.josh

I'm sure he meant exploding a string into an array and imploding back into a string. But I'm sure you knew that, and you're just being an ass. Stop it. That's my job.

so you think creating a new directory for every new user, with an instance of a page for every single user, is the better alternative to having a single script that dynamically generates the user's content from a database, and using a system (mod rewrite) where you can enter in a "friendly" url and the server parses it and loads up that single page, passing the name to it?

I have to wonder why you need to have thousands of variables in memory in the first place, and if the more appropriate solution would be to rethink your system to not have so much data on-hand at once...

google mod rewrite

<script language="javascript"> function blah(a,b,c) { if (a == null) alert('a is null'); } </script> <a href='' onclick="blah(1,2,3);">a is not null</a><br/> <a href='' onclick="blah(null,2,3);">a is null</a><br/>

yeah..there's a difference as far as words your physically using when stating it. In principle though, its the same thing, as the point of getting someone's password is to get into their account, because the point of passwords is to restrict people from getting into things. I will preemptively agree that you can potentially do a lot more damage with the real password than a string that shares the same hash. That would largely depend on how stupid the user is as far as using the same password for lots of different places and the how different systems go about validating passwords (which is, as mentioned, pretty common for sites to just do a string comparison on the hash).

I have to partially agree with rv20 for the isolated incident of it not mattering whether you know which of the two strings is the "right" password if they both share the same hash. (Most) scripts are written to compare the stored hash with the generated hash from what the user inputs into the login prompt. So if user's password is "foo" and it generates a hash of 12345 and I figure out that the hash is 12345 and I "reverse engineer" it and come up with "bar" and enter that into the login prompt... well as far as the login script is concerned, 12345 == 12345.

This isn't really a php question... as far as php receiving the values, it would receive it via GET or POST method. <?php echo "<pre>"; print_r($_GET); // dump all values in GET array print_r($_POST); // dump all values in POST array ?> So your question is how to get flash to send it via GET or POST. Which makes it a flash question. Thread moved.

so what was wrong with the regex solution you said worked?

Until someone discovers longetivity vaccine. but until then, we have viagra.

yeah...I've heard quite a few horrible stories from some people I know who work for blizzard...

hey if you're young and single and otherwise an anti-social bum, I bet its heaven.

Right. But there's a whole lot of other stuff involved in an OS because the software is on the computer and runs withing the OS. If all files and programs were moved and run off a central location, that would slice away most of what current OS's are. They would literally run in the background without an interface. The browser would be the interface. Think of it in terms of how cellphones are right now. They have very little storage space, limited software. The average user cannot directly access the OS running it. I don't think that's going to be an issue. I mean for one thing, I don't think cloud computing will catch on in the first place unless that issue was non-existent. So how would they make that issue non-existent? By not allowing just any company under the sun be a "cloud". I think what will more than likely happen is a company would have to meet a whole lot of standards and jump through a whole lot of hoops to do that to begin with. Like for instance, being a registrar. Or one of those companies that make SSL certificates. Not so easy. So I think what will happen is that there will only be a handful of companies that actually run the servers etc.. and then other companies will act as vendors to it.

I think the overall point is that the idea is to move towards cloud computing, where users' computers will no longer be standalone entities communicating with each other, but little more than dummy terminals interfacing with servers. Which is what cloud computing pretty much is. So the point is that when your computer is little more than a dummy terminal, the OS wouldn't really be an important factor anymore. The browser itself would for all intents and purposes be the OS. HTML5 would be the part of the browser that marks up the page, yes, but I believe they are talking about adding tags to specify components etc.. to be run in the browser. For example, a flash object. HTML doesn't "run" a flash object. It has a set of tags you use, with attribs/params you use to specify how you want the flash object to run. I believe that the intention is that HTML5 will provide similar structures for upcoming cloud computing "components." For example, being able to display a 500x300 area on the page where you can edit something or other via notepad (or generic text editing program. Probably not the best example, but work with me here). The notepad program would be on the server computer. You would use HTML5 to do for example (I'm totally pulling this structure out my ass, I have no idea what it will really look like, but its the principle that matters): <imbed object="notepad" width="500" height="300"> In reality it will probably be more complicated, but hopefully you get the idea. HTML5 isn't "running" it. It's just providing you a means to specify parameters etc... like anything else. Only other way I can explain it is to think about the concept of AJAX. You use html to specify divs and give them ids etc.. but you use js to put the stuff in that specified place. Then you'd also use js to talk to the server in "real time" which runs the program(s) on the server.

this is what you want. All you have to do is convert your vars into timestamps and insert where appropriate. edit: oops my bad. I didn't realize there was another page to this thead.

dunno how much data you are wanting to allow users to post or the sensitivity of it, but if its small and not sensitive, you could have them xfer by appending a query string to an image request. alternatively, they can xfer via ftp. But it kind of depends on the data/system overall as to what would be most appropriate/ideal.

missing closing quote in method

Well that kind of depends on the overall picture. All by itself, the fastest way to change it would be just to edit the page directly.

okay so the previous content you showed had quotes around the href value. This content you are showing right now does not. I sure hope there isn't any more "confusion" about what you're *really* after... preg_match_all('~href=([^\s]*).+?GUID=([^(]*)~is',$string,$matches); echo "<pre>"; print_r($matches);

depending on what you're really wanting to do with this, it might have to be altered a bit, but the hard part is there. <?php $num = 5; $pos = 1; for ($a = 1; $a <= $num; $a++) { while ($pos <= $num) { for ($b = $a; $b <= $pos; $b++) { echo $b; } echo "<br/>"; $pos++; } $pos = 1; } ?>

okay first off, instead of this: $str = implode('', file('pbsvss.htm')); do this: $str = file_get_contents('pbsvss.htm'); And then in your regex, do this: preg_match_all('#<a href="([^"]+)".+?GUID=([^(]+)#is', $str, $id); if that doesn't fix it, post some actual content of pbsvss.htm

This is only going to really be accurate if the only tr's on the page that have those 2 colors are the rows... preg_match_all('~<tr[^>]*bgcolor\s?=\s?"#f(?:ceed8|fffff)"[^>]*>(.*?)</tr>~is',$string,$trMatches); foreach ($trMatches[1] as $tr) { preg_match_all('~<td[^>]*>(.*?)</td>~is',$tr,$tdMatches); echo "<pre>"; print_r($tdMatches[1]); // example of where the data is at // put your db insert code here based off $tdMatches[1] array }

Slightly better, but I don't know very many people who would constitute handing someone else your money and having them do work and handing you back more money really constitutes as you doing hard work. In fact, I would argue quite the opposite. "Work smarter, not harder" seems to be a common mantra, and IMO this would fall under that category.

while I do certainly agree that 10 people will probably have 10 different opinions as to what constitutes hard work, I'm not so sure I'd personally agree that the element of risk is necessarily part of that equation. I mean by that logic, you can throw gambling and playing the lotto into the mix and call that hard work (no offense to the professional gamblers. Speaking at you Tom, lol).

Yeah but to me he also implies that everybody starts out on equal ground and some work harder than others to reach those highly paid positions, when that is not true. Most people start out low income and consequently, remain in that bracket for the rest of their lives. This is relatively speaking, of course. Even the poorest American is still living better than the average 3rd world country person.