is that if you can't find what you're looking for with one engine, try another. I don't see what's so hard about that. Any synthetic benchmark will be just that. It's not like you have to change your voter registration to another party in order to vote in a primary -- you put in another URL!
To help you out, I'll even get you started with a few clickable links...
Anyone really using XServes?
on
Return of the Mac
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I haven't seen people making the server switch... only using Macs as fileservers for Mac-heavy networks. I'm not aware of any large businesses using them, nor popular websites outside of Apple.
Obviously there are some clusters of them that make the news all the time. I'm not trying to troll, just wondering if there's a future for Xserve beyond niche markets.
I'm not saying that it isn't done. I'm saying that iTunes has made the case for a viable non-infringing content source. The iPod isn't made to record broadcasts and the like. Yes, you can put infringing content on, but it's not a "capture stuff you don't have a license for" device, it's a "you can buy music from us, and since we need to provide it to a market which demands MP3 playback, you can do those, too" kind of thing.
Apple certainly doesn't want to be seen as a bastion of piracy. A DVR which can feed into something like Final Cut Pro would be an amazingly great way to master your own show archives, but I think that Steve doesn't want to draw the ire of the TV networks or the movie studios... especially with the whole Pixar connection.
Even the people who use it don't know how to use it.
Actually, it pisses me off that people who use metric will say 5000 kilometers instead of 5 megameters... effectively changing the base unit to suit their scale.
It'll be interesting to see how far the operators will go when performing the physical. Imagine the liability implications if they send a pregnant woman up into orbit and she later has a child with birth defects...
DRM and archiving are quite conflicting. But then again, how do you make available information on which you want to retain technical methods of copyright protection?
I think the obvious solution is to archive it in a non-DRM, non-proprietary format, but transcode to a DRM/proprietary format when retrieved, if the content is not in the public domain.
I'm a little concerned about the possible viruses which may have been dormantly sitting in this soft tissue all along. Who knows what they might be/do?
I'd like to see a company like Yahoo or Google pick up the ball and start a Bittorrent tracker service for creative commons content with a centralized directory-style index.
DNA containing redundancy certainly isn't efficient, so perhaps it's something that happened *because of* evolution, and doesn't negatively impact evolutionary theory, just requires that we modify our understanding of it.
A million may be no harder than four to hijack, but a million dummy sites that would actually fool people is much harder than four.
This isn't about fooling people, it's about fooling a flawed technology to get false listings in the search engine results pages. It's about getting a lot of traffic. Yes, some people will be really pissed off when they get redirected to an affiliate program or something of the sort, but some small percentage of people will buy. If the cost to bring in a million visitors is miniscule because you're stealing search engine placement, and you get 50 people to sign up to something that pays you $50 a person, then you're up $2500 minus your hosting costs.
$2500 to someone in Malaysia is a lot of dough for a little coding... they could work for $200/mo in some kind of outsourcing plan or make a year's wages in their spare time. What do you think they're going to do?
This is why the "302 hack" works. If the redirect is only supposed to be temporary, the search engine keeps the URL of the 302 as the URL for the document, but indexes the content of the page to which the redirect is directed.
301 is what you should be using to point the SEs to your new pages if you've moved them. The behavior is supposed to be for the SEs to replace the old URL in their index with the new one, and furthermore count all links to the 301ed URL as being towards the new one. I don't know why it's not working for the grandparent poster, but it's the way that the functionality is "advertised" for Google and Yahoo, and it should work.
If you haven't been there yet, you should check out TheDailyWTF... it's not obfuscated code, but rather unmaintainable code people submit to show what they've been left to deal with at work. Quite interesting, and sometimes as difficult to understand as intentionally obfuscated code.
Slashdot Mirror
is that if you can't find what you're looking for with one engine, try another. I don't see what's so hard about that. Any synthetic benchmark will be just that. It's not like you have to change your voter registration to another party in order to vote in a primary -- you put in another URL!
To help you out, I'll even get you started with a few clickable links...
Yahoo Search
MSN Search
Ask Jeeves
Hope that helps. Good luck.
I haven't seen people making the server switch... only using Macs as fileservers for Mac-heavy networks. I'm not aware of any large businesses using them, nor popular websites outside of Apple.
Obviously there are some clusters of them that make the news all the time. I'm not trying to troll, just wondering if there's a future for Xserve beyond niche markets.
