Well, the editors could always use a tf*idf weighted keyword vector relevance system on articles posted to Slashdot, which has worked excellently for me in the past.
Or they could actually read Slashdot. Their choice.
Seriously, if you're not au fait with cookery, reading the whole recipe before you embark is a very good idea, as you can measure it against your limitations.
Perhaps, if people have more of a graphical leaning, someone should come up with a set of symbols to put at the top of recipes - I know that I have one or two cookbooks with prep time and cooking time at the top, plus how many it serves, but maybe there should be symbols for techniques and tools required? Like, whether a griddle is required, or a blender...
What people don't seem to be realising is that this is not 'I'm Feeling Lucky' - try it! Presumably it has to feel particularly strongly about a hit for whatever you type into the address bar before it redirects you. For example, type 'AOL' in and it will take you to www.aol.com. Type in 'tie' and it will take you to http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&gf ns=1&ie=UTF-8&q=tie... In other words, it's slightly more intelligent than "let's take the first link we can find and give it to them..."
Think how long it would take to spit enough to rehydrate one MRE. Or collect the sweat to do it.
Theoretically, though, sweat would work as well as urine, but with the same risks to your kidneys - I'm not sure what urea content sweat has versus urine, but it does have some.
"Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach" is a satirical quote from Oscar Wilde. And I agree, to some extent. Everything that I know well, I learned by myself, or for myself with teachers as a guide. The vast majority of teachers that have taught me have been pretty useless when it comes to something other than parrotting from a textbook. In some cases, I learned things in spite of my teachers' best efforts. Sure, I've had two or three really excellent teachers, so I acknowledge it's a stereotype.
The quote is satirical, but that doesn't mean it has to be true.
A rather trashy science program in the UK on Sky, called Braniac: Science Abuse performed an experiment where they covered a trailer in gasoline and left a mobile phone in it. They then phoned it. Nothing happened. Then they added more gas and mobile phones, and phoned them all at the same time. Still nothing happened.
Not sure it proved anything, so they blew it up with something anyway. Bit of detail here.
Not quite. The saying actually refers to the trip from the prison to the Tyburn Tree in London. The prisoner to be hanged would be given drink to calm him down for the hanging. The closest pub to the place of hanging that lay upon the route was a mile away. The prisoner would have a drink at this last pub, and then be given a drink to have on his way to the gallows. Interestingly, this is also the origin of "on the wagon" as one of the guards travelling with the prisoner was not allowed to enter the pubs with him. So couldn't drink, and had to stay on the wagon.
I'd like to know why robot.txt isn't protected from showing up in results from Google? Search for robot.txt on Google and you get a load of actual robot.txt files, which seems to negate its usefulness.
The thought that it's April Fool's Day immediately leads one to question the validity of any story on Slashdot or any other news outlet. Although I doubt this is an April Fool's Day joke, how do we know that it's real? How do we know that this person isn't actually looking for someone else by searching for their MAC address? OR something more sinister?
The other thing about April Fool's Day is that noone ever believes me when I say it's my birthday. Which is kind of depressing.
Unfortunately, it ceased working, as google currently seems to check user agents or whatever and dissallows the script as a flagrant violation of their terms of service...
The following string performs an I'm Feeling Lucky search using Google, when used as the HTTP header (terms being each word separated by +), and is currently being quite successfully used in an IRC bot:
GET/search?btnI=&q= HTTP/1.1\n\n
AFAIK, Google don't have any client checking, they just have some flags in hidden inputs - all you have to do is inspect the HTML of their search submission forms...
clever criminals don't get caught so you don't hear about them
I've thought about this before, thinking I could get away with crimes that others have been caught for because I'm more intelligent than them. I'd plan my getaway route, time everything, put in backup plans for backup plans etc. You know, scope everything out beforehand, figure out weaknesses, stick rigidly to the plan.
After a while, I came to the conclusion that the most clever people would never get caught for any crime because they'd realise how incredibly stupid it would be to do it in the first place!
Slashdot Mirror
You really don't get the Profit!!! joke, do you...
Well, the editors could always use a tf*idf weighted keyword vector relevance system on articles posted to Slashdot, which has worked excellently for me in the past.
