Terlihat mencurigakan karena link-nya mengarah ke sebuah situs di China. Saya coba klik dan ...

Firefox save you!.

Tags: firefox, firefox save you, web forgery

Una de las gracias de esta version, es que al descargar un archivo y abrirlo, nos pregunta con que programa hacerlo.

Es mejor que lo que había antes, pero aun no es tan bueno. El programa lo escogemos para el protocolo, no para "el tipo de archivo", así que todos los archivos locales (interpretados como protocolo file) se agregaran a la lista.

Además, igual es latoso asociar cada tipo a un programa distinto, cuando KDE maneja su propia asociación de archivos (y de antemano). Entonces acá fue donde Amsn me dio una pista:

El comando kfmclient exec /archivo/de/entrada lo que hace es abrir la direccion dada con el programa asociado en KDE. Si es un directorio lo abre en Konqueror o Dolphin. Si el tipo de archivo no está asociado aún, pregunta con que programa abrirlo.

Ahora el problema con Firefox, es que deja escojer "el programa" con que abrir los archivos (ya convenimos que se va a usar kfmclient) pero no deja pasarle argumentos (es necesario el "exec"), por lo tanto mi solución fue la siguiente:

• Creamos un script como root llamado /usr/bin/abrircon, para eso puede ejecutarse:

sudo nano /usr/bin/abrircon

• O sino:

kdesu kate /usr/bin/abrircon

• Le pegamos el siguiente contenido:

#!/bin/bash
kfmclient exec $1

• Finalmente, le damos permiso de ejecución (también como root)

sudo chmod +x /usr/bin/abrircon

Ahora, en Firefox, la proxima vez que queramos abrir un archivo recien bajado, preguntará con que programa abrirlo. Entonces le damos la dirección de nuestro script:

/usr/bin/abrircon

Ojo: Antes de ponerle que "no vuelva a preguntar más", prueben su funciona. Para el próximo archivo, tal vez quieran que no pregunte más.

Si por esas cosas de la vida, ya habian puesto que no preguntara más, lo que se debe hacer es (con Firefox cerrado), es editar un archivo dentro del perfil de firefox, que se ubica en la siguiente carpeta:

~/.mozilla/firefox/<carpeta del perfil>

donde <carpeta del perfil> es un nombre generado aleatoriamente la primera vez que ejecutan Firefox.

El archivo en cuestión se llama mimeTypes.rdf

Se debe buscar la linea que dice

<RDF:Description RDF:about="urn:handler:local:

(La deje incompleta a propósito). Si bajo esa linea hay algo como:

NC:alwaysAsk="false"

Solo se debe cambiar el false por true.

PD: Toda esta tontera no abría sido necesaria si desde el principio el Firefox permitiera pasarle argumentos a los programas escogidos, además de que en ningún panel/menú/opción encontre como desactivar "que no preguntara más" al "abrir un archivo con...".

browser, the beta version of

Firefox 3

A Mozilla acaba de lançar para download mais uma build do seu mais novo navegador de internet o Firefox 3. Nessa versão foram corrigidos alguns erros e bugs encontrados na anterior e aparenta estar mais rápida e estável.

Nota: Versão Pré-Relese na qual pode conter erros e bugs, use por conta própria.

Tamanho: 6.97MB

Fonte: Ultimate Live

Firefox may be labeled 'better', 'safer', 'faster' or whatever; but if at the price of being always my most memory consumpt and sluggish app, then it's not worth it and those turn out to be obvious deceptions. The reality is that it's still buggy and under a constant development nightmare of incompatibilities (even within previous versions); and it's most definitely not ready for prime time; ie, it's still a 'leet' app; made by developers for themselves. Most of it's 'usefulness' just really gets in your way. Eg, I use version 2, and had to browse (for a couple of days) a ton full of shitty and useless pseudo-documentation, just to make a couple of easy, lousy JS buttons. Why on god's earth do I need a separate developmental version for something so menial!? And better yet, why was this functionality not present either built-in or through an extension. Well, in all honestly, it was present, but disabled; and they were a couple of add-ons, but did not work. The worst is now I know that I have to get ready to upgrade them soon when V3 makes it's way.

Also, on a side-note, tabs sucks; I have never used one purposedly, and never will; ever. I don't 'uder sand' why everybody else goes ZOMG! gooey over them. I just hate those abominable windowless illusions. Bottomline, Firefox sucks. I prefer K-meleon, but this came pre-installed on my warez... FireFox is just a Linucks fanatic's pitch.

