electriic ink

You succeeded in logging in then?

 

Obviously I cannot but I concede that when accessing the secure link I got an internal service error but the non-secure one was fine:

 

Just to prove I'm not lying

 

Anyway, if you did log in (I take it you did), submit a new support ticket here:

 

https://support.xisto.com/index.php?_m=ts&_a=submit

 

Tick the box named CH Support and mention the error you got.

 

Thank you

I get the impression this article is taking the mick:

 

Taking screen shots in Windows has never been as easy as it should be. Sure, it starts out simple enough: You press the Print Screen key, and the current view instantly copies to the Clipboard. Where it goes from there, however, is another matter entirely. It's up to you to open up Paint or another image editor, paste the captured screen into the app window, and then save it. What a pain.

[/br]Such a common problem don't you think? Mac's solution is, naturally, amazingly practical:

 

When you press Command-Shift-3, an image of the entire screen view instantly saves to your desktop.

I just have to press three buttons at the same time and then minimise all my programs and then double-click to open the screenshot I just took!

 

With Windows, it's so much easier. Simply [PrtSc], Windows-R, Type mspaint and then Ctrl+V. Simple.

 

Honestly, if anyone could provide me with anything the least bit better about a Mac, I might consider going all the way up to London and actually buying one.

Cpanel is available on port 2082:

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

And the secure version on port 2083:

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

You can also access cpanel by using this url:

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

My apologies for not replying, Windows XP went mad after I tried a technique I found on the Internet to improve my computer's speed (guess I had it coming I suppose )

 

I totally see where you are coming from, the government wouldn't have a job if it didn't need to be enforced, but surely in the case of obesity, frankly if they decide (klnowing the risks) that they wish to idulge in fatty foods, and gorge themselves, then quite frankly, its their fault.

Smokers know the risk of starting smoking: does that mean, then, that in the UK the NHS should not provide stop-smoking clinics for addicts and that adverts for cigarettes should not be banned? Despite, people knowing the risks, the government has intervened.

 

I understand that its fast, affordable, and easy, but you can make meals for a lot less if you are willing to put some work into cooking, and not just resorting to the unhealthy option. Those who are un-willing to try, and put some effort in, don't deserve help, they are aware of the risks, they should be the one to take action.

A typical family has two parents who work from 9.30am - 5pm and get home at 6pm, tired and exhausted. They don't have the energy to make proper to dinner some of them. It's a lot easier to eat fast-food or stick something in the microwave. I can assure you that 500g of mincemeat; a few carrots, new potatoes and a broccoli is more expensive than a Big Mac and chips.

 

 

I know that sounds harsh, and perhaps it is, but I think if people have a problem with being fat, or any other aspect of their looks, then its up to them to fix it. Either go to the gym often, (Or just excercise casually with friends, E.G. Football) and/or dont eat as much fast food. Theres nothing wrong with fast food, but its like the Greeks said, all things in moderation.

The typical cold-blooded capitalist. People who are upset by being fat and are still eating fast-food are heading for depression. You've got to stop these seemingly petty issues before they develop otherwise you will have a much greater problem on your hands. And depression is terrible, takes years to get out off and leaves a permanent scar on your memory.

What happened to your code? You've nested the HTML incorrectly. You've written the code this:

 

<a><b><c> XYZ </a></b></c>

 

When it should be:

 

<a><b><c> XYZ </c></b></a>

 

Also, in one line, you wrote:

 

<th><tr><td> HEADING </th></td></tr>

 

You've started a table cell (in tag <th>) outside of any table row! Also, <th> and <td> are treated exactly the same so <tr><th></th></tr> is valid on its own, without a <td>.

