Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2008 November 14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Computing desk
< November 13 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 15 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


November 14[edit]

Batch File: File Tree[edit]

Does this batch file properly store the computers file tree into a txt file in my documents folder (C:\Users\'User'\Documents)

@echo off
set /p filetree=tree /F C:\
echo %filetree% > Filetree.txt
echo File tree has been made
pause

--Melab±1 00:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you tell us? What results do you get when you run it? -- Tcncv (talk) 01:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The syntax is wrong. Change it to this:

@echo off
set filetree=tree /F C:\
%filetree% > Filetree.txt
echo File tree has been made
pause

Set /p is for a prompt. You don't need to set a variable either -- I'm not sure why you did that. I'd just do it like this:

@echo off
tree /F C:\ > Filetree.txt
echo File tree has been made
pause

That's assuming you want to include file names in the tree (hence the /F). It's also assuming that you're in your documents folder when you run the batch file. If you aren't, you'd need to change > Filetree.txt to > C:\Users\user\documents\Filetree.txt. Good luck with your assignment ;).--Areateeth34 (talk) 02:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Disabling Live Call Hyperlink[edit]

Hello. Internet Explorer 7 hyperlinks whatever looks like phone numbers to Windows Live Call. I visited websites in which the seven digit numbers separated by a hyphen after the first three digits are hyperlinks going to different parts of the website, not phone numbers. How do I disable Live Call hyperlinking? Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 02:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Its probably a setting in Windows Live Messenger. Kushal (talk) 03:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

220.225.242.210 (talk) 03:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC) harshagg

bit storage[edit]

Hello, I want to know how i can myself assign a limited no. of bits to a certain variable instead of using the existing data types. Example, i have char a; --> which will assign 8 bits to a; but i want to make a variable 'a' and assign just 1 or 2 bits to it and use it in my programs. Is that possible in any known programming language? And if not then answer this, Why is it that none of the compilers give the user the ability to make their own new data types in addition to the existing data types (eg : int ,char, float);???????


Also one more question. A char data type can store 256 values and occupies 1 byte, which is equal to 8 bits.

A bool data type can store only two values, 0 and 1 -> but still occupies 1 byte, again 8 bits. Technically it should occupy only one bit of space but occupies 8 bits. IF you use the sizeof() function in c++ and output it both bool and char show the same number of bits assigned to it.

WHy is that?

Note: sizeof() function returns the size in bytes and not bits.

The reason that the minimum data size is 8 bit is because processors work with 8bit registers minimum (very very old processsors were once 4bit). That means the minimum size of a peice of data that the processor can manipulate is 8 bits. If you want to use 1 byte and have 8 bitsf of info you can do it yoursel like this:
char c;
c |= (1 << x)  ;  //set bit number x (where x is 0 to 7)
c &= ~(1 << x) ; //clear bit number x
and test the values like this:
if (c & (1<<x)) ; //true if bit x is set
if ((c & (1<<x) == 0)) ;//true if bit x is clear

Dacium (talk) 04:05, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

You're free to define your own data type, and then act like it's a single bit, but it won't be. C just doesn't allow that; there's no point, since as Dacium said all modern computers perform calculations on data >= 8 bits in length. Superm401 - Talk 04:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
C also allows you to specify fields in a struct to only take up a custom number of bits, which is less than the usual width of the type of the field; see C bit fields. But this is usually only used for things like hardware interfaces which require a specific bit format. Otherwise it is more trouble than it's worth, as it also introduces other problems. --71.106.183.17 (talk) 05:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
There's not much point in cramming in all your variables so that they take up the least amount of space. Even though that will probably save several bytes of memory space in total, the performance loss is not worth it. Here's how you can save two 4-bit numbers in a byte:
char n = 0;
n |= 9; /* n is now 00001001 */
n |= (14 << 4); /* n is now 11101001 */

int r = n & 0xf; /* r = 9 */
r = n >> 4; /* r = 14 */
To retrieve values, the basic idea is to shift it right and then and it with a mask like 0xf or 0xff (2number of bits - 1). --wj32 t/c 05:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Harshagg (talk) 15:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)harshagg QUestion :- but you cannot avoid memory padding which will waste my rest of memory so no use of doing that

