There is an assortment of web content that _requires_ flash
Isn't the Google document viewer among them ? AFAIK
It is not. Look stuff up.
I did. Last time I checked it pressured me to enable JS, when it
got JS, it asked for Flash ... this was the EOD for me.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:25 AM, dos386 dos...@gmail.com wrote:
There is an assortment of web content that _requires_ flash
Isn't the Google document viewer among them ? AFAIK
It is not. Look stuff up.
I did. Last time I checked it pressured me to enable JS, when it
got JS, it asked for
Email is the principal vector for _v_i_r_u_s_ delivery, by attachments all
reside on Google's servers too, and never reach my machine.
Funny ...
Google has viewers for all common file types
Really? How does it work? How do you see the file on Gooogle's server?
Maybe you have the ADOBE FLUSH
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:52 PM, dos386 dos...@gmail.com wrote:
Email is the principal vector for _v_i_r_u_s_ delivery, but attachments all
reside on Google's servers too, and never reach my machine.
Funny ...
True. You can't deliver a virus by a nasty attachment if the
attachment never
I do have the Adobe Flash player installed, but it's not involved in
the transaction. The attachments in question are not SWF objects.
But Google maybe translates them into SWF ... does the attach
viewer still work when you disable or remove Adobe Flash ?
There is an assortment of web
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:24 PM, dos386 dos...@gmail.com wrote:
I do have the Adobe Flash player installed, but it's not involved in
the transaction. The attachments in question are not SWF objects.
But Google maybe translates them into SWF ... does the attach
No, it doesn't.
viewer still
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:41 PM, dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com wrote:
My usual response to worries about privacy is You *wish* you were
important enough that anyone could be *bothered* to pay that sort of
attention to
On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 09:03:15 -0400, dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:41 PM, dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com
wrote:
My usual response to worries about privacy is You *wish* you were
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:22 PM, TJ Edmister damag...@hyakushiki.net wrote:
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html
And none of the issues pointed to are inherent to electronic
databases. The problems mentioned have occurred for as
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:21 PM, James Collins james.collin...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_(electronic)
Just for the record, here's yet another poor Yahoo! sap who's been
compromised by spammers. Sad, but oh well, what can you do? (Change
your password or use a
The privacy of yahoo email users will decrease on July 1st when yahoo will
begin more aggressive ad scanning of your messages stored on their servers.
I even noticed a new ad format that looks like it is part of your inbox
list but its a sponsered ad. I would recommend switching to other
Hi,
AFAIK, Google's machines (not people) automatically scan your
messages to better target ads at you. They don't keep any private data
(or at least not beyond minimal legal limits).
My ISP is ATT, formerly Bellsouth (whom ATT bought out, among
others). Even they (Bellsouth branch) switched
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Chris Evans aaxiomfin...@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't recommend gmail as google scans your messages too.
Http://digitalatoll.com offers email that is private and secure but is not
free.
I personally don't *care* that Google scans my mail. The scanning is
done
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:41 PM, dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com wrote:
My usual response to worries about privacy is You *wish* you were
important enough that anyone could be *bothered* to pay that sort of
attention to you. You aren't and they don't.
14 matches
Mail list logo
