Bart Allen, a.k.a. Impulse.Superman, Batman, and Max Mercury have all been cited as giving comic-book speedster Bart Allen the name Impulse. Batman most famously in Impulse #50, and Superman just recently in the previews for next month’s All-Flash #1. But who named him originally?

Cover: Flash #93
Cover: Zero Hour #3The name first appears on the cover of Flash #93 (August 1994), with an out-of-control Bart Allen fighting the Flash. The cover is captioned, “Brash Impulse!” Over the next few issues, Wally West’s inner monologue refers to Bart as being impulsive, or (at one point) as “Mr. Impulse.”

It first appears on-panel as a name in Zero Hour #3 (September 1994), when Bart meets Superman for the first time, but Bart introduces himself as Impulse. Dan Jurgens writes.
Continue reading

One of the controversies surrounding this summer’s relaunch of The Flash is the question of how far ahead it was planned. Interviews with Mark Waid and Marc Guggenheim make it clear that it was in the works “nearly a year ago,” and definitely before Guggenheim took over as writer. Dan Didio has suggested it was their plan all along, though many fans find this idea suspect, and find it more likely that it was put in place after the first few issues of Flash: The Fastest Man Alive failed to catch on with readers.

While looking for something in Flash: The Fastest Man Alive #1, I noticed something interesting. Continue reading

Flash v.1 #193: Captain Cold holds up a photo labeled 'Censored' and says, They wouldn't let me show you what I did to the Flash.  Do you dare read this issue and find out for yourself!?I didn’t think I had anything to add to the discussion on the infamous Heroes For Hire #13 cover. (Some of those links possibly NSFW.) Something stuck in my mind, though. Typolad suggested that “you would never, ever see Marvel or DC make a cover like this with a male protagonist. Yes, a male hero may be shown in peril, but his face will be defiant. He won’t be shown as submissive.” Lea Hernandez’ remix of the cover alters the expressions to do just that.

Now, I agree—that cover was way past the line, and I can’t imagine DC or Marvel doing the same thing with male characters, especially when you take into account the sleaze factor. But phrases like “never, ever” tend to read like a challenge. Looking just at the defiant/passive stance, I knew I’d seen at least one cover with the Flash beaten to within an inch of his life, unable to put up a fight or even a glare, so I took a trip through the Grand Comics Database’s cover gallery. Continue reading

The suggestion box on my Flash site has picked up a couple of requests for the Flash’s “weakness.” The concept doesn’t really apply to the Flash’s powers, though. Thinking about it, if your hero has to have an off-switch, that’s kind of a sign that they’ve been over-powered, isn’t it?

It reminds me of a line that bothered me in Unbreakable. (Minor spoiler.) Samuel Jackson’s character explains to Bruce Willis that water is his Kryptonite. That’s hardly the case, though: a glass of water isn’t going to take him out of commission. He’ll still be invulnerable and super-strong while swimming. All it means is that he still has to breathe (and, presumably, eat and drink). A plastic bag over his head would be as effective as drowning.

Compare that to, say, Superman and Kryptonite, or Wonder Woman and being tied up, or past Green Lantern books and yellow objects or wood. It’s not in the same league (pun not intended).

Which brings us back to the Flash. What “weakness” does he have? Well, he’s a specialist, so he doesn’t have the advantage of super-strength or invulnerability. He can get tired. Like David Dunn, he has to breathe. He can get distracted. He can make mistakes. He can act without thinking. Are any of these really “weaknesses” in the Kryptonite sense, though?

Since upgrading to Mozilla Thunderbird 1.5 beta 2, I’ve seen a number of messages slapped with a warning label that “Thunderbird thinks this message might be an email scam.” It appears at the top of the message, in the same style as the junk mail notice bar or the warning that remote images have been blocked, and there’s a button to mark the message as “Not a Scam.”

There’s only one problem. Since SpamAssassin and ClamAV do such a good job of catching the phishing scams before they reach my inbox, Thunderbird has yet to catch any actual phish. But there’ve been a lot of false positives. It’s hit LiveJournal reply notices, newsletters from IEEE and Golden Key, a Spam Karma notice from my own blog, and I’ve seen it on both outbid notices and updates to saved searches from eBay.

I found myself wondering just how Thunderbird’s phishing detection decides that a message is suspicious—and how to teach it that the next LJ notice isn’t a scam.

The Thunderbird support website doesn’t seem to have been updated yet. Most of the articles I’ve found only talk about TB adding the feature, not how it works. The best information I found was this Mozillazine forum thread, which included a link to the actual code that makes the decision, in phishingDetector.js. Thunderbird looks at the following:

  • Links that only use an IP address, including dotted decimal, octal, hex, dword, or some mixed encoding.
  • Links that claim to go to one site, but actually go to another. (Phishers do this to fool you into going to their site. Legit mailing lists sometimes do this with redirectors for tracking purposes.)
  • Forms embedded in the email. (This explains the LiveJournal notices.)

It also appears to trap text URLs containing HTML-escaped characters, which explains the Spam Karma reports. In this case the report includes a spammer’s link with ​ in the hostname. The message is plain text, so Thunderbird leaves the entity as-is when displaying it…but decodes it when it creates the link. Result: a link where the text and URL don’t match.

The easiest way to prevent it from freaking out over the next message? Add the sender to your address book. I’m not sure that’s a great idea, since a phisher could guess which addresses you have saved and spoof them, but it’s at least simple. I guess I’ll find out whether it works the next time I get a reply notice from LJ. Update: Adding the sender to your address book doesn’t seem to have any effect.

Update 2 (July 12, 2006): The comment thread’s gotten long enough that I can see people might miss this, so here’s how to disable it:

  1. Open Options or Preferences (this will be under the Tools menu on Windows, Thunderbird on Mac, or Edit on Linux).
  2. Click on Privacy (there should be a big padlock icon).
  3. Click on the E-mail Scams tab.
  4. Disable the “Check mail messages for email scams” option and click on Close.

That’s it.