Slashdot Mirror

Actually, You're thinking of just caching live news or the such. Most, if not all, websites use the same logos, graphic bars, coporate schemes, etc, even though they've updated their text. And graphics put a bigger strain on the your bandwidth than does text.

Next time you go into Hotmail or CNN, look how much of the page stays they same, even from link to link. Caches can be set up to hold these static images for minutes, days, or months. And if the user is REALLY paranoid about the content being fresh, all they have to do is hit the RELOAD button on the browser.

Even with one user, you can get major benefits by using a web cache. Amd to reduce traffic even more, think about adding Ad-Blocking Technology.

Which is fine, unless you have to stick to HTTP/1.0 so that your ad-killing proxy server work.

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of membership:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Users who do not want to take a subscription, or demand that certain changes be made to the website or the editorial policy before they would consider doing so, are often called "whiners"; practices like using software such as the Internet Junkbuster to view ad-free pages without paying are scorned upon by the editors.

Now, let's look at Pater's (aka "Cowboi Kneel") record when it comes to compensating websites for services rendered.
Over at livejournal.com, said slashdot editor keeps a diary.But before I come to the heart of the matter: What is livejournal.com exactly? Let me quote from their website:

LiveJournal.com is a volunteer-run website where you can keep your journal online. We're constantly adding new features and trying to improve the user experience. We cater to all levels of users, from the most technically incompetent to programmers and system administrators. Nearly all development and "business" decisions are discussed in public.

You do not have to pay any money to use this service. You can buy a paid account to show your support and to help us afford better hardware and bring you new features, but you don't have to.

(Emphasis mine.)

You also get some additional features by paying for an account, similar to Slashdot ("feature" there: no ads)

Now, on livejournal.com there are 4 categories of members:

"Free account" -- this is the default account type, with which you can do almost everything. The most notable exception is that users with free accounts cannot create new styles (editing the HTML for their journal).

"Early Adopter" -- All users before mid-September 2000 are considered early adopters, and have access to a subset of the paid account functionality. They have access to create styles, and view their journal at username.livejournal.com.

"Paid account" -- The user has access to all paid account functionality.

"Permanent Account" -- the user has all paid functionality with no expiration date. The user is either a LiveJournal developer or has contributed a significant amount of time or money to the project.

We would of course expect Neal to support this volunteer-run, non-profit. ad-free website by getting a paid account? Isn't this the Linux, the open source spirit of the new millenium?
After all, he's been keeping his journal there since at least the beginning of April 2002, so he should have had ample time to see if livejournal.com's service is worth the money.

If we now look at Cowboi Kneel's user info, what do we see?

Account type: Free User

Oh no! My assumption was wrong; what, for Christ's sake, happened? Why would Pater not want to support such an excellent site as livejournal.com?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a freeloader, that he doesn't what to help a site which does offer some value to him (obviously, as he's been posting there for more than a month)? That he doesn't have any problem whatsoever using up their bandwidth, disk space and volunteer time without giving something in return, all the while (together with the other editors) expecting us, the users of slashdot.com, to donate ( "we regard this as a tip jar" ) to their corporate, profit-driven site?

Could it be that Cowboy Neal is a hypocrite?

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'

Type mismatch: 'CInt'

E:\INETPUB\WEBSITES\YIL\COLUMNS\../ssi/ssiASP.as p, line 83

This is not what Tim Berners-Lee intended...

I run junkbuster as my proxy server, and it has the neat feature of setting the User-Agent string. I've encountered a few sites that falsely claim to not support my browser (and would I please upgrade to something on a windows machine..), so I've taken to changing my ua string to "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0)".

no complaints yet, except hotmail freaks out and displays a 2 inch textarea for message editing.

-----
Couldn't insert new row into MySQL table
Reason: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'You_dont_need_to_know_what_browser_I_use."","en" ""You_dont_need_to_know_what_si' at line 1

Check if the name of the MySQL table in phphits.php is correct!
-----

So my question is : what business does a mere "group of video game music fanatics and musicians" has logging people's browser infos into a SQL database ?

Well, I don't know of a way to do it directly in mozilla, but mozilla with junkbuster. Just set "user-agent" in ~/.junkbuster/config.

ads bugging you?

use junkbuster

oh, geez, i just read your last line. sorry.

now then, i feel it is pretty clear that this fellow knoweth not of what he speaketh. obviously a M$ Sales/Marketdroid.

in all seriousness, though, why bitch about this kind of silliness? i could expend x Joules of precious, precious caffeine whining, bitching, moaning, complaining, posting (oops! :)

or, i could pick a bug and fixor it. y'know, prove them all wrong. nice irony to it

nuff said

BTW, what the hell does "now then" mean?

Check out www.squidGuard.org for what is likely the closest thing to an open source filter project. It runs as a redirector plugin for Squid proxy server.

I checked it out one day, to use as a JunkBuster on steroids. I'm really impressed with it. You can craft categories (such as porn, banner adds, tracking sites like doubleclick) and determine who they affect by source machine, destination machine, and even by the time of day. If you're really clever with regular expressions you can do a really good job with it. It has the same failings as any other block-list based filter, but it's open for all to contribute. The site even has a canned set of lists. You can even "anonymize" the logs, so as to only see that there is a problem, and not that it's Bob in Accounting.

Mind you, I don't like censoring -- even at the workplace. However, I will concede that I may be asked someday to set up such a system. And given the recent "scandals" with the commecial filter vendors, I could only recommend this solution. Besides... it's open source! :-)