I'm not saying that it isn't done. I'm saying that iTunes has made the case for a viable non-infringing content source. The iPod isn't made to record broadcasts and the like. Yes, you can put infringing content on, but it's not a "capture stuff you don't have a license for" device, it's a "you can buy music from us, and since we need to provide it to a market which demands MP3 playback, you can do those, too" kind of thing.
Apple certainly doesn't want to be seen as a bastion of piracy. A DVR which can feed into something like Final Cut Pro would be an amazingly great way to master your own show archives, but I think that Steve doesn't want to draw the ire of the TV networks or the movie studios... especially with the whole Pixar connection.
The flaw in that is that there isn't a "base unit" in the Imperial system.
Nothing this guy did couldn't have been simulated on a computer quite effectively, with many more "robots" and a lot faster of a clock speed.
I'm missing the "really cool" factor about what he actually got done.
Actually, 5000 km vs 5 Mm would be a matter of precision, not accuracy.
If it were only a matter of precision, people would at least sometimes use Mm. I've never heard it used in conversation at all.
No wonder we don't switch to metric!
Even the people who use it don't know how to use it.
Actually, it pisses me off that people who use metric will say 5000 kilometers instead of 5 megameters... effectively changing the base unit to suit their scale.
You apparently haven't seen the pricing for RedHat Enterprise Linux.
It'll be interesting to see how far the operators will go when performing the physical. Imagine the liability implications if they send a pregnant woman up into orbit and she later has a child with birth defects...
I'm sure the OP meant revenue when he said turnover.
We Americans use "turnover" to refer to emplyee churn.
Just one of those terms that was confusing when I moved to London for a while...
Usually they supply the underdog with Mirage fighter jets.
The self-aware threat is now from the water!
DRM and archiving are quite conflicting. But then again, how do you make available information on which you want to retain technical methods of copyright protection?
I think the obvious solution is to archive it in a non-DRM, non-proprietary format, but transcode to a DRM/proprietary format when retrieved, if the content is not in the public domain.
I'm a little concerned about the possible viruses which may have been dormantly sitting in this soft tissue all along. Who knows what they might be/do?
I'd like to see a company like Yahoo or Google pick up the ball and start a Bittorrent tracker service for creative commons content with a centralized directory-style index.
I'm surprised that they haven't patented DNS.
Couldn't you do this with the PHP cgi executable?
Given that a tablet is probably meant to be written on while held in one arm... are there hotspots on these things that slowly cook your arm?
DNA containing redundancy certainly isn't efficient, so perhaps it's something that happened *because of* evolution, and doesn't negatively impact evolutionary theory, just requires that we modify our understanding of it.
Is strictly used for Googling 1) facts in dispute, and 2) addresses of places in New York City when I'm tired of winging it.
Those are about the only things it's useful for.
Maps? Ha! News? Not worth dealing with it. Stock quotes? Unless you are likely to make a trade, what's the need for quotes on the go?
A million may be no harder than four to hijack, but a million dummy sites that would actually fool people is much harder than four.
This isn't about fooling people, it's about fooling a flawed technology to get false listings in the search engine results pages. It's about getting a lot of traffic. Yes, some people will be really pissed off when they get redirected to an affiliate program or something of the sort, but some small percentage of people will buy. If the cost to bring in a million visitors is miniscule because you're stealing search engine placement, and you get 50 people to sign up to something that pays you $50 a person, then you're up $2500 minus your hosting costs.
$2500 to someone in Malaysia is a lot of dough for a little coding... they could work for $200/mo in some kind of outsourcing plan or make a year's wages in their spare time. What do you think they're going to do?
301 is a permanent redirect, 302 temporary.
This is why the "302 hack" works. If the redirect is only supposed to be temporary, the search engine keeps the URL of the 302 as the URL for the document, but indexes the content of the page to which the redirect is directed.
301 is what you should be using to point the SEs to your new pages if you've moved them. The behavior is supposed to be for the SEs to replace the old URL in their index with the new one, and furthermore count all links to the 301ed URL as being towards the new one. I don't know why it's not working for the grandparent poster, but it's the way that the functionality is "advertised" for Google and Yahoo, and it should work.
I do think the figure of millions of pages being hijacked is a little steep, though.
Why? It can be completely automated. A million is no harder than four.
If you haven't been there yet, you should check out TheDailyWTF... it's not obfuscated code, but rather unmaintainable code people submit to show what they've been left to deal with at work. Quite interesting, and sometimes as difficult to understand as intentionally obfuscated code.