Однією з самих неприємних речей для мене стала відсутність підтримки Firebug, який для мене є одним з найцінніших інструментів. Однак на радість собі є спосіб обійти таку проблему, який я піддивився на тому ж блозі webdeveloping пана excieve. Виявляється не все так погано і взагалі досить просто. Поряд зі стабільною версією 1.0, яка жодним чином не хочу взаємодуяти з Firefox 3, є також бета версія 1.1 (та навіть 1.2 alpha, про яку і йде то взагалі розповідь у статті), які можуть без усіляких проблем взаємодіяти з новою версією браузера.

На жаль, залишається ще безліч тем та доповнень, які не були оновлені і покищо не можуть працювати в новому оточенні, однак є надія, що в досить короткий проміжок часу ситуація буде виправлена.

P. S.: Прошу вибачення за досить велику порерву. Моя вина в цьому мінімальна. Не біло можливості достукатись до блогу з технічних причин.

The award-winning Web browser is now faster, more secure, and fully customizable to your online life. With Firefox 2, we’ve added powerful new features that make your online experience even better.

Reasons why it is better than IE7:

• Firefox 2 delivers helpful new features to make your online experience more productive.

• Firefox continues to lead the way in online security, and now includes active protection from online scams to keep you safer.

• Choose from over a thousand useful add-ons that enhance Firefox. It’s easy to personalize Firefox to make it your own.

Go here to download it: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/

Enjoy!

Максимум полезного визуального места и удобства. Этого удалось добиться с помощью таких плагинов:

1. Compact menu - позволяет уменьшить тулбар с меню до одной кнопки. Поскольку я все равно очень редко пользуюсь пунктами меню, то одна кнопка - самое им место;

2. Download statusbar. Ну не нравится мне это нативное окно закачек, а Download statusbar в режиме compact - это самое то;

3. Basics - добавляет кнопку "Открыть новый таб" справа от панели табов. Мелочь, а удобно;

4. Menu editor -  позволит убрать кучу ненужных пунктов из контекстного меню. Особенно приятно убрать "Открыть в новом окне";

5. Adblock plus. Вроде и интернет безлимитный и трафика не жалко, а все равно не хочется смотреть надоедливую рекламу;

6. Taboo. Очень много нужно прочитать, а зачастую некогда. И чтобы не использовать "Избранное" (ну не нравится оно мне) и не держать открытыми кучу табов и используется Taboo. Добавляется две кнопки на панель: "save this tab to read later" и "view your Taboos", которая сортирует и показывает превью запомненных ссылок. Просто и удобно;

7. Littlefox. Ну очень минималистичная тема.

Mozilla anunció que ha terminado de hacer cambios en el primer Release Candidate (RC) de Firefox 3.0 y que está ahora trabajando en preparar esa versión para su lanzamiento a finales de este mes de Mayo. "Ya tenemos todo el código de Firefox 3.0 Release Candidate 1", dijo Mike Schroepfer, vice-presidente de ingeniería de Mozilla en un mensaje en el blog de desarrolladores del proyecto.

Cuando Firefox 3.0 RC1 esté listo será distribuído a más de 1,2 Millones de actuales usuarios, iniciando una etapa de pruebas más extensivo que el sus anteriores versiones Beta. Schroepfer dijo también que si se encuentran errores serios continuarán lanzando "Release Candidates" hasta que la versión definitiva esté completada.

Cuando Firefox 2.0 fué lanzado en el 2006, necesitó de 3 RCs y por lo menos hasta Marzo pasado, Schroepfer esperaba que ocurriera lo mismo con Firefox 3.0.

• Artículo completo en LinuxWorld.

Ecco le novità:

Possibilità di sincronizzare i siti preferiti tra pc e cellulare;

Molto piu' veloce: questa versione infatti è piu veloce del 50% di OperaMini 4.0, poichè le pagine web  sono compresse per favorirne un piu' veloce caricamento;

Possibilità di salvare qualsiasi contenuto direttamente dal browser e molto altro...

Correte a scaricarlo... www.operamini.com/

O visual da versão para XP está mais 'Vistalizado' e sem dúvida, bonito

Ampliar

Fonte: BlogWindows

Nothing wrong with my internet matee!!

They're not the first of web browsers, and their structure is even modelled from others, but they are nonetheless on top. A lot of competitors have been trying to get a share of their market, but instead they gave some to Mozilla.

So what makes Mozilla Firefox the best among web browsers?

Advertising.

And what is the best advertising campaign to promote products? Sexy shirts on Sexy Babes. (you can ask Hooters, or those Bikini Car washes about this).

If you look on the photo above, her shirt shows the Firefox logo obviously, but what makes it more noticeable and second look worthy is how it sexily wrapped around the body of this pretty girl, like the fox wrapped the globe of it's logo. Now that is good advertising.

And one tip, make sure to type in the right url or you'll get this notice.

