Not really much to see or learn here past that. posted by ruffin at 3/04/2019 08:32:00 AM |
|
| Friday, May 31, 2013 | |
|
Camino Browser for Mac Officially Discontinued - Mac Rumors For a while, Camino seemed to be the fastest browser on OS X, and it was always a nice, fairly stable alternative browser for a number of my machines. But the writing was on the wall quite a while ago (the Camino development group was kind enough to spell it out for me in July last year). Camino called directly to Gecko, and then was no real abstraction between the Camino frame and that engine. There was no abstraction, so there was no way to plug in another rendering engine. As Stuart Morgan was kind enough to tell me on Google Groups... and why is the Camino version unsustainable? ... An application built in XUL wouldn't be Camino, it would be something rewritten from scratch in a different technology that looked similar. It would be more like a heavily skinned Firefox than it would be like Camino, technologically speaking. None of us are interested in writing that app... So you've got a single-use OS X native frame, and the use is gone. Goodbye Camino. It was fun while it lasted. posted by ruffin at 5/31/2013 04:48:00 PM |
|
| Monday, August 06, 2012 | |
|
WebKit Isn't Breaking the Web. You Are | Webmonkey | Wired.com: We at Webmonkey hope itโs obvious that building WebKit-only sites is a waste of time. If youโre only interested in iOS users then take a tip from Instagram and build a native app. Let's just quickly say that's crazy advice, and it misses the point of Glazman's critique. If you don't know Objective-C, by all means, leverage what you do know if it'll make a strong HTML5 app for mobile devices. Use PhoneGap. Enjoy. No guilt required. Seriously, if you can't code HTML5 for other browsers you need to learn to code Obj-C in Xcode? Insane and inane. The point is that those who use HTML5 shouldn't use browser-specific prefixes. Not sure how I feel about that either. If one browser (or rendering engine) is so far in front of another, then it's going to "win" the adoption war. Examples are written with webkit prefixes, they're copy and pasted, seem to work okay for their intended browser, and we're done. It's a non-trivial expense to learn that webkit isn't a standard if you're a gunslinger. (I'm not arguing we should be gunslingers, but that browsers should realize they exist. LOTS of them.) If the other browsers support those CSS standards with their own prefixes (and with standardized ones), it's a heck of a lot easier to have the browsers support the different models than every programmer. Any time you're asking a programmer to write something twice to do things right (really, I'm pretty tired of if (document.getElementById) { branch1 } else...), you're doing it wrong. Get the cheese off of your face. Normalize. Put the logic where it belongs. To be clear: In this case, it means Firefox needs to get over itself and chase WebKit. IE might follow. Do we care? It's an ivory tower versus the market issue. You can't control programmers absolutely. I, in theory, like where Glazman is going. And in practice, just mentioning it will lessen the issue. Let's just stop pretending it's a zero-effort change for programmers to write platform neutral code and, therefore, as long as browsers are less than 100% equal, you'll always have a percentage of the code in the wild that supports one over the other. Degrade? Sure. Write to treat each version of each browser equally? Impossible. [sic] posted by ruffin at 8/06/2012 09:02:00 AM |
|
| Thursday, March 25, 2010 | |
|
If there's one thing that I know Jobs would like to have back, it's an Apple computing platform with tightly controlled access for developers. As the Wall Street Journal apparently reports (via AppleInsider): "Jobs has kept 'tight control and directors have rarely challenged him.'" His preferred dev environment is no different. Right now, on the Macintosh, anyone can code up an app and release it without so much as Googling (Binging?) the Apple Human (once User) Interface Guidelines. Heck, even I've released apps for the Mac into the wild. Oh noes!!! Oh wait, Jobs has gotten that closed development environment, hasn't he? It's the iPod, iPhone, and, increasingly overlapping with the Mac, the iPad: In February, it was rumored that Hulu, an online streaming video destination for multiple networks, plans to make its videos available without Flash for the iPad platform. Reports then alleged that the Web site could be prepared by the time the iPad launches April 3, though it was said the service would likely be subscription only. If the iPad only does HTML5/H.264 jive, the fact that this protocol isn't the most popular on the net gives it a leg up on open browsers. That is, if Hulu makes HTML5 pay to play only, thanks to the iPad's effectively closed platform, Hulu has a ready-made, similarly closed/captive market. * If the iPad did Flash, not only would there be a closed system involved that Apple doesn't control, but there'd be no easy way to differentiate folks using the iPad platform. Goodbye Hulu revenue stream. *With no Flash, Hulu has a reason to partner/get in bed with/come to the defense of Apple's iPad and to temper its support of Adobe's Flash. Captive markets are exactly what Jobs likes to have (see the iPhone developer program and the rules for distributing software, where Apple can even, 1984-style, rip programs off of your iPhone retroactively!), at least until he gets to the point that market dominance (digital music) makes it so that captivity works against Apple selling hardware. So once the iPod and the iTunes Music Store dominate digital music, Jobs makes DRM leave the stage precisely to ensure there are no competitors to the gorilla. But, again, the interesting point here is how Apple is reinventing the Mac. As the iPod stretches out and begins to swallow the Macintosh via the iPhone and now iPad, it's essential to pay attention to the compromises these [at least relatively] closed platforms are making. The iPad will do 50% of what I use my MacBook for and essentially 90% of what I use my iPod touch for (the balance being "fitting my pocket"). But I can't run my Java apps on my iPad, and probably never will, and certainly won't without Jobs' permission. (Yes, I realize Apple develops and maintains the standard Mac JVM, but there are others that work on OS X. Don't split hairs, please. ;^D) Labels: browsers, control, DRM, ethics, evil, html, iPad, iphone, ipod, iTunes, online distribution posted by ruffin at 3/25/2010 10:01:00 AM |
|
| Wednesday, October 28, 2009 | |
|
Seamonkey 2.0, the real successor to Netscape, is out. * Doesn't seem slower. * Has the Firefox 3.5.4 engine. * Icons are much better (see pic) -- I can tell the difference between Composer and Mail windows now just by looking. ;^) * Apparently supports more Firefox add-ons The bad: * ProFontWindows is no longer displayed correctly in editable text boxes or for email composing; lots of pixel bleed. * Rendering speed a mixed bag. * Having some issues with pulling the contents of IMAP message from Gmail. I don't store anything locally with SeaMonkey. I wouldn't be surprised if that config wasn't tested so well, esp. since they're supposed to have changed IMAP in this version. I use the Monk b/c it's easier on my P3 600 MHz Toughbook -- less overhead when your browser and mail handler are using the same space. I also use it to test websites. I'll keep the site in Monkey and Google code/docs in Firefox, making reloading and testing an easy alt-tab affair rather than a ctrl-` fiasco. Overall, it's been a good browser for me. Admittedly, I'm still waiting for a search bar displayed by default. Can't have it all. posted by ruffin at 10/28/2009 10:04:00 AM |
|
| Thursday, October 02, 2008 | |
|
I'm still using both Firefox and Chrome, after believing I was done with the latter. Things like having reader.google.com (and later gmail and google docs) offline with Gears is nice, but the real advantage of Chrome is still the few simple tweaks of the nav bar. Want to go to gmail.com? Right now, it's ctrl-l, g, return. Bam. Dictionary.com? ctrl-l, d, return. Man, that's nice. Downsides are lacks of keyboard nav in page and the still incomprehensible inability to use Blogger markup shortcuts, like ctrl-i for italics (which actually inserts "<span style="font-style:italic;"></span>"). So there's still no winner, just a heightened sense of frustration. posted by ruffin at 10/02/2008 01:44:00 PM |
|
| Monday, September 08, 2008 | |
![]() What's "Incognito Mode"? From Incognito Window (aka P0rn Mode): Think of incognito as a 'privacy mode' to prevent tracking from those local and also by websites sharing data about you. Since the advent of browsing the web in the 90's, parents have been slapping their kids around for their surfing habits.๏ฟฝ Spouses have been busting each other and using computer data in court cases for custody battle.๏ฟฝ Incognito mode throws a wrench into the whole spy game by hiding your tracks. Might be worth pointing out that Safari has had just such a feature ("Private browsing" or some such) for a while, now, as well as the "Reset Safari" menu item, which, if it actually does what it says, should render anything you do in cognito [sic] mode moot too. I've kinda wondered if that was a smart idea from Apple. What happens if you surf in private mode, reset the browser, and your spouse or parent still bustifies you? Isn't Apple left holding the bag, or at least responsible for your holding it? Seems like unnecessary liability for browser makers. Cute icon, anyhow, though it ain't no dancing moon. posted by ruffin at 9/08/2008 07:06:00 PM |
|
| Sunday, September 07, 2008 | |
|
Mr. Beal's cleverly named businessweek.com piece, Why Chrome Won't Crash Windows, misses a key point in understanding Chrome's importance. First, a quote: It's our infatuation with the Google brand, more than the technology inside, that will boost Chrome's market share and further extend Google in our daily Web activities. As for being a Windows or Internet Explorer killer, don't count on it. Did Gmail kill Hotmail? Will Google Docs kill Office? Did Google kill Yahoo? How about Google Reader -- it's killed nearly every stand-alone RSS reader I've tried. Now each of these use the browser as their host platform. I've already shown Chrome's ability to take Google Reader offline. Does Firefox do this? Not yet... If Chrome can extend Gmail, Reader, Docs, Maps, search, Scholar, Books, etc etc etc onto your desktop, the OS will finally become a commoditized complement. This kills Windows. Rather, it negates the advantage one OS has over another, in large and almost exclusive part. Again, Google is with chrome making Java's play, and they are, to date, doing it successfully. There's more than just a cute icon to be gleaned from Google's portrait of Java applets as a bunch of dancing moons. What Google is saying is that where Sun failed so miserably and laughably in Web 1.0, Google's winning in version two. Google is killing the OS in ways Sun wanted to with Java and couldn't. It'll be interesting to see if Google can succeed. Labels: browsers, chrome, dancing moons, firefox, gmail, Google, java, microsoft, web 2.0 shiite, windows posted by ruffin at 9/07/2008 08:31:00 PM |
