borfast

boxturt, the thing is that those 500 MB are probably on an anonymous webserver outside any internet/software/web-related jurisdiction, like in Russia, if I'm not mistaken. At least, it used to be, just a couple of years ago. This means you can have a webserver there and do whatever you want with it, store content that would be illegal in other countries, etc... But aside from that, you're forgetting the very essence of hacking: the challenge. What hackers (NOT crackers; these are two different kinds of people) like is the challenge and the opportunity to learn more. This is what will motivate most of the people who will participate. So remember that the true prize of such a contest is not 500 Mb of webspace but the challenge itself.

Actually, TCH security measures aren't enough if you use weak passwords on your account/website, have badly coded scripts running on your website, etc... There's an old saying in the hackers' world that goes something like this: "It's no use to spend all your money on your front door if you don't even lock your back door." So basically, never mind TCH, they do their job right. The question is: do you?...

I think Virtual Imager has a point, there... Imagine that for some reason I couldn't check the forums for a couple of days or so, because I didn't have the time (or any other reason). Bill could put the announcement here but I wouldn't see it because I didn't check the forums... This brings us to the question of "How does TCH warn every customer that has an account on the server that is going to be down, and only those customers?" Well, TCH must have a database with all it's clients, right? If they don't have it already, maybe they could add a field to the database, stating which server the client is on. Then it would be a simple matter of "SELECT email FROM customers WHERE server='24'" and voilá, we have every e-mail address from every customer who's hosted on server 24 What do you guys think?

Never mind, I got it I just love google From http://www.intellectualloafing.com/discuss...deverything.htm

err... I didn't get that "meaning of life = 42" joke (I'm supposing it's a joke)... Could you please explain it to me?

physics

scuba-diving

Aknot, you can install a separate copy of phpMyAdmin and use the .htaccess authentication scheme. I've never tried this, though but I'm prety sure you can do what you want this way. Take a look at the documentation to see how it's done. http://phpmyadmin.net

Glad you could make it Sorry for not explaining it better in my previous post, I was in a bit of a hurry...

If they aren't there, it means Windows made up a new Start Menu for you instead of using your old one. That usually happens if you enter a different username than the one you had before during the instalation. You can try going to "Documents and Settings" and see if you have a directory there, named as your previous username. If so, you should have your previous Start Menu there.

But why does that make it preferable to format the partition instead of just deleting the Windows' directories? If you don't install your software into Program Files, it's not a big problem. You'll have to reinstall the software anyway, so when you do, you just have to put it in the same directories it was in. But if you want to, because something might slip your eyes, you can also delete them. I still can't see why you find it a better option to completely wipe out the partition instead of deleting only the stuff you're going to replace.

Jim, what do you call a "clean install"? Notice that you're not leaving *anything* related to Windows in your partition. Well, at least you're not supposed to be. Everything Windows uses is inside those two directories I mentioned, so unless you mess things up and make heavy changes to system directories' settings and locations, you shouldn't have anything outside "Windows" and "Program Files". The only thing I can think of besides what I already said is that you may want to defragment the partition before reinstalling windows. That's about as "clean" as I can think of.

Why do people insist in completely formating the Windows partition when all they want is to reinstall Windows? If you're not using NTFS in your Windows partition (which you should), you don't need to format it. Just grab a boot disk, boot your PC with it and then delete the "Windows" and "Program Files" directories. That's all you need to delete. Leave everything else in place. Then put the Windows instalation CD in the drive and re-install it. When it finishes, you'll only have to reinstall the software you need. It's the same thing as if you'd format the partition but this way you can keep your personal files without the need to back them up and then restore them. Do keep in mind that it's always advisable to backup your files before you mess things around in your system. A little piece of advice: NEVER keep your personal files inside a system directory. In Windows based systems, this means "Program Files" and "Windows". Windows itself may do strange things to those directories and you never know what could happen to your data.

Strange, I wasn't seing the first part but then I edited my post and everything was there. I didn't change a thing, only clicked the "OK" button and now it's all there again... Strange... Well, everything is fine, now, so ignore these posts regarding this.

Errr... did anyone edit my post about the window managers? It's missing the answer to AtomicVPp's first question, "Borfast: What window manager do you use?" I even threw in a nice description of the difference between a window manager and a desktop environment but now it's all gone. The only thing left is the answer to AtomicVPp's second question, "Borfast: Can you use other window managers with Red Hat 9? Is Red hat free? Can I just download it?" What happened??

Arrakis is the name of the sand planet "Dune", from the Frank Herbert's novel with the same name. Look here: http://www.arrakis-ttm.com/dune.html or here: http://www.duneinfo.com/arrakis/index.asp or search google for it. You'll find TONS of information about it

Arrakis

eheh Thanks Bill I'll post a picture of me with the prize, when it arrives As for the IRC channel, strange stuff is happening there... I'm not sure why but my nickname registration keeps getting deleted Is anyone having the same problem? Yes, I have received the confirmation e-mail and entered that "/nickserv verify blabla" stuff. I have even been in the channel but now it says that I must have a registered and identified nick to enter an unregistered channel....... Talk about confusion! First, it didn't let me identify to nickserv, it said my nickname is not registered. So I registered once again. Then I tried identifying to nickserv again and this time it lets me. Then I tried to join #TCH but it said "#tch :Cannot join channel: Must identify to your nickname to join an unregistered channel." Does anyone understand what's going on??

