|
1999/10/11-12 [Recreation/Media] UID:16686 Activity:high |
10/10 Fuck, why does Fox keep replacing the only decent television shows on Sunday night with stinkin' yermom. \_ whoever censored my posting, it's fucking, not stinkin. stinkin is too kind to describe baseball. \_ Watch GvsE. It's a great show. \_ whoever censored my posting, it's fucking, not stinkin. stinkin is too kind to describe baseball. \_ What is GvsE.? \_ without cable? \_ Good Vs. Evil. Amusing. Light. Has intentional 60/70's retro thing going on. Good stuff. \_ Read http://www.snpp.com You're not missing anything, that's scheduled programming you're watching. \_ The Simpsons is more of a sport than baseball is. \_ baseball is a sport? i thought it was just another form of torture. |
1999/10/11 [Uncategorized] UID:16687 Activity:nil |
10/10 Drop the chalupa man! |
1999/10/11-12 [Uncategorized] UID:16688 Activity:nil |
10/11 anyone know how/where to get a copy of david lynch's recent failed pilot series? |
1999/10/11-12 [Computer/SW/Security] UID:16689 Activity:high |
10/10 Does sshd on soda have an idle timeout? Or is it something that I need to configure on my client? I keep getting "connection reset by peer" messages after about 10 minutes or so. \_ There's an option in ssh that lets you do keepalives. You might also be behind a firewall that timesout too quickly. \_ Yeah, I'm aware of keepalives. It doesn't seem to help. The firewall that I'm behind is a simple Linux ipchains one. I don't *think* it has any idle timeouts. Weird. \_ ipchains masquerading has a 15-minute timeout by default. You can raise it to (say) one day: "ipchains -MS 86400 0 0". See "man ipchains" for details. \_ Thanks for the info. Is that 15 minutes default timeout listed somewhere in the man page? I didn't see it. \_ It's not in the manpage, but it is mentioned in /usr/doc/HOWTO/IPCHAINS-HOWTO (section 4.1.5). \_ Soda's keepalives are currently set for 24 hours, so if you're getting hozed after ten minutes, somethings fucked on your end. |
1999/10/11-12 [Uncategorized] UID:16690 Activity:nil |
10/10 George Lucas in Love <DEAD>www1.mediatrip.com/per/House_Picks<DEAD> |
1999/10/11 [Uncategorized] UID:16691 Activity:high |
10/11 http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu/members.html Why are inactive members still on the members list? (ie. tawei) \_ there are active XCF members? |
1999/10/11-13 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:16692 Activity:high |
10/11 Does anyone know the secret algorithm behind http://www.google.com It is quite good. I'm very impressed. I want to know HOW they did it. \_ a bunch of shell scripts -- awk, sed, grep, and pipe. \_ My understanding is it's a popularity based results engine. The more people who choose a particular result for a particular query the higher that result will be displayed for similar future queries. I don't work at google but we did a similar thing at the search engine company I did work for. \-maybe PCI. there are a lot of ways to do this kind of thing. there are linear algebra approaches and statistical/baysian approaches, depending on problem size and nature of prob. --psb \_ I've read a couple of articles that have mentioned it, which said that they base their scoring on how many other pages link to a particular page, rather than number of times it's chosen on their site. http://www.google.com/why_use.html seems to support this. -niloc \_ number of links to a page determine importance. they sort according to relevance and important. i know what i'm talking about. -ali \_ relevance is only determined by what people actually choose out of the links returned from the search. the second factor is accuracy, which is the "drift" from relevance. accuracy is the perennial problem, since almost all search engines start suffering around 5 to 10% of the first links offered. \_ Ali is correct. The stanford prof of the grad students who developed google comercially came to Soda a few weeks ago and said exactly that - it's click throughs and links to that determine ranking -jones \_ It has to be more complex than this or Yahoo would show up as the #1 hit for every query. #2 would be Microsoft. They *must* take into account the query itself (seems obvious, no?) in some way before doing a most-linked sort on the results. So, no, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Are there any CSUA'ers on their architecture design, engineering or database staff? If so, please come forward. Ali having had coffee with someone's secretary at \_ was this after the mindblasting sex? google doesn't impress. \_ Eat your words, blasphemer! The only person I trust more than ali is bh. \_ I think they use a variant of the clusterfuck algorithm. \_ Algorithm, Heuristic, BAH! They don't interest me and are trolls. \_ You are a faggoty bitch. |