If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On 20/03/2019 18:58, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:50:23 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:45:32 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: Oh, Youtube changed to HTML5 4 years ago :-) Surprising as I didn't think all browsers took up HTML5 for quite a while. So how come a big company like Adobe made such a piece of crap, and didn't fix it? They didn't make it, they bought it. I guess in the end it was too hard to maintain and required a specific install for every os. Just like java which is all also dying. HTML 5 is os agnostic by default. IOS not supporting it was the killer blow. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash Who uses IOS?Â* I doubt the percentage is very high.Â* Isn't that just small Apple devices? Lots of people. At it's height about 60% of the market. Now it's 23% of mobiles and 75%'of tablets http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...bile/worldwide http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...blet/worldwide What market are you referring to?Â* Why are you omitting real computers - laptops and desktops? If you'd read the link you'd have seen it was worldwide. As a proportion of all 'computers' iOS is the third most common OS in the world http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share As for your percentages, it's certainly not true around here (in Scotland where people watch their money).Â* I know of about 15 tablets owned by friends and neighbours, and not one is Apple.Â* I know of about 30 phones, and only 1 is Apple. I'm also in Scotland and iphones are pretty common. I get the bus to work and see a cross-section of people on their phones. I can easily believe it's 20% iphone. |
Ads |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On 20/03/2019 19:00, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:53 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:36:47 -0000, Chris wrote: Carlos E.R. wrote: On 18/03/2019 13.40, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 03:26:19 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 18/03/2019 00.15, Commander Kinsey wrote: WARNING!Â* Do not click the misspelt link below (between asterisks) unless you know your computer is protected. On Stirling Council's parking page https://my.stirling.gov.uk/media/442...park-guide.pdf There is a link to the thistle centre car park, which they have misspelt as **** http://www.thethsitles.com/ **** instead of http://www.thethistles.com/ Question 1) Is this a virus?Â* It just bleeps very loudly through the speakers and asks me to click to update something. Question 2) Can this be reported to someone?Â* The company they rent the domain name from perhaps? (I've already advised Stirling Council to correct their spelling error) The first page is a PDF, not a web page Technically yes, but the PDF is displayed in my browser and has links to click just like a webpage. Depends on the local configuration - in my machine it doesn't :-) and looking at the properties it was generated on 2014. It is possible that the link is outdated and now points to somewhere else than intended, because of a typing error or no maintenance of the site. It must be a typing error, it would never have been spelt thsitle. Anyway hopefully they will update it now I've warned them.Â* I'm surprised nobody else came across it before, parking in Stirling is so bad you have to research first!Â* Even if you pay, hardly anywhere allows more than a 2 hour stay. Wow. I have never seen something like that here To be fair there's not a lot to do in Stirling so 2 hours is plenty There is the rather magnificent Stirling Castle, nearby, and there's plenty of parking. Some of it free IIRC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_Castle I'm doing jury duty (which could be for the whole day), and has no car park.Â* Everything should have a car park and not expect you to find somewhere else! Ah, yeah. That's a pain in the arse. Does the court have any suggestions? I found two nearby streets with all day parking for £4.Â* Maybe the court insisted on it?Â* No other streets allow over 2 hours stay, even if you pay. Good luck with the jury duty. Apart from them paying me **** all to do it, I'm quite looking forward to it - I've always wanted to have a go. The court system has **** all money, plus it's our civic duty, but it does cause people problems - especially the self-employed. I'd like to as well, but not been called up yet. |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On 23/03/2019 12:09, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 22/03/2019 17.52, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:20:49 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 21/03/2019 21.23, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 19:17:19 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:56:24 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 19/03/2019 00.16, Commander Kinsey wrote:. You'd be hard pressed to develop anything worse than Adobe's Acrobat Reader.Â* Just try printing something from it, you won't get anything remotely like what's on the screen.Â* I often have to screengrab it and print it from Paintshop Pro. Huh? I never had any such problem printing from adobe reader reliably. I have, I never get the size I expect.