seec77

I think that the problem with scientists working to find a "better cure for cancer" is that the disease comes in so many shapes and sizes, that's it's almost wrong to even call all of them "cancer!"The way you described the two methods of cancer treatment make it sound as if chemotherapy is better, even with all of the side-effects it induces. Cancer is a biological defect, and just removing a sick lump of mass from someone's body does not completely cure cancer. Anyways, with chemotherapy there are more chances for the cancer to completely disappear. The bad things chemotherapy causes are nothing compared to dying of cancer and losing your life!That's just my thoughts on the subject...

Hello! I have recently applied for your #2 free web-hosting package, and was accepted. My application is here: http://forums.xisto.com/topic/93638-topic/?findpost=1064373807 It's been a few hours, but I still haven't received an email. I've posted my correct address in my application form (seec77@gmail.com), so if an admin could look into it that would be great!! Thank you for the attention, Yotam.

I totally agree...It's just too odd!I really don't know what to think about the moral side of the story. Do embryos have life? Are they living? Can we kill them?All these things are so confusing...But yeah, seeing a version of you 10 years older is quite freaky! They both have the exact same genes, and I suspect that for the newly-born to live with her older twin will leave the 10-year-old's personality imprint on the little one. So yeah, it's truly having two copies of the same human under the same roof, and that's just freaky for both!

wutske, how about sending us a screen shot so we see if you have some other setting for the same purpose? Not that I'm insulting your intelligence or anything... but maybe someone else might see something you've missed. Sten, I'm glad my instructions got you where you needed. This issue troubled me for a long time a while ago... But after re-reading your original post, I would just like to point out that maybe there is a more "formal" way of extracting audio from FLV files (the format Youtube uses for storing videos). Actually, a quick search on Google revealed this tutorial, that describes just what you need, but the program in use there (you can find a link for it at the bottom of the page) is not free, although it has a trial version from what I can tell. Another option is extracting the FLV files from Youtube, using a program such as the VideoDownloader Firefox Extension that lets you download movies you are watching, or if you're not using Firefox, you can try this or this (though if you're not using Firefox, I would suggest giving it a try ) . Now that you have the FLV file on your computer, you need to convert it to AVI, or whatever other format you can extract audio from: this page has lots of articles on video conversion. Just select "FLT to ..." in the Format Conversion field. Now that you have your desired video in a more popular and well-supported format, you can extract audio from it! I do believe that you can use VirtualDub to process AVI files, and maybe VirtualDub-MPEG for doing the same thing, but with MPEG files. Using these methods is probably a bit more "cleaner" and correct than recording your computer's sound card output... but maybe it's a bit of overkill for whatever you're trying to do. I think that lots of static noises and "hisses" can be prevented, because sometimes the long path that the audio makes from Youtube all the way to your sound card, and then back to the recording program can be a bit degrading in terms of audio quality. You just need to remember that Youtube videos' audio quality is really not that high to begin with, so if you want better sound from Youtube videos, you need to either download the song (if it's a music video) or contact the video's author.

Capturing outgoing sound from your sound card is actually a really simple task, and doesn't even require a special program! First you need to access your computer's volume control. You can get there either by double-clicking the speaker icon on your task bar, or by going into your control panel, entering the sound and audio configuration window, and there clicking the "advanced" button in the volume panel. I'm sorry I can't give you the exact names for all these things... I run a Hebrew version of Windows XP. Now in the volume control window go to the options menu, and click properties. You will have a choice between seeing playback and recording controls, so choose the latter and close the dialog. Now you will have a couple of volume sliders, with a check box saying "Select" beneath them. You need to select the output of your sound card. I have two such controls- "Wave encoder" and "Mono Out." Both work great for me. You might have something similarly named, but it depends on your sound card and system configuration, I guess. After you have selected the right control, you can now use any recording program to capture sound from your sound card! Even the basic sound recording application that's bundled with Windows and is limited to 1 minute of audio will work. I personally recommend using Audacity for recording and manipulating audio. It's free, open-source, reliable, and quite user-friendly! The only thing that is not really intuitive about it is enabling MP3 compression on it. On the other hand, really simple instructions for doing that exist here. Once you've installed Audacity and LAME, you can easily press record and save whatever you hear through your sound card to MP3! I hope this helped... If you need more assistance don't hesitate!

