Another Geek Hierarchy [dead link]. This one, instead of focusing on how geeks of all stripes rank themselves [another dead link], portrays the way “mainstream society” ranks geeks. I appreciate that it includes sports geeks. I’ve never understood why it’s considered acceptable to paint yourself blue, wear cheese on your head and giant foam gloves for a sports team, but wearing a Star Trek uniform makes you an outcast. (via sclerotic_rings [yet another dead link])
Category: Tech
First thoughts on IE8 Beta 1
Installed the first Internet Explorer 8 beta. Some thoughts:
I’m impressed that it can import settings from Firefox & Safari.
It detected Firefox extensions and even offered to look up similar add-ons. Unfortunately it was a big long search string with all the titles, and therefore a useless list of results for things like cameras (yeah, how am I supposed to install a $1000 Nikon D80 on my web browser?) and the hint book for Splinter Cell.
Activities: My first thought was, “hey, they’re doing stuff with microformats!” Which is key to the underlying support (recognizing types of data and only offering relevant services, like maps for locations but not for book titles). But on the face of it, it’s a lot more like the way Flock integrates with various web services: Set up your blogging provider, and you can easily send stuff to your blog. Though right now they mostly have Microsoft-hosted services.
“Emulate IE7” appears to involve restarting in an alternate mode right now. I assume automatic switching is something planned for later betas.
Other than that, the UI seems about the same as IE7 so far.
It does indeed pass Acid2 (assuming the page isn’t swamped when you try to load it).
So, how else does its rendering differ?
Minor visual glitch: I have CSS-based banners on some pages (W3C validation, for instance), using spans with borders. If it’s on the last line of a page, IE will cut off the bottom border, because it extends past the end of the page. Other browsers show it. I’ve gotten around this in the past by adding a blank paragraph afterward, but now IE8 collapses the empty paragraph. That’s probably the correct thing to do, but it does mean adjusting things a bit. Not a big problem, though, because I’ve just noticed that it handles other pages fine, without the <p></p> workaround, which means that I’m probably already using a better solution elsewhere.
Several cases of re-styling UL lists seem to confuse it. The tabs running across the top of my Flash page, for instance, or the sidebar on the Alternative Browser Alliance. Others appear just as they do in other browsers (including IE7). This will bear investigation. (Edit: 2 different problems; see below.)
Still no sign of generated content. Beta 2? Please? Edit: according to CSS3.info, it does support generated content, but images don’t work (yet?). I’d been using this, progressive-enhancement–style, to add icons for outgoing links on my Flash site. It works in, well, everything else current.
Additionally: I’m surprised to see it so early, and to see it as a public beta and not something that required an MSDN login. And they had the sense to release a version for Windows XP! I was half-expecting it to be a Vista-only release, which would’ve been seriously annoying.
Further updates will be added below as I think of them.
It turns out the problem on the Alternative Browser Alliance menu wasn’t related to lists as I’d thought, but to a change in the CSS parser. For whatever reason, IE8b1 is susceptible to the Caio Hack (/*/*/ place code here /* comment */) normally used to hide CSS rules from Netscape 4. At this stage I should probably be able to remove it and not worry about NS4 anymore. (And it turns out that since I added media types to the link a while back, NS4 doesn’t even read the stylesheet in the first place!)
On the issue with the tabs on the Flash site, it looks like IE8b1 isn’t extending backgrounds beyond the text line on inline elements (oddly, also like NS4). This is probably what’s really going on with the CSS buttons I mentioned above. I’ll have to check which behavior is correct, but my money would be on the Gecko, Opera and WebKit interpretation. If so, this will probably be changed before the final release. If not, I’ll use inline-block instead. Which perhaps I should be doing anyway, except for the annoying fact that Firefox 2 doesn’t support inline-block and Firefox 3, which does, is still in beta.
I’ve reported the Caio Hack issue to Microsoft using their “Report a Webpage Problem” tool. The form emphasizes that you shouldn’t send anything that could identify you, so instead of reporting the problem on one of my own sites, I sent the page describing the hack. This probably means I reported it in the wrong way. 😕
It looks like Activities isn’t actually context-sensitive yet, since it’s offering to show me a map even when I’ve selected random prose instead of an address.
Having messed with it more than I probably should over the last 24 hours, I’ve come to a decision: During beta 1, any rendering problem I encounter in IE8b1 that works the way I want it to in Gecko, Opera, Safari and IE7, I’m going to assume is a bug in beta 1. I’ll try to narrow them down & report them when I have a chance, but I won’t actually change my sites’ code (except for retargeting IE-specific workarounds) until at least beta 2.
Web News: Acid3 and IE8
Two items of interest today: First, the Web Standards Project has announced the completion of the Acid3 Test. Like Acid2, it’s specifically designed to test features that are in the specs, but that have incomplete, buggy, or nonexistant support in current web browsers. Acid2 focused primarily on CSS, and Acid3 focuses more on scripting.
Also, Microsoft has come to their senses and announced that IE8, when encountering a web page that says it was developed for standards, will actually treat it that way instead of treating it as a page that was designed for IE7. This is a much saner approach to the version targeting scheme, which as previously announced would have (depending on developer response) either frozen IE in place or forced us to go through the same process all over again next time.