As others have pointed out - there is the C 'bit-field' thing - which does allow you to allocate variables with a certain number of bits each. However, the C standard doesn't require the hardware to pack them efficiently - and because of various features of the language - it's pretty inefficient to do so. Hence, I think you'll want to go with your own implementation. This can be wrapped into a 'class' implementation - but will take you quite a bit of work to do well.
I believe the Ada programming language also has variables of arbitary precision...which amounts to having bitfields.
I'd also caution that you should only consider doing this if you need such an insane number of variables that the overhead of rounding each one up to the nearest char/short/int/long-sized "chunk" is going to make things not fit into memory. If that's not the case then the loss in performance for packing and unpacking bitstrings on every single operation will soon kill you...and the extra space consumed by the packing and unpacking software could easily mean that doing all of this packing actually causes you to consume MORE memory! SteveBaker (talk) 06:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes you are actually only going to save space if you have a lot of occurrences of your small bit variable. They are used however if things like bitmaps for images, or a set representation, or fields in communications protocol headers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
you can "fake it" in languages that won't allow "bit toggling" (i've done it in SAS); the trick is to convert your bit level variables into hex and/or decimal then multiply by whatever power of 2 is necessary to shift them, and add. similarly in reverse to get your individual data back. for instance: you have two levels of gender, call them 0 and 1. and 4 levels of ugliness, call them 0,1,2,3. Convert ugliness to binary, you got 00, 01, 10, 11. you can now collapse both variables into one bitfield variable by: use gender as is for bit 1. shift ugliness over one bit to the next spot, so it becomes 000,010,100,110 (equivalent of multiplying by two). convert to hex, so gender is still 0 and 1, ugliness is now 0,2,4,6 hex (luckily the same as decimal, so far). add them. if you play with it, you can see that you can recover the original data intact from the sum by reversing the process. and you've still got 5 bits left over to store more variables. it sounds bitchy, but after a short while you can do it in your head so that you don't need to explicitly go through the binary or hex steps, you just know that a variable of two bits in positions 2 and 3 in your bitfield will have the values 0,2,4,6, etc. and just use plain old addition. Gzuckier (talk) 19:34, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

How to sort all the processes running on my computer[edit]

Hi there, Is there any way to figure out what all the processes are running on my puter? When i go to Task Manager there are nearly 100 exe files listed, one of which is some adware that pops an IE window every window 1/2 hour or so. Some of them are obvious like iexplorer.exe but what the heck is alg.exe or tpfnf7sp.exe? Is the only way to track them down to do gsearch of each and every one? thnx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.6.82 (talk) 07:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

You can right click them and select Open File Location to get a better idea. Or just google. People at CastleCops are willing to look at HiJackThis logs to help people find the needle in the haystack. They're friendly and helpful. Louis Waweru  Talk  07:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
There's a (free) program from Sysinternals called Process Explorer, which is like Taskmanager, except like, 100 times better. There you can see a list of the sofware running, and if it is signed, you can see what company made it and a short description. So, for instance, "alg.exe" is made by "Microsoft Corporation" and it is desribed as an "Application Layer Gateway Service". This doesn't tell you all that much, but at least now you know it's kosher (being from Microsoft and all). Malware programs aren't signed so they have no description, and they stick out like a sore thumb in Process Explorer. It's absolutely fantastic at helping you figure out what's going on inside your computer (btw, after a little googling, tpfnf7sp.exe whatever it is, it's from Lenovo, so it probably came with your laptop). Belisarius (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
The programmer can make description and company name just about anything. Someone could make a program and name it alg.exe, give it the description "Application Layer Gateway Service" and company name "Microsoft Corporation", so those fields shouldn't give a sense of safety. Louis Waweru  Talk  10:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
They're cryptographic signatures, you can absolutely trust them 195.58.125.64 (talk) 14:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Here's a screenshot of an unsigned sample app. Louis Waweru  Talk  14:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Fine, do this: Open options-menu, activate "Verify Image Signatures", right-click the top-bar, select "Select columns" and make sure "Verified Signer" is selected. Then, the programs that say "(Verified)" plus the signer in that field are guaranteed to be kosher. And the vast majority of legitimate software you run will be verified (currently, I have two processes that aren't, one is WinRAR and the other is some subprocess of Skype, both obviously on the up and up). It will basically instantly narrow down significantly the suspected processes. No malware will come out on the other side of that. 83.250.202.208 (talk) 17:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm asking the obvious, but have you tried running a program designed to sniff out this kind of thing? Back when I used Windows I was once affected, by some sleazeware that had the effrontery to attempt to sell me anti-spyware software that would kill it (ha ha); instead I used a freeware program that didn't find the culprit, and then some trialware program (sorry, I forget its name) that got a serious write-up in Wikipedia. It cost me $20 or but I got my money's worth. Although I rate myself fairly highly at avoiding trouble (and I only screwed up that one time), if I am in trouble then I figure other companies' algorithms and databases will be far better at locating sleazeware on my computer than my own tired eyeballs would be. -- Hoary (talk) 12:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty happy with uniblue ProcessScanner. You can click on the .exe after it's run a scan and get info about what it does. It's free and much better than the Taskmanager. Of course nothing is foolproof and there's probably some bored idiot out there who makes bugs appear genuine. But you can at least get rid of things like the ISP you used years ago running an .exe without acidentally deleting your wifi. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 14:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Um, get Spybot and it'll clean out your adware. Don't try to just guess. Smart adware/viruses use legitimate process names (like ieexplore.exe) so you can't see them easily (they rarely have something like hiimavirus.exe as their process name). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to you all! I did try the antivirus software on this puter but it didn't get rid of the adware so I'll try the solutions offered here until I get it. Is there a way to sort the various exe's by date added or modified? thnx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.6.82 (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Open office.org question[edit]

