Brandon0

Suggestion: Can you make it so if I just type "weather" it defaults to my current location? Either based on public IP or a user setting maybe?

What a tease! I want part 2

My co-workers have those hours. In at 9, 1 hour lunches, out at 5 on the dot most days. As a consultant, however, I'm paid hourly, so I get to stay late every night.

Every time I fly.

This is very cool! Is there a way to zoom in on desktop? Mouse wheel perhaps?

Do you have a source on the Facebook statement? I would be interested in hearing how they create the variants.

I would have either just trimmed the ... hic from the received text (if there was only one string causing problems), or maybe even better would be to use control codes to signal the beginning and end of the data.

Wait. What?

Exactly what he said.

How is it we all still remember these numbers however many decades later??

http://www.icq.com/people/20687859/en

Lastpass acknowledges this and tells you that a shared password can be retrieved, but for most employees, it would be more work than it is probably worth to view that password. Also, as another commenter pointed out, as soon as a employee leaves the company, Lastpass makes it VERY easy for one person to change the passwords and everyone with access gets their version updated automatically.

I saw that too. DJB2a also has

>playwright collides with snush

>playwrighting collides with snushing

Not creepy, just lazy. Googling is faster than using LinkedIn's search.

But not going to lie, we all Google people's names. Still nothing creepy about it.

Funny story. I went to a conference earlier this year where I met a very attractive sales rep for a company we were considering working with. She emailed some information a few weeks later and I was going to see about connecting via LinkedIn, so I Google'ed her name. First picture that came up was her mug shot from a DUI. From a professional standpoint I'm sure it haunts her.

Tracking an individual is different than storing personally identifiable information. I can assign you an arbitrary (or seemingly arbitrary) userID (that is unique to you), but does not personally identify you, as a way to track you. This arbitrary userID is meaningless to any third parties. What I cannot assign you, is your name, email address, or even IP address as a way to track you since anyone that sees that information could figure out who it belongs to.

I thought it was a 50/5, but the speed test I ran just showed 65/5.

I'll jump in here and share our current problem and how we are addressing it today. Hopefully it proves useful for whomever tackles this project!

So we are an ecommerce company and we do our own photography for products -- and we do a lot of it. We average about 2-3 photoshoots per month, and each photoshoot can be upwards of 40GB before any processing. We shoot raw images and are starting to experiment more and more with video. After we do the post-processing work and start the video editing we can push 70GB a shoot easily.

Our current workflow is like this:

Shoot tethered to a laptop each day (typically each shoot lasts two days). At the end of the day, we upload the files up to our local NAS (Netgear ReadyNAS, just shy of 3TB) which is redundant.

At the end of the shoot, we load a copy of the entire shoot on the local computers that will be editing so that they don't have to work directly from the NAS. Over the next few weeks while they edit the files, they will push the new files up to the NAS into specific folders.

(This is where it gets hairy) We also have an offsite NAS that is located in the business owner's house (about 6TB, but this one is not redundant). We used to attempt to upload files each night from the local NAS to an offsite NAS via rsync, but the pipe was just way too small. It would take days to upload a photoshoot, and everyone in the office suffered from slow internet while that happened. Now what we do is bring the offsite NAS onsite every few weeks and do a manual sync! Locally the sync only takes a few hours and then that night it goes back home with the business owner.

Now since the local NAS is less than 3TB, we can't store all of our shoots on there forever. When we get close to full on the local NAS, we grab an external hard drive and archive old shoots (typically 2+ years old) to it, and then store that in our massive safe (on-site though). If we need access to just one or two files, we can retrieve them from the offsite NAS, but if we need access to quite a few of them, we can dig them out of the safe.

So that's our workflow. Probably not bullet proof, but it has been serving us well for the last few years. If someone came up with a better solution, we would be all over it!

No way, really? According to the article they claim to "encrypt" the passwords (they actually mean hash). Any way you could post the contents of the email (minus the personal details)?

I was using War and Peace -- now I have to go change my passwords. Thanks!

Which, according to his findings with the dumpmon twitter bot, is not uncommon. Obviously you can make the case that YOU would use anti-virus software and YOU wouldn't let malware be installed on your computer, but in the end, you're still using a fairly insecure method to store your important passwords. And really, wouldn't a solution like LastPass be better in every way anyway?

A master/slave hard drive setup would have data loss. If the main hard drive died and it wasn't a RAID, surely they would have noticed.

That is actually surprisingly cheap. Care if I ask what types of services one would get at those rates?

You're absolutely right though, for a company like OP's, if they are so short on cash, it makes a lot of sense to get someone in even if just for the week to address these types of fundamental problems.

I do this a lot too. In fact more often than not I end up not posting the question because either I solve the problem or I think of a possible solution I should go try first. I think we should start calling it Digital Rubber Ducking.

Made me immediately think of QuickBooks: http://www.intuit.com/

For a brief instant I thought it could be an official release from them, but then I realized they aren't that cool of a company.

Simple with Firebug: <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>Source</title> <meta charset="UTF-8"> <script type="text/javascript"> history.replaceState(null, null, 'source.html' + String.fromCharCode(8237)); </script> </head> <body> <p>Can you view my source from Chrome?</p> </body> </html>

Interesting how they list Google Chrome before Mozilla Firefox (left to right). Did Mozilla do anything to piss off Flock?

Edit: Nevermind. I didn't realize that Flock 3.0 moved to webkit.