rayzoredge

Peer-to-peer is a method and not a software. Peer to peer software utilizing the peer-to-peer method is not illegal in that sense. However, utilizing peer-to-peer software to obtain or share pirated copyright material is illegal. Therefore, it is not the software or means that are illegal; it solely becomes the responsibility of the user of the software to not utilize the software in an illegal way. The way that peer-to-peer works is beneficial in a lot of ways, and it has many legal applications outside of the piracy that we often relate the term with. I believe that World of Warcraft patches utilize peer-to-peer methodology... it would make sense to me that Blizzard allows the users to disseminate patch files as opposed to having 11+ million users assaulting Blizzard's servers to download the same patch files they all need. (If I'm wrong on this, please correct me. I don't have any actual proof that this is how WoW distributes patches, but it makes sense that they do.) As rvalkass has pointed out too, people download Linux distributions too using peer-to-peer methodology. It makes sense to be utilizing P2P to download from the swarm of Linux users online instead of, again, assaulting servers to download the same ISOs. Why not use everyone else's resources and reduce strain on your own, especially if you don't have the resources to support a ton of servers to service the online community by yourself? With those statements, it's a wonder why peer-to-peer should be viewed under a bad light, concerning the benefits that it can provide the online community. It's the fact that P2P is usually associated with piracy, however, that can give people like you a skewed look on what it really is. (It's not your fault; however, it helps to keep an open mind about things.) I found an excellent article the other day written by the guy who does TweakGuides, and he makes some excellent points. I invite anyone interested in piracy to read the article, as it explains the magnitude of the issue, who it hurts, and what it does in the long run, as opposed to the popular gossip that a lot of us accept as true. Addendum: I forgot to include that your advantage and disadvantage is rather incorrect. You can't get anything you want from peer-to-peer sharing, because in order for it to be available, someone has to have it, and someone has to want it. That's how it works. The more peers that have the complete contents of a file or torrent, the "healthier" the existence of that content is, down to the point where no one offers the file anymore, thus killing your bullet saying that you can get everything from peer-to-peer sharing. You are right on your first bullet for disadvantages (to an extent), but the second is part of the whole concept. If people are infected with malware and they attempt to share their files, of course you are going to be sharing that malware (assuming it's infected). Viruses, Trojans, and other malware have been in existence and are unintentionally or intentionally spread with other methods of data transfer too... it's not just limited to peer-to-peer methodology. Some people are jerks and infect their shared content to discourage the sharing of illegal content or intentionally cripple the content that is being shared, and some people are completely oblivious to the fact that they may have been sharing from a machine that has been compromised.

In my eyes, it's just another way that people can plagiarize code or take the easy way out to actually take the code that you were going to write anyway, or even use the tool to analyze how someone did their Flash work and apply what you learned to modify or create your own SWFs.If people are lazy enough to just rip code, I'm sure they'll be stupid and/or lazy enough to leave any copyright comments in which you can pinpoint a culprit. If something looks very similar to your own Flash applications, you can always use the same tool to look through the code and then as such accuse that person of infringing copyright laws (if in the case your work has been protected by copyright). Software like SoThink just makes it easier for people to do something like that, but it doesn't make a plagiarist immune to ripping things off without consequence.Now, back in the day I used to use Flare to try to see how people did certain things with their Flash apps, but it was kind of hard to read through all the garbage as Flare has a text output to include everything: objects, ActionScript, and everything in between. I'm sure that a skilled Flash developer would be able to decipher everything with ease, but I'm just pointing out the fact that decompiling Flash apps have been possible for a long time... but with SoThink, from what it sounds like, it's just much, much easier.

I first heard about this crap back when I was in high school, I think. If anyone is STILL fussing over what we call French fries, those people have a problem.I think that some radical thinker thought that it would be a genius idea to replace "French" with "freedom" to support our good ol' nation. Little did that person know that anyone would even care what we called them.Personally, I think that they should have just called them "fries." You win with being anti-French (if that's how you stand) and lose the possibility of being ridiculed for what I think is a stupid name... and it's gender neutral, too! Some people have a cow over the most stupid things... but I think that it's a good thing, because we can find humor in and out of it.Oops... I said "cow." That probably means that I'm more inclined to utilize the feminine gender side of things, which means that I prefer women, which means that I'm biased towards men. Shame on me. I call bull... but I can't, because now I'm chauvinistic towards womenfolk. Guess I'll have to just settle with "beef." Oh well. Time to go out and snag a hamburger with freedom fries as opposed to French fries... that way I can show how patriotic I am.

