Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2008 June 19

= June 19 =

Protect wiki
Hi, I have just created my own wiki, running MediaWiki software, but anyone can edit pages, register, and even create new pages, and I wanted to disallow all that... making it "locked down", just allowing users to read it and nothing more.... could you guys help me out? thanks. SF007 (talk) 01:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I already found it... SF007 (talk) 02:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * yeah, it was it. SF007 (talk) 16:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

computer being slower than it should..
I just wrote some code for fun that prints "brute force" tries out of a character set (the alphabet), from A to ZZZZZZZZZZ (length is adjustable). I'm surprised at how slow it is.. I count like 10 seconds between A and ZZZZ, which by my calculations is under half a million combinations. How does a modern dual-core processor only get through 50,000 combinations a second? Should I be compiling my programs with arguments to g++ to optimize for my processor? I've been assuming that it does that for me. I'm running on linux with fluxbox, so not a lot of overhead. .froth. (talk) 01:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * My bet is that because you haven't broken your program into multiple threads it is not being distributed to both cores. You could use a process monitoring program to verify this. Multithreading of an individual program usually needs to be explicitly put in place by the programmer; your program, as currently written, cannot go in parallel with itself at all. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 02:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It's the printing that's slower. If you only print out the first and last lines, you will see it will be dramatically faster. StuRat (talk) 02:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, ok thanks .froth. (talk) 03:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I just did an experiment. I took Froth's program and lowered maxLength from 10 to 5, so it would produce only 12,338,351 lines of output. Then I independently tried three different ways of speeding it up. (1) I converted it to C, using calls like printf ("%c", charset[indexes[i]]) and in place of cout. (1A) In the C version, I replaced the printf calls with putchar. (2) I moved the strlen call, which always returns the same value, out of the nested loop. You might expect an optimizer to be able to do that, but it's hard for it to figure out that it always returns the same value. And (3) I compiled the program with the -O2 optimization option of gcc or g++. And I timed each version, with the output directed to a file so that scrolling my display would not enter into the timing. In order from slowest to fastest:

As you see, the C++ version using cout is dramatically slower. The reason turns out to be that, on the machine I used, it is making a separate call to the underlying system call write for every line of output, whereas the C version is buffering 1,024 characters of output before calling write. I presume there is a way to tell C++ not to behave that way, but I don't know what it is, since I don't speak C++. Clearly that would be the most effective way to speed up the program, but the other things I tried also had some effect.

--Anonymous, 23:34 UTC, June 19, 2008.


 * Did you try my suggestion, and only print out the first and last lines ? The intermediate lines really don't serve any purpose other than debugging to ensure that the program does what's it's supposed to, after all.  So, once we know it works, why print out all that extraneous data ? StuRat (talk) 01:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, Stu, neither do the first and last lines. We know in advance that they're going to be "A" and "ZZZZZ" (of appropriate length).   The advice to consider buffering, however, could be very relevant to another program where all the output actually is useful. --Anon, 03:20 UTC, June 21.

404 Not Found error

 * I tried to view in my usual way what froth had linked to, and got "404 Not Found". Several of those have appeared here recently, and when I've been assuming that they were temporary URLs that expired before I got to them. But I got to this one pretty soon after it was added, so what could be happening? I had to try another angle.
 * It turns out that froth's contribution is being given as an extended "error message" in the 404 response. It is neither mandatory nor (normally) useful to display the content ("entity" in RFC 2616 terms) accompanying a 4xx HTTP error code, and I'm glad that my favorite HTTP client doesn't. "Not Found" is a perfectly adequate description of something that was actually not found, and I don't need any extra verbosity. In this case, however, it seems that this "pastebin.com" web site decided that it would be l33t to disguise non-error entities as error messages, and return a misleading "not found" status when really something was found.
 * I'm not even interested in finding out what was going to the "mind" of the person who came up with this profoundly stupid idea. An interesting question did occur to me though. Those of you who do use a client which displays the 404 response in full: is there no indication at all that what you're viewing is the content of an error reply? Is the "404 Not Found" not prominently displayed? Displaying the 404 reply as if it was a 200, giving no clue to the user that the URL was judged to be nonexistent by the server, seems like inconceivably bad behavior to me, but this moronic web trick seems to be relying on it. Do clients really do that?
 * P.S. Computing strlen(charset) over and over again isn't helping your speed either. It has to scan through those letters to find the \0 --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 04:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Safari displays the 404 (wtf were they thinking?!) response in full, as AFAIK do most browsers, but I don't see how this is bad behavior, as the response is (almost) always a custom error page. N (t/c) 04:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Browsing with a real web browser doesn't show anything to indicate a 404 on pastebin, but I verify that error with livehttpheaders. I doubt they're trying to be "l33t"- pastebin is a well-respected resource. More likely apache is incorrectly configured- I believe pastebin uses funky URL rewriting and DNS services to offer its custom subdomains. .froth. (talk) 22:04, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * They might be trying to ensure that nobody spiders their content, which would make sense for a pastebin. If so, it's a pretty ugly hack, but presumably most of the time it does what it's meant to do: show the requested content to humans while telling automated software that there's nothing there.  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