Or they could actually read Slashdot. Their choice.
RTFR!
Seriously, if you're not au fait with cookery, reading the whole recipe before you embark is a very good idea, as you can measure it against your limitations.
Perhaps, if people have more of a graphical leaning, someone should come up with a set of symbols to put at the top of recipes - I know that I have one or two cookbooks with prep time and cooking time at the top, plus how many it serves, but maybe there should be symbols for techniques and tools required? Like, whether a griddle is required, or a blender...
What people don't seem to be realising is that this is not 'I'm Feeling Lucky' - try it! Presumably it has to feel particularly strongly about a hit for whatever you type into the address bar before it redirects you. For example, type 'AOL' in and it will take you to www.aol.com. Type in 'tie' and it will take you to http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&gf ns=1&ie=UTF-8&q=tie... In other words, it's slightly more intelligent than "let's take the first link we can find and give it to them..."
Sounds like you're just pissed off that your batting average is lower than your IQ...
Think how long it would take to spit enough to rehydrate one MRE. Or collect the sweat to do it.
Theoretically, though, sweat would work as well as urine, but with the same risks to your kidneys - I'm not sure what urea content sweat has versus urine, but it does have some.
"Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach" is a satirical quote from Oscar Wilde. And I agree, to some extent. Everything that I know well, I learned by myself, or for myself with teachers as a guide. The vast majority of teachers that have taught me have been pretty useless when it comes to something other than parrotting from a textbook. In some cases, I learned things in spite of my teachers' best efforts. Sure, I've had two or three really excellent teachers, so I acknowledge it's a stereotype.
The quote is satirical, but that doesn't mean it has to be true.
A rather trashy science program in the UK on Sky, called Braniac: Science Abuse performed an experiment where they covered a trailer in gasoline and left a mobile phone in it. They then phoned it. Nothing happened. Then they added more gas and mobile phones, and phoned them all at the same time. Still nothing happened.
Not sure it proved anything, so they blew it up with something anyway. Bit of detail here.
Note my strategic use of the word "one" when referring to the plural "guards".
Hmm. Shouldn't have used that as a reference then. It totally compromises my explanation.
Silly websites, with their alternative opinions.
Guess where I first heard it? =o) Should have cited The Big Bus Company!
Not quite. The saying actually refers to the trip from the prison to the Tyburn Tree in London. The prisoner to be hanged would be given drink to calm him down for the hanging. The closest pub to the place of hanging that lay upon the route was a mile away. The prisoner would have a drink at this last pub, and then be given a drink to have on his way to the gallows. Interestingly, this is also the origin of "on the wagon" as one of the guards travelling with the prisoner was not allowed to enter the pubs with him. So couldn't drink, and had to stay on the wagon.
Some lovely linkage:here, here and here.
I rest my case.
I'd like to know why robot.txt isn't protected from showing up in results from Google? Search for robot.txt on Google and you get a load of actual robot.txt files, which seems to negate its usefulness.
The thought that it's April Fool's Day immediately leads one to question the validity of any story on Slashdot or any other news outlet. Although I doubt this is an April Fool's Day joke, how do we know that it's real? How do we know that this person isn't actually looking for someone else by searching for their MAC address? OR something more sinister?
The other thing about April Fool's Day is that noone ever believes me when I say it's my birthday. Which is kind of depressing.
"When you copy one source, it's plagiarism. When you copy several, it's research." --Unknown
Not at all - they'd be sunglasses!
Bang goes most of the /. crowd.
I mean, they don't bang...Damn.
Well check the Location: header - Google redirects browsers that way.
Of course, terms are included after the &q= bit
The following string performs an I'm Feeling Lucky search using Google, when used as the HTTP header (terms being each word separated by +), and is currently being quite successfully used in an IRC bot:AFAIK, Google don't have any client checking, they just have some flags in hidden inputs - all you have to do is inspect the HTML of their search submission forms...
"[Lego is] one of the greatest educational toys ever produced" and "erector sets rule!!" are not mutually exclusive.
After a while, I came to the conclusion that the most clever people would never get caught for any crime because they'd realise how incredibly stupid it would be to do it in the first place!