Haha... I wasn't going to say anything out loud about the content of your previous posts. But you're not alone.I think the general initial thought process of establishing a good foothold with myCents comes down to "post a lot, get a lot." The problem with that methodology is that the person excited about earning myCents right off the back doesn't realize that the content of what he or she posts DOES matter. Short one-liners don't count for much, not to mention that you don't look very good posting things that are either irrevelant, not much of a contribution, or whatnot. We all do it sometimes... I know that sometimes I post just to put in a short opinion for some threads, so I'm guilty of it.The trick is to find the threads that interest you and post what you know and what you are willing to contribute to helping all of us learn a little more about what's at hand. You'll be amazed what you can churn out about a topic and consequently the amount of myCents that you can earn just by giving thorough advice, well-researched and supported suggestions, or even just a number of simple answers that help someone out. Not only will your myCent balance grow but so will your reputability as a reliable contributor to the community. I'm sure you can see some of the regulars as such, and even the guests from time to time. I won't need to mention any names, as their names come up often enough (not to mention that their posts are interesting to read).If it helps, my usual routine with Xisto involves me logging in, checking new posts, and opening possibly-interesting threads in new tabs (using FireFox) and replying to them when I get the chance.Just keep in mind that it's quality and not quantity here. If you have that down pat, you'll be all right.

I was talking to someone about Mac OSX the other day, and he was explaining why OSX was so much better than Windows thanks to the UNIX core. (I would imagine that OSX and Linux are pretty much interchangeable core-wise, so there's no comparison there.) One of the prime things that he was telling me about was that OSX directly "talks" to the hardware as opposed to utilizing drivers, which Windows primarily uses to communicate with hardware. Is this true? Do Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard as well as any Linux distribution make the most use out of the hardware you have thanks to this ability of direct communication?

I just triple-posted today.And I couldn't even get back on to fix it. </whine>When can we realistically expect responsive servers and a more fluid experience with the forums?

Anyone use Infrarecorder, fire up an audio CD project, then try to add MP3 files and get an error that says "The file you are trying to add is not supported."There's a number of strange things that involve this issue. I am running Infrarecorder 0.46. I installed K-Lite's latest Mega Codec Pack. I've downloaded the Infrarecorder MP3 plug-in and placed it into the Codecs folder. I've uninstalled and backdated Infrarecorder to version 0.45. I've used versions 0.41 and 0.42 of the MP3 plug-in. And time and time again, I would add an MP3 file to an audio track and the same error would come up saying that the file is not supported. The funny thing is, I'll add another MP3 file and somehow that makes it into the list with no problems. The MP3 files are all of the same audio sample rate (44 kHz), all stereo (2-channel), and some of them vary in bit rate (anywhere from 128 to 320 kbps). This machine is running Windows XP Professional with SP2.Even stranger, I have my laptop at home, running Infrarecorder 0.45, with no MP3 plug-in, running Windows Professional with SP2, and I have no problems, whatsoever. I can add MP3s to audio projects with no problem.For the record, I'm not looking for any alternative programs to use, if that's what you're going to throw at me for a solution.Can anyone explain why this occurs and how I fix this, or what to look for?

I think that rvalkass hits the head of the nail with these statements, and I totally agree. Global warming is inevitable, but we as human beings don't contribute to the problem as much as we believe we do. There has been a steady incline in global temperatures over the years, and it's kind of stupid how everyone is raising a ruckus about it NOW as opposed to years ago. The only good thing that comes out of global warming is the fact that most consumers are aware of our environmental impact. I'm not just talking about greenhouse gases and the like... but people are going out of their way to "be green." As stupid as people are, I'm actually glad that they're swayed in that way. Companies are catering to the "green" scheme to appeal more to customers making the move to be bio-friendly, and those that aren't are being forced to reduce their polluting acts thanks to the media making them out to be the bad guy. I've started recycling years ago, but the funny thing is, I'm part of the sheeple problem when it comes to convenience. When I was living in Germany, we had easy access to recycling dumpsters: for paper, cardboard, aluminum, metal, and whatever else. I actually took the time to separate my trash, and it was easy for me to throw them into the separate dumpsters. (It kind of killed me inside though when one day I saw a dumpster truck take the general garbage bin to dump it as part of the load, then proceeded to take the paper bin to dump it in WITH the garbage...) Since I left Germany and now that it's not as convenient for me to separate my trash and haul my loads to a recycling center in the good 'ol U.S., I've followed the sheeple culture and I don't recycle now because of inconvenience. (Now I pay a trash guy to pick up my garbage, and he's not into recycling because "costs make it prohibitive.") Of course, people thought I was silly to recycle back then. I'm sure a lot of you are reading my post now thinking to yourselves how inconsiderate I am to the environment. And I throw back in your face how much I hate it when these same people throw their cigarette butts out of their vehicles on the highway, toss their garbage out in the woods when they don't feel like taking it down to the dump, or litter within the vicinity of a garbage can. (Yes, it happens.) I think this "global warming" movement is a good thing, not because we're reducing greenhouse gases to allow for humanity to live a few more years before cooking ourselves to death, but because we're also making the world a slightly-cleaner, more efficient place to live. And as much as you may be against global warming, you can't argue much with that... unless you want to talk politics.