 

 

So code like this:

 

<table border="1" align="left">
<th><tr><td> HEADING </th></td></tr>
<tr><td> SUB TEXT</tr></td>
<tr><td><th>ANOTHER HEADING</tr></td></th>
<tr><td> SUB TEXT</tr></td>
</table>

 

Should be:

 

<table border="1" align="left">
<tr><th> HEADING </th></tr>
<tr><td> SUB TEXT</td></tr>
<tr><th>ANOTHER HEADING</th></tr>
<tr><td> SUB TEXT</td></tr>
</table>

 

Compare the difference in terms of output:

 

 

Looks quite trivial but in terms of output it's not. Good effort but you still have a fair bit of learning left to do!

Its up to the child/parents (depending on age off child) to look after them, the government needn't get involved, if I'm honest.

You see, this where the socialist side of me kicks in. If you look at various points in history where people have disagreed with governments intervening with the welfare of the people, it turns out that in the end intervention was the right thing to do.

 

Example :: Liberal Reforms, UK, 1906 - 1914

 

The UK was in serious poverty and someone needed to do something. The Labour Party promised help and the Liberals were worried they'd lose votes to them so they introduced a series of Reforms to keep the punters happy. These reforms included helping children, the unemployed, the elderly and the sick. They were popular with everyone but the rich, the House of Lords and the Opposition. However, nowadays the government giving out benefits like this is applauded; in order words, it is acknowledged that the government should interfere with the welfare of the people.

 

SO, let's NOT make the same mistake this time. Parents are poor, fast-food is cheap. Spot the link! Parents know full-well the dangers of this food but it's a choice between cheap food or starvation. If they were your children, what would you choose?

 

You want the problem solved, this is how you solve it!

.:.Parents.:.

I understand why people think that the parents could be to blame, they should be aware of the content in foods such as McDonalds, or Burger king. Because the kids may not be aware, the parents should be responsible for making sure that their children get the nutrition they need, and that they are healthy. But is it really the parents fault? When their children are out with friends, they may choose to go to a fast food restaraunt for dinner, the parents cannot be at fault if the children are out with friends, they cannot possibly keep their children in sight at all times, children need freedom (To a certain extent.) So lets explore the other possibilities.

The morbidly obese children are the ones who are fed the fast food from a young age at home by parents. And you can't blame them. Fast food is cheap and tasty food that young children enjoy, more importantly it's cheap. This means people on a low income can afford to feed their families.

 

Solution?

 

Tax fast-food and use the money to subsidise healthier foods or lift some of the taxes on oil or alcohol. Not the most popular solution but it will make healthy foods cheap and more desirable for poorer families.

 

Also, if you ban ads for fast-food like they've done for cigarettes, then you decrease the demand by children for fast-food products. (Unfortunately, if you do this, the laws of supply and demand tell you that fast-food will become cheaper and increase the parents' want to buy it!)

Theologian Richard Dawkins has developed a scale to measure strength of religious belief on a seven-point scale. They range from 1 (strong theist) to 7 (strong atheist). Dawkins himself claims to lie at 6.8 and has remarked that he would be surprised to meet anyone in point 7.

Where do you stand?

1) Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'
2) Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.'

3) Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'

4) Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'

5) Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical.'

6) Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'

7) Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung "knows" there is one.'

Haha that is awesome! Love it.
But wouldn't people think its weird that a car can out run some missiles? And that the missiles follow the car at the same distance all the time and slow down when the car does?

It would be interesting to know if its illegal to do that... and if so how much you could be fined.

But if you were driving on the other side of the road, all you would see are missiles behind a car.

That looks amazing though! It would be the perfect April Fool's joke...

I'd like to add that there is a more user-friendly way to do STEP THREE, for those not comfortable with the registry:

 

Start -> Right Click My Computer -> Properties -> Advance -> Performance -> Settings -> Advanced -> Memory Usage -> Select System Cache

 

Then click OK and restart your computer.

Hey guys thanks for the info

 

Quick question, what is this point system all about. I have read a lot of posts telling people that they can earn credits, etc... Are these credits exchanged for things such as free hosting/allowing you to request banners. Or is there more to this what seems to be a fun way to ensure people make quality posts?