ePSXe again
Now that I know how to play games on ePSXe, I need to know how to save my progress. Because everytime I save, then quit, then come back in again, my file is gone. Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 09:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * In the top menu, click Run, then you should see "Save State (F1)" and "Load State (F3)". Each "state" is like a save slot. By default, state 1 is selected. When you press F1 it will save over the state that is selected. When you press F3 it will load the state that is selected. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 11:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * But now I have another problem: even though ePSXe worked perfectly before, everytime I try to load a game, I get a meesage that says something like "ePSxe is not completely configured; fix it by going to config --> video." I do exactly that, but the video plugin list is empty! How can I fix that? Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 11:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It sounds like you have a problem with the path ePSXe is looking for its files in. What platform are you on?--Fangz (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Would people stop fucking (sorry about the langauge) asking that question! I did not have that problem until some time later, and I need to know how to fix it! Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 06:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I gave up hope and downloaded another emulator called PSXEven. But there's a problem with that one too: the games move too fast! How can I stop that? Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 06:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You'd probably have more luck asking at a forum dedicated to that particular software product instead of here at the Wikipedia Reference Desk. For what it's worth, The PSXEven project seems to be completely dead. Back before I owned a PS2 I regularly played PSX games on ePSXe . I had good luck with it and the project seems to still be active.  I recomend going back to ePSXe and asking about your problems in their forum. Good luck. APL (talk) 13:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm almost positive that doing this is against wikipedia policy as it involves moving around other user's posts, but not for the purposes of refactoring.. Even if it's not it's confusing and irritating and definitely against the spirit of how this page is organized. This is not a forum where you're supposed to "Bump" threads. Here they stay in one place and slowly fade into obscurity, you're not really supposed to interfere with that process. APL (talk) 13:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The user is doing that repeatedly. He appears to be incapable of understanding the basic concept behind the reference desk and attacks anyone who tries to help because he doesn't get the answer he wants.  It is my opinion that he should be labelled a troll and all posts ignored. --  k a i n a w &trade; 13:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

PDF to Word2007
As the title said, I want to convert PDF documents into Word2007-editable form. What can I do other than buying another software for just one single purpose?--218.102.124.108 (talk) 09:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Try media-convert.com or zamzar.com D0762 (talk) 10:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If it is just a "one off" try copy and paste. It may be slow and you may have to reformat, but that might be quicker for a single use than finding, installing and using software. Some PDFs are protected to disallow this, but it would be quick to try. -- Q Chris (talk) 08:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-Windows based anti-virus scanner for Windows
I just had a brainwave. Say you had a virus on your PC and you needed to scan it. Why install/update your virus scanner while in Windows when the mere action of booting up and running Windows could cause you to lose even more data? Why don't companies make versions of their Windows anti-virus programs run on different OS's? A Linux LiveCD would be perfect for this application. Imagine AVG anti-virus on a boot CD which scans your Windows partition from Linux. Since you're not running Windows, no malicious code can execute.