I laughed at that. Reminds me of "sheeple," a term I thought I came up with until I found out other people on the Interwebz started using it. Damn you Internet peeps. It's sad, too, to say that my girlfriend's subscription just expired last week. Now she's sitting around playing SPIDER SOLITAIRE. Out of all the games that are available to her, she's content with moping about not having World of Warcraft right now and playing Spider Solitaire. I know my girlfriend isn't into the same games as I am, but I asked her to at least try games like Worms and World of Goo, two games that most people would like because they are easy to pick up, fun to play, and have good replay value. Her response? "Blah." She told me that she'll try out new things when she feels like it, but in my eyes, it almost seems like WoW is some sort of addiction, as most people would relate to. Heck, it's referred to as "online crack" pretty often! One of my buddies that works with me has quit WoW and started it back up many, many times. (He's currently on his fix now but thinking of quitting to save some cash.) It reminds me of trying to help one of my Army buddies quit smoking! Crazy... and this is just trying to pull away from a 4-year-old game that apparently hasn't lost its luster, taking away the fact that the core of the game hasn't changed one bit. Speaking of changes, the same buddy I was talking about was psyched about being able to fish anywhere now with the latest update. My response? "Oh, so now it's like real life where you can fish anywhere you want?" I think that the only saving graces about World of Warcraft that keeps a 4+ year old game ticking is the social factor and the fact that they keep adding new things into an old world to keep it somewhat fresh. (I think with Wrath of the Lich King, though, they actually added an entire continent, which means more to explore... yay.)

I would imagine that if you had access to another computer with a CD-ROM drive, or better yet, have an external optical drive, you could just copy the files over from an XP install disc and format your USB stick with a boot image. (Use a program like ISOBuster to rip the boot image from your XP disc, then use a program like Live USB Helper to put that boot image onto your USB drive.) This won't work though if your BIOS doesn't support booting from USB... but your computer would have to be quite the dinosaur to not support that. The link that Puneye provided sounds like it's explaining how to install and boot Windows XP FROM a USB drive and not what you're looking to do.Personally, I would fork over the $20 for a new internal CD-ROM drive. You can pick a x52 speed for that price nowadays, since all the rage is now focused on combo drives, rewritables, and DVD-ROMs.

Is Xisto really unable to satisfy online transfer requests this often? I'm timing out very, very frequently and am having to check to see if I can even connect to the server to view threads, respond to threads, or even just browse the forum at all. I see this now just about 85% of the time when I try to access Xisto at periodic times of the day: Is it just me, or are others suffering this badly also?

There's also the argument of actually developing the game in such a way that ports to console versions would take full advantage of the hardware available as well as being able to be upscaled much more by the flexibility of potentially-better hardware in a PC. There's no sense in arguing the superiority of a PC if the game in question doesn't take much advantage of extra graphical processing power OR if the game was developed poorly or in a fashion that doesn't take advantage of a realistic rendering engine, lighting effects, etc. (Think of World of Goo. It is an awesome game, but graphically-speaking, it doesn't matter whether you have it for the Wii or for the PC. Games like Oblivion, on the other hand, may see improvement in framerates and graphical eye candy when comparing a console port to the PC version.)