Â* Easier to put it into a photo editor with a screengrab, then you can fit to page etc. Pdfs are vector formats and by definition can be scaled to any size without losing resolution*. A pdf print dialogue box always has a "shrink to fit" and/or "scale to page" option. By taking a screenshot your rasterising the page and losing the benefit of the pdf. * Unless it had been saved as raster format. But that's dumb so not common these days. I think the last thing I tried to print was a calendar - I'd found a website that generates calendars for any month and year in pdf format.Â* I wanted to print most of the page, cutting off the borders, but acrobat reader was unable to, so I just screengrabbed.Â* I got the resolution of the monitor, which is fine. Anything should be able to print properly.Â* PDF doesn't help here. Actually it does. That's the whole point of the format. It is completely device agnostic so it doesn't matter what you're viewing it on or printing it with it should print as the author designed it. You often see forms as word files and they never print or render properly. But what about how I want it? That's not the main use case for pdfs. It's mainly a read-only format - forms excepted. However, you can edit them in libreoffice draw or Adobe Illustrator plus others. Word allegedly reads them, but always makes a pig's ear of them. Why the hell would I want something I can't adjust before printing?Â* I might want only the top half, enlarged to fit the page, etc. But PDFs are not designed for you to alter at will. They are designed to be printed as is, just expanded or shrinked to page. Why design something you can't use properly?Â* Not everyone wants things exactly the same. Because that is not "use properly" :-P When I send a PDF it is print as /I/ intend, not as you intend. Exactly. PDFs solve the problem of people sending documents which then render terribly on the recipient's end because they don't have the same fonts or their printer settings are very different. It's horses for courses. If the authors wants you to edit it then they'll send you word-a-like file otherwise you get a pdf. |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
Mayayana wrote:
"Paul" wrote | | But if you make a virtual desktop, and resize Acrobat so | it fills that virtual desktop, eventually you can make | the virtual screen big enough, that you can capture | all 600DPI of the picture content. In one screenshot. | I guess we'll need to watch out for you and the other 7 people trying to steal 600 DPI graphics and medical studies out of PDFs. There are actually, valid cases for the virtual desktop method. A poster once posted a question about Firefox. They had a local news source, with a web page roughly five pages long. An attempt to Print the page, yielded page 1, and page 2-5 were blank. Almost like some rendering surface in Firefox had "tunneled underneath something", on pages 2-5. To thwart this behavior, I was able to invoke a virtual desktop, resize Firefox so it was five times higher, and then "everything went on the page 1 print". That sort of idea. I was able to printscreen, as one way to capture it. I used my HP755CM print driver, to make a print-to-file page 108" inches high and 36" wide, and get it that way too. Then the content could be edited in the PostScript/PDF domain, as my print driver method is a .ps driver. So occasionally you need a hack, where due to a programming bug, the full feature set of the software is not working properly. It isn't a "hack" as such, merely an attempt at a workaround. I've had to do workarounds like this for my own stuff, like trying to send someone a "help page" from a local government site, and having "facebook" and "twitter" icons in the middle of the damn text I was trying to cite. So yes, when you're dealing with idiotic web issues, occasionally these tricks come to mind. If I made the desktop big enough, those Facebook and Twitter icons stayed off on the side, out of the way. If you make the desktop too big, then the OS can be a bit unstable, and your viewing of the desktop could be compromised. I had an option like this on the Mac, a piece of freeware, that worked nicely. That might have been the first really usable virtual desktop I ever saw. I've also done the virtual desktop hack back in my Unix days, using XMX and two X servers, and making the second server render to a huge virtual plane (you never get to see that one, so have to launch applications with fixed XYWH dimensions from the beginning). Then, doing a "printscreen" captures whatever is on there. These ideas are never that practical, so most of the time these are "bar bet" things. Like, your opponent wants to spoil your day, and you want to set them straight. Except for that nice Mac program, none of the other methods is a keeper. The pan-and-scan gets annoying after a while, as it conflicts with a lot of your PC muscle memory. The beauty of the video card driver level pan and scan, is it "feels like hardware", with zero latency as you move the mouse around, and the viewing window into the larger virtual desktop moves. Paul |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On 23/03/2019 02:02, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 01:33:25 -0000, Mayayana wrote: "Commander Kinsey" wrote | PDF for graphics and artwork. | | Do you really think we can't press "printscreen"? | Â*Â* Yes. You can also counterfeit money. But there's a difference between giving you a high quality TIF vs a lower quality JPG in a PDF that you then copy at 96 ppi. Getting good quality from that will be harder or impossible. I can get whatever quality you put in the PDF. No you can't. Like I said before, those word processor created pdfs are vector formats which means the fonts etc scale smoothly regardless how big/small you print/view it. As soon as you do a screengrab you rasterise the contents at a fixed (and pretty low) resolution and won't scale. So many people don't get the difference and it makes such a difference to the final output. Same as I can get whatever quality you put in a Word document.Â* The PDF doesn't protect you, you're hiding your head in the sand. A word document is fundamentally different from a PDF. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