Am I missing something? Can something like this easily be done?  Zun aid  ©  ®  11:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You are a genius! (not a sarcastic comment at all) Just a bit late. Knoppix or Ubuntu with ClamAV can do most of what you just said. However, if you happen to get filthy rich (if you are not yet) and then decide to use all (or some of) your money to translate your dreams into reality, you could create your own fork of GNU/Linux (or maybe you could buy Mac OS X from Apple, Inc. and make it available on all hardware platforms and have ClamXAV as an application installed by default). Kushal (talk) 13:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is difficult for that kind of things to succeed in a commercial and "legal" way, because it is very difficult (at best) to enforce copy protection on Live CDs. Of course then there are things like Reatogo-X-PE and VistaPE.... SF007 (talk) 23:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why, if you are already super rich and you just need a supplement to keep the entity going, commercial tech support should be enough. Afterall, you will not have a wolf-pack of salivating shareholders trying to squeeze the last drop off the corporation, if you are working the way Ubuntu is working. Kushal (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking specifically about free AV software like Avast or AVG so there's no revenue potential lost. Or how about the AV program boots straight off a CD or flash drive without running an OS? On a related note, could you run an AV program under Wine without the risk of executing malicious code while scanning? What about virtualization a Windows machine in Linux and mounting your infected partition as read only?  Zun aid  ©  ®  09:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * A lot of PC-repair programs use a setup like that as well. Most of them used a DOS-based system. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

There are virus scanners that run inside Linux. BitDefender Linux Edition, McAfee LinuxShield, and Symantec AntiVirus for Linux are some examples. There is also Hiren's Boot CD that has McAfee and F-Secure. Trinity Rescue Kit is a Linux live CD with BitDefender.--Hello. I&#39;m new here, but I&#39;m sure I can help out. (talk) 22:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

KIS 7: auto-closing confirmation
I use Kaspersky Internet Security 7. Sometimes, after the confirmation popup ("Firewall in training mode, allow connection?" or "Allow registry change") opens, it disappears immediately, as if "Allow" was clicked. Next time it stays open.

Is this a bug, or a sign of malware?

--grawity 11:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it is normal. It already happened to me with Kaspersky and I have no reasons to believe it is a bug or malware. My wild guess is that it detects a connection or something, but then it either gets info about the program from the internet, (and know it is a safe program, thus, making it unnecessary to warn the user) or Kaspersky just takes some time to read that info from the databases on the cumputer... (keep in mind this is just from my experience and wild guesses, don't take it too seriously...) SF007 (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Gtalk invisible
Hi, as you know that their is invisibility option in gmail. But I couldn't find any such option for the gtalk? Is their any plugin or other method by which I could get invisible on google talk? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.3.7 (talk) 11:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * AFAIK, there is not one, at least not officially. I am not sure if third party clients (applications) would be able to get you invisible, though. I think it is worth a try. Kushal (talk) 13:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The XMPP standard supports invisibility, and so most of the XMPP (Jabber) clients will allow you to be invisible. (Pidgin and Miranda IM are quite nice.) --grawity 16:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * XMPP protocol supports invisible mode, but the server may not support the feature. gtalk does not support it. Even if third party clients allow user to set status as invisible, user's contacts will see the user online. manya (talk) 04:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This in irrelevant, I know. However, I don't really understand the rationale behind the invisible mode. Kushal (talk) 18:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Invisible mode lets you seen which of your friends are on, without them seeing that you are on. This can be good if, say, you want to talk with a family member but not general friends. Being in Away mode tends not to be a deterrent for most folks, as they simply send you messages to get when you "come back." &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 14:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The new Google Talk Labs Edition probably has this. — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 11:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Zune backlight - hardware or firmware?
Bonjour my invisible friends.

I have a Zune 30 which I use with a Belkin FM car adaptor and it works surprisingly well. My only issue is that while plugged in, my Zune insists on keeping the backlight on all the time regardless of its instruction, which is a pain in the arse at night. Is it the firmware or something in the actual cradle that is causing this? Is there a good way of putting paid to it or do I need to make a little bag to cover it? Thanks. 195.60.20.81 (talk) 12:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The reason most electronic devices do this is to show that they are making electrical contact (so you know they aren't draining the batteries). I agree that it sounds annoying, though. StuRat (talk) 22:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia fonts
Wikipedia uses UTF-8 encoding. However some other Wikipedias use some other encoding/fonts that my computer can't display e.g.: ta. I would like to install all missing fonts so that my computer can display any Wikipedia correctly. (I am using FF 3.0 under Win XP SP2.) My question: From where can I download the missing fonts? Thank you, guys. --41.196.69.186 (talk) 15:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Tamil Wikipedia also uses UTF-8, and works just fine for me. (FF 3.0, XP SP3.) --grawity 16:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Check out Help:Multilingual_support and Help:Multilingual support (Indic). --Sean 17:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Area codes
Wasn't sure whether to put this on Misc. or here...

