vizskywalker

Easy enough to diagnose: see line 272 of the script: $pos1 = strpos($db_string, ''', $pos + 1);There are three single quotes for the seond parameter, which, in essence, defines an empty string, and then a string to continue until the next single quote (causing the unexpected string error message). I'm guessing that the object is to find where a simgle quote appears in the string, so change the three single qutes to an escaped single quote inside two double quotes, like so:$pos1 = strpos($db_string, "\'", $pos + 1);Hope this helps. ~Viz

We can't really help unless we can see the source code, several lines at least. We can only make uneducated guesses, which undoubtedly people will do, but source code would be very helpful.~Viz

XP Pro 64bit ws writtenf or one reason. Intel was refusing to make a 64bit chip until there wasa 64 bit Windows, and windows was refusing to make a 64bit OS until there was a 64bit Intel chip. To resolve the issue, windows made a verison of XP which used 64 bit versions of simple 32bit command such as ADD, or AND, so when running 32bit software, the 32 bit commands must first be changed to 64 commands, slowing the process down. However, MS decided to take advantage of having made the conversion, so they sold it anyway, with almost no marketing. The true 64 bit Windows OS will be Vista, which, since it should be out in under a year, I would recommend waiting for instead of getting XP32 bit, unless you already have the install Cd and just need to downgrade.~Viz

EMP is not a new technology. Have you ever watched the movie Sneakers, they have a great explanantion of what EMP devices were being worked on. As far as using it to kill, think about this, people's hearts use electrical pulses to beat, imagine wiping out that pulse with an EMP, instant heart attack. More likely, what the military is looking at EMP for is to make it portable enough that covert ops teams can get inside an enemy base or HQ and set it off, disabling communication and detection for the enemy.~Viz

Okay, I admit, turnitin.com is an okay resource, my school uses it as well. A couple of problems with it:1) It only supports online resources as it essentially performs websearches, so plagiarism from books remales mostly undected.2) It is not able to distinguish plagiarism from cited information. For some papers in my EuroCiv class, turnitin.com returned 20% plagiarism, which is a lot, but all of it was cited, so it wasn't really plagiarism.THe reason why OpaQue doesn't subscribe to it is simply: it is expensive. The moderators and admins at Xisto are very good at identifying stuff that seems plagiarised, and we know how to perform the same sorts of websearches that turnitin.com does to check if we are ever in doubt. We catch most of the palgiarizers on this site, so an expensive subscription is not necessary.~Viz

If ti's the virus I think it is, it says something like "Am I pretty" and on anothe rline has a link to a file that you would think is an image, but it ends in a .com extension. For most of the recent ones of these viruses, AVg will get it.~Viz

Question: was the file's extension .com? If so, this is a new but simple virus, and instead of shelling out money for norotn, simply get AVG for free from grisoft. ~Viz

That's interesting, the IE7 project. I wonder what MS is going to do when they find out about it. I totally agree, you cannot forget about people because you dissaprove of a software company, that would be wrong and unfair. I wonder hoq the real IE7 will compare to this one, I'm tyring to get onthe beta for it, but I can't figure out how.~Viz

Three reasons why Xisto isn't running the most recent stable build:1) we just haven't updated yet2) Some scripts written for 4.0 may not work in 4.1, which would cause people to need to rewrite their scripts3) 5.0 is about to release (soon), so why upgrade now?And I beleive 4.0 does indeed support foreign keys.~Viz

I think that having your thumb cut off would affect your signature as well. But despite what governemtns and law enforcement agencies claim, fingerprints, like DNA, can be very similar between family members, and can change like szupie pointed out over the course of a lifetime. Pattern matching also makes determining which fingerprint is the proper one take a long time. The FBI uses large networks of computers to find one fingerprint out of 300 million, much less the several billion people with credit cards. And it still takes them many hours (unlike what is shown in TV and movies). Also, fingerprint scanners are really not accurate enough in cheap enough models to be feasible in stores, whereas credit card swipers can frequently only cost around $20 for a cheap one, with the subscription to the companies validation service being the expensive part. ~Viz

No question about it, the dangersand instability of windows are hyped up. Just like the security of Macs, Linux, and Firefox are. However, windows is not inherently as stable as you make it appear.Granted, many of the windows problems are caused by software, but they are indirectly caused by windows. frequently, once a piece of software starts running, if it is minimized from fullscreen mode, it is placed into virtual memory, then, windows may place a critical process in active memory. When the original program is remaximized, windows may not move the critical process, causing a GPF when the original program attempts to access a piece of data that used to be located where the critical process currently is.Also, a bad batch of Windows ME was released, which was flawed and would cause extremely frequent BSoDs.I'm overjoyed that some people have had almost no problems with windows. For the rest of us, there are some standard issues, caused by OS program interactions that will constantly prove to be bothersome. But these things occur in all OSes (as anyone forced to perform a force quit in Linux or Mac knows), and is not an event isolated to windows.~Viz

