Posts by EnderX

Recently, I have been requested to build a system to transfer some information to another system via ftp. I was recommended to use a specific, working file and modify it, as it already contained the transmission data. I was given a new target url and a new user id and password set to test my setup. Except that every time I run it, I get the following error.

500 (Internal Server Error) Can't connect to dropbox.test.covansysec.com:443 (Timeout)
Content-Type: text/plain
Client-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:15:43 GMT
Client-Warning: Internal response

500 Can't connect to dropbox.test.covansysec.com:443 (Timeout)

I've looked up the 500 code online, and it says it's a generic error message, to go read the logs for more information. I'm not the one who installed Perl, and am a fairly new user to it. What is the log file being written to likely to be called? Or where on my test system should I start looking for it?

System is running SuSE 9.3 OS, apache2, and I'm assuming Perl 5.8.6 since that's what all the stuff in the library path seems to be labled by.

Unquestionably one of the squirrels left over from Hitler's Killer Squirrel experiment. After all this murderous fellow grew up somewhere near there.

Wait a minute...killer nazi squirrels? I thought it was killer rabbits they were after. I mean, wasn't one of those active in the United States during the mid 70's to early 80's?

I have serious reservations about harry potters' books. One could read it but for the depth of incantations and voodoo/magic involved.
Yes, Yes it is fiction, but one wonders whether those things written about in such detail are sincerely the figment of the writers imagination!

They're not. Rowling has admitted in interviews that she's done a great deal of research into historical beliefs about magic, and that a fair portion of that has ended up in her works. I think the minimum estimate was something like a third of the stuff in the books was believed to be real at some point...and how do we know it isn't?

Library?

A storehouse for books, usually accompanied by audio/video materials and magazine or similar materials. With rules regarding borrowing/returning of said materials. And you probably need to go to one; please look up those books I've listed elsewhere.

Complaint about the first picture. They wouldn't read about it...to much chance the information might be left lying around. They just explain it to each other...that's why you see large groups of pigeons on the ground, and then they all fly away whenever anyone gets close...they don't want to be overheard.

And if you thought even for a second that I was being serious in that, I pity you.

@JoshSCH:
If you ran into an antichrist, you'd agree with him. Your own position as an atheist is based on the spirit of antichrist.

If you ran into the Antichrist (the Beast of the book of Revelation), you'd probably accept him as a wonderful leader with many new ideas; he's not going to be the Hollywood Standard Demonic Monster. Instead, the Beast will appear to be an enlightened world leader.

The Book of Revelation clearly states that the number of the beast is the number of a man, and that the number is six hundred sixty six. (Six hundred and threescore and six in the KJV; a score ["Four score and seven years ago..."] is a fancy/archaic way of saying twenty.) It is in reference to the Beast, but it is not "the devil's number".

And why would a Christian need to kill Antichrist? He will have great power and authority, but he's still bounded about by the Lord. Antichrist will appear. He will rule for a time. And in the appointed end, the Lord will deal with him.

@WaltP and jbennet:
No, you're both wrong. 664 and 668 will be the neighbors; 665 and 667 will be across the street.

@Dave Sinkula:
I seriously doubt Hillary is the Beast...has she signed any treaties with Israel? I do agree she'll probably shoot for eight years, though...and pardon me for saying that I hope she's not the elected official chosen next year.

Did I say that there was no fluctuation in temperature at all? Uh, no.. I believe I said the average temperature has not changed much over the last 1000 years or so..

Considering the fact that much of our current increase in temperature (the same one that everyone is yelling about as 'global warming') appears to be related to the fact that the little ice age is finally ending, I'd say that if the gw temp is important, then so would the gc (global cooling) experienced during the shift into the little ice age. You still haven't found the time to read the Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, have you?

They're not high fantasy, but I've enjoyed the Thursday Next and Nursery Crimes books by Jasper Fforde. I'd say they're worth checking out.

I think the fuss is mostly about making a fuss. While the number has significance in the Bible, Book of Revelation, it has significance because it is somehow attached to a specific individual, not because of the number itself. In this case, I think jamello was joking about arjunsasidharan's post count.

If that's not the fuss you mean, then I apologize for taking up your time.

I believe that 'they' in this case is an attempt to circumvent the politically incorrect third person singular masculine. Or, in other words, 'they' is being used to refer to a single individual of unknown gender, instead of the more commonly used 'he'.