I'm probably just being silly again but is there a way to get rid of the header on every page? I only want it on one page and it seems to be appearing on all of them! I'd appreciate any help! :) --Cameron* 13:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Just like font and paragraph styles, you have page styles. Create a page style with a header and use that for the style of the page that should have a header. For all other pages, use a page style that doesn't have a header. -- kainaw 15:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! :) --Cameron* 16:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Siebel[edit]

Are there any article or materials available for Siebel CRM? Is there any special site for GE Commercial Finance Siebel Application details?What is the link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaliniimohan9 (talkcontribs) 15:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

SIMple questions ?[edit]

I have some questions related to cellular phones and the SIM cards in them (United States):

1) I have two cell phones which have failed. I suspect one has failed in the SIM card itself, as it now says it's "not registered" and gives errors whenever I try to program it. The other phone has problems with the buttons not working reliably, but the SIM card is probably OK. So, can I take the working SIM card and put it into the working phone ? I'm guessing not in this case since the SIM card would be moved from a Motorola W260g with Tracfone service to a Kyocera phone under Page Plus Cellular service.

2) If I can't do the above swap, could I move the SIM to a Motorola V170 under Tracfone ?

3) And how about if I bought an identical phone (Motorola W260g with Tracfone service) ? Could I then move the SIM card over to recover my minutes ? StuRat (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

If phone receiving sim card is not simlocked and it operates in the same standart (and frequency ranges) as phone, from which sim card is being taken, then it should work. Usually, even when phone is simlocked, it accepts only simcards from that operator, which locked it. So, case 1. probably will not work, cases 2. and 3. should work. -Yyy (talk) 11:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, how can I tell if a given phone is simlocked ? StuRat (talk) 19:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The simplest way to find it out, would be to try. (moving SIM card from one phone to another should not cause any damage to either component (unless one of them is badly damaged already (short circuit in SIM card, card reader in phone supplying too high voltage)). Generally, phones, which are sold with contract (at price, which is lower than for phone without contract) are simlocked. There are possible exceptions. -Yyy (talk) 17:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm a bit worried that I could lose my minutes if I do an "unauthorized SIM card transfer". So, I'd like to know if a transfer will work before I attempt it. StuRat (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I have never heard of such restrictions (If they are real then it might be a problem). Some phones might have codes (which can be keyed in to check simlock status), but these are specific to particular model (and usually are not found in user manuals)(might be in service manuals). Usually, if phone is simlocked and rejects inserted simcard, it just does not work, it does not damages that simcard in any way. (I never have had any simlocked phone, so i am not 100% sure). -Yyy (talk) 15:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

CSS standards[edit]