I'm not sure if we offer imagemagick, I'm sure we could talk to an admin about setting it up. we do have GD2, and I've found it works well for anything I need.~Viz

Not really, it's a couple more functions and a couple of functions made more efficient. It's definitley worth it to wait for a stable version.~Viz

MySQL advises against using 5.0.x unless you plan to help in the developement process, adn they recommend that standard users stick to 4.1.x, which is what I do. Upgrading to 5.0.x when it goes stable should be very easy.~Viz

Latest stable release: 4.1.xLatest Test and Deve Release: 5.0.x~Viz

I know what you mean. Firefox 1.0.0 had this problem, and updates fixed it to around 40MB max for lots of windows and tabs. 80MB (especially since I have 384MB total) is too much for me, and it slows down all programs to the point that I no longer see the speed increase. I'm definitely going to try Beta 2 or the final release, though. My reason for liking firefox is plain and simple, best CSS support. ~Viz

I downloaded and installed Firefox 1.5 Beta. My first reaction was "Wow, look how fast it is!" but that soon changed. I first noticed that once again the memory hogging tactics of Firefox had returned. Whereas version 1.06 didn't even use 30MB of RAM for 2 windows each with three tabs, Firefox 1.5 Beta consistently used 70MB to 80MB. In addition, altohugh I like being able to rearrange the tabs and drag things to the tab bar, frequently the tab bar would freeze and not let me switch tabs. This and the memory usage meant I didn't get to appreciate the speed boost for more than about 10 minutes per load, and if I was running other programs there was no speed difference. When I tied to report these issues to QA, all I found was bug report links, andI'm not sure these are bug, so... Anyway, since they just released version 1.0.7, I recommend getting that instead of 1.5 Beta, and either wait for 1.5 Beta 2 if they have that or just the final stable release.~Viz

Not to start a browser war or anything (as a matter of fact, if one starts this topic will be closed) but, do you have any data to back up your claim? Also, popularity has a lot to do with how many flaws are found. It is a simple law of computer science that as soon as you give a user any control over a system, you immediately have at least one security hole. Any fix of that hole invariably creates at least one more. Because windows is so popular and is so hated, many malicious code writers focus their attention on it, causing more security flaws to be found. Because the source to firefox is available to anyone, creating code that takes advantage of blatant security is easier, but blatant security flaws can be tracked down and fixed more easily as well. However, if you refer to CS principle 2 from above, the fixing of the blatant security flaw creates at least one more security flaw. If this one is blatant and gets fixed, new security flaws are created and fixed recursively until a non-bltant security flaw is created that someone can finally make use of. The only difference is that response time in firefox is faster do to the opensource nature, but since its release less than two years (I'm talking about the release of version 1.0) it has required 7 new minor version releases. Internet Explorer, while having many hotfixes an patches (most of which were very particular and really only needed to be installed by select people making use of certain interfaces between IE and other programs) has had maybe one minro version release. Just some food for thought to explain both sides and hopefully prevent a browser war. In conclusion, do not make grand statements without providing evidence. All of my statements can be found at the microsoft website by looking at updates released and at the firefox website by looking at their updates released. Except the CS principles, which, like the Laws of Thermodynamics and Energy, can be found in numeorus trustworthy locations around the net and in several largeCS publications. ~Viz

I can actually answer my own questions! Yes there is a 1.0.7, yes it installs over preceeding versions like a true update. On the other hand, so does 1.5 beta, which is insanely fast, so I recommend simply getting 1.5 beta.~Viz

I've been saying that about Linux and Macs too, but no one will believe me! thanks for the warning, as I don't use my Linux box too muxh I probably wouldn't have found out for a while. Is this another full install update or is 1.07 finally a true update? And do you know if they are releasing 1.07 for Windows or if Linux and Windows will be out of sync on version numbers?~Viz

XHTML 1.0 webpage mixed with CSS 2.1 external stylesheets and who knows what kind of javascript all in a php document (though the php is for a particular purpose, and I'd rather not do thi spart with php).~Viz

I have a <div> tag with id="foo" containing numerous <div> tags in it. Throught the course of my script, I need to make some of the <divs> int foo hidden and some visible. To this end, I was wondering if there is some way to create or get an array of the various <div> tags in foo.~Viz

Astahost uses MySQL version 4.0.25.~Viz

I know IE has and probably never will support standards. Unfortunately, AIM just released AOL Explorer, which is essentially IE, so I've found a number of people whi switch because they think they ar elaving "evil" IE but getting the same interface. So, since this is a company site I'm working on, the IE market is one I have to worry about (unfortunately) although my site will definitely be optimized for Firefox and have a link to it.And thanks for the link.~Viz

here's a thought: how about an if-else series of statements to first try one method, then try the next on failure, etc. Since I keep getting null when it doesn't work, I could just compare the value to null. Or, even better, does java have an exist() function to check if something is null or not?~Viz