1) When I dial a phone number that is still within my area code but is still considered to be long distance, why do I have to dial the area code at all?

2) Also, if I'm dialing a number that I thought would be long distance but turns out not to be long distance at all and I use the area code when dialing, a recording comes on the line saying that I don't need to dial the area code, furthermore that I should hang up, and try again. Why can't the system just drop the area code for me and connect my call on the first go?  Dismas |(talk) 16:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you in any particular country, using any particular phone network? Algebraist 16:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * One reason to force you to dial an area code for long distance is to avoid hassles with people claiming "I didn't know I was calling long distance. I don't think I should pay my $900 phone bill."  If you dial an area code, you are calling long distance. --  k a i n a w &trade; 16:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I forgot to say I'm in the U.S. Specifically in Vermont which only has one area code for the whole state.  And Kainaw, that was the only reason that I could come up with for my first question as well.  Though a similar recording coming on and informing me that "This call is long distance and you will be charged the applicable rates.  We are now connecting your call..." would satisfy that.  Dismas |(talk) 17:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Telephone dialing has used several different plans in different parts of North America. Here in Ontario, until the 1990s, you dialed XXX-YYYY for a local call*, 1-XXX-YYYY for a long-distance call within your area code, and 1-AAA-XXX-YYYY for a long-distance call to another area code.  But the reason this worked was that area codes then always had 0 or 1 as the second digit, while ordinary phone numbers never did.  So 1-XXX could be distinguished from 1-AAA.  The same dialing plan was used in a number of other states and provinces and Vermont might well have been one of them.  But when ordinary phone numbers with 0 or 1 as the second digit began to be used, it was no longer possible to make that distinction, so 8-digit dialing (1-XXX-YYYY) had to be dropped. (Today, of course, in addition there are area codes whose second digit isn't 0 or 1.)


 * (*Note incidentally that 7-digit dialing for a local call used to work even to a number in another area code. That was possible because the same prefix XXX would not be used in nearby parts of different area codes.  If you were in code AAA near the boundary of BBB, you might dial XXX-YYYY to reach the nearby number BBB-XXX-YYYY and 1-XXX-YYYY to reach AAA-XXX-YYYY in a distant part of your own area code.  As area codes got down to the size where a single city might have its own area code, this convenient form of dialing had to be withdrawn.)


 * As to Dismas's question 2, my guess, and it is a guess, is that whoever designed that aspect of telephone dialing assumed people would know which numbers were local to them, and therefore if they dialed what was actually a local number as if it was long distance, they must have misdialed and therefore it would be correct not to complete the call. Certainly there are many people today who feel that on today's telephone network with many more area codes and increasing use of mobile devices, this argument no longer holds water, if it ever did. --Anonymous, 21:56 UTC, June 19, 2008.


 * Thanks, Anon. For the second question, there are areas that are what I would consider local but are long distance for me to call.  And the opposite of that is also true where there are places that are farther from me but still a local call.  So, I often have to wonder, "Is this local?" before calling.  It's really only important to me because of the need to dial an area code or not.  Dismas |(talk) 22:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If you are calling a business, you could always use a free of cost 411 service like GOOG-411 (I am assuming you are using an ordinary landline phone). Kushal (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "Local" versus "long distance" has to do with the mechanics of the phone switching system. Everyone connected to the same telephone exchange as you is local for the purposes of dialing.  Everyone else is long distance, and so needs to be contacted by dialing 1+area code. --Carnildo (talk) 20:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No, that's incorrect in two ways, although it may have been correct years ago. First, while it is normally true that everyone else on the same exchange as you is a local call away, the reverse is not true -- the distinction between local and long distance is about charging, and for a major city any one of hundreds of exchanges may be a local call. Second, nowadays there need be no relationship between telephone numbers and what exchange they are on.  One physical exchange may serve numbers with many prefixes, but some customers in the same prefixes may use a different telephone company (for this see local number portability).  --Anonymous, 04:54 UTC, June 23, 2008.

