UO Second Age

Light Shade wrote:

Malaikat wrote:It this thread in honor of Notorious' bravery because all I see is him 1v3 a buncha noobs.

I particularly like the pic of Contessa's ghost surrounded by C^V and a single dead pk.

Was it Contessa's Lockpicking Skill or her Provocation Skill that the PK should be proud of besting? 1v1 against a lockpicker!

As a bit of background, since it isn't apparent to everyone....Notorious was hopping gates that night. This was the second time in the same evening he did so. A Ram was running with Notorious the entire night, so work on your numbers. In the picture in question, we just gated Contessa out...the "surrounded by C^V" were just coming to rez, but good "take" on it.

Anywho, point of the thread, don't hop gates if you're red. It don't matter how brave you are, the guards will kill you just the same.

Magic Wizard's Hats For The Win!

im just going to end it like this ....
owned irl nerd.
imbtrthanu

Malaikat wrote: Buggy as hell for me, especially playing flash. I heard they worked a bunch of that out tho, so maybe I'll run updates and give it another shot.

Wrong in every way possible. Chrome is the only browser bundling flash right now, thus fixing all of the bugs and security issues that flash inherently carries with it (it's a terrible piece of software). It's not layered on as an NPAPI addon and instead runs in-process. (Also, every tab in chrome runs as a separate process, so tabs get their own execution context and don't share memory, extensions have to do message passing.)

Firefox is dying out. Both the project director and creative lead resigned this year. It's progressively gotten worse, the UI is incredibly slow due to the total conversion to XUL. Gecko is lagging behind in features. spider/jaegermonkey is inferior to the v8 engine, etc. (edit: That's not to say I don't have respect for Firefox. It led the way out of the dark ages (IE6).)

Chrome is the only browser worth using anymore.

Notorious wrote:im just going to end it like this ....
owned irl nerd.
imbtrthanu

I don't understand your nerd speak. Please use proper english, preferrably old english as it will amuse me to see this attempt.

Stuck wrote:

Malaikat wrote: Buggy as hell for me, especially playing flash. I heard they worked a bunch of that out tho, so maybe I'll run updates and give it another shot.

Wrong in every way possible. Chrome is the only browser bundling flash right now, thus fixing all of the bugs and security issues that flash inherently carries with it (it's a terrible piece of software). It's not layered on as an NPAPI addon and instead runs in-process. (Also, every tab in chrome runs as a separate process, so tabs get their own execution context and don't share memory, extensions have to do message passing.)

Flash is still, or was still, buggy in Chrome, and it's certainly still not "secure". Also, from my own experience in addition to my reading, a short while ago Chrome couldn't even run flash at all. A recent patch seems to have since fixed whaever issue that was tho. It's sandboxed in Chrome, which is fantastic, but to say that Chrome magically eliminates Adobe's massive vulnerabilities is a the only thing wrong in every possible way.

http://forums.cnet.com/7726-6132_102-5115717.html

Software: Google Chrome 10.x

Description:
A vulnerability has been reported in Google Chrome, which can be exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.

The vulnerability is caused due to a vulnerability in the bundled version of Adobe Flash Player.

Successful exploitation allows execution of arbitrary code.

Whoops.

Malaikat wrote:Software: Google Chrome 10.x

Description:
A vulnerability has been reported in Google Chrome, which can be exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.

The vulnerability is caused due to a vulnerability in the bundled version of Adobe Flash Player.

Successful exploitation allows execution of arbitrary code.

Whoops.

You realize these vulnerabilities are created by adobe. Google Chrome is able to patch them immediately because it bundles flash. Other browsers need to wait for an official fix from adobe. Did you have previous knowledge of what you just posted, or did you just google it to try to refute my points?

It's undoubtedly more secure than any other browser. In the most recent pwn2own contest, google put up $20k for anyone who could break their sandbox with a simple webpage. There were no successful challengers. However, insane security loopholes involving buffer overflows were discovered in IE, Firefox, and Safari (if I remember right), all of whom only put up $15k. (In the demonstration, the challenger was able to open notepad and write a file to disk, using nothing more than a webpage - no plugins involved at all, ...terrible.)