 

Thanks again guys

 

Priest

Hey,

 

Basically, if you want a hosting account (10 or 30 credits), a free domain (250 credits) or a free sig or banner (10 posts). That's their only official use but if you're not here for the posting then, yes, there are a fun way for you to see how you're doing.

 

Enjoy Xisto,

This is where you can get honest reviews for your website, whether you are hosted by Xisto or not. This means that members not in the [HOSTED] member group can now get advice.

 

Please note that you still need to be a "Member Level 1" or higher to post in this forum, just like all forums in the The Internet section.

 

Thank you

- electriic ink

BuffaloHELP has fixed the permissions. Now non-hosted and hosted members are able to post in the Website Showcase forum.

Don't bother, do as jlhaslip said and download Open Office. What the price of msoffice now anyway? * checks * ...?320 ?! Seriously, if you have that kind of money to spare, you should spend the weekend abroad instead. I use OpenOffice and there is no useful feature that isn't on that that is on msoffice. I recommend you download OpenOffice, try it for a week to see if it fits your needs and, then, if you find you can't bear it, go out and buy Microsoft's alternative.

Because it goes with the chavvy image they're trying to create:

 

 

Isn't it really part of a cycle anyway? You start going to parties at 14 / 15. The moment you do you discover alcohol. You get drunk. Then, if you're with the right people you find yourself going to parties with older children (who are 17+), most of who are on benefits. They persuade you into smoking and eventually on to drugs...

 

But like I said it goes with the image: I know someone who's 14 and smokes and someone who's 16 and does cannabis. The smoker's one of those idiots who'd have you believe he could destroy the Mafia.

Presumably, you were trying to start a new topic in the Website Showcase forum. I can only assume that this still only allows [HOSTED] members to start new topics there. There used to be a separate "Non-hosted Members" sub-forum but that got removed.

 

Please post your topic in the General Talk forum for the time being, stating in it that you posted it that forum after being unable to start it in the correct one.

 

I have started a new topic in the moderators and admins forum, specifically about this problem and hopefully we shall be able to resolve this issue.

 

Thank you for reporting this problem

They even impose restrictions on how many children you can have.

Oh, now I think that's a bit different. China houses a third of the world in a relatively small land-mass. They would be irresponsible NOT to put limits of births. Overpopulation is a problem but that's in a whole different league.

China is generally a terribly-run country and it's a shame they'll soon be the world's greatest superpower. As much as people hate the US, the US is a godsend compared to them. They'll have to sharpen up soon though or the UN will get them.

@guangdian:

What does it say when you try to access sites like YouTube?

I still have to argue the color thing. If our sun were putting out a different light wavelength, all colors on this planet would be different.

 

But color is made up of what part of the light spectrum is being reflected.

NO. The colour we see is. The actual colour of an object is set in stone. It just appears to be different under different lights.

 

I guess that's the experiment. Can we [2]strip an object of its own color by shining light[/2] void of that spectrum, [1]and will it appear dark?

[1] It won't appear at all. By shining pure red light on to a pure blue object in an otherwise dark room, you will not be able to see that object.

 

[2 ]Btw, just by shining light on an object, you won't affect it's colour permanently at all (unless by doing so, you alter it chemically).

 

 

A talk show with us? Oh wow!

Yes I've designed the format already. I'm the presenter and you're my co-hosts

Well, as for hearing if a girl is behind us or not, we do carry fields of energy: magnetic, chemical, and I'm sure certain other wavelengths, along with pheremones and man-made scents can help us get that feeling to look, as does our hearing and other senses that we have.

The point is how do you pick these "wavelengths" up? If you can't tell me, you have to presume that it is impossible and so subtract them from the equation. If you don't, then you're taking unfounded ideas into account and tbh, that allows me to make anything up and call it fact (ie "the sky is actually purple, you just see it as blue because of the gas tesomerone tri-oxide that's surrounding it".

 

If thought is all about a combination of memories, when did mankind START thinking about UFOs and extraterrestrial beings or anything else for that matter? According to your argument, if no one ever thought of it before to give someone a memory, we'd never think of it in the future.