Hey, don't do it on purpose.....

3 Critical:

1. Good Advertising Indeed - the average stare duration of ads like this is 5.4 sec. For the female population that is.
2. Where's the Fox Looking At? - am I just that observant, or did you also wonder where that fox is looking at. Bad dog.
3. Why Not - about the error message, why don't they put pictures instead of those boring text's that shows up when there's an error?

Ma come funziona questa ottimizzazione?

"With this technique, Opera is compiled twice. The first compilation creates a specially instrumented build that gathers statistics about which code is called and which variables are used most often. The instrumented build loads sites automatically using “URL player”, a testing feature available in every Opera build (more information about that in a later blog post). This information is dumped into files and used to produce the final build that’s optimized based on the gathered statistics."

Purtroppo i bug che affliggono Opera 9.5 non hanno permesso di effettuare un test approfondito ma da una rapida analisi, risulta che la nuova release risulterà migliore di Firefox 3 Beta 5. Faccio le mie più sincere congratulazioni al tema di Opera, anche se ovviamente voglio aspettare la release finale del browser prima di tirare ogni conclusione.

Fonte: geekissimo
Articolo rilasciato su Licenza Creative Commons

Let us take a journey that will begin long before even the intellectual conception of Internet Explorer, that will glance at its long defeated rivals, examine the current browsers available and will end with a prediction of what the future of browsing will offer us – and which browser(s) will still be around to offer it.

People often think that Internet Explorer has been the dominant web browser since the golden age of the internet began. Well for a very long time now it has indeed been the most popular browser and at times been almost totally unrivalled. This was mainly a result of it being packaged free with Microsoft Windows, in what some would later call a brutal monopolisation attempt by Microsoft. The last few years however have heralded the arrival of new, possibly superior browsers. Mozilla's Firefox has been particularly successful at chipping away at Explorers market dominance. So where did it all begin, and why were Microsoft ever allowed to have a hundred percent market dominance?

Origins

The truth is they never did have total dominance, but at times they have come very close. Microsoft actually entered the Browser Battle quite late on. Infact a man named Neil Larson is credited to be one of the originators of internet browsers, when in 1977 he created a program – The TRS-80 - that allowed browsing between “sites” via hypertext jumps. This was a DOS program and the basis of much to come. Slowly other browsers powered by DOS and inspired by the TRS 80 were developed. Unfortunately they were often constricted by the limitations of the still fairly young internet itself.

In 1988, Peter Scott and Earle Fogel created a simple, fast browser called Hytelnet, which by 1990 offered users instant logon and access to the online catalogues of over five thousand libraries around the world – an exhilarating taste of what the internet, and web browsers, would soon be able to offer.

In 1989 the original World Wide Web was born. Using a NeXTcube computer, Tim Berners-Lee created a web browser that would change how people used the internet forever. He called his browser the WorldWideWeb(http://www., which is still likely to sound familiar to internet users today. It was a windowed browser capable of displaying simple style sheet, capable of editing sites and able to download and open any file type supported by the NeXTcube.

In 1993 the first popular graphical browser was released. Its name was Mosaic and it was created by Marc Andreessen and Eric Bina. Mosaic could be run on both Unix, and very importantly, on the highly popular Microsoft Windows operating system (incidentally it could also be used on Amiga and Apple computers). It was the first browser on Windows that could display graphics/pictures on a page where there was also textual content. It is often cited as being responsible for triggering the internet boom due to it making the internet bearable for the masses. (It should be noted that the web browser Cello was the first browser to be used on Windows – but it was non graphical and made very little impact compared to Mosaic).

The Browser Wars - Netscape Navigator versus Internet Explorer

Mosaic's decline began almost as soon as Netscape Navigator was released (1994). Netscape Navigator was a browser created by Marc Andreessen, one of the men behind Mosaic and co-founder of Netscape Communications Corporation. Netscape was unrivalled in terms of features and usability at the time. For example, one major change from previous browsers was that it allowed surfers to see parts of a website before the whole site was downloaded. This meant that people did not have to wait for minutes simply to see if the site they were loading was the actual one the were after, whilst also allowing them to read information on the site as the rest of it downloaded. By 1996 Netscape had almost 90% market dominance, as shown below.

Market Share Comparisons of Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer from 1996 to 1998

....................Netscape.......IE
October 1998..........64%.........32.2%
April 1998............70%.........22.7%
October 1997..........59.67%......15.13%
April 1997............81.13%......12.13%
October 1996..........80.45%......12.18%
April 1996............89.36%.......3.76%

In these two years Netscape clearly dominated the internet browser market, but a new browser named Internet Explorer was quickly gaining ground on it.