This is actually a question I ask myself often, so I'm really glad you opened it up to public discussion. The internet has undeniably established communication between the whole world. Since the dawn of the net, distance has become something almost negligible, because we can pass information from anywhere to anywhere else at a great speed and at almost no trouble! It is truly hard to describe the magnitude of this global network, but I think everyone who browses these forums has experienced the digital link tying the whole world closer together. I think that the main problem with the internet today is that everything happens so fast, and no one has a chance to prepare themselves! At the beginning, HTML was only used to display information. Very soon the need for proper presentation arose, and the designers of HTML implemented the font and color tags, among some other now-deprecated means of styling text (can anyone say "blink"?). This change happened so fast that no one had time to prepare himself for the devastating effects these changes would have on the web. Now everyone could create flashing and horribly-colored web pages, and the net was adorned with blinking text and badly-written HTML. Then came the time of enlightened CSS designers, and the ugly HTML formatting tags were a thing of the past... in theory. "Bad" web pages are still everywhere, and they are halting the growth of the web. How is it that I, a Firefox user, cannot access a web site just because its developers only bothered to check their creation on Microsoft's proprietary Internet Explorer? This is blasphemy to the gods of the digital age, where everything is supposed to be accessible to anyone. So yes, only a few numerous browsers support the acid test (but most of the other browsers, except IE, are on the right path), but most of them have pretty great support of most of (X)HTML's and CSS's features. Only if you want to create abnormally complex web pages you need to resort to using invalid code. (Unless of course we're talking about IE... but there many many hacks for that!) I think validity from web pages is rightfully demanded, as the internet should be something that can work on any browser, and operating system and any computer in the world!

Hey Habble, I think I have a solution for at least one of your problems! I just wanted to say first that yes, Apache is a powerful application, and naturally that makes it somewhat complicates, and gives it a bit of a learning curve. You will see that once you start "getting the hang" of it, the documentation will seem so much simpler to you, so don't give up! Running your own web-server is a great experience that helps with web-page programming and creation. So, now for some direct answers! If you want to change the list of index files, that Apache will open when a directory is requested, you just need to find the "DirectoryIndex" directive in the "http.conf" file. Mine looks like this: DirectoryIndex index.html index.html.var index.php main.phpAs you can probably see, you only need to add another filename to the space-delimited list! Now for subdomains. The way Apache (and the HTTP protocol) works is that a server may have only 1 IP, but when a web browser requests the subdomain of the server, while still going to the same server, it passes a "Host: subdomain.example.com" in the HTTP request, and thus the server knows it needs to server the subdomain. So basically you can (if you're using Windows) go to "c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\" (you may have a different Windows directory from me), and edit the Hosts file. For each subdomain you want, add a line to the file that looks something like this: 127.0.0.1 subdomain.localhostNow each time you visit "subdomain.localhost" in your browser, you will be redirected to 127.0.0.1 by Windows. That IP is an IP that tells the computer to access itself. Because the Apache server is running on your computer, 127.0.0.1 will redirect you to your web-site. When you visit the subdomain, Apache will get the information from the browser that tells it that we're looking at a subdomain. To configure Apache to recognize and respond correctly to multiple subdomain, you need to you "virtual hosts." I've never done this before, so I can't help you from my memory, but two articles that might really help you are this one and this one.I hope you manage to get it working, and if not, just write back! As for configuring an email? This one requires a totally different server than Apache. You can find some very nice result by googling "email server" or "smtp server." I'll try to look for some things that might be of help to you, but I've never run an email server, so I might not be of much help. Sorry! I hope I've managed to assist you in some way!

Nope, sorry. It seems like a really stupid idea! I mean, I might be able to say one good thing: I don't think that low-quality videos will be payed for, and I'm guessing that the ol' way of uploading your creations, while not being paid for them, will still be available. It could be cool if maybe videos would be paid for by popularity or something, and then most content creators will choose the non-paying method because they wouldn't want to deal with all the transaction business for a meager sum of money. Might be good after all! Well, we'll just have to wait and see..

Same here. My best experience has been with AVG.I've also used the paid version of Norton Antivirus in the past, and it was just a resource-hogging, not that useful program. Clicking on the tray icon to get the control panel running would take almost half a minute! And yes, my computer is a little sluggish, but if it weren't for all the "graphics" and "special" user interface, I think it could've been a much more light-weight program.I've had various other antivirus programs, and I just stuck with AVG in the end.. but if I'm not mistaken, the free version of it is going to disappear soon and we'll have to pay for it! Bummer...

