My phone has caller ID, so I can see who the number is and if it matches a number in my phone book. I think every cell phone made in the past five years has this. What more do you want?
While it might be a bit expensive, BlueSocket is what is used at Virginia Tech for its wireless network. Students log in with their student ID and password and it records the MAC address. After 15 minutes of inactivity, the MAC address is dropped from the usage table and the use has to log back in again. I'm sure it could be modified to do other things, too.
"Wonder whether it's going to be more evil than Deet-based repellents, which, while being the only type that actually works, dissolve plastic and are believed by some to be carcinogenic."
If the poster actually did read the article, he would have noticed that it says that it's a natural repellant made from chemicals already produced by the body. This leads to a high likelihood that it's not dangerous.
I still use the Mozilla suite because I cannot find the "Classic" skin for Firefox. When I can get the "Classic" skin, I might move to Firefox. Naw, I'm too lazy to make it myself, especially when Mozilla Suite works for me.
The headline for this article is incredibly wrong and misleading. Verisign does not control the.cc domain and thus did not implement this "sitefinder", not to mention it's not even a "sitefinder".
It's run by eNIC Corporation, which apparently handles the root for.cc and all it does is ask you if you want to register that domain. It doesn't advertise any other site, and it doesn't advertise its own services or other services.
Is it a bad precedent? Yes, but it's not sitefinder and it's not verisign.
It's not about taking threats too seriously or not seriously enough. It's about prioritizing threats and acting appropriately. Iraq should not have been a priority and the action taken against it was taken with weak evidence.
It's free, the interface is easy to use, lots of routers have clients built in. Gives you a hostname like yourname.dyndns.org. That's probably your best bet.
Ah, indeed. I see that was just announced on Tuesday, so no wonder I hadn't heard about it.
I find the idea, though, of a medium format digital camera kind of silly. But I guess it goes with the lenses for some Hasselblad cameras, as well as a few others, and as long as it doesn't mess up the field of view, then I suppose more power to 'em.
You can already get 14 megapixel cameras from Kodak. And as other people have said, the pixels aren't important, it's the sensor and the lenses you use.
This is not a troll. Workstation versions of Windows, like Windows NT Workstation, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000 Professional and Windows XP have a crippled TCP/IP stack that make them move data slower than they really should. Using a "Server" edition of windows like Windows NT Server, Windows 2000 Server and Advancd Server and any edition of Windows 2003 will make any network throughput markedly faster.
I run at 1600x1200, but when I surf the web, the window is NEVER maximized, but rather sized down to about 800x600. If things were reset to 1024x768, I know a lot of people like me would not be happy to be forced to make their browser take up a bigger chunk of their desktop. Designers should really make their stuff look good in any resolution is my opinion.
Ok, so I'm a little biased having written my my own template engine. However, they have their plusses and minusses.
On the positive side, it really helps separate code from display, which makes everything look neater -- as in clean, not as in "gee whiz". HTML is easier to read and it's easier to abstract everything. I'm sure you know the arguments for it already. If you need to change something, all you do is find the template and you can see everything in one clear shot, instead of digging through mountains of PHP logic.
Additionally, if you use a good template engine, it will make your pages load faster by using a caching system. Basically, if your page doesn't change very often, it will save a static copy of all of your PHP logic and return that to the browser instead of making the database calls and other operations that eat up processing speed. I did notice a difference when I wrote my site.
However! There are some important things to remember. Unless you cache your site, it will probably not be any faster. Smarty is, in my opinion, bloated and slow. It tries to do too much and takes forever to load and use. (By forever, I mean like 0.1 seconds to load a page created by Smarty versus 0.005 seconds to load the equivalent page from pure PHP.)
Moreover, websites made with templates are summarily locked into that template engine and new developers will have difficulty figuring out what the heck you did without a good bit of explanation.
One more point to consider is the fact that when using template engines, usually you're limited in the tricks you can pull on your website. Template engines seriously restrict your ability to do cool things with PHP in the display process.
Finally, template engines introduce new flaws into your website. Sometimes those flaws are really bad and affect the performance of your site and then the developers are sometimes difficult to work with and then you have this piece of code that you didn't write that you have to work around.
Slashdot Mirror
Go to the bank and get a CD. The longer you have it, the better the interest. The more money you put in, the better the interest.
http://banking.about.com/od/cds/a/cdbasics.htm
My phone has caller ID, so I can see who the number is and if it matches a number in my phone book. I think every cell phone made in the past five years has this. What more do you want?
Something like The Producers?
Microsoft is testing blood now?
While it might be a bit expensive, BlueSocket is what is used at Virginia Tech for its wireless network. Students log in with their student ID and password and it records the MAC address. After 15 minutes of inactivity, the MAC address is dropped from the usage table and the use has to log back in again. I'm sure it could be modified to do other things, too.
