On 2 June 2011 10:49, András Csányi sayusi.a...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Just for the record. It looks like this problem is solved. I switched
back to gentoo-sources and I haven't experienced such problems which
is described in my first letter. I have used ck kernel. I would like
to emphasize
Apparently, though unproven, at 02:07 on Friday 03 June 2011, walt did opine
thusly:
On 06/02/2011 02:21 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Flash is a piece of shit that has never worked right and Adobe are a
bunch of fools that cannot code properly or securely.
I agree 100%. My question is why
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 09:20:01AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Compare how Google goes about doing things with how Adobe does it.
The Google Chromium team appears to take security seriously and are open and
up-front about what they do.
Adobe likes to stonewall on issues and create an
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:12 on Friday 03 June 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 09:20:01AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Compare how Google goes about doing things with how Adobe does it.
The Google Chromium team appears to take security seriously and are open
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 06:10:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:12 on Friday 03 June 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 09:20:01AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Compare how Google goes about doing things with how Adobe does it.
The
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:22 on Friday 03 June 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
Neither. Adobe is utterly incompetent and apathetic, google is evil
and wants to sell ad space for h3rb41 v14gr4 in your brain.
Flash is a necessary evil for a lot of us, chrome(ium) is not.
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 10:20:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:22 on Friday 03 June 2011, Indi did opine
thusly:
Neither. Adobe is utterly incompetent and apathetic, google is evil
and wants to sell ad space for h3rb41 v14gr4 in your brain.
On Friday 03 Jun 2011 21:07:36 Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:22 on Friday 03 June 2011, Indi did
opine
thusly:
Neither. Adobe is utterly incompetent and apathetic, google is evil
and wants to sell ad space for h3rb41 v14gr4 in your brain.
On Friday 03 June 2011 22:50:28 Mick wrote:
Agreed. I do wish we'd get something open and reasonably well coded
to
replace flash,
I do hope that html5 will do away with it altogether.
you can easily block flash.
You won't be able to block all that moving add crap in html5. Why
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Friday 03 June 2011 22:50:28 Mick wrote:
Agreed. I do wish we'd get something open and reasonably well coded
to
replace flash,
I do hope that html5 will do away with it altogether.
you can
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 12:50:02AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Friday 03 June 2011 22:50:28 Mick wrote:
Agreed. I do wish we'd get something open and reasonably well coded
to
replace flash,
I do hope that html5 will do away with it altogether.
you can easily
On Friday 03 June 2011 19:49:40 Indi wrote:
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 12:50:02AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Friday 03 June 2011 22:50:28 Mick wrote:
Agreed. I do wish we'd get something open and reasonably
well coded
to
replace flash,
I do hope that html5
On 06/02/2011 02:21 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Flash is a piece of shit that has never worked right and Adobe are a bunch of
fools that cannot code properly or securely.
I agree 100%. My question is why they continue to be so successful in spite
of such a history. And they don't seem to be
13 matches
Mail list logo
