Do any of these instant messaging systems/protocols support the exposure of a different online "status" to different groups of buddies?
For example, I use Messenger at work, and it would be useful to allow my colleagues to see me as "Online", whilst my friends outside of work see me as "Busy".
I think Buddy Groups would be easier than having to create a separate account (one for work and one for use with friends), and in particular if you have a large number of friends on IM you don't want to have to set your status to Busy for them individually.
Then at lunchtime, I can quickly set my "Friends" Buddy Group to show me as "Online"...
How many of your mates and relatives who know nothing about computers have been sat infront of their monitor that is perfectly capable of 75Hz non-interlaced; but instead, it is configured at 56Hz interlaced!!!!
Agggghhhhh I've lost count. Even worse is the number of tech support people who don't as a matter of course configure a monitor for its optimum refresh rate.
It's not so much a problem now because the latest Plug'n'Pray systems means everything is set-up correctly, but with Windows 95 I came across it all the time.
Explain to the sales droid that LCD displays can have dead [or permanently alive] pixels. It probably won't know that knackered pixels are expected, but the vast majority of displays are perfect, so there's no harm in making sure you get a perfect one.
Unpack the display and plug it into a PC in the store. Now you need to check both a completely white screen and a completely black screen - because knackered pixels can be knackered either always on or always off.
To check always off, fire up Internet Explorer, go to "about:blank" and press F11 (full screen). This will give you a page full of white. Scan the page closely looking for "always off" dead pixels.
Then, to test for always on pixels, right click on the desktop and go to screen saver. Select "Blank" and then "Preview". Again, scan the blank screen and this time look for "always on" pixels - although these are much easier to spot!
... if the media would keep out of things they don't understand.
I'm convinced that the media played a huge and extremely irresponsible roll during the dotcom boom and bust.
They fuelled things up out of all proportion, attempting to report on technologies that they didn't understand one iota.
You watch if Google goes for an IPO. The tech media will go absolutely f****** crazy. Tech journalists will reach blood pressure levels bordering on fatal. And the worst thing is, it will not just be themselves that they kill. It will be Google.
I sincerely hope the media will cover the next "big thing" responsibly - with a cool, calm and collected head.
I am pushing for my local supermarket to have an "Old People Only" checkout isle, with old people banned from all other checkouts, so that I don't have to wait behind some crusty old fart paying by cheque because they're scared that using their debit card (which their bloody bank sent them anyway) might kill them.
Well sod it; it's a dupe _and_ April 1st so this thread is not worth anything anyway; so:
Am I alone in the world, or is there anybody else out there that COULDN'T GIVE A FLYING F*** whether Google go for an IPO or not?
Seriously, the BB's and media are making a meal out if this AND IT HASN'T EVEN HAPPENED YET. If they do, i'm gonna have to cut myself off from society until the media bullshit has calmed down.
I trust the management will do what's right/needed for the company; and i'll leave it at that.
Any journalists reading? Please, I beg you; let's not blow this one out of all proportion.
Thanks.
Re:Anyone interested in extending this concept?
on
Geocoding All Content
·
· Score: 1
Doesn't this require the calculation of "Distance" for _every_ record for _every_ query - bad news if you have a world wide data set and millions of records!
The idea of a spatial index is to avoid having to perform a distance calculation on every record.
My solution creates a hierarchical index that capitalises on the already efficient hierarchical directory filing systems found in any modern OS.
Basically, a simple function(x,y) returns a starting directory within the index. A second function returns the traversal depths (up, down, and sideways) that must be travelled in order to retrieve pointers to all records in your dataset (which can be massive) that are within "d plus a bit" from x,y.
That can be sufficient for most purposes. If you want to filter out records that are "d plus a bit" away from the origin then you must perform a distance calculation on some of the results. This is made easier by the system indicating that a result came from a "maybe plus a bit" directory!
If there's interest I could think about publishing this...
However, many analysts believe a successfully Google IPO could rejuvenated Internet-company investments.
I think the last 4 years have proved that analysts know shit.
Re:Anyone interested in extending this concept?
on
Geocoding All Content
·
· Score: 1
How are you getting on with your spatial query and scaling issues?
I came across somewherenear.com a while back when researching this topic; and you mentioned something about borrowing a technique from a bio-chemist or something!
Would your platform scale worldwide and to millions of records?
The arguments seem to boil down to "trust" and "possible misuse".
Fair enough, but I really think people are getting a little paranoid here.
