Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#11

Post by jdmichal »

kefka wrote: post #2

[ObOfftopic] Hmm. Site blacklists me from using site till I turn off adblocker. I view that as "Program that refuses to run until I turn off Antivirus". Both avenues are ways for a machine to become infected. Adblockers prevent a known avenue of attack: js based 0-days and drive-by attacks.

For those wishing to disable this particular "feature", the script which activates this functionality is:

http://www.tribdss.com/meter/ctcngux.min.js

Filtering that script in uBlock Origin allows the page to function as normal.

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#12

Post by spullara »

yossarianium wrote: post #4
kefka wrote: post #2

[ObOfftopic] Hmm. Site blacklists me from using site till I turn off adblocker. I view that as "Program that refuses to run until I turn off Antivirus". Both avenues are ways for a machine to become infected. Adblockers prevent a known avenue of attack: js based 0-days and drive-by attacks.

I am really hoping that companies are measuring the bounce rate for these types of tactics. When I see one of these I could become a subscriber and log in, I could whitelist the site's advertisements, or I could open Web Inspector and disable the popup layer manually, but I don't do anything of these things. I acknowledge its existence and hit the back button.

Why would they care if you bounce if you aren't paying? My guess is that the possibility that you might share it with others is low enough that it is probably better for them if you don't get value from the site if they don't get value from you.

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#13

Post by jawilson2 »

kefka wrote: post #6
yossarianium wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am really hoping that companies are measuring the bounce rate for these types of tactics. When I see one of these I could become a subscriber and log in, I could whitelist the site's advertisements, or I could open Web Inspector and disable the popup layer manually, but I don't do anything of these things. I acknowledge its existence and hit the back button.

I just sent a LinkedIn email (yeah, spammy horrendous-ness all of its own, but I digress) to Malcolm CasSelle, the CTO of Tronc, the owner of the Chicago Tribune. This is the contents. _________________ I'm [kefka], a systems engineer. I regularly read Hacker News, https://news.ycombinator.com . A user linked to a story on your property, ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13206294 ) which goes to ( http://www.chi…

> Advertisement servers have been one of root ways drive-by attacks are dome on users

I hope this isn't a copy-paste of what you actually wrote.

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#14

Post by beambot »

kefka wrote: post #2

[ObOfftopic] Hmm. Site blacklists me from using site till I turn off adblocker. I view that as "Program that refuses to run until I turn off Antivirus". Both avenues are ways for a machine to become infected. Adblockers prevent a known avenue of attack: js based 0-days and drive-by attacks.

Or program not letting you use it until you install valid, paid license?

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#15

Post by e40 »

kefka wrote: post #2

[ObOfftopic] Hmm. Site blacklists me from using site till I turn off adblocker. I view that as "Program that refuses to run until I turn off Antivirus". Both avenues are ways for a machine to become infected. Adblockers prevent a known avenue of attack: js based 0-days and drive-by attacks.

Sort of related: I have a Nexus 5x and run the latest Android. I will no longer install and use apps that are ad supported because I've twice gotten malware that opens misc apps (Google Authenticator was one, and that scared the shit out of me).

It's clear that ad networks cannot be trusted.

I'm seriously considering rooting again and installing Xposed so I can block ads, but maintain root is such a PITA I'll probably just never use ad-supported apps again.

As an example, look at the app reviews for QuizUp (a recently recommended app).[1]

[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quizup.cor...

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#17

Post by user5994461 »

kefka wrote: post #6
yossarianium wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am really hoping that companies are measuring the bounce rate for these types of tactics. When I see one of these I could become a subscriber and log in, I could whitelist the site's advertisements, or I could open Web Inspector and disable the popup layer manually, but I don't do anything of these things. I acknowledge its existence and hit the back button.

I just sent a LinkedIn email (yeah, spammy horrendous-ness all of its own, but I digress) to Malcolm CasSelle, the CTO of Tronc, the owner of the Chicago Tribune. This is the contents. _________________ I'm [kefka], a systems engineer. I regularly read Hacker News, https://news.ycombinator.com . A user linked to a story on your property, ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13206294 ) which goes to ( http://www.chi…

As if that guy had any clue what are "javascript" "drive by" or "DDoS".

Might as well have sent an email in chinese.

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#18

Post by hcrisp »

Too bad there are more comments about the format of the discovery, than the actual discovery.

I gathered that this is not actually the first time a ghost shark was caught on camera, but the first time it was filmed in its natural habitat. It was seen alive in California and Hawaii in 2011 [0]. There are other ghost shark photos, such as this one (date unknown, file uploaded July 2016) [1]. Video has even existed, such as this one from May 2016 [2]. Maybe this is the first filming of a live Hydrolagus trolli species? What actually happened for the "first time" here?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointy-nosed_blue_chimaera

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimaera#/media/File:Deep_sea_...

[2] http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016/05/18/noaa-marianas-tre...

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#19

Post by hcrisp »

hcrisp wrote: post #18

Too bad there are more comments about the format of the discovery, than the actual discovery. I gathered that this is not actually the first time a ghost shark was caught on camera, but the first time it was filmed in its natural habitat. It was seen alive in California and Hawaii in 2011 [0]. There are other ghost shark photos, such as this one (date unknown, file uploaded July 2016) [1]. Video has even existed, suc…

Per National Geographic: "The video is the first time the pointy-nosed blue chimaera [Hydrolagus trolli species] has been seen alive in its natural habitat." [0]

[0] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/pointy-nosed-blue...

Re: “Ghost shark” captured on camera for the first time

#20

Post by taylorbuley »

hcrisp wrote: post #18

Too bad there are more comments about the format of the discovery, than the actual discovery. I gathered that this is not actually the first time a ghost shark was caught on camera, but the first time it was filmed in its natural habitat. It was seen alive in California and Hawaii in 2011 [0]. There are other ghost shark photos, such as this one (date unknown, file uploaded July 2016) [1]. Video has even existed, suc…

Another interesting link: perhaps this creature is now dead because of the format of the discovery

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2n1yd4/how_is_i...

> I'm a marine biologist and one of my former professors actually did all his research on deep sea eyes, mainly in invertebrates. I asked him about it once, about whether or not it was harmful to have the submersibles blasting white light around everywhere, and his answer was "yep, most of those animals are now blind and will likely die." Research subs usually use red light when in the deep sea since 99.8% of animals can't see it (red is the first wavelength filtered out in seawater so there is no red light at depth. Almost all deep sea organisms don't even have photoreceptors to see it) and it's not harmful. The white lights are mostly used for filming purposes. But yeah, they absolutely are being blinded most of the time.

Post reply on HN