Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

Another quickie post without catching up on loose threads...

I made a creamy squash and potato soup today. It came out pretty good, though I was a little annoyed to realize at the next-to-last tasting that it really wanted a serrano pepper, and what I had on hand were something smaller and milder with a different flavour. (It worked, but it's not perfect.) I was hoping for a wee bit more orange colour, but the soup came out beige. Go figure. Anyhow, that's my midnight snack, and then I'll split the rest of the pot between the freezer and the fridge.

Actually got some things done today before I ran out of steam and got a headache. Now I need a second day in a row like that, 'cause I've got places I have to go in the afternoon.

In the same vein as the entertainment industry executive who said that folks who fast-forward over commercials are STEALING from the networks and television stations, here's an interesting little FUD site for webmasters. A couple of their claimed benefits make some sense; others I consider silly, and still others I suspect are truly un-implementable in any meaningful way. (Yeah, they can hide your HTML code on their server, but for your visitors to see your pages rendered, the code has to get sent to their browsers eventually. If it comes down the wire, it can be captured and examined. I'd demonstrate this, but that might put me afoul of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or something, so for now I'll comment that I couldn't check out their examples in my browser because I've got JavaScript turned off ... which means that any site using their stuff is going to break for certain classes of people. Including folks who can't use JavaScript for whatever reason. So much for "accessability".)

Actually, I did download their "protected" code without turning on JavaScript in my browser. There was only one "gotcha" in it, and that was a matter of my having to guess at JavaScript syntax and behaviour, not any fancy trick the anti-leech folks implemented. At least now I know why they say the code is "crypted" instead of "encrypted". It's about as secure as intentionally obfuscated Microsoft BASIC code from the early 1980s, if that.

But I can't tell you to do the obvious things to see how their system works, because stating the obvious might count as publishing how to circumvent computer security. (This whole thing gets sillier and sillier, on more levels, the more I think about it.)