|
| Tuesday, September 02, 2008 | |
![]() Welp, there we go. The first obvious, Chrome specific integration, which allows me to run Google Reader offline. Neat. I wonder now if Chrome isn't the source of the rumor that Apple was going to release Safari in some fashion to allow websites, like Google Reader, to be saved as their own WebKit apps. posted by ruffin at 9/02/2008 09:59:00 PM |
|
|
Right after releasing Chrome, Google goes and updates Today, we're rolling out major technology upgrades to both Picasa and Picasa Web Albums. As you might have guessed, these are largely focused on how we share and enjoy our photos with others. I used to enjoying playing Civilization, a world domination game, too much. Every time you thought you had a certain civilization under control and you started edging your military a bit closer to their city, WHAM, all of a sudden military units started flooding out of the city like fire ants. You'd had no idea that while you were spending all your resources building up your military that they'd had the same idea. Lured in by the expectation of an easy assault, you now had to sheepishly slink away. I have to think that Microsoft's IE 8 is feeling that a little, and that Apple's Safari on Windows is feeling this Civ feeling in a big way now. Heck, Google even took WebKit and did it better. Now, I wonder how much Picasa has gotten... It already performs one heck of a lot better than what's admittedly a one-generation obsolete version of iPhoto. Price is a bit better, too. Hammurabi Jobs, you're done. Speaking of Chrome, why doesn't ctrl-L blockquote in BlogThis!? I'm also surprised that Chrome doesn't have a menu bar, depending on previous training to, say, know how to search the Omnibar (Control-K) or print (Ctrl-P) or view downloads (Ctrl-J). posted by ruffin at 9/02/2008 09:30:00 PM |
|
|
Well, it does seem faster. I've started to use Safari as my main browser on OS X, but in Windows, Safari isn't near as rock solid an application. If Chrome can give me so little as a reliable WebKit implementation, I'm golden. Nice to see it underlines misspelled words. Honestly, I'm a little surprised that the load time for Gmail isn't shorter with Chrome. Why not go ahead and store as much of that page as possible in the browser by default? It's your party, Google. Bias yourself! posted by ruffin at 9/02/2008 04:38:00 PM |
|
| Monday, September 01, 2008 | |
|
From 9 to 5 Mac: The big news of the day? Google announces Google Chrome, a WebKit (yes the very same Webkit that Safari uses) based-browser. So far, my favorite part of the comic is the little dancing moon on the bottom of page 13. Ain't he cute?! Man, I loved Java applets; all that potential, all the fear from MS, and what does it produce? Dancing moons. Very nice. So what's Google's angle, other than potentially saving paying out a tiny bit in Google search bar licensing fees? Hrm... I do wonder how much more information this browser will provide Google that they don't/can't get from clients currently. And if I have to hear about one more different brand o' Javascript engine coming out, I'm going to puke. EDIT: Well, here's some of what's potentially being phoned, and also how Google hopes to help make crrrrrrrazy cash. ![]() And here's our favorite dancing moon, used for good effect elsewhere in the comic. (The comic, btw, is especially geeky. Does that primarily reflect who is supposed to be using it, or is that who is supposed to start programming for it? I couldn't finish the comic "for fun," so hopefully I didn't miss too much.) ![]() Labels: browsers, dancing moons, Google posted by ruffin at 9/01/2008 10:19:00 PM |
|
| Thursday, June 12, 2008 | |
![]() Okay, this policy of Gmail stinks, especially when you're a programmer trying to distribute applications you've built: Some file types are blocked This fails the "do no evil" test. Why would Gmail shut down sending applications? Viruses, sure, but is there another reason a company who"outlines Web development investments in three areas", one of which is "2. Keeping Connectivity Pervasive" might want to discourage the distribution of applications on the desktop? Look, the browser is the platform for Google. They want to replace exe with http. This is exactly what scared Microsoft when Java hit the scene -- that Microsoft's hold over the desktop would become meaningless as applications moved to the web. Java failed in its attempt to take over the desktop, but it weakened Microsoft enough that Google's been able to do it (look, I realize that's a stretch, and I've left out about three hundred and two points between Java and Google, but hey, this is a blog post. For now, I'm going to have to ask that you trust me.). AJAX is the new Java. The web is winning. That Google would stop you from sending exe's via their new https should come as a surprise to no one. I'm not saying they instituted the policy to stop one from sending competitors to their platform, but it's sure as heck one reason if the decision isn't at least partially reversed in the future. posted by ruffin at 6/12/2008 05:06:00 PM |
