.josh

okay so internet is not free, it's just "free" for you. And I put "free" in quotes because while it may be monetarily free (for now), if you get busted, you'll have to deal with the consequences of that. Also, I hear karma is a bitch.

perhaps he is referring to local "hot spots." I guess he does not realize the indirect costs.. I can stay at home on the internet, sit in my chair nakie, jerking off to pr0n. If I were to go to my local starbucks, I'd have to put on clothes (that I had to buy, and not just any clothes, if I want to adhere to social statuses associated with hanging out at starbucks), drive there, which costs me money in gas, and also having to pay monthly payments for having the car in the first place.. and I'd have to buy something so they don't kick me out. Then I'd have to consider the limitations of that connection. It's public, so I can't exactly jerk off to my pr0n. I wouldn't trust doing things that require a certain level of security, etc...

Being the OP, I have a love-hate relationship with this. I mean, I totally agree with that statement. Sometimes it amuses me, sometimes it's annoying. Considering this is by far not the first time my posts have been labeled as TLDR, I don't really take it personal anymore. I mean, how much can I really expect out of mere mortals?

so when you type in "ac_fl_runcontent" into google it returns 0 results huh? Well then I guess your internet must be broken, and you have bigger problems than this script.

could add a captcha or honeypot to reduce the bots but as far as real users cheating there's nothing to do about that except force them to login.

Okay by subscribe I mean how once you post in a thread, from then on forever and ever if someone posts in it, it will show up in the list of threads under "show new replies to your posts". I want a mod where I can "unsubscribe" to a thread I posted in so I don't have to see it keep coming up on that list every time someone posts in it. for the more traditional interpretation of subscribe, there's a button to the right of the posts/thread labeled "notify"

omg we need a mod to permanently unsubscribe from threads.

If someone goes to http://www.somesite.com/somepage?ref=blah you can do for instance echo $_GET['ref']; // output: blah if you have a url like that stored in a database and are wanting to parse ref=blah out of the url (since coming from the database it would be a regular string), you can use parse_url to get it.

p.s.- you're a damn liar. If you had bothered to google it, there's a ton of results about it. Stop being a lazy bum and put more effort into this. Why are you even bothering with this programming stuff if you aren't going to make an effort?

Go to your page. Rightclick > viewsource. Ctrl+F and enter in ac_fl_runcontent. Nothing found? For each .js file included, wash, rinse and repeat, until you find where it is trying to call it.

being able to add arbitrary html is nowhere near the same as being able to insert arbitrary php script. If they actually allowed that...pfft. What you might want to do is try to see about doing it with javascript. It's possible they might possibly allow js to be inserted. doubt it, but much more likely than server-side scripting.

basename explode

I think if you allow for +/- margin of errors for both js and flash, and also account for the fact that that number coincidentally just so happens to come from the people who own the product (independent survey my ass. where does it say that? I see nowhere where it says that. I see how it was supposedly done by Millward Brown but that does not mean it's independent)...I do not count that 4% discrepancy for shit.

well he also put the substr back in quotes which is what his problem was to begin with... as mentioned before in this thread: functions do not get parsed inside quotes!

well levenshtein() is a lot more efficient at doing the same thing, and translating the result into a % is trivial.. I suppose if you're just comparing single words you aren't going to even come close to noticing the difference in efficiency, so sure, go for the similar_text and skip the extra step of translating it into %

I wanted to post this on the main site as a blog but the responses here confirmed my suspicions that the quality is less than ideal. You know what they say...when you post shit, the flies start buzzing...

You forgot to prefix that with "Dear Diary..."

I'm actually more of a pig. At least, that's what the ladies keep calling me, right before they slap me...

...so...you don't see something between two periods?

any errant whitespace in the include? I notice a blank line in the source of 2nd page...

Can't tell you what's wrong without (relevant) code being posted. Post what you have attempted so far and why it's not working (error messages, etc..)

well if I'm reading the problem correctly, use trim.

But you said earlier... anywhoo....yes, the problem is that regex does not handle nested tagging very well. More accurately, it handles it very poorly. The core of DOM is in fact regex, but the broader scope of DOM is that it goes through and creates a well, model (hence the name) of the page, as a whole. So it properly matches opening/closing tags up by looking at the document as a whole. So you can use regex, but in order to make it any kind of accurate, you're going to have to look at the content as a whole and walk through everything matching them up...which is reinventing the wheel. There is already another active thread about DOM on this very page that looks suspiciously familiar to this thread (trying to get contents of a div...asking for a regex solution, being told about DOM...hmm...not insinuating anything..just..awfully coincidental...). Anyways..it's on the front page of the forum, so look into how to do the whole DOM thing there. edit: in fact, I'll even give you a link to it, save yourself the trouble of trying to find it. http://www.phpfreaks.com/forums/index.php/topic,256532.0.html

It's a matter of perspective. Balancing form and function is not easy. There are plenty of sites out there on both sides of the spectrum. Many go too far with form, at the expense of function, but many also go too far with function, at the expense of form. Coders tend to lean towards function. They are predisposed to have bias against form. At best, they will look at it as how it measures up to function, instead of how it stands on its own. Or in other words, they tend to think that there is no value to form if there is no function. Non-coders on the other hand, tend to lean more towards form. They want the pretty girlfriend, even if she's useless and spends all their money. They want the $100k uber-car, even though it's a gas guzzler and that $5k car is more dependable. They want the 3 story, 20 room mansion, even though they are a bachelor and are rarely even home to begin with. One can argue that it doesn't matter how shiny a site is, if it doesn't work, people won't use it. But you can equally argue that no matter how efficient and secure something is, handles every circumstance that may come up, etc.. if it's not shiny, people simply won't be interested enough to give it a try.

Now that I will agree with.