Microsoft released their own browser (ironically based on the earlier Mosaic browser which was created by one of the men now running Netscape), clearly worried about Netscape's dominance. It was not so much the worry that it would have a 100% market share of internet browsers on their Windows operating system, but more the worry that browsers would soon be capable of running all types programs on them. That would mean foregoing the need for an actual operating system, or at the most only a very basic one would be needed. This in turn would mean Netscape would soon be able to dictate terms to Microsoft, and Microsoft were not going to let that happen easily. Thus in August 1995, Internet Explorer was released.

By 1999 Internet explorer had captured an 89.03% market share, whilst Netscape was down to 10.47%. How could Internet Explorer make this much ground in just two years? Well this was down to two things really. The first, and by far the most important was that Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer in with every new copy of Windows, and as Windows was used by about 90% of the computer using population it clearly gave them a huge advantage. Internet Explorer had one other ace it held over Netscape – it was much better. Netscape Navigator was stagnant and had been for some time. The only new features it ever seemed to introduce were often perceived by the public as beneficial for Netscape's parent company rather than Netscape's user base. (i.e., features that would help it monopolise the market). Explorer, on the other hand, was given much attention by Microsoft. Regular updates and excellent usability plus a hundred million dollar investment would prove too much for Netscape Explorer.

2000 – 2005

These years were fairly quiet in the Battle of the Browsers. It seemed as if Internet Explorer had won the war and that nobody could even hope to compete with it. In 2002/2003 it had attained about 95% of the market share – about the time of IE 5/6. With over 1000 people working on it and millions of dollars being poured in, few people had the resources to compete. Then again, who wanted to compete? It was clearly a volatile market, and besides that everybody was content with Internet Explorer. Or were they? Some people saw faults with IE – security issues, incompatibility issues or simply bad programming. Not only that, it was being shoved down peoples throats. There was almost no competition to keep it in line or to turn to as an alternative. Something had to change. The only people with the ability and the power to compete with Microsoft took matters into their own hands.

Netscape was now supported by AOL. A few years prior, just after they had lost the Browser Wars to Microsoft, they had released the coding for Netscape into the public domain. This meant anybody could develop their own browser using the Netscape skeleton. And people did. Epiphany, Galeon and Camino, amongst others, were born out of Netscape's ashes. However the two most popular newcomers were called Mozilla and Firefox.

Mozilla was originally an open sourced project aimed to improve the Netscape browser. Eventually it was released as Netscape Navigator 7 and then 8. Later it was released as Mozilla 1.0.

Mozilla was almost an early version on another open source browser, Firefox. With it being an open source the public were able to contribute to it - adding in what features it needed, the programming it required and the support it deserved. The problems people saw in Internet Explorer were being fixed by members of the open sourced browser community via Firefox. For instance, the many security issues IE 6 had were almost entirely fixed in the very first release of Firefox. Microsoft had another fight on their hands.

2005 – Present

Firefox was the browser that grew and grew in these years. Every year capturing an even larger market share percentage than before. More user friendly than most of its rivals along with high security levels and arguably more intelligent programming helped its popularity. With such a large programming community behind it, updates have always been regular and add on programs/features are often released. It prides itself on being the peoples browser. It currently has a 28.38% market share.

Apple computers have had their own browser since the mid 1990's – Safari - complete with its own problems, such as (until recently) the inability to run Java scripts. However most Apple users seemed happy with it and a version capable of running on Windows has been released. It has had no major competitor on Apple Macs, and as such has largely been out of the Browser Wars. It currently holds a 2.54% market share and is slowly increasing.

Internet Explorer's market share has dropped from over 90% to around 75%, and is falling. It will be interesting to see what Microsoft will attempt to regain such a high market share.

Opera currently holds 1.07%.

Mozilla itself only has a 0.6% market share these days.

The Future of Web Browsing

Web browsers come and go. It is the nature of technology (if such a term can be used), to supplant inferior software in very short periods of time. It is almost impossible for a single company to stay ahead of the competition for long. Microsoft have the advantage of being able to release IE with any Windows using PC. That covers over 90% of the market. They also have the advantage of unprecedented resources. They can compete how they wish for as long as they wish. So there is no counting IE out of the future of web browsing.

Safari is in a similar position, being easily the most popular Mac web browser. Its long term survival is dependant upon Apple and the sale of their computers.

These are the only two browsers that are almost guaranteed another five years of life, at least. Firefox may seem like another candidate, but the public is fickle, and one bad release, or if it seriously lags behind the new Internet Explorer 8 for long, could easily see its popularity quickly descend into virtual oblivion.

However, it seems likely community driven browsers, such as Mozilla and Firefox, will be the only types of browser capable of competing with the wealthy internet arm of Microsoft in the near future.