Mauna Kea Sky Shadow
Today’s Astronomy Picture of the Day features a view of Mauna Kea’s shadow on the sky, just at the tail end of last week’s lunar eclipse:
I couldn’t help but be reminded of our visit to the summit in April 2005, just at sunset, when I took this similar (but decidedly less cool) photo:
Atmospheric Optics explains why most mountains’ shadows look triangular when viewed from their summits.
Link Laundering
With bloggers squashing obviously-spammy links* as fast as they can, comment spammers have evolved. (I think they’ve reached the level of slime mold now, rather than amoebas.) They’re trying to make their sites look like blogs. And I’m seeing two main techniques, one involving Trackbacks/Pingbacks, the other involving manual person-at-a-keyboard commenting.
Misusing Pingbacks and Trackbacks
Pingbacks and Trackbacks are two ways for one site to notify another that it’s linked to it, and provide an excerpt of the context. Essentially, they’re automated comments. You read a post on some other site, you write your own response, linking to the original post, and your blog software submits the equivalent of “Hi, I read your post, and it got me thinking. I ended up writing my own post over here…”
Where spam is concerned, the main difference is that with Trackbacks, the submitting site provides an exceprt, but with Pingbacks, all it submits is the URL. The receiving blog then retrieves the page and scans it for the link, building an excerpt from the context. The upshot of this is that Pingbacks automatically verify that yes, the site really did link to you, which meant that a lot of early comment spam was submitted using Trackbacks.
The obvious response to that was to set up spam protection to verify links on incoming Trackbacks. And the obvious response by the spammers was to put up real links, at least long enough to let the victims verify them.
So now, a lot of trackback/pingback spam seems to come from sites running actual blogging software, but not really posting any content. Just “So-and so wrote an interesting post today” over and over, hundreds of times a day. Half the time they don’t bother to match the name to the actual link. This is the kind of spam that prompted my recent re-evaluation of spam plugins on this site.
Sneaky Intermediary
Then there was the sneaky post I got on Thursday. It was a sort-of half-on-topic comment on a post about movies, and the author’s URL pointed to what appeared to be a blog about movies. OK, fair enough, but I was still a bit suspicious since it didn’t look like they’d actually read my post.
I skimmed the site looking for things like cobbled-together sentences, and an idea of how long it had been around. Then there was a random post about guitars, in a different writing style. I figured, okay, maybe they’re doing one of those paid-post things.
Then I moved the mouse cursor over one of the links.
It quickly became clear that every single outgoing link on the front page was pointing to ultimate – free – downloads – dot – com, whether it was a movie title, or an actor, or a song title.
At this point I’m not sure whether the site in question is simply an elaborately designed intermediary created to “launder” the links to spam sites, or whether it’s a legit blog that’s been hijacked by someone replacing their links. I looked around at some of the older posts and I do see links to Amazon and a couple of other sites.
*This is also why I’ve stopped using the Alternative Browser Alliance as my URL when commenting on browser-related blogs. Even though I’m making an on-topic comment, I don’t want people to take a look at the link, say, “Hey, this isn’t a person, this is some weird campaign thing!” and delete the comment…and worse, get a rep as a comment spammer. So these days I just link everything here.
Powerless
After nearly 4 years of faithful service, our G4 PowerBook has crashed. This machine has been rock-solid through 2 OS upgrades, a RAM upgrade, and a battery recall. On Sunday, the hard disk finally gave out.
We only lost a few recent files. I had a chance to grab them on Saturday, but unfortunately I misread the signs and thought it was a software problem. Hey, you install a bunch of stuff including a system update, and the machine freezes, you figure it’s a software problem. Until it happens again, and this time it won’t come back up. 😡
After doing all the diagnostics & resets I could possibly come up with, I set up an appointment at the local Apple Store’s “Genius Bar” during my lunch break today. They confirmed it was the drive, and since it’s long out of warranty, they pointed me to a local repair shop. (They were willing to do the job, but can only order parts directly from Apple, so it would’ve been insanely expensive just for the drive.)
Fortunately, as far as laptop hardware failures go, a hardware drive is relatively easy to fix. If the case were simpler, I’d be willing to do it myself, but as the Apple tech joked, “It takes 36 screws just to get the case open.” At least, I think he was joking.
So instead of having to replace the entire computer, or send it in and wait several weeks, we’re looking at ~$200 and 3–5 days. And while I was at it, I sprang for double the capacity.
I can live with that.
Update: It turned out to be the RAM upgrade, not the disk, which makes it considerably simpler to resolve. Finally got it back the following Monday.
Stupid Scammer Tricks: Forgetting BCC
There’s something delicious about irony in spam. Yesterday, the spamtraps netted an advance fee fraud scam message that started out like this:
Let me be honest with you. This information is just for you alone [emphasis added]. I would suggest that you try to fix it instead of making any trouble with it as my job might be put on the line here.
Your name has been on an awaiting list of payment roaster submitted by the Nigerian Government For your lottery/inheritance reasons of no banking particulars on which transfer should be made to until two days ago when the paying Bank personnel brought in another payment roaster for the replacement of the former that had your name on it.
The funny part? (Well, aside from the “payment roaster.”) There were about 300 recipients in the To: line.
Gee, I don’t think all 300 people have the same account info…
Most spam doesn’t run into this problem, since it’s generated by special programs that don’t even bother filling in complete headers. But from what I understand, a lot of 419 scams are still sent by people sitting in internet cafes, copying and pasting bits from templates. So it’s easy to imagine someone pasting their list into the wrong field. Kind of like the classic “Reply All” fiascos.