Cruiser
-
Posts
1688 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Cruiser
-
-
Yes I am a member, and I play on worlds 58 and 59 while living in Suburban Detroit. I use the downloadable Runescape application from the JAGeX website. I am also using the newest version of Java available. My computer is also protected by Sophos Anti-Virus and a recent scan turned up negative. And yes, I am running Runescape on Low Detail. All I ever do is kill those silly Saradomin-hating-Bandits because anything else requires too much clicking to be an effective use of my time.
Any other suggestions?
58 and 59 are based in Chicago, so that shouldn't be a problem unless there are other major internet problems, so we should be able to rule that out.
You mention running a virus scan but have you run a spyware/malware scan using something like Adaware or SpyBot S&D? Would be a good idea to scan with one or both of those just to rule it out.
What are the machine specs? CPU? RAM? (To view these, go to Start > Control Panel > System )
-
Ok, first off the tech guys, are most of the time, idiots.
Way to insult those of us that actually have a clue. The 3 people that have been helping in this thread DO know what they're doing if you've payed any attention at all to this board. If you had bothered reading the reply's you'd notice blade's suggestion nailed the problem before you decided to throw that piece of blazing opinion out there. :evil:
-
Sure other companies might support it for longer then microsoft, but I am talking about Critical bug fixes security holes in the software, things that you NEED to keep your computer from being mutilated by viruses, things that a virus scanner cannot protect you against. If I remember right, the support period on windows XP ends in april 2009 - less then two years from now.
2009 is the end of mainstream update support, which is non-critical updates. The OS is still way past usable after that. Extended support, which includes critical bugs, doesn't end untill 2014 for both XP Home and XP Pro.
-
I would be going for the desktop. There's little to no use for a laptop in highschool and by the time you hit college you will be able to get your hands on much better hardware for the same price if not lower. You aren't going to want to be stuck with a slow machine that just does homework when you go off to college. The fact it's 're-certified' throws up warning flags in my eyes too. It's been used in some form or another and you have no idea what has actually been checked out or fixed on the machine.
-
Your analogy is way off base, Cruiser. No one could get me to jump off a cliff, no matter how hard they tried, even with reverse psychology. You are effectively trying to compare apples (Tip.It Forums with real people and such) to broccoli (Real Offline Forumless Life). At least find something better to compare with, okay? :
It's the same basic logic (which you seem to lack most of the time). The meat of your reply was "You didn't explain your point well enough so I'm going with the opposite side", which I pointed out with the cliff example. Context has nothing to do with it. You did nothing to explain WHY you chose the opposite side other than basing it off not liking how someone else replied to the idea.
-
Fair enough. I don't go looking through a site's code though. Don't want to get blamed as a hacker :ohnoes:
I think he means in the phpbb source code. There's no way you could see the php code of a site like this; iirc, it'll just say "Hacking attempt" and die.
Yar, I don't have access to the Tip.It forum code. I'm talking about a vanila install of phpBB 2. I have a test forum on my LAN server for fiddling with so I just looked there. :P
-
I'm not so sure its whether anyone is subscribed to it, but the fact that it exists and could be subscribed to. What I would imagine the board does is it connects to said server and finds itself in the list. This connection would be where the error is coming from, and not the sending of the e-mail itself. After it makes the connection, it finds subscribed users and sends the e-mail.
Connecting to the mail server with each and every post regardless of mail settings is a rather stupid way to do it when you can just selectively connect and send mail as required per thread.
You can go look in functions_post.php for the user_notification function and look at what the code does. It checks for subscribed users before trying to connect. :P
-
You've been here since 2005. You should know by now to read the stickies that would have told you this is in the blacklist.
-
I'm getting error messages like the one described and I don't even have said feature(the email one) turned on!! -.-
It has nothing to do with just you. If *anyone* has subscribed to the thread with the email options everyone that replys will get the error because it fails to send the emails other subscribed to.
-
All I'm going to ask is please tell me why this is happening, and please not to flame me while responding. :-s ... I'm reasonably sure it is a bug that needs an "admin-squashing". :
(Halloween veggie pun intended.)