What features in CSS, if any, became part of the W3C standard as a result of being implemented by the browsers, rather than vice-versa? NeonMerlin 18:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Non-internet browser way to view locally hosted html files[edit]

I'm in law school, and during our exams we are now running some sort of exam software called Exam4 that appears to disable at least firefox and internet explorer. I like to make outlines in wiki format (I installed mediawiki on my computer), and then I look at them through firefox even though they're hosted on my own computer. (We have open note/laptop exams so we're allowed to refer to our notes, which for most people are in Word.) Does anyone have any ideas of how I could still use mediawiki for constructing my outline, or do I need to go old-school again? (Note that I don't need to access the internet here if that makes any difference, I just need to be able to look at html files that are hosted locally.) I haven't gone through every obscure web browser - maybe I should just do that, but I bet it would take a really really long time to find something the program doesn't recognize. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

One of the HTML editors mentioned in the question above "Help with Seamonkey Composer" might do what you need. --LarryMac | Talk 19:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Shoot, after installing that I just realized that probably I don't need HTML viewing at all but instead PHP viewing or however mediawiki generates pages on the fly. I guess I could try to dump the wiki to HTML at the end but that seems kind of risky to have to wait to check if these things work until right before exam time... Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
If all of the browsers are disabled, it is most likely blocking requests to port 80 (web connections). Change your local webserver to work on a different port (ie: 8080). Then, browse to http://localhost:8080 to use the new port. -- kainaw 19:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Just tried that (good idea!) but it didn't work. :( I don't know what it's doing. IE and FF still open, but they won't load anything. Also after I run the exam program firefox only pretends to close (I have to go and end the process afterwards)--not sure if this gives anyone any helpful clues, but i figured I'd throw it out there.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
The problem with MediaWiki is that it does indeed use PHP. But PHP doesn't execute in the browser - it runs in the HTTP server (Apache or whatever). So it's not that reaching across the network is hosing you - it's that the local PHP execution environment is evidently being blocked. SteveBaker (talk) 06:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Not sure if this would work for your case, but if you download WAMP you can run an Apache server with PHP interpretation locally, as long as the files with PHP in them are in the www (or equivalent) WAMP directory. Hiram J. Hackenbacker (not logged in) 128.100.36.93 (talk)

How do I get a list of files on WinXP using DIR command[edit]

I'm trying to get a list of files that have a file extension of .asp. I tried DIR *.asp but this also returns files with a .aspx extension even though I did not type DIR *.asp? or DIR *.asp*. I imagine that at some point in time, Microsoft F-ed up the DIR command so now it no longer works correctly. Does anyone know the proper command to get a list of files with a .asp extension and only a .asp extension? 216.239.234.196 (talk) 20:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the ultimate cause of this is that DOS (and 16-bit versions of windows) used limited filenames of the "eight dot three" format -- up to eight characters, then a dot, then three characters. The dot was always assumed to be there, and the extension was assumed to be no more than three characters. When they went to 32-bit windows they loosened this up a little, but people had already been doing things based on the old assumptions and some of those still cause annoyance. For instance in the old style "*.*" matched all filenames (whether or not they contained a period). It still gives that result, even though files might not have a "." in them at all.
I believe (I base this largely off a blog post, so I could be wrong) that Windows keeps both "long" and "short" filenames for each file and does its pattern matching against them. For instance, I create a file named "one_two_three.four"; Windows will also recognize the old-style-compatible name "ONE_TW~1.FOU" as pointing to the same file. So wildcard expressions (as with "DIR") end up matching the file if either name matches. See also [1].
I'm sorry, I don't know if there's a way to make "DIR" look at only the "long" filename. Or any other command (I would guess that other command line utilities that take filenames with wildcards probably handle them the same way). If there is, I wouldn't know of it; I don't use Windows very much. Given the wide usage of Windows, it's possible that somebody has come up with a set of replacement command line utilities that do what you want.
One thing you can do that might suit your needs: Use the file handling GUI (windows explorer). Navigate to the directory in question. In the "View" menu, select "List" and "Arrange Icons by -> Type". That will bunch all ".asp" files together. Unfortunately, getting the file names out seems trickier. I think there's a way to do it but it involves more knowledge of batch files than I've got. -- Why Not A Duck 21:05, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Another possible alternative: The Search command available in the Start menu (or by right-clicking on any folder) searches only long file names. For example, I was able to search for *.abc and the results included file.abc but not file.abcd. --Bavi H (talk) 03:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
If you're planning to do any significant amount of command-line stuff at all - give up on the DOS shell - there is just too much of this anachronistic crap. Head over to www.cygin.com and grab a free copy of Cygwin. It includes the Linux/UNIX shell tool - which does command-line stuff PROPERLY. The 'ls' command (which is a bit like DIR) will do what you want and behave totally rationally. Better still, the Cygwin/Linux/UNIX 'find' command has an incredible amount of power for doing file searches. SteveBaker (talk) 06:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
If he's using windows, it's probably smarter to use Windows PowerShell. I actually find it to be a superior shell to bash, and especially so under windows. Don't get me wrong, I love bash, it's a wonderful program that I use every day, but it is 20 years old by now. 83.250.202.208 (talk) 17:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree. It's worth mentioning that the command shell in Vista doesn't behave like this...your query would return only asp files. But dir "*.asp" might work for you. Louis Waweru  Talk  17:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Time complexity of SortedList<TKey,TValue>.Concat()[edit]