Chris wrote:
Exactly. PDFs solve the problem of people sending documents which then render terribly on the recipient's end because they don't have the same fonts or their printer settings are very different. It's horses for courses. If the authors wants you to edit it then they'll send you word-a-like file otherwise you get a pdf. One of the problems with the notion of editing a PDF, is the "fonts" provided with a document, are a subset of a full font. For example, the table inside the document might only have "ABCDE" from Times Roman. If you want to edit the text string in the PDF file, and you need an "F", it's not in the table. You may receive an error message from the PDF editor that "the font is not available". If you acquire copies of all the fonts, with correct version info to match the content of the PDF, install them in the System fonts folder, then you can comfortably edit the PDF document, and a "new" subset font with "ABCDEF" would be used. So if the PDF uses Comic Sans, then you'd put Comic Sans in your system font folder to enable edits. When the document prints, font info for "ABCDEF" is available, so every letter used in the doc, is printable. Paul |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
In article , Paul
wrote: For example, the table inside the document might only have "ABCDE" from Times Roman. If you want to edit the text string in the PDF file, and you need an "F", it's not in the table. You may receive an error message from the PDF editor that "the font is not available". although technically possible, there is zero advantage in doing so. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
"123456789" wrote
| Mayayana wrote: | Imagine a total breakdown | of every system, from water to transportation... all the | systems that allow 8 million people to live in vertical storage | on that relatively small island, imagining themselves to be | occupying the center of civilization... | | That's the plot of Cyberstorm by Matthew Mather and set in NYC. I guess it's a slight relief that at least a few people have thought of this. |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
nospam wrote:
In article , Paul wrote: For example, the table inside the document might only have "ABCDE" from Times Roman. If you want to edit the text string in the PDF file, and you need an "F", it's not in the table. You may receive an error message from the PDF editor that "the font is not available". although technically possible, there is zero advantage in doing so. It's got nothing to do with "zero advantage". I'm describing how these work. Your PDF document that you sent to others, only has a partial set of character inside the document. A portion of the Comic Sans font you insisted on using, is copied into the document. The inventors of this idea, did it specifically to ensure the font industry would never die. As anyone seeking to edit that Comic Sans text you put in your PDF, is now going to need the real font installed on their system, to finish the edits. I know this, because I've already been caught in that scenario. Subset fonts in document, and not the right fonts in my system folder. While Adobe Type Manager is available to make font approximations (from its sans master font and serif master font), and can be used to replace fonts, I don't know whether it's still supported on something like Win10. Windows OSes do have some "ATM" files in them, but I don't know what their purpose is. Those ATM files are also frequently patched, which is why I see them come up occasionally when examining stuff. ******* I have also hand-edited fonts and injected them back into a document. I undid one of these - it took two weeks, innumerable scripts and "human OCR" in effect, to make a document from the original, which could be copy/pasted. While this may seem to be a theoretical idea, there is at least one commercial DTP application which does this. And the 5MB PDF I reverse engineered, was generated by that tool (the name of the tool used is likely in the header of the file). This technique is commercially available if you need it. And it provides a way to protect documents (to bypass this, you need to use OCR on a bitmap output of the PDF). Well, I used scripts and hand-edited subset fonts, to fix this. http://spivey.oriel.ox.ac.uk/corner/Obfuscated_PDF If you want to experiment with the file, this is the one I reverse engineered. First, you have to disable the copy protection, before you can even *begin* to experiment with copy/paste to notepad. qpdf --decrypt input.pdf output.pdf (later, turn on toolbars) http://www.2muslims.com/books/2disco...s_saliheen.pdf filename = 2discoverislam_com_riyad_us_saliheen.pdf type = PDF 1.4 size = 5638888 bytes md5sum = df45ea78241da54c928ba8b91c94c59e So what's the problem ? 