Every employee that forms part of "The Government" is a person just like you or me; they go home at night to their families; and have a private life - just like anybody else.
It is in their interest to protect their private life just as much (if not more so!) as you or me.
Even the (President | Prime Minister) if they were to leave office would be as subject to any government surveillance as anybody else.
If the NSA employee could discover something about you in the future and use it against you; well that's a bummer; but there is just as much chance of something being found and used against that NSA employee.
I think I trust my Government. They're elected after all; the big caveat being that the majority of what is the "Government" is the civil service; which of course does not change with elections. I'm sure "Yes Prime Minister" has been seen outside the UK.
Even Civil Servants fall in love, and have cats and dogs as pets.
We've also had the secret police in western countries for years; and probably still have departments that are "even more secret than the secret ones that we know about"; but so what.
This would only work if humans (and humans collectively as a "country") developed the same sort of peaceful battle mechanism as certain animals.
Specifically, when two males come into conflict, rather than fight 'till one of them dies; they simply face up to each other, take a few parameters and decide who would win. The one that would loose then turns around and buggers off.
Now if you extended that to countries, you would effectively have our only "super power" simply walk all over every other country and colonise the entire planet.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but have they told their subscribers?
You don't know you haven't got what you didn't get.
Tried to produce gas, came out solid.
Shit happens.
Do any of these instant messaging systems/protocols support the exposure of a different online "status" to different groups of buddies?
For example, I use Messenger at work, and it would be useful to allow my colleagues to see me as "Online", whilst my friends outside of work see me as "Busy".
I think Buddy Groups would be easier than having to create a separate account (one for work and one for use with friends), and in particular if you have a large number of friends on IM you don't want to have to set your status to Busy for them individually.
Then at lunchtime, I can quickly set my "Friends" Buddy Group to show me as "Online"...
How many of your mates and relatives who know nothing about computers have been sat infront of their monitor that is perfectly capable of 75Hz non-interlaced; but instead, it is configured at 56Hz interlaced!!!!
Agggghhhhh I've lost count. Even worse is the number of tech support people who don't as a matter of course configure a monitor for its optimum refresh rate.
It's not so much a problem now because the latest Plug'n'Pray systems means everything is set-up correctly, but with Windows 95 I came across it all the time.
Explain to the sales droid that LCD displays can have dead [or permanently alive] pixels. It probably won't know that knackered pixels are expected, but the vast majority of displays are perfect, so there's no harm in making sure you get a perfect one.
Unpack the display and plug it into a PC in the store. Now you need to check both a completely white screen and a completely black screen - because knackered pixels can be knackered either always on or always off.
To check always off, fire up Internet Explorer, go to "about:blank" and press F11 (full screen). This will give you a page full of white. Scan the page closely looking for "always off" dead pixels.
Then, to test for always on pixels, right click on the desktop and go to screen saver. Select "Blank" and then "Preview". Again, scan the blank screen and this time look for "always on" pixels - although these are much easier to spot!
This happened 2 Billion years ago.
Slow news day?
... if the media would keep out of things they don't understand.
I'm convinced that the media played a huge and extremely irresponsible roll during the dotcom boom and bust.
They fuelled things up out of all proportion, attempting to report on technologies that they didn't understand one iota.
You watch if Google goes for an IPO. The tech media will go absolutely f****** crazy. Tech journalists will reach blood pressure levels bordering on fatal. And the worst thing is, it will not just be themselves that they kill. It will be Google.
I sincerely hope the media will cover the next "big thing" responsibly - with a cool, calm and collected head.
This is the social problem of the current decade.
I am pushing for my local supermarket to have an "Old People Only" checkout isle, with old people banned from all other checkouts, so that I don't have to wait behind some crusty old fart paying by cheque because they're scared that using their debit card (which their bloody bank sent them anyway) might kill them.
And PC's are no different to your average consumer "car" for that matter.
30 years ago, a car was a complex mechanical device with some simple electronics.
The electronics hardly ever went wrong, but the mechanics on the other hand could be repaired by anyone with a reasonable IQ and a spanner.
Today a car is a complex electronic device with some simple mechanics.
The simple mechanics hardly ever goes wrong but when the complex electronics does it's back to the garage for a new ECU.
Not totally sure what i'm getting at here but it sounds good.
...that April Fools were only valid up until midday on 1st April.
After midday, the tables are turned and the fool is the person playing the joke.
