Re: State of the Israeli banks websites
This is another issue that seems to repeat on the list every few months. I took the courtesy to summarize the findings of this thread here: http://www.mybroadband.co.il/wiki/Banks. Hopefully we and other communities can keep the list up to date (feel free to publish the link wherever relevant). Gadi Omer Zak wrote: I mean - Firefox on Linux. Could be understood from context - my Linux distribution is Debian Etch, where Firefox is known (and identifies itself) as Iceweasel, due to trademark issues in Debian. The Web site works for me (under Linux, after I changed the useragent string by which the browser identifies itself) in those use cases in which I am interested (checking status of my investments). I did not check further, and I am rather un-surprised that some other use cases fail to work. --- Omer On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 16:00 +0300, Dan Bar Dov wrote: Oh, and when you say Discount works with firefox you mean firefox on windows. With firefox on Linux it doesn't work shit. [excuse my language] Dan On 8/16/07, Dan Bar Dov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not true. Discount mostly works with firefox, but it has some [important] features that fail to work. For example, if you have more than one account, the switch-account drop-down box does not open, so you can't even look at your other account. Dan On 8/16/07, Alon Altman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Discount's web site works well with Firefox, however your browser must identify itself as Firefox and not Gecko or Iceweasel. In case you use a different browser, you get a message saying the site supports IE only, which is not true. On 8/16/07, Omer Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not have experience with other banks, but Bank Discount's Web site blocks you unless you have Internet Explorer, version 5.5 or later. The people responsible for this state of affairs do not have a clue about the importance of supporting W3C standards - if to judge from their response to the complaint which I made about this, few weeks ago. --- Omer On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 10:58 +0300, Kfir Lavi wrote: Hi, I'm looking to open bank account for investing. I currently using Bank Hapoalim website and it works fine, but I don't have experience investing with this bank. From your experience, which bank will have the best Linux support in investment of stocks and mutual funds. Tnx, Kfir -- Gadi Cohen aka Kinslayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wastelands.net Freelance admin/coding/design HABONIM DROR linux/fantasy enthusiast KeyID 0x93F26EF5: 256A 1FC7 AA2B 6A8F 1D9B 6A5A 4403 F34B 93F2 6EF5
Re: [OT] Online privacy, police to have free access to IP addresses
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007, Gadi Cohen wrote about Re: [OT] Online privacy, police to have free access to IP addresses: Exactly, but that's just the point... in any sane democracy there are structures in place to prevent such abuses taking place. Like before I gave my example of police needing to obtain a search warrant before they can break into someone's house, they need to prove that such action is necessary to someone other than themselves, and be able to back up their claim. If that wasn't the case, do you not think the ability to search people's houses would be abused? Such power needs to be monitored; its a matter of protecting our society from human nature. This is getting more and more off-topic, but I'll bite... I don't disagree with you, but I'm trying to explain why the opposite view is not the view of the devil, but simply a different (even if wrong) view. You say that in order to prevent police from abusing their power, they should have to get a-priori (before the fact) approval for searches they conduct. This makes sense, and is indeed how we grew up to think, and as I said this sort of thinking is especially strong in the US, with their fourth amendment. However, look at the other powers the police have, which are far more serious than searching of evesdropping. The police have guns, and can shoot you, for example. Before a policeman shoots you, does he need to get written authorization from a judge? No, of course not. But he knows that *after* the fact, he will be judged, and if he abused his power, he's going to jail for a long time. Similarly, it is not inconcievable to imagine a state where Internet evesdropping is legal for the police, but a policeman knows that if he's ever caught doing it for any other reason but his official work, he'll go to jail. This doesn't make this a totalitarian state, if the police, judicial system, and the government, are still three separate entities which don't cover each other's asses. P.S. Looking at American history is always interesting for putting the relative importance of rights into perspective. As late as 1860, Americans considered sacred the need for a judge to sign on searches before they happen (the 4th amendment) and considered holy the right to own a weapon (the 2nd amendment); But at the same time, they also allowed slavery, forbidden married women from signing contracts or owning property, and forbidden both women and slaves from voting. It's not hard to get the feeling that something was terribly screwed up in this value system. -- Nadav Har'El|Tuesday, Aug 21 2007, 7 Elul 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Long periods of drought are always http://nadav.harel.org.il |followed by rain. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Online privacy, police to have free access to IP addresses