Your area code may always require ten-digit dialing. Mine is 330, which has an overlaid area code. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

1 wifi card, 2 computers
i just finished building a new computer. it has 64 bit windows home premium on it. The problem is that i my usb wireless adapter isnt compatible with vista. i have another computer (running xp) that is compatible with the adapter, so i was wondering if i could somehow use the other computers internet connection. i did a little research, and learned about bridging connections. i cant seem to get that to work. can anyone help me get my internet connection to my vista computer without running a cat5 cable through my house to my router or buying a hub. thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.15.126 (talk) 16:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You could use a crossover cable, but it's probably easier just to go buy a wifi card that works on your upgraded computer. --Sean 17:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with Sean. Kushal (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * See Windows Internet Connection Sharing .froth. (talk) 23:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

How can I import/play mpeg2 files on QuickTime/iMovie without buying "QuickTime MPEG-2 Playback - Mac OS X" ?
Hello, I have an Intel MacBook with Mac OS X 10.4.11. When I import movies from my Sony Handycam DCR-SR85, iMovie gives an error and QuickTime player tells me it is not a movie file. How can I import/play mpeg2 files on QuickTime/iMovie without buying "QuickTime MPEG-2 Playback - Mac OS X" ? Thanks. Kushal (talk) 23:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know how you can play them in QuickTime/iMovie, but you can use alternative media players... like VLC or MPlayer. (both free) SF007 (talk) 23:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Try VLC... it plays back just about everything. Lots of Mac optimization too. --70.167.58.6 (talk) 23:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your prompt answers. Well, I do have VLC. The problem is that iMovie '04 uses quicktime components to import video into itself. and quicktime will refuse to acknowledge that mpeg2 is a movie file until a certain plugin is active. I am trying to work on converting the mpeg2 files to mp4 files with iSquint. I hope that dummy Quicktime will acknowledge its own file format. I will be back with updates soon. Kushal (talk) 00:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not that Quicktime is a dummy, it's that MPEG-2 has to be licensed for extra and so they make you buy it for extra. Which I agree sort of sucks, esp. when you have already bought Quicktime Pro. (And VLC sort of sucks too. Crashes pretty much constantly, crashes on something as basic as seek, etc.) I think HandBrake can convert from MPEG-2 without the component? (Nevermind, it only outputs MPEG-2.) In any case, if you find yourself really struggling, honestly, I'd just buy the stupid component. The whole "(insert name of hip-yet-unreliable open source component here) is free if your time is worthless" sort of thing. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks to everyone. I have found a workaround with iSquint for now. I am working on the project. If I do succeed, I will let you know here (unless this section becomes archived before that). Kushal (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you think Google AdSense is worth it?
I have just setup a website, and I was thinking if Google AdSense could maybe cover the hosting expenses? (at least some day in the future) I mean, how many people click the ads? very few maybe... I only click them "just for fun", to see what the websites offer, but with no intent to spend money... Do you really think it is worth the trouble? Besides, Google does not even provides contact information, in case there is a problem... something I find very disturbing.... anyway, what do you guys think? SF007 (talk) 23:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Unless you have a ton of people visiting your website yet, it is probably not worth it. Kushal (talk) 23:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, probably to just wait and see how the website goes... thanks. SF007 (talk) 23:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * In the meantime, to let them know that we Earthlings are interested in Google services, you might considering signing up for Google Analytics. If you do not have something tracking your visitors yet, you can use Analytics to weigh what should be the best option for you. Kushal (talk) 00:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I already used AWStats... but thanks a lot, one more tool by Google can't hurt... I already registered for it :) SF007 (talk) 01:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's a nice, probably a little out of date blog posting about different ad schemes and how much they pay. According to it, Google AdSense only pays $1 per thousand clicks. So if your server costs are, say, a paltry $10 a month, you'll need 10,000 ad clicks to pay for them. 10,000 hits is kind of a lot for a non-established website (my website was linked to from a news story one weekend, and the story itself even got Slashdotted for the entire weekend), and it only got around 6,000 hits. Out of those visitors, how many would click on the ads? Probably not too many. So anyway, if you're the sort of website that gets a bazillion hits, maybe AdSense would pay for the server costs if they weren't very high, but if not, they won't even come close. In my opinion, you're better off starting with NO ads (server space is very, very cheap, as long as you are not doing super high bandwidth stuff—you can easily get a good server for less than $100 a year), try to build a base. Once you have people, then you can ease in advertising if it makes sense. ---98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, AdSense will definitely not worth it for now... thanks SF007 (talk) 16:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)