One of my friends who plays World of Warcraft complains about the amount of time wasted waiting for party members required for a raid constantly. You would have to wait anywhere from 15 minutes to a couple of hours waiting for the right spec'd Shaman or whoever to complement your raid party before you could even think of commencing the raid. And if you don't do raids, you apparently miss out on good gear, experience, and opportunities that are specific to raid players. I saw the mirror file sites, but my chief complain in this department is the requirement to even patch at all after downloading a trial of World of Warcraft. Why is it that I go out and download the game from the server, only to find out that I downloaded outdated files and have to wait even longer to patch the d*mn thing? And the incremental patching doesn't help either... it's a roller coaster ride where you anticipate jumping into a game, then the enthusiasm slumps because you have to download another patch... then you apply that patch, fire up the launcher, anticipate playing the game, then slump again, seeing that you have to patch again. And again. And again. How Blizzard manages to keep pulling people into the game this way, I have no clue. It's a small something that they can do to keep people happy and enthused to play. It's not hard to include patch files on a CD with the release of new expansions, or update the trial download to be post-patched, or something to that effect. Maybe I'm asking for too much? Or am I just expecting what a normal, sensible consumer would expect? Very, very true. And I think my girlfriend actually balances that quite well with WoW, as well as the balance to keeping it as entertaining as possible. She doesn't play seriously, opting for a guild where getting the latest gear isn't important, being trumped by the social factor and just goofing off. I see that the social factor of the game is a large contributing factor to WoW's popularity, but at the same time, why would you want to purchase a game that you make monthly payments for when you can jump onto the bandwagon with the hundreds of other PC games that are FREE to play online for social interaction?

I do see the promise that Windows 7 may bring, and I can see some things that can count towards the vast improvement from the Vista OS. I think you forgot/didn't see that I mentioned in another thread that I did use Windows 7, but I downloaded the first build (7000? can't remember) and I couldn't do what I wanted with the OS, like streaming to my Xbox 360, running MagicDisc, and other such things. (I don't know if it's just my luck, but I couldn't stand knowing that the stuff I wanted to do with the OS just didn't fly... not to mention the whole "amazing stability" of Windows 7 just wasn't there for me, with it having hung on me a few times.) I will definitely be waiting for a release candidate before trying Windows 7 again. I would go out and see about snagging a later build beta to play around with it some more, but why bother? As far as the 32-second boot time goes, I wonder if M$ would be willing to look into instant-on technology or work with other companies that have already achieve 3-second boot times. What really should be in the works is the ability to instantly boot into an environment with Internet and basic application abillities WITH the actual operating system loading in the background. (I believe ASUS has already partnered with a third party to offer instant boot on some select motherboards, but it's an environment of its own where you would have to specifically request to boot into the main OS as opposed to my idea of the main OS loading up in the background as you work in the instant-on environment.) Anyone with me on this? Of course!

This really depends on how you look at the situation.Nowadays, it's almost easy to just go with a "next-generation" console. The graphical and processing power of consoles like the Xbox 360 and the PS3 far surpasses those of most machines that even some computer enthusiasts may have. In my eyes, I can clearly justify why I do most of my gaming on my 360: because my laptops can't run most games with eye candy, and shutting things off to accommodate my lacking hardware performance diminishes the experience a bit.I will go with the case of an Xbox 360 because I own one.An Xbox 360 costs about $400 for the Pro variant. That is a $400 machine that can play games, play DVDs, supports streaming content, and interact with online content. It houses a 3.2GHz triple core processor (Xenon), a beefy and uniquely-designed GPU, 512MB of GDDR3 RAM shared with the GPU with (again) a unique unifying architecture, and HD and digital audio support. A computer with similar specifications (CPU: $200; GPU: $100-200; RAM: $50;, HD: $50; peripherals, network card, sound card, and optical drive: $50-$100) could cost much more, comparatively. Hardware-wise, you would be smart to go with a 360.Now, looking at the price of games at MSRP, console games cost a bit more than their computer counterparts: $50-60 as opposed to $20-50. Online play with Xbox 360 on XBL costs $50 a year to play, as opposed to free online play with the exception of some games and most MMORPGs (with World of Warcraft at $15/mo, or $180/yr). You also can't surf the Internet, install and run additional software, implement customization, choose your operating system, or do much else outside of entertainment application with an Xbox 360.With a computer, you can upgrade your components, whereas with a video game console, you're stuck with what you have (unless you hack/modify your console). Upgrading may be considerably cheaper than purchasing the next generation video game console, which would probably cost around $300-$600, unless there is a real overhaul of components involved (like purchasing a new processor which would require a different socket type, which means a new motherboard would go along with it, or if you were to upgrade to the latest GPU).However, there's also the thought of actually keeping hardware for a considerable amount of time and the factor of a console's "usable period." If you can still have fun with your aging Pentium 4 machine that can still run newer games at reduced graphics, it is still usable. Likewise, you can still have fun with your old SNES.It really depends on what you're looking to do. Flexibility is won hands-down by a PC, but a video game console can't hurt as a primary entertainment system.