It's exactly what the errors says. It can't connect to the SMTP server. Looking up what SMTP is will tell you it has to do with email. PhpBB happens to have features that email users when a reply is made to a thread or when other similar events happen. It can't connect to the email server to send said notices, that would be why the error appears.
Simple logic answers so many questions.
-
Just one serious problem with all of that. Due to the wordings of Jagex's rules and TOS, they've auto-invalidated rule 15 of their own accord. If you're going to force someone to view something, 2 very deadly things apply:
1.) Policy of the location at which the computer is used. (This can not be avoided.)
2.) Federal law of the country in which the user resides. (This can not be avoided.)
Quote the laws.
There is absolutely nothing stopping Jagex from banning users from THEIR website for not allowing media they decide to put on it. It's their website, they can do whatever the hell they want with it. If you don't like it, you're more than welcome to stop visiting.
Due to the above, Jagex can not under any circumstances, even through a TOS, state that they are not liable for 3rd-party advert damages or other types of damage imposed on a person's computer.They can state it all they want, because they AREN'T liable. It is not Jagex's fault that an advertiser runs a malicious ad on a system Jagex thought was safe to run on their website. It is not Jagex's fault windows machines have unpatched flaws that allow the problems in the first place. They do their part to prevent said problems by screening the ads and allowing reporting of inappropriate material. Even the largest of companies miss things once in a while, and those are honest mistakes that aren't going to net you anything more than a "Sorry we missed that one" and it getting fixed on their end.
And sadly, focus-stealing, as well as viruses incoming from the adverts being triggered by the loading scripts of the advert server of RuneScape is immediately in violation of said computer location policy and federal law both.Focus stealing can result from the browser just assuming the reloading frame deserves the focus. There is no malicious intent most of the time. Stop playing fear monger. Once again, Jagex doesn't provide the ads. The ad companies such as DoubleClick and BurstNet do. It is not Jagex's fault that the ad companies allow said malicious content in the first place and occasionally slip in filtering it from their rotation.
I've said more than I should have to on this matter, Rcty and darkblade986 ... Bug off, and let the true techies talk. BTW, at this point, if any government wanted to come down on Jagex for all the viruses that have been triggered by Jagex's scripts, Jagex's personnel would spend near life sentences in Jail.You sir, are no way in hell a 'true techie' either. Some of the advise you give is flat out wrong and could result in the user actually doing more damage. The default Dell search page you recently attributed to malware comes to mind. If you're going to be telling people to bug off, you sure as hell better have a better post history to back it up. When it comes to tech related stuff, you're no shining star.
On top of all that, telling people Jagex staff would get life sentences of all things proves you havn't the faintest of clues what you're talking about. If governments were going to throw Jagex staff in jail for running ads from DoubleClick, BurstNet, and the like you're going to be shutting off most of the internet for the same thing. Those companies have been doing the same thing for years on end now and nothing has changed. The fact Jagex is involved this time around doesn't change anything.
Stop mindlessly spitting out your opinion as fact. You consistently spit out information that if flat out wrong and doesn't help in the least.
And I'm pretty sure that people know about the stuff jagex uses. They say never to block the ads..I've HEARD it's because Jagex is starting to use their own spyware/cookies/whatever you want to call it to track people who use Gold Selling sites, Ad programs, Block Ads, and break the rules through the internet. If this is true, I'd definitely block their adverts.I "heard" something, so I'm going to spit it out as fact because I "think" it's true! :wall:
If you can't cite it as fact, keep it to yourself. I suggest you read this entire thread, then read it again. After that, go and research the concepts and technologies behind it until you understand it like the back of your hand. Then and only then should you be spitting out what you think Jagex is doing with their website. This applies to everyone that thinks Jagex is using their website to install spyware.
-
Amarok has iPod support. How recent I don't know, but it's listed in the supported devices. I've never used it before but it should do what you're looking for according to the website. Being KDE based I also don't know how well it works with the default Gnome desktop Ubuntu ships with either.
-
Ubuntu comes with a media player and instant messenger (if not, Pidgin works wonders). WINE is also incomplete and still has problems running certain software. You could try it but there's no guarantee they'll work.
