I believe in Virginia they have Open Primaries so people don't have to be registered one way or the other to vote for a candidate. So no switching even needed.
Uh, yeah. But I haven't had to use quotes, pluses, minuses or any other "advanced" crap like that in years. What search engine are you using that still requires such tricks to get good results?
I'll give these guys a pass because the project's young but a little, helpful link that says "pretend you're using google 15 years ago" wouldn't hurt.
Yeah, that's what I was hoping for as well. Just to double check the quoting thing though, try this; do a search without the quotes, pick one "hit" from the results and then search for that with the quotes. The expected behavior is that you will get one result. That's what happened when I tried a couple of specific, quoted searches for host names and IP addresses that came back in previous, unquoted searches.
As I mentioned elsewhere I wouldn't count on this alone but it's a good addition to the other tools used to check hosts for problems.
As some other poster pointed out add quotes around your search will give you the specific results you're looking for. It would be nice if they had a Search Help link or something but it does work better if you use the quotes...
Thanks, that did the trick. I too was getting a lot of results when searching for very specific host names. Quotes around either an IP or host name reduced the results to zero (which is obviously what I was hoping for!). And just to test further I put quotes around a random result that did show up in my initial searches and it just came up once, as expected.
I wouldn't depend it as the only means of double checking a site but it's a good edition to the tool belt. And it should only get better if they don't get sued out of existence.
I'm pretty sure the letters are limited to A-F and map to hexadecimal notation. Not arguing that it's any easier to remember than you suggest but it's not the whole alphabet being used here. IPv6 addresses can be expressed in decimal (or octal for that matter) but the reasoning behind using hexadecimal notation is that it reduces the number of 'digits' you need to remember. It's easier to wrap your head around it if you've ever used hex for memory addressing or similar low level tasks.
Vaguely off-topic but your post reminded me of an interesting NPR Radiolab episode I heard over the weekend. The upshot being "how do we even know the people we talk to everyday are real" and how we all go through life making a series of small leaps of faith just to keep ourselves grounded in what we perceive as reality. Listening to it and than making the comparison to the Turing test makes it seem to be forever out of our reach to prove anything about consciousness, human or artificial.
Weird. For me, I'm not seeing the actual ads but suddenly the space they should take up is back. Just a browser wide white space at the top and a nice square chunk of white above the Disable Ads spot.
At work so no ad block or add-ons in play, although I do have javascript off by default. I tried enabling it briefly yesterday for/. but nothing changed.
I don't much care about what a lot of people think about it, I love Perl and still use it daily in my job. I've dabbled in PHP and the various frameworks it supports but I always find myself returning to Perl/CGI/DBI. But this sounds like something I have been waiting for. It's really nice to see some new stuff coming out for Perl 5 as I simply can't seem to wrap my head around Perl 6. This is great news for old dogs!
Slashdot Mirror
You're welcome and thank you! This looks like quite a nice project, I wish you success. I am short now but will drop by and donate when I can.
I believe in Virginia they have Open Primaries so people don't have to be registered one way or the other to vote for a candidate. So no switching even needed.
Maybe he likes Reggae?
Uh, yeah. But I haven't had to use quotes, pluses, minuses or any other "advanced" crap like that in years. What search engine are you using that still requires such tricks to get good results?
I'll give these guys a pass because the project's young but a little, helpful link that says "pretend you're using google 15 years ago" wouldn't hurt.
Yeah, that's what I was hoping for as well. Just to double check the quoting thing though, try this; do a search without the quotes, pick one "hit" from the results and then search for that with the quotes. The expected behavior is that you will get one result. That's what happened when I tried a couple of specific, quoted searches for host names and IP addresses that came back in previous, unquoted searches.
As I mentioned elsewhere I wouldn't count on this alone but it's a good addition to the other tools used to check hosts for problems.
Try this: add quotes to your search
As some other poster pointed out add quotes around your search will give you the specific results you're looking for. It would be nice if they had a Search Help link or something but it does work better if you use the quotes...
Thanks, that did the trick. I too was getting a lot of results when searching for very specific host names. Quotes around either an IP or host name reduced the results to zero (which is obviously what I was hoping for!). And just to test further I put quotes around a random result that did show up in my initial searches and it just came up once, as expected.
I wouldn't depend it as the only means of double checking a site but it's a good edition to the tool belt. And it should only get better if they don't get sued out of existence.
I'm pretty sure the letters are limited to A-F and map to hexadecimal notation. Not arguing that it's any easier to remember than you suggest but it's not the whole alphabet being used here. IPv6 addresses can be expressed in decimal (or octal for that matter) but the reasoning behind using hexadecimal notation is that it reduces the number of 'digits' you need to remember. It's easier to wrap your head around it if you've ever used hex for memory addressing or similar low level tasks.
Not to mention they were the ones recently accused of the same thing by the US. The other two were not investigated by the US, just Apple.
Vaguely off-topic but your post reminded me of an interesting NPR Radiolab episode I heard over the weekend. The upshot being "how do we even know the people we talk to everyday are real" and how we all go through life making a series of small leaps of faith just to keep ourselves grounded in what we perceive as reality. Listening to it and than making the comparison to the Turing test makes it seem to be forever out of our reach to prove anything about consciousness, human or artificial.
Exactly, and better get a .biz, .info, .someothertldthatwillmakeusmoremoney while they're at it...
When I got an email offering us a .ninja tld for our business domains I died a little bit inside...
Well, I'll make the popcorn, you pick up some beer!
Cool, thanks. The Wired article looks interesting at first glance.
Anyone see the actual document before it was /.ed?
Yeah, but it's gonna be tough holding out until 2068. But then again it leaves plenty of time to kick the tires in testing/development.
Weird. For me, I'm not seeing the actual ads but suddenly the space they should take up is back. Just a browser wide white space at the top and a nice square chunk of white above the Disable Ads spot.
At work so no ad block or add-ons in play, although I do have javascript off by default. I tried enabling it briefly yesterday for /. but nothing changed.
Not to mention that they were one of the first to pull the "you can't access our online content because your ISP doesn't pay us to let you access it" *. F Disney and ESPN.
* See the section on Criticism
F'in Brits! :-)
Yeah, I just saw the announcement for this!
Where did he say it was OK? I'm an American, and no, I don't think what we're doing with drones is OK. Just because it's a law doesn't make it right.
Yeah how dare they ask these companies to take their heads out of the sand and do something about their customer's security/privacy!
I'm appalled at the amount of "Good, they broke the law" comments in this thread...
I think being old is a requirement for understanding TFS. :-)
I don't much care about what a lot of people think about it, I love Perl and still use it daily in my job. I've dabbled in PHP and the various frameworks it supports but I always find myself returning to Perl/CGI/DBI. But this sounds like something I have been waiting for. It's really nice to see some new stuff coming out for Perl 5 as I simply can't seem to wrap my head around Perl 6. This is great news for old dogs!
You do know that Brent Spiner and Patrick Stewart used to rub their balls with the visor before every episode?