Question: Doesn't the fact they 'believe' in it tend to indicate that it's not settled fact?

I would think that technically, a beginner proper would be referred to as a 'newbie', the original, mostly objective phrase. 'N00b' and similar variants are basically a subjective, insulting, variation on the original, and seem to refer not to beginners per se, but to those who not only don't know anything, but won't know anything...the ones who seem to take a strange pride in being willfully ignorant about the subject.

Please note that this is not directed at any specific game; it's quite possible I'm incorrect there. I'm basing my statements off of what I've seen at various message boards online, and I freely acknowledge that the internal cultures may be different.

Over the last Millenium? You mean you've never seen anything on the Medieval Warm Period, or the Little Ice Age?

Probably just to give a nice, even transition between depth and time distance. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it's for any 'real' archaeological reasons.

I was gonna toss in something about depth to the K-T Boundary relating on the 1-10 range, but ran into an interesting point on Wikipedia refering to fossils found 1.3 meters above the Boundary as being 40,000 years younger. I guess compaction works over time.

or rather of no portion of the population at all as the people living there that long ago died out before the current "native americans" arrived from Asia (probably following the Aleutans from Japan) a few hundred years at most before Columbus...

Would you be willing to please point me at a reference source backing up your claim? If I'm wrong, I'd rather be corrected in detail than get little bits and pieces, and I'd rather get it from a source that can be brought forth if/when I do change my mind, then get challenged. I seriously doubt I'd be able to bring you forward at that point, but a reference source could probably be pulled up, either online of via the nearest library. Is this request too much to ask?

"US scientists have found traces of 2000 year old optical fibres, and have concluded that their ancestors already had advanced high-tech digital telephone 1000 years earlier than the Russians."

An interesting trick, considering that those present at that time in the area that would become America are really only the ancestors of a reasonably small portion of the populace.

Am at work; can't take the time to view a video at the moment. Will try to look and respond tonight.

I know that most Delphi components have an 'on mouseover' event that activates when you move the mouse over the component. Are there any text-box style components with a 'mouse-hover' ability, where the event occurs if you park your mouse over the item in question? And if so, what's a good place to start looking for information about them?

The original program I'm writing is slated to be run on WindowsXP boxes and interface with the linux-based server boxes.

I finally found a solution to my own problem by negation...I dropped a DriveComboBox on the form, listed in my drive slot every single letter of the alphabet as a possible drive, and then had the program run through a little compare and delete loop on startup. The end result is that if a drive appears in the DriveComboBox, it doesn't appear in my select box.

Anyone ever heard of that before? I'm running AVG as my antivirus software, and it flagged that thing a few minutes ago. I've been trying to find out information about it in hopes of minimizing loss (I'm on my work computer, which means that any kind of hit is a NOT GOOD thing), but none of the virus library sites I've tried to hit have anything on it either with or without the [1] portion. Anybody here ever heard of this thing before?

<humor>Shh...Don't say that out loud. You'll hurt poor Pluto's feelings.</humor>

I was mostly referring to Nichito's 'e5' opening, but thanks for the information. And have a pleasant game.

e5

I'm confused. I thought a move had to be a pair of alphanumeric designators...starting position and ending position. Am I mistaken?

Thank you for your assistance, but I found a sort of kludgy way around the problem. I set a button to attempt to reopen the file, then to catch the error if the file doesn't exist and spit out a warning of my own if that happens, instead of the normal exception error. The 'Write file' button ends with a call to the test button.

As to linking into the remote location, I swiped some code from a program my predecessor wrote that does the job; it's simply opening up a specific Samba share on the remote (Linux) box. I'm still figuring out how it works, but I've got enough of it to do everything I needed for that.

I am working on a program designed to map a networked drive to a Linux Samba share. I have been requested to give the end users a way to select what drive they want to map. I know that some drives are off limits for use; (A:, C:, and the F:, I:, and L: drives we currently have mapped to servers elsewhere), but I'd like to be able to prevent other mapping conflicts as well. (Second CD/CDR/DVD drive, plugged in flash drives or zip drives, or even someone trying to run multiple copies of this program.)

I've tried setting every possible drive letter, then placing a TDriveComboBox component and removing anything that it mapped to, but the automated remove didn't work.

Does anyone here know of any way to do this in Delphi, or any components which can add this capacity to a program? And if so, would you please share it/them?

Thank you for your consideration.