-
Still, though, I feel nudged in the direction I do because with how the points are presented, Jem's and Mercifull's attempts to shoot it down have an inverse effect by their overall aspects and nature. Just examine it, you will get what I mean. :thumbup:
So if I tell you that jumping off a cliff is bad for your health, but do it in a less than 100% comprehensible way, you'd jump off the cliff just because I didn't perfectly state why it's bad? Using logic like that in situations where it counts can get you killed. You're lucky this is only a forum.
-
Yes they are quite cool, yet if you don't use them, which a lot of users don't, than this is a fine suggestion. But if you do use them, then this suggestion obviously doesn't apply to you.
If you change the automatic redirection to anchor at the general topics and not the stickies, that means everyone that doesn't want the page to automatically scroll down (and doesn't use tabs, as you happily pointed out) now has to scroll back up to get to the index links at the top because you thought this 'luxury' would be a nice change based on 'estimates' you made instead of what the users actually wanted. Pages that assume they know where you want to be reading are annoying as hell.
Me? I don't think it's a waste of time, nor was I ranting, or complaining about how it affected me, I merely tried to estimate how it affected the general user, and how it could be improved. So I don't know why you thought I shouldn't post here.With out hard data, it's nothing more than wild speculation. If people didn't like scrolling, they'd be posting about it, which hasn't happened. There is no reason to implement something based on 'estimates' cooked up by nothing more than a wild idea you happened to find supporting data for.
Ease of implementation is also irrelevant. If people want to scroll down to the topics, they'll scroll down. What if they wanted to read a sticky or announcement after replying to a general topic? What if they wanted to click back to the forum list instead? They now have to scroll back up after waiting for the anchor to load and move the page. That's a hell of a lot more annoying than just scrolling down to where you want the page.
-
There's these things called 'tabs'. Most modern browsers have them. Amazingly they let you open up threads for reading without ever reloading the index so you don't lose your place. Pretty cool isn't it?
If scrolling is wasting so much precious time, maybe you should be working on what requires those few extra seconds instead of posting on TIF...
:wall:
Edit: On top of that, if scrolling is such a big problem, why aren't people calling for more subforums and reorganizing of the index since it's a hell of a lot longer than any sticky list in the forums?
-
Getting XP to boot between multiple installs is fairly easy if you read up on how to edit boot.ini correctly. I currently have 2 XP installs in my boot list because I recently bought a new drive and just installed XP fresh because my last install was getting rather cluttered. Being able to choose which install to load without messing with other options is oh so usefull. :mrgreen:
Doing what Clare suggested would be the best method, as editing boot.ini can end up breaking things if you don't edit the correct lines.
-
Have fun chasing ghosts, and cookie monsters.
I read that and couldn't help but laugh thinking about this image from Family Guy. :lol:
Adding to Errodoth's instructions. Better cut up and unwire the power running to the machine and drill some holes through the hard drive. The only truly secure computer is one that nobody can access, ever. :mrgreen:
-
The first thing I would do is take the drive out of the enclosure and physically plug it into the machine using an IDE or SATA cable (whatever is needed) to test if it truly is the drive. You could also try using another enclosure. It could just be the USB/Firewire connection in the enclosure has gone bad and your drive is fine.
-
If the applet still takes forever to load, it may be java itself. Try clearing out your runescape cache(c:\.filestore32 or something similar, running linux here so I don't know), and see if that makes a difference.
C:\Windows\.file_store_32 and C:\Windows\.jagex_cache_32
-
Digging around speedtest.net should give you an idea of what kind of speeds are available in your area. Being in a highly populated area you probably won't have much luck finding an ISP that isn't saturated like your current one is.
-
He makes it sound like these are traking cookies to see if we go to any gold farming sites. If thats true, then im glad i've never gone to one out of curiosity. I can see why they would do this, and sincce I dont mind all teh other cookies I guess this one dosent bother me either.
Jagex can't track whether you've visit any kind of shady websites based on web cookies. They're tied to the domain name that set them and Jagex can only retrieve cookies that they set, not cookies set by other website. Any flaw that does let you retrieve cookies your site didn't set is a major security hole and gets put rather high on the fix it list.