In C#, what's the worst case time complexity of SortedList<TKey,TValue>.Concat() when both arguments are SortedList<TKey,TValue>s with the same TKey and TValue and the output is being stored in one as well? NeonMerlin 20:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Pesky School Filter[edit]

First of all, to clear everything up, I am not asking this so I can look at porn. I am not even asking this to get onto myspace. I just need to bypass my school's network security to get to websites which will help me with my senior project. I have went to the administration, but they decided I could go to a public library if it meant that much to me (I have 28.8 kb/s dial-up at home. Try watching videos on that).

So here is the scenario: -I am by no means a computer genius; I just know how to use resources, and I can think through things. So if you do help, dumb it down as much as possible, please. -The school used to use a computer based proxy. I could turn that off. -They got smarter, and locked it; I got through. -They based the entire security system at Central Office, where I can't easily access it; I will now provide some information that will hopefully help someone assist me. -It won't even let me use FireFox (they got one up on me). They used to have the proxy based on IE, but after they realized someone (me) was using alternates, they based it on something else.

I will use myspace as an example, since every kid in the school wants to get to it.

Ex 1: When I type in http://www.myspace.com, it redirects me to this page: http://10.1.1.60:81/cgi/block.cgi?URL=http://www.mypsace.com/&IP=10.209.2.111&CAT=GPORN&USER=DEFAULT

Ex 2: I download LimeWire, and it will download, install, and open, but when I try to actually download a song, it never connects. This leads me to believe that they have some firewall or something blocking anything foreign getting to the internet.

What I can Do: I can create/delete and manage (to some extent) Administrator accounts; I can use command prompt within simple LIMITS. I'm just looking for the right website or right person who can basically spell it out for me, or at least point me in the right direction for more research.

So please. Help!

The LimeWire thing is secondary, but it would be nice to have new songs again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EWHS (talkcontribs) 20:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how but even if I did I wouldn't tell you. One it's illegal to manage/delete Admin accounts that don't belong to you, second LimeWire illegaly distributes music, third you shouldn't download LimeWire or Firefox on their computer without permission. --Melab±1 22:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a Wi-Fi modem or could you borrow one? If so, check whether any Wi-Fi spills into the building from one nearby. (Your chances will improve if you have a laptop and try it outdoors. Apartment buildings are your best bet, followed by single-family houses.) Also, do they prevent you from USING Firefox, or just from installing it? If you have a CD burner or USB flash drive, you can get a portable version of Firefox.
Finally, you said you can create admin accounts. Can you do this only locally on the individual computers, or can you create one on the network? Can you log into the router? NeonMerlin 22:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't think its possible to bypass the blocking; here in NSW the DET also uses a HTTP proxy. You can't access anything without using the proxy, and since the proxy only supports HTTP, people can't use LimeWire, BitTorrent, online games, etc. I think your situation is similar to mine; you can access the internet through the proxy but other programs (LimeWire) can't access anything (without using the proxy). Creating an admin account wouldn't do anything, since if you didn't use the proxy, you wouldn't be able to access anything on the Internet. And by the way, is your school administration that stupid to allow normal users to create other accounts and have write permissions to program files? Do they use any form of desktop management? --wj32 t/c 00:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Are the computers set up so that after any person has logged in they have what appears to be their own disk drive (perhaps a "G:" or "M:" or whatever, in addition to the untouchable "C:", "D:", and perhaps "E:")? That's the way it was when I used an institution's computers some years ago. On C:, D:, and perhaps E:, the institution had installed The World's Favorite Software (i.e. mediocre bloatware), and any attempt to install any additional software there would fail. However, it was possible to install software on the virtual drive, and to run some of it from there. Firefox would run perfectly well, though I couldn't store any of its settings (or perhaps even change the settings in the first place; I now forget).

