|
Apparently Google.de[^] today show's a doodle that other countries' Google-sites don't show - and maybe it's a welcome reminder for you 
edit, for clarity: it's Mother's Day, in several countries.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
modified 10-May-15 12:12pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That doodle came on google before too. It's for mother's day but google put it there before too. can't remember the date though 
|
|
|
|
|
Google uses machines to spot patterns in what i search for to build up a profile to sell on.
I feed them machine generated bunk so making the data they sell become worthless.
They are experts in spotting this and you might write code that will fool them for a little bit but after an hour or two they will spot you and send you to a page asking for you to type in a some text.
Here the trick is to send Google a search request and to then parse the form they return to make sure that the next HTTP "GET" uses the same Name/Value pairs that you get back from the first form
www.google.com?q=my+seach+text won't last long.
You can also parse google search results pages so that the links go direct to the sites and are not relayed via google who first records the click. (Years ago they sent you direct, come get your free canndy)
Adverts links are not quite so easy but using a proxy server you can send a fake request to turn the tracking ID's into Urls and then send a cut down reply back to the browser.
Stop peeking throught my letterbox and I will stop poking you in the eye.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm also very critical towards Google but in this case, the point of my post was to inform you about Mother's Day  Nonetheless, your reply is an interesting read
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
Dr Gadgit wrote: Stop peeking throught my letterbox
But you invited them.
|
|
|
|
|
I did not invite google to put spy scripts and nearly every page on the internet that people view.
Google is a monoply that needs to be broken up so others can compete to provide a search engine and not Gazprom thats a russia gas supplier that no one has ever heard off.
As always its do as we say and not as we do when in comes to america and its corporations
|
|
|
|
|
Yes you did; it's in the terms of service, which are implicitly agreed to (by you) when you use their product. If you don't like it then use a different product.
|
|
|
|
|
When i visit a web-site and did not click a box to say i agreeded to anything then how is that an agreement for Google to run 5000 lines of script in the page to try to hack details from my machine.
The T&C of running scripts on my machine is that my machine might lie/fake the results that are then uploaded.
The Google monoply allows them to hold a gun to peoples heads and if everyone was so happy with what google is doing then how come more and more people are trying to block them.
Sites (maybe even here) will say in the T&C that no one is allow to block the add-servers but most people I know do.
|
|
|
|
|
Dr Gadgit wrote: did not click a box to say i agreeded to anything
If you actually read the T&Cs you will see that by using their product you are agreeing to the terms of use. As I said before, if you don't like it then you don't have to use their product; there are alternatives.
|
|
|
|
|
"If you actually read the T&Cs you will see that by using their product"
Well if you want to call googles spyware scripts a "Product" then that is up to you but i should not have to run tons of code to opt out of running these scripts because Google forces everyone to put them on their sites or face being religated to page 50 of any search results.
I signed nothing and i don't have ten hours to read T&C for every site i use but I do have EU laws protecting my rights plus human rights and they contridict many T&C and this puts Google in court ever other week.
Will not say here but do you know about the new changes Google is trying to introduce in the US ?
|
|
|
|
|
Dr Gadgit wrote: I signed nothing
It makes no difference. And the more people shout against it the more likely it is that all this free software that we rely on will change to being chargeable. Then you will have to sign an agreement and be billed for your usage.
|
|
|
|
|
Google needs us more than we need them and they are charging sites, far too much and even says just how we needed to devlope pages to get a good rating and then changing the rules.
SEO is easy, just pay google, JD
Do you think that the billion or so people that run add-block type software should be treated as criminals for getting something for free ?
|
|
|
|
|
Dr Gadgit wrote: Do you think that the billion or so people that run add-block type software should be treated as criminals for getting something for free ?
No, and I never suggested they should. I was merely talking about terms of use.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard we are never going to agree on this one but know its nothing personal with Google and Me bacause I have just the same views towards all the other big american software giants.
Comes from reading the scripts in web pages and watching my firewall logs far to much
I will let you have the last say
|
|
|
|
|
GOOGLE.COM (US) has the same doodle.
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe there's some conditional stuff happening for displaying the doodles, depending on the requested domain and origin of the request.. For me it only showed for google.de.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I could see the same doodle using both GOOGLE.COM and GOOGLE.DE. I don't know if addressing GOOGLE.DE causes the request to be re-directed to GOOGLE.COM, but whatever, I saw the same doodle.
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
I've asked a question (about 3 weeks ago) about Roslyn and types and so...
I've actually came up with a solution (mixed not only Roslyn) and I think to write a tip about it - it will be right to post the link to that tip as an answer to my own question?
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
If it solves the problem, then yes - it's a genuine solution which can help someone else with a similar problem. 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I think that it is a very esoteric problem, and only idiots (freaks?) like me and my team-mates will face such problem ever, but my solution actually solves the problem - we already use it ...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Then preserve it for posterity!
It may be esoteric, but you met it - so it's quite likely that there is someone else out there struggling, or will be.
OK, it's not going to be a vote winner; it's never going to be popular. But how much work would it have saved you if you had found it 3 weeks ago? It's only takes one poor sod to make it all worthwhile!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: It's only takes one poor sod to make it all worthwhile!
Good point!
(I meant to write the tip in any case as I think that there is a nice usage of Roslyn in it, even the original problem is a bit awkward...I actualy wanted to know if it is all right to post it as an answer to myself...And I promise not to upvote it )
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: and your account will be banned
Damn! And I thought to catch up with your million!!! 
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: it will be right to post the link to that tip as an answer to my own question?
Yes.
«To kill an error's as good a service, sometimes better than, establishing new truth or fact.» Charles Darwin in "Prospero's Precepts"
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