Perhaps they need a random number generator that sees into the future.
"Wonder whether it's going to be more evil than Deet-based repellents, which, while being the only type that actually works, dissolve plastic and are believed by some to be carcinogenic."
If the poster actually did read the article, he would have noticed that it says that it's a natural repellant made from chemicals already produced by the body. This leads to a high likelihood that it's not dangerous.
I still use the Mozilla suite because I cannot find the "Classic" skin for Firefox. When I can get the "Classic" skin, I might move to Firefox. Naw, I'm too lazy to make it myself, especially when Mozilla Suite works for me.
You might look at this article on slashdot a while ago:
9 /1 5/1953249&tid=160&tid=126&tid=14
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/0
It was about how they made a server run in Antarctica over the winter.
Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills. You know, like nunchuck skills, bowhunting skills, computer hacking skills...
So eNIC is owned by Verisign. I got that wrong. But it's still not Sitefinder.
The headline for this article is incredibly wrong and misleading. Verisign does not control the .cc domain and thus did not implement this "sitefinder", not to mention it's not even a "sitefinder".
.cc and all it does is ask you if you want to register that domain. It doesn't advertise any other site, and it doesn't advertise its own services or other services.
It's run by eNIC Corporation, which apparently handles the root for
Is it a bad precedent? Yes, but it's not sitefinder and it's not verisign.
It's not about taking threats too seriously or not seriously enough. It's about prioritizing threats and acting appropriately. Iraq should not have been a priority and the action taken against it was taken with weak evidence.
http://www.dyndns.org/
It's free, the interface is easy to use, lots of routers have clients built in. Gives you a hostname like yourname.dyndns.org. That's probably your best bet.
Ah, indeed. I see that was just announced on Tuesday, so no wonder I hadn't heard about it.
I find the idea, though, of a medium format digital camera kind of silly. But I guess it goes with the lenses for some Hasselblad cameras, as well as a few others, and as long as it doesn't mess up the field of view, then I suppose more power to 'em.
You can already get 14 megapixel cameras from Kodak. And as other people have said, the pixels aren't important, it's the sensor and the lenses you use.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kodakdcs14n/
I like http://www.apcupsd.org to handle my APC UPS on Linux. It works very well, and also supports some Belkin UPSes.
Will it work if you're allergic to shell-fish? That's what I want to know.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/synergy2
Works with windows and X-11.
This is not a troll. Workstation versions of Windows, like Windows NT Workstation, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000 Professional and Windows XP have a crippled TCP/IP stack that make them move data slower than they really should. Using a "Server" edition of windows like Windows NT Server, Windows 2000 Server and Advancd Server and any edition of Windows 2003 will make any network throughput markedly faster.
I run at 1600x1200, but when I surf the web, the window is NEVER maximized, but rather sized down to about 800x600. If things were reset to 1024x768, I know a lot of people like me would not be happy to be forced to make their browser take up a bigger chunk of their desktop. Designers should really make their stuff look good in any resolution is my opinion.
http://ettercap.sf.net
Ok, so I'm a little biased having written my my own template engine. However, they have their plusses and minusses.
On the positive side, it really helps separate code from display, which makes everything look neater -- as in clean, not as in "gee whiz". HTML is easier to read and it's easier to abstract everything. I'm sure you know the arguments for it already. If you need to change something, all you do is find the template and you can see everything in one clear shot, instead of digging through mountains of PHP logic.
Additionally, if you use a good template engine, it will make your pages load faster by using a caching system. Basically, if your page doesn't change very often, it will save a static copy of all of your PHP logic and return that to the browser instead of making the database calls and other operations that eat up processing speed. I did notice a difference when I wrote my site.
However! There are some important things to remember. Unless you cache your site, it will probably not be any faster. Smarty is, in my opinion, bloated and slow. It tries to do too much and takes forever to load and use. (By forever, I mean like 0.1 seconds to load a page created by Smarty versus 0.005 seconds to load the equivalent page from pure PHP.)
Moreover, websites made with templates are summarily locked into that template engine and new developers will have difficulty figuring out what the heck you did without a good bit of explanation.
One more point to consider is the fact that when using template engines, usually you're limited in the tricks you can pull on your website. Template engines seriously restrict your ability to do cool things with PHP in the display process.
Finally, template engines introduce new flaws into your website. Sometimes those flaws are really bad and affect the performance of your site and then the developers are sometimes difficult to work with and then you have this piece of code that you didn't write that you have to work around.
Those are just things to consider.
Alright, here is a mirror:
J PG
http://www.paullockaby.com/pub/pictures/IMG_0099.
Though those of you who aren't at VT can't see this image, it's still quite hilarious.
a le/images/g5ordering/IMG_0099.JPG
Apparently Tech ordered the G5s through iTunes: http://computing.vt.edu/research_computing/terasc