We have always wondered: what's up there? If life is so abundant here, then how much of it is there above the sky and below the soil on the ground? My argument said that new ideas can only be formed from past experiences, yes. Life on Earth + sense of direction -> what life is there beyond the sky?

 

You have to remember that thought is temporary - I've forgotten what I thought of the Sun when I first saw it because I could not document my ideas on paper. Someone millions of years ago could have discovered the secret to creating the universe and it would have been lost with the ages since then because they couldn't write. People think of new ideas all the time and they could very well be the same idea someone thought of the other week ... or millennia.

 

Yea, they're all conditional statements and speculation, but they're also not proven facts, so I can't simply state it as if it were a fact.

And because of that, you can't really use them in making a point, which is why I ignored them.

 

Some things we know, are solid facts already. Colors simply exist and can not be created. Primary colors are such only according to what we say and books that we read from. [1] Primary colors are different depending on the application.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_colors

My definition of primary colours are colours that cannot be made by mixing two or more other colours together; only three of these exist: red, blue and yellow. Orange, for instance, can be made by mixing red and yellow, so it is not primary.

 

You can't relate a solid fact to a speculation. I will provide an argument though. We can only see a certain spectrum of light (through which we get our color). If we were given opportunity to receive different kinds of light, we may see different colors, like those Reveal bulbs. [1] A color of something is not permanent, it can change with the light shown upon it. If we were suddenly able to see beyond the spectrum that we can, we'd be seeing different colors. Like black light responsiveness, of which, the colors produced could be further altered by other kinds of light. I'm sure we can assume that there exist many more primary colors that we could use in various applications. [2] We can not create colors, but we sure can 'unlock' them

[1] The actual colour does not change, it's just that a different light is reflected so it looks different

[2] That's the problem. That statement is a far cry from your first post - how anything is possible and that aliens could beam new ideas into our brain.

 

 

Psychic? Coincidence? Intuition? [1] Some people have these 'impulses' of thought that hit them like a brick and further investigation proves that thought to be true. Some people even try to put crazy logic behind it, like they come to believe the plants talk to them. [2] What if it's coincidence that coincidences happen at an unnatural rate for certain people. [3] What causes coincidence? In all the infinite of possibilities, coincidences should occur, mathematically, almost as often as someone getting struck by lightning or less often. You may still be thinking of TV psychics who claim they can 'force' their gift. [4] What I am talking about happens whether you like it or not and at random times at a subconscience level before it's even formed into a thought. [5]We can not assume that the only signals our brains process is from the 5 basic senses.

[1] Those people soon end up on drug rehabilitation programmes

[2] I'm sure it is - what else could it be?

[3] Could you please find proof to back up that claim? I roll a 6-sided die and guess the correct number 3 times in a row and it wins me £200 in bets. What a coincidence! The probability of this is . Unlikely but not impossible.

[4] Oh yes, we can definitely think at a subconscious level if that's what you mean and it only becomes a usable though when it's "transferred" (or whatever it's called, I'm not much on psychological terminology) to a conscious level. We can thinking about things for days and days without realising it, particularly with complicated life problems, before we finally come to an answer or solution and whilst it may seem random, it is not. What "impulses" is it exactly you refer to?

[5] Likewise, we cannot assume that our brains process other signals. It would be much more reasonable to assume that we only process information gathered from our five senses as that it all science has proven.

 

Just remember, if someone thinks it's possible, it probably is. People are making themselves like flying squirrels, it's so awesome, I want to try it. Look up base jumping videos

By harnessing the power of the science behind they're ability to fly and replicating it artificially

 

us 3 should be friends

biblical vs atheistic and i'll be the philosopher, we can challenge each others' beliefs

- We should have our own debate programme on daytime TV

I was often frustrated at how, despite there being thousands of ASCII "special characters" such as &8659;, websites that claimed to list them all only listed the first 256. To combat this issue, I have created a table which lists the first 10,001 - from &#000; to &10000; I am sure there are many more but it is simply not feasible to create a table with many more rows as viewing it would put terrific strain on the browser.!