I know this is a rather dirty hack, and not what you asked for, but it can accomplish the task. I might be mistaken about this, but I'm too lazy to check. :)I believe, again, if I'm not wrong, that Google Docs & Spreadsheets has an Excel importer and a PDF exporter, so you can create an account there, import the excel spreadsheet that you want to convert to PDF, and then export it to PDF. This is quite a long task for something that should be much simpler, but apart from the PDF virtual printer that you can get (for free aswell), I don't know of any other option.You can also do the same thing with OO.org, because it also has an excel importer and the ability to save files in the PDF format! I think we should all be moving to OO.org because it is a much superior office suite, and its file format is far superior to that of MS Office's. I read on slashdot recently that Microsoft hired people to "contribute" to wikipedia and make it seem as though their new standards are better than they really are! That just shows that they don't trust their own products enough.

Wow, I can't believe myself for not posting about it yet. Well, I'll excuse myself 'cause I haven't fully started using Drupal 5 (even though I've been messing around with it since the beta stage). The new theme that comes with it, Garland, I think, is just amazing! And most of the modules have already been upgraded to work with the new and improved API. Not to mention that a new "Project" system has been deployed on the drupal website, and now modules and themes are versioned much more logically, so you know when a certain extension is compatible with your Drupal version. It's great! I just really sometimes find it hard to believe that such a perfect piece of coding such as Drupal exists. It's written so well! And to the user, it's also great! Everyone should go out and download it right now!

I agree with beatgammit about it being more morally just using OpenOffice.org (that's the name of the suite as "OpenOffice" was already copyrighted when the program was created) because by using Microsoft Office we're supporting the horrible standards Microsoft forces on us. Sure, their new document format is going to be open, but if so, why not use the one already available? OpenDocument was designed in a very fine manner, and could be easily interpreted, even by humans. Microsoft Office Open XML contains a lot of clutter to be backward-compatible, and is, like almost everything Microsoft does in terms of file formats, cluttered, very unintuitive and not very friendly. Comparing them shows strong points for both, but that doesn't even matter, as OpenDocument was there before and Microsoft had the opportunity to voice its opinion about it, but instead chose to rebel like an angst-full teenager afraid that his best friend will still his girl. Oh, and in the end the girl always dumps the jealous guy. But don't take me wrong, I never said anything bad about the Microsoft Office suite. It works great and does everything I need! But so does OpenOffice.org, and I'm pretty sure that even in these technical forums, more than 95% of the population hardly use features so special that only MS has it. You're all just being lazy to re-learn how to process your documents. Or maybe you just like the Office UI better, which I must unfortunately agree with.

Such an idea will never go ahead, I believe. First of all, there are numerous technical problems (apart from trying to fill out a normal TV schedule with the crap found on YouTube). The quality of the video on the site is horrible, and while it might be OK for watching on your little computer screen, watching it on a TV, maybe even an HDTV, will be horrible. Besides, why would people regress to the forced programming, ala the "old" style, when they can watch whatever they want, whenever they want, on the internet at reasonable speeds (and if they have trouble finding good videos, the YouTube front page has a few "featured" videos).Basically, to air a YouTube video on the tube (haha ) they must have cooperation from the creator of the video, who needs to at least send in a better version of the clip. They have absolutely no business showing what you see on the website on national broadcast! So your point about royalties and copyrights is kind of moot. But yeah, once more, I really don't think such an idea will ever get anywhere.

Oh come on! I mean, why doesn't some security "advisor" just post a security "threat" about telnet, because users can use it to log in to malicious website and hand-craft a request that sends out their grandmother's phone number to the whole world! This is really stupid. Has anyone even read the ECMAScript specification to see if maybe it requires prompts to show a certain generic title? And besides, what do you want browsers to do? Make the title of prompt dialogs the same as their parent web site? Will it then be that hard for evil hackers to modify a TITLE tag to something that looks like a bank page? Come on! There's no solution for this. This is purely FUD.

WordPress is a great piece of software, really. It fits its purpose so easily and undeniably fulfills most of your needs! I can praise it all day for its reliability, extendability, intuitive user interface, excellent community, and the vast amounts of plugins and themes available for it (even though this might count as part of the excellent community. ) Does anyone ever remember phpBB? I know it's not in the same category of software, but I really believe that by the time the new "Olympus" version comes out (right now it's in its fourth beta, and has been like this for a month and a half) no one will have any interest in it, as much as the beta version is promising. I pointed this out because its great for comparing a high-level web code application like WordPress to the mess of security holes that is phpBB. Anyways, even though I'm not currently using WordPress, I'm definitely waiting for the next minor upgrade (2.1) to check it out. Wow, I love seeing internet communities flourish, and it shows in things like WordPress, Akismet, and lots of other open-source programs, like Drupal for example, which is reaching new heights because of huge involvement on the community's part. I know I went a bit off topic, and maybe this release wasn't this exciting (), but I just felt like speaking my mind.