*ahem*Anyway, I can see how both options can be reasonably important. I guess you could go with the monitor first, seeing as you could buy it out right now and then save for your component upgrades. That way, you can multitask a bit more efficiently... but be prepared to suffer through a bit of wait time. (I'm sure you already know that video and image processing/editing is rather tasking.) Another plus to getting the monitor first is that you definitely won't be tempted to blow that away on beer money if you've already spent it... That first monitor, however adjustable it might be, is quite a bit more expensive for less capability (even though you can adjust it to your liking). Do you think there's something else out there, possibly, that would cost less than a $60+ hike-up for the convenience of being able to adjust the display more? Would you be willing to pay the extra dough for that or would you consider saving some cash by adding height with some old textbooks? (Then again, I'm ghetto like that.)

Let us know what you're replacing. A lot of us would be analyzing whether the upgrades are worth you spending your hard-earned money on or not... like replacing a 19" CRT monitor with a 22" LCD wouldn't seem like a cost-effective upgrade. That's a matter of personal preference though...Not knowing what you'll be upgrading from, I would go with the components, but that's just me with my argument about screen space. But I'm used to a 17" laptop screen and I've never owned anything more powerful than a Pentium 4 3.2GHz or a Athlon Turion X2 1.2GHz. :DJust by glancing at the numbers, why would you go for the first LCD as opposed to the other two? Both the Asus and the Acer have a finer recommended resolution, and the Asus has a faster response time (not like you'll really see it unless you play a FPS).

This is probably a retarded question, but I'm new with VMWare, so here goes.What I'm trying to do is have a virtual, Windows Professional XP machine under VMWare see the hosting machine through the network in the virtual machine. Basically, I want the local hosting machine to be able to talk to the virtual machine and vice versa. This is part of the Peachtree-on-Ubuntu project that I've been trying to pursue for my company for a while and I'm still trying to get it to work. Out of perspective, it seems kind of redundant to install a Windows virtual machine to run Peachtree when I can just install the actual Windows OS on the server and just use that, but am I wrong in thinking that I can reap the benefits of a Linux machine by running Linux on the machine and virtualizing Windows to run Peachtree (which refuses my every attempt to WINE it)?Addendum: I forgot to mention that I'm running the latest version of VMWare Server on Ubuntu 8.10 Ibex... Workstation. (The more I describe the situation, the more retarded it seems.)

It is also very useful for businesses too that take a lot of their work on the road. Our telecommunications company does site walks for customers we've never met, and depending on a GPS is very frustrating when all you have to go off of are addresses and a laggy satellite signal. Sometimes a GPS will even lead you to the wrong place. With street views, you can actually see the buildings that you're looking for (as well as familiarize yourself with the area so you can spot your target destination by recognition), and for us, we can use street views to look for existing side-mounted antennas that we can't usually see with a overhead satellite view.

The instant I read that, I was thinking "Windows 7 == Vista Ultimate." It doesn't matter what they change it to. I'm glad that they're actually improving on things with Gazelle, but with the fact that ActiveX is STILL a security concern and the fact that this new Microsoft browser is going to implement it, it's going to be a hard sell to people that already use Firefox, Safari, Opera, Chrome, or some other browser. Maybe they'll reduce exploits or increase security measures and impose restrictions on ActiveX. Who knows? The market share is still dominant by around 60+% with Internet Explorer, but that number is gradually diminishing. I'm waiting to see when companies will ditch their deals with Microsoft and stop making ActiveX applications in favor of appealing to a growing audience.

Could you throw out some suggestions? I've looked around with the pay-to-post forum area, and the ones I've seen seem like they're not worth the time.I think the best thing to me would be a forum like Xisto, but with an actual cash payout. I say that not because I'm partial to Xisto and some of its members, but the fact that the system that has been implemented makes sense: the myCent scheme. (You get paid myCents for your contributions to the forum, based on your post length and content, as opposed to other systems I've seen that reward you for spamming - as they are by post and not by word.) It's too bad that the credit earned here is ONLY for web-hosting... I would like to see an actual program like I've described. (Not like the credit just for web-hosting is bad... it's actually quite nice for people who are aiming to create websites!)

Is there a way to get the Peachtree installation under WINE to see my Pervasive SQL server running within Ubuntu (Linux Server Edition). So far I've got nothing. I've talked to Peachtree tech support and that's what they suggest that I do... after the many reminders of how "Peachtree is a Windows program."