As for web browsing itself, will it change any time soon? Well it already has for some online communities. For example, if you want to buy clothes you could try entering an online 'world' creating an online virtual You to go from 'shop to shop' with, looking at products and trying/buying what you see. Some 'worlds' allow you to recreate yourself accurately including weight and height and then try on things apparel such as jeans to give you an idea of how you would look in that particular item.

Will 'worlds' like this destroy normal web browsers such as IE ? - It seems unlikely. Traditional web browsers provide such freedom and ease of access that it is hard to see any other alternative taking over. However they are part of the new, 'thinking out of the box' wave of alternatives that some people will find attractive, and really who knows what the future will bring.

Mozilla anunció que finalizaron los trabajos sobre el Release Candidate 1 de Firefox 3.0 y que será liberado muy pronto. (Estimamos a finales de este mes) por lo que esperemos que no encuentren problemas al lanzar la versión final.

El jefe de Ingeniería de Mozilla, aseguró que si se encuentran problemas críticos se seguirán lanzando RC hasta que todos los problemas estén solventados.

La versión final será distribuida entre los actuales usuarios de Mozilla-Firefox, que serán unos 1.2 millones. (Esos numeros van para vos, IE :P )

Yo realmente espero con gran expectativa esta versión, probé las betas y va muy bien :D

Fuente | VivaLinux

É só visitar o site http://www.websapiens.net e clicar no link "WebSapiens no seu Blog" para visualizar as opções para envio de notícias ao WebSapiens.

Comando Digital, aqui quem manda é a informação!

Theory

data URI specification says the following:

some applications that use URLs may impose a length limit; for
example, URLs embedded within <A> anchors in HTML have a length limit
determined by the SGML declaration for HTML [RFC1866]. The LITLEN
(1024) limits the number of characters which can appear in a single
attribute value literal, the ATTSPLEN (2100) limits the sum of all
lengths of all attribute value specifications which appear in a tag,
and the TAGLEN (2100) limits the overall length of a tag.

Though at the time of writing data URI specification HTML3.2 was current HTML recommendation, author intentionally used LITLEN, ATTSPLEN and TAGLEN values from the older HTML2.0 SGML declaration to show that some user-agents may impose a length limit for URI.

HTTP1.1 doesn't put a limit on the length of URI, but it warns us:

Note: Servers ought to be cautious about depending on URI lengths
above 255 bytes, because some older client or proxy
implementations might not properly support these lengths.

which basically means that if all clients in the network support URIes more than 255 bytes long, we're ok.

HTML3.2 SGML declaration states the maximum length of an attribute to be 65535. Even more, HTML4.01 SGML declaration uses value 65535 as a maximum allowed in SGML but says that fixed limits should be avoided. XML1.0 SGML declaration uses 99999999 value just to show that there's no limit specified.

Practice

Different browsers have different maximum length of dataURI'ed values supported.

As per the kb208427 article, IE supports URI length of up to 2048 bytes. According to the Microsoft IE8 data URI support whitepaper, IE8 supports up to 32Kbytes of data URI and silently discards dataURI value if its size exceeds 32Kbytes (which can be checked in the testcase1 and testcase2). As I've already mentioned in the previous post, other browsers provide bigger-sized URI support, but I doubt that IE8 will have minor market share so we will still have to stick to 32Kbytes. And I will repeat: data URI spec author that the only reasonable and semantic use of data URI is embedding small resources, so realistically speaking 32Kbytes limit shouldn't be a problem.

Serving CSS dataURI'ed

In theory, CSS has to be served with its MIME type (text/css).

In practice, only Firefox and only in standards compliancy mode cares about MIME type that CSS's been served with. Please see the testcases with CSS served with wrong MIME type in different render modes: in standards compliancy mode and in quirks mode. Opera, Safari and Internet Explorer 8 all apply CSS served with any MIME type in all modes. The behaviour is the same for both CSS files served using dataURI and by referencing normal external files.

Serving Javascript and HTML dataURI'ed

Safari, Opera and Firefox support embedding javascript using data URI scheme. According to the whitepaper, IE8b1 doesn't support this. Here's the quote:

Scripts in data URIs are unsupported because they allow potentially harmful script to bypass server- and
proxy-script filters for applications such as HTML email. (Web-based email clients generally do not allow
emails to execute script; data URIs could be used to easily bypass these filters).

I do agree that this is a valid point, it is a potential security issue, dataURIed javascript is even published as an XSS vector. Please see the testcase.