|
| Monday, May 19, 2008 | |
|
Charles Moore recently commented on Alexis Kayhill's top 10 freeware apps on OS X. Of his, I found PTHPasteboard interesting enough to check out: How often have you copied something only to find that you need it a few minutes later but you've already copied another item over it on the Mac Clipboard? PTHPasteboard watches you while you work and keeps a copy of any items that you have copied to your Clipboard (you can specify how many entries are cached) and also saves the clipboard through restarts. I keep it configured as a default startup item. Honestly, that happens to me all the freakin' time. This is worth a look. So here are the two lists, now with my idiotic commentary. First, Kayhill's. * NeoOffice: And a few more Moore adds, though he doesn't exactly say what to remove. * ToyViewer Image Viewer/Editor The bottom line seems to be you can't pick a top 10 without a bit more requirements stated beforehand. That is, I tend to program a bit on the Mac, so MacVIm, Netbeans, and Eclipse are all very high on my list. I can't say much for SeaShore (a neat idea not yet ready for prime time) or Cyberduck (bad enough I re-registered Transmit). Adium's okay, Thunderbird's okay, Firefox is okay, but v3 RC 1 does awfully on my iBook. Very buggy. None of these are good enough to get rid of their commercial counterparts, including those that come with OS X, on a permanent basis. Firefox comes closest, especially b/c of its ability to navigate pages by typing. Still, occasionally in my experience it's buggy and I go back to using Safari for a week or two before trying another build. Instead of going through all I can think of, here's the freeware that currently lives on my Dock. * Eclipse * iTerm * TextWrangler * Stella (an Atari 2600 emulator) * AbiWord (a decent, smallish Word replacement that translates Word and WordPerfect fairly well) * vMac (68k MacOS emu) * MacVIm Add to that WhatSize, which was free at one point, and which I use for spring cleaning the hard drive. You might as well add GraphicConverter, which, as I've said recently, isn't smart enough to force you to register and, in fact, encourages you to treat it as free software. I'll spare you the gushing recommendations for each. Labels: browsers, F/free, graphicConverter, office, os x, vim posted by ruffin at 5/19/2008 03:23:00 PM |
|
| Sunday, April 20, 2008 | |
|
And here I was naive enough, coming back to web dev after a brief academic hiatus, to believe that the browsers had converged enough to think the design horrors of 2000 were over. No such. If there's one thing I'd like to see implemented, it's this text-shadow CSS property that the w3c proposed quite some time ago. Here's a page at w3c with "Readable White Text" using the property. Below, I'll include the code that should do the same thing. This should have a shadow. Without Safari, though, you're likely not seeing it -- or you're from THE FUTURE.*sigh* Just for fun, here's what you should be seeing, taken from Safari on Windows: ![]() A little bigger now for effect... ![]() That's really a pretty nice effect. Mozilla had a bug filed for its lack of support in 1999. With any luck, it appears it may have, within this weekend, finally gotten a patch. I tried the nightly build (2008042004) on my Mac, however, and no dice. Here's the best workaround I can find for IE. This should have a shadow. But only on IE, regardless of whether you're from THE FUTURE or not. Unless it's STEVE BALLMER'S FUTURE, where every browser is IE.Not only does it stink visually, it inexplicably seems to require a style value for height. Here's a picture for the IE challenged. ![]() And the code. Note the difference between using "text-shadow" and the "Direction" and "Strength" jive for the IE "filter". <!-- w3c's Way (Safari only right now) --> <center> <div style="background-color:blue;padding:10px;width:70%;text-align:left"> <h3 style="color:white; text-shadow: black 0.1em 0.1em 0.2em;"> This should have a shadow. Without Safari, though, you're likely not seeing it -- or you're from THE FUTURE. </h3> </div> </center> <!-- Microsoft's Way (IE only right now, and likely forever) --> <center> <div style="background-color:blue;padding:10px;width:70%;text-align:left"> <h3 style="color:white;height:100px;filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Shadow(color='#666666', Direction=225, Strength=4)"> This should have a shadow. But only on IE, regardless of whether you're from THE FUTURE or not. Unless it's STEVE BALLMER'S FUTURE, where every browser is IE. </h3> </div> </center> EDIT: Some play in the search for a solution. Better yet, works towards a possible patch for Firefox, with a test build. posted by ruffin at 4/20/2008 09:25:00 PM |
|
|
| |
|
|
All posts can be accessed here: Just the last year o' posts: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|