emordnilap

> Lastly, the unskippable previews really piss me off.

I have a samsung blue ray player too. I usuallly push stop, and then hit the "title menu" (or disc menu? I forget) to skip the unskippable stuff.

Wow, that came out a lot more snarky than I meant it to be.

I recently spent a several hours trying to find correct information about some hardware, all the while running into incorrect information copied and pasted from a wikipedia article.

I eventually found the information, but almost all the top search results from google and yahoo (and even duckduckgo) pointed to the inaccurate wikipedia information, most times pasted verbatim and passed off as truth.

Another common misconception is that Wikipedia is a good place to get reliable facts.

A serious question: Do you ever verify citations? Or do you just assume that since there is one, the article is probably correct?

The link caused my anti-virus (McAfee) to pop a warning. A quick Google search says:

"McAfee Avert Labs has found a false detection with JS/Exploit-Packed.c.gen and will be releasing the 5729 DAT Files to correct this issue. The false detection is being seen on websites containing certain types of javascript obfuscation"

How do you tell if it's a false positive? I wonder why javascript obfuscation is needed? Any smart people out there know the answer (and interested enough to share it?)

I think he meant that making a hard link and copying a small file take about the same time (when storing emails as individual files.)

I think the archive folder idea is a workaround for Entourage. If you have one large file that rarely changes, then making a hard link to it would be much faster than copying it.

"...the difference between a 320GB vs 120GB HDD and 2GB vs 1GB RAM is not worth €200!"

I thought the same thing, but it turns out the cheaper one only has 128MB for video, the more expensive one has 256MB.