Slashdot | U.S. Kids Don't Understand First Amendment

This isn't good for the future of America.

Research Topic

I've got my topic. It's Kaiser William's founding of the Second Reich (1st is HRE, 3rd is Nazis) in 1871. It lasted until WWI.

Fake users suspect

If it really is Pinko, he will be forced into sorrow by the Engleman.
If it's anyone else, chances are that they have nothing at stake.

My first formal phpBB 2.0.11 MOD

Goal is to put a software limit on avatar size without doing any of the negative things that these do:

• Remote Avatar Resize - increases runtime of viewtopic.php significantly (getimagesize many times) - not lower image load time
  
• Limit Image Width - only works on width - increases DB size - increases runtime of viewtopic.php somewhat (more SQL to check cached sizes) - not lower image load time
  
• Fast Avatar Resize Mod - JavaScript eww - increases page load time (JavaScript without making image filesize lower)
  

It will be extremely simple. All it will require modifying is the user_avatar_url function in the includes/usercp_avatar.php file. I will use PHP's getimagesize function which is widely availble, works with the PHP HTTP(S) wrapper, and works with many different image formats. The info that getimagesize returns about the candidate avatar is checked against the maximum height and width as specified in the ACP. If it's OK, nothing is done. If it's too big, then the user recieves an error.

Just to make it clear, this MOD will NOT:

• Resize any avatars. It will just reject those that are too big. MODing this MOD to use PHP's Image Funtions (GD) in order to resize the big ones and save them on the server would not be hard; however, this will take up more disk space and bandwidth.
• Enforce filesize. The filesize function is only useful if the avatar is on an FTP server and you have PHP 5. Maybe we can download image, check size (with regular filesystem wrapper), then delete it; but this won't be done in first public release.
• Remove existing oversize avatars. Try SELECT user_avatar, username FROM phpbb_users WHERE user_avatar != ''

Ups:

• profile.php when using new offsite avatar ONLY will have a small runtime increase. No other files will be affected.
• quick to install.
• won't increase your disk, DB, or bandwidth usage.
• total size of pages will be kept low
• no JavaScript required
• works on both width and height

It will be coded according to the phpBB MOD standards. I will release the first barely-working version in the Beta Development forum. Then I will test it on a vanilla phpBB 2.0.11 install on a CTE Development test server, as well as with EasyMOD. Once I have everything I want done, then I will submit it to the MODs Database. I will probably add it to the PDG forums and include it in the pdgBB distrobution (which still hasn't been publically released) fairly soon after.

phpBB.com :: View topic - phpBB Destroyer info

I hope someone tries this sh*t on me.

Barracuda 7200.8 SATA NCQ - ST3400832

If my funding comes through, I'm getting 4 of these for a 1.2 TB RAID 5 array. (raw storage would be 1.6 TB, but one HD's worth of space is used for parity bits).
Chances are I won't and I'll be sticking with the WD1200JB (I already have one and would buy another.). Still will probably have 4, but then only will have 360 GB.

phpBB.com :: View topic - phpBB 2.2 is no more ... meet Olympus

I hope the betas come soon.

lj_dev: Power-loss post-mortem

Interesting.
Lucky for me Blogger stuff is hosted within Google data centers.
I'm definetely going to check out that whole MyISAM vs. InnoDB thingie. Maybe I'll convert mine.

another wierd thing

the popup looks much closer to what i wanted in IE
no 100 px upper limit. yet MSDN said...
i don't get it.

follow up

should have said this before, but vim also seemed to interpret it the same way as IE (the syntax highlighting I mean). also interesting to note is that vim didn't like "onload" attribute, but it checked out in the w3c validator.
also interesting: there is this one page I had that was giving out php warnings before any XML info or anything. it was a known issue that i knew i needed to fix.
anyway, IE refused to render that page, and guess why:

The XML page cannot be displayed
Cannot view XML input using XSL style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Only one top level element is allowed in an XML document. Error processing resource 'http://hosting.ctengel.net/kog/static.php?doc=Main'. Line 2, Position 2

Warning: file_get_contents(data/Main): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/ctengel/public_html/hosting/kog/static.php on line 13

-^

no sh*t shurlock. yeah it is invalid. actually, i don't have too much of a problem with IE doing this. it is technically correct. but for the fags who say IE is better "cuz its more tolerant of my sh*tty coding"---YOU ARE WRONG. here there is a slight error. there is a bit of stuff before any formal opening. Firefox guesses (correctly) how I would like this to be rendered, and just slaps it above everything else.
Let me make myself clear: there is no right or wrong way to render this. some extremists (depending on my mood, i can be rather extreme, not that much though) might argue that IE did a better job here. I'm just saying this to prove all those ppl who say that IE guesses better wrong.

anyway, now for the real followup. this can be modified for screwball IE to get it right (while also preserving XHTML 1.0 Strict compliance) by making the original script tag be non-self-closing (removing the / that IE forgot) and slapping a close script tag immidiately after.
now to decide: shall i indulge in the geeky humor of dissing IE, or shall i play it safe by just making the site "work" in IE (the former does have the advantage of not requiring me to do a good job or finish it)

Pop up ad

Well, I've learned alot with this.
I spent a long long time trying to find some javescript standards document. I came up with ECMAScript and the W3C DOM. I still couldn't find anything, but the closest thing I found to a formal reference that had exactly what I wanted was this page on MSDN (yuck). Even more yuck when I realized the Firefox JavaScript Console (which I had already fired up to run my script through) came up with this:

Error: unterminated character class
Source File: http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/code/browdata.js
Line: 26, Column: 31
Source Code:
else if (this.userAgent.match(/Mozilla[/].*(95[/]NT|95|NT|98|3.1).*Opera.*(\d+)\.(\d+)/))