1) Open the document in Acrobat. It won't bite. It's a lot of English text. 2) Attempt to copy/paste some of the text into Notepad. What do you notice ? Your paste buffer will have gibberish in it, and there's a reason for that. $FFRUGLQJ ... You can't "steal" the content using copy paste. You can always try OCR, but another trick they used is a couple custom fonts where only one letter of the font is used, and it's specifically there as a "watermark" that an OCRed copy is not the same as the original document. There's a character which looks like an "i", but isn't an "i". So what I did, is make my own copy of saliheen.pdf, where the text in it *can* be copied. And I did it, to prove it could be done. Not that it was clever or anything. Another one of those bar bets. A practical person would just OCR the document, to bypass the protection. I wanted to see whether it was possible to undo the magic using scripts. And it's a *lot* of work. There is also a web site, which neatly converts the text without using a copy/paste technique, so it gets the character extraction correct as well. I only discovered that later. Paul |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:09:12 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 22/03/2019 17.52, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:20:49 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 21/03/2019 21.23, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 19:17:19 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:56:24 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 11:23:13 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 19/03/2019 00.16, Commander Kinsey wrote:. You'd be hard pressed to develop anything worse than Adobe's Acrobat Reader. Just try printing something from it, you won't get anything remotely like what's on the screen. I often have to screengrab it and print it from Paintshop Pro. Huh? I never had any such problem printing from adobe reader reliably. I have, I never get the size I expect. Easier to put it into a photo editor with a screengrab, then you can fit to page etc. Pdfs are vector formats and by definition can be scaled to any size without losing resolution*. A pdf print dialogue box always has a "shrink to fit" and/or "scale to page" option. By taking a screenshot your rasterising the page and losing the benefit of the pdf. * Unless it had been saved as raster format. But that's dumb so not common these days. I think the last thing I tried to print was a calendar - I'd found a website that generates calendars for any month and year in pdf format. I wanted to print most of the page, cutting off the borders, but acrobat reader was unable to, so I just screengrabbed. I got the resolution of the monitor, which is fine. Anything should be able to print properly. PDF doesn't help here. Actually it does. That's the whole point of the format. It is completely device agnostic so it doesn't matter what you're viewing it on or printing it with it should print as the author designed it. You often see forms as word files and they never print or render properly. But what about how I want it? That's not the main use case for pdfs. It's mainly a read-only format - forms excepted. However, you can edit them in libreoffice draw or Adobe Illustrator plus others. Word allegedly reads them, but always makes a pig's ear of them. Why the hell would I want something I can't adjust before printing? I might want only the top half, enlarged to fit the page, etc. But PDFs are not designed for you to alter at will. They are designed to be printed as is, just expanded or shrinked to page. Why design something you can't use properly? Not everyone wants things exactly the same. Because that is not "use properly" :-P When I send a PDF it is print as /I/ intend, not as you intend. Because you're more important than me? You need your head examined. I want to print it as I want, not as you want. -- A friend is someone who will help you move; a *good* friend is someone who will help you move a body. |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 04:39:41 -0000, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
Mayayana wrote: "Commander Kinsey" wrote | PDF for graphics and artwork. | | Do you really think we can't press "printscreen"? | Yes. You can also counterfeit money. But there's a difference between giving you a high quality TIF vs a lower quality JPG in a PDF that you then copy at 96 ppi. Getting good quality from that will be harder or impossible. And there's a deliberate effort required on your part to break the law. Many people will pick up a wallet on the street and not tell anyone if no one sees them. Few people will actually pick your pocket and consciously steal your wallet. PDFs are similar. Also big difference when it is a *vector* PDF. And editing text is more difficult. Yes you *can* take a screenshot. There are those who always steal; but editing my artwork without written consent would violate the copyright my clients agree to with the project. Capitalist ****. -- A harp is a nude piano. |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 17:21:45 -0000, Chris wrote:
On 23/03/2019 02:02, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 01:33:25 -0000, Mayayana wrote: "Commander Kinsey" wrote | PDF for graphics and artwork. | | Do you really think we can't press "printscreen"? | Yes. You can also counterfeit money. But there's a difference between giving you a high quality TIF vs a lower quality JPG in a PDF that you then copy at 96 ppi. Getting good quality from that will be harder or impossible. I can get whatever quality you put in the PDF. No you can't. Like I said before, those word processor created pdfs are vector formats which means the fonts etc scale smoothly regardless how big/small you print/view it. As soon as you do a screengrab you rasterise the contents at a fixed (and pretty low) resolution and won't scale. So many people don't get the difference and it makes such a difference to the final output. I grab it at the resolution I need. Same as I can get whatever quality you put in a Word document. The PDF doesn't protect you, you're hiding your head in the sand. A word document is fundamentally different from a PDF. Yes, the difference being it actually works. -- A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory. |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:57:33 -0000, Chris wrote:
On 20/03/2019 19:00, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:47:53 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:36:47 -0000, Chris wrote: Carlos E.R. wrote: On 18/03/2019 13.40, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 03:26:19 -0000, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 18/03/2019 00.15, Commander Kinsey wrote: WARNING! Do not click the misspelt link below (between asterisks) unless you know your computer is protected. On Stirling Council's parking page https://my.stirling.gov.uk/media/442...park-guide.pdf There is a link to the thistle centre car park, which they have misspelt as **** http://www.thethsitles.com/ **** instead of http://www.thethistles.com/ Question 1) Is this a virus? It just bleeps very loudly through the speakers and asks me to click to update something. Question 2) Can this be reported to someone? The company they rent the domain name from perhaps? (I've already advised Stirling Council to correct their spelling error) The first page is a PDF, not a web page Technically yes, but the PDF is displayed in my browser and has links to click just like a webpage. Depends on the local configuration - in my machine it doesn't :-) and looking at the properties it was generated on 2014. It is possible that the link is outdated and now points to somewhere else than intended, because of a typing error or no maintenance of the site. It must be a typing error, it would never have been spelt thsitle. Anyway hopefully they will update it now I've warned them. I'm surprised nobody else came across it before, parking in Stirling is so bad you have to research first! Even if you pay, hardly anywhere allows more than a 2 hour stay. Wow. I have never seen something like that here To be fair there's not a lot to do in Stirling so 2 hours is plenty There is the rather magnificent Stirling Castle, nearby, and there's plenty of parking. Some of it free IIRC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_Castle I'm doing jury duty (which could be for the whole day), and has no car park. Everything should have a car park and not expect you to find somewhere else! Ah, yeah. That's a pain in the arse. Does the court have any suggestions? I found two nearby streets with all day parking for £4. Maybe the court insisted on it? No other streets allow over 2 hours stay, even if you pay. Good luck with the jury duty. Apart from them paying me **** all to do it, I'm quite looking forward to it - I've always wanted to have a go. The court system has **** all money, plus it's our civic duty, Why on earth should people be required to sort out other people's problems for free? but it does cause people problems - especially the self-employed. I'd like to as well, but not been called up yet. -- "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:55:01 -0000, Chris wrote:
On 20/03/2019 18:58, Commander Kinsey wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:50:23 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 08:45:32 -0000, Chris wrote: Commander Kinsey wrote: Oh, Youtube changed to HTML5 4 years ago :-) Surprising as I didn't think all browsers took up HTML5 for quite a while. So how come a big company like Adobe made such a piece of crap, and didn't fix it? They didn't make it, they bought it. I guess in the end it was too hard to maintain and required a specific install for every os. Just like java which is all also dying. HTML 5 is os agnostic by default. IOS not supporting it was the killer blow. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash Who uses IOS? I doubt the percentage is very high. Isn't that just small Apple devices? Lots of people. At it's height about 60% of the market. Now it's 23% of mobiles and 75%'of tablets http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...bile/worldwide http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-...blet/worldwide What market are you referring to? Why are you omitting real computers - laptops and desktops? If you'd read the link you'd have seen it was worldwide. As a proportion of all 'computers' iOS is the third most common OS in the world http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share I call bull****. Phones are a small percentage of all computing devices. iOS is only on those silly little things, not real computers. A telephone is to make phonecalls. A computer is for computing. As for your percentages, it's certainly not true around here (in Scotland where people watch their money). I know of about 15 tablets owned by friends and neighbours, and not one is Apple. I know of about 30 phones, and only 1 is Apple. I'm also in Scotland and iphones are pretty common. I get the bus to work and see a cross-section of people on their phones. I can easily believe it's 20% iphone. So 20% of people are gullible fools easily parted with their money, doesn't surprise me. It's a fashion statement, not a sensible decision. -- "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
Virus on page?
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 10:55:27 -0000, David in Devon wrote:
On 23/03/2019 02:02, Commander Kinsey wrote: Tax men aren't clever enough. cough Yes - they are! ;-) Not in my experience. -- 111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|