Since flash is almost dead now, flash security may not be the best thing to judge quality on anyway. Personally, I don't use flash at all. I don't even have it installed (and disabled in chrome). Youtube can stream h264 and webm. The html video/canvas elements are becoming more widely used. etc.

The security isn't even the selling point for me. v8 (the fastest js virtual machine currently) + webkit + the general speed of the ui is what makes it worth using. The fact that it's the most secure browser is just a bonus.

Light Shade wrote:

Notorious wrote:im just going to end it like this ....
owned irl nerd.
imbtrthanu

I don't understand your nerd speak. Please use proper english, preferrably old english as it will amuse me to see this attempt.

your a nerd son.

Notorious wrote:

Light Shade wrote:

Notorious wrote:im just going to end it like this ....
owned irl nerd.
imbtrthanu

I don't understand your nerd speak. Please use proper english, preferrably old english as it will amuse me to see this attempt.

your a nerd son.

Shut up! We're praising Chrome in this thread, "son".

Stuck wrote: You realize these vulnerabilities are created by adobe.

Ya, I said that verbatim actually.

Did you have previous knowledge of what you just posted, or did you just google it to try to refute my points?

I work in infosec...

It's undoubtedly more secure than any other browser.

I concede that and never said otherwise. However, more secure and infinitely secure, which was previously inferred, are two different things entirely. I was familiar with the pwn2own results, but to say that Chrome has removed "all of the bugs and security issues" is wrong and dangerous in terms of risk management.

Malaikat wrote:

Stuck wrote: You realize these vulnerabilities are created by adobe.

Ya, I said that verbatim actually.

Did you have previous knowledge of what you just posted, or did you just google it to try to refute my points?

I work in infosec...

It's undoubtedly more secure than any other browser.

I concede that and never said otherwise. However, more secure and infinitely secure, which was previously inferred, are two different things entirely. I was familiar with the pwn2own results, but to say that Chrome has removed "all of the bugs and security issues" is wrong and dangerous in terms of risk management.

Alright, fair enough, I'll revise what I said then...

Thus being able to fix all of the bugs and security issues flash carries with it, as opposed to other browsers who naively ignore the most commonly used (and worst) browser plugin in existence."

Notorious wrote:

oops sorry did i murder u kids ?

LOL I like how your taking credit for the guards hard work that u forgot to circle, I died by yer hand, not the rest of em. so GG .

Cattie B wrote:

Notorious wrote:

oops sorry did i murder u kids ?

LOL I like how your taking credit for the guards hard work that u forgot to circle, I died by yer hand, not the rest of em. so GG .

ok i helped them still unfair amount.

owned irl stop crying....nerd imbtrthanu

Cattie B wrote:LOL I like how your taking credit for the guards hard work that u forgot to circle, I died by yer hand, not the rest of em. so GG .

I wasn't gonna point that out because he obviously needed to save some face after hopping into town 2 times in the same night on his red...but since you pointed it out i'll say it. I'm a noob that didnt' know how the guard zone lines functioned and I have since done a bit of research on it.

Good use of the guards. I approve of this tactic.

-L/S

Here, we have another instance of Bravery at its finest. A foul fiend chose to take on 7 valiant warriors. This kind of bravery is the thing of legend. Songs shall be written of his last stand. He stood there and stared death in the face and didn't blink...though I doubt he had time to blink.

That kind of bravery is.......fleeting.



-L/S

Still wondering why you feel uberganking is braggable. I've seen your threads...you can't even drop a meteor shower on some poor guy's lumberjack without a friend there holding your dick.

And what, did you have a stroke or did you really think you needed to spam ebolt 7v1?

sssdssdddddddddddddddddsssdsdsddddddddddddddddddddd

I think you've missed the point of the spotlighted "brave" individuals. Perhaps figurative language and jest is not your strong suit. Regardless, the "gank" role was quite the opposite when this fight began and the person in the screen shot fled. He then returned to find his "gank" returned in kind. A completely fair turn if you ask me.

-L/S