Scary.
Well anyway, yeah, all I wanted was a formal list of all those attributes you can specify, and while I am fairly sure some of them are IE-only, it did well enough.
Anyhow, I used that list to come up with something, and I placed it in a seperate file, to be loaded in the "head" part of my document, and the one-line function in it was to be called by the onload attribute of "body."
I load it in firefox, and since I had my site in the popup exception list (I was worried for a moment when it popped up, then I remembered the list.) it popped up. Only problem I could see is that there was too much padding above and below (making the right side invisible) and that there was too much space below it (the MSDN thing did say that "height" should be at least 100, so I guess maybe it wasn't lying. So I realized I needed to tweak those two, and maybe adjust ad.html to pad it less. Best of all, no errror in the JavaScript console.
Anyway, now for the reason I am writing this before I am done. I'd like to say that MSIE officially sucks alot. I hate it when people say they use IE all the time just because it shows "every site" and some that others don't. I hate it even more when people say they don't give a shit if it doesn't work in any sane browser, so long as it works in IE.
Get this: Firefox displayed it perfectly, MSIE didn't show sh*t. That's right. There was nothing, just whiteness. The title was there on the titlebar, but none of the document. I checked a few things, and then I nearly fell off my chair laughing when I realized why it wasn't working. IE's XML parser sucks d*ck.
Let me show you the code I used to load the external Javascript file: (keep in mind that this is within the head element of a perfectly XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant document)

<script src="ad.js" type="text/javascript" />

So lets see, the validator accepted it, and any XML-knowing person will tell you that when you have an element with a slash like that at the end, it means that that tag closes itself, and there is nothing inside the element, just the attributes (this eliminates my XML obligation to have a seperate closing tag after it, like </script> - those are MANDATORY in ALL cases (including stuff like br and hr) unless the opening tag closes itself, the way I did)). The f*ck*ng retarded XML parser in IE translated my beautiful code to mean this:

• Opening stuff-like clearly specifying that we are dealing with XML here, as governed by the XHTML 1.0 Strict DTD
• open tag of html element-OK
• open tag of head element-OK
• other info in head, like the title (which it got right) and loading my CSS stuff
• script stuff (in detail below)
  • "<" get ready we have a tag coming
  • "s" OK, now we know it must be an opening tag, since its not started with a /
  • "cript " OK, we've got a script element, lets see if there are any attributes
  • "src='ad.js' " I think I'll just pretend that's not there (OK-to tell the truth, I don't really know. It's very possible that it did actually load it. Chances are it did, actually, but I can't find out with this example. Maybe I will. Bottom line is, if IE is "so good at guessing what the author means" wouldn't you think that it wouldn't expect to see inline javascript after this?
  • "type='text/javascript' " OK-javascript
  • "/>quot; - I think I'll just forget that there is a / and act as if it didn't close itself, by processing everything after this as javascript until i hit a </script>
• rest of document-perfectly coded end head tag, a nice body, and end of html - IE sees it all as javascript- sh*tt**st javascript I've ever seen

IE SUCKS! DIE!
Now I'm tempted to leave it like this and explain to Mr. LaVancha that I did do my project, but his f*ck*d up sh*t web browser can't notice valid XHTML when it runs into it.
Fags at microsoft.
LONG LIVE THE MOZILLA PROJECT. LONG LIVE THE WORLD WIDE WEB CONSORTIUM. TIM BERNERS-LEE IS COOL. BILL GATES LIKES MEN.
/rant

Slashdot | Jail Time For P2P Developers?

Slashdot | Jail Time For P2P Developers?

Slashdot | US Air Force Building Space Router

That was the best video game I have ever played.

Sorry about the lack of updates and strange messages. I'm doing better now, but still won't post much because of midterms.

ShareLive Forums -> The paste what's on your clipboard game

ShareLive Forums -> The paste what's on your clipboard game: "The following is supposedly an actual bonus question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so 'profound' that the professor shared it with colleagues via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

The bonus question was:

Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

'First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell.

Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my freshman year that, 'it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you, and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is, therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven...thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting 'Oh my God.'

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY 'A '!

how did that get there?"





Amazing.

Admission

I enjoy watching others fail. I hate failing. I try to find faults in others. I am harder on myself than anyone else.
I may be holding on by a thread, but I'll be alright.

I'll be alright.

I'm not perfect. I have regrets, but I hope to improve. I've done alot that I haven't really meant. I wish to change and restart. I apologise for my wrongdoing, and hope to make amends. I want to show some of what was hidden.

I hope to be better. I will try to be better. I can be better. I will be better.

Sharelive (Mod&admin), PDG (printer&halo), design (HVL&OA15), school (projects&midterms), mobile hardware (music&work), and THE website (code&org).

I may be holding on by a thread, but I'll be allright.

Cannot find Weapons of Mass Destruction

umm yeah

Top 20 Gaming Lows of 2004 Feature for Domestic on GamePro.com

Interesting read.
Some stuff I didn't know. Like Sierra and Maxis practically being shut down.

Slashdot | Grokking Knoppix

I don't know why.

i hate all

including u
including me
including life
i hate it all

ShareLive

It's back, and better than ever.

Gentoo Forums :: View topic - Making a RAID file server out of an ancient PC

Gentoo Forums :: View topic - Making a RAID file server out of an ancient PC
Read it to see my plans.

ABC News: People of the Year: Bloggers

Cool. I'm one of the people of the year.
Umm yeah

2004 Top 10 Games of the Year

NEVER PLAY THE HAMPSTER ONE
ITS TOO ADDICTIVE!!!