Nadav Har'El wrote: However, look at the other powers the police have, which are far more serious than searching of evesdropping. The police have guns, and can shoot you, for example. Before a policeman shoots you, does he need to get written authorization from a judge? No, of course not. But he knows that *after* the fact, he will be judged, and if he abused his power, he's going to jail for a long time. Yes, that is a valid argument. The main difference is, of course, that if a policeman shoots someone, the chances of no one related to the victim noticing are extremely small. Questions such as whether people are believed, whether the policeman can still walk even if he abuses power etc. are all good questions, but they are nullified by the major problem - with evesdropping, the chance of the police getting into any kind of trouble from which he will have to wriggle free are close to nill. So, the above law could be improved by saying, for example, that anyone whose records are pulled will have to be notified (preferably by an automatic system) as soon as the investigation can allow it, but never later than a month after the information was pulled (unless a judge thinks further secrecy is still needed). Put that into the automatic system that does the evesdropping (and make sure that only someone from the judiciary system has the technical permissions to extend the one month expiry), and I think you may actually get a net improvement over the situation as it is today. Shachar = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Online privacy, police to have free access to IP addresses
On 21/08/07, Shachar Shemesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, the above law could be improved by saying, for example, that anyone whose records are pulled will have to be notified (preferably by an automatic system) as soon as the investigation can allow it, but never later than a month after the information was pulled (unless a judge thinks further secrecy is still needed). Put that into the automatic system that does the evesdropping (and make sure that only someone from the judiciary system has the technical permissions to extend the one month expiry), and I think you may actually get a net improvement over the situation as it is today. I like the technical solution. Good luck getting *this* through the Knesset, thought...:^) --Amos
Re: why debian doesn't allow calling ns_initparse in shared lib?
On 11/08/07, Lior Kaplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't have any clue about the reason, but I've forwarded you mail to the bug report with hope that someone will answer. I've also reproduced the bug on my machine, and updated it: * reassigned it to the libc6-dev package * retitled for easy understanding of the current problem * marked in as appearing in unstable). I hope these will ease the current maintainers of libc6 to fix that. Just an update on the outcome - The response this produced (pretty quickly, I must admit) was that these are undocumented and unsupported API's which could be gone any time, and true enough - even when I finally got it working on Debian with Debian's libresolv somehow the settings directly into the internal variables were somehow ignored, unlike the behaviour on some version of RedHat. This was different when I compiled my own version of the library on Debian. I found lwres (lightweight resolver) which provides API's to control this stuff and we might switch to it when we get back to this. Thanks, --Amos
Re: [OT] Online privacy, police to have free access to IP addresses
The following movie of the day is pertinent to the discussion, and is even a bit on-topic (there is a penguin, if you look carefully!): http://wolfgang.lonien.de/?p=386 -- In civilized societies, captions are as important in movies as soundtracks, professional photography and expert editing. My own blog is at http://www.zak.co.il/tddpirate/ My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone. They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which I may be affiliated in any way. WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How-to: Debian, ATI, XGL + Compiz Fusion/Beryl
Hello list! I have created a detailed guide on how to setup XGL on a Debian system with an ATI graphics card along with Compiz Fusion and/or Beryl. If anyone's interested, the guide can be viewed here: http://linuxized.blogspot.com/2007/08/how-to-debian-ati-xgl-compiz.html There's also a digg on this: http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/How_to_Debian_unstable_ATI_XGL_Compiz_Fusion_Beryl Hope this helps anyone interested in fast Compiz Fusion under Debian (AIGLX with the free radeon driver works too, but its slow) :) Alex -- | | Alex Alexander | Wired | \