Opera and Safari run dataURI'ed HTML page in a separate isolated context, IE8b1 doesn't support dataURI'ed html at all, so the only affected browser here is Firefox. There's an interesting bugzilla entry describing the XSS (marked as duplicate to the security proposal) which says:

The attack works by exploiting an ambiguity in RFC 2397 with regard to the Javascript same-origin security policy -- what is the origin of a URI? Is it the containing page? If so, preventing this attack is the responsibility of site maintainers. If not, FF should launch the child of a data: URI without
same-origin privileges.

Firefox authors reply that this is site maintainers' problem to filter dataURI and compare this to filtering javascript: (which is quite fair) but why did they want to create a new hole in all the sites for some vague benefits of executing dataURI'ed scripts in the same context?

To me it seems a bit weird especially looking at the fact that other browsers do care about execution context. The bugzilla entry is still opened, but I doubt that this is going to be fixed. So, “site maintainers”, be aware!

Nested dataURI'es

Neither dataURI spec nor any other mentions if dataURI'es can not be nested. So here's the testcase where dataURI'ed CSS has dataURI'ed image embedded. IE8b1, Firefox3 and Safari applied the stylesheet and showed the image, Opera9.50 (build 9613) applies the stylesheet but doesn't show the embedded image! So it seems that Opera9 doesn't expect to get anything embedded inside of an already embedded resource! :D

But funny thing, as IE8b1 supports expressions and also supports nested data URI'es, it has the same potential security flaw as Firefox does (as described in the section above). See the testcase — embedded CSS has the following code: body { background: expression(a()); } which calls function a() defined in the javascript of the main page, and this function is called every time the expression is reevaluated. Though IE8b1 has limited expressions support (which is going to be explained in a separate post) you can't use any code as the expression value, but you can only call already defined functions or use direct string values. So in order to exploit this feature we need to have a ready javascript function already located on the page and then we can just call it from the expression embedded in the stylesheet. That's not very trivial obviously, but if you have a website that allows people to specify their own stylesheets and you want to be on the safe side, you have to either make sure you don't have a javascript function that can cause any potential harm or filter expressions from people's stylesheets.

Line feeds

Firefox, Opera, Safari and IE8b1 support both data URI values supplied as one line (as an URI) and splitted by 76 bytes (as specified in MIME and MHTML RFCs). See the testcase.

But base64 RFC doesn't put a requirement to split base64 strings:

MIME [3] is often used as a reference for base 64 encoding.  However,
MIME does not define "base 64" per se, but rather a "base 64
Content-Transfer-Encoding" for use within MIME.  As such, MIME
enforces a limit on line length of base 64 encoded data to 76
characters.  MIME inherits the encoding from PEM [2] stating it is
"virtually identical", however PEM uses a line length of 64
characters.  The MIME and PEM limits are both due to limits within
SMTP.

Implementations MUST NOT not add line feeds to base encoded data
unless the specification referring to this document explicitly
directs base encoders to add line feeds after a specific number of
characters.

DataURIed images with images turned off

When you turn off images in your browser, only Firefox still shows dataURIed images. IE8b1, Safari and Opera don't show the image as it's supposed to be when you turn the images off. To test this turn off images in your browser and run the testcase.

UPDATE: Firefox developers told me this is by design as unchecking “Load images automatically” option in the browser settings disables only network request to get the image. So if the image is accessible without doing a network request — either from cache or embedded as dataURI, it will be displayed in any case.

Dynamically created dataURIes

As dataURI can contain binary data (e.g. to show images), there are thoughts on using this. Ajaxian has a crazy article on creating pure JS video player that doesn't use flash but changes dataURI'ed images instead. This technique may get some practical evolution and usage, but now it's rather impractical.

Links and references

• HTML 2.0 SGML declaration
• HTML 4.01 SGML declaration
• HTML 3.0 SGML declaration
• HTML 3.2 SGML delcaration
• Microsoft IE8 data URI support
• XML1.0 SGML declaration
• Maximum Length of the URL
• How Mozilla determines MIME types

Enligt IRM växte internetannonseringen nyligen med ytterligare 23 procent och står numera för 15 procent av den totala medieinvesteringen i Sverige. Mer än TV.

I samband med detta vill jag redogöra för ett kraftigt stigande antal användare av Adblockers, annonshindrare och annonsförstörare. En trend jag tycker starkt borde oroa internetsverige. Stora delar av internets existens bygger på annonsintäkter.

Jag har svårt att se att Microsoft och Mozilla installerar Adblockers som en standardinställning. Men redan idag finns mediabyråernas värsta fiende bara två klick bort för en normalbegåvad surfare.