It's a pleasant surprise to see that not all the world is like (most of) the portuguese fellows... All people know around here is mIRC! For them, there's no "IRC", there's only "mIRC". Most people here don't even know the difference between one and the other... Anyway, for those of you interested in a free IRC client, you may want to try XChat. It was made with Linux in mind but there's a version for windows too. http://xchat.org http://xchat.org/files/binary/win32/

First of all, allow me a small correction: KDE (and Gnome, too) is what is called a "desktop environment", not a window manager. I must say I'm not the best person to talk about this difference so I searched google and here's a simple explanation: Here's a link to another better explanation if anyone is interested (recommended, since the above explanation is not very accurate in some aspects): http://www.tuxfiles.org/linuxhelp/xwtf.html Now, to answer your question: I don't find KDE closer to Windows than Gnome. I think both KDE and Gnome 2 are *very* easy to use and any windows user won't feel too discomfortable with any of them. But I guess in the end it's all about personal preferences. As for my preference, before Gnome 2 I used to think that KDE was way better than Gnome. At least IMHO. SO that's what I used. KDE has always been slower than Gnome, that's a fact. But it had all the bells and whistles that I was used to and it was easier to use than Gnome 1.x. But then Gnome 2 came and turned things a bit upside down for me. First of all, I found it much faster than Gnome 1.4 (though people say Gnome 2 is slower than Gnome 1 but I see it the other way), so that meant it was even faster than it already was, when compared to KDE. Everything was so much easier to do than in Gnome 1, there were so much more features... I decided to give it a try. This was when I installed Red Hat 8.0 beta. By the time 8.0 final came out, I had already converted myself to Gnome 2 and have been using it since then There's another thing that I can't quite explain: It's true that Gnome is not as mature as KDE but it looks to me that Gnome is progressing in the right direction, while KDE is wandering a little bit off it's path... I'm assuming that once again you mean desktop environments and not window managers. Yes, you can. Red Hat comes with both KDE 3.1 and Gnome 2.2 available for installation. You just have to choose the one that pleases you most. And if there's another desktop environment out there that you like better... hey, It's linux, just get the thing, compile it and run it! As for the free part... Linux is "Free Software", so yes, it's free... But here's a better explanation from GNU's website: If you want to read a bit more about this, go to this webpage: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html I had already posted somewhere in this thread that Red Hat Linux is available free of charge (and any Linux distribution, for that matter). Here's the link again for downloading Red Hat Linux: http://www.redhat.com/download/products.html

I think Red Hat is better for people starting to use Linux, not for everybody. It's really easy to install, comes with a lot of usefull software, it's constantly updated, it has nice support... People need an OS that is simple to install, simple to use, simple to adapt to their needs, intuitive... and Red Hat is all that. I think it's the best way for a novice user to get started in the Linux world. For the rest of the experienced users, Linux is Linux. You can take SlackWare, change every little bit of it and turn it into Debian. I don't think there's a better-than-all-the-others distribution. Of course you can point things like the frequency of the updates, or the default security level and configuration, etc... but in the end, what I said remains: it's Linux - you can do whatever you want with it That's the whole purpose of Open Source and Free Software. You get the source code so you can make changes to the software in order to make it fit your needs. Then you share those changes with the resto of the community.

Yeah, I forgot to mention that kind of distributions. Yes, they're really usefull for trying Linux without messing up your Windows installation. I don't know Knoppix, I've never used it but they have KDE as the default desktop and I don't like that... But that's just my personal preference, so don't let yourself be influenced by that Anyway, you guys might want to take a look at this site: http://www.distrowatch.com/index.php?language=EN They have a specially useful section for beginners, with detailed descriptions of all major Linux distributions: http://www.distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major

If anyone is interested in a comparison between Windows and Linux, I found a webpage that has a pretty good one, IMHO: http://www.michaelhorowitz.com/Linux.vs.Windows.html

Hi. If you want to load a random stylesheet, you can do that with either JavaScript or PHP. With JavaScript, you could do something like this: >..... <head> <script language="JavaScript"> <!-- var style_count = 5; // The number of stylesheets you have stylesheet = '<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles'; stylesheet += Math.ceil(Math.random() * style_count); stylesheet += '.css" />'; document.write(stylesheet); //--> </script> ......... </head> ......... style_count is the number of stylesheets you have available. The only thing you must do is name your CSS files like "stylesN.css", with N ranging from 1 to "style_count ". In my example, N could be 5 at max. If you want to do it in PHP, it's easy, too: >..... <head> <?php $style_count = 5; // The number of stylesheets you have $stylesheet = '<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles'; $stylesheet .= rand(1, $style_count); // Generate a number between 1 and style_count $stylesheet .= '.css" />'; echo $stylesheet; ?> ......... </head> ......... About your second question, it can be done but it requires that you make changes to phpBB's database, and code your website in a way that it gets that information from the database. It shouldn't be too hard but I don't have the time to look into that, right now. I'll explore that later and I'll let you know what I come up with.

Always glad to help