 

You can download the file in two forms. One uses PHP to dynamically create the table (1KB), the other has it ready-made in pure HTML format (437KB).

codes.php

codes.html

Sorry for neglecting your topic

Ok, but if im not just going to add a shoutbox code in there, i will post other tags like so then it wont work

It does. That's what this part of the code does:

$string = strstr ($input, '[shoutbox]');	// Removes all parts of string that are NOT [shoutbox]...[/shoutbox]$string = strstr ($string, '[/shoutbox]', true);$string = $string . '[/shoutbox]'; // End remove

It removes all parts of input that are not [shoutbox]...[/shoutbox] and processes them separately. Unless you can see otherwise...

BTW, what truefusion is saying about including files (I don't think you understand - sorry if you do) is this:

You can't include a file like this:

include 'file.php?id=1';

And have the code in file.php as:

function ($_GET['id']);

It doesn't work. If you want to "give" a variable to an included file, you have to this:

$id = 1;include 'file.php';

And have the code in file.php as:

function ($id);

91.3% of people lied when answering this poll. The question asks:

 

"Why were we Born?" Does it have a Divine Answer?

Of course, no-one knows.

 

Then why does history repeat itself? Then why is science capable of seeing patterns in life? Then why can science make sense of life? You sure science was the one that said life is random?

He was referring to people's individual choices and not the make-up of the world. History repeats itself because people are generally incapable of learning from other's mistakes. It's human nature.

 

We are here to expand the territory of God. In other words. our Aim must be telling the world about God and Christ so that the whole world will realize that there is a life after this, and we are in this world to get prepared for that Life.

(important points highlighted)

 

You, my friend, must be careful. You are an inch away from religious extremism, an inch better than the 9/11 and 7/7 bombers.

It's cheating on a grand scale but this would work:

<form action="http://google.com/search" method="get" name="searchform">Search <input type="text" name="q"> <input type="submit" value="Search!" onclick="document.searchform.q.value+=' site:***insertsitenamehere.com***'"> </form><noscript><br> The search engine requires javascript to work</noscript>

It saves creating tonnes of your own php code...

[1]Why not something more realistic? Not one human being has ever created a color—the colors were already there. Humans just gave them a name for sake of reference. But now-a-days, it's not about being or creating something unique, it's about who can do it better than the other. [2]Also, humans can't create anything, we just manipulate our resources to fit our needs; it's more like: we don't adapt to things, we make things adapt to us.

[1] My point was that if these extra-terrestrials were beaming new thoughts into a brain then it could, theoretically, be possible to do that - to create something from nothing. The OP also made the point that anything and everything is possible:

 

Anything and everything is possible.

So I deliberately gave him an impossible task to counter his argument.

 

[2] Interesting point and I'd have to agree with you. We don't create; we invent.

 

edit: I love the contrast in our sigs - it's like we're nemeses

I believe EVERYONE is psychic at a subconscience level. Our brains are electrical in a way, and everything electric, and other things, have fields of energy. I believe we feed off each other's brain activity in a way that science can't yet detect.

 

Why is it a guy can just know when to look to catch a glimpse of a girl's *bottom* 20 yards behind him or that feeling you get when someone is present but you can't see them.

 

Because you can hear them breathing and moving.

 

Our brains pick up on each other's fields of energy and at a subconscience level our thoughts are constantly mingling and producing formed ideas. Like forces attract and people who think the same usually find each other and become friends. How else can you complete another person's sentence?

 

Because usually in a conversation you're discussing something very specific. That nails it down. The person has already said a large amount of words in that sentence so you can "predict" very accurately, not 100% accuracy mind. Also bear in mind that words form a logical order and that very few words can sensibly follow another. For instance, "yesterday I was in my ....., planting a ....". Any idiot could guess both the words from reading my post, even someone in Australia, are you suggesting that fields of energy could therefore travel half way round the world to Australia? What a "noisy" place the world must be with all these energy fields...