Legal or not, the topic is about speeding up the transfer rates for a program, not the legality of what you use it for. The Speed Guide in uTorrent is actually rather decent in setting preferences to allow for decent download and upload rates. However, you can further tweak it to maximize your potential... but I wouldn't recommend it too much, considering it's quite a bit of work for possibly up to a 25% increase in performance. (That's just a guess... scrutinizing your settings to allow for 5-10KBps on a download might be rather trivial, depending on your circumstances.) As someone has already said, your download and upload rates are always capped by your available bandwidth. Also, keep in mind that here in the US, they love to advertise XX Mb, which is much, much different than XX MB. (My connection speed of a "decent" 1.5Mb is actually 192KBps, or 0.1875MBps.) So don't be mislead by that, first of all. Now that you know what to expect for your maximum download rate, you should start with using the Speed Guide to start off with and match your bandwidth profile. Once that's done, you can read the millions of articles that Google will spit out for you about tweaking uTorrent. However, like I said, there's more work and effort involved than payout (unless you are seriously bottlenecking yourself somewhere). So I'll leave you with a couple of things that work (because they make sense): Enable encryption. ISPs are not going to like you utilizing their bandwidth for filesharing. So encrypt your data. Specify a port above 10000. ISPs also like to cause havoc with P2P traffic at ports below 10000. Not sure why, but you have 55535 ports to choose from. Forward that port. Open it up for P2P traffic and allow inbound and outbound connections on that port. Visit PortForward for more information. Make your firewall exceptions. This is program dependent, but each firewall program should, by default, ask you if you want to allow uTorrent to make and receive connections. That should net you some good speeds to begin with, assuming you are working from default settings before adding these tweaks. You can also increase or decrease torrent slots, simultaneous downloads, and whatnot, but I'll leave that up to your discretion. In my experience, the "optimization" isn't worth the pain. Edit: I've been reading some optimization tips by people who moderate the uTorrent forums, and one of my main complaints about uTorrent is that it kills your Internet connection. The reason behind this is that uTorrent makes so many requests through so many ports on your network that your router is flooded by these requests and therefore times out every other request on your network, which means that you can't even bring up Google on any networked PC served by that router. I was thinking about making another topic about optimizing uTorrent, but figured that I could just throw my findings in here. Source Match your connection speed with the chart above, then make your changes to your bandwidth and BitTorrent options to reflect what's on this table. To figure out your transfer rates, do a SpeedTest with nothing else accessing the bandwidth on your network. Take note of your download and upload rates, and remember that SpeedTest displays its information in kilobits (kb) by default. Make your necessary conversions as needed to kilobytes (KB). (Note that the table above is in bits.) This will optimize your settings for uTorrent, but if you want to tweak further, I would suggest that you set your download and upload rates manually instead of letting uTorrent do these for you automatically. Take the numbers you got from your SpeedTest and multiply them by .8 (80%). Those results should be in your maximum download and upload rates. You can also disable DHT and NAT-PMP mapping, although this will affect your ability to make more connections for your torrents. However, reducing your number of connections will have you discover that you will be able to actually browse the Internet, watch movies, and do things normally with a slight affect on performance due to P2P, but not as drastic as having your Internet timing every other request out. If you wish, you can also patch your TCPIP.sys file with LvlLord's TCPIP.sys Event ID 4226 patch. This will open up the ability for XP to make more half-open outbound connections... which Service Pack 2 addressed by crippling this capability to reduce the propogation of the spreading of malware to other machines should it happen to that host machine. (The problem with that logic is that it cripples everything else that rely on the capability of sending outbound data.) Increase the value of uTorrent's net.max.halfopen attribute under the Advanced tab as necessary, but remember not to set it too high less you chance crippling your Internet again.

This seems like an awesome idea.I have a stupid question though. What do I put for the Site URL when signing up to earn money on Xisto? Is it Xisto.com? Or do I put my own personal site?Also, has anyone made any money yet? What's the rate per click? Any catches? (The website looks very nice, but at the same time, I'm personally finding it hard to get any real hard facts about the program itself.)

You would make an excellent customer service representative. I LOL'd. 'Tis too is true, what Tramposch pointed out. But then again, if you have to get used to something, that means continuous usage, which means that if it already pisses off OP to use it, most likely he won't be hanging around enough to get used to it. It's a whole ease-of-usage gig factor, but I think one retaining factor of Xisto would have to be the MyCents system and [basically] being paid free hosting credits. Still, I think OP has a point.