I know the moon doesn't really rotate relative to the earth (tidal lock and all that), but what other velocities would it have that could cause directional changes to a lunar explosion?

i also never get how N means Knight in chess notation)

K was already taken.

Including him, maybe?

@~s.o.s~:
I know it's not Yugioh, but where does your avatar pic come from?

Not exactly. From what I've heard (I make no claims to the accuracy of this), the phrase originated during the days of sailing. A woman of, er, 'loose morals', shall we say, who found herself pregnant,
would supposedly, if the voyage lasted long enough, give birth behind the cannon. And, since the parentage of such a child would be in doubt, the kid was supposedly listed as the 'son of a gun', for the place of birth. So it's not exactly Josh's claim, but more along the lines of 'b****rd' instead.

I've been working on a program designed to allow the end user to offer data corrections back to my company. (That is, they send us the originals, we process those and store it in a database, and this program is supposed to allow them to search the DB and send us back a file with any changes that need to be made.)

The sending back of a file is the part where I'm asking for assistance. At the moment, I can correctly write the file out to the necessary network location. However, I'd like to be able to add an error message if something happens to the file during transmission. At the moment, the only thing I can think of is try to have the program find the filename at the target location, and I'm trying to come up with a way to do that. I've found some stuff about a 'TFileFind' on google, and I'm continuing to follow that up, but I was wondering about what other, possibly simpler, methods exist to simply verify the existence of a file from within a delphi program.

Hopefully that largish paragraph made sense...anyone have any suggestions for alternative paths to my goal?

Thanks.

Um, that link pulls up a Daniweb 404 page with a google search at the bottom. Are we supposed to search Daniweb ourselves?

American War can't have been a civil war in books for the last couple of hundred years. War itself began less than a century and a half ago.

Ever heard of excoummunication? And you were the one who pointed out the relatively large catholic population of the world.

There is a difference between the French and British recognizing a country and the Vatican. The French and British were both world super powers during the American Revolutionary war, and having one of them recognize a country is a lot different from the Vatican recognizing a country as independent..

A political power with the self-implied authority to choose the difference between heaven and hell for its believers, believers who live in many places across the world, doesn't qualify as a superpower?

Considering he's in England, I'm betting that he's referring to North Ireland. Anybody want to take that bet up?

Okay, one country/city recognized the confederacy.. the fact is that the U.S. did not recognize the confederates. The U.S. was never truly its own country until Great Britain recognized the U.S. as its own country..

It sounds like you're contradicting yourself here. Earlier, you implied that French recognition was part of your prereq for 'de facto' recognition of the US as its own nation, while claiming that no nation officially recognized the Confederacy. In the same post, you stated the following:

Had the Brits conquered the American citizens in the revolutionary war, then they would be treated like a conquered nation b/c the citizens committed the act of treason.

Would this not also imply 'de facto' admission of nationhood? I would think that, if the British truly had not recognized the colonies as a nation, then in victory they would have treated the rebels as treasonous subjects of the Empire rather than as a conquered nation.

Nope. The Civil War. Had the south won, they would have called it a revolutionary war. The only difference between a civil war and a revolutionary war is who wins.

I think he was referring to the 1776-era incident at the time. I'd also say that, while I recognize the use of the terminology, there's no such thing as a 'civil' war. And that's not including the bloodshed on all sides of any given war. The below is a minor sample of what I mean.

"As the officers and soldiers of the United …

Nope. I once got a well-deserved chewing out for doing so. Can't remember which one it was that did the chewing, though.

The Vatican did.

...

I just always thought that in their most basic form, conservatives favored tradition and convention, and the liberals favored change..

Once upon a time, that was true. Now, though, the socialiberals in America have gotten the country largely ordered along the lines they were aiming for; that is, they have already succeeded in causing the change. As a result, the two terms have somewhat reversed themselves. Political conservatives seek to change things back to the way they were, political liberals seek to maintain the current (socialiberal-enduced) status quo.

It was still a civil war... the American citizens declared their independence too during the revolutionary war.. but this doesn't make it just a general war because there are truthfully two countries fighting each other. The American Civil War was a war within one country, and this does not change by the fact that the Confederates created their own government, constitution, and currency. The Union argued that the states did not have the right to rebel from the Union, but the confederates thought they did.. thus a war was fought, and it was determined that states do NOT have the right to nullify Federal laws or leave the union.