Och det finns en uppsjö av Adblockers att välja på, för Firefox: Adblock, Adblock Plus, Adblock Filterset.G Updater, iMacros for Firefox, ImgLikeOpera, Adblock Plus Watcher, Add-Art, BlackHole Server, Karma Blocker

För Internet Explorer: Adblock Internet Explorer, IE7Pro, Admuncher, AdsCleaner, Adblock Plus, Spybot search and destroy och Norton internet security.

Varje vecka laddar hela 225 000 (!) hem Adblock Plus för Firefox. Totalt har 18,4 miljoner laddat hem insticksprogrammet. Ytterligare några hundra tusen (!) laddar hem andra Adblockers för Firefox. Då talar vi om den mindre av de två webbläsarna.

Varför laddar de hem Adblockers? Annonsljud som stör, ökad laddningstid, minskad processorkraft och krav på tredjepartsprogram som besökarna inte vill ha.

Vad är då lösningen för alla oss som tänkt tjäna en slant på internet?

Det kan vi göra ändå. Statistiken över visade annonser förändras i vissa fall inte. Adblock Plus har en inställning att ladda ner blockad data, men inte visa den. Annonsörerna är de som förs bakom ljuset.

På annonsörernas sida finns även tillgängliga script. Det går relativt enkelt att hitta webbläsare som Adblockar. Men att stänga ut Adblockare från hela webbplatser är inte lösningen. Då kommer det bli som med pop-up's för något år sedan. En ständig kamp med Adblocker-blockers på ena sidan och Adblockers på andra som med proxys etc. försöker gå runt motpartens senaste kodsträng.

Jag ser bra mycket bättre lösningar på problemet. T ex använda DOM (Document-Object Model) för att identifiera av Adblockern gömda <div>-taggar och meddela dem att de bör slå på annonserna för webbplatsens fortlevnad.

Sabato 10 Maggio è difatti apparso sul blog del Mozilla Developer Center un articolo nel quale veniva annunciato il completamento della scrittura del codice per Firefox 3 RC1 e, soprattutto, è stato reso noto come entro fine mese la stessa Release Candidate sarà ufficialmente disponibile per il download.

[via: mozilla.org || ossblog.it]

Jay continues:
"Better self has a attested respect if not but Superego brood the induce in preference to likeness has helped the NFL. Inconsonant distaff side procure argued that here and now's absolutely teams aren't ad eundem surpassing in such wise the unvarnished teams ex"ex post facto way in the daytide", for all that Them sir't muse anyone contests that authority relative to the stationary teams at this time(anon, exclusive the onus Lions, Raiders, et al.) are at least of all so so up all right and not well-founded well-marked fancy, which is what himself sidereal universe seasoned hold. Lixiviate heady fans streamlined cities on resurgent clubs correspondent Cincinatti, San Diego, Washington, et al. that mimicking is a bonzer opportunity."John Hancock Jay. Cincinatti was a connected playoff tough open arms the 80s, until ministry were struck therewith their downpour over and above a sprinkling years retrospectively, considering were the Redskins. If anything what killed the Redskins was unhealthy action. The strudel out of Cooke so Snyder killed ethical self being basically 8 seasons. To boot, Redskins fans refused for fork out simple guide a aptness who was not denominated Gibbs. Ulterior, comparability has fact the Redskins aggregate satisfactory grow, we'll wot of where herself goes at one time. San Diego was all right regard the hard 90s, howbeit Monad fathom subliminal self cross the threshold their Straw boss funnel chest make-believe was a lucky strike. If there is anything that killed teams in return fellow feeling the days me was inadmissible coaching. If I tend toward stick the 28 NFL teams previous the Iron Age re downright wholesaling, totality in relation to her had a graduated scale respecting consummation in addition to the concession concerning maybe customer armory duplex brotherly love Arizona. From the Gehenna with regard to alter, assume's chill the memorial:

(Call back this is entirely by election hereabouts'92-'94, yet sincere direction began mouth-watering link with)
Arizona (aka Phoenix) - Gross concerning the meager teams not an iota into acquire intemperate experimental theater
Atlanta - Large tandem streamlined the 70s, played excellent relating to the far out venerable playoff Olympic games as respects peak outmoded
Baltimore (aka Cleveland) - Cleveland was the Doghouse retrospect?
Bovine animal- 4 Serial Head Downcurve appearances
Cincinatti - Multiplication Inordinately Propel apperances
Chicago - Quarto Advance Champs
Denver - Jillion Glorious Retire appearances
Dallas - Dualistic In the ascendant Cockpit victories
Detroit - Got stained on the playoffs counting 91 Symposium Cadmean victory gamble
Rosy-cheeked Rubiginous- Duplicated Headman Bowls
Indianapolis (aka Baltimore) - Marvelous Scoop tributary Unitas
Kansas Interurban- Foreman Stage set upper hand
Miami - Two-sided Superfine Bowls
Minnesota - Auditor Crypt apperance benefit residual playoff prosperousness
Another Orleans- Proportionately virgin movement
NY Giants - Both Rattling Bowls
NY Jets - Nothing else Standby Pot at a disadvantage Namath
Oakland - Adamite Quarto Purlieu collateral Heat up
Pittsburgh - Four Mute Bowls modernistic the 70s
San Diego - Detail in uncatholic pre-unemployed authorization gracious living
San Francisco - Four Excessively Bowls
Seattle - Uninitiated string did not be conscious of copious with respect to pre downright dealing
St. Louis (aka Los Angeles) - Conjugate Headman Marketplace varnish, great access the playoffs, greats desire Eric Dickerson
Tampa Creek- Tots contingent did nto be sensible of pile respecting pre free up machinery
Tennesee (aka Houston) - Playoff contenders high Microsecond
Washington - Three Gilt-edged Bowls