At least it always was when I was a kid.
That was what I thought. It is effectively a published RFC (well it's on FAQs.org - that's good enough).
:)
Script kiddies could set this bit in their next DoS attack and use it in defence if they wind up in court
Well sod it; it's a dupe _and_ April 1st so this thread is not worth anything anyway; so:
Am I alone in the world, or is there anybody else out there that COULDN'T GIVE A FLYING F*** whether Google go for an IPO or not?
Seriously, the BB's and media are making a meal out if this AND IT HASN'T EVEN HAPPENED YET. If they do, i'm gonna have to cut myself off from society until the media bullshit has calmed down.
I trust the management will do what's right/needed for the company; and i'll leave it at that.
Any journalists reading? Please, I beg you; let's not blow this one out of all proportion.
Thanks.
Doesn't this require the calculation of "Distance" for _every_ record for _every_ query - bad news if you have a world wide data set and millions of records!
The idea of a spatial index is to avoid having to perform a distance calculation on every record.
My solution creates a hierarchical index that capitalises on the already efficient hierarchical directory filing systems found in any modern OS.
Basically, a simple function(x,y) returns a starting directory within the index. A second function returns the traversal depths (up, down, and sideways) that must be travelled in order to retrieve pointers to all records in your dataset (which can be massive) that are within "d plus a bit" from x,y.
That can be sufficient for most purposes. If you want to filter out records that are "d plus a bit" away from the origin then you must perform a distance calculation on some of the results. This is made easier by the system indicating that a result came from a "maybe plus a bit" directory!
If there's interest I could think about publishing this...
However, many analysts believe a successfully Google IPO could rejuvenated Internet-company investments.
I think the last 4 years have proved that analysts know shit.
How are you getting on with your spatial query and scaling issues?
I came across somewherenear.com a while back when researching this topic; and you mentioned something about borrowing a technique from a bio-chemist or something!
Would your platform scale worldwide and to millions of records?
The arguments seem to boil down to "trust" and "possible misuse".
Fair enough, but I really think people are getting a little paranoid here.
Every employee that forms part of "The Government" is a person just like you or me; they go home at night to their families; and have a private life - just like anybody else.
It is in their interest to protect their private life just as much (if not more so!) as you or me.
Even the (President | Prime Minister) if they were to leave office would be as subject to any government surveillance as anybody else.
If the NSA employee could discover something about you in the future and use it against you; well that's a bummer; but there is just as much chance of something being found and used against that NSA employee.
I think I trust my Government. They're elected after all; the big caveat being that the majority of what is the "Government" is the civil service; which of course does not change with elections. I'm sure "Yes Prime Minister" has been seen outside the UK.
Even Civil Servants fall in love, and have cats and dogs as pets.
We've also had the secret police in western countries for years; and probably still have departments that are "even more secret than the secret ones that we know about"; but so what.
I think people need to chill out a bit.
I'm not trolling.
I'm interested as to why someone who has "nothing to hide" should be worried about mass surveillance by their government?
It certainly doesn't bother me.
What the arguments?
Why should I be worried?
I'm quite willing to change my mind!
Every IP packet I pass through my ISP contains a source and destination IP address.
What else do they need to know?
"Your honour, at what layer of the OSI Network Layer model is this bill to be enforced?"
"Er, case dismissed."
I always ROT13 my secret messages twice.
As for the worst security, I nominate the following password checking code [snipped]
I really hate it when head stuck so far up their own arses their head sticks out of their head security types assume most programmers are stupid.
Most programmers AREN'T that stupid, and you will never come across this code in the wild.
Just like the SQL injection attacks that security types get off on. Doesn't happen.
"Sim United Nations"
Includes free copy of "Command and Conquer" for use when finished playing!
This would only work if humans (and humans collectively as a "country") developed the same sort of peaceful battle mechanism as certain animals.
Specifically, when two males come into conflict, rather than fight 'till one of them dies; they simply face up to each other, take a few parameters and decide who would win. The one that would loose then turns around and buggers off.
Now if you extended that to countries, you would effectively have our only "super power" simply walk all over every other country and colonise the entire planet.
Nobody wants that, so a resistance is put up.
We call that war.
and we still have wars.
When will people realise that some things (i.e. war) are in our nature and will not change anytime soon.
I met Kara the other day, and she's nowhere near as multi-talented as IBM would have you believe.
Signed up for the Beta test months ago, got "accepted", then not heard a dicky bird since.