However, I can't see how running Firefox rather than Exploder is likely to help you very much.

Despite your modesty, you clearly do know quite a bit. Rather than wasting your knowledge and energies battling with the people who run your school (a war that you're sure to lose in the long run, and that might get you into serious trouble), I suggest you find some way of turning them into cash (creating websites? setting up LANs?), and use the cash to get a good connection at home, a good connection which you can then use for your serious purposes and also (cough) for purposes that require more privacy than would be available in a school. -- Hoary (talk) 02:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Turning computer skills into cash doesn't always work; I've tried it. NeonMerlin 22:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Opps, I have been slightly misleading. I can download and install Firefox successfully (just as LimeWire), but when I try to access a website that is block (i.e. Youtube), instead of getting the blocked message as I do with IE, I rather get a "Connection Error" and no matter how many times I click <Retry> I will still get the same error. It is really quite frustrating. All I need is to download maybe three videos and a couple sound clips for my project.

Now, philosophically, why can't my administration grant an exception? I'd be willing to do it supervised, even. I'm in the top of my class, I never get in trouble; you would assume that there would be a certain level of trust. But yet, they even have google images blocked. Yeah. Go figure.

And, addressing the WiFi theory, I have already tried that, to the same effects. I haven't, however, tried to use an apartment building or a single family house. I live in rural, western NC, and WiFi is hard to come by--especially with my lack of Laptop.

Finally, thanks for the compliment, but I'm really not that good. Yeah, I know synonyms for "hacking" to search google (they have word-specific searches blocked to, hacking being one of them), and the common sense to not get caught and delete everything I do at the end of a session. I don't think there are any jobs that would pay me for having common sense. And, to be quite honest, I have never even tried making a website or anything...and this LANs you speak of...I had to wiki-it. :D Seriously, I'm not modest--I'm honest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EWHS (talkcontribs) 20:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

When I was in high school we also had a school filter that was too strict. Granted most of the machines ran Windows 98 or Windows 2000, but I made a VB Script and stored it on my student network drive that basically set the proxy in the registry to nothing, i.e. turned it off. For some reason or another the domain policies at the school let me run VBScript, even though I wasn't able to run .reg files, open regedit, or anything like that. It might be worth looking into. If I had the script still, I'd give it to you, but alas I do not. --Anthonysenn (talk) 03:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
We run XP; and I'll look into VBScript, whatever that might be. This is where my un-goodness shows, if you will. But anything is better than nothing.EWHS (talk) 20:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
"certain level of trust" wait until you get into the world of "business", where you are allowed to daily make decisions with minimal or no supervision or checkup, on the basis of which your company risks millions of dollars, but they still block google images because they know for sure that if they didn't you're too immature not to spend the whole day looking at porn. then you realize why financial meltdowns happen.Gzuckier (talk) 19:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Downloading from YouTube[edit]

[2] This video seems to resist such tools as the media-converter and KeepVid - any ideas? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTagcontribs─╢ 22:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

It says that the video is not available in my country (which is the United States); so that might explain it, if those sites are based in the US. --128.97.244.12 (talk) 23:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
It's not available from Australia either. Have you tried VideoDownloader? --wj32 t/c 00:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
UK only fwiw. VideoDownloader, DownloadHelper etc. should work, GDonato (talk) 01:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually, VideoDownloader doesn't work with Firefox 3.0. Try Fast Video Download. --wj32 t/c 02:15, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, did it with FVD :-) ╟─TreasuryTagcontribs─╢ 08:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)