 

BTW, if you really can't work out what the gaps are see the bottom of my post.

 

These fields of energy are vast, an example would be [1] if you've ever picked up the phone without intending to call out or even receive a call. You just do it as an impulse, it doesn't even ring, and you say hello and someone IS on the other end. [2] Or have you ever suddenly thought about someone you don't normally think about and a second later they are calling on the phone. [3]How many times have you called someone to have them tell you they were just about to call you or vice-versa.

 

[1] No

[2] No, never.

[3] None, although it does happen. It's called coincidence.

 

Are the energy fields limited to telephone conversations? Pretty useless...

 

I think that inventors receive brand new thoughts from outside of this world. New thoughts can't simply be. Our brains only work from memory and respond in such a way that is generally a programmed response because of memory. So where does all the really new stuff and genuinely new ideas come from? I can almost guarantee that new thought is not terrestrial.

 

Imagination, which you seem to have lots of All new ideas are drawn from memory and previous experiences. The same way that everything I dream about is in some way related to or an amalgamation of my past. I ask you to invent a new primary colour - you can't because doing so would be completely new and there's nothing you or anyone else has seen/done for you start from. Of course, you can get your extra-terrestrial beings to do that for you.

 

Why is it that UFO sightings occur over the largest cities. Well, there are more potential witnesses, but the reason for them being THERE and not elsewhere is simple. They are aware of how we think and pick up on each others' thoughts and could possibly be advanced enough to consciencely pick up another being's thought. All they simply have to do is be near enough for our energies to mingle.

 

Why bother come so low? I've already proven that energies can travel as far as Australia, 10,000 miles away from here (England). The exosphere, the uppermost point of the Earth's atmosphere is, at most, 6,200 miles away. Surely it's not worth the risk of being caught to travel so close?

 

 

The effects could be astounding as new thoughts are introduced to the population, even though we aren't aware of it, and they get to study our population in relative safety. Because they KNOW, there are groups of people that are simply not friendly.

 

But they still get spotted. We could shoot them down very easily. They ARE NOT safe there.

 

Would you stick your hand in a rattlesnake's cage? Same with them and what they may think of us. Honestly, we are a hostile race. In that aspect, what if they were able to 'manipulate' our thoughts and make us hostile for their entertainment? I mean seriously, entertainment is the spice of life and a bored advanced race with nothing better to do could easily be evolved enough to accomplish this.

 

They say large crowds of people are generally dangerous and stupid. Well that may be true, maybe because of an overload of thoughts being introduced, a more primitive state of mind takes hold as a defense mechanism.

 

Now your assuming things. These paragraphs are FULL of conditional statements, see bold.

 

 

Some organization I read about so long ago (I wish I could cite the source), did a study. They had a number of people take a written test and they had other people in another room, separate from the test takers, wait patiently. After testing, the people haven't taken the test were finally tested and scored significantly higher. They reproduced this experiment many times over and the second group always did amazingly better. Is it because their thoughts mingled?

 

I wish you could cite the source and say how many times they did it "again and again". Were the two groups of a similar IQ and intelligence (as in the difference in IQs between groups A and B is less than 1 point)?

 

Real, true psychic events occur on impulse upon our part. My grandmother was vacationing in another state when a lady next to her blurted out that one of her children was in alot of trouble. My mother was very ill because of ammonia poisoning at the time and no one knew except our household.

 

Your mum had ammonia poisoning and a woman's children were in trouble. I fail to see the link...

 

[1]There are so many energies our science can't yet detect and some energies we can detect aren't completely understood. [2]Anything and everything is possible.

 

[1] No, funny science can't detect them and I bet it never will. Convenient that...

[2] Not yet. In millions of years' time when our true understanding of life is superior to that of any invented phenomena or deity. Then, maybe then, will we be able do anything. Just to prove we cannot now, I ask you, once again, to invent a new primary colour.

 

[hr=shade]It's "garden" and "tree".[/hr]