If the entire position of the Union was that the Confederacy was not a separate nation, then how come after the war, the Republican Congress insisted on treating the Confederate states as conquered territories rather than as rebellious portions of the United States? And the 'no right to leave' was started by Lincoln; his predecessor in office had tacitly admitted the right of the states to leave by permitting them to peacefully secede.

Yea, a lot of people are confused by this. But actually, Lincoln was racist himself, and only used the emancipation proclamation as a war tactic. From what I understand, he actually wanted to send all the black people back to Africa.. and who knows what would have happened if he wasn't assassinated.

I don't know specifically about racist, but you are correct about Lincoln's particular desires in this case. Liberia originally began as a colony of American Freedmen (before the war); Lincoln proposed sending the freed slaves there, from what I recall.

And given that legally, Lincoln had no right to dictate what happened in another country (Confederacy), the entire purpose of the proclamation was propagandistic. I don't believe he felt that way, but from what I've read, Lincoln's own understanding of governmental interactions between federal and state levels was in error; he felt that the constitutional union could not be broken, in spite of the Virginia Conditional Ratification.

He's got a point. Privately owned commodities are worth more than so-called 'common' commodities are; from what I recall, elephant herds do better in the areas of Africa where some limited hunting is legal; the hunters have an incentive to protect the herds for future use. In those areas where it isn't, there's no personal incentive not to turn a blind eye as poachers sneak in.

I don't know that you're wrong, but I do have one question. Given that it ozone (O3) seems to have different properties than normal oxygen (O2), how would it react against such a high-energy strike, assuming even the slightest bit of fuel was available?

um that would be a dumb idea. That would involve beaming high intensity light down to earth? = set fire to the atmosphere. Setting fire to the atmosphere is bad,

[humor]How do you know? Is it something you've done before?[/humor]

Vacation? I think I remember something about those...long ago...

Here's a good question. What right does the United States have to build a missile defence station in a nation that doesn't want us to build onw in their country? And why would they want to when it threatens peace? It really defeats the purpose if you ask me. Build a DEFENSE station at the risk of going to WAR. There's no logic.

Sorry it's taken so long to get around to this, but I'd like to ask a question of you, sk8.

The article states that the defense stations will be built in Poland and the Czech Republic. It also states that Russia, in the form of Mr. Putin, is against this. What it doesn't state, as far as I can tell, is that Poland or the Czech Republic is against this. Therefore, I would wonder at the gist of your question quoted above...how do we know that the countries that were actually supposed to have had the emplacements (haven't paid enough attention to cease-shout since then, don't know if they still are or not) were against it?

I disagree. I mean, the writers of the constitution did several things to try to limit the power of the common man, but the U.S. has many checks and balances and fail-safes that help it to run much smoother.. 200+ years, and only one revolutionary war ain't bad ;)

Two. The so-called 'Civil War' was an attempted revolution, in which the revolt was crushed.

A Civil War, as the term is commonly used, means a war in which multiple groups are fighting to gain control of the governmental structure. This did not happen during the War between the States (a misnomer in itself; it's not like, say, Massachusetts declared war on, say, Tennesee); instead, two separate governmental bodies, that of the United States of America (Union) and the Confederate States of America (Confederacy), were at war with each other. The individual governments of the separate states which went on to form the Confederacy felt that their constitutionally guaranteed rights to self-government were being violated by the federal government, and in accordance with what I keep thinking of as the Virginia Conditional Ratification*, declared themselves to be no longer a part of the constitutional union. They then banded together themselves, setting up a government which would
honor states rights. There wasn't really that much difference between the American Revolution of 1775-on (sorry, can't recall ending date) and the Confederate Revolution now called the 'Civil War' except for the fact that in the first, the individuals revolting against the high-scale …

oh yah i remember the one that let all the black people go and got shot at a play

Not exactly accurate, from what I recall. If I remember the wording correctly, the Emancipation Proclamation would have had no effect on the states in the Union, or on those Confederate states which chose to rejoin the Union before the Proclamation's deadline.

Yea, they probably can. I saw on the news a while back that some fancy restaurant kicked out OJ Simpson b/c they didn't like him.

Private institutions can do w/e they wont so long as its legal (no discrimination..)

After which, the individual in question will probably turn around, sue the institution for as much as s/he thinks s/he can get away with, and in our litigation-happy society, actually has a fair chance to make an unfair gain. And another question: How do you disprove discrimination charges when it's claimed you are discriminating against a single specific individual for some asinine reason or another?