--------------------------
As for zzarr:
Sadly, this whole thing is being blown way out of proportion because you obviously have no clue what web cookies are actually used for, even after the explanations. Runescape.com sets a whole 3 cookies when you visit it. RSORGIN, which records where you came to the game from. In my case, runescape.com. Standard web metric. #2 is RSCOUNTRY. Set to 0 in my case, since I'm in the US. Again, standard web metric you can look up using any GeoIP utility. #3 is serverlist_order, which simply stores what order you keep the server list sorted in so you don't have to reset it each time you load the page. Which of these 3 again is a privacy violation? Are you complaining about the advertising cookies that Jagex doesn't control? Are you complaining about the single hash DoubleClick sets (that Jagex doesn't control!) when an ad loads that for all you know simple makes sure you don't see the same ad again?
Do you go complaining to the grocery store management for their use of security cameras that track you through the store and eye tracking cameras for product placement? Have you disabled javascript on every browser you use to do away with Google's (and other search engines) mouse movement and click tracking? Have you had yourself removed from the major credit reporting systems to prevent tracking of your payment history?
Unless you can answer that you already do the above and do something about anything else that goes about tracking you in such small ways as a web cookie, you need to rethink what you're fighting for. There will ALWAYS be something trying to track you and there are much more important elements to worry about taking care of.
If you think this is a trivial matter you have only to look at the current US Government's activities and their unwarranted surveillance of the US population (and since most of the Worlds internet traffic is routed through the US this applies to everybody). So at what point do you want to draw the line and start living and working towards a world based on respect and trust? Why not start small and start here....Which has nothing to do with your complaining about a web cookies set by a British company. Deleting a web cookie from any website does zero to stop the US government from tracking what you're doing. You must have missed all those stories about the NSA working with AT&T and other major ISPs to track activity at the backbone level. They couldn't care less that you deleted that cookie, they can log it before you ever know it's being set.
Your good intentions are focusing on worthless elements that have little to no privacy implications.
-
hey if it doesn't bother you to have someone watching over yer shoulder and recording every website that you go to and then storing that info on someone else's server.... well then cool.
They aren't watching over your shoulder. It's a static piece of data that is only accessible by runescape.com and is only used to enhance usability. The site can just as easily serve you ads and store other data about you without the cookie.
You're severely paranoid if you think a simple web cookie is 'looking over your shoulder' when certain sites out there use javascript and other methods to collect your mouse movements and much more personally identifiable data than a simple static data element.
I personally don't like it and it doesn't have anything to do with banner ads or the ability of Jagex to make money off of me. It has to do with the lack of respect for my personal life and their lack of trust in me choosing to play the game honestly - If you don't trust me and you don't respect me - why should I give you my money?You need to get yourself off the internet then because any website worth the bandwidth it's using will be using cookies in some form or another to store data related to a user account or session ID related to you. Have fun breaking functionality with your cookie paranoia.
Besides the whole thing is stupid - if I were really cheating - odds are I'd debug every time I did it and Jagex would still know nothing about me. So if it is so fallible why bother with offending some of us - why invest money and time in something that is offensive when the money could be better spent on improving the game or heck going out to dinner more often lol.Cookies are offensive? Do you even know wth you're talking about?
Web cookies have NOTHING to do with preventing cheating. Their anti-cheating systems collect data ingame via the game servers while you're logged in and playing, not via cookies stored in your browser. Once again, it's a static data element, not spyware...
You need to go look up the definition of a web cookie and research how they actually work before you continue to spew this junk. You also need to log yourself out of Tip.It and nuke your hard drive because these forums use the EXACT same methods to track your user account and various settings. Hell the Windows install you're most likely replying to this on knows more about you than Jagex ever will. You paranoid Microsoft is 'looking over your shoulder' too?
Get a grip. Please.
-
1) This thread is old as hell and is obsolete. You should have atleast bumped a thread that was from 2007 instead of using a thread that's been dead for a year and a half.
2) Signature and avatare sizes won't be reviewed again until next year (2008).
Are people really getting so lazy that they just bump a thread that is just remotely similar to what they wanted, even though what they quote was already implemented over a year ago? :wall:
Halp :(
in Tech and Computers
Posted
If you installed FireFox after installing Java it may not have the proper plug-ins installed in the browser and doesn't know Java is even installed. If that's the case try reinstalling Java.