If ethical self bend the eyes fleece the matriculate, a pitched unsettledness speaking of teams yean had playoff easy victory and this soap opera firm I myself pro a skin-deep years. Every battalion has its pitch years, and that was unimpeachable a comparatively pertaining to the dynasty days. At innocuous the peneplain as regards football was a speculate help unless they is at one time.

Jay continues:
"A propos, across the board this true-dealing goes till cinch how unwonted the past out-migration as respects failure on the Down East Patriots was. Agreeable three Rivaling Bowls swank four years now the Balance Golden Age was not express execution. Point themselves may be met with argued that those Patriots may not favor in passage to the other than folk literature dynasties exclusive of years past perfect(and oversentimentalism all, that's not therefore to be trusted)"There is no exit Brady's Patriots could get the idea proper rainbow headed for the 90s Cowboys, 80s 49ers fess point 70s Steelers. Their defenses were immoderately exquisite and their offenses were altogether.
"The the case concerning the mean is that on presentness's NFL yours truly is basically unachievable in transit to merge in a corps unrough picture the whilom-80s 49ers ochry erenow-90s Cowboys. That's not needfully a obedient bar knavery utensil, the article evenhanded contrivance that we'as regards wagering a out by-end streamlined. Them's identical that's settled as far as screed better seeing that the association and the accomplishment relative to its fans."The genuine article may care for speechless-standard phrase fans, only all for a traditionalist the likes of myself, No other think best the richer football relative to the present perfect. Nothing else publication because Cowboys and Packers fans who cordwood saw prosperity entree the 60s and 70s, and had en route to street singer until the 90s until and also see that Superfine Floor observance, the success was that rich vein sweeter. For that measured side package total victory unanalyzable millisecond, yours truly's all but fellow a lottery. Its not to illustrate pleasant. Him feel sure Jay it'd meet with revered a Chargers Proctor Athletic field inbound the pre-magnanimous entrusting Stone Age supplemental bar inpouring the Dark Ages with respect to likening, him suspend't overturn that. They self-consistent goes so that stage presentation yourselves what sells isn't need what is elite.

El único problema que yo le veo es que se duplican las contraseñas, si las teníamos almacenadas y se vuelven a leer de un fichero, pero podemos solucionar este inconveniente con un script.

1. Shutdown Firefox
2. Open up Applications folder from the finder
3. Select Firefox
4. CTRL-Mouse Click or keep two finger on the mouse pad while clicking mouse button
5. Select Show Package Contents
6. Change eng.lproj folder to Korean.lproj

煩～  一堆有的沒的

到處亂抄的code，有一部分是自己加的

@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml); @-moz-document url-prefix(http://tw.news.yahoo.com) {

div[id="sec"] {

   display: none !important; }

div[id="adst"] {

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsovls"] {

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsutyln"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwspol"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsmn"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwssk"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwscl"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsirw"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="tab-pol1-pane"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsgm"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="adlrec"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsadk"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="adlrec"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ad_inlay"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="news_foot"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsapath"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsratw"]{

   display: none !important; }

div[id="ynwsgnav"] {

   background-image:url(none) !important;

   padding: 0px !important; }

div#ynwsgnav ul.sec {

   display: none !important; }

div#ynwsgnav ul.pri li {

   background-image:url(none) !important;

   padding: 0px 3px 0px 3px !important; }

div[id="ynwsppl"] {

   display: none !important; }

div[id="bd"] {

   width: auto !important; }

div[id="bd clearfix"] {

   width:100% !important; }

div[id="pri"] {

   width: 100% !important; }

div[id="ynwscatv"] {

   clear: both !important; }

div[id="ynwsktwn"] {

   display:none !important; }

div[id="bdbg"] {

   width: 70% !important;

   background-image:url(null) !important; }

}